Ancestry If You're Listening

[@DrRobertKGreen]

Thanks!

[@GenealogyTV]

Dr. Green... Thanks for becoming an channel member and for the Super Thanks. I appreciate it.

[@MuchMoreMatt]

Ancestry needs a feature like Genetic Affairs! The ability to see how all your dna matches relate to your other dna matches would go a long way.

[@saraschneider6781]

THIS!

[@batintheattic7293]

Absolutely. Lots of features being spoken of here that already kind of exist - for one, it's really simple and straight forward to pick up the research on the last person you were looking at. We don't need special things for that. But to see how one match relates to another, or even if they do, without having to canvas both parties would be quite revolutionary. I have no problem with other Ancestry DNA users comparing my DNA to another match. I think it's generally termed as 'triangulation'. I'm related to shared matches, one of them with 10 cM and one with 20 (for example) but how much do they share with each other? Yes.

[@dtvdxer]

We're talking shared matches here. I was just about to post about this same "feature". And all the numbers are already calculated by Ancestry... all they need to do is create a way to display the data. I'm so surprised this has not been done. On a related note, I'd like to see shared matches displayed for cm's going below 20cm's... maybe 10cm's.

[@glenjones6980]

@@dtvdxer I've noticed a trend with mine where I get shared matches appear for people down to 12cM on my paternal side but on my maternal side 25cM is about the limit where I see shared matches. I have about 14k matches assigned to a parent and the cut off point for those is 20cM but not had an update since December,

[@rkrforlife2024]

I understand how the ethnicities are discovered and posted, but would love to quickly see other potential family members quickly with lower percentage estimated ethnicities, such as in below 10% to 1%. Im especially interested in the 1% range and what their percentages are.

[@conniemurdoch8528]

I like the idea of being able to notify people of mistakes. I have one which everyone and their uncle copied and it’s easily proved wrong by me because it’s my Dad. It has an Arthur Williamson (my Dads cousin) married to my mother with all the detail you can have (I’ve written a lot of things about the family that my Grandmother told me) and have her married to a dude from another branch of his tree and living a thousand miles from here.

[@kittyhouse1028]

i agree! I have several lines where someone must have grabbed the easiest person they could find on a census and posted it on their tree, Then everyone and their neighbor copied it and it is propagated all over the place, when very little research is needed to disprove the error. My own sister has done this and has our great-grandfather's parents wrong. I would like to be able to flag entries on other trees as wrong, but then, too, I might be plagued by other people flagging as wrong the carefully validated entries I have made on my own trees.

[@enjoyslearningandtravel7957]

I agree with you, because I know, for example how my grandfather’s last name is spelled on one of the translations from the original record they had the first litter is written an H instead of an N and it’s because the original document is hand written, even though it’s in English because it’s hand written it makes it look like it’s a different letter . So I see in peoples trees that they think it’s the right name but it makes it look very different when the last name starts with a different letter but I don’t see a way to correct that. I sent a message to Ancestry but it’s still not corrected. !! And I know the correct last name for sure because he is my grandfather, and I’ve known him for many decades

[@cruznk9]

It would be good if this was considered with high importance. I regularly see the same error copied across 100 and sometimes even 200 trees. They're being carried right across the net onto every genealogy site and it is very difficult to correct.

[@pauletteweaver7049]

I agree. I often send messages to people who have errors in their tree, giving them my sources or reasons why it is wrong. Sometimes they change it, and sometimes they ignore it but often they say thanks.

[@glenjones6980]

It's frustrating when what is often a fairly obvious error is copied so frequently but almost impossible to find examples with the correct scenario. My great grandfather is one of a dozen or so men born in the same area in the span of a decade, with one exception they are all related to each other to one degree or another and often appear in the same two or three streets on the census. I did spend quite a bit of time (and cash) on certificates in order to make sense of the census returns and news cuttings featuring the name. I can view dozens of trees that have him married to anyone and everyone bar the correct spouses. At one point there were more than 40 duplicate entries for him on familysearch, needless to say it took a while to merge them all but within weeks there were 20+ again. These seem to be the basis for many trees but as an Ancestry member for over 20 years with a public tree I have never had one message about him despite having is birth, 3x marriage certs, death cert and several news cuttings clearly displayed.

[@marilyncarey7957]

And more ways to contact matches. Or big flashing lights to say there is a new message. The little red dot is too easy to miss. My friend is adopted and so is his mother - now 91. We’ve tracked down all close matches with wonderful new relatives but there in one TC and the lady who is her manager who never reply. And don’t have trees with anything other than living people. TC is a daughter of Mothers full sibling - most likely a twin who were both fostered to seperate families. We want to find TC before mother passes. The manager visits ancestry regularly but never looks at or reads messages. Thanks.

[@bissells]

One of my favorite things about family history is old photos. When I find a photo of an ancestor it is like finding gold. I really wish that ancestry would divide the "photos" hints into images and people. Because so many people take photos of documents, the photo hints are mostly documents and not many photographs. With today's facial recognition it should be easy to separate photos that include a person and not just a document, headstone, building, etc. This would also go along nicely with your idea of matching photos. :-)

[@Pepsipenquin]

I would like to see folders added to the gallery to organize my super finds into subjects,. Would be very helpful.

[@GenealogyTV]

Ooh. Good one.

[@2williamsdad]

I would like to see Photo Hints broken down into something like four categories. For instance: 1. Documents/stories, 2. Memorials(Headstones, signs,...), 3. Pictures(Portraits, a human image), and 4. Icons. I think the AI could delineate those easily.

[@laZOETje]

I think that is kindo of an option but some, myself included at times, forget to click on the type of document when uploading.

[@ellieplantagenet9121]

Yes! I get tired of clicking on something and compng up with "Immigrant Ancestor", etc. Useful for the originator, no doubt. But.

[@copperweaver13]

Yes!! Please add a chromosome browser!! I use 23andme and My Heritage browser all the time, and find them to be some of the most useful tools for sorting out my matches. I was able to trace common ancestors with X DNA matches by using a combination of 23andMe's chromosome browser and a 23andMe match that had shared her Ancestry tree. I found that the match and I shared a 5th great grandmother because she shared her ancestry tree in her profile. It would be so much easier if I could do that type of comparison within Ancestry.

[@AnRuixuan]

I don't know if it's for privacy reasons, but I would love to be able to see how much DNA my shared matches share with each other to potentially confirm relationships. Since Ancestry lets you put anything as a user name, sometimes it's hard to tell which relative a DNA match is, so being able to triangulate via amount of shared DNA would be really helpful.

