Comments on: U.S. Content Update: Maintenance to U.S. Census, Tennessee Marriages and more

By: Chris Lydiksen

Chris Lydiksen — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 05:08:47 +0000

Responding to more comments relevant to the topic at hand:

13) kkandtc, we’re constantly working to improve quality. That said, there is an optimal level for keying accuracy. I appreciate feedback like this so that I can use it to research and help improve quality.

14) Reed, I won’t promise to post an answer back here, but I do promise to look into this. Thanks.

15) Marjorie, please send me the link to the record.

16) Julia, thanks for reporting this. It will be prioritized against all other U.S. projects.

19) JMaule, More often than not, such problems are unforeseen and technical, and not the result of a conscious decision by a human to disable databases. We know how important access to the data on our servers is and we strive to continuously improve.

22) Rich, thanks for your kind remarks and input.

23) Shirley, please send me a link to a specific record in question. Thanks for your feedback.

By: Chris Lydiksen

Chris Lydiksen — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 04:24:55 +0000

6) Don, I’ve done some research on the WWI Draft images. Some images were produced many years ago with period technology. These images have been added to the list of those that could benefit from being re-scanned. Thank you.

By: Shirley Starks

Shirley Starks — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 13:16:19 +0000

Census:
We are so fortunate to have this resource. I use it a lot.

Please help those of us who know a name is there, but indexing is amiss.

I am often finding difficulty in a census search.
Known Profile:
Surname known
State of Residence known.
County known.
…………….
A while back:
I could fill in certain search blanks for the census, say, 1880. I found one lady with nothing more than a first name, birth year &
place.
……..
Recently, I was looking for a Ridenour surname in 1910. Known to be living in Clinton Co, MI. Not finding him by name, I sought to look at every Ridenour family in that Clinton Co, MI.
……….
What was offered by Ancestry…
I had to begin with all of that name in Arkansas and go through EVERY state in alphabetical order until I came to MICHIGAN. Then I had to wade through every county in that state! How fortunate that the county began with a ‘C’!!

I’ve had to do this procedure with VIRGINIA..! grrr!

By: Rich Hrazanek

Rich Hrazanek — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:13:26 +0000

Chris, I enjoyed listening to you on Dear Myrtle. I’m looking forward to the resources you will be adding to supplement the missing 1890 Federal Census. You asked for feedback as to what types of data Ancestry subscribers would like to see added in the future. I would love to see the following New York State Census records, 1892, 1905, 1915 & 1925. Next, I would like to see the Connecticut Military Census of 1917 added. Keep up the great work!

By: Mary Beth Marchant

Mary Beth Marchant — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 18:06:32 +0000

Same problem here with the census. We are getting this

Server Error in ‘/’ Application.
——————————————————————————–

Runtime Error
Description: An application error occurred on the server. The current custom error settings for this application prevent the details of the application error from being viewed remotely (for security reasons). It could, however, be viewed by browsers running on the local server machine.

Details: To enable the details of this specific error message to be viewable on remote machines, please create a tag within a “web.config” configuration file located in the root directory of the current web application. This tag should then have its “mode” attribute set to “Off”.

DONT’ YOU THINK WE DESERVE AN EXPLANATION OR AT LEAST A REFUND!!!!

By: Derek

Derek — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 00:38:06 +0000

I look forward to the new 1900 census content and particularly the enhanced index. Thanks for taking the effort. I am checking the database daily to see if the change has been implemented…

By: JMaule

JMaule — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 00:27:34 +0000

A well run operation would leave the current image database in place, put the new one on a new server, and then do a switchover. Instead, they’ve taken down the census records (and other images) and they leave them down. The quality of service on ancestry.com has been going downhill rapidly. Its value to me has been going downhill just as quickly. Customer service shuts down at 5 or 6, and then they close down databases without notice, and there is no one to call. Have they forgotten that when someone is paying them for a service, they need to serve?

By: Mary Beth Marchant

Mary Beth Marchant — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 14:43:34 +0000

If y’all are updating the census pages, it would be a courtesy to let us know. At this time this morning census images are out for at least decades 1850 through 1900. All I and others are getting is “error processing image”. We can be patient if we know ahead of time when and how long but very impatient when things just go offline with no notice or explanation.

By: Julia Mitchel

Julia Mitchel — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 05:25:25 +0000

Your 1900 census for Kentucky is a mess. The Caldwell County census is reversed with BUTLER County census and vice versa.
I sent three issue reports and tried to email the error, but all I get is Auto Response.
Guess you guys are gettin too big for us common folk.

By: Julia Mitchel

Julia Mitchel — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 05:24:23 +0000

Your 1900 census for Kentucky is a mess. The Caldwell County census is reversed with BUTLER County census and vice versa.
I sent three issue reports and tried to emain the error, but all I get is Auto Response.
Guess you guys are gettin too big for us common folk.