<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 1911 – your monthly update</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/02/24/1911-%E2%80%93-your-monthly-update/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/02/24/1911-%e2%80%93-your-monthly-update/</link>
	<description>The official Ancestry.co.uk blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Apr 2013 18:23:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: 1911 knife &#124; Shooter Magazine</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/02/24/1911-%e2%80%93-your-monthly-update/#comment-1660</link>
		<dc:creator>1911 knife &#124; Shooter Magazine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Oct 2011 13:46:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/?p=1793#comment-1660</guid>
		<description>[...] 1911 &#8211; your monthly update (blogs.ancestry.com) [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 1911 &#8211; your monthly update (blogs.ancestry.com) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Russell James</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/02/24/1911-%e2%80%93-your-monthly-update/#comment-869</link>
		<dc:creator>Russell James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2011 10:46:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/?p=1793#comment-869</guid>
		<description>Thank you for your further comments/suggestions. I&#039;m not going to be able to respond to all of them here. However, I&#039;ll reply on a couple of key points, which will hopefully help.

In terms of giving specific dates on 1911, we would love to be able to do this, and we will do as soon as we can. Sadly we can&#039;t be specific at present, as we don&#039;t know exactly how long the process will take. It&#039;s difficult to be precise with the digitisation of so many historical records, as we can&#039;t predict how many issues such as damaged or mis-filed pages we&#039;ll run into. We&#039;d hate to provide you all with a date, and then find we can&#039;t achieve it, as this would certainly be misleading.

Turning to other records, it&#039;s not the case that once one website has a set of records they&#039;re automatically available to all websites. So, you will occasionally find records on another website that aren&#039;t on Ancestry.co.uk. However, from the other point of view, there are literally millions of important records on Ancestry.co.uk that you won&#039;t find on any other website.

We&#039;re always adding new record collections. So, if there are any records you&#039;d like to see which we don&#039;t currently have, please do let us know.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for your further comments/suggestions. I&#8217;m not going to be able to respond to all of them here. However, I&#8217;ll reply on a couple of key points, which will hopefully help.</p>
<p>In terms of giving specific dates on 1911, we would love to be able to do this, and we will do as soon as we can. Sadly we can&#8217;t be specific at present, as we don&#8217;t know exactly how long the process will take. It&#8217;s difficult to be precise with the digitisation of so many historical records, as we can&#8217;t predict how many issues such as damaged or mis-filed pages we&#8217;ll run into. We&#8217;d hate to provide you all with a date, and then find we can&#8217;t achieve it, as this would certainly be misleading.</p>
<p>Turning to other records, it&#8217;s not the case that once one website has a set of records they&#8217;re automatically available to all websites. So, you will occasionally find records on another website that aren&#8217;t on Ancestry.co.uk. However, from the other point of view, there are literally millions of important records on Ancestry.co.uk that you won&#8217;t find on any other website.</p>
<p>We&#8217;re always adding new record collections. So, if there are any records you&#8217;d like to see which we don&#8217;t currently have, please do let us know.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lin Traill</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/02/24/1911-%e2%80%93-your-monthly-update/#comment-868</link>
		<dc:creator>Lin Traill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2011 10:12:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/?p=1793#comment-868</guid>
		<description>The comments on the 1911 Census have been varied and echo many of my own thoughts.  I also agree with there being too many unrelated issues in the searches.

I recently telephone Ancestry.co.uk with a query and was told to write to the researchers, which I did.  Now, some 2/3 weeks later I have still not had a response.