[@Mistydazzle]

Great idea! Other websites now offer that feature, where you can sort common DNA matches by closest relation to your match in question, or to yourself, even labeling the inferred relationship. That is very helpful!

[@vincentformisano1785]

I commented this exact thing once on ancestry's KZbin channel and received a reply from Crista Cowan from ancestry. She said it would be a privacy issue. Some other websites have this option and if ancestry allowed this option, it would be a game changer.

[@jtidema]

Yeah, I've heard they feel it is a privacy issue, but then why is it OK for FTDNA or other sites to do it?

[@xrystal]

@@jtidema it probably is related to the reason why they don’t allow uploads - which I believe is privacy/security as well.

[@ashleymitts]

23 and me does this

[@debbeb4499]

I would suggest instead of more colors for DNA coding, additional shapes. Many of the colors are very difficult to differentiate. Yes, yes, yes on the chromosome browser. One thing not mentioned that would be helpful is larger fonts for various things such as adding notes or comments in a person's profile. While it is possible to ctrl+ to enlarge it, the whole page enlarges and then needs to be reduced again to the more convenient size for regular use. While on the subject of clicks, it would be great if the options when clicking on a person in the tree view in order to add a relative would say"son" or "daughter" instead of just "child" since we then need to select "male" or "female" when adding the name. The less cumbersome method can be done from a person's profile page where the son/daughter choice is available, so it might be a pretty easy fix to do it on the tree view.

[@GenealogyTV]

Good ideas Deb

[@stevegilchrist4357]

Big yes to Chromosome Browser, but also and much simpler to implement, remove the 20cM limit on Shared Matches. Personally speaking I have only a couple of hundred matches closer than 20 cM and these are mostly down just two branches of my tree, nearly every time when I look at Shared Matches there’s nobody there. Ideally remove limit and give the size of the shared match and whether it triangulates. All of that should be real easy to do.

[@carokat1111]

Definitely agree with this. The 20cM limit has really reduced opportunities to confirm DNA connections. I'd be happy to see 20cM as the default, but would love to be able to search by 7cM or 10cM at my discretion.

[@Humphreyat86]

Definitely removing the 20 cM limit on shared matches would be a big improvement. Let us see the information for ourselves, including a chromosome browser so we can judge whether the shared match is likely to be real ourselves. I've let my Ancestry membership lapse for the time being because I'm researching Irish ancestry with very little documentary evidence & My Heritage's chromosome browsing feature can handle the lack of documentary evidence much better.

[@michellerickard234]

I have 3 suggestions: 1. Have the ability to "turn off" a record set in hints. Example: I really don't use the school pictures. It add a ton of duplicate hints (sometimes up to a dozen per person). It takes so much time to ignore each one by one. I know they are available and can go get them for a specific family member. 2. Be able to clear hints by record set. Example: Find-a-grave hints. 3. Correct the glitches in auto entry with census records. Example: when I accept a hint for the 1930 Federal census, the city is listed twice - Seattle, Seattle, King, Washington. There is a slightly different glitch with the 1940 census. I actually called Ancestry about this but got nowhere. I find trying to reach help at the help desk extremely frustrating. I know this is long and I thank you for listening.

[@saraschneider6781]

I'm fine with the yearbook pictures, but I do wish we could turn off multiple hints of the same thing.

[@carokat1111]

@@saraschneider6781 Amen to that.

[@TeresaDorey]

The number one most useful and easy to do request that I want (asap) from this list, is to be able to search my tree people by other means besides name. The most important one is by location. Too often I visit somewhere and miss looking a person up, because I was only thinking about one line of my family at the moment, but it would have been great to get everyone at the same time.

[@Mistydazzle]

Yes! Location!

[@GenealogyTV]

Agreed. I think this would be an easy one for them to do.

[@saraschneider6781]

Another idea: The ability to turn off hints by criteria that are pulling hints from the wrong people. For example a yearbook picture of someone with a different name or from a different state.

[@paulcavill4573]

I have a number of elderly ancestors that have now passed, but had taken a DNA test with Family Tree DNA some years ago. I would have liked to have got them retested with Ancestry, but obviously that is not possible now. I would love to be able to have the ability to upload their raw DNA data to Ancestry, even if I had to pay the equivalent charge of a new DNA test.🙏

[@daveb8886]

As someone who belongs to two separate Ethnic "Maternal; Paternal" groups, It would be a big help to me, to be able to search via Ethnicity.

[@Humphreyat86]

Searching via ethnicity & community could be very useful. I often want to search for DNA matches with ancestry in a certain region. Searching only by name doesn't cover that, especially as many matches have partial trees or no trees at all.

[@valauramiddleton686]

Someone may have suggested this before, but one ting I would like to see is a global replace format feature. When I first started with Ancestry I was formatting dates as mm/dd/yyyy, but then I learned the preferred is dd/mm/yyyy. Maybe something like in Excel where you would have a selction of formats to choose from. Same with place names and profile names a lot of mine have all caps last names). Having said that, if someone else knows of a way to accomplish this already, I'd love to learn how.

[@GenealogyTV]

Good idea. The algorithm takes care of the differences in dates...but you're right. I would be nice to have it consistent across the board.

[@LHickleIL]

I would agree with this as well. I am currently in the process of going through my entire list of over 12,000 names and fixing the date format to be consistent, as well as changing each name to have underscores if necessary instead of blanks or “unknown” and putting each surname in my preferred format of all caps. It’s slow work but really helps my OCD to be consistent.

[@L1...]

Being able to find ancestors by place ( city/town) would be great.

[@conniewiles3678]

Id like to add my thanks yo Ancestry. LOVE using it! My request is to separate people who have not done their DNA from those that have. So if I check if someone is a DNA match to me, I would be able to see “no, they are not related” different from “this person has not done a DNA test”.

[@CristaCowan]

Unfortunately, this is a privacy issue.

[@carylosborn1808]

Search by place would be awesome! Another thing would be that when you save a photo we no longer get duplicate hints to that same photo.

[@GenealogyTV]

Yeah... I suspect that if they did my photo matching idea, that would also double to help eliminate the same photo. I think it is like a two-fer if they did that.

[@Mistydazzle]

Yes, thank you! PLACE search is so important to narrow down your tree! So many families stayed in the same place & it's a big clue. And, I would also love to refine the family tree "List of All People" by PLACE search, to see which people lived in a certain area, together. Chromosome DNA browsing - a note to everyone, that I have found that a small segment of 22 seems to be a general population segment for English, Anglo-Saxon? origin. If someone matches me just on that little 22 segment, I know they are my paternal side, but probably really far back for common ancestor, because the whole area carries that segment. :)

[@vincentformisano1785]

I would love it if Ancestry would allow users to upload DNA test data from other websites such as myheritage

[@triciamason9542]

That is what I would like!! I did ask at 'Who Do You Think You Are? Live!' and was told that it wasn't going to happen. I hope that they will change their minds soon.

[@ha5mth]

Yeah it wont happen because they would probably loose cash.

[@BillPfaffenberger]

Chromosome browser is also my #1 desired addition to Ancestry.

[@justanothergigi]

Be able to set your defaults: 1) Set if you want USA or United States or United States of America. 2) Date format- choose how you want it defaulted on your screen. 3) On the Media Gallery be able to choose your default sort method. All of my image names start with a date so have to click "Title A-Z" to put them in order. And I have to do it EVERY time. So annoying for it not to stay how I have marked it.

[@GenealogyTV]

Good ideas.

[@redf7209]

yes its annoying for annoying less relevant things are in your face all the time. I'd also like searches restricted to country only to give you results for that country

[@BlueBird-vi8vo]

Also, when color-coding dna matches, it would be helpful to have a "check all" button. For example, when you find someone with a shared ancestor, and you want to color-code all of your shared matches with that person, it would make it so much easier to be able to just hit a "check all" button and automatically put a checkmark on everyone on that list, at the same time, than having to go down the list and manually put a check mark by each individual person to add the color.

[@GenealogyTV]

"color-coding dna matches, it would be helpful to have a "check all" button" AMEN. I have been asking them for this for a while.

[@jancook1425]

I would like a filter on using the groups to show all that ARE NOT included in a group because I missed doing some of the analysis. And they aren’t “I viewed” anymore so besides paging down and visually inspecting my matches, I don’t see the ones I’ve missed.

[@rridderbusch518]

@@GenealogyTV The color-coding dots could have *patterns,* too. Stripes, mini-dots inside, etc..

[@Sinan-Timuri]

I would like to be able to link invited people to trees, in the way you link the DNA kits to your tree also be able to link invited people to the tree so they have themselves as the home person. It would help a lot for those who aren't to familiar with ancestry, so they don't have to look where they are in the tree, but the owner and editors can link them to the tree. This would help a lot if you have lots of invited people in your tree so i would really love to be able to do that. And thanks a lot for all the help you've given me for my journey on ancestry! Lots of the things i learned, are from your helpful videos. So thanks a lot:)

[@AncientDirtbag]

The ability to search inside a tree for location seems like such an easy addition that would be so helpful. Like it's great to be able to search my DNA matches by location, but then I open up the person's tree and there are 12,000 people in it and it's virtually impossible to find the person in the tree from the location I originally searched for! I wish Ancestry would prioritize advanced feature development a lot more than they seem to.

[@Mistydazzle]

Yes! Location is SO important! Many of the mistakes in trees is because people attribute a same-named person, in another location, to that ancestor who actually stayed in one place all their life. Extended family can also be more readily identified when they are all living in the same location.

[@cruznk9]

Location search is a must when working with patronymic surnames.

[@baltojo]

Yes! I just submitted this suggestion yesterday.

[@ThePokiman]

My biggest wish would be that Ancestry finally lowers the centimorgan limit of 20 cM for common matches to a normal 8 cM, so that also common matches with cM values below 20 cM are displayed. This can actually not be difficult to implement and would help us researchers enormously! Please, please, please! Okay, a chromosome browser like Myheritage has would be great too, of course.

[@mattpotter8725]

I would like this too, maybe initially down to say 15cM, maybe 12cM (that's where my number of matches explodes), but as someone who works in software development, specifically database development, I can understand why they've done this in that there is just too much data for their back end to process and present to the front end that the user sees. I think this is very possible but would mean a huge amount of work making their database more efficient, which costs money they probably want to spend elsewhere.

[@TheEncourager366]

Thank you!!!!!!!!!!! Ancestry is my #1 DNA and research site. It's always Ancestry and an additional DNA company. With the new added features, I find myself just using Ancestry. If Ancestry could implement these user requests it would make a huge impact on the work of genealogists and family trees created using this platform. Thank you Connie for passing on, not only our requests, but also our gratitude for all that Ancestry has created to advance family connections. I have learned so much using Ancestry. 💯

[@debbiecrisp6872]

Absolutely agree with all that you've said! Thank you

[@kerriehawkins3686]

I love a lot of these ideas! I was just thinking yesterday that on thrulines, I wish that people that I have identified in my tree - so gone to their match and linked to a person in my tree, would also show up on my thrulines (not anyone else's). I have a lot of people who don't have enough people to trigger thrulines in their tree, but I have been able to identify them. So it would be nice to have the work that I have done also display in thrulines.

[@karendebruyne9592]

I would like some shapes for DNA groups (struggle with colour differentiation on screen). Also would like to see my matches side view, would help to eliminative half of tree research if we know whose side we match with.

[@melissasaylor2562]

These are all great suggestions but I’m quite surprised that I did not hear the one that I have had on my mind for a very long time, and that is to have a search feature for the Shoebox. As many years as I have been an Ancestry member I have accumulated LOTS of pages of ancestor and potential ancestor sources of information in my Shoebox so that it has now become an impossibility to find what I want as it requires endlessly scrolling from page to page! Adding a name search feature to the Shoebox does not seem as if it could be that complicated. Would you please also pass this suggestion along to Ancestry? Thanks!

[@saraschneider6781]

Agreed!

[@mareeevans5746]

One of my most wanted features is to have better search options and filters in DNA match lists. 1. Able to use NOT, AND, OR filters in the search. Eg search for all matches with no colour dot. Search for all matches with surnames Hopper AND Weston 2. The ability to search for a particular person in a matches tree (eg search by first and last name plus birth date and place) 3. Search for death locations (sometimes that's the only info we have on a brickwall ancestor.)

