genealogy.com
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
Sherlock Holmes
genealogy.com
Hi,
Just letting everyone out there know that the Genealogy.com side of
things is being being made redundant meaning it will not longer be used
as a site and all those that have accounts with Genealogy.com ought to
ensure that they have an account with Ancestry.com
This means that all data that one can find at Genealogy.com at present
will is being moved to Ancestry.com
As to when this is supposed to be completed by you will need to contact
Ancestry.com to find that one out.
I do not work for Genealogy.com or Ancestry.com
I only found this out today 3rd Jan 2008 while in the process of
canceling a subscription.
Hope this helps someone.
David
Just letting everyone out there know that the Genealogy.com side of
things is being being made redundant meaning it will not longer be used
as a site and all those that have accounts with Genealogy.com ought to
ensure that they have an account with Ancestry.com
This means that all data that one can find at Genealogy.com at present
will is being moved to Ancestry.com
As to when this is supposed to be completed by you will need to contact
Ancestry.com to find that one out.
I do not work for Genealogy.com or Ancestry.com
I only found this out today 3rd Jan 2008 while in the process of
canceling a subscription.
Hope this helps someone.
David
-
JD
Re: genealogy.com
Sherlock Holmes <hawke_eye_david@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
Hmm. That's interesting! If you don't mind.. What exactly did they say?
I asked Ancestry help recently (last 2 weeks, maybe?) about their intent
to add the CD-based databases from Genealogy.com on Ancestry (to avoid
subscribing to both) and was told:
"We appreciate your message.
Genealogy.com is its on date base and own company you have to buy in to
both ancestry and genealogy to have both.
If there is anything else with which we might assist you, please let us
know.
Derrelene
Member Solutions
Ancestry.com"
Gotta love a company that gives you straight answers!
Hi,
Just letting everyone out there know that the Genealogy.com side of
things is being being made redundant meaning it will not longer be used
as a site and all those that have accounts with Genealogy.com ought to
ensure that they have an account with Ancestry.com
This means that all data that one can find at Genealogy.com at present
will is being moved to Ancestry.com
As to when this is supposed to be completed by you will need to contact
Ancestry.com to find that one out.
I do not work for Genealogy.com or Ancestry.com
I only found this out today 3rd Jan 2008 while in the process of
canceling a subscription.
Hope this helps someone.
David
Hmm. That's interesting! If you don't mind.. What exactly did they say?
I asked Ancestry help recently (last 2 weeks, maybe?) about their intent
to add the CD-based databases from Genealogy.com on Ancestry (to avoid
subscribing to both) and was told:
"We appreciate your message.
Genealogy.com is its on date base and own company you have to buy in to
both ancestry and genealogy to have both.
If there is anything else with which we might assist you, please let us
know.
Derrelene
Member Solutions
Ancestry.com"
Gotta love a company that gives you straight answers!
-
JD
Re: genealogy.com
JD <jd4x4@<del.this>verizon.net> wrote:
My brain must be in a time-warp. I looked and I asked the question on Nov
15! But, I just asked again on live help and they said that they "do not
know, but have not heard of any plans to do that".
I suppose I should have asked if they were closing the site, rather than
just adding the CD-based data to Ancestry... but I didn't.
I asked Ancestry help recently (last 2 weeks, maybe?) about their intent
My brain must be in a time-warp. I looked and I asked the question on Nov
15! But, I just asked again on live help and they said that they "do not
know, but have not heard of any plans to do that".
I suppose I should have asked if they were closing the site, rather than
just adding the CD-based data to Ancestry... but I didn't.
-
Sherlock Holmes
Re: genealogy.com
JD <jd4x4@ wrote:
The exact phrase used was that it is being fazed out which in turn means
will not be used at some latter date.
It was apparent that they are unwilling to spend any money on fixing up
issues concerning the Genealogy.com website.
Pity they do not communicate within their own outfit seems the left hand
does not know what the right hand is doing.
Case in point is that while I was getting my subscription to the WFT's
canceled they in turn then canceled my free subscription with
Ancestry.Com so the argument of having to subscribe to Genealogy.com for
one service and Ancestry.com for another does no any longer hold water.
I did not ask for my Free subscription to be canceled by the way.
David
JD <jd4x4@<del.this>verizon.net> wrote:
I asked Ancestry help recently (last 2 weeks, maybe?) about their intent
My brain must be in a time-warp. I looked and I asked the question on Nov
15! But, I just asked again on live help and they said that they "do not
know, but have not heard of any plans to do that".
I suppose I should have asked if they were closing the site, rather than
just adding the CD-based data to Ancestry... but I didn't.
Hi,
The exact phrase used was that it is being fazed out which in turn means
will not be used at some latter date.
It was apparent that they are unwilling to spend any money on fixing up
issues concerning the Genealogy.com website.
Pity they do not communicate within their own outfit seems the left hand
does not know what the right hand is doing.
Case in point is that while I was getting my subscription to the WFT's
canceled they in turn then canceled my free subscription with
Ancestry.Com so the argument of having to subscribe to Genealogy.com for
one service and Ancestry.com for another does no any longer hold water.
I did not ask for my Free subscription to be canceled by the way.
David
-
Hugh Watkins
Re: genealogy.com
JD <jd4x4@ wrote:
I believe the CDs contain the same data as Woldconnect.rootsweb.com
can anyone plaese make some test searches
also of AWT and OWT which share some data too
Hugh W
--
For genealogy and help with family and local history in Bristol and
district http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Brycgstow/
http://snaps4.blogspot.com/ photographs and walks
GENEALOGE http://hughw36.blogspot.com/ MAIN BLOG
JD <jd4x4@<del.this>verizon.net> wrote:
I asked Ancestry help recently (last 2 weeks, maybe?) about their intent
My brain must be in a time-warp. I looked and I asked the question on Nov
15! But, I just asked again on live help and they said that they "do not
know, but have not heard of any plans to do that".
I suppose I should have asked if they were closing the site, rather than
just adding the CD-based data to Ancestry... but I didn't.
I believe the CDs contain the same data as Woldconnect.rootsweb.com
can anyone plaese make some test searches
also of AWT and OWT which share some data too
Hugh W
--
For genealogy and help with family and local history in Bristol and
district http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Brycgstow/
http://snaps4.blogspot.com/ photographs and walks
GENEALOGE http://hughw36.blogspot.com/ MAIN BLOG
-
JD
Re: genealogy.com
Hugh Watkins <hugh.watkins@gmail.com> wrote:
database that caused me to ask the question was called "Maryland
Genealogical Society Bulletins 1-38" which is also an old FTM CD (#FTM208).
I found that out through a "new" relative I met via Ancestry who sent me an
image from it. It had a baptism transcription that knocked down a
relationship wall I hadn't been able to solve on only Ancestry.com. After
that I did a search on both sites and found that there are a few more on
Genealogy that aren't on Ancestry, and I thought that surely they would
move them over. That remains to be seen, I suppose.
I've been meaning to make a complete list, so I'll try to do that post
haste now. I think I have the complete CD list from Genealogy, but what I
haven't done is checked it against the Ancestry database list (massive!).
I believe the CDs contain the same data as Woldconnect.rootsweb.com
can anyone plaese make some test searches
also of AWT and OWT which share some data too
Hugh W
It's actually a little more than just the trees on CD, Hugh. The one CD and
database that caused me to ask the question was called "Maryland
Genealogical Society Bulletins 1-38" which is also an old FTM CD (#FTM208).
I found that out through a "new" relative I met via Ancestry who sent me an
image from it. It had a baptism transcription that knocked down a
relationship wall I hadn't been able to solve on only Ancestry.com. After
that I did a search on both sites and found that there are a few more on
Genealogy that aren't on Ancestry, and I thought that surely they would
move them over. That remains to be seen, I suppose.
I've been meaning to make a complete list, so I'll try to do that post
haste now. I think I have the complete CD list from Genealogy, but what I
haven't done is checked it against the Ancestry database list (massive!).
-
JD
Re: genealogy.com
Hugh Watkins <hugh.watkins@gmail.com> wrote:
While I haven't compared the trees between Genealogy & Ancestry, further to
my post about the CDS on Genealogy I've made a comparison as follows-
I'll note that within the FTM CDs (which I think are what is available on
Genealogy) there may often be several collections. I made no attempt to
determine if these individual collections are listed on Ancestry by their
collection names, rather I compared the Ancestry database titles with the
CD titles on Genealogy.
Since only 17 of the 73 Genealogy titles matched with the 24,975 Ancestry
titles, here are the CD numbers of those that DO appear on Ancestry:
118, 129, 216, 224, 231, 234, 235, 237, 238, 239, 241, 244, 250, 256, 258,
259, 273. So, any CDs NOT in the above list are not currently on Ancestry
as far as I can tell.
Also, CD #208 which is the one that I was after seems to no longer be
available through Genealogy (or Ancestry). Luckily for me I found and
bought it as an FTM CD earlier last month.
I believe the CDs contain the same data as Woldconnect.rootsweb.com
can anyone plaese make some test searches
also of AWT and OWT which share some data too
While I haven't compared the trees between Genealogy & Ancestry, further to
my post about the CDS on Genealogy I've made a comparison as follows-
I'll note that within the FTM CDs (which I think are what is available on
Genealogy) there may often be several collections. I made no attempt to
determine if these individual collections are listed on Ancestry by their
collection names, rather I compared the Ancestry database titles with the
CD titles on Genealogy.
Since only 17 of the 73 Genealogy titles matched with the 24,975 Ancestry
titles, here are the CD numbers of those that DO appear on Ancestry:
118, 129, 216, 224, 231, 234, 235, 237, 238, 239, 241, 244, 250, 256, 258,
259, 273. So, any CDs NOT in the above list are not currently on Ancestry
as far as I can tell.
Also, CD #208 which is the one that I was after seems to no longer be
available through Genealogy (or Ancestry). Luckily for me I found and
bought it as an FTM CD earlier last month.
-
Gjest
Re: genealogy.com
On Jan 4, 12:35 pm, JD <jd4x4@<del.this>verizon.net> wrote:
I recently signed up with ancestry.com for a 3-month subscription
following a 14-day free trial. Although I hesitated signing up with
ancestry.com, I found that every "free" genealogy research website
always directed me to an ancestry.com website. Therefore, one has no
choice but to subscribe to ancestry.com if you wish to do any
genealogy research.
iuki
Hugh Watkins <hugh.watk...@gmail.com> wrote:
I believe the CDs contain the same data as Woldconnect.rootsweb.com
can anyone plaese make some test searches
also of AWT and OWT which share some data too
While I haven't compared the trees between Genealogy & Ancestry, further to
my post about the CDS on Genealogy I've made a comparison as follows-
I'll note that within the FTM CDs (which I think are what is available on
Genealogy) there may often be several collections. I made no attempt to
determine if these individual collections are listed on Ancestry by their
collection names, rather I compared the Ancestry database titles with the
CD titles on Genealogy.
Since only 17 of the 73 Genealogy titles matched with the 24,975 Ancestry
titles, here are the CD numbers of those that DO appear on Ancestry:
118, 129, 216, 224, 231, 234, 235, 237, 238, 239, 241, 244, 250, 256, 258,
259, 273. So, any CDs NOT in the above list are not currently on Ancestry
as far as I can tell.
Also, CD #208 which is the one that I was after seems to no longer be
available through Genealogy (or Ancestry). Luckily for me I found and
bought it as an FTM CD earlier last month.
I recently signed up with ancestry.com for a 3-month subscription
following a 14-day free trial. Although I hesitated signing up with
ancestry.com, I found that every "free" genealogy research website
always directed me to an ancestry.com website. Therefore, one has no
choice but to subscribe to ancestry.com if you wish to do any
genealogy research.
iuki
-
JD
Re: genealogy.com
iuki@hotmail.com wrote:
Until we find out what the LDS is brewing, I have to admit that Ancestry is
so far the best (imo) way to quickly research & build a decent tree with
the least amount of pain. It may not be the end-all, and they're having
some programming growing pains but once you get the hang of the site it can
be pretty quick to add people, families, and citations. Just stay away from
the trees as a resource! They are usually poorly documented and many are
outdated. Stick with the historical databases and newspaper listings, etc.
