Bottomless Pit 2

 MARY HANSON
 Birth 09 Aug 1675 in Upton, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA
 Death  in Upton, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA

 PARENTS
 John Hanson (1549-1622)
 Janet Raynor (1551- )

 SPOUSE & CHILDREN
 Walter Stanhope (1572-1661)
 ✿ Mary Stanhope (1602-1616)
 ✿ Jane Stanhope (1612-1693)
 ✿ Walter Stanhope (1612-1646)
 ✿ Edward Stanhope (1615-1675)
 ✿ Catherine Stanhope (1618-1618)
 ✿ Anne Stanhope (1623- )

If you're thinking Mary's birth year is a typo, you're an optimist. A birth year of 1575 would be better than having her parents and most of her children dying before her own birth. It would not, however, explain the births and deaths of Mary's parents, husband and children all occurring in England. Changing her birth year would also not improve the rest of the profile which is after the jump.
Here are just a few highlights (numbers in parenthesis are the number of events that are exact duplicates):

 ✿ Marriage
810 AD
Uppsala, Sweden
 ✿ Marriage
1503 7 Oct
Bernbowgale Edinburgh St. James St. Giles Toftis Manys Bernbowgale Manys Toftis Dummanyne Canongate Trinitarian Peblis Crukstoun, Midlothia, Scotland
 ✿ Christening
1847 31 Jan
Kerry, Ireland
 ✿ BURIAL
1864 15 Oct
NC
 ✿ Residence (85)
1911
Guysborough, Nova Scotia, Canada
 ✿ Arrival (12)
1913 6 Jun
Detroit, Michigan
 ✿ Residence (72)
1930
Boston, Suffolk, Massachusetts
 ✿ SSN issued
California

After the jump: The complete list of events

It Paynes Me

My apologies, this should have been Rule #1.

RULE #12  Pay attention to what you're doing!

 Harriet S. Payne

 PARENTS
 Peter I Coughnet (1793-1856)
 Catherine Wohlgemuth (1794-1881)

 SPOUSE & CHILDREN
 Lafayette Wilmarth (1811-1854)
 ✿ Harriet Ceilinda "Hattie" Wilmarth (b. 1841)
 ✿ William P Tiffany (b. 1844)
 ✿ Katherine (Kate) Tiffany (b. 1844)
 ✿ Priscilla Tiffany (b. 1845)
 ✿ Luther Scott Tiffany (b. 1867)

 Birth  April 30, 1812 in Susquehanna, Pennsylvania
 Marriage  22 Feb 1842 to Lafayette Wilmarth
 Marriage  30 Jun 1846 to Lafayette Wilmarth
 Death  March 29, 1859 in Jackson Twp, Susquehanna, Pennsylvania
 Residence  1880 in Davenport, Scott, Iowa, United States
 Burial  in Davenport, Scott, Iowa

After the jump: The records and more

What's In A Name?

A quick post today. This...

Nicholas Lanier Laniere Lane Lanye Lanyer the YOUNGER, MASTER of MUSIC, on FACULTY at OXFORD UNIVERSITY, COURT MUSICIAN to CHARLES I & KING JAMES I, BEN JONSON

 ...is not a name. It's a biography. Why would someone do this?
I understand the many surname variations. If you search from the profile it may be easier to add all of those to the profile, temporarily anyway. Though I have found that formatting variations as, Lanier/Laniere/Lane/Lanye/Lanyer, yields better results, at least with Ancestry's search engine.
I do not, however, understand the suffix. A suffix should not be a curriculum vitae. And what/who is "BEN JONSON"?

Thanks to Kristin for the link to the profile for Nicholas! ;-) If you have a profile or tree to suggest please email the link to buwtree(at)gmail(dot)com. Thanks!


PREVIOUS POST: Leaving the New Ancestry
NEXT POST: It Paynes Me

Leaving the New Ancestry

New and returning Ancestry.com subscribers are being thrown directly into the "New" Ancestry. New subscribers have nothing to compare it to but returning subscribers will notice some basic functions missing.
Some people have the option to switch back to "Classic" Ancestry, others do not. If you have the option it will be ​in the drop down under your Ancestry user name.

