Could I ask those who have the beta if you can get back to the old version or is that it ::)
Could I ask those who have the beta if you can get back to the old version or is that it ::)
Would I be wrong in thinking that this beta might only be on mobile devices i.e. iPads, Amazon Kindles etc?
Would I be wrong in thinking that this beta might only be on mobile devices i.e. iPads, Amazon Kindles etc?yes
I'm confused about this because there was a big change last ?summer/autumn. Margaret started a thread, It wasannounceddiscussed here:
http://paulbrooker.posthaven.com/ancestry-dot-com-updates-updated-previews-dna-beta-test-results
Are you sure that it is another version, since there have been no announcements or discussions as there was to the last one.
Gadget
It's a brand new interface, plus what were Hints pointing to your tree and a.n.other's are now Common Ancestors pointing to a lineage composed of two or more trees joined up to fill in generation gaps.
OK I am a little concerned with "the pointing to a lineage composed of two or more trees joined up to fill in generation gaps"
given how some of the potential parent hints they give are clearly wrong and yet people still add them to their trees. That said I think there are potentially more positives than negatives.
This morning I noticed a blue "1" next to the "Extras" tab at the top of my Ancestry DNA page.
Being a curious fellow I had a look.
At the bottom of the drop-down "Ancestry Lab" takes you to the option to enable or disable the beta.
Of course, this may not be available to all.
I'm off to check out some of the "common ancestors" matches .....
Welcome. Please feel free to join any of our current beta features listed below. These may only be available for a limited time and we hope you enjoy the experience!
If you enable a particular beta feature, we will collect usage data and you may be asked to provide feedback about your experience.
Has anyone, who wasn't on the new beta interface, clicked to try these new 'features'?
If so, have all your results gone to the new/scrolling interface?
thanks
On that new Ancestry Lab page it implies that you can turn these new features on and off at will - I presumed that if you turned all off you would revert to the usual set up.You're probably right, there is a disable link for both new features, but I'll have a play around before clicking just in case it disappears permanently ;D.
Is this not the case?
Pheno
Thrulines is the best new beta feature it is sensational i, suddenly I can work out many more connectionsUnfortunately the first ones I looked at were completely wrong ;D. I have to say, although originally against the idea the scrolling is growing on me ::). Originally to skip pages, there was about a 3-4 second wait, but now there is just a micro second pause as you scroll down. The only thing that concerns me is the memory running out if you scroll ad infinitum.
It's very good, but the line of my direct ancestors has a mistake in it. They have swapped my ancestor and his wife for an identically named cousin and his differently named wife. Otherwise they all seem to be correct. One tree they said had a matching name, didn't, when I went to that tree. I suppose they will iron these glitches out. cbThe Thrulines is even worse than I thought! Having made this wrong connection around the 1850s, it now gives me all of these legions of ancestors of these wrong relatives, back to the 1600s, some people of which will now gleefully add to their trees ::) ::). The other lines I checked, on different parts of my tree were also wrong :(.
My reaction to Thrulines is very positive. I have found a good link to a cousin with only 10cM and another with only 17cM. I think they would have been difficult to connect having female lines.As far as I can see they have exactly the same problem as the Ancestry tree 'hints', i.e. the criteria seems to be if one person has it on a public tree, ancestry will suggest it, without any checking whatsoever. Then of course, after a few people have accepted the hint, others see how many people have the same link and assume it must be right. Thrulines is just taking ancestry tree hints and attaching them to DNA links.
The ones I know about and would expect to see are there. This gives confidence that some of early guesswork was actually correct. I like it.
I also like the Common Ancestor feature. I think these two features will build up real links over time.
However I can see many people just copying the ones from further back form other trees with out research. They should of course be worked through properly.
This will potentially annoy a lot of people and could backfire on ancestry -
They are giving suggestions from people's private trees attached to their DNA, which will certainly help, but some people may opt out.
But I also noticed 2 suggested potential ancestors for me. I got a bit excited, thinking I might have a breakthrough on one of my lines, a suggested DNA match from these 2.
The suggested match turned out to be my first cousin.
