Comments on: Family Tree Maker Tutorials http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2011/01/10/family-tree-maker-tutorials/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=family-tree-maker-tutorials The official blog of Ancestry Thu, 02 Jul 2015 17:37:17 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.2 By: Paulahttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2011/01/10/family-tree-maker-tutorials/#comment-51953 Paula Sun, 23 Jan 2011 22:01:27 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=5178#comment-51953 FrancisGRISWOLDnewDifferent Birth:1635newDifferent
Kenilworth, Warwickshire, EnglandnewDifferent

Death:3 Sep 1704newDifferent
Norwich, New London, Connecticut, United StatesnewDifferent
George GRISWOLDBirth:19 May 1633
Kenilworth, Warwickshire, England
Death:3 Sep 1704
Windsor, Hartford, Connecticut

Someone please tell me why these are matched up on the family tree when the exact data (match) for George is just above it?

]]>
By: Beverlyhttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2011/01/10/family-tree-maker-tutorials/#comment-51951 Beverly Sun, 23 Jan 2011 21:41:19 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=5178#comment-51951 I have just started with Ancestry and now I have FTM. With 4000+ people in 3 trees have have 400+ hints.. How do I manage the information?. Should I gather all the hints first and then delve into individuals?

The duplicates are getting me down! I don’t know any tricks to avoid them or to eliminate them without loosing other data.

I have gone to tutorials yet for FTM, but I hope it gives me more help. Ancestry was easier for a newbie.

]]>
By: Paulahttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2011/01/10/family-tree-maker-tutorials/#comment-51950 Paula Sun, 23 Jan 2011 20:34:50 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=5178#comment-51950 Here is a classic example of the crap that I see all the time and wonder how many really stupid people there are on this website:

Thomas GriceBirth 1540 Warrington, Lancashire, , England Death 1588 Clayton Manor, Lancashire, , England Family InfoFather Robert Worden (1534-1580)new Mother Isobel Worthington (1547-1580)new Spouse Alice Grice (1544-1585)
Married 1565 Children Margaret (1569-1612)

First of all His name is Thomas GRICE but his Father was 14 when he was born and his name is WORDEN Thomas was 7 years old when his Mother was born in 1547 and his spouse has the same name GRICE as he does.

The sad thing is that this was on 10 of the 10 trees that ancestry gave me as “POSSIBLE” matches.. That ofcourse would be a “POSSIBLE” match if I wanted to Screw up like all the others and join the COPY/PASTE Contest. Thanks but no thanks, I’ll Pass on this and leave my set of parents unknown.

]]>
By: Paulahttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2011/01/10/family-tree-maker-tutorials/#comment-51946 Paula Sun, 23 Jan 2011 15:30:09 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=5178#comment-51946 I have an issue and would like to discuss it here, if this isn’t the place then please advise me where I can address it.

The issue is WOMEN’S MAIDEN NAMES, they should ALWAYS be used. If the Maiden Name is unknown, then type in UNKNOWN if you want to keep track of your unknown’s by their husband then type in UNKNOWN (Jones) but she is NEVER Mrs. John Jones. This only confuses the search engines in ancestry and really screws up the family trees for match ups.

My next issue is the “COPY/PASTE CONTEST” when matching family trees they should be proof read before adding to your family tree. I’ve noticed as many as 20 family trees with the same error and it is because of the click and go or “copy/paste” without proof reading. One such occurance I ran into yesterday was Thomas Gallop b. 1529 as the father of Mary Gallop b. 1530. Thomas was her brother not her father. John Gallop b. 1500 and Joan Collins b. 1505 was their mother. But all 10 of the trees that matched to mine had the same mistake. By not proof reading and doing the click and go method parents get attached to children who are 200 years younger than they are or Parents have been dead 20 years before the child is born. All it is is NOT PAYING ATTENTION to the little details.

Genealogy research is a precise and detailed science
and should not be a COPY/Paste Contest just to add names for the sake of adding names to your family tree.

My next issues are with Ancestry, and the match ups making a person a NEW person and just below that person my person is connected with a sibling. This is how so many trees have the same person listed several times and it is an issue that should be corrected. Marriages don’t line up. When you want to attach a document to a spouse and the person has several spouses, the document attaches to the wrong or first spouse, not the one mentioned in the document. All the data is correct in the tree and in the document, but it attaches to the wrong person.

I have been doing genealogy research for over 50 years. Don’t get me wrong I Love Ancestry.com, but I still go to the Mid Continent Genealogy Center frequently and just this fall took a month trip doing genealogy research in 18 states from Maine to North Carolina and from Illinois to Delaware and everything in between. Most of this trip was to confirm information I got on Ancesty and some was disputed, but when all is said an done it was a very interesting and FUN trip.

