Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments
Saturday, September 22, 2012
Expanded Genealogy Catalog at Family History Expos
Family History Expos is in the process of rapidly expanding their offering in their online catalog or Genealogy Store. Recently added items include the popular software programs, Ancestral Quest 14, Legacy Family Tree 7.5, and RootsMagic 5. The number of items for sale have increased dramatically just in the past week. The catalog is available through the Shop link from the startup page. Announcements of new products added to the catalog and presently available will be made regularly through the Family History Expos Blog.
Unanswered Questions
When I do a presentation, I usually ask everyone before I start whether or not they have any questions about the known or unknown universe. Occasionally, I will get a question or two but usually everyone just sits there and stares. They are likely weighing my sanity. But often I explain that I always have questions and here are some of the ones that I cannot answer (or have not yet answered).
[Disclaimer: Some of these questions are not serious, but some of them are]
1. If genealogy can be learned in five minutes, why are there 25 five-minute-episodes so far in FamilySearch.org's Learning Center?
2. Which of Adam's children are you descended from? Can you document your sources?
3. If 2.7 percent of the members do genealogy in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, where are the other 2.6 percent?
5. If all the courthouses in America burned down, would we all have to stop doing genealogy?
6. Where is Waldo? And who were his parents?
7. Will the only free records on the Internet all end up in FamilySearch.org?
8. If the only people doing genealogy are 55 year old or older, white, educated women, what am I doing here?
9. If genealogy is so fun, why does my head ache?
10. Why did so many immigrants change their names when they came to America? Have you read anything about Arizona in the newspapers (or online) recently?
11. How long will it be until I no longer hear, "I don't have any computer skills?"
12. Why do more people do genealogy in the Winter than in the Summer?
That's probably enough questions for one day. I am sure that some of these are really obscure and will need further explanation. But, none will be forthcoming. Then again, I might comment on some of them. I'll have to think about it. As the judges used to say to me all the time, I'll take it under advisement and get back to you.
[Disclaimer: Some of these questions are not serious, but some of them are]
1. If genealogy can be learned in five minutes, why are there 25 five-minute-episodes so far in FamilySearch.org's Learning Center?
2. Which of Adam's children are you descended from? Can you document your sources?
3. If 2.7 percent of the members do genealogy in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, where are the other 2.6 percent?
5. If all the courthouses in America burned down, would we all have to stop doing genealogy?
6. Where is Waldo? And who were his parents?
7. Will the only free records on the Internet all end up in FamilySearch.org?
8. If the only people doing genealogy are 55 year old or older, white, educated women, what am I doing here?
9. If genealogy is so fun, why does my head ache?
10. Why did so many immigrants change their names when they came to America? Have you read anything about Arizona in the newspapers (or online) recently?
11. How long will it be until I no longer hear, "I don't have any computer skills?"
12. Why do more people do genealogy in the Winter than in the Summer?
That's probably enough questions for one day. I am sure that some of these are really obscure and will need further explanation. But, none will be forthcoming. Then again, I might comment on some of them. I'll have to think about it. As the judges used to say to me all the time, I'll take it under advisement and get back to you.
Friday, September 21, 2012
The Second Most Popular Topic?
Dick Eastman is really good at picking up the obscure. He had a recent post citing a BloombergBusinessWeek Lifestyle post called Ancestry.com's Genealogical Juggernaut. Given my analysis in an earlier post about MyHeritage.com and my own opinions on the popularity of genealogy, I looked into the article. The BloombergBusinessWeek post talks more about Ancestry.com than it does about genealogy in general. The reason for the article is the fact that Ancestry.com is up for sale. The comment made in the BloombergBusinessWeek post concerning genealogy refers to a January 2012 report by market research firm Global Industry Analysts. The information in the BloombergBusinessWeek post says essentially that an "estimated 84 million people around the world spend anywhere from $1,000 to $18,000 a year in search of their ancestors." The only other reference to the report, which is 58 pages long and costs $1450 ranks genealogy as the "second most researched topic online." I will not mention the first most popular topic because I do not want the term searchable in my blog.
That is really the only information given to support the assertion. There is a quote from Ancestry.com PR Director Sean Pate that claims that the demographic of online genealogy researchers are "mostly white women, 55 and older, who browse the Internet from home."
Now, other than paying the $1450 is there anyway to verify or support the Global Industry Analysts, Inc. report? Why has this report become newsworthy now, nine months after it appeared? Isn't the article in BloombergBusinessWeek really about Ancestry.com? Do you agree with the report? Does the conclusion sound reasonable? If the claim is correct, then why do the genealogy sites rank so far down in the overall Internet traffic?
For example, according to Alexa.com, Ancestry.com is ranked 623 in the world (all figures as of the date of this post) and 145 in the U.S. If genealogy is the second most searched topic, then why is the ranking of the most popular site so low? MyHeritage.com is globally number 4,125 and 2,930 in the U.S. Findmypast.com from brightsolid.com is 75,943 in the world and 16,131 in the U.S. FamilySearch.org is 4,142 in the world and 1,260 in the U.S.
I could go on and on, but any other sites would start to disappear into the tens of thousands and millions of online sites. Let's just say that I flat out don't believe the study's claim. For a reality check, this blog on Alexa.com today is ranked 285,789 in the world and 66,336 in the U.S. Hardly an indication that there are hordes of 55 year old white women out there scouring the Web for genealogical content. I might mention that this blog is ranked 2,296 in New Zealand (thanks to all you out there in the Southern Hemisphere). But does that mean New Zealand has more 55 YOWWs than the U.S.?
Now go back to the report I mentioned above. When was the last time you spent an average of $18,000 on genealogy a year on genealogy?
That is really the only information given to support the assertion. There is a quote from Ancestry.com PR Director Sean Pate that claims that the demographic of online genealogy researchers are "mostly white women, 55 and older, who browse the Internet from home."
Now, other than paying the $1450 is there anyway to verify or support the Global Industry Analysts, Inc. report? Why has this report become newsworthy now, nine months after it appeared? Isn't the article in BloombergBusinessWeek really about Ancestry.com? Do you agree with the report? Does the conclusion sound reasonable? If the claim is correct, then why do the genealogy sites rank so far down in the overall Internet traffic?
For example, according to Alexa.com, Ancestry.com is ranked 623 in the world (all figures as of the date of this post) and 145 in the U.S. If genealogy is the second most searched topic, then why is the ranking of the most popular site so low? MyHeritage.com is globally number 4,125 and 2,930 in the U.S. Findmypast.com from brightsolid.com is 75,943 in the world and 16,131 in the U.S. FamilySearch.org is 4,142 in the world and 1,260 in the U.S.
I could go on and on, but any other sites would start to disappear into the tens of thousands and millions of online sites. Let's just say that I flat out don't believe the study's claim. For a reality check, this blog on Alexa.com today is ranked 285,789 in the world and 66,336 in the U.S. Hardly an indication that there are hordes of 55 year old white women out there scouring the Web for genealogical content. I might mention that this blog is ranked 2,296 in New Zealand (thanks to all you out there in the Southern Hemisphere). But does that mean New Zealand has more 55 YOWWs than the U.S.?
Now go back to the report I mentioned above. When was the last time you spent an average of $18,000 on genealogy a year on genealogy?
This is really significant -- MyHeritage.com Record Matches
NOTE: This post is now more than two years old. If you wish to vent about MyHeritage.com and/or any of the other companies, please do so elsewhere. If you have something to say and can document your accusations, I will be glad to respond. Otherwise, please comment on one of my more current blog posts.
Recently, there have been a significant number of posts about MyHeritage.com's Record Matches, most simply recording the facts as presented in the press releases. But I have had some time during the past week or so both to work with the new program and to think about the significance of this step by MyHeritage.com. It is apparent that through its recent acquisitions and a number of undisclosed partnerships, it has put together a wide ranging method of searching previously unrelated databases simultaneously. In my opinion, this is a significant step forward for the online genealogical community.
