Record Matching brings me so many totally irrelevant matches that it's ridiculous.
A good example is a man born and died in Canada who never left the country yet is matched to numerous US newspapers, to US college yearbooks from after his date of death, to American Civil War records from before he was born, to census records from England and Wales.
I don't need to view the matches to know that these aren't valid (and why does the software even bring them up?).
It would be great to be able to have checkboxes so that I could select them then reject the whole works en masse. Can do?
It would then be great to never have to see them again. That means having some way to fix the filters so that only relevant records appear (in other words, I want to have some control over what I consider relevant).
It would also be wonderful to be able to reject them without paying for a WVR subscription. Can do?
I think WVR in its present form is next to useless because of all the irrelevant "matches" it produces.
In this merry xmas time I only have a few wishes from my favorite genealogy program, MyHeritage:
1) Please revert to the former format of the online familysite, as the current is to tedious to work with when updating details about individuals. Please bring it back to the format of the looged out version.
2) Please listen to the great and devoted community surroundig you. If we could have just a minimal influence on the the future design and contents/functionality of the online famili-site and FTB, I'm sure that even more users would prefer MyHeritage. At least inform about yor plans for the future (blueprints).
3) Please let RecordMatches be voluntary as SmartMatches are. Until now I have only received payable information about WikiTree information that I have uploaded myself.
The wishes are presented in order of relevance. Thanks in advance and have a Merry Xmas
Hi Guys.....just an idea.....amongst all the family tree boxes for each individual, it would be great to have an identification icon (perhaps a 'crown') on the box corner <perhaps top right> of all fellow researchers who are attached to your own web-site tree. This way, amongst the many individuals in the tree, researches would be more obvious, and easy to connect with, for deeper information on those branches.......have a great day!.....cheers Ian
Tenho dois sites: ragrilo e grilo. Quero deixar o ragrilo e cancelar o grilo. Como faço? Não encontrei orientação no suporte. Meu medo é de eliminar os dois. Não quero eliminar os dois. Quero deixar o ragrilo
What would really complete a site like this would be a wiki or collaborative style document editing platform where family historians can construct a story of the family history in booklet form. Each document should be editable by all family members and can link to family member profiles when referenced.
For example, if I wanted to write a biography of a famiy member, it should be in a section called biographies and then if someone later wants to put together a book and include that biography, they should be able to simply reference that biography in a tag or something and it gets pulled into their family history book. If a photo is needed, it should be able to be referenced from the family photo album and inserted wsywig style.
I was really thinking of something like how wikipedia is set up except oriented at family and individual documentation.
I have the full vision for this in my head and was considering just authoring the website myself but I want to give you guys a crack at it first because I don't want to reinvent the wheel.
We currently offer fact, events and biography editing only by certain allowed people in the tree - usually the site managers. This ensures that only selected few will have this privileges of actually making changes in order to not make a mess or to hold individuals from doing un-wanted changes by the owner.
And in order to allow individuals to edit the tree, it needs to be on the web site (not edited and published in the Family Tree Builder) and you will need to add the privileges to the users in your settings.
You're making good points for us to work with - referring to people on trees along with events is very important and we will take this as feedback. Also, we would be glad if you could point out what is currently different and wrong in our documentation system (such as the biography) that needs improving in more details (What are the points that are critical and different from Wiki pages that could enhance your experience)
I recently moved from Ancestry.com to myHeritage.com (Premium Subscription) just because of more interactive reports and charts ... but one thing, which continuously irritating is the display of STEP relationships on your site.
- 1st Wife
- Son B
- Son BA
- Son BB
- Son C
- Son CA
- Son CB
- 2nd Wife
- Son D
- Son DA
- Daughter DB
1) In ancestry.com, The relationship of "Son BB" with "Son DA" shows "Paternal Cousin". However, in myHeritage.com it only showing "Relative"
2) The Siblings of "Son B" in Ancestry.com
- Son C
- Son D
- Daughter E
However, in myHeritage.com, it shows only "Son C" I believe, Ancestry.com showing more accurate relationships; which I am also expecting from this site. Please resolve this issue.
Both of your issues are caused by an underlying problem where our tree does not connect between the families of the two wives of a specific person. This happens because the design of our family tree is made for one wife per person.
I will take this feedback and suggest it to the developing team, but this problem is actually a solution to a different problem (which means the this option might not be included) - where people might have too big or too complicated of a tree which might take too long to load or too complicated to view easily, and thus we make the trees more minimized. Ofcourse, you should be able to view the different parts of the family by clicking on the small tree icon.
I agree. I also suggest there should be no email field for anyone born before 1900, whether marked as deceased or not. I don't suppose anyone born before 1900 who is still alive will have an email address (although I might be wrong!)
I use the email function weekly with my family updates via MyHeritage. We truly are trying to use the site as a social, family netowork.
While I understand that you do not see the need for allowing for attachments or embedding photos, it sure would be nice if there was a reply all option on the emails that go out.
With so many folks used to having this option on real email, it would be nice to have that option on MyHeritage.
I believe it would also build interesting and involvement by more family members if they could communicate in this fashion.
I use a lot of documents and location photos for profile picutues of my earlier generations. I find it irritating that whenever I go back to open a photo used as a profile picture, it defaults to the small, generic box size.
This means anytime I change a notation, add a word, correct something, I have to resize the box again and again.
While this might not be bad for one person and one photo, but if it is a census document and I am using it on a dozen people resizing is a time consuming irritant.
Hi team....any chance of enabling the sorting of potential matches <from other site managers>, by their Country flag?....Many of our family trees extend into many different Countries.....As a selectable option, it would be really useful to look at the potential matches from just site managers within the same Country......cheers Ian