The suggested potential ancestors were taken from my private tree which is not attached to my DNA results.
These 2 don't appear on my DNA tree, as I am working on them, didn't want everyone copying potentially incorrect information.
Some people will be very annoyed if and when they find out - but they probably won't find out if they haven't had their DNA tested.
This will potentially annoy a lot of people and could backfire on ancestry -
They are giving suggestions from people's private trees attached to their DNA, which will certainly help, but some people may opt out.
But the remedy is there. A tree can be searchable or not searchable. If people don't want suggestions taken from their private tree just make it non searchableBut I also noticed 2 suggested potential ancestors for me. I got a bit excited, thinking I might have a breakthrough on one of my lines, a suggested DNA match from these 2.
The suggested match turned out to be my first cousin.
The suggested potential ancestors were taken from my private tree which is not attached to my DNA results.
These 2 don't appear on my DNA tree, as I am working on them, didn't want everyone copying potentially incorrect information.
Some people will be very annoyed if and when they find out - but they probably won't find out if they haven't had their DNA tested.
Might the suggestion here be to keep your tree private and searchable as now but to do your “thinking” on a separate private and non-searchable tree and that why your musings will not end up as suggestions to others.
I do appreciate the problem of the potential parents hints Ancestry give and have on a few occasions given them feedback as to why their suggestions are wrong but never got any feedback from them on the points I made.
Had a better look today, I appear to only have ThurLines and there I have 15 matches. Just went through them all and it was great, a few I already knew and had been in contact with but a couple were non responders to messages so I was able to work out where they fitted, a few others were up to 5th to 8th cousin which I wouldn't even have looked at before.Sorry to be a party pooper :P ;D, but I really think people need to not give in to the 'rush' of having these new promising ancestors appear. Really this Thruline is the exact same thing as Ancestry tree hints, with the only difference that it is now tied to DNA. We on the board have pretty much condemned tree hints as an almost unmitigated disaster, spreading wrong links multiple times over with the ease of being able to copy onto your own. In my case at least 60% of these Thruline matches are wrong, even when multiple DNA matches are showing, because people have simply chosen the wrong person, but with the same name and rough birthdate, and proceeded to trace back 100+ years, providing zillions of other exciting Thruline matches, but I know they're all wrong :-\.
I'm happy with how it worked.
Just a pity no one from my father's side has a tree so no matches on ThruLines on that side.
Had a better look today, I appear to only have ThurLines and there I have 15 matches. Just went through them all and it was great, a few I already knew and had been in contact with but a couple were non responders to messages so I was able to work out where they fitted, a few others were up to 5th to 8th cousin which I wouldn't even have looked at before.Sorry to be a party pooper :P ;D, but I really think people need to not give in to the 'rush' of having these new promising ancestors appear. Really this Thruline is the exact same thing as Ancestry tree hints, with the only difference that it is now tied to DNA. We on the board have pretty much condemned tree hints as an almost unmitigated disaster, spreading wrong links multiple times over with the ease of being able to copy onto your own. In my case at least 60% of these Thruline matches are wrong, even when multiple DNA matches are showing, because people have simply chosen the wrong person, but with the same name and rough birthdate, and proceeded to trace back 100+ years, providing zillions of other exciting Thruline matches, but I know they're all wrong :-\.
I'm happy with how it worked.
Just a pity no one from my father's side has a tree so no matches on ThruLines on that side.
Sinann, Are you looking in the right place?I'll check that later, I did find it last night but couldn't remember how I got there, wouldn't work at the time though.
Any page > Top middle> Extras> Ancestry Labs > My Tree Tags and New & Improved DNA Matches, both beta
Sinann, Are you looking in the right place?I don't have a subscription so I only have a tree linked to my DNA and yes it goes back 4 generations
Any page > Top middle> Extras> Ancestry Labs > My Tree Tags and New & Improved DNA Matches, both beta
You say you only have 15 ThruLine suggestions. Do you meet the following criteria?
