Source linker Daughter / Sister confusion
Below is a picture of the source linker. I'm trying to reconcile if the LHS is the Same as RHS.
Most of the facts are true, accept one. The LHS it says Daughter and Son's while the RHS says Sister or Brothers. Little confused if its just my perspective eg. Is the LHS in relation to the father at the top (Thomas Jones) or not. However the source is added to the Brother who is 12 at this time Ernest William Jones, so its seen from his perspective on right.
How am I to understand this?
Part B Of question is , what does Head Mean? Usually I think of it at the time as the head of household, usually father. I'm sure there are all sorts of permutation. But in this case its a 12 Year old boy. One might also ask, where are the parents here, it appears the oldest person in the house was a 21 year old girl. But I dont think anybody can answer that, well who is alive anyway.
The information on the left-hand side comes from the indexed record (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:X962-TKP), and this index appears to have everyone's relationship described relative to a head of household who for some reason isn't included in the grouping. (The image is on FindMyPast, where I do not have an account, so I cannot check: maybe the family starts on the previous page?) In other words, Ernest, Florence, Lucy, and Horace are all children of this phantom person, and that's why it says "son" and "daughter" next to their names on the left.
The information on the right-hand side comes from Family Tree; the focus person (Ernest) is labeled "Head", and all of the relationships are described relative to him.
It looks to me like you have everyone correctly linked. I suggest ignoring the index-side relationship labels, especially when there is any sort of error in the indexing. Use the index (and the image, if possible) and the people's Details pages in Family Tree to make your comparisons and evaluations, and then use Source Linker to make the attachments, lining up people based on the names and dates.3
Perspective may help - you're looking at the family in the extract/index of the 1901 census. The family is spread across 2 pages, in the original document, with father Thomas, mother Mary A, and son Edwin T, at the bottom of one page, while the children - Florence, Lucy, Ernest, and Horace are at the top of the next page.
In the extract on Find My Past, the source of the index, the family is indexed as one group. In the index on FS, the family is in 2 parts because of the 2 pages.
Pasting the images from the transcription on Find My Past is not permitted, so I hope my explanation is clear, without images.
Edit to add: Here's a share link, from Ancestry, to the index and image there. The family is indexed as a group, starting with the parents. Maybe this will make it clearer: https://www.ancestry.com/sharing/2627203?mark=84c1f628dec2bedf8dc01660e7b93d0ac3060609fb48b789cdfccddf47293a3f1
Again thanks all. The link you provided me gives me error Sorry this page is temporarily unavailable. I dont know if this is true or if there is something wrong with the link.
Currently my library allows me to use the library version of Ancestry. How can I find this document myself there if the library version has it? (Teaching a man to fish.) Is there an easy way to connect up to the same document, since the document referred to in this source seems to be pointing at FindMyPast not ancestry.
@ColinM0288 Ancestry had maintenance late yesterday. It seems they broke something.1
Thanks for confirming that, I had some difficulty yesterday and thought it was me.0
So I found it on Ancestry and Yes its two pages as you mentioned. Great I can see now why its a bit confused.