Moderator Control Panel ]

FAMILY SEARCH

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

FAMILY SEARCH

Postby a-s-e » Sat Jun 23, 2012 8:25 am

As I am home alone at the moment and I have the need to scream I'm sorry everyone but I just need to tell someone that....... I HATE THE NEW FAMILYSEARCH !!!!!!!!!

I put in every option I can but am still inundated with american records and stuff with no relevence to what i want.......

AGH !!!!!!

Thank you - have a nice day xx
a-s-e
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 7:01 pm

Re: FAMILY SEARCH

Postby Sylcec » Sun Jun 24, 2012 7:24 am

Gosh - so sorry you are having this problem. I do know what you mean, and occasionally also get unwanted USA hits. Nevertheless it is a very powerful search engine. When putting in a place of birth/marriage/death I find it best to set out the place in full, e.g. "Leeds, Yorkshire, England". You can of course also ask for exact matches - though I don't have much experience of using this function. However, when doing this it is probably best to minimise the amount of detail provided.

Another option, which I often use (particularly when searching for bmd in India or Australia for example) is to, on the home page, scroll down to location and click on the area of interest. This brings up a list of data sets available for that area, and you can then click on one of these and search solely within that dataset. By using this browse function you will also discover that there are many additional, browsable, datasets - where the records have not yet been indexed but you can view the original records. (Tedious, but sometimes productive.)

FamilySearch also provides a large number of on-line learning videos/training, see here: https://www.familysearch.org/learningcenter/home.html - maybe something here may help?
Keep at it! Sylvia
User avatar
Sylcec
 
Posts: 2509
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2008 4:36 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: FAMILY SEARCH

Postby a-s-e » Sun Jun 24, 2012 7:45 am

Thank you Sylvia :)

I'm just old, stubbern and set in my ways and when something gets changed to "new & improved" it always gets my goat as I never think it is as it's not what I'm used to.

I found the new site brilliant when I did my American line last year and I got the whole tree up together in a couple of hours but for English ones I've always stuck with the old version no matter how many times it asked if I wanted to go to the new one.

Now it seems to of vanished altogether so i have no choice..........

I'll keep at it and keep exploring it :)
a-s-e
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 7:01 pm

Re: FAMILY SEARCH

Postby Sylcec » Mon Jun 25, 2012 7:12 am

I know the feeling well - there comes a point where we feel that we have enough resources to be able to achieve what we want to do - I certainly resent constantly changing websites, though realise that they have to update themselves to use the latest technology and to appeal to a new set of users. (My bugbears in this respect are the National Archives sites - both England and Australia - very dense and complex sites, which change just when their intricacies have been fully mastered! :roll: )

However, we are streets ahead of those fortunately few people who still turn up occasionally at both the LDS FamilySearch Centre and the Society of Australian Genealogists library and insist that they still want to use the IGI on microfiche, further insisting that it is better than anything that has come after. :roll:
User avatar
Sylcec
 
Posts: 2509
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2008 4:36 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: FAMILY SEARCH

Postby ColinB » Mon Jun 25, 2012 7:31 am

I know the feeling too. What really bothers me is the vague suspicion that I'm not finding things on familysearch which I " know " are there. I had some notes on records which I looked up on the old site which do not come up on the new one. It's no longer possible to search the old site but by Googling
' International Genealogical Index' I found an old link which worked. Sure enough I found the records in question. Sadly the link which I found no longer works. I'm hoping it's just a question of records not being fully indexed yet.

Colin

Incidentally , when it comes to " improvements" , the prize must go to Ancestry. I wonder how many more versions of the Image Viewer they can inflict on us !
ColinB
 
Posts: 1432
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 11:54 am
Location: Essex

Re: FAMILY SEARCH

Postby Emmeline » Mon Jun 25, 2012 7:43 am

I'm glad this isn't just me. I was starting think I'm old and set in my ways but I really don't like the new Family Search either. Like Colin, I always have a sneaking suspicion that I'm not getting everything that's there especially when I know it was there on the old site.

As for Ancestry, I've seriously thought about cancelling my subscription. The "new, improved" image viewer is awful. It takes ages to come through and the resulting image is no better than before. AND they keep "improving" it. Sometimes, I think it's just best to leave these things alone.
Emmeline
 
Posts: 118
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 7:17 pm

Re: FAMILY SEARCH

Postby Sylcec » Mon Jun 25, 2012 12:41 pm

If by chance you recorded "batch number" for your old IGI finds, then you could try using that as one of your search criteria in the new FamilySearch.

Items that were in Ancestral File and/or Pedigree Resource File now show up at the end of the list of other hits. Other unreliable member submitted data no longer appears in the general data sets - you know, this sort of thing: "Mrs John Smith, born abt 1786, Yorkshire" - though are still part of Ancestral File records. (Only last week I spent some time explaining to a lady who excitedly thought she had found details of the birth of some ancestors in Ireland, that it was only information extrapolated from an Australian death certificate of one of their children, with a guesstimated year of birth added). Annoyingly Ancestral File & Pedigree Resource File no longer provide submitter contact details - but refer the user to use the old MS-DOS CDs at a FamilySearch Centre - lo and behold, my local centre's computers have just been updated and the old programs and data haven't been re-installed :x

Further investigation through the "browse" function finds a link to the old IGI with apparently 667,784,388 records! https://www.familysearch.org/search/collection/igi. Of interest is the introductory information to this data set:

PRINT

International Genealogical Index (IGI)

The International Genealogical Index was a family history database that listed several hundred million names of deceased persons from throughout the world. Names in the IGI came from two sources.

Community Indexed IGI (Vital and church records from the early 1500s to 1885)

The indexed data has been organized into the original collections from which it was transcribed and resides in the Historical Records system. To see a list of all collections available choose All Record Collections from the home screen. The Community Indexed search from this page searches ONLY the records that were part of the old IGI. Most of these collections have had many more records added to them. To do an exhaustive search for your ancestors you should choose to use the search form on the home screen.
Community Contributed IGI (Personal family information submitted to the LDS Church)

For a short period of time duplication in the IGI was reduced by removing records from the indexed data when these records were submitted by the community. To do an exhaustive search for your ancestor you should choose to search the Community Contributed IGI and follow the process outlined on this page to determine if the record you find was part of an indexed collection.
User avatar
Sylcec
 
Posts: 2509
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2008 4:36 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia


Return to Genealogy chat


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests