RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: Cockneyrebel on Thursday 22 May 25 09:59 BST (UK)
-
Have you seen the latest changes to the above? Where there used to be a proper alpha numeric reference number like P/.... now it's 2 long numbers as: Reference Number 2678056 and Additional Reference Number 666124.
Also the baptism place is longer as in: 'West Hackney Church, West Hackney: Stoke Newington Road, Hackney, Hackney, England'; wouldn't it have been easier and shorter to say 'West Hackney Church, Stoke Newington Road, Hackney.'
Why do they need : when a comma will do?
Cr
-
''Why do they need : when a comma will do?''
Because that's just what Ancestry do (they are an American company after all :()
-
Another niggle about Ancestry that I have noticed recently is the new banner on the home page, below the blue banner, which relates to Common Ancestors.
Why do I want these details here, when all have the DNA match icon attached, meaning that I have incorporated them into my tree. Seems unnecessary overkill to me.
Pheno
-
I think that Ancestry's pages are created by computer programmers not family tree researchers as most of their records are over long and they desire you to waste more time researching than is necessary.
Cr
-
Ancestry is organising the records by borough in the way that the London Archives does. See the catalogue for West Hackney Church:
https://search.lma.gov.uk/LMA_DOC/P79_WH.PDF
The title:
THE LONDON ARCHIVES
WEST HACKNEY CHURCH, WEST HACKNEY: STOKE NEWINGTON ROAD, HACKNEY
P79/WH
I'm afraid to say the London Archives also uses a colon, rather than a comma. So it is the London Archives, not Ancestry, nor the Americans, who are to blame for this. You could perhaps write to the London Archives about their disagreeable use of punctuation.
I believe the London Archives uses somewhat redundant names and addresses for their churches because there were an awful lot of churches in close proximity that need to be clearly distinguished from one another.
Click the Source tab on the record of interest and you can still see the old reference (P79/WH/001).
-
Thank you Alexander. very interesting and a helpful way of finding the original alpha numeric references.
-
Alexander I can't find the original ref on the source tab?
Cr
-
Are they perhaps using the colon to separate two different fields of information – before the colon, name and parish; after the colon, an address? That would make it easier for a computer to use the two pieces of info for different tasks?
-
Alan Boyd Are we concerned about the computer's tasks or the researcher's? Seems Ancestry is more concerned with computer programming rather than ft researchers.
btw found the source ref Alexander.
-
Computer programmers don't design the systems!
Business and Systems Analysts do the design work.
Programmers work from the spec's given to them by the analysts.
(I'm a former programmer, developer, Systems Analyst and Business Analyst!)
-
(deleted - redundant post) :-[
-
KGarrad Well whoever designs the Ancestry pages and records doesn't do it for ft researchers!
Cr
-
I think Ancestry transcribers often have to do what those at the top tell them, such as a member on here once explained about banns records on Ancestry having to be put down as a "marriage" record, hence why you may see many banns records as marriages. Banns records can be great, and while you may not always find a marriage, a banns record may be found that shows the couple did intend to marry. My widowed ancestor had her banns read in July 1834 in Marylebone but not marriage has ever been found yet she took his surname.
-
Yes an ancestor of mine had the Banns read 3 times but never married! Depending on whether the registrar knew the mother's real name or assumed married name was how the children were registered!
CR