RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: bugbear on Friday 17 November 17 14:08 GMT (UK)
-
I was searching to find information about the Bice family. In Middlesex/London this is a VERY rare name, and I was hoping to trace their movements/exodus.
So I searched in London/Middlesex/Essex/Suffolk/Surrey/Kent.
No results. I know they were a poor family, but it defies belief that NONE of them had a phone right up til 1984.
Out of paranoia, I tried Devon and Cornwall, which is where the Bice name originated (the earliest Bices in London were all born in Cornwall).
Nothing.
So I tried "Smith" in Devon.
Nothing. ???
I attached my failed attempt (query, and results). Am I being dumb, or is the search borked?
BugBear
-
It must be you?! ;D ;D
I no longer have a sub to Ancestry, but I can still do a basic search.
For Bice, I found:
S.F. Bice Essex
C. Bice Hertfordshire
M.J. Bice Surrey
Bice Berkshire
D.T. Bice Surrey
D.L. Bice Berkshire
E.J. Bice Middlesex
And that's just on page 1 of the results.
-
I can't help with the Ancestry problem but it doesn't surprise me that they might not have a phone. I remember knowing a family that didn't have one circa 1990 and I didn't get one till 1980 when I was all of 31 - IIRC it was the cost of getting one installed then that put me and other people off, but as soon as I moved to a house with one I took it over. (Plus I'd lived very near a red phone box.)
Even if they got a phone they might have gone ex-directory immediately. Nowadays it seems most people are xD, judging by how thin the residential section of the phone book has become.
-
It must be you?! ;D ;D
I no longer have a sub to Ancestry, but I can still do a basic search.
For Bice, I found:
S.F. Bice Essex
C. Bice Hertfordshire
M.J. Bice Surrey
Bice Berkshire
D.T. Bice Surrey
D.L. Bice Berkshire
E.J. Bice Middlesex
And that's just on page 1 of the results.
How did you do the search?
I've tried going into the card index for "British Phone Books, 1880-1984" and ONLY doing the search that way, and I've also gone in from the top most, and tried to select sources down to "British Phone Books, 1880-1984". Nothing either way.
I do have the shiny new Firefox, which might be a possible factor.
BugBear
-
I do have the shiny new Firefox, which might be a possible factor.
BugBear
I tried Seamonkey - same lack of results.
BugBear
-
I'm getting the same results as you, Bugbear. I tried searching for my grandparents, also an unusual name who I know had a phone and nothing comes up either. They were in the phone book as I've found them before. Then as a test I tried Smith, England, London - none. I don't believe that every Smith in London was ex directory. ;D
(I'm using Chrome)
-
It didn’t work for me either.
However, at the right side of the page there is ‘Browse this collection’ and you can get into the directories that way, through year-I used 1984 and choose London A-D. I found two by going through the book!
-
I'm getting the same results as you, Bugbear. I tried searching for my grandparents, also an unusual name who I know had a phone and nothing comes up either. They were in the phone book as I've found them before. Then as a test I tried Smith, England, London - none. I don't believe that every Smith in London was ex directory. ;D
(I'm using Chrome)
At least I know I''m not going mad. Thank you (and your ex-directory Smiths)
BugBear
-
I amended my post - I used London not Middlesex.
-
I also use the new Firefox - so it's not that! ;D
I clicked on Search, then selected Directories & Member Lists.
In the search boxes I used a surname of Bice, and left all other fields clear.
6,398 results :D But I only looked at page 1.
-
I also use the new Firefox - so it's not that! ;D
I clicked on Search, then selected Directories & Member Lists.
In the search boxes I used a surname of Bice, and left all other fields clear.
6,398 results :D But I only looked at page 1.
I don't have that (exact) menu option?!
I'm using "Schools, Directories & Church Histories"
BugBear
-
I clicked on Search, then selected Directories & Member Lists.
I can't see that on my options, the nearest is Schools, Directories and Church Histories.
Same here Bugbear!
-
I don’t have the same option either :-\
I used the card catalogue for Phone directories and the method I outlined works.
-
Sorry all, I've been out since early afternoon.
I will try to recollect exactly how I got to a page showing "Directories & Member Lists" - obviously I forgot exactly how I did it before. :-[
But I definitely had a page showing just that ;D
-
I am having the same problem, I also used the card catalogue and got the Phone Directories. I did exactly the same searches that brought successful results for my own uncommon name in the past, now they are coming up blank, even our own old address and number don't show up.
The only way I can get a result is through the browse option, I am on my iPad which uses Safari. It will be interesting if the same thing happens tomorrow when I go in my laptop.
-
I reported this (with screen shots) to Ancestry. I got the following reply.
Thank you for contacting Ancestry in regards to finding certain records in the phone books. We're happy to help you with this today.
If you will go to your Home page you will see a box on the left side of the screen that says "What's Happening At Ancestry". There is a selection for Directories. Please click that.