The MyHeritage.com program is centered around a free local computer-based application called Family Tree Builder 6.0. Roughly speaking, you enter your information into Family Tree Builder, either by keying in the information or through a GEDCOM file, and the program either creates and online family tree or syncs the information with your online MyHeritage.com Family Tree. You can store up to 500 names online free of charge including up to 250 MB of storage for attached photos and documents. Their Premium Plan adds up to 2,500 people and 500 MB of storage and their PremiumPlus Plan has unlimited people and storage. The Premium Plan is currently $6.25 a month billed annually and the PremiumPlus Plan is $9.95 a month billed annually or $119.40 a year.
The new Record Match feature is not free. MyHeritage.com with the Records Match looks like it will run an additional $6.35 per month billed annually or $76.20 for full access. Otherwise, you can purchase credits to download specific documents. Here is the explanation:
Point #1:
Ancestry.com searches its own databases internally and returns records in its own collection.
Counter:
MyHeritage.com seems to search records outside of its owned databases and therefore it is unpredictable what it will produce. This is not bad, this is very good.
Point #2:
Full access to Ancestry.com is more than $300 per year and you have to buy their program, Family Tree Maker at about %70 to $80. Ancestry.com has Family Tree Maker for both the PC and Mac.
Counter:
Both subscriptions to MyHeritage.com are cheaper than the single Ancestry.com charge and their program is free. MyHeritage.com only has Family Tree Builder for the PC, but it is free.
Point #3:
Both companies seem to be aggressively seeking acquisitions and partnerships. However, Ancestry.com is presently reported to be for sale. Could MyHeritage.com buy Ancestry.com? It is not mentioned as one of the potential buyers at all. In any event, Ancestry.com's future is highly unpredictable whereas MyHeritage.com seems to be advancing very rapidly.
Point #4:
Ancestry.com is free in the FamilySearch Centers.
Counter:
MyHeritage.com's online database WorldVitalRecords.com is also free at FamilySearch Centers.
Point #5:
Both programs, Ancestry.com and MyHeritage.com, allow you to attach images to your online family tree. When you upload your file to MyHeritage.com, the results online include the images already attached to your local file. In both programs, you can add additional photos, however, without the PremiumPlus Plan on MyHeritage.com, you are limited to the storage allowed.
Point #6:
How do they stack up with content? It is really too early to tell but my initial indications are that they are NOT duplicates to a great extent, so MyHeritage.com is a good alternative. If you have the resources (i.e. money) You may want to try both. I would note that neither program costs as much as one research trip across the country.
I also have the incentive now to use the MyHeritage.com program more aggressively than I have in the past. But I will not likely use Ancestry.com any less.
One dramatic difference between the two programs is the amount of personal contact with the owners and developers. Not one time in my years of research and writing has Ancestry.com or any of their representatives ever acknowledged my existence. They have never sent me anything about their company or had a representative talk to me. On the other hand, even the President and founder of MyHeritage.com has taken the time to call me personally on the telephone from Israel to talk. When they introduced this new Research Match program, I got an early look with several emails explaining the program and multiple calls from their U.S. representative making sure I got the emails and asking if I had any questions. MyHeritage.com's personal approach to marketing is outstanding and almost unique.
I do not wish to imply that I am in any way important enough, in any sense, to merit the attention of the huge Ancestry.com company. As a matter of fact, very few commercial entities out there in genealogy land acknowledge my existence. That is one reason why the approach taken by MyHeritage.com is so unique.
My guess is that corporate style and friendly but aggressive marketing puts MyHeritage.com way ahead of Ancestry.com and I would think that absent a corporate change from Ancestry.com they will ultimately lose out to the better marketing of MyHeritage.com and since I have given away my two TVs recently, I no longer see any Ancestry.com ads except on the Internet where they can be ignored.
As a final note, FamilySearch.org is in the process of implementing their online family tree program called appropriately (but not very originally) Family Tree. The FamilySearch Family Tree is unique in that it is a monolithic tree. When you add your information, you are not creating your "own" tree, but sharing that information with all other users. Further, FamilySearch Family Tree is entirely integrated, meaning there are no individual family trees with "personal" information. In a fundamental sense, what Family Search is trying to accomplish is totally different than either Ancestry.com or MyHeritage.com and any resemblance between either Ancestry.com or MyHeritage.com and FamilySearch Family Tree is superficial.
