tgrubb Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 Hi I haven't actually searched the service records for my remaining men - but if my eyes aren't deceiving me, Ancestry is stating that all service records are now up Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Marshall Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 It certainly looks like some records have been put up recently, but just on my small sample of names, the coverage is patchy at best. Time to dig out the old lists again, though, all the same. Edit: a quick search of the names I had brought no results, but searching by place name was more successful, turning up one man I knew of, and three names I knew nothing of before. I'm hoping this is a phased release and not the end of it all there are huge holes in the listings and, sadly, the indexing is still rough. Cheers, Nigel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark f Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 Just found my Granddad. No rest tonight when I get home from work. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archangel9 Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 Definitely been updated and Ancestry claim the database is now complete - "About British Army WWI Service Records, 1914-1920 This database contains the surviving service records of non-commissioned officers and other ranks who served in WWI and did not re-enlist in the Army prior to World War II. With the final release, this database now contains the entire service records collection. The type of information contained in these records includes: name of solider, age, birthplace, occupation, marital status, and regiment number." John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Baker Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 First one I looked at - my grandfather - has his middle name wrong. Brilliant work, as ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveE Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 At long last . I Know what I'll be doing for the next week or so now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tgrubb Posted 4 November , 2009 Author Share Posted 4 November , 2009 Don't get your hopes up - i've just spent the last hour looking and none of my remaining men appear to be there. In fact there are so few Prettys, Pressnells, Wheatleys and Swans I am beginning to wonder exactly what Ancestry has loaded.... Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Nulty Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 They've definitely loaded a substantial number of records. One of my previous search criteria returned 623 hits, now returns about 1200. But it would appear that there are also some additions to the previously published A-N range, so it might be worth rechecking those which you have failed to find on earlier searches Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apwright Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 Good news, but there's definitely something wrong with the search function. e.g. from the Ancestry.co.uk home page, type WRIGHT in the Last Name box and hit Return. It shows hits in all sections including 7,196 under Service Records (good so far - used to be about 3!). Click on "British Army WWI Service Records, 1914-1920" and it shows you the first 10 hits. Then go down to the Refine Your Search bit, and again type WRIGHT in the Last Name box and hit Return. This time it comes back with only 455 hits, and these appear to be men with Wright as one their forenames! Entering First Name Albert, Last Name Wright, gives no hits even though one of the first hits of the 7,196 was an Albert WRIGHT! (And entering Albert WRIGHT from the home page gives 253 hits in Service Records...) Would someone be kind enough to double-check this, please? But I think the Search within the Service Records section is b*ggered! Adrian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattgibbs Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 This database contains the surviving service records of non-commissioned officers and other ranks who served in WWI and did not re-enlist in the Army prior to World War II. Does this mean that if someone re-enlisted after 1920 but came out before 1939 - ie no ww2 medal entitlement etc, then they won't be listed? Anyone know if there is any figures out there about this. Regards Matt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tgrubb Posted 4 November , 2009 Author Share Posted 4 November , 2009 Adrian This mirrors exactly what I was finding. My searches on surnames were bringing back only hits on first or middle names. Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apwright Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 Thanks for the confirmation, Tim! Actually, go into the Service Records section and enter anything you like in the First Name box, e.g. Fred, leaving Last Name blank. How many results? None for me! Adrian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eviltaxman Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 Good news, but there's definitely something wrong with the search function. e.g. from the Ancestry.co.uk home page, type WRIGHT in the Last Name box and hit Return. It shows hits in all sections including 7,196 under Service Records (good so far - used to be about 3!). Click on "British Army WWI Service Records, 1914-1920" and it shows you the first 10 hits. Then go down to the Refine Your Search bit, and again type WRIGHT in the Last Name box and hit Return. This time it comes back with only 455 hits, and these appear to be men with Wright as one their forenames! Entering First Name Albert, Last Name Wright, gives no hits even though one of the first hits of the 7,196 was an Albert WRIGHT! (And entering Albert WRIGHT from the home page gives 253 hits in Service Records...) Would someone be kind enough to double-check this, please? But I think the Search within the Service Records section is b*ggered! Adrian Adrian - I've had the same "fun" too. Typical Ancestry fiasco in my books!! I've got over 100 medals to Turner and not one is listed. I've been waiting 18 months for this anticlimax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IPT Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 You gave them our old search engine for a knock-down price, didn't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eviltaxman Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 I had to pay them to take it away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Reed Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 Good news indeed. I use the 'old' search engine, as the new one seems to miss a lot of the records. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
June Underwood Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 How did anyone know these records were supposed to have been added? My Ancestry Home page and the Military page still say that the Service records are "updated to N" and there is no notification of any additions. I've tried the refresh button and this makes no difference. I've got the same problems as everyone else when doing a search. If you change back to the 'old' search does this change the census pages too, or just the Military? June Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Thompson Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 Hi there, I have just checked my grandads William Thompson and its there, although I already had a copy of it about 2 1/2 years ago, I just thought I'd check, now to check some others. Maybe just maybe we have got through to them as I have written to them voicing disapproval. Cheers Roger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebie9173 Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 (On old search) I cannot search on Regiment and/or number. It always returns no records. They've f*#%£d it up again it seems .... I would say unbelievable.... but it's not. Steve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Lees Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 I can't find any records at all if I seach on "regiment", but using the old search it brings up thousands. I may be way for some time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebie9173 Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 It seems that the search that comes up at the bottom of the results is the one that is not working. The front page (old) search appears ok - notwithstanding the Indexing! Steve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Thompson Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 I only tend to use the old search anyway and just checked using Y&L and its brought 2485 of them up. Cheers Roger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ralphjd Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 Found nine of mine using the "old" search, not using the records/pension section. Ralph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KONDOA Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 Found another dozen using the old search engine. Well chuffed, over 50% of my men have an SR now. Roop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshdoc Posted 4 November , 2009 Share Posted 4 November , 2009 are they going to have a free november like lasy year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now