A quick tip (they may fix this soon)- If you add a person to your online
tree directly from a census, go back to the census page and attach it to
him/her again to get the residence event. For some reason it only adds the
person & birth on the first pass.
I've only just picked up Family Tree Maker 2008, but that might be the best
way to go with an Ancestry subscription. When you build a tree in it you
can do all of the online searching & adding of people/events/citations
automatically from the PC, and it will also download the census & other
image files to your PC as well.
I hate to get sucked in by "the man", but so far they have a good game.
I recently signed up with ancestry.com for a 3-month subscription
following a 14-day free trial. Although I hesitated signing up with
ancestry.com, I found that every "free" genealogy research website
always directed me to an ancestry.com website. Therefore, one has no
choice but to subscribe to ancestry.com if you wish to do any
genealogy research.
iuki
Until we find out what the LDS is brewing, I have to admit that Ancestry is
so far the best (imo) way to quickly research & build a decent tree with
the least amount of pain. It may not be the end-all, and they're having
some programming growing pains but once you get the hang of the site it can
be pretty quick to add people, families, and citations. Just stay away from
the trees as a resource! They are usually poorly documented and many are
outdated. Stick with the historical databases and newspaper listings, etc.
A quick tip (they may fix this soon)- If you add a person to your online
tree directly from a census, go back to the census page and attach it to
him/her again to get the residence event. For some reason it only adds the
person & birth on the first pass.
I've only just picked up Family Tree Maker 2008, but that might be the best
way to go with an Ancestry subscription. When you build a tree in it you
can do all of the online searching & adding of people/events/citations
automatically from the PC, and it will also download the census & other
image files to your PC as well.
I hate to get sucked in by "the man", but so far they have a good game.
-
Charani
Re: genealogy.com
On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 08:57:13 +1300, Sherlock Holmes wrote:
Oh rats!!!
Thanks for the info.
--
http://home.comcast.net/~webact1/Collingridge/
Just letting everyone out there know that the Genealogy.com side of
things is being being made redundant meaning it will not longer be used
as a site and all those that have accounts with Genealogy.com ought to
ensure that they have an account with Ancestry.com
This means that all data that one can find at Genealogy.com at present
will is being moved to Ancestry.com
Oh rats!!!
Thanks for the info.
--
http://home.comcast.net/~webact1/Collingridge/
-
clifto
Re: genealogy.com
JD wrote:
I hate to say it, but what I've seen of LDS so far is highly disappointing.
What little tiny fragments of my family tree I've found there are sparse
and inaccurate. I've pretty much stopped using their site as a resource.
--
Dec. 6 (Bloomberg) -- Government officials and activists flying to Bali,
Indonesia, for the United Nations meeting on climate change will cause
as much pollution as 20,000 cars in a year.
Until we find out what the LDS is brewing,
I hate to say it, but what I've seen of LDS so far is highly disappointing.
What little tiny fragments of my family tree I've found there are sparse
and inaccurate. I've pretty much stopped using their site as a resource.
--
Dec. 6 (Bloomberg) -- Government officials and activists flying to Bali,
Indonesia, for the United Nations meeting on climate change will cause
as much pollution as 20,000 cars in a year.
-
brenda parker
Re: genealogy.com
the LDS just required them to bring back names not proof
On 1/5/08, clifto <clifto@gmail.com> wrote:
--
Proud member of IBSSG
On 1/5/08, clifto <clifto@gmail.com> wrote:
JD wrote:
Until we find out what the LDS is brewing,
I hate to say it, but what I've seen of LDS so far is highly
disappointing.
What little tiny fragments of my family tree I've found there are sparse
and inaccurate. I've pretty much stopped using their site as a resource.
--
Dec. 6 (Bloomberg) -- Government officials and activists flying to Bali,
Indonesia, for the United Nations meeting on climate change will cause
as much pollution as 20,000 cars in a year.
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
ALT-GENEALOGY-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
--
Proud member of IBSSG
-
hlmw
Re: genealogy.com
clifto wrote:
Ancestry File it is will often be incorrect. I have an error I am trying
to correct because someone submitted wrong information. However, if you
consult the IGI it is going to be a lot more accurate, alsi Census are
more accurate.
Do not use the Ancestry File, it will only mislead. It was compiled as
an experiment by the LDS Church to get their members to submit 4
generations of their families. Much of it was done from memory by those
families, not from accurate records.
Repeat: DO NOT TRUST ANCESTRY FILE!
Other than that the IGI data is very helpful. It is always being added
to so don't give up. Go back and check again.
Lorna
JD wrote:
Until we find out what the LDS is brewing,
I hate to say it, but what I've seen of LDS so far is highly disappointing.
What little tiny fragments of my family tree I've found there are sparse
and inaccurate. I've pretty much stopped using their site as a resource.
It is not a resource per se, it is a guide. If you only look at the
Ancestry File it is will often be incorrect. I have an error I am trying
to correct because someone submitted wrong information. However, if you
consult the IGI it is going to be a lot more accurate, alsi Census are
more accurate.
Do not use the Ancestry File, it will only mislead. It was compiled as
an experiment by the LDS Church to get their members to submit 4
generations of their families. Much of it was done from memory by those
families, not from accurate records.
Repeat: DO NOT TRUST ANCESTRY FILE!
Other than that the IGI data is very helpful. It is always being added
to so don't give up. Go back and check again.
Lorna
-
brenda parker
Re: genealogy.com
The LDS, ancestry, 2 county web sites all have copied a book that has wrong
info in it and POSTED on the net.
They copied word for word the 1880 census record for Sumner County TN
straight from a book. My grt. grt. grandad and his father are listed as born
10 years apart and their last name is spelled wrong.Know its them all the
wives names, kids match up.
A book of Sumner County Cemetery records is also on net, and it has 5 people
whose funeral i attended in 1 cemetery thats not listed.
On 1/5/08, hlmw <hlmw1@telus.net> wrote:
--
Proud member of IBSSG
info in it and POSTED on the net.
