Author Topic: new beta on ancestry dna results  (Read 4439 times)

Offline Gadget

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 46,786
    • View Profile
Re: new beta on ancestry dna results
« Reply #117 on: Tuesday 12 March 19 09:54 GMT (UK) »
It's a general rather than individual problem see:

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/

** Margaret  corrected Cache to Ancestry cookies in a subsequent post.



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

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Offline jillruss

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,510
  • Gt Gt Grandfather Shepherd from Aberdeen 1827-1910
    • View Profile
Re: new beta on ancestry dna results
« Reply #118 on: Tuesday 12 March 19 12:36 GMT (UK) »
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

Credit where credit's due - I emailed Ancestry about my subscription renewal and had one of those 'online chats' within an hour or so with a very nice lady who assured me it was sorted. No complaints there!
BRICKWALL - WILLIAM HORWOOD bn c.1779 in or near Berks. N.B. NOT s/o William & Joanna in Waltham St Lawrence.

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Offline Rhapsody

  • RootsChat Pioneer
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: new beta on ancestry dna results
« Reply #119 on: Tuesday 12 March 19 14:53 GMT (UK) »
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.

Offline TinaRoyal

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 108
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: new beta on ancestry dna results
« Reply #120 on: Wednesday 13 March 19 06:50 GMT (UK) »


It’s been fascinating reading this thread on Thrulines and all the arguments, both “for and against”.  Do not lose sight of the fact that Thrulines is nothing more than one additional tool in the Genealogist Armoury and cannot be relied upon on its own.  As with everything else, verification by “traditional” methods is needed.  It may however suggest a “lead”.

Offline Pheno

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,064
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: new beta on ancestry dna results
« Reply #121 on: Friday 15 March 19 20:02 GMT (UK) »
I know I have said this previously, and possibly even earlier on this thread (I didn't look back) but it is so very annoying when ancestry suggest a potential ancestor, which when followed through means that they have ignored your verified great grandfather and suggested instead someone from someone else's tree with whom I do not have a dna match, just because the person in her tree has the same name as my actual great grandfather.

So this incorrect person now appears in my Thrulines as a potential ancestor and I cannot get rid of that outline profile aaaghhhhhhhhhhh!

Does that mean that if another person puts someone in with the same name the current one will be overriden or will they suggest yet another great grandfather?

I don't mind the suggestion - I just want to be able to get rid of it like you can with hints.

Pheno
Austin/Austen - Sussex & London
Bond - Berkshire & London
Bishop - Sussex & Kent
Holland - Essex
Nevitt - Cheshire & Staffordshire
Wray - Yorkshire

Offline familydar

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 824
    • View Profile
Re: new beta on ancestry dna results
« Reply #122 on: Friday 15 March 19 20:21 GMT (UK) »
Pheno - last para - hear hear :)

Will add to my ancestry feedback - honest - if I remember....

Jane :-)
ALLEN
BARR, BARRATT, BERRY, BRADLEY,BRAMLEY,BRISTOW,BROWN,BUGBIRD,BUTLER
CAIN,CARR,CHAPMAN,CHARLES,CH*LTON,CHESTER,COCKETT
COLLASON,COLLYER,CORKERY
DARLING, DENYER,DICKERSON,DOLLING,DURBAN
FARMER,FURNELL
GIBSON,GILES,GROOMBRIDGE
HALL,HAMBIDGE,HARMES,HART,HICKS,HILL,HOLLOWAY
JACKSON
K*AT*S
LANCASTER,LINTON
MCDONALD,MCFADEN,MEARS,MILLARD
NICOLAS,NOAK,NORTH
PARFIT,PORTER
RIPPINGALE,ROBINS
SEARLE,SPENCER,STEDHAM
TYLER,TILLY,TUCKWELL
WADE,WAGER,WALKER,WATSON,WEBB,WITHRINGTON,WOOD

Offline hurworth

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,138
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: new beta on ancestry dna results
« Reply #123 on: Friday 15 March 19 20:41 GMT (UK) »
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.

Unfortunately Rhapsody it is extremely unlikely that Ancestry have the correct man in the Thruline.  I have a similar situation with an ancestor of mine whose mother was an unmarried teenager at the time of her birth.

About six months ago, from autosomal DNA of a few of her descendants, we've worked out who her father was. However, in numerous trees she is recorded as the daughter of her mother's first husband.  This man keeps showing up as her father in Thrulines because it's in so many sloppy unresearched trees, even though I have the correct lineage in the tree attached to the DNA.

One cousin even went and 'helpfully' (eye roll) edited the tree at FamilySearch because he now thought this Thruline proved that his ancestor and my ancestor were full sisters.


Offline melba_schmelba

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 288
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: new beta on ancestry dna results
« Reply #124 on: Friday 15 March 19 21:33 GMT (UK) »
Have seen some absolute shockers on my Thruline this evening, with people being baptised multiple times in counties half way across England, being born in Suffolk, baptised in Hertfordshire, lived in Essex, died in Battersea. Then the piece de resistance, a 'brother' of a slightly similar surname, born one year apart from the sister who was born in Hertfordshire....in Mannheim  ???  :o :o.

Offline Sinann

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 8,302
    • View Profile
Re: new beta on ancestry dna results
« Reply #125 on: Friday 15 March 19 21:43 GMT (UK) »
I'd just like to get my few ThruLines back. Everyone else seems to what to get rid of them.