Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6

Author Topic: Another Ancestry Feature?  (Read 4591 times)

Offline Gadget

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 57,138
    • View Profile
Re: Another Ancestry Feature?
« Reply #9 on: Thursday 17 January 19 23:05 GMT (UK) »
Very similar comments on this thread:

https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=806662.0

Gadget
Census &  BMD information Crown Copyright www.nationalarchives.gov.uk and GROS - www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk

***Restorers - Please do not use my restores without my permission. Thanks***

Offline jaybelnz

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,762
  • My Runaway Bride! Thanks to Paula Too!
    • View Profile
Re: Another Ancestry Feature?
« Reply #10 on: Friday 18 January 19 08:26 GMT (UK) »
Quote from: Gadget on Thursday 17 January 19 23:05 GMT (UK)
Very similar comments on this thread:

https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=806662.0

Gadget

I recall that heaps my places reverted to USA when Ancestry changed their format a few years back!
I had to go right through and edit my tree changing them back to the correct locations!  At the time I really disliked the new format, but it certainly took me a very long time to get used to it! 😱
"We analyse the evidence to draw a conclusion. The better the sources and information, the stronger the evidence, which leads to a reliable conclusion!" Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk.

MATHEWS, Ireland, England, USA & Canada, NZ
FLEMING,   Ireland
DUNNELL,  England
PAULSON,  England
DOUGLAS, Scotland, Ireland, NZ
WALKER,   Scotland
WATSON,  England, Ayrshire, Scotland, NZ
McAUGHTRIE, Ayrshire, Scotland, NZ
MASON,     Scotland, England, NZ
& Connections

Offline mike175

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,756
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Another Ancestry Feature?
« Reply #11 on: Friday 18 January 19 10:47 GMT (UK) »
Shouldn't it be Westminster, Middlesex?  ;)
Baskervill - Devon, Foss - Hants, Gentry - Essex, Metherell - Devon, Partridge - Essex/London, Press - Norfolk/London, Stone - Surrey/Sussex, Stuttle - Essex/London, Wheate - Middlesex/Essex/Coventry/Oxfordshire/Staffs, Gibson - Essex, Wyatt - Essex/Kent

Offline Edward Scott

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,239
    • View Profile
Re: Another Ancestry Feature?
« Reply #12 on: Friday 18 January 19 11:02 GMT (UK) »
Quote from: mike175 on Friday 18 January 19 10:47 GMT (UK)
Shouldn't it be Westminster, Middlesex?  ;)
Thanks, I will try Middlesex later
Scott - Lincolnshire
Jobson - Lincolnshire, Suffolk
Needham - Lincolnshire
Wayet - Lincolnshire

Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline Enumerated

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 125
    • View Profile
Re: Another Ancestry Feature?
« Reply #13 on: Friday 18 January 19 12:42 GMT (UK) »
Quote from: mike175 on Friday 18 January 19 10:47 GMT (UK)
Shouldn't it be Westminster, Middlesex?  ;)
Middlesex no longer exists. Westminster has been in London for over a hundred years now.

Offline andrewalston

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,938
  • My granddad
    • View Profile
Re: Another Ancestry Feature?
« Reply #14 on: Friday 18 January 19 12:49 GMT (UK) »
I always quote full address in my data, including country and traditional county. I include Middlesex, because "London" is, properly, the "square mile".

However Ancestry's LifeStory is completely unable to cope with addresses, even with country mentioned.

They can't even cope with well-known addresses such as:
Looking at ALSTON in south Ribble area, ALSTEAD and DONBAVAND/DUNBABIN etc. everywhere, HOWCROFT and MARSH in Bolton and Westhoughton, PICKERING in the Whitehaven area.

Census information is Crown Copyright. See www.nationalarchives.gov.uk for details.

Offline CarolA3

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,127
  • My adopted home
    • View Profile
Re: Another Ancestry Feature?
« Reply #15 on: Friday 18 January 19 13:04 GMT (UK) »
Quote from: Enumerated on Friday 18 January 19 12:42 GMT (UK)
Quote from: mike175 on Friday 18 January 19 10:47 GMT (UK)
Shouldn't it be Westminster, Middlesex?  ;)
Middlesex no longer exists. Westminster has been in London for over a hundred years now.

Middlesex ceased to exist as an administrative county in 1965.

Westminster transferred from Middlesex to the (then) County of London in 1889.

The record in question dates from 1882, when Westminster was still part of Middlesex.

Well spotted, mike175 ;D

Carol
OXFORDSHIRE / BERKSHIRE
Bullock, Cooper, Boler/Bowler, Wright, Robinson, Lee, Prior, Trinder, Newman, Walklin, Louch

Offline JohninSussex

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 486
    • View Profile
Re: Another Ancestry Feature?
« Reply #16 on: Friday 18 January 19 13:15 GMT (UK) »
Westminster being Middlesex or London is not relevant to this issue, as both refer to the right place.  More to the point  is that even if you accept Ancestry is American owned and run, given that there are more than one Westminster even in the US, the algorithm should not default to one in Adams county just presumably because it's the first in the alphabet.  This would surely annoy Americans just as much.
Rutter, Sampson, Swinerd, Head, Redman in Kent.  Others in Cheshire, Manchester, Glos/War/Worcs.
RUTTER family and Matilda Sampson's Will:

Offline CarolA3

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,127
  • My adopted home
    • View Profile
Re: Another Ancestry Feature?
« Reply #17 on: Friday 18 January 19 13:28 GMT (UK) »
This sort of issue comes up frequently on RootsChat, and I have to wonder why people continue to have their trees on Ancestry when the site evidently creates so many problems :-\

Carol
OXFORDSHIRE / BERKSHIRE
Bullock, Cooper, Boler/Bowler, Wright, Robinson, Lee, Prior, Trinder, Newman, Walklin, Louch
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6