Dear Lindsay,
Thanks.
Regards, Bill
Doug and Bill -- John Graham replied to the original email on 1/1/17 and he
said:
Paul,
I would add the Les entry, maybe with a bit extra.
It's only a year since his death, so the chance of Eva re-marrying in that
time is low, and that increases the chances of SMITH being his name.
There is no existing Ryerson entry for a Les SMITH in Dec 1998.
However, is it a small paper or a large paper? If a small paper, it won't be
hard to find the notice, but if it's a large paper, I'd add Eva as a Prev Name
for Les so a cross-ref entry is generated pointing to the correct entry. (This
is another case of asking for help without giving us ALL the available
information! It's impossible to give a definitive answer.)
John
On 7/1/17 20:00, Bill wrote:
Dear Doug and Paul,
I have had a busy time of late so have missed a few things.
In reality Les is not the subject of this notice, so should be left out.
While there is no entry in the Ryerson Index for SMITH, Leslie or SMITH, Les
there is no guarantee that the paper that his Death Notice was published has
been indexed into the Ryerson Index.
Regards, Bill
G'day All,
Happy New year!!
I have a notice that reads, in part
"SMITH, Eva May... on Dec 12 1999 .... wife of Les (deceased Dec 10
1998) ..." So, should I make an entry for Les, to do so would assume
his surname was also Smith. A reasonably logical conclusion, but not
certain. Also, a researcher looking through the paper would not find
the entry if they were looking for "SMITH, Les". Any thoughts ..Paul
Nobody seems to have answered this one.
Les's death is well and truly more than 1 month ago. I would leave him
right out. The decider is probably "a researcher looking through the
paper would not find the entry if they were looking for "SMITH, Les."
Doug.
