RootsWeb ruined!

CE Wood

unread,

Nov 8, 2019, 3:21:35 PM11/8/19

to

What has happened to all the RootsWeb databases?

For instance, the direct link to an individual was:

https://wc.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=GET&db=wtm2&id=I32050

Now, entering that url results in:

https://wc.rootsweb.com/trees/243930/I32050/-/individual

Their instructions say you can jump to a specific tree, if you know the tree ID number, but there is no page on which you can jump to a specific tree ID.

So how does one access well-sourced databases such as Jim Weber's or Bill Marshall's, to name but two?

CE Wood

donna hartley

unread,

Nov 9, 2019, 7:07:31 AM11/9/19

to

I agree! I used to access Jim Weber's database for the references. Now it is impossible.

Please give us back the "old" rootsweb!

Donna Hartley

P J Evans

unread,

Nov 9, 2019, 8:05:43 PM11/9/19

to

I wrote to them and said the same thing - you can't tell which database you're looking at, or what they're using for sources.
(I think they're trying to make the search engine match the one at Ancestry, which isn't nearly as good.)

witzd...@gmail.com

unread,

Nov 9, 2019, 9:39:54 PM11/9/19

to

They have made Rootsweb useless. I, too, used to visit JWeber's page frequently.

CE Wood

unread,

Nov 10, 2019, 4:16:05 PM11/10/19

to

The references for an individual are still there, but run together and hard to decipher.

If you enter the old url, you will be taken to the atrocious new individual page.

Jim Weber's Tree ID name is "jweber". It's a long slog through all the "J" names to find it. His tree ID # is 162642. CLicking on "jweber" takes you to a modern individual; go to the Index (also horrible) and enter the name.

Bill Marshall's more extensive and better sourced Tree ID name is "wtm2". His tree ID # is 243930. His site also never changed ID numbers the way Jim's does/did. That made it so easy to always find the correct individual - the number never changed.

At the very least, RootsWeb needs to allow searching by specific Tree ID, such as "jweber". Such a simple thing to do if your programmers are any good at all!

Of course, there is no way to know the RootsWeb ID Name unless you saved the url in your own database.

They have made genealogical research so much more difficult because they don't do any themselves.

Bah, Humbug!

CE Wood

On Saturday, November 9, 2019 at 4:07:31 AM UTC-8, donna hartley wrote:

P J Evans

unread,

Nov 10, 2019, 4:44:15 PM11/10/19

to

Part of the problem is that Ancestry seems to aim for novice genealogists, and does minimal education, even of its indexers. (I found court records that were indexed by the court clerk's name, because that was prominently written near the start of the document.) If you have experience and some education in the field, it's good for the actual records (and the images - though they only automatically download the first page of multi-page documents).

Rootsweb is available without a large fee, and can be good - but it requires more of the user to find the good stuff, and the old searching and indexing system was far better than the one Ancestry is imposing.

P J Evans

unread,

Nov 13, 2019, 1:34:01 PM11/13/19

to

The response I got:

Dear Valued Client,

Thank you for contacting RootsWeb regarding our WorldConnect trees search. We regret not getting back to you sooner, as well as any difficulties you may be experiencing, but are happy to help.

Unfortunately, at this time the Advanced Search fields are not available, and we are continuing to work on restoring the Notes, Sources and Events to the trees. It is a work in progress; we expect these functions to return, although we cannot provide a specific time as to when it will happen.

You can currently search by first and last name, and you can also add in the year of birth or death, and birth or death place as well. Adding this information can narrow your results.

We are also still in the process of restoring all the trees to the updated WorldConnect; we are currently at 90.92% completion. However, in the restoration, the URLs to the trees are being changed. If you attempt to access a tree using an existing link, you should be automatically redirected to the new page. If not, you can use this: https://wc.rootsweb.com/search.

Once the trees are restored, we will begin working on returning them to full functionality. Some tools are available, others have yet to be developed.

Rather than take the site down while we update it, we are gradually transitioning into the new site. Thank you for your patience and understanding. If there is anything else with which we might assist you, please let us know.

Andrew Lancaster

unread,

Nov 13, 2019, 1:35:49 PM11/13/19

to

Perhaps the fact that Rootsweb had no fee is part of the reason it is being sabotaged or at least left to rot? I am sure most of us on this list have spent money on the various commercial sites, but we need to be careful of them.

wjhonson

unread,

Nov 14, 2019, 12:46:48 PM11/14/19

to

Some time ago, perhaps two years, Rootsweb lost *all* their databases. All hosted sites, all trees, everything.

They have been restoring portions of it here and there, and if you had a hosted site, you can make a specific request to restore that but otherwise they won't

What you are referring to here, is actually called WorldConnect, it's just one portion of Rootsweb. For whatever reason, when they restored these trees, they didn't restore the *names* of the trees properly. However wtm2 is still the database you pointed to, it's just now called with a number instead of wtm2.

You can browse the list of all trees, to find wtm2, but the URL is still the same. I think when they restored the trees, all the individuals in a a tree, got renumbered.

So yes, all the links to so-and-so, now link to someone else, but in the same tree.

I agree the look of the new individual pages, is horrible.

P J Evans

unread,

Nov 14, 2019, 3:40:24 PM11/14/19

to

This is a very recent change - up until a month or so back, the old search engine still worked and the trees still had their names, along with the banner that also had the name and a (probably outdated, for most) e-mail (graphic, not text) for the owner.

Vivien Martin

unread,

Nov 14, 2019, 5:34:55 PM11/14/19

to

"We are also still in the process of restoring all the trees to the updated WorldConnect; we are currently at 90.92% completion. However, in the restoration, the URLs to the trees are being changed."

In fact what they are doing is connecting an individual in a World Connect tree to a public tree on Ancestry and not completing the tree as it was originally. So "restoring all the trees" my ass. If there is no public tree on ancestry to connect to... bye bye data.

The tree "Celtic Royal Genealogy - WorldConnect Project - Ancestry.com" is an example of how "restored" these trees are.

P J Evans

unread,

Nov 14, 2019, 6:13:10 PM11/14/19

to

So if you're not a member of Ancestry, it's not very useful. (I dropped it at the end of a subscription year, because every change they made made it more useless to people who can't (or won't) pay extra for their "premium" services like Fold3 access.)

CE Wood

unread,

Nov 14, 2019, 7:24:05 PM11/14/19

to

Scrolling through the tree ID numbers is useless. Besides being incredibly long (more than 150 pages for each number), neither Bill Marshall's tree ID number, 243930, is not listed, nor is Jim Weber's - 162642.

However, scrolling through the ID names, you will find "wtm2". Clicking on that will bring up an individual in his tree. You can then use the links on that page to find more.

The same id true for Jim Webber's tree. His tree ID name is "jweber".

CE Wood

On Thursday, November 14, 2019 at 9:46:48 AM UTC-8, wjhonson wrote:

wjhonson

unread,

Nov 18, 2019, 11:41:07 AM11/18/19

to

On Thursday, November 14, 2019 at 2:34:55 PM UTC-8, Vivien Martin wrote:

Not true.
For example my fowlhar WorldConnect tree still exists, even though I never loaded that tree seperately to Ancestry Trees