On the next page on the right hand side is a box at the top of the column that says All Our Directories & Gazetteers. The first selection says National and the second says Local Directories. Please click that selection then choose from the drop down list the place where you would like to search.
The UK Ancestry site is the only one to have this fabulous search feature! You can search by phone, trade and city directories or search by occupations, criminals and probate and tax. We hope that you will find this useful.
Searching City and Area Directories
Searching by Occupation or Organization
>:(
I know how to do it. But it doesn't work!!
BugBear
-
Deleted - misread the rest of the thread :'(
-
New email from Ancestry; fractionally more hopeful
Dear Paul,
Thank you for contacting Ancestry in regards to the search results!
Thank you for reporting that problem to us. We have received a few reports of this kind and are investigating at the moment. We are very sorry about the inconvenience here and working on solving the problem as soon as possible.
I hope this helps!
Kind regards,
Anneli
Customer Solutions Associate
Ancestry
At least they acknowledge the fault.
BugBear
-
Still broken - nobody called Smith in Essex, ever!
BugBear
-
I think they are more interested in selling their DNA products than getting their website working properly ::)
-
Still no "Smiths" in "London", "England".
BugBear
-
This was reported end of October on their facebook page - see attached. They definitely dont seem to be in any hurry to fix it!
-
Still no "Smiths" in "London", "England".
BugBear
Hi Bugbear
I've joined the search too - no Smith's for me either. I also tried 'Brown' my London family. No Brown's in London either.... :-X agree DNA seems to be taking the forefront. Ancestry! Wake up ! >:(
-
Hi Bugbear
I've joined the search too - no Smith's for me either. I also tried 'Brown' my London family. No Brown's in London either.... :-X agree DNA seems to be taking the forefront. Ancestry! Wake up ! >:(
Tell 'em !!
BugBear
-
I do have the shiny new Firefox, which might be a possible factor.
BugBear
I tried Seamonkey - same lack of results.
BugBear
I had same problem yesterday using Internet explorer, no results for Derhams in Bournemouth area when I know I have found them before. Browsed through directories and found them manually - lucky the names are in alphabetical order.
I think Ancestry's search engine is playing up
-
I had same problem yesterday using Internet explorer, no results for Derhams in Bournemouth area when I know I have found them before. Browsed through directories and found them manually - lucky the names are in alphabetical order.
I think Ancestry's search engine is playing up
And has been since October, according to other posts in this thread. >:(
BugBear
-
I had same problem yesterday using Internet explorer, no results for Derhams in Bournemouth area when I know I have found them before. Browsed through directories and found them manually - lucky the names are in alphabetical order.
I think Ancestry's search engine is playing up
And has been since October, according to other posts in this thread. >:(
BugBear
[/quote
It's probably almost a year since I last used phone book search, so could well have been a problem for three months.
-
This still doesn't work. I just logged another report.
I "suggest" others do the same.
BugBear
-
Where do you log reports, I can't see a contact us :-\
-
Bottom of Home Page - About Us - then Contact Information, choose type the question or it gives the free-phone number.
-
Thanks BumbleB I was going round in circles ;D
-
Where do you log reports, I can't see a contact us :-\
I always have to search for ages to find it - they hide it quite well, "for some reason" >:(
BugBear
-
I have complained. It is certainly hidden well obviously for a reason.
Rosie
-
Their reply -
My name is ..... I am an Ancestry Directly Expert . We are advanced Ancestry users who are assisting with queries such as yours. We can not access your account but can offer you other assistance.
You are correct, this is a known issue . Unfortunately Ancestry have not given an expected date for resolution. I totally understand your frustration at the delay in fixing this issue
You can let them know how this negatively impacts your use of the site here http://www.ancestry.co.uk/cs/suggestions
-
This is bizarre - all OTHER phone books seem to work (search for "Bice" attached)
I wonder if this is legal/copyright/privacy related and NOT technical?
BugBear
-
Surely then they could restrict the dates that are accessible. Most of the records I had were for my grandfather & uncle in the London/Surrey areas in the 1950's both of whom have been dead some time.
I think that their reply was weak and what good would it do me with completing their form that they linked to. Why are 'Ancestry Directly Expert ... advanced Ancestry users' replying to the questions anyway when they clearly can't help. All they are doing is fobbing us off not solving the problem.
Rosie
-
Surely then they could restrict the dates that are accessible. Most of the records I had were for my grandfather & uncle in the London/Surrey areas in the 1950's both of whom have been dead some time.
I think that their reply was weak and what good would it do me with completing their form that they linked to. Why are 'Ancestry Directly Expert ... advanced Ancestry users' replying to the questions anyway when they clearly can't help. All they are doing is fobbing us off not solving the problem.
Rosie
I'm asking this question on their public Facebook and Twitter feeds too.
If anybody else is interested in answers (and solutions) they might choose to do the same thing. ;)
BugBear
-
I don't 'do' facebook & twitter ;D
-
I don't 'do' facebook & twitter ;D
Hopefully it's not just thee and me interested in this...