[@judimccoy3807]

Thank you for this opportunity to add my wish to your list. When I find a match that doesn't have any shared matches, I mark them using one of my precious limited groups and I also put a comment with the date it was checked, since there is no place the date is indicated anywhere as to when the match was made. So when I want to follow up at a later date to see if there are still no matches, it is very difficult to do. I consider these to be possible matches by chance. I have to sort the group by date but the oldest separation is at "over 3 months" old. This can become a large list and cumbersome to navigate. I would like to see additional time frames added to the sort by date feature, namely for over 6 months, 1 year, 2 years and 5 years. That way after 1 year and still no shared matched, I can hide them to help made my legitimate lists more manageable. Thank you for your consideration, Judi

[@GenealogyTV]

Thanks Judi. Thank you for supporting the channel too.

[@imzadi2u]

Two suggestions I've made in the past that I hope Ancestry can make in the future: 1. Please bring back the message folders. I manage quite a few trees and message lots of people. I used to have folders for each tree, and filed the messages in the appropriate folders, making them easy to find. Now since they took away the folders, the messages are just in date order, and I have to scroll through all of them to get to the one I'm looking for. 2. Since I manage quite a few trees, I'd like to be able to search all of the trees at the same time for a person's name. If someone writes me about a person, but doesn't know what tree or where they saw that person, I'd like to be able to put that person's name in a search window, and it will search all of the trees I manage and tell me which one(s) they are in. This way we wouldn't have to go into each individual tree to do a search. They could also expand this to do searches for other things such as places/locations, which would let us see if there are shared locations on more than one tree! Love the picture search idea!! Being able to upload a photo and being shown all the trees it's in would be amazing!

[@DonaldSampson]

These are great ideas, but for those of us on fixed, or low incomes, Ancestry seems to be overly greedy, and are pricing us out of this great program. It would be great if they would create a senior discount, say 25% or so. HELP!!!!

[@itbk30]

They offer half off subscriptions several times a year. There may be one coming up for DNA Day. If not then, they normally go on sale ahead of the winter holidays. I'm in the US and mine comes out to about $12.50 a month when I get the half off gift subscription in November. You can set it to start out to 90 days from the date of purchase, so my old sub ends in Feb and then the new one starts the same day.

[@CristaCowan]

If you are a member of AARP, there is a discount available.

[@teatimeandmore9442]

These are great suggestions. One more that would make my use of hints so much more efficient and effective would be the deletion of redundant hints. I cannot tell you how many times I have to hit "ignore" on hints about documents or photos that I put on Ancestry myself. And also, how many of the same hint shows up multiple times in the same group of hints. It's annoying to have to ignore the same photo or story 5 times. Thank you for a wonderful genealogy site and for listening to our suggestions. You're still my favorite site!

[@GenealogyTV]

Thank you.

[@carokat1111]

Totally agree.

[@carmelkeogh8917]

Hi Connie, my request is for managers of multiple DNA kits. My request is to allow those of us who manage many accounts - when comparing shared matches in the profiles of each DNA kit we manage, PLEASE can we order the list of accounts we manage into an order to suit ourselves? eg alphabetical, or a family group of names be consecutive etc. With thanks for your help in making Ancestry even better than it now is. The latest Rootstech innovations are a boost to we who love working on Ancestry.

[@KevinRHenke]

Adding colors is a great idea. Adding squares, triangles and other shapes would also help because sometimes the shades of orange and brown are too similar to distinguish.

[@forthehaulofit]

Thank you Connie an thank you Ancestry! I'm so super excited about the additional generation of side-view coming! Please give us an option to customize our pedigree view with a colorized background. THANKS!

[@GenealogyTV]

Yes... you can only change from light mode to dark mode in www.ancestry.com/family-tree/tools/treesettings

[@grantfahlman1815]

Connie, thanks so much for forwarding these ideas, based on the feedback you have received. One additional item I would like to comment on is what I see as being a serious weakness with the Ancestry product. I would really like to see Ancestry add a feature where the software is "looking" at existing records when new ones are being added (at any time). If it finds one that is a duplicate, or even close, it should have a warning and provide the ability to add (or not), merge, update, etc. the one/two records involved. Just a few days ago I updated the record for the wife of a relative, via her obituary or grave record, and I couldn't believe when I went to look at her record ALL the children from her husband's previous wife/marriage had been added/duplicated as being her children. Imagine my disbelief and frustration and I now have to merge every single one of those records; one at a time. What a serious pain in the... all over! 😭

[@saraschneider6781]

We are SO blessed to have you in our corner!

[@GenealogyTV]

Thanks

[@mgertp]

Adding a Badge" or some kind of alert to other members would bre very helpful. It should include the ability to attach an explantion. In the same vein, corrections made such as indicating a misspelled name in a census should not be listed as "alternative fact."

[@pegpowell2486]

Great ideas. Thanks for making our wants and needs available to Ancestry for their consideration. You continue to amaze me with your research of the entire world of genealogy and your willingness to share your expertise. You’re a gem.

[@GenealogyTV]

You’re very kind. Thank you.

[@bemist7954]

I love Ancestry, especially for the links (hints) to other records I might never have thought of, or didn't know existed. The #1 item on my wish list is the ability to sort a list of results by clicking on a field name at the top of the column (as in File Manager). It's especially important in a list of city directory results presented in random order. It would be so much more helpful to be able to sort by name, or date, or city.

[@cruznk9]

Lots of great ideas here. I would also like the ability to calculate the relationship between any two people in the tree.

[@motheryesser5544]

In Ancestry it would be helpful if the citations merge onto the document when it prints our or saved!

[@ed2850]

Thanks Connie! If only a few of these suggestions come to fruition, we will all be happy and more productive genealogists!

[@GenealogyTV]

I know, right?!!!!!

[@digne6502]

My number one ask: When I search documents, and I find one that I am uncertain about, I would like to tag it as undecided on a specific ancestor. At the moment all I can do is put it in to my shoebox - but only things that come through as hints can be marked as undecided. I end up with a huge shoebox and it’s not manageable.

[@GenealogyTV]

Interesting point.

[@sloppysmurf1231]

Yes! The unverified/verified idea is fabulous! Especially the VERIFIED. I want the contact of having my tree public, HOWEVER…. I don’t want people to think that some of my work is GOSPEL. But I have to have it on there to find substantiating evidence. I kept my tree private as long as I could - with the warning to those who I shared it with, as to how many generations back I was confident in. I can’t do that with anybody/everybody who looks at my tree with it being public.

