Personally I think it a great idea, but even at a quick look I have 2 major problems with it. 1. The light grey font on a white back ground, unless you have young perfect eyes, is horrible, hard to read and glary. 2. I did a basic quick search and an advanced search on my great Grandfather Charles warren died 6 Dec 1956 Rutherglen, Victoria, Australia. Even with adding parents names, in both cases I got slammed with American entries, and even 4 star matches which were correctly matched to him, well, there were also matches considered to be 4 stars with totally different names and who died in America! So, the search bit is combersome so far. I think the idea is great and should be built upon, but I feel it has been rushed. Hope it improves, I'd certainly use the my heritage site more if it did. Best wishes, Jo.
The SuperSearch works kind of like a Google search in that it returns ALL results but then it shows them to you in order of relevance.
The reason for showing seemingly irrelevant results is due to the fact that as records were recorded by hand most of the time, name spellings may have changed, dates might be off, place names might not exist anymore. So when you search we want you to be able to make the decision whether or not a record that has a different birth date is actually the one you were looking for, rather than filtering that result out and lose the opportunity for you to find a record.
We are definitely working on the ranking of matches in order to give you more high quality results.
The first results are totally irrelevant, as they are on wrong continent. Why report something so obviously and totally useless? This is what previous posters have mentioned. This has nothing to do with handwritten records, mispellings, or the other things you mention -- it's just poor programming.
The US Social Security Death Index returns 2500 results for a specific name, date of death and place of death? Unbelievable! 2500 results from Find A Grave? Strange -- when I search that site for my specific data, it returns no results!
It appears that Record Matching is totally ignoring the data in the record. When you fix the code so that it works and returns relevant records, I'll once again be a happy customer, but until then I do not plan to renew my data subscription. I don't want to waste any more money on it.
Well, it's 167 days since my last comment. I've upgraded to build 5638 from 5634. Today, just to see if anything had improved, I clicked the "45 Records" reported for my grandfather, born in the US and later came to Canada. Here's what I got:
I am finding the same thing. An excellent idea, but when I search someone born in England who migrated to Australia, I also am bombarded with USA matches. I have to scroll through several pages of false information before I find anything remotely plausible.
The search engine doesn't seem to consider the country of residence at all when it searches.
When it works, it does work very well, but it seems I have to search a name, then click the 'UK Additional' option at the top when it ought to put all the Australian or UK options first.
Until now, this avoidance of the US data overload was a winning feature of MyHeritage. But still a great application and hopefully the kinks are being resolved as the problems appear.
The reason we give you a link to the "UK additional" option at the top of the results list is due to technical reasons. Our capability to display search results for this collection is a little more limited than other collections.
As time passes I am becoming more familiar with these features. I also now understand that it is a work in progress. Even in the past two weeks I have seen changes which improve functionality and add resources. It's looking better all the time.
I am hoping to see Australian records (electoral and school records) move beyond Queensland information soon!
It's unclear to me whether this research tool is related or equal to the new Super Search feature/product.
I understand that MyHeritage is a business and must generate revenue; however, it seems as though MH is turning into another Ancestry.com. Ancestry recently, via their iOS app (which does allow online editing of one's family trees) started sending HINTS, which are essentially SMART MATCHES. For every record or connection to another member's tree--there's a fee attached. Aarrrggghh!
Now My Heritage has added SuperSearch with the same 'feature' for a price. What an annoyance. What a pain in the neck. Will Smart Matches be immediately tied into this 'great feature'? I hope not. I appreciate the free-ness of Smart Matches and the opportunity to connect with other users without paying for every mouse click!
I suspect the icon by this message is a tombstone.
But to me it looks like a lady whose religious preference is to wear a heavy hood with a narrow aperture to look through. Could you re-design the icon to make it clear what it really is? The tombstone icon in Family Tree builder is unambiguous and looks much better...
As the Admin. Of my family research, When I add a member I thought they couldn't edit the work on the site? I had a member edit a entry on the site yesterday? The good thing is he is a cousin who I asked to join to make sure my Info. was correct.
Family sites are meant to be collaborative so by default, the site members that you invite (not just everybody) *can* edit the information and improve it. If you are not interested in them changing anything, please instruct them not to do this, either in the welcome message of the site, or by sending all site members a message (via Home > Site Members > Send e-mail to all members). There is also a setting that prevents site members from making changes so only you could make them. It is not working properly and we intend to fix it soon.
PS: you posted this item in the wrong place in the forums. It will be moved soon.