Comments on: Updated Groups Page Design & Formatting http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/02/23/updated-groups-page-design-formatting/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=updated-groups-page-design-formatting The official blog of Ancestry Tue, 21 Oct 2014 14:10:39 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.2 By: Gerrihttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/02/23/updated-groups-page-design-formatting/#comment-44822 Gerri Mon, 08 Mar 2010 12:42:25 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=3026#comment-44822 Accurate family information is extremely important It seems when the “leaf hints” were added, the problem became worse.

The television advertising of Ancestry shows a person without any “real” research, can in minutes find their ancestors….just click and you have it.

If you contact the person who actually doesn’t belong in your tree, they rarely remove themselves from it. Contacting Ancestry doesn’t help they say they can’t remove incorrect information from anyones tree, it’s too involved.

Ancestry has lost sight on the importance of accuracy of information for ones Family Tree.

]]>
By: innerjujuhttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/02/23/updated-groups-page-design-formatting/#comment-44665 innerjuju Thu, 04 Mar 2010 00:35:20 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=3026#comment-44665 #19 Ms. Barwick, I have to agree with you. I attach documents, photographs, etc to support my facts. But it never ceases to amaze me how many ‘unsourced’ family trees are out there AND that show up at the top of the lists. ‘Sourced’ trees will be available but appear much further down the list. Newbies don’t alwasy look, or know to look, for sources. Ancestry is already corrupted. The question is how to clean it up.

]]>
By: Nancyhttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/02/23/updated-groups-page-design-formatting/#comment-44657 Nancy Wed, 03 Mar 2010 03:45:57 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=3026#comment-44657 Bee #22,
That is a problem, and it is the reason that you see so many trees with multiple spouses with the same children–people don’t realize that the names aren’t recognized and just click to add them anyway.

I don’t know of anyway around it. The programmers would have to give us the ability to select from people in our tree–and I doubt that that is high on their to do list!

]]>
By: BEEhttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/02/23/updated-groups-page-design-formatting/#comment-44655 BEE Wed, 03 Mar 2010 02:23:05 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=3026#comment-44655 How many times today the name of a spouse wasn’t recognized on the “review and save” for a census because of misspelling of a name; a first name and just an initial instead of the full name or vice-versa – so the 8 to 12 children in the family could not be added from that particular census, even if all names were recorded from a previous census. I have to keep returning to the record, bring up each name individually, remembering it as it appears on the tree, or switching back and forth between tabs to view it on the overview. If I click on the name of the “spouse”, it shows as “New Person”, but I can’t find a way to correct this to the “old person”{spouse}. If someone knows a way around this, please clue me in! It’s almost as bad as having to delete information that has been added more then once, because there is nothing to block a census entry that has already been recorded!

]]>
By: Andy Hatchetthttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/02/23/updated-groups-page-design-formatting/#comment-44641 Andy Hatchett Mon, 01 Mar 2010 19:16:25 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=3026#comment-44641 Susan Re: #19

The ability to copy from another person’s tree into you own tree is a subject of constant debate and comment on several of the Message Boards, particularly the Member Trees board, the Ancestry Site Comments board, and the Ancestry Improvements board.

In fact, it is such a re-occurring theme it almost needs its own message board.

Hopefully, at some point in the near future, Ancestry will see the error of its way and cease to allow this practice which only aids and abets the generation and distribution of one click junkology.

Andy Hatchett
agh3rd@aol.com

]]>
By: Susan Barwickhttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/02/23/updated-groups-page-design-formatting/#comment-44635 Susan Barwick Mon, 01 Mar 2010 13:14:44 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=3026#comment-44635 There needs to be some type of pages before a person can begin adding and using the family trees that stress hugely how important it is for everyone to input accurate info and copy accurate info. It is up to each member to make sure this fabuluos project is kept as accurate as possible.

This is not a recreational project, but a historical project.

Sometimes wading thru incorrect entries here on the trees is as difficult as when I began my research. When records were hard to find and involved traveling to even find the records.

Susan Barwick

]]>
By: Susan Barwickhttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/02/23/updated-groups-page-design-formatting/#comment-44634 Susan Barwick Mon, 01 Mar 2010 13:04:07 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=3026#comment-44634 Stop the craziness of people just clicking on records and adding without actually looking at records! I am finding so many incredible errors in families and am spending too much time writing advising of errors. One person places wrong info and then soon it is showing up in other trees.

There are many of us who have been reseaching for years, way before everything would be pulled up for you to review, hints (love it for my research). Those who have actually had to pour for hours thru records undestand how tricky finding info and correct info can be and proceed with more caution.

Too many new people who do not actually research are propragating incorrect information. There are many who do mostly click and attach.

I think everyone should have to review the actual records (census, death, etc) before attaching.

Also, many are just attaching records to women and throwing in their married names and not specifying that their maiden names are not known. Soon it is going to be a mess if not already, with all these married names attached to females not showing their maiden names or maiden name not known.

I love the family tree program here, but it is great for real researchers.

I fear when the tv show begins to air this week, that many will join ancestry.com, then jump in on the trees and start clicking their way through and adding without researching. I fear that when this happens many family lines are going to be greatly corrupted as wrong info is copied over and over.

I just found where someone had attached the wrong person to my father! I have it clearly documented who my parents are and their family lines are….yet, there it was…someone had my Dad married to my Mom’s sister. My Mom died just over 1 and a half years ago so this is not old info that could be twisted thru time.

Please somehow create reminders and restraints on how people grab information, before family lines become full of incorrect data.

Susan Barwick barwick.susan@gmail.com

I would love to hear from others who are running into these same situations.

]]>
By: Carol A. H.http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/02/23/updated-groups-page-design-formatting/#comment-44601 Carol A. H. Sat, 27 Feb 2010 22:20:42 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=3026#comment-44601 Jerry Bryan #15:

You are so right about the huge space Ancestry uses for New Search. Then they started it in the trees. They have however tightened the space in the trees. However, I notice text notations do not always wrap around. It bleeds into the area for sources/add media.

I think Ancestry spreads out everything because they are in Utah and that state is really spread out. They are used to w-i-d-e open space. I happen to like Utah, but I don’t like the spread on my computer screen.

]]>
By: Mary Carrhttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/02/23/updated-groups-page-design-formatting/#comment-44576 Mary Carr Sat, 27 Feb 2010 00:53:03 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=3026#comment-44576 Feb.26,2010…I hope you HURRY and fix the site.I can’t stand the way it is today.I really, really hate it.I don’t even want to do anything on it !!!!!! PLEASE….

]]>
By: Valerie Bledsoehttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/02/23/updated-groups-page-design-formatting/#comment-44545 Valerie Bledsoe Fri, 26 Feb 2010 05:14:49 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=3026#comment-44545 Not happy with some of the new changes & it’s NOT making my search easier. In fact it’s slowing things down & I’ve lost info. in my tree.It seems I have to use a few more steps to get the same info. I’m not happy & reconsidering to not continue service. I’m too frustrated with the changes that take more time. How about working on your server & speed that up.

]]>