Searching Ancestry for WW1 Service & Pension Records

[RussT]

Has anyone else noticed some bizarre changes recently to the output layout when conducting general searches in Ancestry's so-called WW1 Service (Burnt WO/363) & Pension (Unburnt WO/364) Records.

I haven't used these in quite a while (I normally now use Find My Past), so I'm not sure when these changes were introduced.

Here are the outputs that I get when using the simple search example of "Smith" in the Surname search field and "Lancashire Fusiliers" in the Regiment Name search field. All other search fields are left empty.

First image below is the output page for the "Service Records". Not too many changes I think since I last used it  - new columns have been added for "Residence/Place" (perhaps that could be helpful to some folk) and Relation to Soldier (what's  the point of that?). I now have to reduce my screen size to about 70% to view all the output columns otherwise the right-hand most columns go off screen and you are then forced to use a horizontal scroll bar at the foot of the output screen to bring those columns into view (losing the left-hand most columns in the process).

Second image is the output page for the "Pension Records". A complete change. It doesn't show the surname or Regiment name (OK, I'm searching on Smith & Lancashire Fusiliers, so perhaps just about forgivable), no service number is displayed (unforgivable) and a silly Table of Contents has been introduced - which is a bit ridiculous and takes up so much space that only a few men on your screen is displayed forcing you to scroll vertically all the time to get through the 50 men outputted per page. Also there are the same issues with screen size as above with Service Records output.

Without a Service Number being displayed it's all but pretty useless even for the most basic of general research.

Thoughts? Solutions?

Regards

Russ

 

[brianmorris547]

Russ

I'm fighting it as well. Like you I always start with FMP.

Brian

[TEW]

I've noticed a different layout/format to the search results but not taken on board the details you mention. I'll have a test run in the  library later.

The Table of Contents makes life difficult and serves little purpose, lack of service number is a bizarre omission.

Incidently, have you muddled your burnt & unburnt refer?

TEW

[RussT]

4 minutes ago, TEW said:

Incidently, have you muddled your burnt & unburnt refer?

 Yes - easily muddled nowadays - I'll edit the post.

Thanks for having a test run - would welcome your feedback.

The only reason I had a go was because I received one of those regular Ancestry emails notifying me of their recent new/up-dated collections (see image below). I noticed that it included their WW1 "Pension Records". Not a clue what they intended to mean by that "up-date" - perhaps they have discovered some extra records down the back of a sofa - so I had a go to investigate and now I think the up-date is to the output screen as I described. Their search engine is already useless but the whole package is now even further compromised by having this ridiculous output layout.

 

 

[TEW]

Regarding the 'Update', unless someone knows the total number of records has increased to 2,139,613 I'd have to agree that the update is to the addition or indexing of each page within a file and the loss of a unit number visible in the search results.

The number is there but only visible in the preview or hovering the cursor over the result. You can still search by number only but the addition of the Table of Contents makes the search results view awkward and involves more vertical scrolling IE. all the dead space in your attachment. Using a big monitor at present so I don't have the horizontal scrolling problem.

The Table of Contents is odd. I've just checked a man and see that his Army Form B179 'Medical Report on a Soldier Boarded...etc.' is indexed under Medical Forms and Service and Casualty. That is, a page from that form could be under either heading.

I'd want to start at the front and work through anyway just to see what there is rather than rely on someone else's interpretation.

The numbering thing is bound to cause more problems. There are many mis-transcribed numbers where a 2 becomes a 5 or a 1 becomes a 7. There are occasions where being able to scan down a column of numbers could help you pick out a number as a potential mis-transcription.

Have they actually gone through the whole lot just to add the table of contents? I could have suggested a better use of such a resource!

TEW

[Dai Bach y Sowldiwr]

I've noticed the changes, but having a wide screen monitor helps a lot. However, am I right in thinking that only one service number is now displayed, rather than all as previously.

[Allan1892]

I have subscribed to Ancestry for over 20 years (and still do) in addition to Find My Past for over 20 years. I noticed the changes on the MICs and the Medal Rolls a week or so ago but didn't look at the service records (always use FMP for this as the images tend to be clearer). Over the last few years, Ancestry have b******d up searches on 'normal' family tree searches / results as well due to their so called improvements to the system. If it wasn't for the fact that the Medal Rolls are only on Ancestry, I would have to give serious consideration about not renewing my subscription next year.

[charlie962]

5 minutes ago, Allan1892 said:

If it wasn't for the fact that the Medal Rolls are only on Ancestry

But have you seen that Findmypast now have the medal roll transcripts created(?) by NavalMllitaryPress. Not the same as seeing the original rolls but a great search tool, particularly with Findmypast's better search engine (IMO). 

 

[Allan1892]

6 minutes ago, charlie962 said:

But have you seen that Findmypast now have the medal roll transcripts created(?) by NavalMllitaryPress

I wasn't aware of the transcripts on FMP -- just had a look for them but can't come up with anything. Do you have the full title of the database or can you give me a link?

[RussT]

1 hour ago, Allan1892 said:

I wasn't aware of the transcripts on FMP -- just had a look for them but can't come up with anything. Do you have the full title of the database or can you give me a link?

Here:

Search Results for Britain, First World War Campaign Medals | findmypast.co.uk

Thanks for all the feedback.

I think Ancestry focus on those users who are just looking for a single record of a known specific person rather than users like many of us who do much more generic research where the use of wildcards etc come into their own - making FMP's search engine and output far superior.

It wouldn't surprise me if Ancestry were to soon "up-date" their Service (Unburnt) Records output format to look like their newly altered Pension (Unburnt) Record output in a similarly silly way.