They copied word for word the 1880 census record for Sumner County TN
straight from a book. My grt. grt. grandad and his father are listed as born
10 years apart and their last name is spelled wrong.Know its them all the
wives names, kids match up.
A book of Sumner County Cemetery records is also on net, and it has 5 people
whose funeral i attended in 1 cemetery thats not listed.
On 1/5/08, hlmw <hlmw1@telus.net> wrote:
clifto wrote:
JD wrote:
Until we find out what the LDS is brewing,
I hate to say it, but what I've seen of LDS so far is highly
disappointing.
What little tiny fragments of my family tree I've found there are sparse
and inaccurate. I've pretty much stopped using their site as a resource.
It is not a resource per se, it is a guide. If you only look at the
Ancestry File it is will often be incorrect. I have an error I am trying
to correct because someone submitted wrong information. However, if you
consult the IGI it is going to be a lot more accurate, alsi Census are
more accurate.
Do not use the Ancestry File, it will only mislead. It was compiled as
an experiment by the LDS Church to get their members to submit 4
generations of their families. Much of it was done from memory by those
families, not from accurate records.
Repeat: DO NOT TRUST ANCESTRY FILE!
Other than that the IGI data is very helpful. It is always being added
to so don't give up. Go back and check again.
Lorna
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
ALT-GENEALOGY-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
--
Proud member of IBSSG
-
Texas Gen
Re: genealogy.com
Regarding incorrect information being posted online:
Don't always trust the hard copy printed word either. There is one book on
my dad's family that states clearly that my 2nd gr grandparents died young
and without children. Apparently no one even bothered to check the
censuses. They raised a large family, lived to old age in plain sight on
the census records, and of course had many descendants (including me
.
I got in touch with the author. She was gracious and indicated that she
would add an errata sheet to books already printed and correct the next
printing.
I doubt that the book will go into a second printing, and we know what
happens to errata sheets. :-/
Donna
Don't always trust the hard copy printed word either. There is one book on
my dad's family that states clearly that my 2nd gr grandparents died young
and without children. Apparently no one even bothered to check the
censuses. They raised a large family, lived to old age in plain sight on
the census records, and of course had many descendants (including me
I got in touch with the author. She was gracious and indicated that she
would add an errata sheet to books already printed and correct the next
printing.
I doubt that the book will go into a second printing, and we know what
happens to errata sheets. :-/
Donna
-
JD
Re: genealogy.com
clifto <clifto@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks for all of the warnings everyone! But I've been there and I know
what you mean. I'm also an Ancestry.com subsriber and the biggest waste of
time & effort are the trees (any of them). I try only to use Fed, State,
Local records and publications that have some merit, and I know they all
have limitations as well. The problem with ALL trees now is that you have
big trees that are built from a lot of bad smaller trees, so unless they
have credible sources I won't use any of them.
What I think the LDS is "brewing", is an expansion of their repository of
records (not just trees) for use on the familysearch.org site. I say that
because of what I've been reading on the blog at
http://labs.familysearch.org/. I don't know what it takes to get an
account while they are testing/"brewing" but I applied although haven't
heard back yet.
JD wrote:
Until we find out what the LDS is brewing,
I hate to say it, but what I've seen of LDS so far is highly
disappointing. What little tiny fragments of my family tree I've found
there are sparse and inaccurate. I've pretty much stopped using their
site as a resource.
Thanks for all of the warnings everyone! But I've been there and I know
what you mean. I'm also an Ancestry.com subsriber and the biggest waste of
time & effort are the trees (any of them). I try only to use Fed, State,
Local records and publications that have some merit, and I know they all
have limitations as well. The problem with ALL trees now is that you have
big trees that are built from a lot of bad smaller trees, so unless they
have credible sources I won't use any of them.
What I think the LDS is "brewing", is an expansion of their repository of
records (not just trees) for use on the familysearch.org site. I say that
because of what I've been reading on the blog at
http://labs.familysearch.org/. I don't know what it takes to get an
account while they are testing/"brewing" but I applied although haven't
heard back yet.
-
cecilia
Re: genealogy.com
JD wrote:
It was quite a number of days before I heard back. I've only used it
for about 15 mins, but I can see it will be useful - it's fleshed a
few bones already.
[...]
What I think the LDS is "brewing", is an expansion of their repository of
records (not just trees) for use on the familysearch.org site. I say that
because of what I've been reading on the blog at
http://labs.familysearch.org/. I don't know what it takes to get an
account while they are testing/"brewing" but I applied although haven't
heard back yet.
It was quite a number of days before I heard back. I've only used it
for about 15 mins, but I can see it will be useful - it's fleshed a
few bones already.
-
Ann Avery Hunter
Re: genealogy.com
"cecilia" <myths@ic24.net> wrote in message
news:47841b2c.6336296@news.plus.net...
I got my account after about 30 minutes. The OH death records alone are a
treasure!
Ann
Winston-Salem, NC
news:47841b2c.6336296@news.plus.net...
JD wrote:
[...]
What I think the LDS is "brewing", is an expansion of their repository of
records (not just trees) for use on the familysearch.org site. I say that
because of what I've been reading on the blog at
http://labs.familysearch.org/. I don't know what it takes to get an
account while they are testing/"brewing" but I applied although haven't
heard back yet.
It was quite a number of days before I heard back. I've only used it
for about 15 mins, but I can see it will be useful - it's fleshed a
few bones already.
I got my account after about 30 minutes. The OH death records alone are a
treasure!
Ann
Winston-Salem, NC
-
hlmw
Re: genealogy.com
Ann Avery Hunter wrote:
resembling OH. Do you mean OHIO?
Lorna
"cecilia" <myths@ic24.net> wrote in message
news:47841b2c.6336296@news.plus.net...
JD wrote:
[...]
What I think the LDS is "brewing", is an expansion of their repository of
records (not just trees) for use on the familysearch.org site. I say that
because of what I've been reading on the blog at
http://labs.familysearch.org/. I don't know what it takes to get an
account while they are testing/"brewing" but I applied although haven't
heard back yet.
It was quite a number of days before I heard back. I've only used it
for about 15 mins, but I can see it will be useful - it's fleshed a
few bones already.
