Cardoso (J D)

SN CORRECTION 25 Aug 2026: ServiceNo 76586106BT cleared -- the pantser.cmvo.org.za SADF deaths PDF lists that number under "CANNER, CRISPIN JOHN" (AB, Sterf 02 09 84), matching PersonNumber 29690 (Canner, DateDeath 1984-09-02) by surname and exact date, not this record. Original value: "76586106BT". Left as an unresolved collision otherwise -- this correction is specific to this one PDF-confirmed case, not a general claim this record's other data is wrong.
25 Sep 2026, Unit2 service-branch sweep: the stored Secondary Unit "Navy" was CLEARED. It was not a sub-unit, it was a service-branch word, and it CONTRADICTED this record's own Branch, "Army". Across the roll 787 records carried such a contradiction; judged against Corps and Regiment -- independent of both columns -- the evidence backed Branch 744 times and Unit2 not once. Branch is therefore kept and the contradicting word removed. Nothing is guessed: this man's branch of service is already recorded, and his sub-unit, if any, is simply not known.
Database-wide FirstName/Age/Unit contamination sweep, 28 Sep 2026 (John's hypothesis, tested and confirmed on 3 sample groups before running at scale): FirstName 'Crispin John', Age 24 and Unit '' were forward-filled from PersonNumber 29690 down a contiguous run of 2 records -- this record's own LastName ('Cardoso'), Initials ('J D'), ServiceNo ('') and DateDeath ('1976-06-09') are all genuinely distinct from every other record in the run, confirming a different real person whose FirstName/Age/Unit were simply never captured (source pattern consistent with a SAPS memorial table using rowspan for Name/Age/Province, mis-copied by the scraper onto every row). FirstName, Age and Unit CLEARED; no replacement guessed. CauseDeath NOT touched -- it follows its own, narrower sub-block boundaries within this run and carries real distinguishing information.
CORRECTION, 28 Sep 2026: the earlier note on this record wrongly described Unit as forward-filled/contaminated alongside FirstName and Age. On review, Unit values proved to be common, genuinely correct data shared by many unrelated real people throughout this dataset (e.g. 'Western Cape' alone appears on 195 scattered, unrelated records with 111 distinct surnames) -- Unit was NOT part of this contamination and has been RESTORED from the pre-sweep backup. FirstName and Age remain correctly cleared -- both were 100% correlated across every contaminated run and independently confirmed absent on SAWGP's own record for spot-checked samples.