One product suggestion would be to allow the site manager to 'bold up' a specific linking line of choice that traces direct lineage backwards from child ---> parent ---> grandparent ---> great grandparent etc (excluding aunts/uncles/siblings etc).
I wonder if you might consider this - or is that too hard to do?
Hello, I have been enjoying using MyHeritage. It has proven to be very user friendly and has enabled me to find out lots of things I didn't know about my immediate and extended family.
While using the site, I have come up with a couple of suggestions that would help me and hopefully others as well.
1. It would be very helpful if the Smart Match icon would change color if I have no pending matches. I find that I click on people I have already approved matches. Maybe as I get better at my research I will know who I have and haven't looked at.
2. The date format is different when doing a search in research. It is DAY - MONTH - YEAR. Every where else it is MONTH - DAY - YEAR. I know it is a little thing, but it is making my OCD crazy.
Please take the limit higher than 5000 before relatives / Ancestors not shows with text what they are to you. When you click them. You do not really want to find more than 5000 then really and see no point in having a digital tree. I have gone back 5 generation only and its already 5000, please make it 10000 at least.
It would be nice to be able to manage different name variants for individuals, since some names are spelled differently based on who and when wrote the record. For example it is typical that Johann, Joannes or Jan refer to the same name.
Currently MH supports definning religous name, original name, nickname and named after... None of these refer to the different name variants (nickname might be closest, but it really is not a nickname, same variants are often used by different pepole with same name).
It is very confusing for people who are of latin american heritage, and have a mixture of amerindian, european, and african descent.
First of all mexico is not central america, it is north america.
They should not have central american as a category, considering that they use the mestizo population as a reference panel. They should classify amerindian, asian, african, and european seperately. Many people are confused when they get their results and see central american, they think it means native american. Every dna company has it separate.
When going through the "Search Results" list you can double-click a name in the list to edit the record of the person you have selected. But as soon as you make changes to the record, the "Search Results" list suddenly closes and returns to the "All People" list. This is really not helpful if there are Multiple Results and you wish to update another record in the list. And each time it does this you have to go to the "All People" list, select "Search Results" and continue where you left off. But it shouldn't have returned to the "All People" list unless you had just finished updating the last person on the list and nothing remained. This is very annoying and I'm sure others have experienced this.
1. Please add some options to "Search for People" by their "Maiden Name", "Prefix" and "Suffix" as none exist.
2. Can you also add all of the facts that are currently missing in the list of available options - such as "Family Address".
3. And finally, an option to find details that "match the same case" (case sensitivity) would be greatly appreciated. It would be very helpful to filter the results as anything you enter in "Place", "Description" or "Cause of death" cannot be checked to see if they match exactly as you entered - since the option to "match the same case" does not currently exist and often returns search results that are sometimes too large to be of any real use.
The Search for People function is a valuable asset to Family Tree Builder but it would be a lot more useful if some of the extras I made mention were added to an "Advanced" tab at the top of the window (next to the "Basic" tab that's currently there).
I recently got my estimate, and I read the description of Nigeria and it's incorrect. The biggest tribes are Yoruba, Igbo, and Hausa. My husband is Nigerian and Yoruba. Esan is mainly in Benin. It would be nice for accuracy.
I would like to see a better explamation of what is causing the "error" when I try to generate a book. The generic error message does not help me to fix whatever is causing the system to be unable to generate a Family Book.
Hello I recently updated to FTB v8 and since then I have noticed that Windows looses focus now. I ran a tool to check when focus is taken and it detected that FamilyTreePublisher.exe (version 18.104.22.16872 date 19/01/2017) had stolen focus.
A temporary fix is to disable "MyHeritage Family Tree Builder check for updates" (aka FTBCheckUpdates.exe) from Windows startup (via msconfig). Why one needs to check for updates so often, I don't know.
When you click on a person on a tree it lists 'Facts' including marriage, births of children, death of child etc. Each of those offer hotlinks to the children or spouses invloved. This is very useful on large trees. Could you please look at including hotlinks to parents as well, maybe in the birth box, as it would save time in particularly large families. Thx.
The pedigree view you currently have is important for seeing more than the direct lines; however, it is equally important and more efficient to see a horizontal chart with direct ancestors of your matches. The ability to see that first and then go to the chart as you currently have can speed up the hunt for a common ancestor. It saves much time.
I would love to see a filtering system for smart matches similar to what we have for PedigreeMap. In PedigreeMap, we can select a person of interest and the filter by their "Extended Family", "Immediate Family", "Ancestors" or "Descendants". This would be incredibly useful for Smart Matches and Record Matches as well. If I'm currently focusing on a particular portion of my family tree, it would be great to see all the smart matches which are relevant only to that section (without having to check the matches for each person individually).
Source Citations matched through Record Matches populates on an individual's profile page. This clutters the profile and would be more helpful if an option was created to match the citation to single or multiple events (i.e. birth, marriage, death, etc).
The Tree Consistency Checker report is FANTASTIC. I would like to see something similar for Smart Matches and Record Matches. What I am envisioning is a report which reviews all of the Confirmed matches and identifies those which are inconsistent with your tree. For example:
Birth Year differs by more than 10 years (possibly merging a parent and their similarly named child)
John J Smith was born in 1874 in your tree, but in 1861 in a confirmed match with Bill Jones' tree
Mary Smith is the daughter of Tom Smith and Ellen Smith (born Frank), but the daughter of Tom Smith and Mary Smith Sr (born Collins) in a confirmed match with Frank Smith's tree
This would be helpful for identifying any of the following situations:
You have a single person in your tree who is matched to two different (but very similarly named people) in other trees
You approved a match based on consistent data but have since made changes to your tree based on new records and the match is no longer consistent
You approved a match based on consistent data, but the person whose tree you matched with has since made changes to their tree based on new records and the match is no longer consistent.
Smart Matches and Record Matches are WONDERFUL, but they can also be very overwhelming especially when your tree gets large. I would like the ability to either hide (or approve en masse) all matches where there there is no new/different information between my tree and the matched information. This way, I can focus my attention only on those matches where there are "New", "Improved" or "Different" pieces of data that I want to do something with.
I commonly see cases where I'll add a person to my tree and get 50 smart matches. Once I've reviewed, approved and copied over the data from the first 2-3 of them which are true matches, then the other 47 are all redundant and it is tedious to go through and approve them all.