[@allicmw557]

Yes. I would love to be able to search / filter my tree by location as well as other’s trees. It would be super helpful - especially when you get really far back in your tree. 🎉

[@marilyncarey7957]

Bigger description boxes. PLEASE! Some way of sorting addresses and actual street addresses. I know this is a problem because nobody dies the addresses correctly but even being able list people in one town would help. The street addresses are important to know who was living where, especially for places without census records. People move in the family next door or shuffle between families and there is often more than one family in a street. Love this video.

[@Holy_Moley]

Absolutely. Hopefully they will do those things. I would also hope they would add some extra things in the DNA area, link auto clustering. Thank you for putting our collected thoughts forward.

[@amandagunther8688]

I’m pretty new to this, so I may be missing something but, many times when I am researching a new person I click on the “Ancestry Members Tree” hint, not to blindly copy the info, but to see who else is researching that person. I click each member’s profile to see if we DNA match. If we do match, it gives me a some confidence that I’m on the right path since we’re both researching the same person. Then I view the DNA match’s tree to see their details about the person being researched. I can learn a lot, but it’s hard to tell is how person being researched is related to the tree’s home person (who is usually the DNA match themselves). I wish Ancestry would have a label underneath each of the Ancestry member’s tree in the hint section showing their relationship to the person being researched. So say I’m researching Bob Smith who I think is my 3rd cousin. I see an Ancestry member, Mary Anderson, has Bob Smith in her tree in and that me and Mary are DNA matches. I go to Mary’s tree and see Bob’s info, but I cannot easily (if at all) figure out how Bob is related to Mary. I wish Ancestry would say Bob is Mary’s second cousin twice removed or something. Kind of like a more in depth ThruLine.

[@cruzinbosco]

All of these things appeal to me! My greatest desire, however, is a dark mode. I work on my tree at night and the white is too bright for my eyes. As a result, I must rely on a third-party (Night Eye). I wouldn't mind doing this indefinitely, but NE makes all of the DNA group colors look very similar, so instead of 24, I can only use 8.

[@GenealogyTV]

You can go to dark mode. I use it. Go to Trees>Create and Manage Trees> Settings (on the right side of your tree)>Under Hint Preferences click Site Preferences>Trees (left column)>scroll down to the bottom under Background Color and choose Dark.

[@cruzinbosco]

@@GenealogyTV But it's only dark (grey, not black) on the trees, not on the profiles or on the DNA areas.

[@jtixtlan]

Flag for errors: What I have been doing when I discover what I know is an error on the user name and send them a message and explain what the error is and how I know it is wrong, and I provide any evidence that I might have. I have only done this occasionally. Some thanked me and corrected their tree, and a few did not respond at all. No one argued or expressed annoyance. I like the idea of a feature to point to a possible error with a field to provide the evidence and a summary.

[@MoongyrlGuru]

Great video with lots of information. I upload lots of photos to my tree and make sure I tag them. You know how many Joseph Lewandowski's are in the Latin German records? I wish ancestry had a translation feature for documents. It gets harder the farther back you go. I love the idea of flags. One tip I suggest is to always look at trees with lack of sources. That's a big red flag to me because no one likes to do the work, just copy others and assume it's true.

[@rjb6327]

4:00 Sometimes these colors are so close, you don't know which is the right one

[@IowaKim]

I've run into that too. Perhaps colors, shapes or shapes & colors together? Like yellow stars, yellow triangles...

[@justanothergigi]

And they have no true red. It is an orange red. I would like specific primary colors not shades.

[@MsBadd0g]

A text search for notes on matches would be awesome(particularly if the additional group colours aren't implemented), as would an indicator on the matches list pages of number of shared matches that you have with each match (something like a notifications icon). I don't know how much time I have wasted going into matches only to find there are no shared matches and therefore of little help to me. One final thing would be to ensure the match page on web and app are consistent - the ethinicity and shared matches tabs are reversed. Not a major issue but if you are swithing between the two, it would be nice for them to be the same set up.

[@feelswriter]

Or instead of more colored dots, add colored stars, etc.

[@barbarahawkins7930]

Connie, Thank you for all your genealogy help. I have a lot of info on my 4th great grandparents. I have everything but the kitchen sink now. I made numerous calls to KY archives, libraries, historical societies, Circuit courts, The Archives in Logan, KY gave me some land record info, Deed records, also the archivist/historian gave further info about folks coming to KY in groups because of the lawlessness and all types of why people would not dare travel to KY alone back in 1800-1810's. The archivist further told me that not only my William Blalock and his wife were there in Warren, KY but that a Jeremiah Blalock was there in Bowling Green in 1803 married there, lived there for quite some time as well as my 4th great grandpa. The Archivist, after studying the whole situation and finding certain records states that Jeremiah may be the older brother of my William or an uncle to my William. After the findings later in the conversation the archivist and a relation to my Blalock line are convinced Jeremiah and my William were brothers. Boy, that made me feel pretty good ! Now, the archivist states since Jeremiah was not the right age to take care of my William William had to live with a Farmer and Minister/Reverend of the newly formed Presbyterian Church in Logan, KY but lived in Bowling Green, KY in 1806 until my William turned 21. Now, why we have never found a marriage record for my William and wife Katherine was probably because the Reverend/Minister Harris more than likely performed the ceremony.... The Presbyterian Church there in the early 1800's more than likely did not have a place to put records unless it was with the Reverend/Minister Harris himself. Therefore, we may never know Katherine's maiden name after all the research. Still, we have a lot of other documents now and don't know what else to do YOU???? NO BURIAL RECORDS EITHER ! The End

[@amandagunther8688]

Another enhancement to the DNA matches list would be if Ancestry showed which exact search term triggered the match when you use the search field “Surname in matches’ tree“ with the “Include similar surnames” checked. For example, I want to search my match list for the surname “Koerner”. I know it’s spelled many different ways, so I click the “Include similar surname” checkbox. I then click on one of results and then look at their tree to try to find the person with the surname Koerner in their tree. The problem is though I don’t know what search term to use to search the tree - maybe Koerner, Körner, Kerner, etc. - I don’t know because I don’t know which exact spelling triggered Ancestry to return that result. Many times I can’t find it all, thus reducing the effectiveness of the surname search.

[@CristaCowan]

Instead of going into their tree to find the surname, just scroll to the bottom of the match compare page and you will se an alphabetical list of the surnames in their tree. You can click on any of those to see who exactly in their tree has that surname.

[@amyadams4579]

I need to add this coment. When I was scrolling down my email list. I had an email from myHeritage. They are introducing "Photo Discovery" that is doing a lot of what you mentioned.