I got my account after about 30 minutes. The OH death records alone are a
treasure!
Ann
Winston-Salem, NC
What does OH mean? I just checked out the site and saw nothing
resembling OH. Do you mean OHIO?
Lorna
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ALT-GENEALOGY-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
-
Ann Avery Hunter
Re: genealogy.com
"hlmw" <hlmw1@telus.net> wrote in message
news:mailman.1793.1199851240.4586.alt-genealogy@rootsweb.com...
Yep, Ohio.
Ann
news:mailman.1793.1199851240.4586.alt-genealogy@rootsweb.com...
Ann Avery Hunter wrote:
"cecilia" <myths@ic24.net> wrote in message
news:47841b2c.6336296@news.plus.net...
JD wrote:
[...]
What I think the LDS is "brewing", is an expansion of their repository
of
records (not just trees) for use on the familysearch.org site. I say
that
because of what I've been reading on the blog at
http://labs.familysearch.org/. I don't know what it takes to get an
account while they are testing/"brewing" but I applied although haven't
heard back yet.
It was quite a number of days before I heard back. I've only used it
for about 15 mins, but I can see it will be useful - it's fleshed a
few bones already.
I got my account after about 30 minutes. The OH death records alone are a
treasure!
Ann
Winston-Salem, NC
What does OH mean? I just checked out the site and saw nothing resembling
OH. Do you mean OHIO?
Lorna
Yep, Ohio.
Ann
-
Hugh Watkins
Re: genealogy.com
clifto wrote:
well then you better contribute what you know for the general good
Hugh W
JD wrote:
Until we find out what the LDS is brewing,
I hate to say it, but what I've seen of LDS so far is highly disappointing.
What little tiny fragments of my family tree I've found there are sparse
and inaccurate. I've pretty much stopped using their site as a resource.
well then you better contribute what you know for the general good
Hugh W
-
Hugh Watkins
Re: genealogy.com
JD <jd4x4@ wrote:
useful for social networking
eg
my late first wife's brother found me because I uploaded a gedcom to
worldconnect,rotsweb.com
Hugh W
clifto <clifto@gmail.com> wrote:
JD wrote:
Until we find out what the LDS is brewing,
I hate to say it, but what I've seen of LDS so far is highly
disappointing. What little tiny fragments of my family tree I've found
there are sparse and inaccurate. I've pretty much stopped using their
site as a resource.
Thanks for all of the warnings everyone! But I've been there and I know
what you mean. I'm also an Ancestry.com subsriber and the biggest waste of
time & effort are the trees (any of them).
snip
useful for social networking
eg
my late first wife's brother found me because I uploaded a gedcom to
worldconnect,rotsweb.com
Hugh W
-
Hugh Watkins
Re: genealogy.com
Charani wrote:
this is still just a rumour
Hugh W
On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 08:57:13 +1300, Sherlock Holmes wrote:
Just letting everyone out there know that the Genealogy.com side of
things is being being made redundant meaning it will not longer be used
as a site and all those that have accounts with Genealogy.com ought to
ensure that they have an account with Ancestry.com
This means that all data that one can find at Genealogy.com at present
will is being moved to Ancestry.com
Oh rats!!!
Thanks for the info.
this is still just a rumour
Hugh W
-
Charani
Re: genealogy.com
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 14:20:46 -0600, clifto wrote:
The IGI and their associated Pedigree and Ancestral files are a waste
of time because of the inaccuracies and outright fantasy entries.
It's a resource I rarely ever use now either.
It is only one part of their holdings though, albeit the best known.
--
http://home.comcast.net/~webact1/Collingridge/
I hate to say it, but what I've seen of LDS so far is highly disappointing.
What little tiny fragments of my family tree I've found there are sparse
and inaccurate. I've pretty much stopped using their site as a resource.
The IGI and their associated Pedigree and Ancestral files are a waste
of time because of the inaccuracies and outright fantasy entries.
It's a resource I rarely ever use now either.
It is only one part of their holdings though, albeit the best known.
--
http://home.comcast.net/~webact1/Collingridge/
-
Lesley Robertson
Re: genealogy.com
"Charani" <SGBNOSPAM@ mail2genes.invalid> wrote in message
news:47849254$0$47162$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
Church of Scotland parish registers plus scottish births & marriages to 1875
so, as long as you check the source, can make a useful (and free)
preliminary index to focus down on records before heading for Scotlands
People. They also have extractions from real records for 19th century expats
in the Middle and Far East.
As long as you are careful with the source of the info (I ignore all
patron-submitted material since there's no way to sift the good from the
imaginary), and treat it as a preliminary search, the IGI has its uses and
can save one money!
Lesley Robertson
news:47849254$0$47162$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 14:20:46 -0600, clifto wrote:
I hate to say it, but what I've seen of LDS so far is highly
disappointing.
What little tiny fragments of my family tree I've found there are sparse
and inaccurate. I've pretty much stopped using their site as a resource.
The IGI and their associated Pedigree and Ancestral files are a waste
of time because of the inaccuracies and outright fantasy entries.
It's a resource I rarely ever use now either.
It depends what you're looking for. The IGI has actual extractions of the
Church of Scotland parish registers plus scottish births & marriages to 1875
so, as long as you check the source, can make a useful (and free)
preliminary index to focus down on records before heading for Scotlands
People. They also have extractions from real records for 19th century expats
in the Middle and Far East.
As long as you are careful with the source of the info (I ignore all
patron-submitted material since there's no way to sift the good from the
imaginary), and treat it as a preliminary search, the IGI has its uses and
can save one money!
Lesley Robertson
-
JD
Re: genealogy.com
Hugh Watkins <hugh.watkins@gmail.com> wrote:
VERY good point, Hugh.
How quickly I forgot that my "new" 3rd cousin contacted me through my
submitted tree. And, she was the one that had found and pointed me to the
baptism record that broke through a wall for me as well.
useful for social networking
eg
my late first wife's brother found me because I uploaded a gedcom to
worldconnect,rotsweb.com
Hugh W
VERY good point, Hugh.
How quickly I forgot that my "new" 3rd cousin contacted me through my
submitted tree. And, she was the one that had found and pointed me to the
baptism record that broke through a wall for me as well.
-
JD
Re: genealogy.com
Charani <SGBNOSPAM@ mail2genes.invalid> wrote:
Hugh's mention of the social networking value of the trees is something I
overlooked/forgot about at first, but in retrospect it really IS a valuable
asset.
All of this really comes back to what I think I see as a good turn-around
and new direction in software & sources.. It seems that it's going to be
easier for people to use the new web resources and software to auto-record
and pass on good, credible source citations in their trees.
Wow. Imagine if all of the trees out there already had good sources/cites!!
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 14:20:46 -0600, clifto wrote:
I hate to say it, but what I've seen of LDS so far is highly
disappointing. What little tiny fragments of my family tree I've
found there are sparse and inaccurate. I've pretty much stopped using
their site as a resource.
The IGI and their associated Pedigree and Ancestral files are a waste
of time because of the inaccuracies and outright fantasy entries.
It's a resource I rarely ever use now either.
It is only one part of their holdings though, albeit the best known.
Hugh's mention of the social networking value of the trees is something I
overlooked/forgot about at first, but in retrospect it really IS a valuable
asset.
All of this really comes back to what I think I see as a good turn-around
and new direction in software & sources.. It seems that it's going to be
easier for people to use the new web resources and software to auto-record
and pass on good, credible source citations in their trees.
Wow. Imagine if all of the trees out there already had good sources/cites!!
-
ecunningham
Re: genealogy.com
Ann Avery Hunter wrote:
Ann: AMEN! (And thank you for the heads up!)
I thought my Ohio stuff was in pretty good shape until I inserted some
names!
Now I have to go and fill in some hidden potholes.
ecunningham@att.net
I got my account after about 30 minutes. The OH death records alone are a
treasure!
Ann: AMEN! (And thank you for the heads up!)
I thought my Ohio stuff was in pretty good shape until I inserted some
names!
Now I have to go and fill in some hidden potholes.
ecunningham@att.net
-
saki
Re: genealogy.com
melsonr@aragorn.rgmhome.net (Robert Melson) wrote in
news:13oaemqja2316f5@corp.supernews.com:
Wasn't Phillip Klass actually using William Tenn as a pen name? Sturgeon
was the correct source of that quote, of course---"Sturgeon's Law" it was
called.
For some reason the LDS indexers were unintentionally very good to me and
included some actual, verifiable links to ancestors of mine in the IGI
database. So for me it's been a tool that works pretty well, if used
judiciously. I ignore entries that aren't sourced to film and always
check film or fiche myself to verify information.
Occasionally I've found entries that have been properly indexed but which
I missed on my first or second pass through records that have poor film
images---for instance, searching for all children of two particular
parents. Sure enough, when rechecking the film, there they are.
The IGI's usefulness does depend on your ancestral region, of course, and
depending on where they're based it might be a waste of time to use it.
But occasionally there are hidden gems to be found.
----
saki@ucla.edu
news:13oaemqja2316f5@corp.supernews.com:
In article <47849254$0$47162$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net>,
Charani <SGBNOSPAM@ mail2genes.invalid> writes:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 14:20:46 -0600, clifto wrote:
I hate to say it, but what I've seen of LDS so far is highly
disappointing. What little tiny fragments of my family tree I've
found there are sparse and inaccurate. I've pretty much stopped
using their site as a resource.
The IGI and their associated Pedigree and Ancestral files are a waste
of time because of the inaccuracies and outright fantasy entries.
It's a resource I rarely ever use now either.
It is only one part of their holdings though, albeit the best known.
But why criticize the LDS/familysearch for the same problem
one finds on RootsWeb and/or Ancestry? Author Theodore
Sturgeon (Phillip Klass) famously said, "90% of everything is
crap."
Wasn't Phillip Klass actually using William Tenn as a pen name? Sturgeon
was the correct source of that quote, of course---"Sturgeon's Law" it was
called.
For some reason the LDS indexers were unintentionally very good to me and
included some actual, verifiable links to ancestors of mine in the IGI
database. So for me it's been a tool that works pretty well, if used
judiciously. I ignore entries that aren't sourced to film and always
check film or fiche myself to verify information.
Occasionally I've found entries that have been properly indexed but which
I missed on my first or second pass through records that have poor film
images---for instance, searching for all children of two particular
parents. Sure enough, when rechecking the film, there they are.
The IGI's usefulness does depend on your ancestral region, of course, and
depending on where they're based it might be a waste of time to use it.
But occasionally there are hidden gems to be found.
----
saki@ucla.edu
-
Robert Melson
Re: genealogy.com
In article <Xns9A20901F7E127sakiuclaedu@130.133.1.4>,
saki <saki@ucla.edu> writes:
Blush! You're absolutely right. Out-thought myself yet again!
As with everything else "out there", you can't just accept things,
you have to verify them. The LDS is neither better nor worse than
the other public/free sites when it comes down t accuracy, and I
see no reason to single them out or accuse them of operating a
useless, innacurate or somehow deceptive site.
I'll add here that I'm NOT a Mormon - good, bad or indifferent.
Bob
--
Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas
-----
Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is the probable
reason so few engage in it. -- Henry Ford
saki <saki@ucla.edu> writes:
melsonr@aragorn.rgmhome.net (Robert Melson) wrote in
news:13oaemqja2316f5@corp.supernews.com:
snip
Wasn't Phillip Klass actually using William Tenn as a pen name? Sturgeon
was the correct source of that quote, of course---"Sturgeon's Law" it was
called.
Blush! You're absolutely right. Out-thought myself yet again!
For some reason the LDS indexers were unintentionally very good to me and
included some actual, verifiable links to ancestors of mine in the IGI
database. So for me it's been a tool that works pretty well, if used
judiciously. I ignore entries that aren't sourced to film and always
check film or fiche myself to verify information.
Occasionally I've found entries that have been properly indexed but which
I missed on my first or second pass through records that have poor film
images---for instance, searching for all children of two particular
parents. Sure enough, when rechecking the film, there they are.
The IGI's usefulness does depend on your ancestral region, of course, and
depending on where they're based it might be a waste of time to use it.
But occasionally there are hidden gems to be found.
As with everything else "out there", you can't just accept things,
you have to verify them. The LDS is neither better nor worse than
the other public/free sites when it comes down t accuracy, and I
see no reason to single them out or accuse them of operating a
useless, innacurate or somehow deceptive site.
I'll add here that I'm NOT a Mormon - good, bad or indifferent.
Bob
--
Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas
-----
Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is the probable
reason so few engage in it. -- Henry Ford
-
clifto
Re: genealogy.com
Robert Melson wrote:
I find a lot of usable stuff on rootsweb and on ancestry. I don't find any
usable stuff on LDS. I criticize those entities where I find no usable
stuff.
--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.
Charani <SGBNOSPAM@ mail2genes.invalid> writes:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 14:20:46 -0600, clifto wrote:
I hate to say it, but what I've seen of LDS so far is highly disappointing.
What little tiny fragments of my family tree I've found there are sparse
and inaccurate. I've pretty much stopped using their site as a resource.
The IGI and their associated Pedigree and Ancestral files are a waste
of time because of the inaccuracies and outright fantasy entries.
It's a resource I rarely ever use now either.
It is only one part of their holdings though, albeit the best known.
But why criticize the LDS/familysearch for the same problem
one finds on RootsWeb and/or Ancestry? Author Theodore
Sturgeon (Phillip Klass) famously said, "90% of everything is
crap."
I find a lot of usable stuff on rootsweb and on ancestry. I don't find any
usable stuff on LDS. I criticize those entities where I find no usable
stuff.
--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.
-
Hugh Watkins
Re: genealogy.com
clifto wrote:
which means you did not look in the right place
what could you not find on fsmilysearch.org ?
what have you uploaded to the other sites?
Hugh W
Robert Melson wrote:
Charani <SGBNOSPAM@ mail2genes.invalid> writes:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 14:20:46 -0600, clifto wrote:
I hate to say it, but what I've seen of LDS so far is highly disappointing.
What little tiny fragments of my family tree I've found there are sparse
and inaccurate. I've pretty much stopped using their site as a resource.
The IGI and their associated Pedigree and Ancestral files are a waste
of time because of the inaccuracies and outright fantasy entries.
It's a resource I rarely ever use now either.
It is only one part of their holdings though, albeit the best known.
But why criticize the LDS/familysearch for the same problem
one finds on RootsWeb and/or Ancestry? Author Theodore
Sturgeon (Phillip Klass) famously said, "90% of everything is
crap."
I find a lot of usable stuff on rootsweb and on ancestry. I don't find any
usable stuff on LDS. I criticize those entities where I find no usable
stuff.
which means you did not look in the right place
what could you not find on fsmilysearch.org ?
what have you uploaded to the other sites?
Hugh W
-
Charani
Re: genealogy.com
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 21:21:30 -0000, Robert Melson wrote:
LDS was mentioned. Now that you've mention Rootsweb and Ancestry: I
don't use either of them either. The Rootsweb mailing lists are
useful because there are always people on them with good local
knowledge.
If that's the case, then why are any of us doing our family history or
genealogy if 90% is only fit for the trash? I don't think that those
who helped me assemble Dear Cousin Albert's life (as in the link in my
sig file) would regard their efforts as 90% "crap". I certainly
don't.
--
http://home.comcast.net/~webact1/Collingridge/
But why criticize the LDS/familysearch for the same problem
one finds on RootsWeb and/or Ancestry?
LDS was mentioned. Now that you've mention Rootsweb and Ancestry: I
don't use either of them either. The Rootsweb mailing lists are
useful because there are always people on them with good local
knowledge.
Author Theodore
Sturgeon (Phillip Klass) famously said, "90% of everything is
crap."
If that's the case, then why are any of us doing our family history or
genealogy if 90% is only fit for the trash? I don't think that those
who helped me assemble Dear Cousin Albert's life (as in the link in my
sig file) would regard their efforts as 90% "crap". I certainly
don't.
--
http://home.comcast.net/~webact1/Collingridge/
-
Christopher Jahn
Re: genealogy.com
Charani <SGBNOSPAM@ mail2genes.invalid> wrote in
news:47874a50$0$47102$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net:
Because we have an obsession that is mostly harmless, so society
lets us do it without much derision.
Many cultures indulge in ancestor worship to varying degress. I
know of at least one culture at actually keeps their ancestors'
remains (only a couple generations back) in the house! Oh,
they're fully "prepared," so there's no health issues. But they
will often have the departed sit at the dinner table for
ceremonius occasions.
"As it harms none, 'do what thou wilt' shall be the whole of the
law," proclaims another religion.
Have fun with it, but don't over-estimate its value in the
greater scheme of things.
--
}:-) Christopher Jahn
{:-( http://soflatheatre.blogspot.com/
Sin that pays its way can travel freely, and without a passport;
whereas virtue, if a pauper, is stopped at all frontiers.
news:47874a50$0$47102$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net:
If that's the case, then why are any of us doing our family
history or genealogy if 90% is only fit for the trash?
Because we have an obsession that is mostly harmless, so society
lets us do it without much derision.
Many cultures indulge in ancestor worship to varying degress. I
know of at least one culture at actually keeps their ancestors'
remains (only a couple generations back) in the house! Oh,
they're fully "prepared," so there's no health issues. But they
will often have the departed sit at the dinner table for
ceremonius occasions.
"As it harms none, 'do what thou wilt' shall be the whole of the
law," proclaims another religion.
Have fun with it, but don't over-estimate its value in the
greater scheme of things.
--
}:-) Christopher Jahn
{:-( http://soflatheatre.blogspot.com/
Sin that pays its way can travel freely, and without a passport;
whereas virtue, if a pauper, is stopped at all frontiers.
-
Graeme Wall
Re: genealogy.com
In message <Xns9A226C97AAAC5xjahn@216.196.97.136>
Christopher Jahn <xjahn@yahoo.com> wrote:
[snip]
The Aztecs and Incas went in for it in a big way, especially the latter where
dead kings would have their own (live) households.
