Verifying Smart Matches and Historical Record matches is work. It's work that benefits MyHeritage customers and MyHeritage.
Provide an incentive for those who only use free MyHeritage accounts to do that work, and increase the value of MyHeritage data for paying MyHeritage members. Provide credits to those who do work to verify or reject matches.
Allow those who only use free MyHeritage accounts to use those credits to contact other members of MyHeritage.
What I find needed is cloud integration since there's no document center. A document center can be created by using cloud integration similar to DocHub or any other cloud drive. Even though this is commonly everywhere we're linking to our backweb especially since there's domain mapping. We have bylaws, ordinances, finance docs etc that's necessary. Typically this is done outside on another network, but the blood-line integration is necessary.
Confidence in a source citation can be documented on the MyHeritage web forms -- but usually just knowing the kind-of source citation is sufficient to indicate how much confidence we should have.
The problem is that although we can be reasonably confident in the cited sources, we cannot be reasonably confident that the individual mentioned in those sources is actually our ancestor rather than some unrelated individual living in the same place in the same period.
I'd like to be able to mark the individuals record (in a way that shows on the family tree) so that we can immediately distinguish those individuals who should confidently be considered as ancestors from those who should be considered place-holders for an unresolved line of research, and those in-between.
For some where little is know, it would be enough to show them on the family tree like the Add Father and Add Mother. We've seen a citation showing "Richard" as father but that's all we know -- so that's still just a place-holder in the same way that "Add Father" is a place-holder.
I can prefix the forename with a question mark but that will probably mess-up Smart Matching. There have been somewhat similar requests -- "Plausible but Uncertain Connections" and "Mark as complete"
I'm fairly new to the site so maybe I just didn't figure this out yet but it would be great if there'd be a check when adding new person (or at a later stage) if that person already exists in the tree.
I know at least in my tree sometimes a person is accidentally added twice (as their own sibling) or maybe they actually should exist twice as a spouse somewhere else in the tree but it'd be great to get a heads up in an early stage before the tree gets chaotic.
Another thing I was hoping for would be a way to check parent/child relationsships based on age. I know there's a statistics tool for "top oldest / youngest parents" which can be used to find errors but I've also found that sometimes a child has been concieved after the mother has already passed away - an obvious error somewhere.
I think a quick check when adding a new person to a tree regarding both these issues would be marvellous - like a pop up window checking validity of age/relationship/duplicity of person.
Just remembered one more thing - a check for deceased. Many times people will have a birth date but not a death date and automatically be added as living.
Would be great with a check reminding to change anyone born before for ex. 1900 as deceased - or even let it be completely automatic - these people are definately not still alive...
I have to say I am very disappointed to find that even though Gays and Lesbians can legally get married throughout the US and Canada, the UK, Ireland, the Netherlands and even Israel, we are listed as "partners" on MyHeritage.
Even when you put in that you were married, the date, the place, etc., if you are Gay or Lesbian, instead of being listed as husband/husband or wife/wife, we are listead as partners. My husband is my husband, not my partner.
Whether you are a same sex marriage supporter or not, we are legally married, and are given second class citizenship on MyHeritage.
Any idea when MyHeritage will get around to giving us equality?
i have a few product suggestions for family tree builde. First of all i love the tools in the ftb the checks are so handy!! but i miss a few.
1. make a check to see if you have people in your tree without any parents. if you have this check you can go further back in time for more people.
2. check if there are people who could have children but you didnt add them yet.
or you could make these suggestions in the form of a checklist or a to-do-list for every person in your family tree where you have a to-do-list for every single person in your tree and you can check off if you filled in the: birthdate/place, mariage date/place, birth of children, iif they have listed parents etc, etc, etc.
also i was wondering if any one from my heritage is reading the forums because they look quite dead.... like completely deserted....
Please provide a release notes section for both the app as well as the functionality on the web page. This would improve the user to see whether a bug has been fixed (such as I have always problems with copying marriage data in a smart match (does not work).
Provide a compare function (maybe linked to a button, see screenshot, or automatically) within the DNA hit list, that compares the list of names within my (main) ancestor tree to the (main) ancestor tree of the found hit, to identify potential persons listed in both trees. Search should be based on soundex or similar, as you already are using within the normal matches.
2. Capitalized Maiden name as in Myrtle Louise [BARWELL] Shaver;
3. Capitalized Married Name as in Myrtle Louise Barwell [SHAVER];
4. Upper and lower case as in Myrtle Louise Barwell [Shaver] ; and
5. Upper and lower case as in Myrtle Louise [Barwell] Shaver.
It would be nice if we could choose the way we want our names to be displayed. Once we choose, FTB should go through our tree and change all names to the way we have chosen. This would fix the problem of importing smart matches with all kinds of methods which makes our trees look like an infant did them.
I have several photos for some people in my FTB tree - often as a baby, a child, at their wedding, and when older. I note that when printing reports, only one photo (the main one) gets printed. It would be better if the report builder included all photos.
When creating an ancestor report, I consistently get a bug that gives incorrect spacing between the words.
For examlpe, I cut-and-pasted this from the report :
Anne Agate [Martin] was born in 1935 in Hastings,
which looks fine here, but in the original the space after martin] does not appear to be there.
I think the problem is in the spacing of the bold font - in some places in the report, whole words get overwritten. I would change the size of the font, but the "report options" menu item is greyed out and inactive). I am using FTB version 220.127.116.1133
I have attached a jpeg, so you can see that I am not imagining it. Note also the wrong spacing next to person 14 after 'married'.
Note also that the "untitled" attachment below is getting copied whenever I edit the post to correct spelling or add some words.
I have recently been giving some thought to trimming off some distant relatives, to lessen the burden of constantly getting matches for them that add no new information.
I'm referring to people separated by three or four marriages as well as distance - e.g. the cousin of the father of the husband of the sister of the husband of the sister of the daughter of a fourth cousin's aunt's husband's brother.
I regret having added them to the tree in the first place!
Now in the main page of FTB, I can see a column at the left that indicates a relationship as a single number, which is great, but I find it not very useful, because a "12" might indicate something like the above (which I would like to trim), or a direct ancestor 12 generations ago (which is important).
I would really like to have some way of distinguishing between the two situations - maybe something as simple as a negative sign or a "d" in front of a direct ancestor's number of steps?
There is really no point in having a "Back to matches" link at the top left of the page. The way this works is that, from the matches page, we select a matcfh, and wait for download to go to the match detail page. We then select 'confirm' or 'reject' pm each match, and then have to go back to the matches page (and wait to download up to 50 matches) before being able to go to the next match.
It would make a lot more sense to have a "Go to next match" link instead of a "Back to matches" link, or if you worry that some actually want to use up their download allowance going back to the matches page, then have both.
Having a "Next Match" link would (a) speed up checking matches, (b) reduce download time, (c) impact less on your computer server.
Another issue I have is that I am probably missing out on extra information. I might have, for example, a date with the year only, and get a match to someone who has the day and month. Unfortunately, the match only indicates a year so I don't find out. I have given up loading the comparison page - it just takes too long for too little benefit on most matches. It would be of great help if the match somehow indicated that there was extra information available, even if it did not actually duisplay the information.
Los ciudadanos hispanos y portugueses tenemos dos apellidos, uno de parte de nuestro padre y el otro de nuestra madre. Con eso quiero decir que, por tanto, estaría muy bien que, cuando introdujéramos el país de procedencia de los miembros de nuestra familia se estableciera por defecto que (1) las mujeres no tenemos "apellido de casada" ni "apellido de soltera", pues mantenemos nuestros apellidos toda la vida, y que (2), en vez de haber una sola casilla para "el" apellido, hubiera dos casillas para cada uno de nuestros apellidos y que, de tal forma, el primer de los apellidos se sucediera en la cadena hereditaria.
Ptovide an additional reconnect function in the visual pane. Where I can drop a connection and connect to parents, there should be a reconnect with the same parent, but together with (a later added) parent.