1) AncestryDNA results linked to a public tree or a private searchable one
(2) DNA matches also linked to a tree, and
(3) A tree that extends back at least 3–4 generations
Regards Margaret
Totally agree. melba. Also, the My Heritage 'Theory of Family Relativity ' appears to be the same!Thanks :). I am worried we are all going to go a bit mad with a new toy...but it's just the same old thing as before with a posh new name, which they no doubt took weeks to come up with, with numerous meetings and cake served ;D ;D.
Gadget
That's the thing - I have one ancestor, that if I didn't know otherwise, it would look like an absolute cert, and on Thrulines it is showing as a DNA link to three other people all neatly tracing back to this one person. But that person is the mother of someone of the same name, not our ancestor. They didn't find the right link because I found the baptism from a local baptism index rather than the big websites. People should always try these local indexes such as family history society or private indexes if a search fails on the main sites. People may be under the impression that because there is a DNA link that gives these ancestors credence, I am afraid it doesn't at all.Had a better look today, I appear to only have ThurLines and there I have 15 matches. Just went through them all and it was great, a few I already knew and had been in contact with but a couple were non responders to messages so I was able to work out where they fitted, a few others were up to 5th to 8th cousin which I wouldn't even have looked at before.Sorry to be a party pooper :P ;D, but I really think people need to not give in to the 'rush' of having these new promising ancestors appear. Really this Thruline is the exact same thing as Ancestry tree hints, with the only difference that it is now tied to DNA. We on the board have pretty much condemned tree hints as an almost unmitigated disaster, spreading wrong links multiple times over with the ease of being able to copy onto your own. In my case at least 60% of these Thruline matches are wrong, even when multiple DNA matches are showing, because people have simply chosen the wrong person, but with the same name and rough birthdate, and proceeded to trace back 100+ years, providing zillions of other exciting Thruline matches, but I know they're all wrong :-\.
I'm happy with how it worked.
Just a pity no one from my father's side has a tree so no matches on ThruLines on that side.
I'm sure your correct but I didn't just slot them in willy nilly I checked all the shared matches, it is possible they have connected themselves to the wrong person but they do at least connect to the correct family,
and I've only listed them under their believed ancestor on my offline tree so I won't be sending anyone astray.
Sinann, Are you looking in the right place?I'll check that later, I did find it last night but couldn't remember how I got there, wouldn't work at the time though.
Any page > Top middle> Extras> Ancestry Labs > My Tree Tags and New & Improved DNA Matches, both beta
That a shame, and must be very annoying but in this case the 3 people I'm looking at, 2 I also match to one of their parents and if the parents can't get their grandparents names correct that there is no hope. The other one I'm a bit wary of I need to chat to some contacts and send him a message.Totally agree. melba. Also, the My Heritage 'Theory of Family Relativity ' appears to be the same!Thanks :). I am worried we are all going to go a bit mad with a new toy...but it's just the same old thing as before with a posh new name, which they no doubt took weeks to come up with, with numerous meetings and cake served ;D ;D.
GadgetThat's the thing - I have one ancestor, that if I didn't know otherwise, it would look like an absolute cert, and on Thrulines it is showing as a DNA link to three other people all neatly tracing back to this one person. But that person is the mother of someone of the same name, not our ancestor. They didn't find the right link because I found the baptism from a local baptism index rather than the big websites. People should always try these local indexes such as family history society or private indexes if a search fails on the main sites. People may be under the impression that because there is a DNA link that gives these ancestors credence, I am afraid it doesn't at all.Had a better look today, I appear to only have ThurLines and there I have 15 matches. Just went through them all and it was great, a few I already knew and had been in contact with but a couple were non responders to messages so I was able to work out where they fitted, a few others were up to 5th to 8th cousin which I wouldn't even have looked at before.Sorry to be a party pooper :P ;D, but I really think people need to not give in to the 'rush' of having these new promising ancestors appear. Really this Thruline is the exact same thing as Ancestry tree hints, with the only difference that it is now tied to DNA. We on the board have pretty much condemned tree hints as an almost unmitigated disaster, spreading wrong links multiple times over with the ease of being able to copy onto your own. In my case at least 60% of these Thruline matches are wrong, even when multiple DNA matches are showing, because people have simply chosen the wrong person, but with the same name and rough birthdate, and proceeded to trace back 100+ years, providing zillions of other exciting Thruline matches, but I know they're all wrong :-\.