[@Tyler-zo6xe]

Yes. Would appreciate the verification option. Ancestry makes it super easy to attach problematic persons, it would be nice to have a quick visual to alert to problematic entries that we wouldn't have to spend the time fixing later.

[@mommadirt3557]

I was hoping a popular suggestion would be the ability to see how our DNA matches related to other shared matches. 23andMe, MyHeritage, and several other popular sites have this function.

[@DrCatherine321]

Great suggestions! I realise I need to work more with learning new features that in the last months have suddenly appeared in the program. But that’s difficult! So I would love for Ancestry to do more tutorials. And work through how a new feature can be used and do so by several SLOW examples! I bet you I’m not the only one having problems with tutorials including more than one feature… Tutorials that goes too fast… Tutorials where I can’t get WHEN to use a new feature… We must be many millions of Ancestry users that don’t have English as our first langue, so tutorials in other languages would also be appreciared. But I agree with your final words, Ancestry is a phenomenal program that I hope will still be there for my descendants hundreds of years from now! ❤

[@saraschneider6781]

Connie has great ones right here!

[@user-kx4xk4hl3m]

Hi, it would be great if Ancestry could do what My Heritage does with shared matches. Give us the ability to see how matches are related to each other.

[@saraschneider6781]

FINAL idea.. the ability to merge tress AND their attached sources/hints. For example, being able to merge your Paternal and Maternal trees.

[@Lamb1204]

Great video! Adding my $.02 - I'd love to see the ability to add searchable name variations by creating our own "synonym" dictionary. The spelling variations for early Dutch names leaves me with duplicates that are nearly impossible to identify, especially in a large tree, especially with the number of variations possible with first and last names. Even "easy" names can be hard to account for: Corson, Corsen, Courson, Coursen, Korson, Korsen... etc. Ancestry does recognize Katy for Catherine for example, but not Elisabeth for Elizabeth or Patty for Martha.

[@TravelingBibliophile]

The photo match one would be easy, you can do it on google. I agree with the colour options, yes some of them are too close to one another. If we could search the matches of the kits we manage within our own match list, for those we are DNA matches for, especially our parents/grandparents, since their matches are our matches too we just didn’t inherit that bit of DNA. It could help figure out how some of our matches without trees are related to us.

[@GenealogyTV]

Yeah I thought about that (using Google for photo matching) and I do that sometimes, however, Google does not scrub the internal accounts at Ancestry (behind the paywall) for photos. I'm not clear on your second thought about DNA Matches. You can switch to DNA kits you manage and then use the shared matches tool. What might be interesting if we could some how combine two or more DNA kits in one view to see who is closer matched to the shared match list. This gets deep, I realize. Love your handle BTW, Traveling Photographer. I can appreciate it as a wildlife/nature photographer myself.

[@lornaescobar3828]

Would like to have Ancestry accept DNA from 23 and Me so that I could add my Mom’s DNA to her profile. This would be great in looking at great parents DNA info.

[@mattpotter8725]

That's never going to happen. They have by far the biggest database and want to sell their own DNA kits. I can understand your frustration though I think getting as many people as possible exporting from Ancestry to other platforms is what needs to be done.

[@lornaescobar3828]

@@mattpotter8725 would gladly pay for the price of a kit to transfer DNA data. My Mom is gone and I have no other way to do this.

[@mattpotter8725]

@@lornaescobar3828 Ok, I get where you are coming from now. They'd probably have to charge you the price of their kit, as much as I hate to say it, but yes, I hadn't thought of that scenario. Actually that could be a very good money making sideline going forward for Ancestry, in surprised they've not thought about this!!!

[@larrymcclain8874]

Me too, I would pay the full price of their DNA test if I could bring in the three tests from cousins done at FTDNA years ago, the first in 2009.

[@tonyeagle3912]

Wonderful suggestions especially the badges such as “warning” where you may not be sure of an ancestor and authentic source. Saves making a note in comments where it could be missed by others.

[@Chris-iz1rd]

I would love to see a fan chart as well. My husband made one for my mom last year and we were able to colorize it so she could see where cousins married and why her grand mother had three grand moms herself.

[@dthomas5667]

Along with the photo matching idea, also show a flag or hint to alert them that the photo has been miss identified.

[@billmanzke758]

How about a way to control tinting in each person's bubble in the tree views. That way it becomes easier to know what part of the family tree distant cousins come from when you aren't seeing the entire tree back to the home person.

[@GenealogyTV]

Interesting. Yes we had talked several years ago about being able to color the branches of the tree. I know FTM used to be able to do this. I like your idea... especially if it was customizable.

[@jaredlash5002]

Here is something I wish Ancestry would add, and maybe it's coming in the future given that they seem to be doing more research on how best to make use of the DNA matches. When trying to break through a brickwall using DNA, it is extremely tedious to manually group cousin matches. Ancestry has all of the DNA results and they ought to be able to figure out which cousins have overlapping sets of matching segments. When dealing with three or more cousins with overlapping matching DNA segments, it would be nice for Ancestry to indicate in some manner that they are all descended from a common family tree. Assuming no recent endogamy, there are still some nuances in how the common family tree should be indicated (two cousins can have one common ancestor couplet, and the third, fourth, etc. in the group might be related through a descendant of that couplet or from an ancestor of that couplet.) The point, though, is that they are all related in an identifiable subset of the greater family tree. Leeds grouping is someone decent at this, but this needs to be done manually, and making sense of the groupings manually is often fraught with challenges if there happens to be any endogamy anywhere down the line. Just give us more tools to manage the thousands of DNA matches!

[@GenealogyTV]

Yeah... I think they'll get there, but I suspect they want more data first.

[@annieg7440]

I love the idea about the instant ability of matching photos which have as much data attached to them as possible.

[@manxkin]

These are all great ideas. I had a photo for years and had no idea who they were, then one day SHAZAM! I found the same photo in a distant cousin’s media with their identification.

[@helenhershtjader5759]

Wonderful compilation - kudos. For pictures, I had the reverse situation. Someone had a misidentified photo based on the writing on the back of their photo. I had an identified photo of clearly same person in their younger years. Wrote a polite message several years ago flagging the issue, but the owner of the tree never replied. I have both photos on my tree properly identified, but who knows how many folks simply adopted that other photo ( and I wish there was a photo of that person!). Thanks!

[@GenealogyTV]

Thanks again Helen.

[@Knoxvilletim]

I'd love to see a DNA Cluster analysis tool like My Heritage and other Genealogy sites have. Thank you!

[@mattpotter8725]

Or, as I said in another comment I made, allow third party developers (maybe licensed ones) to develop tools to do this. I was looking at one of those yesterday and it seems Ancestry sent them a cease and desist notice. I get that Ancestry are protective of their data, but they seem to be actively stopping this from happening. I've been manually recording my matches and their shared matches and clustering in this way, which is cumbersome I can tell you, and I think Ancestry has spent time and money adding code into their site to kick people back out of their match list if they just browse backwards and forwards through their match list. As a software developer I can tell they've done this deliberately, and these tools are only automating what could be done manually anyway, and would probably after seeing all the analysis drive people towards actually subscribing to Ancestry when they want to confirm links between people in clusters. I think Ancestry is shooting itself in the foot. I don't think it gets DNA, Christa said this herself in her presentation at RootsTech, and I don't think they have the time, money, developers, or inclination to do what you and me would like, and there are people willing to do this for free!!!

[@sandramoore8903]

Yes! More Colors! I also like to know all of my ancestors, not just paternal or maternal lines but everyone in-between. More colors help with that. YES! That is a great idea! Being able to somehow annotate that a record could be wrong. They have that on Family Search, but I would like it to be able to come up on the trees, and the proof that something is right. I have no idea how to put an emoji on a tree. Instructions would be helpful. I sometimes see a DNA sign on the tree of one of my matches, and I don't know if that means we match at that person or what. Oh Yes! Where I left off last!!! That would be great! My mind jumps around constantly, and I will start researching one thing, only to get off on a tangent and end up researching something else! I also have a problem of being interupted by my husband wanting to go somewhere or do something for him in the middle of my research, and I have to take everything down because it generally times be out before I can get back. Such a pain! What is a red heart? and a red circle emojie? What does Null mean? Chromosome Browser is nice, but showing the exact place numbers that we match is better. O.K. A big thing for Ancestry would be, Don't tie people up in a membership!!! Not everyone can afford one. Have the membership end when their payment for a certain period ends. If they want to go back in and sign up for another membership for another month, 6 months, a year, they can.

[@jtidema]

Love all of these! It's a great list. And yes, THANK YOU CRISTA and the Ancestry team!

[@stmoose]

somethings i'd like to see added - 1. ability to add someone not directly to parents - example - in an obit the children and grandchildren are listed, but not specifically to who - so add the grandchildren linked to the grandparent (the person in the obit that has passed) - true you can add a 'fake' child and add all the grandchildren to that 'fake' person until you work out who belongs to who (which is currently done), == 2. ability to add the spouse in the same window when adding a person - a box/line for birth name and one for married name - true this is done now by just adding the person then adding the spouse == 3. in the find/list of all people/all people list a column for relationship to the current person - so name/birth/death/relationship (name/birthdate/birth location/marriage date/marriage location/deathdate/death location/relationship is probably asking for a lot :) == 4. in the pre-DNA days I would follow a line until I couldnt find anything else (cluster genealogy all the way) so I have a BIG tree (30,000+) where not everyone is connected in away that is really useful now - i have someone in my tree that is listed as 'Mother-in-law of 1st cousin of husband of sister-in-law of grand nephew of husband of 1st great-aunt of husband of grand niece of husband of sister-in-law of uncle of 1st cousin 1x removed of husband of aunt of wife of 1st cousin of wife of half uncle' - also have some 'unrelated' (who i probably got because a line was broken somehow or put them in with a note to another person (pre MyTreeTag days) and lost that note/person - so someway to 'break' the really long far off lines and move those to another tree or be able to tag them all - essentially trim the tree to direct line (probably should just make another tree - it's on the back burner :) == 5. a way to add people without a hard link (this probably can be done with MyTreeTags now, just havent worked out how - example people that are listed in an obit or marriage accouchement that may be related but when initially adding you dont know - helpful also if you are cluster genealogging (probably should say researching) a town/neighborhood/graduating class/military unit == thanks to ancestry and everyone making it easier to research at 2am in pjs - it's a long way from waiting for that 15 cent stamped envelope (SASE :) to confirm an ancestor

[@imzadi2u]

Another suggestion: When you are on a person's page searching hints, files, etc. and you have to scroll down, I wish the gray bar at the top of the page, with the person's name, birth date, death date, etc. would stay static so if we come across a record we want to compare to, we don't have to keep scrolling back up to the top of the page to confirm dates and places.

[@GenealogyTV]

Great idea. That’s like freezing a pane in Excel.

[@imzadi2u]

@@GenealogyTV Exactly!

[@lindab9608]

Two other things I want to see are ALL of the shared matches which includes people who match under 20 cMs and the ability to search messages by keyword. I used to be able to search by keyword and can’t understand why they took that feature away.

[@ardleighstreet]

I've been begging for more color matches in DNA for years. I have no colors left!

[@sheppeyescapee]

I would love to be able to filter my DNA matches by ethnicity. So it would make finding our Chinese and African matches easier to find among the predominately white American matches in our list.

[@mattpotter8725]

I think ethnicity is a red herring unless your ancestors have stayed put and not married outside of their ethnic group (which I'm sure does happen). The reason I say this is when I heard Christa talk at RootsTech she mentioned that in the ethnicity tab of the match page you were going to be able to see any shared communities you and the match had in common. At the time this sounded great, but the more I thought about it and saw it in practice it's pretty much useless for anyone with a common ancestor more than a generation or two away from you, which most people probably know already (ok, some won't, adoptees especially) Say someone who is a 3rd cousin does have common ethnicity and communities in common with you, they will have at most 2 out of 8 potential ancestors in which that shared ethnicity/community came from, and you go one generation further back and it's one or two out of 16. For those researching ancestors who migrated to the US or Canada I don't think it helps that much. I can understand why you might think this would help but the further you go back the more the chance of your DNA being from a wider and wider number of people, some of which may have the same ethnicity, even from the same region or area, which will cause confusion, and I think Ancestry needs to get away from thinking of DNA as an ethnicity based product rather than a genealogy one.

[@itbk30]

I agree! I have narrowed down my daughter's Nigerian ethnicity as coming through one 2nd great grandmother...who was adopted :( If I could quickly group any others who may share that same ethnicity, I may be able to find a common ancestor.

[@sheppeyescapee]

@@itbk30 I managed to narrow down my mum's Chinese to a great grandfather on her father's side. Unfortunately currently I can't get any further back due to difficulty getting records from Mauritius and not knowing his original Chinese name 😏

[@mattpotter8725]

@@itbk30 I can understand why you think ethnicity might help, and I'm not saying it isn't part, maybe a large part of helping discover further back, but unless the matches are in Nigeria the match could be getting their Nigerian from any one of their other 15 2x great grandparents, so is it really that much help? I just think there are better ways that Ancestry could facilitate being able to cluster your matches into groups. I just think ethnicity, whilst I'd still want to use it wouldn't be the first. I would say maybe a filter option rather than a sort option, like there already is for amounts of DNA, groups, tree types, might be useful.

[@itbk30]

@@mattpotter8725 I understand what you're saying. On most of my other family lines, comparing ethnicity is useless. For descendants of enslaved people who may have had kids who passed for white, it can help narrow down the options in the family tree from sixteen 2nd great grands to 2 if none of the test takers of the other fourteen 2G's have any Nigerian ethnicity. Being able to push back one more generation to find descendants of that 2nd great grand couple may help to identify which of their 4 parents had Nigerian DNA. Being able to sort through ethnicity quickly would be a help in that case. If ten of her 2nd great grandparents had Nigerian DNA, then of course that wouldn't be much of a help. It only works well when one branch can be identified with a different ethnicity than the rest.

[@dianashelton1371]

Yes Ancestry, we do Thank you. Great video, Connie.

[@GenealogyTV]

Thank you

[@DNAConsultingDetectives]

Yes!! Thank you for asking for these features!

[@canadianspring5417]

So many wonderful suggestions! Mine is a relatively simple request...let me know when another member is using my tree as a source. Frustrating when checking out a tree and finding only other trees as sources and then finding its your own tree.

[@CristaCowan]

Ancestry is currently rolling out a feature that shows you who is viewing your family tree. Does this meet the need you have or is there something more you are requesting here?

[@canadianspring5417]

@Crista Cowan that sounds interesting and I look forward to seeing that new feature. I'm referring to the "member connect" feature where it saves the other tree as a source on the ancestors profile. Personally I don't use member connect but it would be nice to know when I've been connected to by another member. Also would love a notification when a member saves one of my pictures.

[@CristaCowan]

@@canadianspring5417 Got it. Thanks for the feedback. I will get it to the teams responsible for those parts of the website.

[@caroljennings2278]

Here's an easy one, perhaps. When in my "All People" list, I wish I didn't have to scroll to the bottom of each page in order to advance to the next page or to a chosen page number. It would be very helpful if, while at the top of a page, I could choose to go forward or backward without having to scroll to the bottom to get to that feature. Also, it would be helpful if the next page started at the top, rather than the bottom.

[@BrownsFaninIowa]

100% yes to each and every one of those. Well summarized!

[@GenealogyTV]

Thanks

[@vikinggenie]

If Ancestry did a chromosome browser, they would be a dominating DNA company. I think they would get even more users. However, most people do not know unless you know this trick already of uploading the results to the other companies. Most do not and it is something I constantly have to talk to people about.

[@lev92870]

Thank You Connie, fantastic suggestions !!! I would like more tools for cousin matches, especially a chromosome browser. We experienced genealogist are still trying to solve our 20-year-old brick walls and the answers are in DNA if we just had the right tools. Unfortunately for me my family is full of endogomy.

[@deannabates1575]

The name badges is a great idea. I think that is why so many people use different pictures like trees, COA, flags, ships, etc. it’s a visual way of quickly identifying those people. I used the Betsy Ross flag to mark Revolutionary War veterans until I discovered the markers for life events. Now I have to take them all off as I run across them.

[@Historian212]

Thank you. As one of those clamoring for a real chromosome browser, I have to say: why are you apologizing and groveling about asking for what we want? Ancestry is a *business.* It thrives on our money. Lots of companies pay market researchers to get a better idea of what their customers want. So they can stay competitive in the marketplace. We’re not only paying Ancestry membership fees, we’re doing their market research for them. They’re not doing us favors, they’re cultivating their clientele. This is a business relationship. Without a real chromosome browser, many people spend more time on sites that have one (as you mentioned, MyHeritage, and also FamilyTree and GEDmatch). That’s not good for Ancestry. If Ancestry won’t provide us with a browser, how about giving us the ability to take the DNA info - with other users’ permission - and transfer it to a site that does? In many cases, we may know how to do that, but a match may not, and may not want to take the time to learn how. This is what AncestryDNA users want. So that’s what Ancestry needs to provide, to maintain good relations with both amateur and professional genealogy folks. This is neither rude nor disrespectful. I’ve used Ancestry for over 10 years. But no amount of pretty colors or extra badges will make up for this glaring lack in Ancestry features.

[@GenealogyTV]

Interesting comment Historian212. As the person who reads hundreds of comments, I was trying to keep the comments respectful. Sometimes people can get really rude when they are hiding behind their computer screen. My goal was to make this a useful and engaging conversation, not a town hall meeting. This is my happy place too. So I was speaking to the audience when I was saying we are not being disrespectful, in an effort for the comments that I knew would follow... would follow my lead in being grateful and respectful. Thanks for being one of those respectful and constructive persons.

[@maryherzog957]

I use the Filters in DNA matches a great deal to sort matches that I might actually be able to identify. I would love to see a "not" filter. For example I use the Star to mark all matches that I have already identified so would love to search by "not starred" matches with a public family tree. Along with that I would like the matches in the ThruLines view to be marked as identified somehow.

[@GenealogyTV]

Yes... I actually talked to them about this a couple of years ago. A feature called "Not in Common With" is used on other software. Now that they have grouping I'm not sure it is needed as much as before.

[@debralarrabee4530]

Wonderful suggestions, thank you, I hope Ancestry is listening! 🙏

[@SRHS83]

Just found you! Now I want to go back and watch more of your videos! I've been researching for over 30 years and as much as I use and love Ancestry, I'm always surprised to find out what things I can do and find. Right now I'm working on a project to find as many of the descendants of my earliest Newberry ancestors, Benjamin and Alice in New Jersey then to Illinois. Before I started I never imagined how prolific those Newberry's can be. LOL. Taking me over a month so far, though I don't always work on it. Happy searching!

[@GenealogyTV]

Welcome. Glad you found me.

[@joanthomas7079]

TY Connie for this great video and YES YES YES to all these so wonderful and useful features that would make Ancestry an even GREATER place to go to ,

[@GenealogyTV]

:)