The new FindMyPast (Part 4)

[Kincaid444]

Yes, I remember reading the bit about not looking at any records . .  which is a catch 22 situation, because how are you going to know they have substantially changed everything (and to such an extent it constitutes a change of what you paid for previously) if you don't try to use it . . .

I have blown my fuse . .  made my rant . . .  breathed fire . . . . now sanguine and resting calmly on the far shore . . ha ha

Knicaid

[lisalisa]

Something I'm finding very annoying (one of many things) is the lack of county in the census search results.  This is proving very time consuming, and I'm finding that I have to google some of the places to find out which county they are in to save looking at records unnecessarily.
I certainly wouldn't want to be using pay as you go credits since the changes.

I sent an email via contact us saying that the county needs to be included on results - as it was before.  I did receive a reply but I would think it standard/automatic as there was no mention of the issue I referred to at all and it could have been sent in response to pretty much anything that wasn't a question of how to do something.

I used to be really impressed with how quickly and (generally) how easily one could find individuals/families on a census, and I used to really like how the address search worked. 

Lisa

[Kincaid444]

You and me both, Lisa . . . . . I had to go back to FindMyPast yesterday as I was not getting anywhere easy with Ancestry and spent ten minutes looking for the 'County' button . . .  they certainly could do with a County filter.   Have nit had the nerve to try an address search yet.

Kincaid

[Kincaid444]

Another fiddley thing is (I think I am right) - you can only see the individual you have found - there doesn't seem to be a transcription showing family members, unless you look at the actual census form.   Usually ok but a couple of times the form has been so faint as to be unreadable.

I am going back through the census trying to find if three married men with the same surname meet up as brothers in the same family.   I know Ancestry have a full transcription so will have to go back to them this time.

Kincaid

[groom]

Another fiddley thing is (I think I am right) - you can only see the individual you have found - there doesn't seem to be a transcription showing family members, unless you look at the actual census form.   

Surely there is a transcription for each family member? Go the the bottom of the page where it lists all members in the household, you then have the option to look at the image or transcription for each person.

[JenB]

The 1891 census keeps on coming and going from their index.

A couple of minutes ago it wasn't there.

I refreshed the page and it re-appeared. It's been doing that for nearly 24 hours now 

[Kincaid444]

Good afternoon, Groom - thanks for that - will try again.

Kincaid

[Kincaid444]

Oh Dear . . .  Groom was correct - I feel quite stupid - did not scroll down far enough.  brain fatigue I am afraid.

Kincaid

[groom]

Don't worry Kincaid, it is quite easy to miss - not as clear as it was on the old site.