APG-L Archives

Archiver > APG > 2003-06 > 1055829141


From: "Joan M. Lowry" <>
Subject: RE: [APG] wildcards at Ancestry.com
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 01:52:31 -0400
In-Reply-To: <034d01c3346c$9d2f9740$6701a8c0@KimberlysLaptop>


Kimberly and all

Yes, there definitely is still a problem with the wildcard searches at
Ancestry - but what I found and haven't heard from anyone else - is that if
you use four letters and a wildcard, rather than three letters and a
wildcard - you get entirely different results for the search. So, using
your example, searching for Dem* Owens in the census indexes, as you did,
finds 8 matches total. Searching for Demp* Owens finds 9 listings. Further
searching on Dems* Owens and Demd* Owens gets you four more hits, for a
total of at least 13, rather than 8!

I'm not at all clear why the census indexes wildcard searches work better
with the fourth letter added - but I have tried it with a really common name
like William Smith, in 1930, in NJ. Wil* Smith gets me only 65 hits for the
state. Will* Smith nets me 1031 hits for the name in NJ in 1930. So,
whatever the problem is - it is worth bearing that in mind when you are
trying to use wildcard searches on the censuses for now at least... And
then hope Ancestry is still working on the problem!!

Good Luck!
Joan

Joan M. Lowry
mailto:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kimberly Powell, Genealogy Guide at About
> Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 9:06 PM
> Subject: RE: [APG] wildcards at ancestry.com
>

> I can't speak for all wildcard searches, but in my experience and
> according to several posts I've read on the Ancestry.com message boards
> wildcard search works fairly accurately in the Global Search but is
> still not working as it should in the U.S. Census Search. For example, a
> recent search I tried in the U.S. Census search form for "Dem* Owens"
> finds my "Dempsey Owens" listed as "Demdey Owens" in 1810, but misses
> him listed as "Dempsey Owens" in 1800 and 1820; "Demprey Owens" in 1830,
> and "Demsy Owens" in 1840. The same wildcard search on Ancestry.com's
> Global Search form picks up all of the above (in the AIS indexes),
> however. The Global Search also finds him in the 1860 mortality index.
> No search brings him up in the 1850 census because, apparently,
> Ancestry.com appears to have missed most of the county of Edgecombe, NC
> in 1850 (only 187 matches for the entire county, as compared to 1544
> matches in 1840)!
>
> Kimberly Powell
>


This thread: