tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post6658716630150385310..comments2023-04-20T12:46:11.858-06:00Comments on The Ancestry Insider: Ancestry Deletes Hundreds of DatabasesThe Ancestry Insiderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02490682912125335188noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-9075420558446192322015-10-27T12:48:04.555-06:002015-10-27T12:48:04.555-06:00I correct things too, but what bugs me is that som...I correct things too, but what bugs me is that some corrections never ever show up. I don't like the two step process now, but I'll try to keep on correcting.noihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08938736142600133174noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-85804815657095801432015-10-18T06:52:21.187-06:002015-10-18T06:52:21.187-06:00Very interesting information.Very interesting information.VictoriaReginahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09400402624255988175noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-78385974484152963642015-10-14T16:55:03.799-06:002015-10-14T16:55:03.799-06:00Yes. I am aware how to find what remains of the c...Yes. I am aware how to find what remains of the collection. But please note that you will not find any records for Morris County, and no ORIGINAL NJ State records at all. By original I mean the will that was actually signed by your ancestor and offered for probate, along with original inventories. Any COPIED (by a clerk who hand wrote them in a book) wills and inventories which are available for some time periods for some counties cannot be depended upon for accuracy. Also, since there were no county offices for recording wills until 1804, there are no recorded copies of these documents -- only the originals, which have now been removed from Ancestry. Thus, the collection for New Jersey has been gutted. Sharonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05484884075457514695noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-62084041960232746082015-10-14T09:01:10.196-06:002015-10-14T09:01:10.196-06:00This question is totally off topic. But it bugs m...This question is totally off topic. But it bugs me immensely. Why do some of your emails come through...and print...in very small font? The current email above was so small I had to come here to the web site to view it.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07448813660370419445noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-38075781989309333062015-10-14T07:28:44.689-06:002015-10-14T07:28:44.689-06:00I notice that the One World Tree is gone. I know o...I notice that the One World Tree is gone. I know of at least one person with a reference to that old old old database with a date I can't find anywhere else. I'd sure love to see what was in One World Tree for that person.noihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08938736142600133174noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-2579391529540416902015-10-13T23:25:12.057-06:002015-10-13T23:25:12.057-06:00Sharon,
http://search.ancestry.com/search/db.aspx...Sharon,<br /><br />http://search.ancestry.com/search/db.aspx?dbid=8796<br /><br />New Jersey, Wills and Probate Records, 1785-1924TomVotehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07744193321159491189noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-67039331360666605342015-10-13T17:45:17.023-06:002015-10-13T17:45:17.023-06:00Many of those databases may be less useful, unread...Many of those databases may be less useful, unreadable, etc. as you mentioned. However, some of the databases removed were ALL of the NJ State original probate records which had been a well touted addition to Ancestry only weeks before. Removing these databases means there are NO actual probate records available for NJ before 1804, and only unpredictable, scattered and incomplete records for most counties after that date. So this is a case of removing something NEW, VERY USEFUL, and easily ACCESSIBLE.Sharonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05484884075457514695noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-81293433564992786372015-10-13T13:13:58.268-06:002015-10-13T13:13:58.268-06:00Only a computer nerd would see "32,222 databa...Only a computer nerd would see "32,222 databases on Ancestry.com." (from Randy's page) and think "Gee, getting close the signed 2 byte limit of 32,767." Maybe they are using two bytes to store a database identifier value? Just silly musing.<br /><br />Tom VoughtTomVotehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07744193321159491189noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-39649783549921582802015-10-13T12:46:06.729-06:002015-10-13T12:46:06.729-06:00Claire THOSE are the kind of things I would like t...Claire THOSE are the kind of things I would like to see in Story View instead of some of the lame things I am seeing in MY tree about snowstorms and media showers---instead of seeing USEFUL things like the plight of the Irish coming over, and the fact that about 50% came through Canada etc...if they are going to give us "stories" at least make them useful things that help progress our research, links to outside sources etc etc <br /><br />I don't know how often I run into people that don't even know the card catalog exists, let alone know how to use it...that is why the categories search can be so useful but many people don't use it.<br /><br />Sigh...I just don't like the new changes and then to find out we are losing databases because of then doesn't make me happy either. <br /><br />Joycewrdsrushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03979538866342575847noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-28454763250832847612015-10-13T11:36:32.699-06:002015-10-13T11:36:32.699-06:00This is not precisely on topic, unless we expand t...This is not precisely on topic, unless we expand the definition to include "Inexplicable Ancestry Decisions re Records", but I cannot figure out a way to raise the issue otherwise, and it is bothering me. I am finding it extremely tiresome to have to leave Ancestry census records to make a correction--you used to be able to fix several at once from the page itself. Now you have to go out of the record to correct wrong or missing data, and if there are several errors, you have to write stuff down or else keep going back and forth. It's cumbersome, and I bet will discourage corrections. It is beginning to bug me already, and I am an ardent corrector. Why did they do this? JudyBGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11481961917093120257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-72221518764593634262015-10-13T11:01:20.907-06:002015-10-13T11:01:20.907-06:00If they provide the list with the locations of whe...If they provide the list with the locations of where they can now be viewed it would help immensely.TheLadyClairehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16380808353735270704noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-34163056241565707562015-10-13T10:21:07.870-06:002015-10-13T10:21:07.870-06:00As the descendant of two United Empire Loyalists, ...As the descendant of two United Empire Loyalists, both on the list, I can well imagine that not that many people used it--as what is the population of Canada?--but how absurd to delete a list of such historical significance on those grounds alone. Yes, of course it is available elsewhere, but still, I find it insensitive at best. And cloth-headed at worst, since early Canadian records are not that thick on the ground. Why REMOVE one?JudyBGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11481961917093120257noreply@blogger.com