RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: warncoort on Wednesday 29 January 25 00:19 GMT (UK)
-
Apologies in advance if this post offends any users.
I have just noticed that Ancestry are now rating users tree,mine being 9.5 but no indication if this is a percentage or what.
Maybe users can now start rating Ancestry's performance,though knowing their dislike for anyone questioning them,posts would probably be deleted.
-
I can’t see anything whatsoever to be offended by in your question. :)
The first I heard about this rating system was a couple of days ago when someone mentioned that their tree was rated quite low. I think they hadn’t bothered putting in birth or death dates or something like that. I must say I wouldn’t trust any of these automated, guesstimated, calculated, algorithmic estimated carrots put out by Ancestry.
I’m sure you are right - the rating would be very low if users were able to rank Ancestry.
I haven’t checked my tree yet, but I’m not paying Ancestry at the moment so they might have removed my tree or maybe only showing me three generations, or three people with the rest behind a pay wall. ;D
-
I'm not subscribed either but I can see all of my tree but not view their sources.
I can't find any rating on it but then I do have it as private.
-
I was just on Ancestry now trying to find my rating. It must be hidden somewhere, or maybe only subscribers can see it.
(I was sort of joking about them not letting me view my whole tree, due to “included” features dwindling.) :)
-
Ah! I missed ;D.
-
That was indeed me hinted at by Ruskie above
It only appears when you open a tree on the activity bar ie : Activity : Invite: Find A Tree
Its an opt-in to ''help you with your tree '' ie tidy up the duplicates and point out the issues with your tree
6.6 Fair
You have 4744 possible errors in your tree.
64 Possible duplicates
14 Only tree documentation
4664 No documentation
2 Other possible errors
As noted the 4664 No Docs would be 3rd cousins spouses etc where dates havent been entered
1. Its a money spinner at $XX per month
2. Again its you the purchaser doing their work to provide them with more hints
And yes I know I have errors in my tree but I dont care - its my tree
-
Is this a "Pro Tool"?
-
Is this a "Pro Tool"?
Yes
-
I notice Familysearch is now using a Data Quality Rating on some records, which is explained in this article dated 27 Nov 2024.
https://www.familysearch.org/en/help/helpcenter/article/data-quality-rating
Perhaps it is something similar.
Feedback is invited.
-
Quite disappointed; my main tree rating is up to 6.5. Thought it would be much lower than that as it’s simply an uploaded basic Gedcom from the tree on my computer!
I also have a tree for a specific part of it which is public, partially sourced and that doesn’t even warrant a rating.
-
I used to be on an Ancestry Insiders panel. I think they got fed up of my feedback on their services/offerings surveys being truthfull and direct to the point. ;D
-
That was indeed me hinted at by Ruskie above
It only appears when you open a tree on the activity bar ie : Activity : Invite: Find A Tree
Its an opt-in to ''help you with your tree '' ie tidy up the duplicates and point out the issues with your tree
6.6 Fair
You have 4744 possible errors in your tree.
64 Possible duplicates
14 Only tree documentation
4664 No documentation
2 Other possible errors
As noted the 4664 No Docs would be 3rd cousins spouses etc where dates havent been entered
1. Its a money spinner at $XX per month
2. Again its you the purchaser doing their work to provide them with more hints
And yes I know I have errors in my tree but I dont care - its my tree
Yes, sorry for forgetting it was you David. ;)
I think anyone with a mind to copy your tree probably doesn’t care if you have thousands of errors either.
Thanks for confirmation that I’ll need to pay to see how many errors I have in my tree. ;D
-
Quite disappointed; my main tree rating is up to 6.5. Thought it would be much lower than that as it’s simply an uploaded basic Gedcom from the tree on my computer!
I did the same - but I got 6.6 ;D
-
Rubbish.
Tree Checker reports duplicates in our trees, there are zero duplicates, each tree has been checked in both Roots Magic and FTM and the duplicates that were caused by Ancestry simply loosing an entry were all found, corrected and reloaded into the trees.
In one tree it says that Ellen Bradley is a duplicate with Ellen Bradley, yes there are two Ellen Bradley's they are Cousin’s.
-
I think the whole rating business is rubbish. Mine is rated 7.6. I only have a partial tree which is private, but searchable. One of the errors is because one person has no name or information attached, the simple reason being that it's me and I have no intention of filling in my details. I also have no intention of paying for Pro tools.
It annoys me that I am always getting hints that certain people have no photograph attached to them. I have no intention of adding photos, with one exception, a photo of my maternal grandmother which I took from another tree, it also appears on a number of trees. The person who was first to add it to their tree is a second cousin to whom I gave a copy of the photo along time ago. I own the original and the negative. Many of the other hints I get have no connection to people in my tree. I had one hint which took me to my paternal grandmother on a tree on Family Search, that had given her parents who had no connection to her whatsoever.
It's getting to the point where I'm seriously considering letting my subscription lapse.
-
I don't have ProTools but I do have a tree rating, mine's 9.8 ;D. Clicking on the info button gives this: "Trees with over 50 people get an updated tree rating each week, along with a deeper dive into possible errors for 3 people in the tree. Your rating and possible errors will update on Thursday."
I've investigated the three they are allowing me to see. One is apparently a duplicate of someone with a different name and dates, two have no records (correct). I await tomorrow's update (realistically more likely Friday as Ancestry is probably working on US time and I'm in the UK) with bated breath ::)
Jane :-)
-
I've investigated the three they are allowing me to see. One is apparently a duplicate of someone with a different name and dates,
I've got a "duplicate" like that - different names, different dates and different genders.
I also have a Possible duplicate "John Carr". Same name, same month and year of baptism but different days, same place of baptism and both had a mother with the same name. Hence according to Ancestry they are the same person. This has caused me endless annoyance with hints and incorrect thrulines, which I thought had stopped. Now I expect any remotely related people (or even those who aren't related but for some reason best known to themselves like to add any random tree to theirs so they can boast that they have 400,000 people) will merge these two boys.
What in heavens name did Thomas Carr think he was doing when he not only married a woman with the same forename as his brother's wife (my direct ancestors), but then both decided to conceive a boy with their respective Sarahs on about the same day. They did have a choice in names, but both thought John was a good idea. If it had been their father's name I could have understood it. I suppose I should be grateful they had the baptisms 15 days apart and not on the same day.
-
This duplicates business is bonkers. I've got at least two sets of fathers and sons marked as duplicates. Quite common for fathers and sons to have same name but to born / baptised 30 odd years apart in different places - supposedly the same person!
And I've got a triplicate !
William Hibberd Cluett b 1823 Christchurch, Hants
Thomas Hibberd Cluett b 1827 Christchurch (his younger brother)
William Hibberd Cluett b 1862 Islington (son of William HC 1823)
Obviously they're all the same person. ;D
Imagine how that would totally screw my tree if I made them all one - but which one?
Sadly, I think some people would do that.
-
I wonder what rating a family tree that belongs to a DNA match of mine has?
She has an ancestor dying in 1920 yet the next entry shows her alive on the 1939 register. ???
-
Took me a while to find it.
Our tree is 6.8, but mainly because of lack of information. I don't use the Anc tree as a main tree- I have a family history program for that. The Anc tree has basic info needed to match with other people- names, dates, places. Of course, some of these people don't have known dates of birth or death so can't add any.
Add to that, there's a whole branch of the tree labelled things like "John SMITH - DNA investigation, do not copy" because I'm trying to match (or not match) with people on Thrulines.
-
I don't have ProTools but I do have a tree rating, mine's 9.8
Jane :-)
How do i see my tree rating without giving ancestry even more money?
-
Just bring up a persons profile,rating is next to search button.
-
I didnt realise this. It can't be too much of a bad thing. Although, putting it behind a pay wall is a bit sad 😭
-
Is it possible to see another persons Tree rating ?
-
I have a "tree" where i do all my hypothetical stuff and also where I put things I am working on for questions on here. So in no way would I regard it as a 'good tree'.
There are duplicates. MULTIPLE tiny family groups hanging on their own, and even a few singles.
It has a rating of 9.3.
So I am inclined to take the ratings with a pinch of salt.
P.S. My ratings only showed this week, so they must be rolling them out over a period of time.
-
This is just another money making gimmick from Ancestry.
My errors are my own and I am not paying Ancestry to "possibly" correct them. If this is anything like most of their hints I will be quids in ;D ;D
Dorrie
-
My trees are rated as 12.0 ;D
-
Does anyone know what the ratings are out of? Mine come out as 9.7 and I know one of mine is not great.
-
Does anyone know what the ratings are out of? Mine come out as 9.7 and I know one of mine is not great.
It is out of 10 but it is labelled "Elite". My tree was 9.7 when I first got pro tools but I went through all of the supposed errors and fixed it up. It went to 9.8 then 9.9 then on to Elite.
-
At first I thought this tool, or at least the free version (as a true Yorkshireman I don't want to be spending more than necessary), was potentially useful.
Today however the 3 free prompts suggested a possible duplication, fair enough i thought best check. Turns out the possible duplication William Dickinson 1787 and Robert Dickinson 1789, was complete tosh, I have baptism details, marriage details, child baptism details, the works.
I'll put it down to the free version being less well informed with less algorithms, but i doesn't exactly make me think it's worth investing in.
-
I have a "weekly tree rating" of
6.5 Fair
You have 1637 possible errors in your tree.
26 Possible duplicates
0 Only tree documentation
1608 No documentation
3 Other possible errors
That looks quite good to me.
I haven't bothered with sources and haven't attached any documents.
I have plenty of both but not included on the Ancestry tree, which is only there for DNA purposes.
I wonder what the 3 possible errors are.