Let me search just my ancestors
Comments
-
Adrian Bruce said: Setting the "my" tree thing aside... To find "my" relatives of a specific name in FSFT, I use the Watch List. Unlike the Recents list, it doesn't time out or get cluttered with profiles that I just happened to look at.
Sure, you need to spend some time setting it up, but you'll be there a lot earlier than any FS coding changes.
Once you have your list set up, then you can filter it by name and get the profiles from your Watch List that match the filter. And of course, you get a warning if someone changes your relatives' data. Usually.
I think that we need to bear in mind that no simple search method is going to help if we have too many people of the same name - if we start running into that problem then the results from the Watch list might need to be expanded to show extra data - the question is what?0 -
Jeff Wiseman said: Here's another way to do it. Anytime I am online working in the FSFT, I have my AQ database open in another window. Since any of my relatives that I have researched are not only in my AQ database, but they are also linked to their record in the FSFT. In order to quickly find someone, I first go to the Name List in AQ:
I simply select the person I'm interested in, and then click on the "FamilySearch--View Person in FamilySearch" menu item, and that person's page in FamilySearch will be immediately opened in a new tab in my browser window. I can sort on any of the fields shown in the example in order to find people. I can also add any number of new fields that I want. For example, I can sort on the "Living" field to get a list of everyone that I have in my private space on FS.
I can even sort on the names of cemeteries to show everyone in the same cemetery grouped together.
On top of that I have very flexible search capabilities. In the following example I can generate a list of All Descendants that are Related to Thomas Oscar Santee:
You can define search groups that will take all ancestors of the person you select back X generations and then forward Y generations. When you have that list, you can then apply a filter to all of the fields for any of those persons using the field selection filter:
The capability is so powerful and FAST, that in general I NEVER do any searches in the FSFT for any of the people that I've done work on. The only time I do is obviously for new people I'm interested in that are not already in MY OWN PERSONAL TREE in my AQ database.0 -
Jeff Wiseman said: Although not supported in FS at this time, you DO have this capability if you use a third party tool. See my Reply below.0
-
Brian Jensen said: This is a feature request that we frequently get, and we agree it would be very helpful. But with 1+ billion records in Family Tree we’ve not been able to come up with a performant design for this feature. Yet!
Thanks,
Brian Jensen
Search Engineering Manager0 -
Tracy Lynn Keeney said: PLEASE, please oh pretty please make a way for users to search their OWN tree, and not the whole database! Very often there are names that I KNOW are on MY tree that I have entered, but I can't find them because I don't remember WHERE they are on my tree. Currently, a search searches all of FamilySearch.
When I click on "Tree" It shows MY tree and gives me the option to select "portrait", "landscape", "Fan Chart" or "Descendancy". To the left of that, is a "Home" button, a "recenter" button, a "full screen" button, and the option to zoom in and zoom out. What I need more than anything is a "SEARCH" button that I can click on, where I can type a name and the system will find that name on my tree so I can GET to it easily. Ancestry has this option, but I need it on FamilySearch!
The FamilySearch tree automatically load your DIRECT Ancestry, but very often I'm trying to find someone who isn't in the direct line, and I don't remember who's child they were, who their parent was, etc. I can't spend hours and hours clicking through every possible relation trying to find that person. And typing in their name in the "Search" or "find" button searches ALL of FamilySearch and sometimes gives pages and pages and pages of results. PLEASE make a search option that allows people to find someone on their OWN tree.
0 -
Orisela Thomas said: I would like to SEARCH within the tree I am working on. Sometimes I can't remember the person's name and want to search all the men named "Blas" or I want to go directly to a relative without having to remember all of the branches I need to hop to get there.0
-
Juli said: Some suggestions:
1. For finding an ancestor (as opposed to just a relative) to jump to, use one of the tree views. I find the fan chart to be easiest to use.
2. To return to someone you worked on recently, use the Recents list.
3. Put key relatives on your watch list.
4. Maintain an offline tree as a backup, and as a means of searching only a limited set of profiles. If you use one of the FS-sync-able programs from the Solutions Gallery, you don't even need to retype what's already up on FS.0 -
Shauna Rae Foliaki said: I would love to have a way to search within my pedigree tree by name only and not id number. It would make searching for my family so much easier than having to go out into the whole wide world.0
-
Tom Huber said: Welcome back to the community support forum for FamilySearch. FamilySearch personnel read every discussion thread and may or may not respond as their time permits. We all share an active interest in using the resources of this site and as users, we have various levels of knowledge and experience and do our best to help each other with concerns, issues, and/or questions.
Introducing FamilySearch Family Tree
FamilySearch FamilyTree is a single tree that is a collaborative effort, built around an open-edit model, allowing any person, including yourself to add to and make changes on any person who lived throughout history, including all of our deceased relatives.
There is no "my tree" in FamilySearch FamilyTree — it is a tree for all mankind. If you have found errors, you need to know why those errors are there. It could be that someone incorrectly combined another person's record with your relative. It could be that someone found a source that they thought applied to your relative, but it did not. It could be that someone just knew that their information was correct and entered that.
There are sites that support independent trees and building them. FamilySearch is not one of those sites.
If you are unfamiliar with how to work with the massive tree (now containing over 1.2 Billion persons), The Family History Guide (http://thefhguide.com/) is an approved training resource. It not only contains procedures for working with the site and the massive tree, but also exercises for you to use.0 -
Tom Huber said: Many of us recommend maintaining a separate tree, either on a site that supports individual trees, or with a family tree management program. Three fully certified programs are available: Ancestral Quest, Legacy, and Roots Magic. Each one has its fans and also has a free version that allows you to become familiar with the program and decide which one works best for you.
The advantage to using a fully certified program is that it interfaces with the massive tree that currently contains over 1.2 Billion profiles. For most persons, the free version adequately meets their needs and can download your ancestral lines into a local database.
By maintaining a separate tree, you always have a base that you can return to if some other well-intended user believes that your relative is their relative and makes a mess of things. The integrated nature of the programs helps in restoring the information in the massive on-site tree, but at the same time, offers the ability for you to collaborate with others in researching your ancestral lines.
FamilySearch is still under development and there are sections of the tree that need further work. This forum serves to help us help each other in dealing with changes and "how to" information about the site. It is important to understand that while FamilySearch personnel read each discussion thread, there are limited resources and sometimes it can take years for a badly-needed feature to be implemented.0 -
Lyle Toronto said: I agree, it would be nice to be able to search your "scope of interest". This would make discovering your family stories a lot easier, especially if you only remember part of a story and a name.0
-
Sebastian Neugebauer said: Thank you so much for your constant effort on the site. I would love to see a feature where you can search for an ancestor specifically in your family tree. This will help find a specific person to share stories about or put in new information, without having to go through all "find" options on the existing page.0
-
Carol Jo Menges said: These are among the reasons why I like to sync in and out of FamilySearch to my RootsMagic database. The collaborative tree of FamilySearch is a truly great thing, but I often need to be able to see at a glance the relationships, especially while looking through my RootsMagic Index of names. It's very helpful to me to work both databases, and to add to and fix either one whenever necessary. Syncing into one or the other, back and forth, is a miracle in itself, especially for the purpose of this work we're charged to do.
FamilySearch isn't meant to be set up to see "only [your] tree". Once you add people to it, the names become a part of the whole of the human race. There is no "your tree" there. Your people are a part of everyone else's trees, and the whole becomes one tree--albeit with a bazillion fixes and additions to be made. That's what is sometimes so disturbing to contributors, to find that out, and that you won't be the one most in charge of whoever you've entered, except for living people. Not even a nanosecond beyond your typing them in. It's just not set up to work that way. We *all* really are connected to each other. The more we do this work, the more I am reconvinced of this. It is no academic exercise to me anymore. The proof of it is in front of us continually.
So I suggest you keep a separate yours-only tree in a personal database, one that has simple access into and out of FamilySearch, Ancestry, My Heritage, and another I can't remember off the top of my head.0 -
Jeff Wiseman said: Remember that "Your Tree" is actually the single shared FamilySearch FamilyTree with over 1.3 billion names in it. Walking through that whole tree "of yours" looking for a name could be a problem :-)
How about the ability to simply have a note of some type that has a list of records that you are interested in that you could click on an go there directly? We used to have that--it was called a "watch list" and was used for just such things.
That has been changed now and is now been given a rather confusing name. From the top left of a FS web page, select the "Family Tree" menu and go the the "Following" menu item. That will bring up a list of all recent changes to items on your "Following" list (i.e., when you select "Following" it doesn't really take you to your "Following list", instead it takes you to a "recent changes to your following list" type list)
At this point go and select the "Following" button. *THAT* will take you to your actual "Following" list where you can pick a name. Unfortunately, this list is incredibly clunky as you can only scroll down a short ways before having to hit "More" to bring up other entries. Heaven forbid that you need to find anyone with a name starting with "S" or some other letter in the last part of the alphabet!
Also, if we had a decent To-Do list with active links, you could add the names you are currently working on there. That ability was requested over 2 years ago as item #2 of an 11 item list. Although FS is aware of the requests, nothing has yet materialized:
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...
One last way to deal with this, which is how I handle it, is to get one of the certified PC programs (I use Ancestral Quest). Any record in FS that I have worked on and want to track is linked to the equivalent record in my AQ database. AQ has a feature where I can view a list of everyone in my database. I can filter that list, I can sort it on any criteria I want (e.g., sort them by name and location of cemetery), and then by selecting one of the records in the list, with a single click I can tell it to go to that very same record in FS and it will open the FS record in my browser! And this all with a free tool (Ancestral Quest Basic).
So since many folks aren't set up to do things that way, It would be really nice if FS *FIXED* the "Following" list so that it was more useful, and/or upgraded the To-Do List feature to be more useful as well0 -
Merlin R Kitchen said: I also use Ancestral Quest. You can download a free copy from ancquest.com.
You can add a deceased parent or a deceased grandparent. Then with a fairly simple procedure link your deceased person to the record of that person in FamilySearch Family Tree (FSFT).
Then with another fairly simple procedure, tell your program to download from FSFT x number of generations of ancestors (which can be "your tree.") It is also possible to start with any ancestor and download x number of generations of that person's decendants.
When you want to look for any person which has any particular piece of information,such as "find all the people in my database that were married in the county of Adair, Missouri: In my estimation, the advanced search capability of Ancestral Quest is phenominal.
I believe that Roots Magic has these same capabilities.0 -
Hannah Ruth DeForest said: I have had reason to search just my tree for a particular person many times. I'd really like to be able to search by last name or even full name and have it bring up results from only my tree. If I can't remember a name or I find someone similar in a record that I think might be a match but can't remember just which line they are in I want to be able to look them up. We could really use a way to find and navigate to someone without doing it manually up a line or having the results from the whole family search database show up in the search. I know you all are working hard and this functionality seems a lot more simple than it probably is! But, please make it a priority! Thank you!0
-
The fact that this is a very common request would indicate this should be something to be considered by the FamilySearch developers. However, the common response to all similar requests is based on the hard fact that Family Tree is a community project, so there is no such concept as "my tree".
For those with a limited amount of relatives whose records they wish to maintainn, the "Following" feature allows one to keep track of up to 4,000 individuals. These can be sorted alphabetically and can now even be labelled, with terms like "Ancestor" or "Maternal Ancestor", etc., to give some sense of their relationship. From your "Following" list you can link directly to that person's FT page or their "Tree". So, even without having all of ones relatives under "Following" it is relatively easy to get to most, if not all, of the branches in Family Tree in which they appear.
In short, if this facility is still not adequate for you, you really do need to acquire some personal software (that interacts with the Family Tree program) both to help with your specified needs and for back-up purposes.
0 -
The fact that this is a very common request would indicate this should be something to be considered by the FamilySearch developers. However, the common response to all similar requests is based on the hard fact that Family Tree is a community project, so there is no such concept as "my tree".
For those with a limited amount of relatives whose records they wish to maintainn, the "Following" feature allows one to keep track of up to 4,000 individuals. These can be sorted alphabetically and can now even be labelled, with terms like "Ancestor" or "Maternal Ancestor", etc., to give some sense of their relationship. From your "Following" list you can link directly to that person's FT page or their "Tree". So, even without having all of ones relatives under "Following" it is relatively easy to get to most, if not all, of the branches in Family Tree in which they appear.
In short, if this facility is still not adequate for you, you really do need to acquire some personal software (that interacts with the Family Tree program) both to help with your specified needs and for back-up purposes.
0 -
I have been asking for a way to have a "My Family Tree" option for years. Mainly to keep from having to correct and recorrect bad information and family relationships entered by others. The global "whole World family" design of the database currently makes this seem unfeasible. The world family concept does have some great benefits. If you could persist in a separate database for each account the records attached to (at a minimum) their direct line ancestors, something like a surname search on your family tree might be possible. You could have the best of both worlds.
To me this would be an invaluable tool for people doing genetic genealogy and asking "hey, do you have such and such a surname in your family tree?" I was just asked this question through chat.
The alternative of downloading all of my family tree from Family Search to my Roots Magic database so I can conduct such a search seems rather daunting, time consuming, a questionable use of resources, redundant and prone to perpetuating misinformation.
EPW
0 -
EPW
I, 'hear'; and, 'understand', what you are saying ..
But ...
That said ...
Please do not be offended, my comment is not meant to offend ...
Although, you seem to understand the structure of "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch' ...
You DO NOT seem to have grasped the basic concept of "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch' ...
.
We do not have our OWN "Tree" in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch'.
We ONLY have "Branches" (ie. Ancestral" Lines), that are interconnected, in this SINGLE "One" World 'Tree', for all of us, that is "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch'.
"Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch' is NOT like 'On-Line' "Websites" (eg. "Ancestry_com"; or "MyHeritage_com"; or, the like); and/or, 'standalone' personal (computer) programmes (eg, the OLD, now no longer supported, "PAF"; or, "Ancestral Quest"; or, the like).
We DO NOT have "Private"/"Personal" 'Trees' in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch' like other 'On-Line' "Websites"; and/or, 'standalone' personal (computer) programmes.
We do not even, own; or, manage; and, are NOT even responsible for, the "Deceased" individuals/persons in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch'.
And, what many Users/Patrons DO NOT 'seem' to understand ...
We DO NOT even, own; or, manage; and, are NOT even responsible for, Our OWN "Deceased" Ancestors in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch'.
"Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch' is built on a "Open Edit" Platform - hence, why any registered User/Patron can "Edit" (ie. Add, Delete; and/or, Change) ANY "Deceased" individual/person in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch'.
.
The concept, of the 'Model', of "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch', being a SINGLE "One" World 'Tree', built on a "Open Edit" Platform, IS the very REASON that, so MANY Users/Patrons, both, USE; and, MAINTAIN, their OWN "Private" and "Personal" 'Database(s)' [ or, "Copy"/"Copies" ] of their "Ancestral" Lines (ie. 'Trees') on, 'On-Line' "Websites" (eg. "Ancestry_com"; or "MyHeritage_com"; or, the like); and/or, 'standalone' personal (computer) programmes (eg, the OLD, now no longer supported, "PAF"; or, "Ancestral Quest"; or, the like).
.
We CANNOT expect 'FamilySearch' to HAVE or MAINTAIN a 'myriad' of Private and Personal 'Trees'.
That is NOT the purpose of "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch'.
What we must be aware, is that ...
The 'Model', of "Family Tree" (and, its forerunner, "New.FamilySearch"); as, a SINGLE "One" World 'Tree', built on a "Open Edit" Platform, was ORIGINALLY "Created", by the Church, for the use of Members of the Church, to HELP the Members in the furtherance of their beliefs; as, a means to STOP the amount of DUPLIACTION of ("Deceased") individuals/person that was taking place, with ALL the MANY "Private" and "Personal" 'Database(s)' [ or, "Copy"/"Copies" ] of "Ancestral" Lines (ie. 'Trees').
The use of "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch' is, now, FREE to ALL, not just Members of the Church.
The REASON for "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch' being a SINGLE "One" World 'Tree', built on a "Open Edit" Platform, is to STOP the DUPLIACTION of ("Deceased") individuals/persons from taking place, with ALL the MANY "Private" and "Personal" 'Database(s)' [ or, "Copy"/"Copies" ] of "Ancestral" Lines (ie. 'Trees'), all around the World - that is just the way it is.
.
And ...
Furthermore ...
"Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch' is amiable to "Collaboration", that is part of what "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch' is all about.
But, "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch', is NOT setup/structured for "Genetic" research ...
Remember: "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch' is a FREE website ...
Lets leave the setup/structure for "Genetic" research to the "Commercial" (ie. Subscription/Paid) websites.
You never know ...
Later on 'down the track', "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch', may be setup/structured for "Genetic" research ...
We can live in hope ...
.
I hope this helps.
Again, this was comment not meant of offend.
