Ancestry searches are awful

[Gadget]

I think Ringrose mentions her father's name here:

http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,354561.msg2321940.html#msg2321940


Gadget 

PS - he comes up on Family Search straight away!

[avm228]

Yes, easily found here (free index):

https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/XW2K-ML3.

Perhaps Anc has a gap in Fulham?

[KGarrad]

You would think that when people are using the United Kingdom one that the results would surely be United Kingdom biased, I always tick/check the box and still get loads of unrelated results
Frank.

My point was not so much the search results but, when you enter terms for a search, the drop-down box for place-names doesn't always start with UK hits?

E.G. Enter "Somerset" as a place name, and the first 4 are USA, as are another 10!
If I am using .co.uk I would expect "Somerset, England" to be top of the list; and I don't give a jot about any US ones!

[Alexander.]

I have found the record on Ancestry. For some reason, for Fulham North West any schedules numbers greater than 164 have not been transcribed. Your father is on schedule 176.

Therefore, this is not a problem with the search engine, but probably a human error that occured during indexing which caused these pages to be missed out. I have reported it to Ancestry.

Alexander

[Ringrose]

Clever sleuthing Gadget.Im going to look again and see how I get on.
Interesting comments all round
Ringrose

[Ringrose]

Thank you Frekneale....that answers one problem .I have found it on family search but I want the piece number.
Lets hope that Ancestry improve their search facilities.I cannot find the old search on my iPad so perhaps I need to use the main computer.
Ringrose

[carol8353]

Just wanted to throw this into the pot........there are also 119 Rodrick's in 1911 !!!