Finding anything on Ancestry

[Phoenix]

I am creating a tree for Best Mate. I'd like it to be right, with as many sources as possible. There already is a tree I created with my own log-in.

So why am I referred to the fanciful and the rubbish, with my tree never suggested as a possibility?

I am really struggling to find some of the census references as they are not showing up as hints.

[Olde Crone]

It's that old thing of - 50 people have this information in their trees so they must be right. You are the only one who has this different information therefore you must be wrong.

It used to drive me barmy but in the end I rose above it and confined myself to leaving terse comments on their trees in the forlorn hope that just ONE PERSON would stop and check "the facts".

OC

[marquette]

I have three ancestry trees which cover some of the same people - one linked to the DNA profiles, direct ancestors only, one that is factual and one that is my conclusions/fantasies. The first two are public trees, and naturally the other is private.

The factual and the fantastical often show up in my searches but my other private trees on other parts of the family don't usually show up in searches.

I don't know if its because there are so few people researching the family of the factual/fantastical, and there are lots of other researching the others, or if its because my trees are private and only people I invite can find my trees.

I have had difficulties finding people in the census too. Some just don't seem to come up without very restrictive search criteria.


Di

[Phoenix]

It's a pain that I'm not getting the hints. It's weird that I'm finding searching more difficult than I did (say) five years ago.

[kiterunner]

They have changed the hints system in the last year or so with the result that a lot more of the hints are rubbish now.

[Kit]

Searching is very hard now.

I can search for John Fred Smith and 3 results in only get results for Fred Smith