I am looking for Christenings for offspring of John Sunderland of Wakefield, around 1760-1780
I search for 'Sunderland', 'Yorkshire' 1770+/-10 and this throws up lots of results in Wakefield, Horbury, Haworth etc
However, when I restrict results to just Wakefield, I get No results
Any suggestions why, and how do others get round this?
We welcome any query on Who When Where. If you have previously posted it on another forum (including the old WDYTYA forum), please state this in your opening post - this will save people redoing the research which has been done before: they can look at it and possibly go further with it.
Resticting Search on Ancestry
Re: Resticting Search on Ancestry
I would assume the search is taking into account Wakefield District rather than simply the city of Wakefield, Wakefield District covers an area of about 338 square kilometres and takes in many surrounding small towns and villages.
It may help to try searching using "Wakefield City" but I have not experimented to see if this changes anything.
Cheers
Guy
It may help to try searching using "Wakefield City" but I have not experimented to see if this changes anything.
Cheers
Guy
As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.
-
Mick Loney
- Posts: 371
- Joined: 15 Jun 2020, 07:27
Re: Resticting Search on Ancestry
Guy,
You seem to have missed the point. Restricting it to Wakefield, is not restricting it to Wakefield District, as I would then expect to see results for Wakefield, Horbury etc, but I don’t get any results whatsoever.
You seem to have missed the point. Restricting it to Wakefield, is not restricting it to Wakefield District, as I would then expect to see results for Wakefield, Horbury etc, but I don’t get any results whatsoever.
-
AdrianBruce
- Posts: 358
- Joined: 14 Jun 2020, 18:57
- Location: South Cheshire
Re: Resticting Search on Ancestry
Oh? I got 18.... 
Search parameters...
Results....
Don't ask me....
Search parameters...
- Screenshot 2022-06-12 205910.jpg (64.15 KiB) Viewed 682 times
- Screenshot 2022-06-12 205937.jpg (58.42 KiB) Viewed 682 times
Adrian Bruce
-
Mick Loney
- Posts: 371
- Joined: 15 Jun 2020, 07:27
Re: Resticting Search on Ancestry
Adrian,
As far as I can see, your criteria was same as mine, yet you got 18 I got none - I think this needs further investigation. Something for my todo list tomorrow.
Thanks for feedback
As far as I can see, your criteria was same as mine, yet you got 18 I got none - I think this needs further investigation. Something for my todo list tomorrow.
Thanks for feedback
Re: Resticting Search on Ancestry
I get 28 for Wakefield alone
- Sunderland Wakefield.jpg (121.86 KiB) Viewed 668 times
As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.
Re: Resticting Search on Ancestry
In my experience Ancestry gives you different answers at different times, I much prefer to use FMP.
I recently found a record on Ancestry that I stupidly forgot to save and it took me ages to find it again when I realised later I hadn't saved it! Perhaps the sheer quantity of records available now is impacting on the search?
In the same way if looking for a newspaper article BNA's search is superior to FMP.
I recently found a record on Ancestry that I stupidly forgot to save and it took me ages to find it again when I realised later I hadn't saved it! Perhaps the sheer quantity of records available now is impacting on the search?
In the same way if looking for a newspaper article BNA's search is superior to FMP.
Sally
-
AdrianBruce
- Posts: 358
- Joined: 14 Jun 2020, 18:57
- Location: South Cheshire
Re: Resticting Search on Ancestry
You've got 2 census records not just baptisms, according to the filters, but I can't make it come up with 26 BMD! Somehow you're asking a different question, but I don't know how!
Adrian Bruce
-
Mick Loney
- Posts: 371
- Joined: 15 Jun 2020, 07:27
Re: Resticting Search on Ancestry
Sally,
I know how you feel. Only this morning I came across a parish register image for a marriage. When I later tried to find it again, so I could browse the rest of the register, I couldn’t find it, despite knowing who, where and when marriage took place - very frustrating.
Following the comments from Adrian and Guy, I tried my Sunderland search again, and I ended up with even more results than them, but not all were in wakefield, despite putting it in my criteria. Seems very hit and miss.
As for the new Familysearch search screen, I can’t get on wih it at all, anymore. It used to be so clean, simple and clear cut, now it’s just a complicated mess. But as it is free, I shouldn’t complain.
BTW, are you aware that Findmypast has links to Kent Archives, and when FMP gives one a link to the archive, click on it and you’ll get the image, BUT as part of a larger set. Click the download and you’ll get a PDF file containing images of all the records in the series! Very useful for follow on research
I know how you feel. Only this morning I came across a parish register image for a marriage. When I later tried to find it again, so I could browse the rest of the register, I couldn’t find it, despite knowing who, where and when marriage took place - very frustrating.
Following the comments from Adrian and Guy, I tried my Sunderland search again, and I ended up with even more results than them, but not all were in wakefield, despite putting it in my criteria. Seems very hit and miss.
As for the new Familysearch search screen, I can’t get on wih it at all, anymore. It used to be so clean, simple and clear cut, now it’s just a complicated mess. But as it is free, I shouldn’t complain.
BTW, are you aware that Findmypast has links to Kent Archives, and when FMP gives one a link to the archive, click on it and you’ll get the image, BUT as part of a larger set. Click the download and you’ll get a PDF file containing images of all the records in the series! Very useful for follow on research