Ancestry & FMP search comparisons

But where would we all be without whinges Peter its what makes the world go round? Do you honestly expect people who have been searching Ancestry & FMP for years to suddenly break off and read your 'how to search'? It just doesn't happen that way unless they are newcomers in which case the advice is golden. People learn by their own mistakes and by whinging and picking up tips from others. It's what the Forum is all about and you created it for which we are all grateful.

 

Well you hit the nail on the head with that one and I doubt the 'Power Users' would work either -but that's me of course, not everyone. But there's an awful lot of stuff I do read!

I do not and would not doubt your intentions I have in my time been equally zealous about steering people in the right direction (just think health and safety and you will know what I mean). Of course you cannot do their research any more than I could perform work actions.

I think most people know a whinge when they read (or hear) one like my posting on the dreaded Lumens words when buying light bulbs. Its just Bob sounding forth and enjoying the responses.

 

You have already made this point in a previous post...please stop winging at me

 

And will likely again so Grr to you too

 

It was Peter's post I was replying to because he had already made the point about using the search form to his recommendations in an earlier reaction to my post re maiden names.

 

I use FMP but mostly monthlywise and for the Newspapers. They have improved in their records search, I must admit. However, on Ancestry, I was recently contacted by a relative - a genuine one - and this is part of the fact that I have an annual subscription with them. FMP I have downsided to monthly.

An aggravating fact with FMP Historical Newspapers outside the British Isles is that the required "News" is not highlighted as with the British Newspapers and, "floats around the screen". One answer is to download the page but then one has to scour the whole page to find what one wanted - sometimes without success.

 

As I said, one of the reasons I subscribe to FMP is their Historical Newspaper Section. However, I will sit down and follow your instructions, Peter. I have read them but sometimes, I wish you were sitting next to me when I am searching - just for the searching!!

I search for various people with German ancestors in the Hohenlohe district of Baden-Württemberg who emigrated to the UK between 1850-1900 +/-.

The other day, a researcher delivered the "hard facts" ie. when born, married, died, naturalised, etc. but I was able to send the descendant a photograph of his ancestor at the Sunderland Pork Butchers' Association Dance. His ancestor had been president and treasurer of this Association and he was thrilled to receive it.

I have also found a wealth of information about my own family. I learned that my grandfather's brother had received an inheritance from his father's sister in Künzelsau, Baden-Württemberg who had made a fortune in Bradford in the butchery business and retired to her homeland to live in comfort for a few years. My grandfather also inherited.

These historical newspapers gives us the flesh on the bones and also supply facts we would never find in the census and BMD records.

 

I always select a specific database for searches at both Ancestry and FMP (unless I have a particularly good reason not to). However, one thing which now bugs me about both sites is the "standardising" of place names, particularly when searching with a place of birth in censuses.

I have been trying at both sites to search for someone elusive in the 1871 census, and have tried entering just the forename, approximate dob and birthplace (St Pancras). However, whilst Ancestry offers me the option of St Pancras as a place of birth, I cannot get FMP to do so - at least not in 1871. I've tried spelling St in full and just typing Pancras but it won't have it, and if I just write it in regardless, then it gets ignored and removed.

Ancestry will at least allow me to override its standardised place name suggestions when I start typing something in, something which I consider vital when you consider how often birthplaces were misspelt.

 

Thanks, Peter. I'd forgotten about that, and didn't realise it still applied. It seems to affect some counties in 1891 also. Maybe the birth town field should be greyed out in the 1871 search.

Also, whilst adding St Pancras as a birthplace in the 1871 search at FMP would be pointless in the circumstances, I still think it would be better if you could add in a birthplace not in the list of suggestions to allow for misspellings and mistranscriptions. With a common name, searching on the county alone can bring up far too many results, whereas trying common misspellings or using wild cards with a more precise place of birth often finds the person you're looking for.

 

Fair enough.

I'm not sure if it's what you meant, but it looks to me as though rather than listing every spelling variant used for a birthplace, they've been grouped together to show up in a search on the corrected spelling. For example, if I want to search for someone born Wotton under Edge, which may have been spelt as all one word, with or without hyphens, with a double o or single t in Wotton, the only option I'm offered is Wotton-under-Edge.

Yes, this seems to bring up possibilities with other spellings, but that relies on the indexers making assumptions about what was meant when a place was misspelt. That is probably not too much of a problem with the example I've used but in general it's a rather risky strategy, as who is to say the right assumptions have been made?

 

I can see you get lots of possibilities by entering 'clerken' in that dataset but as far as I can see, at FMP the options differ between datasets, and for the different search fields within a dataset.

Notwithstanding what I said above about risky assumptions, and about being able to override the list of options offered, at least having a different list of places for each dataset makes a bit more sense than the apparently universal list of places at Ancestry. I frequently get frustrated when doing a search there in, say, the Gloucestershire marriages dataset, that when I start typing in the parish of interest, I get suggestions of places in China, the US and almost everywhere in the world except Gloucestershire!

 

This post caught my eye. Whinges can be trivial (yes admitted) but in many cases they truly relate to a perceived personal upset or worrisome experience; and often a perceived wrong. The whinger seeks redress by response, explanation and if necessary recompense. It matters not one iota that another person sees the whinge in a different light or perception, such as misinformed, lame or even down to grumpy old age; to the whinger it is a thorn in his/her side. Depending on the true facts of any situation the responder has a variety of ways to address the matter: to totally ignore it; give a blasé on the hoof answer right up to full apology and (again if necessary) to make recompense and be seen to do so.

It is also a golden opportunity as Alexander alludes for the cognoscente to hold sway and point out mistakes they believe are inherent in the whinge; and let’s face it there will often be an element of misinformation and misdirection in any whinge (not reading the small print comes to mind). But to the person, organisation, corporate or government body to whom the whinge is addressed it is in their best interest to address the matter quickly and professionally.

I know this because for quite a few years one of the posts I held was Quality Assurance Manager and responding to complaints was an important element of good QA practice. It could be explained simply as ‘a soft answer turns away wrath’ and it didn’t even matter if the complainer was right or wrong on the basis that a customer is always right (even if one had to bite ones tongue). A whinge is just another name for a complaint, real or perceived. They exist and always will exist and the best way is to deal with them.