The latest Ancestry "feature"

[Johnf04]

Thanks for the hint, Jool....I've unticked the option.

[ladybird]

I think I'm quite glad I don't have my tree on Ancestry...it looks hideous!

[jim234j]

Thanks for that Jool.  Got rid of that.  Its a very bad idea.

[Melbell]

The whole point here is that all these companies want to do your research for you and they don't care how sloppy or stupid their suggestions are as long as you are using their sites and making them money.  Don't play their game - use the research facilities and info they provide, but keep your research your own. You are the one who has invested your time, money and interest in the research.  Keep it safe and sensible. Don't give them the control.

Melbell

[Chilternbirder]

I have looked at these rather than just throwing my hands up in horror.

They seem to be based on a concensus of the available public trees which is pretty hit and miss. They certainly haven't broken any brick walls for me but there are a couple of 50% probabilities which are worth checking in detail.

There seems to be a second feature in that the gender of spouses no longer seems to be assumed. Unless I have missed something there is no tick box when creating a new record, you need to go to "Quick Edit" as a separate step.

[Pheno]

I've always found Ancestry hints to be precisely as advertised - hints.  Either ones that Ancestry has actually found or more numerously details of people that someone else has linked in their tree to the person I have in my tree.  In most cases the link is erroneous but is what another member has listed on their tree.

I don't mind ancestry showing me this and deciding for myself that I don't want to take advantage of this link (and probably have a good laugh to myself at the other person's blunder).

However, I now find that Ancestry are suggesting completely untoward hints - suggesting a marriage for my person on a date prior to his birth for example!  Is this another glitch or have lots of others really incorporated this kind of info into their trees as it seems to be occurring much more frequently than previously - unless they have just completely run out of useful hints to offer me.

Pheno

[PrawnCocktail]

However, I now find that Ancestry are suggesting completely untoward hints - suggesting a marriage for my person on a date prior to his birth for example!  Is this another glitch or have lots of others really incorporated this kind of info into their trees as it seems to be occurring much more frequently than previously - unless they have just completely run out of useful hints to offer me.

Quite. Today I have been offered baptisms over 100 years late, or in somewhere like Jamaica or Dublin instead of UK. Marriages in the 1990's insead of the 18th century. Baptisms after deaths. London instead of Oxfordshire, Derbyshire instead of Cheshire. Duplicates of 1939 Register, that I already have linked.

As long as the name is the same, they don't seem to care where or when they are. I caught sight of the number of rejects on one guy - I'd accepted 1 hint, and rejected 28!!!   

That's if I can get Hints to display at all, they keep telling me they're offline, or non-existant. 

[ThrelfallYorky]

Yes, I've found "hints" with pretty stupid dates - and I really, really wish there was something that I could tick to say NO RESULTS FROM USA!!
I'm aware that most of the subscribers on it are American, but when you're hunting for people with absolutely every place in England, let alone Britain, it's a bit maddening!