I'm happy with how it worked.
Just a pity no one from my father's side has a tree so no matches on ThruLines on that side.
I'm sure your correct but I didn't just slot them in willy nilly I checked all the shared matches, it is possible they have connected themselves to the wrong person but they do at least connect to the correct family,
and I've only listed them under their believed ancestor on my offline tree so I won't be sending anyone astray.
Sorry to be a party pooper :P ;D, but I really think people need to not give in to the 'rush' of having these new promising ancestors appear. Really this Thruline is the exact same thing as Ancestry tree hints, with the only difference that it is now tied to DNA. We on the board have pretty much condemned tree hints as an almost unmitigated disaster, spreading wrong links multiple times over with the ease of being able to copy onto your own. In my case at least 60% of these Thruline matches are wrong, even when multiple DNA matches are showing, because people have simply chosen the wrong person, but with the same name and rough birthdate, and proceeded to trace back 100+ years, providing zillions of other exciting Thruline matches, but I know they're all wrong :-\.
I think we are all in agreement here melba, each DNA clue has to be properly evaluated.In my case, it is definitely the case of someone, rather than searching out the parish indicated by census entries, took a baptism in a nearby county ;D, and then proceeded to trace that person's ancestry back over 100 years, all of which ancestors now show up on my Thruline :-\ and seem to have been copied to multiple trees. I think it is a bit of a plague now, people just think ALL records must be online and if they can't find it, it must not exist. But in this case the parish is covered by no online indexes, only a private index (but as I said, you could also go to the register at the local record office).
But it isn't mainly a case of people choosing the 'wrong person with the same name and rough birthdate' though there will be some.
It is Ancestry, picking A from one tree, B from another tree, C from another tree, then combining them into one big line of descent, sometimes correct, often incorrect. The match hasn't got the wrong tree at all, it is Ancestry at fault.
I agree that the common ancestor thing seems to be more reliable, but I am not sure if that is just luck so far. I am not sure if you match some but not all of the other person's tree, whether it still shows up as a common ancestor?
Hopefully teething problems - on my side I have found two definite false connections, several which will need further investigation, but the majority appear to be valid matches (not Thruline, but New & Improved DNA Matches, checking out shared ancestor hints).
It is still in beta phase, I have given feedback, I think we all need to do so to make the most of this new offering.
Regards Margaret
Had a better look today, I appear to only have ThurLines and there I have 15 matches. Just went through them all and it was great, a few I already knew and had been in contact with but a couple were non responders to messages so I was able to work out where they fitted, a few others were up to 5th to 8th cousin which I wouldn't even have looked at before.Sorry to be a party pooper :P ;D, but I really think people need to not give in to the 'rush' of having these new promising ancestors appear. Really this Thruline is the exact same thing as Ancestry tree hints, with the only difference that it is now tied to DNA. We on the board have pretty much condemned tree hints as an almost unmitigated disaster, spreading wrong links multiple times over with the ease of being able to copy onto your own. In my case at least 60% of these Thruline matches are wrong, even when multiple DNA matches are showing, because people have simply chosen the wrong person, but with the same name and rough birthdate, and proceeded to trace back 100+ years, providing zillions of other exciting Thruline matches, but I know they're all wrong :-\.
I'm happy with how it worked.
Just a pity no one from my father's side has a tree so no matches on ThruLines on that side.
What triggers them to disappear? I've only got two left. I only looked at all of them, I didn't add them to anything.
Easy come easy go, they were fun while I had them.
Maybe it's different if you have a sub, but I would just not click on it.What triggers them to disappear? I've only got two left. I only looked at all of them, I didn't add them to anything.
Easy come easy go, they were fun while I had them.
I was going to ask how to deleter/ignore them like you can Ancestry Hints (which is what I end up doing most of the time) but can't find that option with Thrulines.
Maybe mine will also just disappear at some point.
Pheno
For my higher matches I'd already identified the common ancestors and made a note against the match, so it was just a case of giving them a group - I like groups, more user-friendly than the chrome add-on I was using previously.
