This is why I only want to use Ancestry.

Question

I just need to have a little pity-party.  I am working on my New Mexico ancestors, adding bios, cleaning up Gedcom leftovers, etc.  I am trying to only use FamilySearch for Census records, etc., but I have been searching over an hour with I don't know how many different searches and I have still only found Census records for 1850 and 1870.  In ONE SEARCH on Ancestry, I found Census for 1850, 1860, 1870, 1880, 1900 and 1920, and an 1885 New Mexico Territorial Census.  I'm lucky if I finish one profile a day.  Trying to guess how I can tweek the search to find the records on FamilySearch is not how I want to spend the little time I have to work on genealogy.  Okay, I'm done whining.

Comments

I find that the major genealogy websites complement each other. They all have their strengths, as well as weakness. Some are better for certain areas than others, but they all contribute to our goal.

---

Marcie, don’t be discouraged. I often find something on Ancestry I can’t find on FamilySearch. While it is better to have a source from FamilySearch because other folks can see it, if you gotta use Ancestry, use Ancestry. There are plenty of folks here who have Ancestry accounts and can view something as needed,

---

I have the same issue..I can spend hours looking for one document on Family Search or I can find multiple image and sources on Ancestry, so I chose to spend my time on Ancestry.  Even when I have the image on Ancestry and go to Family Search to find the exact same image, it takes so much longer.   I don't know what it is with their search matrix.   So I use ancestry and include every bit of info from that source that I can to hopefully point someone who uses Family Search in the right direction.

---

Most records are in family search too, it’s just their search criteria are more restricted than ancestry... I often find if I strip back everything in rootsearch other than the exact record I’m looking for I find it!

Ancestry is better for some obscure parish records though!

At the end of the day a source citation is still a source, even if not everyone can see the original. Some kind wikitreer once said to me ‘don’t kill yourself replacing Ancestry sources’ in a question I asked on g2g :-)

---

For example, most uk marriage records before 1800’s don’t have the ages. If you are looking for a marriage the best way to search is to add the first/last name of the spouse if you know it; take out the birth date and add an estimated date range for the marriage date.

Does that make sense?

---

I only replace them if they are using an Ancestry Tree as a source, not if they are using some other record, such as a database or image as the source.

---

That’s what I think too Cindy, if it’s just a tree as a source, no matter where it from, Ancestry or other, then it’s not a source. Therefore should be sourced with properly sources, either free or paid for... or tagged as unsourced.

---

I agree Lizzie. I do not use Ancestry. FamilySearch being free is worth the extra time spent exploring. Trees posted are not sources and many times conflict without a source. First hand memory from someone born in the 1950's about someone born in the 1700 to 1800's is difficult to accept. Recently a find a grave source was removed after I posted a copy of a court order that contradicted the parentage of certain children. While not everyone has access to court records, it is refreshing when they do change their information when presented documentation. The list goes on. I try to use hard copy research whenever possible. Birth and death records, court orders, wills, etc. Yet, I continue to find where trees confuse persons of the same time frame because of name similarities. Even when presented with hard copy evidence, they continue to post what is proven to be wrong. So not accepting 'trees' as a source is a very good start.

---

Agreed! I have also found profiles that linked to Family Search trees as 'sources'.  They were just as bad as Ancestry trees.  Trees are not sources, no matter which site they are at!

I don't use Ancestry trees even as clues these days - i search Ancestry for their records.  Much easier to find census info than at Family Search.  Then the fun of trying to make Family Search cough up the same document! There have been some excellent suggestions for that in this conversation!

---

I have found searching for census on FamilySearch does take tweaking, but is worth the effort. Adding 'other person' to the search sometimes helps. It also helps to plus or minus the birth year you are searching for. And then sometimes if you enter too much search info on a search I find the results are buried in 1000's of records. Further tweaking, by searching for the person providing less information will sometimes put the person and census at the top of the results. Leaving out birth years and only searching for the residence years has worked quickly. Census records are also easier to pull up if I do not list the city, listing  only the state sometimes cuts down on the false hits. FamilySearch does not always provide answers, but it's Free.

---

I can join that pity party! I do find that when there are census records available in Ancestry and I review them, the surnames are so badly misspelled and I would never have found them in FamilyFinder. Currently, Ancestry is now adding the various surname spellings in order to assist further in accurate identification. For example:

Baldin, then (Baldwin; Baldwine; Baldwen; Baldwyn; Baldwyne). My 10X GGF, Henry Baldwin came to Woburn, MA ca. 1640. In the early records in genealogical textbooks, his surname is listed as 'Balden'. It took several years for me to discover that this was 'Henry Baldwin'! (Baldwin-3428)

---

I love how what started as a pity-party (and several of us felt the same!) turned into sharing some really useful tips!

I wonder if these tips are enshrined somewhere so that others can find them:  How to tame your FamilySearch search, or something!

