Thank you for writing on our Forum.
What Eva told you is correct.
If you would like to read those illustrated articles on how to do that on the site and on the Family Tree Builder, please click on the links below:
No, Smart Matches wouldn't find matches within the same account, because the idea of Smart Matches is to help users to find other family sites on MyHeritage with which they might have coincidences of information and therefore be able to add that information to their own trees and also exchange information with other users, by contacting them.
Notice that even if you could have the matches within the same site or account, that wouldn't help you much on merging duplicates, because the information that you get with the matches are only copied to your own tree. The original data would still continue existing, i.e., the duplicates would still be duplicates.
This sort of thing is handled through the "more" option of the person's info in the family tree view. I think what you have to do is disconnect each child in turn from the duplicate (=the version with fewer kids) and re-connect them to the person you'll keep. Grandchildren etc. will follow automatically. I't's a little fiddly, but definitely worth doing.
In the privacy settings page (click on your name on the top right corner of the site and then "My privacy"; then on the left side of the page that opens, click on "Access"), you have the option to "Allow guests to view limited information in my site".
If the setting is enabled (yes), guests will be able to visit your site. They will be able to see the content that you and your site members have posted, except that your family tree will be censored (limited) so that information on living people will be hidden away. Hidden means that other than last names, no information of living people in family trees will be displayed: first names, genders, photos, dates, events, etc -- all will be hidden.
I thought to also include that the information Myheritage responded to is the same with all family tree sites. This is a protection for our privacy and stalking issues that can happen. Even tho it hinders our research efforts. But you can personally contact the family tree member through messaging and they can share it with you other ways. It all depends on the Genealogist willing to share.
My tree currently goes 9 generations back from me on my maternal grrandmother's side, and 8 generations on my maternal grandfather's. When I view the tree on the family site, all 8 generations are shown on my grandfather's line, but only 6 on my grandmother's. I can find the persons in the older generations, and if I go to them they show the full line down to me, but they are not shown as direct ancestors. They are reported correctly in a relationship report, just not shown in the tree view. Why is this?
FTB recognizes the direct relationship and it shows up in the tooltip.
I have complained about this since year one--5 years ago! It seems myHeritage can only handle one line of descent at the time and they are not interested in expanding this ability. It's very annoying. I don't know how well other programs do this or if they do it at all.
Hmm - the problem doesn't seem to be quite that simple, at least in my case.
With me as the root person, I see my maternal grandfather's line 8 generations back but my maternal grandmother's line stops short at 6 generations, although there are three more generations in the tree. If I go to the person at the point where the line stops, I do not see her parents, even if I choose "View this person's branch". However, if I go to my mother and choose to view her branch, all generations show up on both her father's and mother's sides.
I don't know if it may be relevant, but I think I added the early generations to my grandfather's line in FTB before the latest update (v7.0.0 build 7129) but I added my grandmother's earliest entries after the update.
The generations in every family tree, on both maternal and paternal sides, are limited to 5 generations. Up from that you will start seeing as "[Name] is your direct ancestor (X generations, great-great-great-grand[father/mother])".
This detailed information will appear on the full persons profile. Having it on the tree display would be too much, especially when you arrive to a generation with many "great-great-" to write.
Moreover, trees over 5000 people and less than 17,000 individuals are limited:
- relationships of up to 20 degrees for direct ancestors/descendants
- relationships for people that are 2 degrees away for indirect relatives
Trees over 17,000 individuals only show close family relationships at this point in time.
I hope it was helpful. In case you would like to have more details to specific questions regarding your tree, in a more private way, please contact us directly by sending an e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org.
My problem was not that details were not visible but that the ancestors were not showing up at all. However, when I go on to the site today, I cannot reproduce the problem - I see all the branches, all the way back.