Now I'm working through the suggested common ancestors for my lower ranked matches and whilst one or two have come good, a large number of them seem to depend on "tree-hopping" and these are iffy at best. The usual complaint of someone with approximately the right name born 150 years earlier or later and on a different continent.
Jane :-)
Found a very odd one on my husband's side.
Ancestry is suggesting that his grandfather was not Joseph A 1881 - 1956, but was John A 1857 - 1932.
Leading back from this, he is supposedly descended from Z family from Lancashire and Derbyshire. I have his grandfather documented and sourced, originally from Wakefield, Yorkshire. I must have got it wrong, I'll change everything. I'm getting many suggestions for husband's incorrect line in Thrulines, which is annoying. I have sent feedback, but don't know if it will get sorted out.
Regards Margaret
Ancestry, You are the most irresponsible company.Margaret I can see the logic of how they might do that i.e. they can tell from a very high centimorgan link to another testee, that they are a full sibling, and that full sibling has a much more substantial tree that either links directly to your 4G grandparents, or partially the way, and Ancestry are using the new Thruline 'intelligence' to join trees up. Of course, we all know the hazards that brings as already detailed.
I have been checking the New and Improved DNA matches daily, with the filter Common Ancestor. I can easily see when new matches appear because I immediately tag them as I review them - coloured star to indicate add to favourites, more research needed, invalid match etc.
Today a new match, sharing 7 cMs, common Ancestor supposedly my 4G grandparents, her 5G grandparents. The match has one person in her tree, herself.
This connection may or may not be valid, but I feel it is utterly wrong of ancestry to assume that her parents are who they think they are, then carry on with these assumptions re parentage for 6 more generations.
It won't stop me trying to confirm this match, who I would not have found any other way, But genealogy is about so much more than wild assumptions, based on one name.
Regards Margaret
Richard,Glad its not just me, but sad its happening.....Still waiting for support to respond to me
It’s the same for us, no ThruLines are being shown, whilst we have numerous matches including known tree matches.
Al & Al
Richard,Glad its not just me, but sad its happening.....Still waiting for support to respond to me
It’s the same for us, no ThruLines are being shown, whilst we have numerous matches including known tree matches.
Al & Al
Thank you for contacting Ancestry in regards to DNA ThruLines.
I can confirm for you that as this is a new feature not everyone will have this instantly. This is something that is slowly rolling out to all members over the coming weeks so you may find that if you have not got it by now you will have it soon enough. I will attach a help article below that may further explain ThruLines to yourself and how they work.
AncestryDNA® ThruLines™
If you need additional assistance, reply to this email or feel free to contact us by phone
Well I have got a response from support, and they suggested unlinking my tree and then relinking it, then leave for 48 hours....The lady who responded said if they didn't work they would raise it with the developers as she could see I had an extensive tree, and it theory it should have generated the new features, but it is in beta so its not fully working in all cases :-). So far its been 30 hours since I unlinked/relinked my tree and no show yet on the new features working
Richard
I added new people to my linked tree and it asn't adjusted for that yet. About 3 days now.I have a cousin with a DNA match and a matching tree to mine, and her DNA results came in 3 weeks ago and they have never matched on the tree... Something funny is going on with the Ancestry matching/syncing process :-)
I have not looked at my DNA on Ancestry for some time ::) When I did the other day I noticed ThruLines.
After checking them all out I have some new connections and two 4 x great grandmothers I have not seen before :o
Kooky
ThruLines is very weird. I have a bare bones ancestors only tree attached to my DNA results and my ThruLines page seems to include all of my ancestors, conveniently arranged in order working backwards in pairs. Sort of.The private thing in Thrulines just means that the details are taken from a private tree Jane, rather than that their tree says they are still alive ;D. Obviously that's a point of some controversy, since many weren't aware that Ancestry's terms and conditions allowed them to take private tree data and join it up to make common ancestor links.
