Why is it so hard to find accurate results
When I enter a name, date of birth, location, date of death, parents etc and search it doesn't give me any relevant results except the surname.
It will give me all names associated with the surname and every possible date of birth etc ranging rom the year I am interested in up to +/- 100 years either side. With many many many pages to search through.
WHY WHY WHY????
It is very annoying and frustrating. There does not seem to be any reason to enter dates, locations and first names etc because it ignores requests and gives every possible result.
There must be a better and easier way to search.
Answers
-
Are you searching for historical records? Or are you looking for a person/profile in the Tree? You've posted in General Questions, so it's hard to know where you are looking and struggling.
3 -
As already suggested, it is difficult to offer help when we don't know which part of FamilySearch you are using to make your searches.
If I am guessing correctly and you are referring to the Search page at https://www.familysearch.org/search/ there are usually strategies (using filters, "Exact" searches, etc.) that will enable you to narrow down results to something like what you would hope for. The search engine is far from perfect, and you still might find some of your search results do not exactly match your search criteria, but you can almost certainly improve on your current experience.
Please provide an example (screenshot or URL reference), so we can see the way you are conducting your searches at present and provide advice on how different actions could help make your results much more in line with your requirements.
3 -
Why? Like almost all modern search engines the FamilySearch search engines are designed to give results based on what you ask for and everything the designers of the search engine think, based on what you asked for, you should have asked for. That is why it is hard to design a search in google that has fewer than ten million results.
The most likely reason for seeing that "When I enter a name, date of birth, location, date of death, parents etc and search it doesn't give me any relevant results except the surname" is that based on your criteria, there are no results. But search engine designers really seem to hate to admit that.
This does not mean there are no records for what you are searching for, just that you need to fix your criteria and start off with a smaller focus such as searching in just one pertinent collection instead of all of them.
3 -
@mwilson83 great question. I have learned that different sites have really different search capabilities. In FamilySearch, oftentimes, less is more.
Here is an article that might help: https://www.familysearch.org/en/fieldops/article/understanding-and-searching-familysearch-records
I hope this helps :)
0 -
A key point, which may be clear to you but which is worth mentioning I think, is that every Record is effectively independent of every other, and its indexing information (metadata), which is all you see on the results list and is all that is used in searching, will vary from minimal to very full dependent on the collection, date, legibility, etc. A good example would be the early US censuses, which are only indexed by location and name of head of household, because that's all the indexable information that was collected, while later censuses collected far more and so have far more useful indexing information.
2 -
Here is an example of how well the search engine works when a result does actually exist.
This morning I wanted to find the birth record for Bernt Ingelaus Helgesson Mehammar. Other sources tell me he was born in 1900. I know he was born in the community of Stord. So I use that information in the search. First I'm going to limit my search just to the collection the record should be in, that is, the Norway Church Records collection. I know from experience that the first couple of letters of a name tend to be the most stable so I'm going to search just for be* with father h*. I'll say I want records from 1900 to 1900 on the starting assumption that my other information is correct. I can always widen the range later. Finally, I'll include the place he was born:
Only 63 results and he is right at the top.
After those two the place starts getting wider first and then further down the list a result from 1901 gets thrown in.
1