I will undoubtedly have more to say in the future.
Recently, there have been a significant number of posts about MyHeritage.com's Record Matches, most simply recording the facts as presented in the press releases. But I have had some time during the past week or so both to work with the new program and to think about the significance of this step by MyHeritage.com. It is apparent that through its recent acquisitions and a number of undisclosed partnerships, it has put together a wide ranging method of searching previously unrelated databases simultaneously. In my opinion, this is a significant step forward for the online genealogical community.
The MyHeritage.com program is centered around a free local computer-based application called Family Tree Builder 6.0. Roughly speaking, you enter your information into Family Tree Builder, either by keying in the information or through a GEDCOM file, and the program either creates and online family tree or syncs the information with your online MyHeritage.com Family Tree. You can store up to 500 names online free of charge including up to 250 MB of storage for attached photos and documents. Their Premium Plan adds up to 2,500 people and 500 MB of storage and their PremiumPlus Plan has unlimited people and storage. The Premium Plan is currently $6.25 a month billed annually and the PremiumPlus Plan is $9.95 a month billed annually or $119.40 a year.
The new Record Match feature is not free. MyHeritage.com with the Records Match looks like it will run an additional $6.35 per month billed annually or $76.20 for full access. Otherwise, you can purchase credits to download specific documents. Here is the explanation:
Record Matches are provided for free as an abbreviated summary. Viewing full records from some data collections is free (e.g. Ellis Island and Find-a-Grave). Viewing other records in full requires a new type of subscription, called a data subscription, which also provides unlimited access to MyHeritage SuperSearch. You can also view specific records by purchasing pay-as-you-go credits.Now, the first thing is how does this program compare to Ancestry.com? MyHeritage.com is obviously a very viable competitor, perhaps the first one Ancestry.com has ever had. These are some of the points I have noticed comparing the two programs.
Point #1:
Ancestry.com searches its own databases internally and returns records in its own collection.
Counter:
MyHeritage.com seems to search records outside of its owned databases and therefore it is unpredictable what it will produce. This is not bad, this is very good.
Point #2:
Full access to Ancestry.com is more than $300 per year and you have to buy their program, Family Tree Maker at about %70 to $80. Ancestry.com has Family Tree Maker for both the PC and Mac.
Counter:
Both subscriptions to MyHeritage.com are cheaper than the single Ancestry.com charge and their program is free. MyHeritage.com only has Family Tree Builder for the PC, but it is free.
Point #3:
Both companies seem to be aggressively seeking acquisitions and partnerships. However, Ancestry.com is presently reported to be for sale. Could MyHeritage.com buy Ancestry.com? It is not mentioned as one of the potential buyers at all. In any event, Ancestry.com's future is highly unpredictable whereas MyHeritage.com seems to be advancing very rapidly.
Point #4:
Ancestry.com is free in the FamilySearch Centers.
Counter:
MyHeritage.com's online database WorldVitalRecords.com is also free at FamilySearch Centers.
Point #5:
Both programs, Ancestry.com and MyHeritage.com, allow you to attach images to your online family tree. When you upload your file to MyHeritage.com, the results online include the images already attached to your local file. In both programs, you can add additional photos, however, without the PremiumPlus Plan on MyHeritage.com, you are limited to the storage allowed.
Point #6:
How do they stack up with content? It is really too early to tell but my initial indications are that they are NOT duplicates to a great extent, so MyHeritage.com is a good alternative. If you have the resources (i.e. money) You may want to try both. I would note that neither program costs as much as one research trip across the country.
I also have the incentive now to use the MyHeritage.com program more aggressively than I have in the past. But I will not likely use Ancestry.com any less.
