RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: rocala on Sunday 05 June 22 14:01 BST (UK)
-
I had not logged in for a while so was surprised by the new design.
Amongst the clutter, I found an interesting message, "we have found hints for your relatives." The two relatives mentioned were medieval. 24 x and 32 x great grandfathers.
The hints referred to are a collection of U.S. school records beginning in 1900.
I don't know in which back street market Ancestry bought their software but next time I really hope they spend more than a tenner and get something decent.
-
You're not the only one~
https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=862243.0
-
I honestly think Ancestry's hint system is really good when it comes to my 19th century ancestors, most likely because civil registration and censuses make it easier for the system to cross-reference the data.
Pre-1800 is a different story because records are so sparse and full of so little identifying information, the system ends up recommending anything.
-
I think the system should have a few more controls Even without dates the number of generations is recorded. I was born in the 1950's. Ten generations before me should preclude WW1 records and U.S. phone directories as a simple example.
To the best of my knowledge, not one of my ancestors has ever set foot on American soil. It would be nice to have an opt-out of U.S. records feature.
It is not a major issue but it is far from professional. It is also very frustrating in those cases where you are particularly interested in a certain individual and your hopes are constantly raised by large amounts of trash arriving.
-
rocala
I couldn't agree more. Ancestry seems to have been taken over by people who don't understand how research works. I've noticed more and more that other people's trees are full of trash that must have appeared in hints. Where does it all lead?
Martin
-
Ancestry seems to have been taken over by people who don't understand how research works.
Seemingly my 4th great grandfather was someone who died aged 2 years old, according to someone on ancestry at least. They found a birth record with the same name, then failed to check for deaths.
-
rocala
I couldn't agree more. Ancestry seems to have been taken over by people who don't understand how research works. I've noticed more and more that other people's trees are full of trash that must have appeared in hints. Where does it all lead?
Martin
An interesting point Martin. I can see that the sloppy approach of Ancestry could rub off on less skillful beginners. There are some truly ridiculous trees online.
-
I wonder if Ancestry has anybody monitoring this site? I am sure it would be valuable for research. They could use it for some decent PR opportunities as well.
-
Ancestry seems to have been taken over by people who don't understand how research works.
Seemingly my 4th great grandfather was someone who died aged 2 years old, according to someone on ancestry at least. They found a birth record with the same name, then failed to check for deaths.
I made that mistake once, and managed to rectify it with the correct ancestor about a month later.
I knew that another member regularly copied my work so I checked and sure enough he now had the error too. I contacted him and pointed out my mistake and the correction. He replied that he was happy with things as they were. A year later he still had the wrong ancestor plus several forefathers of the dead child.
You just cannot help some people.
-
Is it just Ancestry? I've had similar from MyHeritage, especially 'new photos' which are just cartoons of coats-of-arms, or a 'soldier' or 'convict', not a phot at all. That's in addition to the spurious hints of family members who were never anywhere near the USA yet seem to have records there, and the tenth-cousin-three-times-removed's aunt's mother-in-law from Australia 'confirmed' by someone who's just copied from another tree. Also, I've put info on WikiTree or FamilySearch myself which MyHeritage then shows me as as a hint! Now they appear to have bought a French database (name escapes me) which links to the same hints so they now all appear again, with a new logo, as 'new'. The clutter is too much.
-
Sorry, I cannot comment here, I only use Ancestry. I chose it because I really like the design of the family tree layout and the profiles.
I suspect that their staff are under pressure to provide evermore. More is not always good but looks good on reports to the upper echelons.
-
I don't intend to sound as if I support (or not) Ancestry's hint system, but I can't help thinking that it will be damned if it does or if it doesn't. Without some system we know we will catch no surprises; with a 'system' in place there are bound to be irrelevant arrivals when there are almost unlimited possibilities of overlapping names. After all they are only 'Hints' so it's up to recipients to find out what fits. Most won't of course, but it's up to you.
If you expect the hint to check for date compatibility you must also expect it to take more computer time - always assuming that the checking rules allow for every possible event.