Why do people use Ancestry sources that are not sharable?

Question

I apologize if this is inappropriate, but I am becoming increasingly annoyed by those who use Ancestry sources to which one must subscribe in order to view. I usually just circumvent to Family Search to get (free!) information, but lately I am finding more and more Ancestry sources there, too. For marriage records and Censuses! Are these people not aware that these sources are and should remain obtainable without cost on the very website they are using? Why would anyone put an Ancestry 1850 Census record source on a Family Search profile? Are they daft or do they support Ancestry's attempt to monopolize and monetize genealogy research?

Sorry I felt the need to vent here publicly, but it really irks me and I wonder if anyone else is troubled by this growing trend.

Laurie

Comments

If you have a big database on Ancestry…30,000 profiles. Won’t start over on Family Search.

Answer 1

Hi Laurie, for some of us it's because we much prefer to work at Ancestry. The format and search algorithm of the website is more user friendly. So if I can have a link to the same source at Ancestry, I want it.

Since I work on Ancestry the most, most of the sources I add to WikiTree will be from there. (the new Sourcer extension gives a sharing link so others can view it too). If I have both FS and Ancestry links available, I'll put both on the profile so people who prefer one over the other will have choices. FS source links are constantly changing too which makes them unreliable.

You get what you pay for when it comes to anything. I pay for Ancestry because I get way more than I do at free websites like FS.

Comments

Unless that site is WikiTree. 

---

That goes without saying :-) I meant genealogy websites where you're looking for records.

---

I have had to spend several hours finding accessible sources for profiles added to my ancestors by some one (not you) who only reference Ancestry links behind the pay wall, that were not visible to me or many others.  There is guidance on sourcing in the Help pages that advises against Ancestery, unless you C&P the entire record so that we don't have to open any link to see chapter and verse.

Answer 2

Hello Laurie,

When the only source available is from Ancestry.com, then it should be used. There is a way to share the image to be viewed for free. You open the document and you click on the 4th image down, the arrow (points right) which is the share button. Then a whole bunch of selections pop up. You select the "Copy Link" and this is what will come up: https://www.ancestry.com/sharing/5230979?mark=7b22746f6b656e223a22524a42453232475763344c576c48445459386955782b3441662b434b4e6a53704b577536543454756a614d3d222c22746f6b656e5f76657273696f6e223a225632227d

You can hide the link like this: [https://www.ancestry.com/sharing/5230979?mark=7b22746f6b656e223a22524a42453232475763344c576c48445459386955782b3441662b434b4e6a53704b577536543454756a614d3d222c22746f6b656e5f76657273696f6e223a225632227d Abstract of Will]

i hope this help you.

Missy 

Comments

Hi Missy
I appreciate that Ancestry probably has a better search facility for that source and that might be a reason to use Ancestry's version, but it is freely available elsewhere.

H. Husted has created a free space page on WikiTree (thanks H.) for that series, including links to databases where it is available, both free and paid, and the page you linked to above is available in Internet Archive

Answer 3

Ancestry and Family Search don't always have records indexed the same and sometimes the only place I can find a census record is at Ancestry due to really bad indexing at FamilySearch.  There are a lot of records at Ancestry that aren't also available at Family Search also.

Answer 4

I think there were some good responses on why people use ancestry, but I want to offer another point that might give you more perspective.

Sources serve only one purpose: to tell you where the information came from. It is nice to have a viewable link that you can view yourself when you have questions about the source, or find a conflicting record and want to compare. But, the purpose is to tell you where you can get the information.

While links are nice, they will eventually be broken. As the database grows, it will become harder to keep all links actively working.  Have you ever clicked on a Wikipedia link to find it is no longer working?

Despite the inevitability of links getting broken, all is not lost. If Ancestry disappears, the link will still tell you where to get the information. For example, the census records contain the year, roll and page number where the information can be found. This will remain valid, and you could go to the archives in person and find it. That is the value of a source.

Answer 5

lately I am finding more and more Ancestry sources there, too. For marriage records and Censuses! Are these people not aware that these sources are and should remain obtainable without cost on the very website they are using?

If only that were true. Frequently I can't find a record on FS and I'll look for it on Ancestry. Things like a census records should be on FS, but if the search algorithm doesn't find it, it's not very obtainable. 

Sure, once I have the record, I could go back to FS and force a different search to find the actual page and get a link to it. But already have a link to where I saw the record and I have a copy of the record. The citation will tell you everything you need to know to find the record if you would like to get it from a different repository than the one I used. I don't find it a great use of my time to go digging around for links from other repositories, just for the sake of it.

Maybe your real gripe is bad citations, like the pre-written ones from various websites that don't actually tell you about the specific record that was consulted? You know, the ones that says things like "FamilySearch database of marriage records from Tennessee county clerks, 1703 to 1999, linkylinklink."

Bad citations are a complaint I can get behind.

Answer 6

Others have given some helpful responses. Some further observations.

1. It is perfectly acceptable to use a subscription site for finding information. It is important, though, to make sure the relevant information is placed on the profile.
2. Many transcriptions on subscription sites have linked images of the actual records. Familysearch does for some records, but much less often. There are many errors in transcriptions on the main genealogy sites, so checking an image of the actual record can be quite important.
3. Sets of records on the subscription sites - and any linked images of records - often contain more information than is available on Familysearch.

When I cite a record on a subscription site (in my case, most often FindMyPast), my own practice is to cite Familysearch (or another free site) as well if I can easily find a record there and have time. Besides the obvious advantage that this means that people without a subscription can see what is on Familysearch, this has other benefits. It gives a second weblink if:

• a set of records is removed from a site - and I have seen this happen
• the web address for the record on one of the sites changes
• a site disappears - we cannot assume that any site will exist for ever

Answer 7

Thank you everyone for taking time to respond to my whining. Of course I understand that some prefer Ancestry for the above reasons. I tried Ancestry and hated it because I was already accustomed to WikiTree and Family Search. If I had used Ancestry first, I probably would not have bothered spending so much time on WikiTree or perusing the records database on Family Search.

My complaint is that Family Search is being hijacked by Ancestry. I get peeved when I look at a Fam Search profile where someone has attached multiple unsharable Ancestry links to sources for Findagrave, Census, marriage, death, etc.--sources readily available on Family Search itself.

And about links--Yes they are volatile and tend to disappear. I forgot to complain about link sources that appear on a profile as simply [1] where we have no choice but to click and see what might be offered. Haha I know I sound like a grumpy old woman.

I love WikiTree! I am truly grateful to you all!

Answer 8

Hi Laurie, I fully understand that you are annoyed - I use a lot of Ancestry sources and usually create a share link with the WikiTree Sourcer, but it seems that it does not always work (and in these few cases I want at least to give the source at all)