Skip to content

Family Tree

Groups Select


New Discovery Page

How is A New Discovery Page created; and why is it that some of my ancestors have one and others don't, even when they are in the same family?


  • dontiknowyoudontiknowyou ✭✭✭
    edited July 22

    The difference seems to be all about data quality.

    Apparently there is some automated screening going on. Perhaps there is a human in the loop too. I find it very disconcerting to be working on a page and suddenly that banner appears, inviting me to see the new discovery page. Wah, too soon, I wasn't done editing!

  • It would be nice to be able to "dismiss" the Discovery page banner - a nice option, but distracting when you have seen there is nothing there you don't already know ...

  • What exactly is the purpose of this Discovery page, anyway? I can find absolutely no utility to it -- it scatters the information randomly around the page, some of it repeatedly, and there's nothing one can actually do with any of it. And I can find no way to fix the "narrative" that it concocts. (One example: yes, my great-grandparents technically had three female children born to them -- but the first one was stillborn, so they emphatically did not have "at least three daughters".)

  • dontiknowyoudontiknowyou ✭✭✭

    Discovery pages are exported to the open web, where Google etal. search engines can find them.

  • Thanks for the additional insights - it still would be nice to be able to turn things like the Discovery page banner and discovery hints off for those not interested.

  • Brett .Brett . ✭✭✭✭



    I am just another 'lowly' User/Patron ...

    Great suggested enhancement ...

    Can I humbly suggest, that actually make, that suggested enhancement of yours, to be actually able (ie. enable us) to 'Turn Off' the 'Banner' for the "Discovery Pages", for (us as) individual Users/Patrons, in the "Ideas" (ie. 'Feedback') Section, under say the 'Topic' of, either, "General User Interface" or "Family Tree" (or, both), in this "Community.FamilySearch" Forum.

    Just a thought and suggestion.



    "Ideas" Section

    [ 1 ] 'Category' = "General User Interface"

    Home > Ideas > General User Interface

    General User Interface

    [ 2 ] 'Category' = "Family Tree"

    Home > Ideas > Family Tree

    Family Tree


  • Thank you, Brett, for the suggestion, I was under the impression (but may be wrong) that before posting a new question (or suggestion in the case of ideas) it is requested we check to see if a similar question or suggestion has already been posted - and perhaps answered (either with a good, accurate, and complete explanation - or for ideas with an indication of a "fix" or "not planning to fix" response. So far, I have been seeking questions or suggestions regarding opting out or dismissing the "discovery" items (hints and the page), and commenting, liking, or upvoting the many similar questions/suggestions in both Ideas and Q and A. However, if others who have spent more time in Community than I have so far, think this has not been adequately asked or suggested, I don't mind doing so. It seems to be a desired option for many ...

  • Brett .Brett . ✭✭✭✭



    There is certainly nothing wrong, with doing, what you are doing, such is commendable.

    But ...

    That Said ...

    In the current NEW Platform of this "Community.FamilySearch" Forum, there are so many 'Posts', in the likes of, the "Q and A" Section; and/or, the "Groups" Section; and, the "Ideas" (ie. 'Feedback') Section, that you could get yourself lost, in trying to find matters of a similar nature, to 'Up Vote'. Not to mention, that some 'Posts' include MORE than just one matter.

    Believe me, I have been working in the "Community.FamilySearch" forum, for a number of years, not trying to 'big note' myself; but, part of what I have been doing, is 'linking'/'cross-referencing' 'Posts' of similar nature together. Such, was a little easier, in the PREVIOUS Platform of this "Community.FamilySearch" Forum. Such, is nowhere near as easy, in the current NEW Platform of this "Community.FamilySearch" Forum.

    Although, I DO NOT discourage Participants (ie. Users/Patrons), from doing, what you are doing; and, would commend anyone for doing so ...

    Been there, done that ... still do ...

    Personally, I would really suggest to ALL Participants (ie. Users/Patrons) to just simply submit/post any, suggested enhancements; or, problems/issues, WITHOUT, trying to 'Search' for anything of a similar nature.

    Apart from the time required to do so, the main reasons, that I suggest such are:

    (1) Get it out there, before one forgets (or, gets confused) - it happens (... speaking from experience. here).

    (2) The MORE times that a matter is RAISED by NUMEROUS Participants (ie. Users/Patrons), 'independently', of each other; then, hopefully, the MORE notice (and, consideration) that 'FamilySearch' will give to the matter.

    (3) IF, such has ALREADY been proffered; THEN, one can be assured that SOMEONE will most likely let you know. ... [ Often, ME ... ].

    As always ...

    Just my thoughts.

    Good Luck.


  • dontiknowyoudontiknowyou ✭✭✭

    Be able to turn off the Discovery Page banner and discovery hints.

    This has my vote!

  • Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts!! We know the engineers are WAY busy with all the changes; and will hopefully get to some of these requests/suggestions soon!

  • I , for one, like the New Discovery page as it correlates age of person to age of parents and also especially what is occurring in history at the different ages of the person. To me that gives us more sources to verify the facts of that person's life. I am still curious why some Ancestors have a New Discovery Page and others don't have one?

  • Brett .Brett . ✭✭✭✭

    @Connie Bateman


    As far as I was aware, NOT all of the "Deceased" individuals/persons in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch', yet, have "Discovery Pages".

    There are various reason for such; but, I suspect that the main one, is that the "System", has not yet caught-up with some (in fact, many) of the "Deceased" individuals/persons in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch'.

    Plus, of course, we would ONLY want those that are, well "Documented"; and, "Sourced" (and, 'Connected') to appear/be displayed, we would not want the MANY that that are, lets say, somewhat lacking; or, with MANY "Duplicates", to appear/be displayed.

    I would suggest that given 'Time', those that should, will eventually, have "Discovery Pages".

    Like, you; and, many others, mine are the SAME, some of my Ancestors have "Discovery Pages"; whereas, some of my Ancestors DO NOT have "Discovery Pages".

    I hope this helps.


    ps: Personally, I would prefer that NONE of my Ancestors had a "Discovery Page"; as, we have enough trouble with existing Users/Patrons, making 'wayward' "Changes", let alone, an influx of (and, in particular, some very inexperienced) NEW Users/Patrons 'wreaking havoc'.


  • When I was talking to an Elder about a different issue he sugested that I go the person page and enter the info I knew about my Ancestor under where it says Life Sketch or under Memories

  • Brett .Brett . ✭✭✭✭

    @Connie Bateman


    That is certainly worth trying ...


    ps: I just sent you a "Private" 'Message' 😀

  • I think 'Discovery Page" is a good name for it - it takes bits and pieces of Person Details, Memories, Activities, etc. and mashes them all together into one page - as mentioned above so that they are 'more easily discoverable' through Internet search engines. So sort of a 'current snapshot' of all the person's FamilySearch pages. I assume this could have broader appeal to 'new' FamilySearch users. But also note there are fewer options to edit the said page - so an abstraction/aggregate sort of page - which 'as mentioned above' reflects the 'completeness' of 'research' on a person. A setting to remove/hide Discovery page banner could be useful otherwise there is the handy exit option (If FamilySearch UI were customizable - I think mine would be a trimmed down version - but always nice to have options).

Sign In or Register to comment.