Census Reference check

[Bob Spiers]

I have done none of the above

You don't have to you just have to use your laptop and go online. Peter paints the extremes about people self inflicting problems upon themselves, but not everything happens that way. Malware hidden in carriers like DoubleClick (and by no means the only host) flows around the internet awaiting activation with some innocent click on a web link. Anti virus software like AVG (not the best but quite adequate) -unlike Windows Defender which is barely up to the job - will not detect same. This is why I use the belt and braces methods Peter does not recommend and employ Malware detection software.

I incurred the DoubleClick lockouts you describe and on many occasions which drove me to seek a solution. Such lockouts may return without me doing anything out of the ordinary , but if so next time my Malware detection will pick them up and order will be restored.

 

[Pauline]

The problems you have experienced are almost certainly down to your Internet connection

I don't understand how the problem described can be down to an internet connection. If I've understood correctly, when Bryman clicks on the reference checking arrow, instead of going to the FMP website, it seems his browser is being redirected to the doubleclick website, but something then blocks that site from loading.

Adverts on webpages can sometimes redirect browsers, so it doesn't have to mean malware on your computer, but I don't see any adverts at FMP when reference checking.

 

[Bob Spiers]

If I've understood correctly, when Bryman clicks on the reference checking arrow, instead of going to the FMP website, it seems his browser is being redirected to the doubleclick website, but something then blocks that site from loading.

Forget how Bryman experienced the redirection and blocking for a moment and concentrate on the fact it happened because of a click on a URL link requiring (in this case DoubleClick) to activate access. If DC as a host is corrupted with malware (of whatever kind and intensity) that is when problems occur; if it isn't they don't.

At worst you get taken to an unexpected website (usually to be showered with unwanted ads) or perhaps more innocuously the link fails with a 'cannot Access' report. In my experience retries rarely worked, although on occasion they did. I recall I could sometimes get round the problem by deleting the 'doubleclick' element from the URL address.

 

[Pauline]

concentrate on the fact it happened because of a click on a URL link requiring (in this case DoubleClick) to activate access.

But why would clicking on the reference checking arrow require doubleclick to activate access?

 

[peter]

But why would clicking on the reference checking arrow require doubleclick to activate access?

I would guess it's either because I use Google Analytics - which tracks how long users stay on the LostCousins site, which pages they arrive on, which pages they leave from etc - or because Findmypast use Doubleclick in connection with their advertising.

I suspect it's the latter because if I watch the bottom line of the browser I see doubleclick.net after the Findmypast page has been displayed.

 

[Bryman]

Sorry to have ducked out of this conversation but access has been delayed by an 'extreme' weather power cut - it is winter here with sub zero temperatures. Fortunately, we have underfloor heating in the concrete slab which keeps us warm for many hours after any loss of power.

I assumed that DoubleClick was involved in the data gathering for Google Analytics, or similar program, but do not have detailed experience. I use StatCounter to track similar information when I created web sites.

When I click on the reference check arrow, DoubleClick gets invoked before the search is performed at findmypast. Hence the denied access stops the process dead before getting anywhere. I just hope that my denied access was due to problems at the DoubleClick site rather than closer to home. If other forum members had experienced similar then that might have confirmed those suspicions. As it is I will just have to keep a watchful eye in the future. Hopefully, this discussion will help to set other members minds at rest if they do experience anything similar.

 

[Pauline]

I usually use IE and for some reason I don't see it going through the doubleclick website on its way to FMP, which is why I was confused.

I've now tried in Firefox and in Safari on my iPad and there I see doubleclick displayed - sometimes before the FMP URL appears, sometimes after, sometimes both and sometimes neither, but the variation may be because sometimes it's too quick to show up.

 

[Bob Spiers]

Well at last understanding looms particularly with Peter's explanation as to a likely reason for Google/DoubleClick involvement on this occasion. When the same thing happened to me (although nothing to do with LC or FMP) I soon twigged DC as the culprit, when I found a way around by simply deleting the 'doubleclick' part of the address. (It didn't work every time, but most of the time it did). That is when I found others experiencing the same problems and how it could be overcome. So when I read Bryman's first post mentioning DoubeClick it was deja vu!

It is interesting that Pauline uses IE which for many is now largely obsolete (although Pauline I believe uses W7) and I think Edge (its replacement) may be similarly immune. I say this not with any proof this is so but just because of the great antipathy between Microsoft & Google with each going out of their way to exploit the apparent weaknesses of the other. I may be wrong on that of course, but it's a thought.

 

[Bryman]

I found a way around by simply deleting the 'doubleclick' part of the address.

