Welcome to The Briercliffe Society Forum

Thanks Kris well done, but have they changed the site? I couldn't find them anywhere---Mel would call it age

_________________
Gloria

I'd be dangerous with a brain.

Ancestry mis-transcribed the name as Briealey (there is no “r”)

I don't know that the search is any worse than it has ever been. I've never thought a lot of the ancestry search function but have found my own methods of beating it. That said, the 1841 is terrible to read in places and I would hate to have to transcribe an area that was unfamiliar to me which is what the ancestry staff probably had to do. You get used to the surnames in an area after a while and the familiarity can be a huge help.

_________________
Mel

Searching for lost relatives? Win the Lottery!

Got it now Kris thanks, thought I was going funny, couldn't find them anywhere---all good fun.

_________________
Gloria

I'd be dangerous with a brain.

Origins won't be getting my cash! I've signed up for the 72 hour access and am not very impressed at all. They use a very strange viewer for their 'tiff' files. So far, I have been unable to view anything! Not because I don't have the viewer (jumped thrugh those hoops) but because I keep getting a 'server runtime error'.

This is only the first hour of the 72! At this rate I will be abandonning Origins before I reach the second hour.

_________________
Mel

Searching for lost relatives? Win the Lottery!

I've given up. They do have some interesting collections, different to Ancestry and Findmypast but having found absolutely nothing of relevance, found it a complete waste of time.

I wouldn't have thought Origins is much use if you are just starting out with your research either. Many of the record collections seem to be pre 1850 and in some cases only cover the 18th and 17th centuries (& earlier).
There seems to be a good coverage for the south (London) and Yorkshire but not much in between.

The one thing I do like is the 72 hour access plan. It's an affordable taster and I think all sites should offer it as an option instead of the 'pay as you go' credits which I think limit the use of a site.

_________________
Mel

Searching for lost relatives? Win the Lottery!

Finally taken out a new subsrcription. I have gone with The Genealogist. Just a 6 month sub for now while I find my way around. I've not yet used the census but the blurb says it's transcripts, would have preferred images but I don't think I have a lot to look for in the census these days. What I really really like is the church records. They are images of the Non-Conformist/Non-Parochial Chapel registers that are currently held at the National Archives. From what I have seen so far....really pleased. Maybe I will knock down a wall or two? I have already taken one line back a notch by finding a baptism which gave parents of the child but also the mothers father.
It's possibly not the best site for someone who is only just starting out with the research.

_________________
Mel

Searching for lost relatives? Win the Lottery!

Mel, how are you finding The Genealogist? My renewal for Ancestry is due at the end of next month, I won't be staying with them and am looking for something else.

_________________
Gloria

I'd be dangerous with a brain.

I love it Gloria. Best decision I have made...not missing ancestry at all. Census images are available. The only thing I would pick fault with is the search. If you want to view a specific household, you can't search on census ref.

Definitely value for money. I only took out a 6 month sub to try it but it'll be 12 month when renewal time comes

_________________
Mel

Searching for lost relatives? Win the Lottery!

Thanks Mel, I have a month to decide. I feel quite lost when I don't have access to records, even though I may not dib in from one week to the next.

_________________
Gloria

I'd be dangerous with a brain.

I'm not sure if I have seen an offer in m-in-laws magazine. Will check it in morning.

Census search is not impossible - I have learned to live with it and make it work for me

_________________
Mel

Searching for lost relatives? Win the Lottery!

"Census search is not possible" in what way-----do you mean it wouldn't bring up all the "Kippax" say in 1851 Lancashire, or it wouldn't bring up a specific person?

_________________
Gloria

I'd be dangerous with a brain.

It's not impossible (you put possible )

It would bring up all cases of Kippax and variants I think but if there were a lot of results, it's difficult to narrow it down. Ancestry search box gives loads of options....TG doesn't. There is a keyword box and that's it other than names. If you were to put a birth year in the keyword box, it would only search on that year, there is no option for the +\- like you get with ancestry.

_________________
Mel

Searching for lost relatives? Win the Lottery!

Ah I understand now

_________________
Gloria

I'd be dangerous with a brain.

So glad it's not just me and so glad it's not an issue anymore anyway!

http://lostcousins.com/newsletters/may10news.htm

Why I prefer old-style Ancestry searches

Over the past year I've mentioned on many occasions that I prefer the old-style searches at Ancestry - but I've suddenly realised that newer Ancestry users might be wondering what I'm talking about, or why it matters.

The old system allowed one to carry out precise searches, or to use wildcards to allow for errors or other discrepancies. Once I'd mastered the system I could do all sorts of wonderful things, such as search for a family using forenames alone - a great way to overcome badly-mistranscribed surnames. Of course, to achieve all this I had to tick the 'Exact matches only' box, otherwise I was showered with so many matches that I didn't want that I couldn't find the ones I was looking for!

The new system probably isn't intended for experienced users like me. It seems to have been designed for people who don't know what they are doing, in order that they can get some results - even if they are the wrong ones - rather than none at all. I hate it! Don't get me wrong, I'm all for encouraging beginners - I just wish Ancestry could have achieved this without messing things up for the people who do know what they're doing.

Fortunately it is possible to switch back to the old-style searches - if you know how. First go to Ancestry, then choose Search All Records from the Search tab. On the next page look at the far right end of the navigation bar - you should see the words Old Search or New Search just below the bar. Click to switch to the other type of search - and see how you get on.

(In the unlikely event that there are some experienced Ancestry users out there who think the new-style searches are better, by all means tell me why you've come to that conclusion - preferably with some real examples.)

_________________
Mel

Searching for lost relatives? Win the Lottery!