My membership is Worldwide (but it has limitations).  My query was why could I not find details of US death records on Ancestry when I have been able to find them on Family Search?  Obviously they are available and I would like to attach them to my Ancestry tree, preferable to scanning and attaching.   I was given a reference number 110209-001373, but am still waiting for an answer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The comments on the 1911 Census have been varied and echo many of my own thoughts.  I also agree with there being too many unrelated issues in the searches.</p>
<p>I recently telephone Ancestry.co.uk with a query and was told to write to the researchers, which I did.  Now, some 2/3 weeks later I have still not had a response.</p>
<p>My membership is Worldwide (but it has limitations).  My query was why could I not find details of US death records on Ancestry when I have been able to find them on Family Search?  Obviously they are available and I would like to attach them to my Ancestry tree, preferable to scanning and attaching.   I was given a reference number 110209-001373, but am still waiting for an answer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mark field</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/02/24/1911-%e2%80%93-your-monthly-update/#comment-867</link>
		<dc:creator>mark field</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2011 07:24:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/?p=1793#comment-867</guid>
		<description>The reason that Ancestry are only just getting the 1911 census is that Find My Past had the rights to it for an x amount of time, pay per view first and then subscription, these rights were exclusive and they proberly paid a tidy sum for that, hence the very high prices they charge. In time ancestry will have it and from what I see they are putting in with their existing subs. Derek that is why you can get it on FMP and not here. But I do agree why can&#039;t ancestry say for example, in May we have this from 1911, then in August we have this rather than keep on saying some time this year. If I remember FMP were vague like this as well and they were very misleading.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The reason that Ancestry are only just getting the 1911 census is that Find My Past had the rights to it for an x amount of time, pay per view first and then subscription, these rights were exclusive and they proberly paid a tidy sum for that, hence the very high prices they charge. In time ancestry will have it and from what I see they are putting in with their existing subs. Derek that is why you can get it on FMP and not here. But I do agree why can&#8217;t ancestry say for example, in May we have this from 1911, then in August we have this rather than keep on saying some time this year. If I remember FMP were vague like this as well and they were very misleading.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: derek pickard</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/02/24/1911-%e2%80%93-your-monthly-update/#comment-865</link>
		<dc:creator>derek pickard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Mar 2011 22:19:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/?p=1793#comment-865</guid>
		<description>How is it that I can get full access on Find my Past. I must add that they also had full cover of the census last year???</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How is it that I can get full access on Find my Past. I must add that they also had full cover of the census last year???</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: robert parr</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/02/24/1911-%e2%80%93-your-monthly-update/#comment-862</link>
		<dc:creator>robert parr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Mar 2011 16:40:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/?p=1793#comment-862</guid>
		<description>I agree with Carol Whitfield&#039;s, comments. I felt the biggest insult was that having just paid my annual subscription I was  informed that if I wanted the 1911 census I could obtain this through your sister company
by taking out a further subscription.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with Carol Whitfield&#8217;s, comments. I felt the biggest insult was that having just paid my annual subscription I was  informed that if I wanted the 1911 census I could obtain this through your sister company<br />
by taking out a further subscription.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: B.Woods</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/02/24/1911-%e2%80%93-your-monthly-update/#comment-861</link>
		<dc:creator>B.Woods</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Mar 2011 14:58:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/?p=1793#comment-861</guid>
		<description>These monthly updates are far too vague !!
&quot;as we work towards having it all online in 2011&quot; and
&quot; .... making strong and steady progress&quot; means little, other than there is a possibility that your fee paying members may see the 1911 census in the next 9 months.