One of my long-dead GGMs has a private individual as her spouse and that private individual is apparently a potential ancestor. They are private because they are apparently still living (yes that is what Ancestry says, not an assumption on my part). When I click through it seems that a distant rellie has that person, whom I know to have been born 1855, as still living, and rather than my GGF being the person I think they are, with a name matching my tree, they are presumably someone else who married my GGM and are still alive and kicking at the age of 163. I hope I don't live that long. I'm not a DNA match so hopefully I've not inherited his genes!
Similar thing with several more distant ancestors where one spouse is named and the other is private. A couple are even genderless. It's a wonder I'm here at all ;D
Jane :-)
In the example I give, it's not a private tree but it has a lot of individuals who are flagged as private because the tree owner has them as still living.Oh I see Jane, yes that's annoying, I admit I sometimes forget to uncheck the living box myself :P.
But I was making an assumption. Theoretically the private individual could be still living. My ggm died in 1911, so if he married her that year and was only 16, he could be only 122 ::)
Jane :-)
Melba,Margaret, yes I was always aware you can find and see simple info about people in private trees. However what ordinary users cannot do is browse from one person to another - which is what ancestry must be doing to make the links.
You say 'The private thing in Thrulines just means that the details are taken from a private tree Jane, rather than that their tree says they are still alive ;D. Obviously that's a point of some controversy, since many weren't aware that Ancestry's terms and conditions allowed them to take private tree data and join it up to make common ancestor links.'
If your tree is private but searchable here is what Ancestry says. The exact wording may have changed recently, I'm not sure, but it had always been along these lines, as far as I remember (which isn't very long these days I am ready to admit).
"This setting makes your tree "Private" so that it can't be viewed as a Public Member Tree. Note that the information from your tree will still be indexed for searching, but those who find your information can't view your tree without your permission.
What does this mean?
Even if you don't share your tree, other members can still learn if a specific deceased individual is in your tree, in addition to the birth year and birthplace of the person and your username (but no personal information about you).
They can then contact you anonymously through the Connection Service on Ancestry sites to request more information. Keep in mind that members who want to learn from your tree may also have helpful information about your tree to offer you in exchange.
Note: although your tree will instantly become public or private, it usually takes about a month or more to be reflected in the search index"
So, they are searching it and finding as any other member can - "other members can still learn if a specific deceased individual is in your tree, in addition to the birth year and birthplace of the person and your username".
Sneaky, but not hidden away in terms and conditions.
Regards Margaret
Hi all, I am in the UK does anyone have a local contact number for Ancestry.
Since the ThruLines have come out (which I have) I have not been able to see any Ancestry profile, it just comes up as a grey screen with their account/profile number in the header bar.
Even though I have ThruLines, within Ancestry Lab tag I have only the writing, no buttons to able/disable anything.
I have cleared my cache within the last few days, also unlinked, relinked my tree. Also cannot contact support through Ancestry as it is a grey page with rotating circle that never connects.
Any thoughts..or a local number, is it a freephone or do you have to pay to contact them?
Cas
Something strange is happening at Ancestry.
With DNA sometimes I get Thrulines, sometimes I get circles, sometimes I can't access my matches at all - Error message 400. The site generally is now acting the same way on Chrome, sometimes accessible, often not.
It is fully accessible in incognito mode, and on Firefox.
Elsewhere, someone has suggested clearing the cache**, but this means all my saved passwords will go.
Regards Margaret
Modified
https://dna-explained.com/2019/03/08/ancestrys-disappearing-thrulines-now-you-see-them-now-you-dont/
I called Ancestry UK on 0800 032 4681 a few weeks ago (not about DNA). Their office is located in Dublin and a lovely Irish chap sorted out the problem in no time. I always prefer speaking to large organisations, rather than emailing which usually brings unhelpful standard replies.
I'm pretty sure 0800 calls are still free.
Carol
This is my first posting, so please excuse me if my query is silly.
I took dna test with Ancestry a while ago in the hope of finding out who my Grandfathers father could be, didn't have any luck until the new ThruLines showed my GtGrandfather as the man my GtGrandmother married 10 years after my Granfathers birth. I had previously dismissed him as he was only 15 at the time of my Granfathers birth, Gt Grandmother was 20. I have dna matches to descendants of this mans siblings, so could Ancestry have the right man? Any help much appreciated.
