Please note, that by design you can only see a part of your tree at at given time, to make processing easier and faster for you computer.
The other people in your tree are showed in "pruned" branches (the very small pink and blue icons that you can see above certain individuals).
You can click on these icons to show the "hidden" parts of the trees.
I have entered your site and saw your profile with your family branch.
I then entered your husbands branch by clicking on the "pruned" branches of his icon and then returned to your family branch by clicking the "pruned" branches of the icon that represents your profile- I have returned to the page that was displayed when I've opened the site.
I and some other folks have complained about this as well. Way in the beginning (2008/2009) myheritage did display the tree the way you and I and many others like to see it, but they changed it giving space, efficiency and speed as reasons. I would gladly give up a considerable portion of all of the above to be able to see more branches of the same generation! It has to be possible, because it is done in FTB.
There is supposed to be an editing button etc to edit a profile and there isn't one on my site. Need instruction on how to edit a profile when there is no editing button and clicking on the space where a ;photo is supposed to be doesn't work either.
In the Chinese culture, the order of children and how they are shown is very important.
In Family Tree Builder, I know I can changed the order of children via the Manage Chldren option. I've used it. However, when it publish it, the online version doesn't reflect my order. It seems to put it in the order of entry (ie, the order that I entered the chlidren or "ID" of the person), then by date of birth, etc. Adopted children tend to be listed after the natural children.
I have a case where the first son was adopted and should be listed first and I reflected it in Manage Children. However, MyHeritage.com changed the order.
Yes I truely believe you. However, sometimes it is not possible to get everyone's birth dates, especially for the older generation. I like the power of Familiy Tree Builder for being able to arrange the children in the right order but why couldn't MyHeritage.com take advantage of that? Of course it requires more software to be written.
I also use Geni.com (I prefer MyHeritage.com) and they allow you to specify the birth order and use it.
The online site dosen't recognize a seperate 'adopted' status. The only way to indicate that is a comment. I think all it recognizes is a seperate mother from the rest of the children, and birthdates. If you want to have adopted children, you have to put them on the tree last, and if they are older than any of the natural children, you would have to leave off the birthdates of the other children. When none of the children have dates, it puts them in order that you placed them. If a child has no dates, while the others do, the dateless child will always be listed as last
As I said, I use Family Tree Builder. It allows you to designate a child as "Natural" or "Adopted" or "Foster". When I designate a child as "Adopted", the online site shows it as a dashed line from the parents, rather than a solid line.
I also disagree with you that dateless children as listed last. I have a case where child1 is adopted and has birth/deceased dates. The other natural children also have dates and some don't. So according to you the dateless children would be listed last. However, child1 is listed last.
Sorry, I guess since I had never published(I do everything online) I had figured that they only used the dashed line to indicate a divorce. So I figured it automatically translated what you had into terms that the online site recognized as if it had actually been written there from the start.
What progress is being made on the accuract of Smartmatching. It is about a year since this thread started and I started another one under a different thread,
I have received a load of Smartmatches this morning and most are wildy inaccurate. For example, what is Smart about matching Mary Martin Collison who lived between 1815-1891 with Mariq Isabel Marron who was born in 1947?!
As a software developer I know that just a simple line of code would have prvented that match on birth dates alone. And even without the date inconsistency, it is difficult to understand how three names that are so obviously different could get through.
Could we please have a report on progress beng made with Smartmatching? Issues such as the above are really so straightforward I would have thought they would take no more than a few days (if not hours) to eliminate. How about if we the users are given some tools that could set some filters at the client-side to eliminate such tedious and time wasting matches?
Mary MARTIN (COLLISON)
1815 - 1891
Mary Ann, John Henry, Frederick George, Elizabeth and Ann Jane
Nooooooooo! Please stop doing that to the rest of us! If you glance through all the different threads in this "Support" site, you will find dozens and dozens of us who have the same questions and irriatations about "Smart ? matches". Sending a private email does not help the rest of us, so please stop doing that. We all want to know if any progress is being made to get rid of matches that are not even close to being Smart. Thank you. Charles
Sometimes users ask questions in the forums that require us to get more information from them in order to solve the problem- and this information is not relevant to all forum readers and could also be private.
Therefore we prefer to answer some questions directly by email.
If you have the same question, we'd be happy to explain the answer again, but we can decide if it would be better to give it on the forum or in a personal email.