You should be telling us how far along you have got in terms of percentage or similar figure to give us a more finite measure of progress.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>These monthly updates are far too vague !!<br />
&#8220;as we work towards having it all online in 2011&#8243; and<br />
&#8221; &#8230;. making strong and steady progress&#8221; means little, other than there is a possibility that your fee paying members may see the 1911 census in the next 9 months.</p>
<p>You should be telling us how far along you have got in terms of percentage or similar figure to give us a more finite measure of progress.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Keith Lee</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/02/24/1911-%e2%80%93-your-monthly-update/#comment-859</link>
		<dc:creator>Keith Lee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Mar 2011 10:58:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/?p=1793#comment-859</guid>
		<description>Family History research, although time consuming is a great hobby. Comments by earlier subscribers about helping with transcription is a very good idea. I am fortunate enough to have knowledge of the areas where my ancestors lived and this gives me the advantage of reading place names and peoples names which the transcriber might not know. Understanding old styles of handwriting is an asset when reading the original document. Any assistance I could give ie correcting spellings of details can only benefit the next member looking for that particular person/place and avoid unnecessary trawling through lists of irrelevant information. It is useful to have the choice of both Old &amp; New Search. I look forward to an early release of the 1911 Census in an accessible format.
I would like to propose that you consider a reduced subscription on all of your packages for OAP&#039;s. It might increase your overall membership and revenue!!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Family History research, although time consuming is a great hobby. Comments by earlier subscribers about helping with transcription is a very good idea. I am fortunate enough to have knowledge of the areas where my ancestors lived and this gives me the advantage of reading place names and peoples names which the transcriber might not know. Understanding old styles of handwriting is an asset when reading the original document. Any assistance I could give ie correcting spellings of details can only benefit the next member looking for that particular person/place and avoid unnecessary trawling through lists of irrelevant information. It is useful to have the choice of both Old &amp; New Search. I look forward to an early release of the 1911 Census in an accessible format.<br />
I would like to propose that you consider a reduced subscription on all of your packages for OAP&#8217;s. It might increase your overall membership and revenue!!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Thomas</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/02/24/1911-%e2%80%93-your-monthly-update/#comment-858</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Thomas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2011 19:08:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/?p=1793#comment-858</guid>
		<description>I am an ardent amateur user of on-line genealogy resources, and a subscriber to Ancestry - having tried many sites in the early days, I decided that Ancestry became the BEST (though I sometimes resort to others if Ancestry fails me). However, as a computer &#039;expert&#039; of 40 yrs experience, I am appalled at the very poor design of almost all web-sites - does no-one teach systems analysis nowadays?
I have offered my analytical services, for free, to sites that will take my offer seriously, so that I&#039;m not just wasting my time, but such contact is usually discarded by junior staff who have no concept of the value of such an offer. 
   The database held is vital, but the best data in the world is useless without good search-engine facilities. Yours have gone backwards recently, and long sessions of searching are becoming VERY frustrating!
   If you are interested in discussing my comments in depth, contact me...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am an ardent amateur user of on-line genealogy resources, and a subscriber to Ancestry &#8211; having tried many sites in the early days, I decided that Ancestry became the BEST (though I sometimes resort to others if Ancestry fails me). However, as a computer &#8216;expert&#8217; of 40 yrs experience, I am appalled at the very poor design of almost all web-sites &#8211; does no-one teach systems analysis nowadays?<br />
I have offered my analytical services, for free, to sites that will take my offer seriously, so that I&#8217;m not just wasting my time, but such contact is usually discarded by junior staff who have no concept of the value of such an offer.<br />
   The database held is vital, but the best data in the world is useless without good search-engine facilities. Yours have gone backwards recently, and long sessions of searching are becoming VERY frustrating!<br />
   If you are interested in discussing my comments in depth, contact me&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken McIntosh</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/02/24/1911-%e2%80%93-your-monthly-update/#comment-857</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken McIntosh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2011 17:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/?p=1793#comment-857</guid>
		<description>I have been waiting for the 1911 Census, but I realize that there is a lot of preparation for it. However,I have also been researching my Scottish ancesters using Scottish People Census facilities and I have had trouble finding my ancestors..it costs about 6 credits to get this information for one family.  Yet using Ancestry&#039;s Scottish Census facilities, I have had a lot of success. ken.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have been waiting for the 1911 Census, but I realize that there is a lot of preparation for it. However,I have also been researching my Scottish ancesters using Scottish People Census facilities and I have had trouble finding my ancestors..it costs about 6 credits to get this information for one family.  Yet using Ancestry&#8217;s Scottish Census facilities, I have had a lot of success. ken.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
