Genealogy Chat
Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!
- The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
- You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
- And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
- The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.
Quick Search
Single word search
Icons
- New posts
- No new posts
- Thread closed
- Stickied, new posts
- Stickied, no new posts
Am I going mad?
Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
---|---|---|---|
|
Jennifer | Report | 28 Sep 2006 21:35 |
Not as simple as the old name search, but if you go to Imediate Family on the left hand side, you can change the name and details that come up to whatever name and place you wish to search. Jennifer |
|||
|
Janet 693215 | Report | 28 Sep 2006 21:16 |
Lin, my hot matches have always sent me every Elizabeth Smith and William Smith born in the relevant years despite the fact that I have them both born in Glasgow. It takes me ages to get rid of all the ones born England, Wales etc |
|||
|
Unknown | Report | 28 Sep 2006 21:06 |
Thats stupid - it's going to take me forever, especially when it states - start your search with over 83 million names to search from. I pity the Smith researchers :) Lin |
|||
|
Debbie | Report | 28 Sep 2006 21:03 |
HI this is from the records board Original Added by Maureen Darby on 28/09/2006 16:27:24 Has anybody noticed that the search form on this site has changed? Hi I have just found some extra rellies and thought I would look and see if anybody else has them listed. The search form now does not now allow you to search by place, only first name, surname and appr year of birth. Maureen -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Added by Marion from Scotland on 28/09/2006 16:32:14 Oh so it has, that wont be so helpfull then :(( Marion -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Added by Marion from Scotland on 28/09/2006 16:33:10 infact that will make it very hard -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Added by Reggie Harvey on 28/09/2006 16:58:56 One step forward.............fifteen back. Nothing new in that then......... reg -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Added by Deborah Coone on 28/09/2006 17:32:35 I agree with Reggie on this...... ........ and Marion. *sigh* Changes for changes sake!!! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Added by Maureen Darby on 28/09/2006 17:49:00 I feel sorry for anybody who has X generations of John Smiths on their family tree. Think how many Hot Matches they are going to get in the future. Maureen -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Added by Alexandra Griffiths on 28/09/2006 17:44:21 *slaps forehead in disbelief* How could they do this to us? I think anyone who is annoyed by this should join me in emailing GR and complaining and asking for an explaination. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Added by Gwyneth in Kent on 28/09/2006 18:15:23 It must have only changed within the last hour or so. I searched for JONES born in a certain place earlier today. What a pain. What with my DAVIES, JONES, etc I'm going to get nowhere fast. Gwyn -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Added by Linda McFeat on 28/09/2006 18:22:13 Dont see the need for GR to do this. They can't say its an improvement. I am going to contact them too. Linda -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Added by Deborah Coone on 28/09/2006 18:24:54 I've wasted no time in informing them of my disappointment ....... I've only just re newed as well. Its daft!! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Added by Chris in Sussex on 28/09/2006 18:53:17 Sorry everyone This is not a problem to me but that is, only, because I have never used the place when searching...... But then again I don't have Jones, Davies' or even a Smith in my tree..... YET! I do however agree that removing the additional search for place is a backward step and will register my displeasure!!!! I am wondering if this is to now tie into Hot (Not) Matches that don't use the place of birth as a match either. Chris -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Added by Sheila in Devon on 28/09/2006 20:09:49 I think it must be a malfunction rather than a change because it still states that you can search with place of birth at the side on the right............and it was working fine this morning :( -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Added by Angela Holt on 28/09/2006 20:53:04 Have sent genesreunited an email, will await a reply from them to see if they plan to allow you to search for place of birth as well. Angela so your not going mad regards debs |
|||
|
Unknown | Report | 28 Sep 2006 21:03 |
Unfortunately I put in a name and it brings up over 1000, then it states if you want to narrow the results down then enter place of birth - but where? its was there before... Lin |
|||
|
Janet 693215 | Report | 28 Sep 2006 21:01 |
Thats because there isn't one. I guess they've realised that everyone enters the format differently. i.e. If you searched for John Smith London England, it would ignore London, England, London,England and London UK etc. It is a pain though. If only there was a recognised format to follow |
|||
|
Unknown | Report | 28 Sep 2006 20:56 |
I have just tried to do a name search, but I cannot find a space for place of birth - need to go to specsavers I think Lin |