How do I get the correct returns for my search?
In the old search engine this would not be an issue. I have been struggling with this since it was released several weeks ago, and still, I cannot find basic things that were easy to find before. Tonight is but one example - I am searching for a birth record in Kern County, California in 1905. I opened the website home page, clicked on search and got the new form. I put in the surname, the place, and the year, and hit search. I got nearly 22K results. The top results are 3 births in Alameda county (ok, so we got the year right and the state right at least), but the next results are for Illinois and Georgia, followed by a bunch of death records in every county in California EXCEPT the one I used in my search. Ok, let's try going to the "more options" on the right. Scroll through, click on +Birth and add birthplace and year range (again? didn't I already do this once?) and low and behold - I get the same 22K returns. Ok, now what? oh.. try the filters at the top of the page. Click on "Birth" - can filter down by place or year range. Ok, let's try place. Three choices are Canada, UK and Ireland, or USA.
ok, pick United States. (why do I have to filter these down when I've already said I'm looking for Kern County, CA twice before this) .
having already asked for California results twice before, I am now asked to pick which state again. As you can see - I got more than just California in my original search results. Ok, let's click on California...
I've suddenly gone from 396 results to 6. Great, finally, now I can see the 3 births in Kern County for 1905 that fit my surname criteria...
uhmmmmm... NOPE, wrong again!
By the way, clicking on Alameda county results gives the same 3 resulting records.
Some one please tell me there's an easier way than the 500 clicks, duplicating the same information multiple times, that it took me to get to here?? and how do I get relevant/useful results? Was there just no one born in Kern County in 1905? I'd rather get a "no records match your search" message if that's the case. Or please tell me this is actually a design flaw/error and it should work differently/easier than this? I hope? help! please and thanks!
Answers
-
I must admit I have been trying to prove you can filter out results that do not include "Kern" as a placename, but cannot. For some reason, even in checking the "Exact" box, the results list still includes ones for Alameda, too.
See https://www.familysearch.org/search/record/results?q.birthLikeDate.from=1904&q.birthLikeDate.to=1906&q.birthLikePlace=kern%2A&q.birthLikePlace.exact=on&q.surname=smith&q.surname.exact=on where I searched for "Smith" births at Kern (adding a wildcard) for the 1904-1906 period.
Usually, I have little trouble with such searches - at the very worse I might get a few irrelevant results at the bottom of the Results page, but why those Alameda results are included is baffling to me.
Incidentally, inputting the placename as "Kern*, California removes those North Carolina results, but why (apart from the Alameda ones) is there the unwanted one on page 3 for a birthplace of "Warren, Worcester, Massachusetts, United States"? (See https://www.familysearch.org/search/record/results?count=20&offset=20&q.birthLikeDate.from=1904&q.birthLikeDate.to=1906&q.birthLikePlace=kern%2A%2C%20california&q.birthLikePlace.exact=on&q.surname=smith&q.surname.exact=on)
By the way, you can filter on "Collection" and choose the "California Birth Index, 1905-1995" option (on the right side of the page). This cuts out immigration and death records, etc., that include birth details, but (as you can see) still includes both Kern and Alameda results. (See https://www.familysearch.org/search/record/results?count=20&offset=20&q.birthLikeDate.from=1904&q.birthLikeDate.to=1906&q.birthLikePlace=kern%2A%2C%20california&q.birthLikePlace.exact=on&q.surname=smith&q.surname.exact=on&f.collectionId=2001879)
What a shame this cannot be referred to a FamilySearch engineer / programmer, who might be able to come here and explain exactly how this is not working as one would expect. Otherwise, perhaps an experienced FamilySearch user might be able to offer some suggestions.
2 -
Another possible complicating factor for this search:
https://www.familysearch.org/wiki/en/California_Birth_Index_-_FamilySearch_Historical_Records
NOTE: "*Statewide registration for births and deaths started in 1905. General compliance by 1920."
So maybe the record result is not being found because it was never 'recorded'? Maybe it would be worth contacting the County Clerk/Recorder to check for this particular record since the desired name result is not appearing in the 'legacy database' (https://www.familysearch.org/wiki/en/California_Birth_Index_-_FamilySearch_Historical_Records. ) Perhaps try searching for your family name in this collection directly rather than the general Search (or filter to the collection) ?
Additionally perhaps searching other record types for the area may be able to establish the parents/family name (you don't mention the Family name you are searching - you appear to be searching birth of female - last name 'Nor*' ) existence in the area.
It appears that if you know the mother's maiden name that might help your search considerably. I believe California Birth Index may be available for search on other sites as well - the search interface/parameters might be different and therefore yield different results?
As far as to why the Search is not filtering results by location 'properly' - I don't know (perhaps Familysearch Search 'thinks' K~=A? ... otherwise maybe AI hasn't 'learned enough yet' to be helpful??) - but would suggest explicitly using Birth Life Event for births and not Any Life Event (as mentioned elsewhere Any Life Event does not mean include Birth results - it means Any Life Event other than Birth, Marriage, Death or Residence categories. You can find this 'definition' at: https://www.familysearch.org/en/help/helpcenter/article/when-i-am-searching-historical-records-what-are-the-best-practices-and-tips ) You are not 'doing anything wrong' in your search and have tried filtering to the desired location 'correctly' (there is the Location search parameter but probably would not find different results - by the way I don't know the difference between including Location search parameter and using location filters - there is not a 'location' or help document to find FamilySearch Search parameter specifications/definitions other than the previously referenced document - to my knowledge) but are not finding the desired results.
As to whether Search Results are complying with said Any Life Event definition - that is a different matter ...
All in all - unless there is some other online database for birth records for the County - I would recommend contacting the County directly. That seems to be the best recommendation I can give for your Search query.
1 -
Thanks to both responses so far.
The person who is actually doing this particular search has gone directly to the county and hasn't been able to locate this particular record. I wanted to try to help, but ran into this type of error on the search results yet again, and thought it was a good clean example for asking my question about getting better results. Some of my own searches can get pretty round about so this was a good way of cross checking something much more direct.
I ran it again myself this morning using the surname Smith and only the filters across the top. I am still getting results for Alameda County even when adding the "exact match" in the "more options" area. I also put only birth location, not event location. I am still getting Alameda results. It's very odd. Is there someplace I can put this for familysearch people to see? They need to know that this is not working correctly. I was hoping they would see this because it's via their own feedback button. If not, then that becomes another issue in of itself.
0 -
Yes there is not a direct channel/method of submitting these search issues to development - since they took the Feedback button away. I don't think I have heard whether they have resolved all search concerns or why it was taken away. Indications are they received much feedback - but no reports of how things are going to fix issues...
Opinion: I agree - if someone wants results limited to a particular location - search should be able to filter/return those specifically. There are some known issues with Place names in FamilySearch places authority - but I don't know why Alameda results would return for Kern query. Sometimes it does seem the engine returns the 'first' ( A before K) results for the input criteria verses filtering for exact input. I think many times it is what is searchable for the collections being returned (in other words name might be weighted more heavily than place for the query results).
I hope the correct team can take a look and contact you as needed. Otherwise I guess we only hope Search gets better over time (difficult to recommend anything else because without more knowledge of how Search works ... there isn't much else).
1 -
Me too - it's still coming up with the same results. So strange!
0