Just before Christmas (18 or 19 December) I opened a thread in this forum entitled "The word born is no longer translated into other languages", thus reporting a bug. I never got an answer from the good people at MyHeritage, and now I realize that my thread has simply disappeared. Can someone explain me what happened? Did someone else observe the same phenomena?
Many threads are removed if they are bug reports. MH want them to be reported thru the support. Use the Contact form in the link above.
In one way I understand them since that will give them better control of reported bugs and also the forum would be littered with posts conserning the same bug even if it was corrected since many does not upgrade to the latest version.
On the other hand if bugs are not corrected in reasonable time we users start to wonder what is happening with reported bugs. And therefore start report bugs in the forum too.
Hopefully they sent it to support before they removed the post.
I would like to have a release schedule that says we release main versions this date and updates these dates for FTP and WEB. In this way MH would have some breathing room in between release. So in some support page: We plan to release vX.X the Xth of XXX 2014 would be great.
A good start is the release notes for the FTB in the forum. The same would be wanted for the Web version.
Thanks for the explanation, it sounds quite likely in my ears. I work in IT myself and I know how important a good and structured dialog with the users is. So I find it surprising that MH would not want all users to have visibility on the bugs reported. It would avoid having several users reporting the same bug over and over again. It would also allow MH to provide feedback that would be visible to all of us, like "we are aware of that bug and target to fix it in our next release" or "this is a feature, not a bug, because ...".
I also second your motion about getting visibility on new releases of the website so we know what's coming and when.
For now I will take your advise and use the Contact form. Thanks!
I can add that I now received a kind email from the MH support team asking for screenshots demonstrating the original problem. Which I have just provided. They also said they send me an email before deleting my previous thread, which I somehow never received. So Anders, your remarks where 100% correct.
I am importing files from my ancestry.com site. I started this not knowing what I was doing, and still don't really know. For no reason other than "I didn't know what to do," I have created TWO family trees, one for my paternal grandfather (Tree 1), and one for paternal grandmother (Tree 2). I somehow put my mother's family tree history onto my paternal grandfather tree (Tree 1).
Should I be setting up TWO family Trees, one for my father and his side, and one for my mother and her side?
Or do I only need ONE family tree starting with myself, and my father and my mother's history merges into the one tree?
It depends a bit on your family, but keep the trees to a minimum; no trees that are just duplicates of your other trees, please! One person who 'matches' with me had sixteen, what a pain!
But you may want to keep apart major family groups that have no connection except say between yourself and a spouse. Keeps the tree more manageable.
Or maybe your father, and your mother. Which is impossible for me because there were many marriages between (un-related) members of both families.
I have a tree for my family, including the descendants (and in-laws etc) that my wife and I share. And one for my wife's family (helping her with her ancestry tree, especially with SmartMatches); just including the very closest descendents (and siblings and parents etc.) That works really well.
By the way if you still have a connection with that other organisation use it for looking up documents. I use it for looking up my wife's family members while I help her with her ancestry tree; it's her subscription after all; and I have been known to peek at the details of one or two of my own relations. It is a great help in verifying information (or showing it as uncertain or disproved).
One factor to consider is the size of the family tree(s). In our case, there are over 6,000 in my tree and over 2,000 in my wife's, so separate trees are much easier to maintain and to follow.
I sort of don't have a MAIN tree, I have one for my family, and one for my wife's family.
And I include (ONLY) the very closest family in both of the trees.
For example in mine I include my wife's parents and siblings.
And, thinking about it, yes, I should have a MAIN tree (still only two altogether) and that would be the one for MY family (for no other reason than that it seems natural since I am keeping the records) in which I can record all the joint DESCENDANTS of my wife and myself. No sense entering those in two trees.
Separate ancestors, shared descendants.
Sometimes it is not possible to have separate trees for husband and wife; I can't have separate trees for my mother and my father because there are many relationships between the two families. In the old days the (very large) families were neighbours in a somewhat rural community (and this happened not once but on many occasions) so there were a lot of marriages between the families. Cousin marriages also.