Is Anyone Having Difficulty Getting Ancestry To Accept Fact / Profile Edits?

[Coppit]

Edits on screen for some of my people work fine, but for others, only Close is allowed in the 2 boxes at foot of screen.

[Buenchico]

I notice, from your other posts, that you're also experiencing problems with the BT mail site. The two things together suggest to me that you need to clear your browser's cache. That might well fix both problems.

Instructions here:
https://clear-my-cache.com/windows.html

[Coppit]

A total clearout using C Cleaner has made BT run faster but problems remain with the commercial Ancestry site. Interesting that a site dealing with family history problems has this to say.

We've been getting a lot of posts and comments recently about problems with searches, impossible hints and slow access in general to the commercial Ancestry site.
While we all sympathise with these problems, there is nothing we can do on this group other than echo Ancestry's own mantra to ''clear the cache and cookies on your browser and reboot your device to resolve the issue.''

[dance2trance]

I find it to be a low quality site.

[Peter Pedant]

we dont mind taking your money but giving a service is a completely different matter

seems to a mantra of the 21 st century innit ?

[Coppit]

dance3trance. By 'low quality' do you mean data accuracy or its overall set-up?
1881 excepted, taking England & Wales censuses as an example, it's crazy that user submitted corrections don't show up clearly in searches, since overwhelmngly they will be far more likely to be accurate than much of the nonsense generated by the ignorant transcribers from the Indian sub-continent. Also, most of the time when investigating an item of 50 on a page, seeking the next item returns you to the top of the page, and so on.
However, the structure underlying personal trees is good overall.

It is the quality of the work they exhibit that is my biggest quarrel with them. Yesterday, looking for the name Broadway I came across a correction on an original PR page where an arrow points to 'of Broadway' written above the line. So, not the surname at all and as the image of the parish register doesn't show the parish nor is there any means of finding a reference to its source, it is beyond correction.

Having been transcibing for many years I took 6 months recently surveying all of the *surnames only* in Ancestry's Glos 1911 and ended by submitting between 4000 and 4500 corrections. 1911 was chosen as the writing changes on every page. I don't claim to be infallible, I nod, misread and so on (which is why all transcripts should be double-checked independently, IMHO).

Some were near cosmetic, DAVIS / DAVIES, WILLIAM / WILLIAMS, CLARK / CLARKE, others pathetic misreadings, but a major group were of people who would otherwise be almost impossible to find. These are Lodgers, Boarders and Servants and who had been given the same surname as the Householder.

It breaks my heart to have passed over so many mistranscribed placenames, which I could see were wrong and just by being old, have the old counties in my head.

The most interesting correction was for a servant who had written her own entry, surname Sile. She must have been dyslectic as she was unchallengeably found to be Iles.
Seeing that Ancestry are unlikely ever to be interested in mass correction, I think it should be the job of FHS's to undertake; and not just 1911.

Find my Past are not without criticism but at least they spend money by having people overseeing submitted corrections.

To turn to the Ancestry program problem, by chance, a pal discovered that if the 'Save' box is greyed out, it can be resurrected by unticking the box, 'Show this event on Lifestory', making the correction, then by going back to tick the Lifestory box. Ancestry won't hear of it being a program error they still blame Firefox.