Image taken from Ancestry's Help page for "The New Ancestry."

If you don't have that option you just need this link: http://home.ancestry.com/newancestry/leave. It looks as if Ancestry's crack social media team is under orders to keep this link a secret. Anyone asking for help with this problem on Facebook is asked to contact them privately with their account info. Wouldn't just posting the link be easier?
If you happen to call Ancestry for the answer you might get the same answer a friend of mine did. She was told "they can't do it and the developers have removed the link that will give you the option." The customer service rep also told her "the new site is fully functional." HA!
I called as well. My phone call started with, "I just subscribed again and was thrown into the new site. I don't have the option to go back to the old site. I either need that option or I need you to refund the money I just paid your company 10 minutes ago." The rep sent me the link to the New Ancestry help page and told me to keep scrolling. Keep scrolling. Eventually she just read me the "leave" link which she could have done in the first place to save us both some time. It's buried on that help page and in a teeny tiny font.
Whether you switch back to "Classic" using the link or the drop down you should have the option to give feedback. If you have writer's block feel free to use the following in whole or in part to get you started:

I am paying, giving you my money, to use a fully functioning, established website, not to be a guinea pig. Most of the ongoing issues were reported at the end of January, during the first week of BETA testing. I am willing to use and give feedback on the site you released to the public too soon in exchange for a 6-month subscription. If that's acceptable feel free to contact me.

If you have spent time using the new site be as specific as possible with your feedback. "I hate it!" and "Don't change it!" responses will just be tossed aside. Leave feedback when you switch back to Classic. Leave feedback on their message boards and on their community boards. Leave feedback on Ancestry's Facebook page and their other social media pages.
The changes being made may actually be improvements, once they're functioning, but we are not paying to use a site that is under construction. From the customer viewpoint I have to say that releasing the new site to the public months, maybe even years at the rate they're going, before it's ready is one of the worst business decisions Ancestry has ever made.

Here are some of Ancestry's posts about the new site. The comments make for entertaining reading. ;-)
Announcing the New Ancestry Website
New Ancestry: Feature Update 
The New Facts View: Make Sure You Are Climbing YOUR Family Tree and Not Someone Else's


PREVIOUS POST: Baby Love
NEXT POST: What's In A Name?

Baby Love

 Alexander Love
 Birth  1690 in Northumberland, Virginia, USA
 Death 1773 in Onslow, North Carolina, USA

 PARENTS
 James Arnold Love (1681-1773)
 April Osterman (1681- )

 SPOUSE & CHILDREN
 Elishe Love (1695-1729)
 ✿ Saponey Indian Squaw Aka Honor Love (b. 1690)
 ✿ Hannah Love (b. 1702)
 ✿ Elizabeth Love (b. 1705)
 ✿ Amos Love (b. 1705)
 ✿ John Love (b. 1720)
 ✿ James Love (b. 1723)
 ✿ Judith Love (b. 1727)
 ✿ Jane Love (b. 1727)
 ✿ Jane Love (b. 1727)

 RECORDS attached to this profile

 ✿ U.S. Revolutionary War Rolls 1775-1783
     Alexander Love, Military Date: 7 Feb 1778, Rhode Island
 ✿ U.S. Civil War Soldiers, 1861-1865
     Alexander Love, Confederate, North Carolina

So Alexander was born to 9 year old parents. He then either starts his own family at birth or adopts a child later who is the same age as him. He and his wife continue to have children as children themselves. Five years after his death he fights in the Revolutionary War. Then he hangs around for 90 more years to fight in the Civil War.

 Father  Sir John LeLou ( -1308)
 Mother Amice Mauduit

 Child    Nigeli Luiff (1420-1492)

And John's parents were 100 and 70 years old when he was born.
It's never just one mistake. Clickohphiles don't pay attention to what they're doing. Ever.


Thanks to Linda for the head up about this profile and to Madelyn for the earworm of a title ;-)
If you have a tree or profile to suggest please send the link to buwtree(at)gmail(dot)com. Thanks! 


PREVIOUS POST: The Genealogy of Jesus
NEXT POST: Leaving the New Ancestry