Getting very irritated with Ancestry UK

[rocala]

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.

[Gadget]

You're not the only one~

https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=862243.0

[JAKnighton]

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.

[rocala]

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.

[martin hooper]

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

[Foreversearchingforanswer]

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]

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.

[rocala]

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.

[rocala]

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.