Ancestry incorrect images - do they get corrected?

[Peter L. Mitchell]

I've not had many good outcomes in dealings with Ancestry or its users. As JAKnighton says, they make no money from corrections so they don't seem to bother. I've frequently found errors in entries, including one classic in which an ancestor was recorded as still working as a lorry driver at 124 years of age! The author had merged two sets of different family records to come up with this gem.

As a general rule, I suggest that a useful guideline is to look at the number of supporting documents and actually check that they match the records shown. If there are any errors, it's probably more helpful to contact the author of the information (although you can sometimes get a frosty reply).

Good luck!
                Peter

[Romilly]

I reported an error in the 1911 Census Entry for my Paternal Grandparents about 10 years ago now.
Ancestry have mixed them up with a family a few doors away and put them as all living together, even though the Census pages show them as living inseperate households.
I wrote the error on a note attached to the Entry and I’ve phoned Ancestry about it, but nothing has ever been changed.
In my opinion it’s a waste of time pointing out errors to Ancestry. FindMyPast however, do  make changes and corrections if errors are pointed out.

Romilly.

[Wexflyer]

Apologies if this has been asked before. 

I recently submitted 2 queries/reports to Ancestry, as when I clicked to view the Census returns in question, the images presented to me were completely wrong.

I just wondered, as a general point, are Ancestry good at correcting these reported errors?

Will they just correct them, and not tell me that has been done?

Will they correct them promptly... or take ages?

Or will my reports just go into a black hole somewhere?

I guess I want to manage my expectations!

Oh Ha Ha!

Ancesrotry coreect ererors? LOL!

They NEVER correct ANY errors!

Why?
Because it would cost a fortune!
Their indexing and transcribing is littered not just with random but with systematic errors.
So they don't bother. At all.

[MollyC]

I find it disappointing that archive services, including the National Archives, are happy to allow this sloppy outfit to make their holdings available online.  I can only assume money talks for cash-strapped public services, but it is poor value because money is not being spent on good indexing and on corrections.

They are probably tied into a contract for several years, but if they all voted with their feet when possible and moved to a better organised British provider we would find a considerable improvement.