These changes to Ancestry just re-enforce my view not to use them for WW1 Service/Pension Records - but I am still mad enough to subscribe because they have the War Diaries (even though these are now free on TNA), the Medal Rolls (even though there is now an FMP option as noted above) and the Soldiers' Effects Records (which are not on FMP or anywhere else).

Regards

Russ

 

 

[charlie962]

4 minutes ago, RussT said:

These changes to Ancestry just re-enforce my view not to use them for WW1 Service/Pension Records - but I am still mad enough to subscribe because they have the War Diaries (even though these are now free on TNA), the Medal Rolls (even though there is now an FMP option as noted above) and the Soldiers' Effects Records (which are not on FMP or anywhere else).

I agree totally.

[charlie962]

2 hours ago, Allan1892 said:

wasn't aware of the transcripts on FMP

Discussion here

(Thought I'd posted this a little earlier but must have forgotten to save it??)

 

[Allan1892]

1 hour ago, RussT said:

Here:

Search Results for Britain, First World War Campaign Medals | findmypast.co.uk

Many thanks Russ

1 hour ago, charlie962 said:

Discussion here

Must have missed your November post on the subject, thank you.

[Keith_history_buff]

18 hours ago, RussT said:

Has anyone else noticed some bizarre changes recently to the output layout when conducting general searches in Ancestry's so-called WW1 Service (Burnt WO/363) & Pension (Unburnt WO/364) Records.

I haven't used these in quite a while (I normally now use Find My Past), so I'm not sure when these changes were introduced.

Here are the outputs that I get when using the simple search example of "Smith" in the Surname search field and "Lancashire Fusiliers" in the Regiment Name search field. All other search fields are left empty.

..... image is the output page for the "Pension Records". A complete change. It doesn't show the surname or Regiment name (OK, I'm searching on Smith & Lancashire Fusiliers, so perhaps just about forgivable), no service number is displayed (unforgivable) and a silly Table of Contents has been introduced - which is a bit ridiculous and takes up so much space that only a few men on your screen is displayed forcing you to scroll vertically all the time to get through the 50 men outputted per page. Also there are the same issues with screen size as above with Service Records output.

Without a Service Number being displayed it's all but pretty useless even for the most basic of general research.

Thoughts? Solutions?

Regards

Russ

 

 

Thinking aloud, I wonder if they are using this as a prototype for next year, when WW1 soldiers who served after 1920 and who have service records within the WO420 series of British Army other ranks' service records, are having a minimum content scan.

Quote

Our licensing partner for the first tranche of records, Ancestry, will publish newly opened records on an annual rolling basis as they reach 100 years old.

When will you publish the MOD service records online?

Our licensing partner for the first tranche of records, Ancestry, will publish the records on their platform in phases between 2024 and 2029. We will update on launch dates and details as the project progresses.

How much will it cost to access the MOD service records online?

The first tranche of service records will be available as part of Ancestry’s Premium (all UK and Ireland) and Worldwide (everything on Ancestry) membership packages, providing subscribers with unlimited access to view and download images and indexes.

The first tranche of service records will also be available on a pay-per-view basis, without an Ancestry subscription.

 

 

 

This is the key element, which I had failed to copy across

Quote

Are you digitising everything in each MoD service record?

No – due to the scale of the project, and the nature of the information that records contain, it is not possible to digitise each service record in its entirety.

The information being digitised includes:

• Attestation forms: structured information about when the individual joined the service
• Statements of Service: providing details of which units an individual served in, including dates
• Service and Casualty forms: providing rich information of the individual’s time in service, including details of the regiment(s) in which they served and where they were posted.

Medical forms and disciplinary and conduct forms will not be digitised as part of this project as these records contain sensitive personal data.

 

[Keith_history_buff]

More info on this thread 

 

 

[RussT]

Thanks for posting. Whatever the reasons might be, the result of their efforts always astound me - I would "love to meet" and understand the mindset of the sort of people they use to consult on how they should database these types of records, the search engine architecture/algorithms, the manner in which the information is retrieved and how it is then formatted for output. 

Regards

Russ

 

[Keith_history_buff]

I have been thinking further about this:

In the past, FMP have in my opinion provided a better service, and a better user experience. There is one thing that they have been able to do in the past, when they had the monopoly on it:

Pay-per-view for items in general in the noughties (as an alternative to subscription), viewing the 1911 Census in 2009, viewing the 1939 Register from 2015 onwards, and viewing the 1921 Census.

 

I am wondering if the new setup will enable pay-per-view of service records of the records in 12 months time, to be enabled. (In theory, the first set of records go live in late 2024.) I don't believe Ancestry has pay-per-view facility. Perhaps the compartmentalisation of data is needed to do this? I'm not a system architect, so cannot comment on the technical stuff. The categories seem to match, though.

I think I am on the same page as yourself, insofar as I have found myself questioning the logic behind some of the search results, and find the search results page to be abysmal. Why is so much key data hidden by the search results, forcing the user to go through line by line, I have wondered.

[RussT]

34 minutes ago, Keith_history_buff said:

have found myself questioning the logic behind some of the search results, and find the search results page to be abysmal. Why is so much key data hidden by the search results

We live in the Information Age - yet information has zero value if information is not searchable, not retrievable even if found and not legible even if found and retrieved.

Ancestry seem often to fail on all steps of the process yet no doubt spend millions in turning paper information into digital information, which is the whole point of the exercise in the first place.

I find it quite incredible that our supposedly responsible custodians/repositories of such important sources of information e.g. TNA, MOD etc do not do due diligence on these matters on the organisations they select to undertake these activities.

Russ