Thanks Bob. DC was once again inaccessible so after a couple of prohibitions, I tried your deletion circumvention and it worked perfectly.

 

[canadianbeth]

I have a different problem. I was adding census references to my FTM program and checking LC to see if I already had them there. When I clicked on the little gray arrow beside one family I was informed that there were zero results found. The book, folio, page and piece numbers match exactly the ones I see at Ancestry so why would there be zero results at FindMyPast? I checked a few others and they were ok.

 

[Bryman]

I have a different problem. I was adding census references to my FTM program and checking LC to see if I already had them there. When I clicked on the little gray arrow beside one family I was informed that there were zero results found. The book, folio, page and piece numbers match exactly the ones I see at Ancestry so why would there be zero results at FindMyPast? I checked a few others and they were ok.

Sometimes in the past I have found that the Ancestry references are not correct and this may be cause of your problem now. Typically, it is the Folio number that is wrong. You may get confirmation by looking at the original hand written form to find the Folio and Page numbers.

When FMP displays the zero results, try editing the Folio number up or down by 1 and see if that then displays the expected set of results. If it does then adjust the reference that you have entered at LC.

 

[canadianbeth]

Amazing! Thank you so much. I checked the form and it was indeed the wrong folio #. It should have been 46 and Ancestry had 45. I changed it for the first person, checked the grey arrow and voila! there he was. So I then had to, of course, change everyone else in the household. And now I have another one to check, with probably the same problem.

 

[peter]

Amazing! Thank you so much. I checked the form and it was indeed the wrong folio #. It should have been 46 and Ancestry had 45. I changed it for the first person, checked the grey arrow and voila! there he was. So I then had to, of course, change everyone else in the household. And now I have another one to check, with probably the same problem.

It does warn about this problem on the Add Ancestor/Edit Ancestor form. Up to half of all Ancestry records from 1841 have the wrong folio number (which is why the grey arrow check uses Findmypast for this census).

 

[canadianbeth]

So just 1841 that I should be concerned about? I think I have checked all of those. I admit that when I first starting entering records, a few years ago now, I did not check those little arrows; have just been doing it recently.

 

[Bryman]

So just 1841 that I should be concerned about? I think I have checked all of those. I admit that when I first starting entering records, a few years ago now, I did not check those little arrows; have just been doing it recently.

I find those little arrows so useful. I am now in the habit of clicking after the first entry from a household. If there are any problems then I can correct them before entering the rest. I also find it a quick way to go back and look at census pages without having to note the reference details and enter separately.

 

[peter]

So just 1841 that I should be concerned about? I think I have checked all of those. I admit that when I first starting entering records, a few years ago now, I did not check those little arrows; have just been doing it recently.

If you haven't checked the rest of your entries now's the time - we all make mistakes. It's so quick and easy to make sure, and you only have to do it once.

 

[Alexander Bisset]

Coming soon a reference checker in FTAnalyzer...

 

[trebor]

I have a different problem. I was adding census references to my FTM program and checking LC to see if I already had them there. When I clicked on the little gray arrow beside one family I was informed that there were zero results found. The book, folio, page and piece numbers match exactly the ones I see at Ancestry so why would there be zero results at FindMyPast? I checked a few others and they were ok.

I have a similar issue - just one person from the family showing up with the exclamation mark in Lost Cousins. When I looked closer I found that FMP had not listed this person so nothing I may do will clear the mark. Fortunately it is just one person so I don't see it as a problem.

 

[peter]

I have a similar issue - just one person from the family showing up with the exclamation mark in Lost Cousins. When I looked closer I found that FMP had not listed this person so nothing I may do will clear the mark. Fortunately it is just one person so I don't see it as a problem.

The ! symbol indicates that there is a close match between your entry and another entry. The fact that this person is apparently not listed at Findmypast has no relevance - you can't have a close match to nobody.

(I say apparently because Findmypast will only list people on the same page as the head of household, so if the household is split between two pages it won't show all of them.)

If the other members of the household have matched with a living relative compare your entry with theirs (you'll have to ask them). Y0u certainly shouldn't confirm your entry based on what you have said so far - if it is an entry from 1841 or 1911 take another look at the handwriting and see if it is capable of being interpreted in more than one way.

 

[Bryman]

if it is an entry from 1841 or 1911 take another look at the handwriting and see if it is capable of being interpreted in more than one way.

If the entry is from 1881 then check the transcription at Ancestry in case that is different from FMP. Although both transcriptions were the same initially, some records have been updated by either or both since then, based on user feedback. I have been caught by similar situations on several occasions.