One dramatic difference between the two programs is the amount of personal contact with the owners and developers. Not one time in my years of research and writing has Ancestry.com or any of their representatives ever acknowledged my existence. They have never sent me anything about their company or had a representative talk to me. On the other hand, even the President and founder of MyHeritage.com has taken the time to call me personally on the telephone from Israel to talk. When they introduced this new Research Match program, I got an early look with several emails explaining the program and multiple calls from their U.S. representative making sure I got the emails and asking if I had any questions. MyHeritage.com's personal approach to marketing is outstanding and almost unique.
I do not wish to imply that I am in any way important enough, in any sense, to merit the attention of the huge Ancestry.com company. As a matter of fact, very few commercial entities out there in genealogy land acknowledge my existence. That is one reason why the approach taken by MyHeritage.com is so unique.
My guess is that corporate style and friendly but aggressive marketing puts MyHeritage.com way ahead of Ancestry.com and I would think that absent a corporate change from Ancestry.com they will ultimately lose out to the better marketing of MyHeritage.com and since I have given away my two TVs recently, I no longer see any Ancestry.com ads except on the Internet where they can be ignored.
As a final note, FamilySearch.org is in the process of implementing their online family tree program called appropriately (but not very originally) Family Tree. The FamilySearch Family Tree is unique in that it is a monolithic tree. When you add your information, you are not creating your "own" tree, but sharing that information with all other users. Further, FamilySearch Family Tree is entirely integrated, meaning there are no individual family trees with "personal" information. In a fundamental sense, what Family Search is trying to accomplish is totally different than either Ancestry.com or MyHeritage.com and any resemblance between either Ancestry.com or MyHeritage.com and FamilySearch Family Tree is superficial.
I will undoubtedly have more to say in the future.
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Dead End
In my choice of a title, I am not referring to the proverbial "brick wall" I am referring to the attitude of some of the people I talk to each day. I happened to be teaching a "basic" research class. The sole participant in the class began talking about her family and how she was trying to find the origin of a mid-19th Century immigrant from Ireland. Hmmm. Why was she in a basic class? So I decided she likely needed a little more advanced help and thought I could lay some ground work by asking which genealogy program she was using. I got a blank stare. "Oh," she said, "I don't want to use a computer program, I am perfectly happy with my paper forms thank you."
I suppose the class could have ended right there, but I said, "Perhaps you would like to have your genealogy in a program so you can share it with others?"
"Not really," was the reply. I don't want to get into all that computer stuff, I just want to find the origin of my great-grandfather." I wondered out loud what records she might use to achieve this goal without using a computer, but the comment went right past her. So I took a different tack.
Without seeming patronizing, I tried to explain the need for recording your information in a computer. (I do not wish to offend any of the researchers out there who are using paper records) but of course, that discussion went no where. I ended up demonstrating finding a census record online, whereupon the computer system crashed and I lost the copy of census record. Maybe I need to go back to paper? I forged ahead trying mightily to find a way to get her to agree that working on a computer was a good idea, if not absolutely necessary. I thought I was making ground, until she mentioned that she was using New.FamilySearch.org. In reaction I mentioned that New.FamilySearch.org was being replaced by FamilySearch Family Tree. That was the end of the conversation. A dead end, I might say.
I think I am running out of arguments to convince the paper users that computers have become necessary. Have I mentioned that the last time I calculated the number, it would take 80,000 pages just to do one printout of one of genealogy files? Sharing does not seem to be a motivator either. Some people are perfectly happy without touching a computer, but the erstwhile student did mention having a copy of the 1900 U.S. Census record and I was wondering where she got that without a computer. I couldn't imagine her sitting in front of a microfilm reader. She was however impressed when I zoomed in on the online version of the census record, just before the system crashed. She acted like that was the first time she had seen a document online. Maybe it was.
This post has no moral. No tight little suggestive admonition. It is just a baffled wandering into the surreal world of trying to help people with their genealogy.
I suppose the class could have ended right there, but I said, "Perhaps you would like to have your genealogy in a program so you can share it with others?"
"Not really," was the reply. I don't want to get into all that computer stuff, I just want to find the origin of my great-grandfather." I wondered out loud what records she might use to achieve this goal without using a computer, but the comment went right past her. So I took a different tack.