--
Graeme Wall
My genealogy website <www.greywall.demon.co.uk/genealogy>
Christopher Jahn <xjahn@yahoo.com> wrote:
[snip]
Many cultures indulge in ancestor worship to varying degress. I
know of at least one culture at actually keeps their ancestors'
remains (only a couple generations back) in the house! Oh,
they're fully "prepared," so there's no health issues. But they
will often have the departed sit at the dinner table for
ceremonius occasions.
The Aztecs and Incas went in for it in a big way, especially the latter where
dead kings would have their own (live) households.
--
Graeme Wall
My genealogy website <www.greywall.demon.co.uk/genealogy>
-
Robert Melson
Re: genealogy.com
In article <47874a50$0$47102$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net>,
Charani <SGBNOSPAM@ mail2genes.invalid> writes:
The point was - or so I thought - that most of the information
found on the internet is suspect, particularly on the genealogy
sites, whether free or commercial. Had nothing to do with
why you and I and others indulge in this obsession/passion. I
do it out of curiosity about my antecedents as well as for the
thrill of the chase, which lets me indulge my Sherlock Holmes
fantasies. Others do it for other reasons, how 'bout you? A
NEED to know, knowledge for knowledge sake, name collecting,
one-upmanship with other family members?
Bob
--
Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas
-----
Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is the probable
reason so few engage in it. -- Henry Ford
Charani <SGBNOSPAM@ mail2genes.invalid> writes:
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 21:21:30 -0000, Robert Melson wrote:
But why criticize the LDS/familysearch for the same problem
one finds on RootsWeb and/or Ancestry?
LDS was mentioned. Now that you've mention Rootsweb and Ancestry: I
don't use either of them either. The Rootsweb mailing lists are
useful because there are always people on them with good local
knowledge.
Author Theodore
Sturgeon (Phillip Klass) famously said, "90% of everything is
crap."
If that's the case, then why are any of us doing our family history or
genealogy if 90% is only fit for the trash? I don't think that those
who helped me assemble Dear Cousin Albert's life (as in the link in my
sig file) would regard their efforts as 90% "crap". I certainly
don't.
The point was - or so I thought - that most of the information
found on the internet is suspect, particularly on the genealogy
sites, whether free or commercial. Had nothing to do with
why you and I and others indulge in this obsession/passion. I
do it out of curiosity about my antecedents as well as for the
thrill of the chase, which lets me indulge my Sherlock Holmes
fantasies. Others do it for other reasons, how 'bout you? A
NEED to know, knowledge for knowledge sake, name collecting,
one-upmanship with other family members?
Bob
--
Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas
-----
Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is the probable
reason so few engage in it. -- Henry Ford
-
Texas Gen
Re: genealogy.com
Bob wrote:
Yes, that is the research motivation for me. I find fascinating stories and
get a look at their lives in the social and historical context. I research
in-laws' families for about two or three generations, sometimes more if they
are interesting. And I research all my maternal lines with the same focus
as I do the paternal lines. I just follow the trails.
My motivation for research has nothing to do with ancestor worship. It has
everything to do with curiosity about ancestors, collateral ancestors, and
allied families.
I definitely don't do it to find famous figures----although I have found a
very few. And I've found a few rascals. It balances out.
I find the search to be valuable to me and a few members of my family who
are particularly interested in history in general.
When I find something particularly interesting (such as someone who died at
the Alamo), I write up a brief "Family Factoid" e-mail and send it to
members of the family. When I began this about three years ago, I put in
the disclaimer that there would be no pop quiz later---they might choose to
read it now, store it and read it later, or drop it in File 13. It has
worked out well and some do love it. Some distant relatives have even asked
to be added to the list. I never ask anybody about it later---it's a
no-pressure deal. Sometimes I'll get a reply asking for more detail or
asking other questions about it.
I try to keep the factoids brief and simple. However, the last one I sent
out had a "short version" at the top and then the "longer version" added
separately at the bottom for those who were interested in more detail.
I might only send one every couple of months. I don't want to spam!
Warmest Regards,
Donna
P.S. Right now I'm doing research for a client. I find the search
fascinating and fun--and it's nice to help someone else who doesn't have the
time to do it himself.
I do it [genealogy research] out of curiosity about my antecedents
as well as for the
thrill of the chase, which lets me indulge my Sherlock Holmes
fantasies.
Yes, that is the research motivation for me. I find fascinating stories and
get a look at their lives in the social and historical context. I research
in-laws' families for about two or three generations, sometimes more if they
are interesting. And I research all my maternal lines with the same focus
as I do the paternal lines. I just follow the trails.
My motivation for research has nothing to do with ancestor worship. It has
everything to do with curiosity about ancestors, collateral ancestors, and
allied families.
I definitely don't do it to find famous figures----although I have found a
very few. And I've found a few rascals. It balances out.
I find the search to be valuable to me and a few members of my family who
are particularly interested in history in general.
When I find something particularly interesting (such as someone who died at
the Alamo), I write up a brief "Family Factoid" e-mail and send it to
members of the family. When I began this about three years ago, I put in
the disclaimer that there would be no pop quiz later---they might choose to
read it now, store it and read it later, or drop it in File 13. It has
worked out well and some do love it. Some distant relatives have even asked
to be added to the list. I never ask anybody about it later---it's a
no-pressure deal. Sometimes I'll get a reply asking for more detail or
asking other questions about it.
I try to keep the factoids brief and simple. However, the last one I sent
out had a "short version" at the top and then the "longer version" added
separately at the bottom for those who were interested in more detail.
I might only send one every couple of months. I don't want to spam!
Warmest Regards,
Donna
P.S. Right now I'm doing research for a client. I find the search
fascinating and fun--and it's nice to help someone else who doesn't have the
time to do it himself.
-
Charani
Re: genealogy.com
On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:57:26 -0000, Robert Melson wrote:
Curiosity - and as a by product an OPC.
--
http://home.comcast.net/~webact1/Collingridge/
Others do it for other reasons, how 'bout you? A
NEED to know, knowledge for knowledge sake, name collecting,
one-upmanship with other family members?
Curiosity - and as a by product an OPC.
--
http://home.comcast.net/~webact1/Collingridge/