Just my thoughts.
Brett
0 -
Am I stupid, or is there still no way to do this?
0 -
It would be wonderful to have this feature. For example, I have a 5 ggrandfather whose middle name was Rankin. Since he was not a firstborn son, I'm certain the name Rankin came from somewhere in the family before, but it would take me hours to search for a "Rankin" among the myriad aunts and uncle and cousins that preceded my 5 ggrandfather especially considering families of 12-13 Childdren and each of those children have 10-12 children.
Since there is no way to isolate just the names in MY tree and move them to WORD where I could do such a search, it would be so nice to be able to do it in FS.
I don't even know how to find out how many entries are in MY personal tree.
0 -
Thank you, this was very useful to understand the "one tree".
I do think there as a simpler version of this search feature that would be doable.
I have run across people with last names that seem familiar and want to talk about a possible relationship. These are usually married names joining into my recent ancestry. Wouldn't it be possible to search from me back to my great aunts and uncles and the associated 2nd and 3rd cousins? I think this would satisfy what most people would be looking for in a "local" search function.
0 -
Right now, there is no functionality to search only people attached to my family tree. If I try and find a person, it brings up results from the entire database...but I only want to see the record for the person that is relevant to me (a person I've added to MY family tree).
So my suggestion is to make allow an individual to search for a person by name only within their family tree.
0 -
If you're looking for someone you added (or contributed to in any way), use My Contributions. If you're looking only for direct ancestors, use the Fan Chart and your browser's Find function.
Otherwise, this is probably The Most Frequently Requested Feature on FamilySearch, but the one that misunderstands the underlying structure the most thoroughly. What it boils down to is scope: how should the Find function go about determining who is part of "your" tree and who isn't? Should it do this before each search, essentially doing a tree download every single time? Those can take several hours each. Or should it try to do it after the search, running the "View Relationship" function on every search result? Those can take half a minute each, meaning each results page would take five or ten minutes to load.
7 -
I can see how that would be useful.
1 -
It often happens that I want to find one of my ancestors or their descendants who is already in my tree, but I don't know where they are (because my tree is huge). Therefore, I'm suggesting the ability to search for them, and have the search yield the closest-related matches first.
This would differ from the existing 'Find' feature in that it would exclude results that are not connected to my tree. Also, it differs in that the most closely-related matches would show up first (making searches for known individuals whose location is not known much faster).
This feature could be implemented (for example) by adding two checkboxes (or similar) to the current 'Find' feature. One for searching your own tree. Another, for yielding the closest related match first.
0 -
This is a variation on a very frequent suggestion. The problem? Please define "your own tree", and suggest a way for Find to limit its search to it.
Should it do the equivalent of a full tree download before every search? In the genealogy programs that can synchronize with Family Tree, a download of, say, eight generations of ancestors plus their descendants can take many hours.
Or should Find do the search and then run "View My Relationship" on every result? Depending on the initial number of results, that could also take hours.
---
To find a profile you've edited, use My Contributions.
If you know you'll want to return to a profile later, use the Following feature.
If you want to search your direct ancestors, use the fan chart and your browser's text-finding function.
If you know one of the person's ancestors, use the descendancy chart and your browser, again.
Or get one of the genealogy programs that can synch with FS, spend the hours (or days) needed to download your relatives, and then use the program's features to find people.
2 -
Could FamilySearch include a search option to find persons by name who are connected to my family tree. Frequently while searching images I see a name that I recognize from my family tree, but can't remember the exact relationship. A general search locates too many options to narrow down.
0 -
This is a very frequent request or suggestion, but unfortunately, on a shared tree the size of FamilySearch's, it's just not currently feasible. The problem boils down to scope: how do you propose that FS should determine who is or isn't "connected to your family tree"? Should it compile a list before the search, of all of your ancestors and all of their descendants? In third-party software that can synchronize with Family Tree, a download like that can take hours. Or should it do the search first, and then run the "show relationship" routine on each result? That would cause each page of Find results to take several minutes to load.
If you've edited the profile of the person in question, you can search by name in My Contributions. If the person is a direct ancestor, you can use the fan chart and your browser's text-finding function. You can also keep track of profiles using the Following option. And finally, you can use one of the third-party programs to download your relatives into that software, and then use its search features. (As I said, the download will take time, but you'd only need to do it once.)
2