Without seeming patronizing, I tried to explain the need for recording your information in a computer. (I do not wish to offend any of the researchers out there who are using paper records) but of course, that discussion went no where. I ended up demonstrating finding a census record online, whereupon the computer system crashed and I lost the copy of census record. Maybe I need to go back to paper? I forged ahead trying mightily to find a way to get her to agree that working on a computer was a good idea, if not absolutely necessary. I thought I was making ground, until she mentioned that she was using New.FamilySearch.org. In reaction I mentioned that New.FamilySearch.org was being replaced by FamilySearch Family Tree. That was the end of the conversation. A dead end, I might say.
I think I am running out of arguments to convince the paper users that computers have become necessary. Have I mentioned that the last time I calculated the number, it would take 80,000 pages just to do one printout of one of genealogy files? Sharing does not seem to be a motivator either. Some people are perfectly happy without touching a computer, but the erstwhile student did mention having a copy of the 1900 U.S. Census record and I was wondering where she got that without a computer. I couldn't imagine her sitting in front of a microfilm reader. She was however impressed when I zoomed in on the online version of the census record, just before the system crashed. She acted like that was the first time she had seen a document online. Maybe it was.
This post has no moral. No tight little suggestive admonition. It is just a baffled wandering into the surreal world of trying to help people with their genealogy.
FamilySearch update 20 September 2012
I've decided my "updates" need to have dates so both the reader and I can differentiate between the updates as the occur and see if an "update" you might find through a search, is really a recent update or an older one. So now on to the FamilySearch.org update. Some of this information came from an online update presented to FamilySearch employees, missionaries and volunteers on 19 September 2012. Significant changes are promised for the future.
Historical Record Collections
There is no question that this resource continues to expand at a tremendous rate. Today, so far, as I write this post an index to over 6 million Wisconsin births and marriages has gone online. All I can say is that if you haven't looked at the new records added in the last week or so, you have missed millions of additional records. It may seem that the records are being added randomly, but if you look over time, you will see that a pattern emerges; records are being primarily added to areas where online access have previously been missing. In addition, it appears that records that are in the most demand are being added.
The 1940 U.S. Census was completely indexed some time ago. 163,000 people helped index the 1940 U.S. Census. As of the 18 August 2012, there were 38,654,888 records online.
Over 350 million names have been indexed online. There are over 161 million images online. 23% of the images in the Granite Vault have been digitized and it looks like the images will be completed within three or four years. There over 3 billion searchable names in the database.
Family Tree
This program which will replace New.FamilySearch.org in the near future is still on track. The last major update was dated 29 August 2012, but incremental changes continue to be made continually. I have been working on the program on and off since February and I am convinced that this program will become a fundamentally revolutionary development in genealogy. For the first time, there is one unified place to put information and sources where there is substantial effort to avoid duplication. As there are changes, I will keep providing specific updates.
Family History Library Catalog
There are some important developments, first, the integration of the various FamilySearch Centers and Libraries' catalogs around the world and the main catalog. If you search for an item in the catalog and that item is available in a local FamilySearch Library, eventually all of the holdings of all of the libraries will appear in the catalog entries. In addition, thousands of digitized books are being added online and the entries in the Catalog show the newly added books. By the way, as the books are digitized and made available online, the physical books are removed from the shelves in the Family History Library to make room for books that have previously been available.
FamilySearch Research Wiki
Of course the number of articles continues to increase and there are more than 68,000 articles. But numbers do not tell the story, a lot of the work in the Research Wiki goes unnoticed because it is primarily incremental additions to existing pages. This is another resource that cannot be ignored. Every day it becomes more valuable. There is no question that this the go-to resource for finding genealogical resources.
Billion Graves Index
This website, BillionGraves.com, has quite a ways to go to catch up with FindaGrave.com, but it is growing rapidly with over 1,800,000 gravesites located. I include it here because the index appears in the FamilySearch Historical Record Collections.
There are, of course, many more resources available on the website, such as the Forums, the Research Courses and others. But in these areas I have mentioned, there is most value being created.
