Personally I have not seen any geolocation or location matching functionality in MyHeritage. From the sounds of what you guys are saying it seems like you have it? Odd!
If I create a "family book" via the chart generator, the same place will be listed 100 times in the appendix with slightly different formatting (abbreviations, postcodes being added, more or less specific version of the same place name, different language variants of the same place name, typos, etc...).
I was actually going to suggest they add something to sort all of this out.
I intend to go through 2000 records and reformat the place names manually.... *sigh*
I do support suggestion of Graeme. Current data set let to register places of living, birth and death of currently available countries. However historical countries (and flags) shall be available as well.
Possible solution is to give access for the users to edit country list.
Alternative solution is to keep curruent country set as master country list and let the users to create own custom country list.
Names of places should be as they were at the time of the record that the event decribes, thus they will correspond with the original, as part of the data set of that place should be it's geolocation (Latitude & Longitude) and a date range that it was callled that name
In version 5.x we had a very great treeview (next to the list). Since version 6 or so its no longer there.. why leave out this practical navigation method? I'm still working with version 5.. waiting untill it returns..
Excellent question. In version 8, there are a number of additional things left out, for example the tree consistency checker, Translation wizard , GEDCOM merge, ToDo task list, and all 'save' functions (especially "save as"). It is a pity that MH does not think it necessary to warn its customers when they bring out a new version that does not do as much as the replaced version. I upgraded without even thinking that I would lose some very important functionality. What programming company EVER does that? I regret having upgraded, as version 7 no longer seems available.
Please note that MyHeritage provides you with a platform to create and share a family tree and family memories. The DNA kits that are available through our site for our two partner companies, FamilyTreeDNA and 23andMe are not supplied by us and we also do not process the results of these kits.
Although you are able to enter DNA markers into a persons profile card within the Family Tree Builder Software only, these results are not published to your online family site and do not appear within the persons profile card.
Due to international privacy laws we here at MyHeritage are forbidden to allow this to happen and therefore non of the results can be used in any matching processes between family trees and or users.
I could understand if you would have received the reimbursment for sharing your DNA data, but in case you have paid for...
The only way is to check what you should get for yur money, to my understanding MH is not promising that you will be able to get the data of your testing, however I do understand your dissapointment.
I have even worse situation. I have paid Premium Plus subscription but I do not receive the proper support. I have paid for backup services - the reality is that tree restoration from backup is not functioning. You see the point, backups are created (I have paid for), but I have no access to backups (I have not paid for ?).
Presently, only the Smart Matches forum has new posts at the bottom, but it has happened before in other fora. Our comlaints have been ignored, but sometimes the problem experiences a "spotaineous cure". When checking a forum, first note the age of the first listed post; if it is obviously excessively old, click on the last numbered block (just above the "# Subject bar), go to the bottom of the file, and then back up a few clicks to see the most recent entry.
90 % of my tree is deceased ancestors. Their residence information gotten from the census material goes into contact info. That is not logical; it creates this huge contact list on their profile page. I am a transfer from Ancestry.com and mostly pleased with this site. I moved so that my family could view the tree and info without being "invited". Only reason for the move. I love Ancestry's front page for each individual; a life story tab followed by a facts tab etc. The Biograhpy section is at the end of the profile page. Maybe it could be moved up... tht is what people are interested in. Also ... while I'm at it. It should be easier to add photos to source material. I already uploaded all the images but when I try to add to source ... it wants to go to my computer. I can attach images to the people but that doesn't link it to the appropriate source.
You might want to reconsider the way that you calculate the percentage of a match because of a couple of problems I've noticed.
Firstly, consider two brothers born in different years, with the first names Jack and John. Given the parents' details, and place of birth, all match, this scores very highly - over 95%, despite them being different people. I don't really have a suggestion on how to avoid that.
However, I'm also getting matches in the high 70%, where the names, dates and places of birth and death, and spouse's and children's names and details are all exactly the same, but my tree has the the parents' names and the other tree does not. I think that is a logic flaw, and also very annoying in that the other tree has nothing to contibute to my tree, even though I do have something to contribute to theirs. I would agree that if the parents' names were different, then maybe 70% is appropriate, but where one tree has no parents' names and the other tree does, that should not lower the match percentage. So the percentage matching should not treat a lack of information as a "no match".
A further problenm is in addresses - "England", "Wiltshire, England", "Mere, Witshire", "Mere, England", and "Mere, Wiltshire, England" are treated as five different addresses, and then tripled because some people put "UK", or "United Kingdom' at the end - so 15 ways to show the same piece of information. My only suggestion for this is to not just deal with an address as a single string, but to parse it into country, state shire or county, region, etc and to calculate the match on the basis oof consistent or inconsistent information - that is, if one has a country only and the other has a city, region and country, that is not actually a mismatch at all.
Last April (2015) I suggested improving the alpha listing of those site managers who have or have had matches with your tree. Every so often I would like to be able to find a site manager again after a having a match and cannot locate them due to the odd alpha listing. Usually site managers are listed by their first names, but not always, so finding them is sometimes nearly impossible. And, of course, the more there are the harder it gets. Please make the listing better. And also make a place where you can type in a site managers name and get sent to their name in the listing.
I would like to see how someone is related to me at all times. So if I go to Smart matches and I compare trees with someone, or if I bring a person up in my trees, or just anywhere I am looking at someone on my trees, I would like to see how they are related to me. On my tree, I don't want to add my great aunt's nephew's niece on to my tree as I am trying to keep it a direct/blood line. But I don't know if I am adding someone on that isn't directly related, as I do my research on this person
I have seen several other requests of this type, and I too would value this. I've got to the stage where I just don't bother checking matches that do not indicate relationships. I suggest that you add a field to each person in someone's tree that stores the number of steps that person is away from the the tree owner - a byte would probably do it. I know that in FTB, there is a column in the index that shows the relationship as the number of steps away that person is. Is this being recalculated continuously? I think probably not. That would mean that you already store that information. It is the work of a couple of minutes to add that number to the information being displayed on the "people" and "trees" tab of the smart match page. A simple (x steps) after the dates of birth and death or name would be enough, and would take one line of code. And while you are at it, why do the smart match pages only show the year and not the day and month of births and deaths? I'm sure I have missed getting more concise information as a result, since I have now checked over 34,800 smart matches and do not bother with "review match" unless I see there is some new information there. Also, how about making the default for number of matches to show at a time 10 instead of 50, so it doesn't jam up everyone's download time (and your computer time too!)?
Being a programmer myself, I know those 3 changes could be made in minutes, with no need for extensive testing. I've been using FTB 7.0 and the website for around 5 years now - when is an update coming out?
In the "Find a person" entry block if I enter a persons name that was born before the year 1000 (four digits) the names come up with "?" for the date. If DOB and DOD are both before the year 1000 then they both come back with "?" in the date fields. This makes it difficult finding the right person if they lived or died before the year 1000.
I suggest that you need to tweak your results table field to recognise dates that are less than 1000.
I have found a lot of matches where the tree matched to mine seems to have taken the information from my tree - and obviously it is a match. I guess this from the fact that the matching tree has a photo that I took and put in my tree - so I am the origiinal source.
Now I accept that the owner of the new tree may have subsequently added information that I did not know, but I have yet to find a case where this has actually happened - in all cases, there is no new information to be had. But I still get notification of a match, have to wait for the matches to download, go through them, press 3 buttons to confirm, confirm the confirm, and get back to the smart match page to look at the next one. This is getting tedious. I do, however, occasionally find matches with some interesting or pertinent data, so I am not willing to give up entirely (but maybe soon !).
So, I propose a couple of options :
1. Automatically confirm in my tree when the other person has already copied the information from my tree through a match that inserted the person from my tree into theirs. I don't think there is a danger of them adding information that I will miss - it will still turn up if I check the people matches and get the combined data. Maybe this could be an option, so those with a lot of info already could let the matches be automatically confirmed, whereas those just starting out could get hem all.
2. Provide an option on the smart match screen (the one that lists all matches) to filter - like any database should have. One would be to filter out already confirmed matches - why make me wait fora list of 50 matches when I have already confirmed or rejected all but a handful? Then add a filter that I can activate (and happen by default) such that smart matches does not bother showing matches with trees that have the same or less data than my tree already has.
3. Alternatively, or as well, provide a button that goes through all matches and automatically confirms those that fit a selectable filter option - e.g. >90% match, no extra information, and less information.
Then maybe I wouldn't waste an hour a week confirming matches without finding anything new.