---

That’s the WikiTree way, eh?

Good idea on “Making the Most of Your FamilySearch Search.”

Answer 1

Marcie,

I do feel your pain.  Been there, done that.  Since Ancestry and FamilySearch have their own indices, search parameters that work on one sometimes don't work on the other.  I've also found that FamilySearch sometimes just doesn't display a census match even if your search parameters exactly match what's in their index.  However, IF you've found the census page on Ancestry, you can usually just browse to it on FamilySearch.  Here's the method I use:

1.  Let's say that you've found Lorenzo's 1870 census entry at https://www.ancestry.com/interactive/7163/4275083_00113?pid=40468254.

2.  You can just Google something like "FamilySearch 1870 census" or bookmark the FamilySearch census records for quick access; link.

3.  Click the link for the 1870 census.  You can try a quick search on the 1870 census page which often works when a general search does not.

4. Otherwise, the next step is to scroll to the bottom of the search page where you'll see a link for Browse through 1,049,047 images.  Click that link (fear not).

5.  Refer back to the census entry on Ancestry.com and note the exact location.  On the FamilySearch  page, you'll select New Mexico Territory, then Mora, then La Cueba.

6.  You'll then see the census images for that location.  From the Ancestry page, find the image # and enter that; in this case, 3 (of 16).  Sometimes the page will be one earlier or later.

7.  That should take you to the exact same census entry on FamilySearch as on Ancestry.  At the bottom of the page, under Image Index, you can scroll to the indexed entry.  In this case, you can see the problem.  He was indexed as "Sorenzo Romero".  If you hover over his name, an icon will appear to the left that you can click to go to the indexed information.

I might have made it seem harder than it is.  It gets easier after a little practice.  It still does take a couple of minutes.  You can get a little of that time back by using the supplied FamilySearch citation versus converting the convoluted format  that Ancestry provides that doesn't include a hyperlink.

I personally do spend the time to find FamilySearch census entries that were originally located on Ancestry so that others can find it easily and freely.  However, there is no expectation or requirement that you do so.  Thank you for being conscientious about it.

Comments

This is really helpful.  I tried it on the 1885 NM Territorial Census and I found the record.  Whoever rewrote this copy did a horrible job.  Lorenzo is just a scribble and was indexed as Luego.  I never would have found that record.

If these are handwritten copies of the original documents, are they still technically considered image copies?

Thank you for the help.  This should save me a lot of time.

---

Glad it helped.

I don't know the answer to your question about copies.  For the federal census, three copies were made by the enumerator.  See https://www.familysearch.org/wiki/en/United_States_Census_Historical_Background.  You have a sharp eye noticing the differences in the NM state census.  No wonder the indices are also different.

I see that you've added the 1885 source to Lorenzo's profile.  I would just suggest that you include a complete hyperlink, not just a generic one to Ancestry.com.  One tip about shortening it; the Ancestry link I found is:

https://www.ancestry.com/interactive/1976/30243_074905-00035?pid=23512&backurl=https://search.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/sse.dll?_phsrc%3DppM3560%26_phstart%3DsuccessSource%26usePUBJs%3Dtrue%26indiv%3D1%26db%3Dnmterrcen%26gsfn%3Dlorenzo%26gsln%3Dromero%26msrpn__ftp%3DMora%26new%3D1%26rank%3D1%26redir%3Dfalse%26uidh%3Dizk%26gss%3Dangs-d%26pcat%3D35%26fh%3D1%26h%3D23512%26recoff%3D%26ml_rpos%3D2&treeid=&personid=&hintid=&usePUB=true&_phsrc=ppM3560&_phstart=successSource&usePUBJs=true

That's pretty unwieldy.  You can remove everything from &backurl... onward, so:

https://www.ancestry.com/interactive/1976/30243_074905-00035?

pid=23512

(For anyone wanting to view it at FamilySearch:  https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QS7-89HY-Y3NV?i=1&cc=2110742)

---

Thanks for the tip on the Ancestry URL.  I'll start doing that when I can't find a FamilySearch record and someday (hopefully soon) I'll go back and fix my other profiles.  My list of things to cleanup on my early profiles is getting pretty big now.

I looked up and changed all the sources for Lorenzo for FS.  This is going to be so much easier.  I am deeply in your debt!!

Answer 2

I hear you!  I also use Ancestry as my sandbox, then try to manipulate FamilySearch or the Canadian Library and Archives site to find the same result.  I can't always make it happen.  :-(    

Thanks for keeping on keeping on!

Cheers

Shirlea

Comments

Agreed.  If I can't find something in FamilySearch, I go straight to Ancestry since their searches are more flexible.  I'll note the location and a neighbors name and then go back to FamilySearch and click on to the image, and then back into the record I need from the index at the bottom of the image page.

Answer 3

Marcie, would you prefer tea, coffee or chocolate? I'll send it right over.

Comments

Tea, please!