]]>
By: Tana L. Pedersenhttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2011/01/10/family-tree-maker-tutorials/#comment-51936 Tana L. Pedersen Fri, 21 Jan 2011 16:29:03 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=5178#comment-51936 I’m glad many of you have enjoyed the tutorials. Are there topics that weren’t covered that you’d like to see explained in this format?

#16
Jan
I am sorry that some of your information didn’t import the way you expected. I did not experience this same thing when I imported my files into Family Tree Maker 2011–all my Also Known As facts remained. I will look into this problem and let you know if others are having this same issue.

]]>
By: jan costic-ihrighttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2011/01/10/family-tree-maker-tutorials/#comment-51928 jan costic-ihrig Thu, 20 Jan 2011 02:07:29 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=5178#comment-51928 I have just downloaded the 2011 family tree maker. I am looking forward to correcting all the problems I was having with the 2010 version. However what I noticed when I downloaded this version was this. If enter your name into my data base as Tana L. Petersen. I put all the other variations of your name that I find as “also known as” like: Tana L Petersen and if I find a Tana Peterson. When I downloaded 2011 it took all of the “Also known as” and replaced them as Name.
So my question is: Should I only use “Also known as” category for a single first name? I am not looking forward to editing all of the 2000 entries of my trees. I also am not looking forward for running a duplicate program, which I do at times, and finding these people needlessly being flagged as errors.
I hope you can understand my questions and a bit of my frustrations? I really do love your programs.
Jan

]]>
By: Zachttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2011/01/10/family-tree-maker-tutorials/#comment-51923 Zac Tue, 18 Jan 2011 22:22:06 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=5178#comment-51923 The place authority remains poor for the United Kingdom with many major towns and cities missing. Also the validation should also be against historical as well as current places. There does not appear to have been much improvement to this feature for some years. In addition the full address should be supported.

]]>
By: Hazel Clackhttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2011/01/10/family-tree-maker-tutorials/#comment-51916 Hazel Clack Tue, 18 Jan 2011 05:49:28 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=5178#comment-51916 I’m just wondering if anyone is having the issues I’m having with the 2009 and 2011 version of FTM. I only transferred one family line from FTM 2009 to the 2011 FTM as I did not want to move my information into another program that might have more issues than the 2009 does. Ancestry has admitted that there are issues with the 2009 FTM but it’s not cost effective to fix them so they put out another FTM program and incorporate the fixes into the new program. What is happening is they bank on their customers purchasing the new program so they don’t have to dig into their profits for the total cost of a new program, which is minimal, and they probably actually turn a profit.

After working in the 2011 program and adding several more hundred ancestors I then started trying out all the print options. Serious issues when the information is saved as an rtf file…puts it into a word document and information can then be edited if necessary. The 2011 program has issues in the print and save portion. The rtf saved file has portions within a box that has lines and columns and the information can not be edited as it moves information into the wrong format. Need I say more? It’s useless. So now I have a family line completed and ready to print and share with family and I have no way of getting it to print correctly.

So I decided to print out reports from the 2009 program as I have some of those completed and had never had any issues with saving my data into a rtf
file and being able to edit and then print. Well, now I have the same issues with the 2009 as I’m having with the 2011. Can not print a decent report!

I have contacted Ancestry and have been told the programmers decide what is or is not priority when it comes to fixing their many program issues. And this is based on how many complaints they receive regarding the same issues. In my mind I contracted with Ancestry to be able to merge records into FTM and then be able to print out decent reports. I fulfilled my part of the contract. Since 2005 I’ve paid my membership fees. And Ancestry has yet to fulfill their part of the contract. There are still certain records since 2005 that can not be merged. Like Death, Marriage, etc that should be mergeable.

I am a competent computer user and there are no issues with my system. I am not the only one having these same issues with FTM programs. Also, there are issues with printing out data from the online trees.

So if you are having any issues, please call Ancestry and let them know. They’re not going to do anything about their issues unless they get bombarded with everything that is wrong with their servers, their databases and their FTM programs. I’ve been contacting them since 2005 with the same issues and am still being told the same thing. But I will persevere.

]]>
By: Ronald Chardhttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2011/01/10/family-tree-maker-tutorials/#comment-51913 Ronald Chard Mon, 17 Jan 2011 00:16:53 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=5178#comment-51913 Is there anything coming in the future for the once noted book that was supposed to come out last fall titled “Beyond the Basics: A Guide for Advanced Users of Family Tree Maker 2011″. Have had an order it for it at Amazon.com for months ..they adjusted release dates a couple of times, now it just says will let you know when it comes out.

]]>
By: Jameshttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2011/01/10/family-tree-maker-tutorials/#comment-51909 James Sun, 16 Jan 2011 20:21:01 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=5178#comment-51909 #11 Margaret -

I can read these types of files with Family Tree Maker version 16 or lower.

Regards,

]]>