BugBear
-
'Ancestry Directly Expert ... advanced Ancestry users'
What a very strange title - who are these people, are they employed by Ancestry or a type of volunteer Moderator?
-
Have you got a link to their FB page, there are so many different Ancestry groups on there, a lot that say they aren't actually connected with the Ancestry firm?
-
'Ancestry Directly Expert ... advanced Ancestry users'
What a very strange title - who are these people, are they employed by Ancestry or a type of volunteer Moderator?
I thought it was weird. They sound like a volunteer but who in their right mind would do anything for a big company like that for nothing. I just feel that they are fobbing me off.
-
Have you got a link to their FB page, there are so many different Ancestry groups on there, a lot that say they aren't actually connected with the Ancestry firm?
https://www.facebook.com/AncestryUK/
BugBear
-
I too had an email from someone with such a title when I logged the fault in December. It may even be the same person, although the vagueness hints at a rule-based script. The fault call was closed automatically without giving me the chance to escalate it.
The attitude seems to be be: "No idea why this is happening. I can't fix it. I don't have access to anybody who can. Life's hard, isn't it?"
-
My email reply was/is:
Hi Paul
My name is XXXX. I am an Ancestry Directly Expert . We are advanced Ancestry users who are assisting with queries such as yours. We can not access your account but can offer you other assistance.
This is a known issue with Ancestry at the moment . Ancestry are aware there is a problem with the search in the British Phone Books record set They are currently working on a resolution and though they have not given us an estimate of a time it will be resolved we all hope things will be back to normal soon .
I understand you frustration and suggest you let Ancestry know how this is negatively impacting your use of the website on this page
-
Standard answer then ::)
-
They're hiding behind a layer of these "Ancestry Directly" people;
My name is XXXXX. I am an Ancestry Directly Expert . We are advanced Ancestry users who are assisting with queries such as yours.
.
.
.
As I mentioned earlier, Ancestry are aware of the issue. They have said they are attempting to resolve it but have not given a date for resolution. There is nothing that I as another customer can do to speed the process of resolution. All I can do is advise customers to let Ancestry know your displeasure by submitting feedback on the page I posted on the previous message
.
.
(which was)
.
.
I totally agree with you. As a fellow customer it is very frustrating. You can make your feeling known to Ancestry on their feedback page http://www.ancestry.com/cs/suggestions
BugBear
-
It seems that it is a case of we will take your money but we really don't care about the service we are giving. Whichever link you follow they don't want to listen to complaints.
As for Ancestry Directly Experts I wonder how they qualified to be called that, would you work voluntarily for them ???
-
It seems that it is a case of we will take your money but we really don't care about the service we are giving. Whichever link you follow they don't want to listen to complaints.
As for Ancestry Directly Experts I wonder how they qualified to be called that, would you work voluntarily for them ???
May there's a free (or discounted) sub in it for them?
BugBear
-
Maybe there is. They are not really giving any help though, just fobbing us off. ;D
-
I attempted to escalate matters from a "Directly" person to an actual An*stry employee. I got this:
Dear Paul,
Thank you for contacting Ancestry in regards to not being able to search the British Phone Books, 1880-1984 collection.
We're sorry for not getting back to you sooner. We are always sorry to learn that our members had a frustrating experience. We are happy to assist you. This issue has been reported. We ask for your patience in this matter. Unfortunately, we do not have a time frame for when this will be resolved.
When you pull up no results, you can look on the left hand side at the box below the filters and select Browse Individual Records to help you access what you are searching for.
While we hope you enjoy using our Services, there are things we don't promise about our Services. For further information, please click on the following link:
http://www.ancestry.co.uk/cs/legal/termsandconditions#Warranty
If you need additional assistance, reply to this email or feel free to contact us by phone at 0-800-783-1340 from 9 AM to 10 PM GMT, Monday through Friday or from 9 AM - 8 PM GMT, Saturday and Sunday. If you're calling from outside of the UK, please click here for numbers and hours in your region.
Kind regards,
XXXX
Customer Solutions Associate
Ancestry
-
Thanks for that :)
What amazes me is that it was working so what is the problem. It is not as though they have not transcribed it.
People will just have to be patient ::)
-
Thanks for that :)
What amazes me is that it was working so what is the problem. It is not as though they have not transcribed it.
Agreed - it used to work, and other phone books still work.
People will just have to be patient ::)
Ahem. IMHO People "will have to" bombard them with complaints to get it fixed. ;)
Browsing the pages (at least I suppose they're sorted) is OK if you KNOW where your ancestors lived, but the whole point and merit of searchable records is that you can find stuff you didn't know about.
BugBear
-
It appears to be (finally) searchable again.
BugBear
-
At last.
Virtually all of my emails to Ancestry are of the "It used to work - you've broken it" type.
This sort of problem is an indication that database maintenance is being skimped. Just because the contents of a dataset is apparently static does not mean that it can be ignored. The structures need to be compatible with the methods used to access it, and a slight change to the user interface, or a newer version of software, can have unforeseen effects.