New Ancestry Site

[zebo]

What do other users think of the new site layout? On the old one there was the opportunity to add an event, I can't see now where this can be done, other than editing the notes. Also so many place-names are now in the USA!

[trt]

New Ancestry Site, which one????????

[zebo]

The layout of the trees has changed and it doesn't seem as easy to add extra information, no doubt I'll get used to it eventually.

[Khandro]

I fail to see why people waste so much time on this subject; each of us have ; 2 parents, 4 g. parents, 8 g.g. parents, 16 g.g.g. parents, 32 g.g.g.g.g and 64 g.g.g.g.g, parents, and you're still probably in the 19th century, then it goes 128, 256,512 and so on, what's the point?

[Rose Maybud]

To add an event, you need to be on the 'facts' page for an individual. Under the banner at the top there is a small +ADD to click on.

Khandro - we don't all have ancestors in the number progression you describe - it only takes cousins to marry to mess up that theory. But you won't know unless you look :)

[DaisyNonna]

It is interesting to know who one's forebears were and whether any family jobs or interests have been passed down.

[lardhelmet]

I've never understood the attraction of wanting to know who my ancestors were either. Bit like that programme "Who do you think you are". Wonder how how many celebrities relatives were too boring to bother making a film about?

[Rose Maybud]

Look like family history is one of those hobbies you either love or hate. I love it. As for WDYTYA, I read an article about the research the programme makers do before filming, and yes, some celebrities have ancestors who are considered too 'boring'. What annoys me is the ease with which these people get access to all kinds of archives, experts and places the rest of us can't.

[DaisyNonna]

I have always enjoyed messing about with clay, one of my favourite presents was a load of it. Much later my research led me to a family of potters in my family tree.

[lardhelmet]

I'Il switch from WDYTYA to another channel if I don't like the celebrity (Jane Seymour for example) without even giving it a chance to see if it's going to be interesting. Shallow I know.

[zebo]

Similarly, I don't understand the fascination with "reality" shows, Celebrity anything, amateur baking programmes, snooker, XY Factor etc., I could fill a page. I do however enjoy looking into my and other friend's families.

[Canary42]

While I don't share zebo's enthusiasm, I recognise her hobby and I think it most rude to condemn it as a waste of time.

Any form of research can be an absorbing and rewarding task.

[Khandro]

Despite what I have said above, I should be grateful to genealogists because a few months ago I was contacted by a lawyer who informed me that a distant aunt had died intestate 10 years ago, she never married and had no children and a (hobby) genealogist they hired had traced me to be the nearest relative (I thought it was a scam and such things don't happen) however it turns out to be true - I'd never even heard of her before.
So after the lawyers and the genealogist have taken their cut, I inherit all shares and bank balances, total yet to be announced on sale of the shares.
So I'd better take back what I have said, and good hunting! :0)

[Canary42]

Nemesis Khandro ;-)

[trt]

zebo, I repeat. New Ancestry Site, which one????????

[Rose Maybud]

trt - same Ancestry site, just a new look. From what other people have said it was foisted upon Ancestry.com first; and Ancestry.co.uk subscribers could choose which version to use (that happened for a week or so). Now you get the new look version whether you want it or not. Zebo is asking what we all think about it - I'm also trying to get used to finding new ways to achieve what I used to do on auto-pilot. Some of the quick edit features have gone eg adding dates of birth and death, and you have to do them individually by 'adding' an event. That was what zebo was asking about. That I have found how to do!

As to the new look, you have a choice between 'Lifestory' mode and 'Facts' mode.
Lifestory seems more wordy, is spread out on the page more, and to me seems more like a paper copy in its presentation, and, indeed, I have borrowed some wording and ideas to update my paper copy, in the hope that someone else might care to read it!
'Facts' for an individual have been expanded to show births and deaths of family members as an 'event', so you can see at a glance the age of an individual. That can be useful, but I would prefer a toggle switch to turn that off because you have to scroll right down and down to work on event that happened later in life of people who were part of huge families.

Some of the wording can be quite ironic eg so-and-so 'passed away'. Fine if the person did, but when he or she was murdered, not so good. And where you have placenames in common with the US, the algorithm chooses the US version to write in full. Another annoying aspect is the back-referencing of the volume number for the GRO Index. It might well be the same for eg Basingstoke and Aldershot, but they are two different places!

That's the thoughts so far....

[zebo]

Sorry trt, I didn't answer your query about the site, it the usual Ancestry site but the layout of the trees is new and I find it not as user friendly.