Moderator Control Panel ]

ancestry'new look

Share your thoughts with your fellow family historians – and the Who Do You Think You Are? Magazine team – here

ancestry'new look

Postby maxine tallon » Tue Dec 15, 2015 4:55 pm

I've just logged into my Ancestry account to find that the new site has been introduced without warning. Yesterday my family tree was OK and on the old style ancestry, today it's had major changes made to it by the site on the new look ancestry. I lost count of the number of things that have been altered without me knowing all of them incorrect. I'm going forget ancestry I think, it's a shame because it has records other sites don't have. What they've done is unforgivable I now have to start the tree again as in it's present form it's not worth transferring it as it stands.

maxine
maxine tallon
 
Posts: 138
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 5:07 pm

Re: ancestry'new look

Postby pete25 » Tue Dec 15, 2015 5:21 pm

Hi Maxine,

I'm the same as you...I don't like the new look and the changes to Ancestry and for this reason, I cancelled my monthly subscription.
Some of my Darbyshire ancestors are on the maps provided but they are showing in 'manchester' ha ha terrible! And Ancestry is supposed to be a reputable genealogy provider...I now don't think so!

If ancestry don't rectify this, by putting everything back to the way things were,I won't be returning.
I've spend hundreds of pounds with Ancestry.co.uk and don't like my requests, to return to the 'old' interface, being ignored.

Kind regards,

Pete.


Sent from my iPhone using WDYTYA Forum
User avatar
pete25
 
Posts: 355
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 11:35 pm

Re: ancestry'new look

Postby AdrianB38 » Tue Dec 15, 2015 10:19 pm

Please - your trees have NOT been altered. If you look at the Fact view of a person, you should see no change. The Life story view is something you don't need to look at and can ignore.

As I have said elsewhere, the maps often go pear shaped when called on to deal with partial or obsolete names. I just looked at someone in Louise Rural Municipality, Manitoba. Presumably because Louise RM is a jurisdiction not a place, Ancestry can't find it so just put the place in the middle of Manitoba. (Google can find it so why can't they?) But it doesn't matter - I only looked at the map because I was looking for trouble. The Facts are fine.

Sent from my MotoG3
Adrian
AdrianB38
 
Posts: 2516
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:07 pm

Re: ancestry'new look

Postby ksouthall » Wed Dec 16, 2015 12:40 am

pete25 wrote:...Some of my Darbyshire ancestors are on the maps provided but they are showing in 'manchester' .....

Kind regards,

Pete.


Is Darbyshire the surname or the place? If the place, then, if you have spelled it with an "a" on Ancestry instead of correctly as Derbyshire, then perhaps if you correct it, Ancestry might show the correct county location.
ksouthall
 
Posts: 1891
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 7:26 pm
Location: Sussex

Re: ancestry'new look

Postby pete25 » Wed Dec 16, 2015 1:08 am

No, spelt it with an 'e'. Little mistake here and not on Ancestry.
Ancestry new interface still not good...thanks for pointing out my mistake 'here'.

Kind regards,

Pete.


Sent from my iPhone using WDYTYA Forum
User avatar
pete25
 
Posts: 355
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 11:35 pm

Re: ancestry'new look

Postby maxine tallon » Wed Dec 16, 2015 11:54 am

sorry AdrianB but my tree has been changed, people left off and places altered for example "London Ontario" instead of England, dates have also been changed. Add to that 3 months ago I updated my FTM only to now find out that it's being done away with. Not good enough for a site as large as Ancestry, they also don't seem to care!

maxine
maxine tallon
 
Posts: 138
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 5:07 pm

Re: ancestry'new look

Postby meekhcs » Wed Dec 16, 2015 1:22 pm

Maxine

That is interesting .

I had resisted the switch to the new look Ancestry basically because I don't like change, and can be lazy when it comes to learning a new system! However, having looked at my tree on the new system using the fact button, I was going to back Adrian, and say that there is nothing different except presentation.

I ignored the maps, and the Lifestory button was interesting because of the extra dimension it gave to my tree IF I wanted to look at it.

For me the proof will be when I try and take my tree to a new independent software system because I am not leaving it on Ancestry.

I am also wondering what else Ancestry have in store for us. The problem is in terms of the records it contains it is excellent. I don't care much for their search system, I much prefer Find My Past, and as a result I tend to have a sub to both.

I guess the moral is change will always happen, things have to evolve, and if you want total control over your research do not put it on any commercial website.

Sally
meekhcs
 
Posts: 1527
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 7:43 pm
Location: england


Return to Genealogy chat


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest