The search engine doesn't work for me since the upgrade. If I restrict the search I get nothing, unr

User15834746259049071288

The search engine doesn't work for me since the upgrade. If I restrict the search I get nothing, unrestricted I get 10,000 possibilities. Almost all of my ancestor are in the UK. I get the USA, Australia and else where. Anyone else experiencing the same?

Nvpattt

I would recommend that if you are unhappy with the search feature that you go to "Ask a Question" at the top right, present your problem and hopefully this will bring this to the attention of those who can use your feedback to make the site more user friendly or at least give you a satisfactory answer to your problem.

Brett .

@MichaelLock4 MichaelLock4​ 

.

Michael

.

You are not alone ...

.

Short Answer: 'Yes'.

.

Other Users/Patrons have been advising of the SAME problem/issue of late.

.

FYI

.

Here are a couple of posts in the (NEW) "IDEAS' Forum, now the (Temporary) platform 'Feedback' Forum for 'FamilySearch, the replacement for the OLD 'FamilySearch' ("GetSatisfaction") 'Feedback' Forum:

.

Find - Discover Your Deceased Ancestors Page ... 4 November 2020

.

Looks like another change in a design on FamilySearch, this time in the "find" page for looking up ancestors. Yes, it's good that we can still look up by name and by ID number (the latter I use mostly), but why the "+" signs beside "marriage", "residence" "death" "spouse", "father" "mother"??? Is this really necessary? Isn't just blank spaces more easier to use than to have to ADD these other fields? If FamilySearch is trying to copy Ancestry, they won't compete, never. Please stick to what works best as a unique site and what we are use to. THANK YOU!.

.

https://community.familysearch.org/s/idea/0874V000000sjNJQAY/detail

.

discovering deceased ancestors page. ... 4 November 2020

.

Have to agree with weatherboi. The new search for ancestors layout is impossible to use. You enter name, dates, birthplace and are presented with people with the same name from all over the world. I got 36000 pages with about three quarters of a million people to search instead of the expected couple of dozen.

.

https://community.familysearch.org/s/idea/0874V000000sjNOQAY/detail

.

Brett

.

Dennis J Yancey

can you share your exact query?

 

I had noticed the same thing a week back and had reported it. They had made some tweaks and what I noted that was in error was corrected. But there may still be some needed tweaks

when I do a search on Last Name Smith

and birth place Australia

it does seem to work for me.

 

BUT when I do a search for last Name Yancey

and birth place Australia

it doesnt find any Yanceys in Australia

but it still gives me thousands of entries in return of Yanceys in other places - but

it seems if it had found anything (in Australia) it would have been on top (for Yanceys in Australia - and it wasnt)

 

 

I think this is by intentional design (when it doesnt find an exact match to your exact search - it still tries to provide results of partial matches)

 

 

Paul W

Michael

 

As suggested, please provide a couple of examples. In FamilySearch, a lot of searching is about restricting criteria, then broadening if that doesn't produce results. Use of the filters can also be helpful.

 

However, if you are talking about the FIND function in Family Tree, I have always found that difficult and don't often use it. It only ever really prioritised results, so I don't see how the "new look" has made a great deal of difference regarding functionality.

 

There are a lot of experienced users who visit this site and who would relish the challenge of finding the specific results you are finding difficulty with!