Historical Record Collections
There is no question that this resource continues to expand at a tremendous rate. Today, so far, as I write this post an index to over 6 million Wisconsin births and marriages has gone online. All I can say is that if you haven't looked at the new records added in the last week or so, you have missed millions of additional records. It may seem that the records are being added randomly, but if you look over time, you will see that a pattern emerges; records are being primarily added to areas where online access have previously been missing. In addition, it appears that records that are in the most demand are being added.
The 1940 U.S. Census was completely indexed some time ago. 163,000 people helped index the 1940 U.S. Census. As of the 18 August 2012, there were 38,654,888 records online.
Over 350 million names have been indexed online. There are over 161 million images online. 23% of the images in the Granite Vault have been digitized and it looks like the images will be completed within three or four years. There over 3 billion searchable names in the database.
Family Tree
This program which will replace New.FamilySearch.org in the near future is still on track. The last major update was dated 29 August 2012, but incremental changes continue to be made continually. I have been working on the program on and off since February and I am convinced that this program will become a fundamentally revolutionary development in genealogy. For the first time, there is one unified place to put information and sources where there is substantial effort to avoid duplication. As there are changes, I will keep providing specific updates.
Family History Library Catalog
There are some important developments, first, the integration of the various FamilySearch Centers and Libraries' catalogs around the world and the main catalog. If you search for an item in the catalog and that item is available in a local FamilySearch Library, eventually all of the holdings of all of the libraries will appear in the catalog entries. In addition, thousands of digitized books are being added online and the entries in the Catalog show the newly added books. By the way, as the books are digitized and made available online, the physical books are removed from the shelves in the Family History Library to make room for books that have previously been available.
FamilySearch Research Wiki
Of course the number of articles continues to increase and there are more than 68,000 articles. But numbers do not tell the story, a lot of the work in the Research Wiki goes unnoticed because it is primarily incremental additions to existing pages. This is another resource that cannot be ignored. Every day it becomes more valuable. There is no question that this the go-to resource for finding genealogical resources.
Billion Graves Index
This website, BillionGraves.com, has quite a ways to go to catch up with FindaGrave.com, but it is growing rapidly with over 1,800,000 gravesites located. I include it here because the index appears in the FamilySearch Historical Record Collections.
There are, of course, many more resources available on the website, such as the Forums, the Research Courses and others. But in these areas I have mentioned, there is most value being created.
A MyHeritage Bonanza
A short time ago, I got an invitation to try MyHeritage.com's soon-to-be-released Record Matching technology. On my very first tries, I was impressed and that isn't very common. I don't usually do software reviews because I like all of the programs and I don't want to appear to hold favorites, but this turns out to be different. There is an obvious initial comparison with Ancestry.com's little green leaf suggestions of records, but the similarity is somewhat superficial. MyHeritage.com has come up with a new service that should impact many genealogical researchers in a way that hasn't happened previously.
As a result of by preview introduction, I wrote a blog post concerning newspaper articles about some of my ancestors. That material, the newspaper articles, came from the suggested searches made by MyHeritage.com. The description provided by MyHeritage.com says it all:
As a result of by preview introduction, I wrote a blog post concerning newspaper articles about some of my ancestors. That material, the newspaper articles, came from the suggested searches made by MyHeritage.com. The description provided by MyHeritage.com says it all:
Record Matching utilizes the current global pool of more than four billion records on MyHeritage, including strong collections in the USA, UK, Ireland, Australia and Canada, with more content being added daily for additional countries. Users can receive birth, marriage and divorce documents, gravestone photos, death, burial and census information, military, immigration and other types of records in their Record Matches. More information about the lives of relatives and ancestors can be revealed in Record Matches from the world’s largest historical newspaper collection licensed to MyHeritage (currently about 120 million pages dating back to the 18th century), books and other free text materials. Record Matches also cover the 1930 and 1940 US census records and the content from MyHeritage-owned family history websites, WorldVitalRecords and FamilyLink.The only problem I have seen so far is that its popularity may have exceeded their server capacity.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)