The recently revised "Search By ID" fearture does not always work
The FamilySearch "Search By ID" feature has been revised recently. And it sometimes brings back incorrect data. For example, I have been trying to bring up the Person page for Eugene Moore, who's ID is LDJ5-VCR. When I enter his ID into the FamilySearch "Search by ID" feature, I get back the following: Delia Sophronia Moody, ID LX9X-QK2.
I'm careful when I enter the desired person's ID, and if the correct person doesn't come up, I re-enter the data. I never had this problem with the old "Search By ID" feature. This problem has started happening only with the new, revised "Search By ID" feature.
Can we please get this bug fixed? Thanks for your help.
Best Answer
-
Just for full clarity, the box at the top of the Recents menu doesn't use your recents list at all. It will work perfectly fine with an ID you've never visited before. It's just a quick and simple "go to this person" tool.
The difference between the box in Recents and editing the URL is that the box always goes to the profile's details page, while the URL goes to the same view as you're currently using. (Also, editing the URL is slightly more fiddly, because you have to convince your browser and OS not to "helpfully" select more characters than you want.) Sometimes, the other person's same view is exactly what you want -- say, if you're checking descendancy charts for flags -- but sometimes (more often, for me), the details page is preferable. (A fan chart for a distant ancestor is unlikely to be of much use, after all.)
1
Answers
-
The Find by ID logic does not appropriately flag an ID that has been changed by a merge. If you instead go to Recents, and put that ID in that search, you will see that the ID you are trying was deleted by a merge, and that it was Delia Moody before. You might want to recheck your ID for Eugene Moore. It might be very similar to the ID you mention in your post.
0 -
Yet another reason to skip "find by ID": it's applying smarter-than-thou behavior and going to the survivor of a merge rather than the merged-away profile that you actually asked for.
The fact that you didn't mean to ask for that merged-away profile, but for someone else entirely, just confuses the matter even further. (As jlwestra said, re-check your ID for Eugene: you've made a typo somewhere in it.)
As I've said on other threads: if you already have the ID, why on Earth are you searching for it? Just use the darn thing. If you're on a Family Tree page, you can either paste it at the end of the URL (in place of whatever ID is currently there), or use the box at the top of the Recents menu. If you're not on a Tree page, use any of the choices under the Family Tree menu to go to one, and then use the ID. (I usually use Family Tree - Tree.)
Ah! Found him: LDJ5-VRC. You transposed two letters at the end.
1 -
Thank you for the reply. There is a good reason why I can't skip the "Find By ID" feature. I'm now doing descendancy research. After over 50 years of extending my family lines I've reached a point where attempts at furher extention aren't really productive. It's more productive to look at descending lines of siblings of my direct-line ancestors. As I do this descendancy research I find many persons who will pass their 110-year birthday during 2012 and 2013. I keep a list of these persons, recording their names, IDs, and birth dates. As I go forward into 2012 and a person on my list reaches their 110-year birthday, I use their ID to refind them in Family Tree and I submit their name for temple ordinances. This is a highly productive process. Over the last three years I've added 669 names to my list.
Using the old "Find by ID" feature I never even once had a problem, and I've been following this process for three years. But I find the new, revised "Find by ID" feature to be inconvenient to use. I don't like it at all. Prior revisions of features in FamilySearch have typically been excellent, but I think most patrons would be overjoyed to see the revised "Find by ID" thrown out and the old feaure returned. There's an old saying that applies here: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Thank you very much for your help and patience. As I continiue to use the revised "Find by ID" feature, I'll use this forum to raise a red flag if I encounter the same problem of getting back incorrect results. And I apologize for the transposing of Eugene Moore's ID letters. I'm generally extremely careful in my work, but I have to admit I was a little bit frustrated when I wrote that message yesterday.
Ray Garrison
1 -
I do use the Find By ID feature a lot. For some reason I never seem to be at a place were Recent's is available when I need it. However, I almost never type an ID number. They are not designed for typing! It works much better to always copy and paste them, even when posting them here. I've never had any trouble with either the old or new Find By ID routine.
Since the purpose of searching is to find a person (who should be constan), not just an ID (which may change with merges), having an old ID bring you to the person does seem to be proper behavior. If one really needs to find a record that has been merged in, it is nice that that is still available through the Recent's menu and, of course, that record can always be found in the Change Log.
1 -
I am somewhat the opposite of Gordon (not saying what is correct) but I use the recents drop down box and paste the ID there. It takes me to exactly the record I want and requires one less click that find by ID. I do agree with Gordon that copy paste is the way to go. Since many of my activities are to look at deleted records (usually incorrect merges) and the new Find by ID will not display them, my current approach is to always use recents and I really have no issues.
One of the nice features of Family Tree is that there are multiple ways to arrive at the same endpoint and we can each have our own preferred methodology.
0 -
gasmodels,
I've never tried to use the Recents drop down box as a way to find a person by their FamilyTree ID number. But I just tried to do that and it worked perfectly. I always thought the "Recents" were restricted to just the last 50 searches. But that isn't true. Any ID entered into the drop down box, regardless of how long ago a search was made for the person, will bring the person's Person Page up immediately.
So you are correct, and I thank you for providilng me (and hopefuly others) with this wonderful bit of information. I'll never use the "Find by ID" feature again when I need to use a person's ID to in order to access their Person Page.
Ray Garrison
0 -
Ray
I am just another 'lowly' User/Patron ...
Just in passing ...
As an aside ...
Apart from features/functions/facilities of, BOTH, "Find" (ie. 'By ID'); &/or, "Recents" (ie. 'Enter Name or ID') ...
Just in case you were not aware ...
When wanting, to go straight to, a specific KNOWN 'FamilySearch Person Identifier" (PID), in the "Family Tree" Part, of 'FamilySearch', one DOES NOT even have to use, the "Find" feature/facility/function (or, "Recents").
There are a couple of OTHER, quick; and, easy, ways to get to a KNOWN, 'FamilSearch Person Identifier' (PID).
[ 1 ]
One can simply use the URL:
https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/details/[PID]
Where, the [PID], is the specific KNOWN 'FamilySearch Person Identifier" (PID).
IF, you have such a URL already displayed; &, want another; THEN, just CHANGE the [PID] at the end; &, Enter.
That works just fine.
And, is very quick and easy.
I use it all the time.
[ 2 ]
IF, one is REALLY adventurous; THEN, ...
Take a 'look' at this "Video", that was, a presentation, in "RootsTech, 2021" ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-GuNpnF7bM
In 'Google' "Chrome", from that "Video", I CREATED a customised 'Google' SHORTCUT, that allows me to search (in a NEW, 'Tab'; and/or, 'Window"), for a KNOWN, "FamilySearch Person Identifier' (PID), with just a couple of "Key Strokes" [ ie. "xxxxx" (eg. FSPID); then, the 'Tab' Key]; and, the PID (where, "Copy & Paste", works just fine).
That, is MAGIC ...
I NOW use it, ALL the time ...
And, once setup, that, is even, EASIER; and, FASTER, than using other methods ...
[ There may be a SIMILAR option, in OTHER "Browsers"; but, I have not bothered, to explore that ... ]
.
Hey, but, that is just me ...
Each to their own ...
Good Luck.
Just my thoughts.
Brett
0 -
Thanks for the heads up on the search engine method from Goldie May. Brilliant! I have set it up for future use.
Graham
0 -
Graham
It's 'Brett'.
'Yes', it s MAGIC ...
Open a NEW 'Window'/'Tab' ...
So simple ... Some "Key Strokes"; "Tab"; the PID (Usually, through "Copy" and "Paste); and, Enter ... DONE ...
Glad, I was able to at least help/assist, some one ...
Brett
0 -
I forget about the recents; thank you all for reminding me! I have to add I have never had any issues with the Search Family Tree by ID. I occasionally have had it do weird things when searching by first name and surname, ie, the person won't be in the search results. I check spelling and that's usually not the problem. When the search seems to not work, I switch to searching for the spouse and almost always there is the couple, with the original person I was searching for. Why didn't he or she appear in the results before? I shake my head and move on. Enough other people are complaining that I hope all will be fixed.
Of course if I remember to look at recents, I may become more efficient. (These days I'm doing a lot of research into other people's ancestors and frequently use Search Family Tree.)
0 -
Just another short comment. If you enter a name in the recents box dropdown - it only searches by name your 50 most recent names visited. It does not search all names in Family Tree.
0 -
is there a glich in the find by ID tab? Every known PID # I've put in for the past few days, brings up a no results found page and I can find it through the search bar on recents, but why is there a tab for find by ID that doesn't work??
1 -
FYI
I am just another 'lowly' User/Patron ...
Just in passing ...
I DO NOT understand, WHY, the "Find by ID", DOES NOT work for you, with "Known" PIDs.
I have (and, are NOT having) any problem/issue with such ...
Questions:
▬ Were, you using, "Copy" and "Paste"?
▬ Did you make sure, that there was NO, "Leading" 'Prefix'; and/or, "Following" 'Suffix'
.... [ eg. Even a "Space"; or, a 'Leading' "Tab" ... ]
As, such, can cause the PID, to be INCORRECT; where, the "Space"; and/or, "Tab", are NOT evident ...
▬ Did you 'double-check' the PIDs; as, entered?
Unless, of course, the PIDs were, in "Private Spaces"; and/or, have been since, "Merged"/"Combined" ...
Very curious ...
I know, that this certainly may not help/assist.
Brett
0 -
If I want to search for a person, I'll typically search by name, dates, and relationships. But when I put in a PID, I want to find that specific PID, even (or especially) when it was deleted by a merge. It's frustrating and much slower now to be taken to the surviving PID and have to sift through the change log to access the PID I really wanted.
If a user searched for PID that was deleted by merge and really wanted the survivor, it was a simple matter to click the survivor link on the deleted person page.
I also suspect it's extremely confusing for beginners to search for one PID and come up with another one, especially if they don't yet understand how PIDs are retired in a merge.
Finally, I wish some of the more serious issues in Family Tree had taken priority over changing the behavior of PID searching, especially when the old method was working well in virtually all cases, and the new method has some serious downsides.
Just my 2 cents...
1
