Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Most Common Surnames

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by keigh View Post
    Since I'm still only getting the surnames of matches rather than names of people on my tree [----]
    Seeing three most popular family names in the hundreds matches is perfect for me. (Especially that some kits have thousands of matches.)

    I think I am not alone in hoping that the "three name bar" evolves into a hotlink to some advanced statistics about the matches.

    And if you think that those three names are not useful to you. They are . If you want search by name and then execute In Common With with anybody from the search results, their family name has to be one of the three... Try it...

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by dna View Post
      If you want search by name and then execute In Common With with anybody from the search results, their family name has to be one of the three... Try it...
      Tried to try it, but cannot see what you are asking us to try. Do you mean that we should search by name on one of the three names or on any name?

      Comment


      • #48
        I've not seen an explanation of this feature so it would be useful if FTDNA decided to write up what they are trying to do.

        If one merely counts occurrences of surnames than what will happen is that you will just recreate the list of most common surnames for whatever society your ancestors have been in for the past few generations. Since most FTDNA customers will have American colonial ancestry, the most common English names - Smith, Johnson, Williams, Jones, etc., will be what you get.

        What is needed is a way to evaluate frequency of names in matches' pedigrees and then compare that data to frequency of those surnames in the population at large, to see what names are occurring more frequently than expected.

        But as for me, since Family Finder is almost impossible to use, and out the browsers Chrome, Safari, and Firefox only Safari I can use, and that often goes wrong, I really don't like trying to use Family Finder, which makes the whole exercise futile anyway.

        Comment


        • #49
          Let's say, there is a list of FF matches.

          For any of them, you can display In Common With (ICW).

          For example, you are interested only in matches having the family name Ample. In the dialog box for Name: one needs to enter Ample and press Apply. Then a list of people whose last name is matching Ample is displayed.

          On that list you would be able to display ICW only for those with a family name that is on the list of three most popular family names. Otherwise, you get a Houston error upon attempting to display ICW.

          Ample matches both Example and Sample. And ICW would only work for any o the matches if their last name (Example or Sample) were listed at the top of the original matches page.

          P.S.
          A bug was reported...
          Last edited by dna; 16 November 2014, 04:02 AM.

          Comment


          • #50
            OK I see. You were asking us to confirm that there is a bug. I misunderstood to start with and thought you were trying to tell us about something new and useful.

            Bug confirmed. I ended up with the ridiculous Houston message which just adds to the irritation when something is wrong. I wish their programmers would stop being so juvenile and replace the Houston message and Eek with professional error messages.

            Comment


            • #51
              I've kept track of all of my matches' surnames from the beginning, and haven't found it as useful as I'd hoped. The more information you have to work with, the better, because depending on surnames can be tricky. Some names are uncommon in the general population, but not within ethnic and regional subsets; and some families are better-documented than others. In making comparisons, it's hard to correct for those factors.

              There's also the need to exclude in-laws (collateral lines). I've wondered if this isn't the reason we're not seeing surname lists generated from the new trees.
              Last edited by WCoaster; 16 November 2014, 07:51 AM.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by dna View Post
                Seeing three most popular family names in the hundreds matches is perfect for me. (Especially that some kits have thousands of matches.)

                I think I am not alone in hoping that the "three name bar" evolves into a hotlink to some advanced statistics about the matches.

                And if you think that those three names are not useful to you. They are . If you want search by name and then execute In Common With with anybody from the search results, their family name has to be one of the three... Try it...
                I like using the In Common With feature. I find that far more helpful in my family than the Most Common Surname feature. Both sides of my family are German with the exception of one line which is Austrian. We don't get a lot of matches on either side and many fewer on my dad's side of the family. The Most Common Surname feature generates a list of names for my paternal grandmother and her half-first cousin for single numbers with a last name. Not even two people sharing the last name. I think this would be a more helpful feature for those with a lot more matches to sift through. When the kits you administer range between 100 and 140 matches each that really isn't an issue.

                The one very interesting thing I did notice with the Most Common Surname feature in my maternal grandmother's account is that the top two surnames on her match list occur three times each and they appear to be Ashkenazi Jewish matches. Not that I didn't already see something interesting going on with her matches based on the surnames and trees her matches posted but at least in her case the Most Common Surname turned up something interesting.

                I would love to see this feature expanded to include names in trees especially when those trees are really extensive. Location match lists would also be really helpful but I think I'm pushing my luck in hoping for that one.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by LynCra View Post
                  OK I see. You were asking us to confirm that there is a bug. I misunderstood to start with and thought you were trying to tell us about something new and useful.

                  Bug confirmed. I ended up with the ridiculous Houston message which just adds to the irritation when something is wrong. I wish their programmers would stop being so juvenile and replace the Houston message and Eek with professional error messages.
                  I am sorry. In my first post, I was trying to be sarcastic, but my juvenile humour did not come across

                  What really bugs me, is a persistent lack of acknowledgement from FTDNA that the issue exist...

                  More in the thread http://forums.familytreedna.com/showthread.php?t=36230 Houston... in the Features Requests & Bug Reports Area.

                  W.
                  Last edited by dna; 16 November 2014, 11:39 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Looks like you and I are pretty much in agreement with each other, dna.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X