While I'm at it, I just notified ancestry of something else bugging me.
If you try searches in Madison in 1860 and 1870 you may find enormous households of
unrelated people coming back on the search.
That's because Madison, Madison Township and the town of North Madison were all
counted separately. So you get a number cases in which the same household number, lets say
201, is used in each of the three. Apparently, the search picks its returned individuals
by household number because a return for an individual in any of these jurisdictions will
yield families that are lumped together. I put a Facebook page post up and was given the
support number and instructed to take a picture of the offending page. there are several
pages, actually
For example, I just searched for David Green under Indiana, Jefferson County, Madison, in
1860. Transcribed as Darch Green, he comes back with a household comprised by three
Greens, two Sloans, six Cowderys, one Clarion and two Hockersmiths. The Sloans are
David's widowed daughter and a Granddaughter. But the Cowerys and the Claron (a
Servant) are in Madison's Fifth Ward and the Hockersmiths are in North Madison (whose
name is on the census page the but almost cut off)
So the Hockersmiths are dwelling house 217 family 214 in North Madison; the Cowderys are
dwelling house 216 family 214 in the Fifth Ward and the Greens are dwelling house 214
family 214 in Madison Township. Hence, we know they are aggregated in households by family
number within the jurisdictions. However, someone failed to recognize the different
jurisdictions existed.
I have not contacted support for a couple of years because it was generally pretty
useless. I would get back an email saying "we assume unless we hear from you again
the problem is solved" and the problem was not solved. It took years to get some
issues resolved, specifically that the transcribers did not understand that in the 1800s
the abbreviation IA was for Indiana. Iowa was not abbreviated. So until maybe eight months
ago, if you plugged "Iowa" into the birthplace field for Indiana and search the
1850 census, there would be about 167,000 individuals returned. I just did it and it's
down to 211 Hoosiers born in Iowa and that sounds more reasonable.
I once complained that a database of Missouri wills had everything except the name of the
testator. The response from support was "we can't put every bit of information
in."
It was clear a case of bad training. Maybe they improved after I quite trying
-----Original Message-----
From: bobwscott <bobwscott(a)aol.com>
To: injeffer <injeffer(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thu, Feb 21, 2013 2:46 pm
Subject: Re: [INJEFFER] Old search-still not sure I understand
Old Search and New Search is Ancestry. This discussion has primarily been about
how to get to Old Search on Ancestry. Some how somebody mentioned the LDS as a
side comment.
LDS search on
FamilySearch.org is nowhere near as good as Old Search on Ancestry
but it's a heck of a lot better than New Search on Ancestry. It's not as easy to
use and I think it has a tendency to have strange returns on queries.
Earlier, I said that the LDS transcriptions, at least when it comes to Indiana
marriages, are no where near as good as Ancestry's although they have a lot more
records in that area (but not in others.)
-----Original Message-----
From: Antoinette Waughtel Sorensen <waughtel33(a)gmail.com>
To: injeffer <injeffer(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thu, Feb 21, 2013 2:39 pm
Subject: Re: [INJEFFER] Old search-still not sure I understand
Are you people talking about Ancestry or Family Search?
Antoinette (Tacoma, Washington)
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 11:14 AM, <bugszie(a)aol.com> wrote:
I agree, they don't make it easy. I even called them, and they acted like
they did not know what I was talking about.
The new search is a failure as far as I am concerned, and I think that LDS
is doing a poor job of listening to their researchers.
They give you too much information in a disorganized manner. They should
be listening to the people who do the majority of the searches.
M
Marlene D. Seaton
-----Original Message-----
From: bobwscott <bobwscott(a)aol.com>
To: injeffer <injeffer(a)rootsweb.com>; kanichi <kanichi(a)theriver.com>
Sent: Thu, Feb 21, 2013 12:04 pm
Subject: Re: [INJEFFER] Old search-still not sure I understand
It basically toggles. If you are in Old Search The link will say "Go to New
Search" I f you are in New Search it will say "Go to Old Search"
You have to be in the "Search All Records Screen"
Believe me, when it first would switch back on me I would spend minutes
trying
to find the link before i finally made myself memorize where it is. They
don't
make it easy
-----Original Message-----
From: bugszie <bugszie(a)aol.com>
To: kanichi <kanichi(a)theriver.com>; injeffer <injeffer(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thu, Feb 21, 2013 1:53 pm
Subject: Re: [INJEFFER] Old search-still not sure I understand
Sorry, that new search link is up in the upper right hand corner under the
tabs.
Iit is highlighted and underlined.
Marlene D. Seaton
-----Original Message-----
From: Linda Jenkins-Wensel <kanichi(a)theriver.com>
To: injeffer <injeffer(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thu, Feb 21, 2013 11:39 am
Subject: [INJEFFER] Old search-still not sure I understand
Could you explain how to get old search once again, can't seem to find
it...looked at drop down at search and didn't find it, am I looking to
soon?
Sorry but just don't understand how to get there. Thanks for any help.
Linda
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
INJEFFER-request(a)rootsweb.com
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body
of
the message
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
INJEFFER-request(a)rootsweb.com
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body
of
the message
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
INJEFFER-request(a)rootsweb.com
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body
of
the message
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
INJEFFER-request(a)rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to INJEFFER-request(a)rootsweb.com
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of
the message
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to INJEFFER-request(a)rootsweb.com
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of
the message