I havent looked at Thru lines YET am tempted until I read this...You are right Xin, as per my previous post some of what I am finding in other's trees via Thrulines is so unbelievably jaw droppingly useless, it beggars belief! But I also now believe these ridiculous errors are caused BY ANCESTRY because their algorithms are making ridiculous suggestions, based on simply similar names and proximity - but as I just posted yesterday having one sibling in Hertfordshire and one in Mannheim seems to be pushing the limits of 'proximity' :o!!
it seems it is like looking at something similar to hints from other trees... that take you nowhere.
If that is the case Ancestry really need to get their act together and take it off again..
Its enough of a mess out there as per my 'beyond a joke' post.
I as of today REFUSE to read another tree just in case...again.
I have turned off alll llll kind of hints but they still try.
WHAT is the REASON why are they allowing such errors to go through..
They will end up with a very bad name when someone actually manages to get it into their head what is happening.. (I mean the Ancestry people... that is if there are any!? or is it all done by some remote little machine on the moon and we are all being laughed at... !!!!! )
xin::) ??? 8) :o ::) ??? 8) :o
Can I as a question about Ancestrys DNA results, its a bit of a strange one.You say your Dad was adopted by his aunt - do you mean his biological aunt, i.e. a sister of either his biological father or mother, not a sister in law? If she was a proper sister, if I understand correctly, you would be second cousin of her granddaughter. Your niece would be a 2nd cousin once removed, which Ancestry may show as a 3rd cousin.
My cousin has taken a DNA test, now for a little bit of history. My Dad was adopted soon after birth by his aunt, so she became my grandmother. My cousin is her biological grand daughter. Her results has shown one of my nieces to be her 3rd cousin. Can this be right? The only biological genes that are shared is between my dads adopted mother and his biological father.
You say your Dad was adopted by his aunt - do you mean his biological aunt, i.e. a sister of either his biological father or mother, not a sister in law? If she was a proper sister, if I understand correctly, you would be second cousin of her granddaughter. Your niece would be a 2nd cousin once removed, which Ancestry may show as a 3rd cousin.
HiThat happened to me for a while yesterday but corrected itself when I reloaded the page.
Have been reading your comments with interest, and went back to Ancestry lab and turned on the Beta feature for grouping ancestors. Looks great, but I am completely unable to scroll down the page! No side bar, mouse doesn't work, Page up/Page down doesn't work. Have completed Feedback for Ancestry with this information.
I will have to switch back to the old format, which is a shame because I really wanted to try the new one out (which I had previously turned off because the filter had to be reapplied after each view of a match - also reported via Feedback).
Ms_C
LizzieL, Try clearing your Ancestry cookies. If that does not help then you will probably need to contact them to find out why you are not getting ThruLines.
I've been wondering how the thru-lines algorithm work. My thru-lines suggest a specific couple are my4x grt grandparents as this is who is on ONE of the public tree. This is the wrong couple, I have the correct couple on my tree and a few of the other public trees have the same couple I do. So I wonder what makes them give more weight to one tree over another? I had previously thought they went with what the most trees had.
I have similar PharmaT with a particular couple who I know are correct but who differ to those that most other people have on their tree and so ancestry presents the other couple as potential ancestors for me on thrulines. However I just wonder whether any of those other people get presented with my couple as their potential ancestors. It would be interesting to specifically compare.
Pheno
If only I could find privacy settings!
I have. It was a most unproductive experience.
Very pleasant customer service person took the call but obviously had very little knowledge of the system and seemed to making it up as we went along. I was told not everyone can get ThruLines and they don't know why. Even the operative can't get ThruLines on their own account.
I lost the will.
Yes, unlinking and relinking has already been done, may try it again some time!.
We're sorry, information on this page is temporarily unavailable. You can try reloading the page in your browser, or come back later.
With matches set to 'distant', and the filter set to 'matches you haven't viewed', click on the name at the top of the list and ... the name doesn't open.
Do you PROMISE it is worth it Gadget?? No pressure....