Comments on: State and Country Pages in Old Search http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/11/18/state-and-country-pages-in-old-search/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=state-and-country-pages-in-old-search The official blog of Ancestry.com Thu, 24 Apr 2014 14:54:21 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.2 By: Andy Hatchetthttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/11/18/state-and-country-pages-in-old-search/#comment-42196 Andy Hatchett Wed, 18 Nov 2009 18:57:38 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=2485#comment-42196 Ron Re:#7

I hope you have verified each link in that “famous People” thing. It is filled with errors and biological impossibilities. In Fact, it rivals OneWorldTree as a masterpiece of Junkology.

]]>
By: Ronn Sheriffshttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/11/18/state-and-country-pages-in-old-search/#comment-42191 Ronn Sheriffs Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:22:56 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=2485#comment-42191 In the past I have been able to take the name of a relative back in 1700-1800 and find famous people related to them – now I can no loner find the site to do this – where is it

]]>
By: Johttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/11/18/state-and-country-pages-in-old-search/#comment-42190 Jo Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:22:02 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=2485#comment-42190 Thank you, Anne. The 1830 census is fixed now.

]]>
By: Conniehttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/11/18/state-and-country-pages-in-old-search/#comment-42186 Connie Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:02:12 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=2485#comment-42186 Anne,

I have to take issue with your statement that old search is working correctly. Yesterday afternoon, old search (exact) of the 1850 census was giving me no one with the surname Hancock in Illinois. It finally seemed to correct itself later in the day, but is doing the same thing this morning. I’m not sure about other census years; I’ve only tried 1850 this morning.

]]>
By: Mary Beth Marchanthttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/11/18/state-and-country-pages-in-old-search/#comment-42183 Mary Beth Marchant Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:10:57 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=2485#comment-42183 I just wonder why we the poor subscribers have to notify Ancestry about these problems. Isnt’ anyone watching the store? And when I say “poor” subscribers I am also referring to the amount of money we pay to get these reocrds that we then have to tell y’all are messed up. Maybe y’all should practice “Zero defects” especially in light of becoming a publicly sold company. This kind of thing could adversly affect the stock prices of the investors.

]]>
By: Jim Livermorehttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/11/18/state-and-country-pages-in-old-search/#comment-42182 Jim Livermore Wed, 18 Nov 2009 14:41:41 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=2485#comment-42182 Anne,

Does anyone at Ancestry even monitor the board in question?

]]>
By: Anne Mitchellhttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/11/18/state-and-country-pages-in-old-search/#comment-42180 Anne Mitchell Wed, 18 Nov 2009 14:09:34 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=2485#comment-42180 Jo, thank you for bringing that to our attention. I missed that on the boards.

I have notified the team that takes care of that and they are working on it.

]]>
By: Johttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/11/18/state-and-country-pages-in-old-search/#comment-42177 Jo Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:24:31 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=2485#comment-42177 I’m sorry to post about a different problem here but is anyone at Ancestry aware of the 1830 census images not showing up at all? See this message board thread, http://boards.ancestry.com/topics.ancestry.ancusc/2804/mb.ashx

]]>