Search for content in message boards

The FAILURE of ALTERNATES and BETA REVIEW FORM

Replies: 14

Re: abstract no longer gives the reason for alternative?

Posted: 19 Mar 2013 10:50PM GMT
Classification: Query
Edited: 19 Mar 2013 10:53PM GMT
This is absolutely no "Improvement!" While user submitted corrections can be helpful I've seen many that made corrections that made no sense or wasn't supported by the actual record itself either and offer no explanation!!! One example is the J. C. Daggs posted by BrklynBridge.

http://search.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=1910USCenIndex...

The census cites J. C. Daggs and the poster cites no other facts that support their correction not even with an explanation this is their ancestor by that name, born such and such, etc. When I clicked to save the record as a new person the user submitted data what comes up in the screen with no alternative for the original and actual record of J. C. Daggs and the new person created is John Craddock Daggs! I now have a record of someone who may or may not have even existed and certainly isn't supported with available data. There are 7 public member trees citing John Craddock Daggs but this could have any name as well. Sorry I've seen to many corrections that aren't supported nor have I been able to find actual records supporting it in many of those I've followed either. I want J. C. Daggs in my tree until I find something to support another name.

Yet another Ancestry "improvement" that defies sound genealogical methods and will only lead to even more erroneous "facts." Anymore I have days where I actually laugh at Ancestry corporate policies that are prime example of why American corporations get beat by their own "game!" Detroit is only one example of this where the automotive industry failed because they grew too cocky and didn't adequately prepare for the future by providing quality products that met the needs of consumers. Ancestry's failure to do so will eventually lead to the same conclusion. I hope I live to see it! Maybe contacting every archive, society or agency that I've worked with and hasn't given Ancestry access to their records as to why Ancestry isn't a company that can't be worked with or trusted with their records could help change policy or prevent the corruption of excellent records in the future.
Attachments:
SubjectAuthorDate Posted
dedted29 20 Mar 2013 4:50AM GMT 
MissLeadingBa... 20 Mar 2013 12:31PM GMT 
dedted29 22 Mar 2013 4:02AM GMT 
sageflat 22 Mar 2013 4:10AM GMT 
dedted29 22 Mar 2013 8:52AM GMT 
per page

Find a board about a specific topic