Comments on: Working Through Other People’s Family Trees http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/04/06/working-through-other-people%e2%80%99s-family-trees/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=working-through-other-people%25e2%2580%2599s-family-trees The official blog of Ancestry Sat, 23 May 2015 02:27:04 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.2 By: P J Evanshttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/04/06/working-through-other-people%e2%80%99s-family-trees/#comment-45445 P J Evans Tue, 20 Apr 2010 04:30:44 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=3400#comment-45445 I try to check the informstion I find online Рthere are published records available for some places, and GenWeb can be very helpful Рbut there are a lot of people who dump data into their files and never check it in any way, so I find non-existent place names, people who appear multiple times in a single file, mythical genealogies (particularly the ones going back to Rome, Greece and ancient Egypt) and (one of my favorites, found in Ancestral Files and a lesson in bad information) children who were linked as their own grandparents.

I’d rather read the original records myself, if they’re available. At least then the mistakes will be mine.
And I hope that people using my records don’t graft their people onto my tree and do give me credit for my data.
(Sharing is part of genealogy. You never know when a stranger will have the piece you need.)

]]>
By: Patti Woodhttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/04/06/working-through-other-people%e2%80%99s-family-trees/#comment-45441 Patti Wood Mon, 19 Apr 2010 22:58:48 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=3400#comment-45441 1620. That is the magic date. I am constantly amazed at the number of “just clickers” who have ancestors living in New England in the 1500′s.
Puleeze.

]]>
By: Barbara Reecamperhttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/04/06/working-through-other-people%e2%80%99s-family-trees/#comment-45438 Barbara Reecamper Mon, 19 Apr 2010 03:42:16 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=3400#comment-45438 I know what you mean. It’s fun to prove it yourself. I’ve been doing this since 1997. The problem now is Family trees that show up as new hints are trees copied from me long ago. Also, it’s amazing how many trees have no sources or records listed.

]]>
By: Biancahttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/04/06/working-through-other-people%e2%80%99s-family-trees/#comment-45433 Bianca Sat, 17 Apr 2010 18:36:53 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=3400#comment-45433 I’m a newbie…but learning very quickly the value of NOT blindly accepting the advice from the little green leaf…and to properly source the facts. I’ve gone the way of a private tree so my mistakes are not copied by others. I invite guests by request. One of my guests is an expert (and “cousin”), who leaves me tips via e-mail or the Comment feature. I fix my mistakes. That works beautifully.

Over these past few months (since I started researching) I have met the parents of my grandparents, my father (who is normally very quiet) is now telling me and my children his stories, my mother presented to me original pictures of her family, I met “cousins” and a few good people willing to help me out, and I’m exploring other countries and history. The trees, photos, and stories from other people have been a big part of this experience…so far it’s been an incredible journey!

With so much good, there is going to be some frustration with those people who don’t take it seriously or know the rules. I don’t know the rules, but I am serious and I am learning. My progress forward is really based on the advice and sharing of trees from the experts…

So, Pam #19, I agree.

]]>
By: Kerryhttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/04/06/working-through-other-people%e2%80%99s-family-trees/#comment-45431 Kerry Sat, 17 Apr 2010 17:03:33 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=3400#comment-45431 Ah, at last-the elephant in the room is discussed! When I started researching, it was the “traditional” way-research, libraries, books, and more research! It was painstaking-but generally speaking, more accurate than the new “copy and paste” method. I also have the love/hate thing going on. In sheer frustration, I have posted corrections on others’ trees-only to be ignored. I have kept my tree private to assist in protecting some of my hard-won data from the “instant resulters” who think genealogy or the study of history is copying what someone else has done-correct or not. I am always open to correction or comments from other researchers, and believe this to be the in the best interests of continued learning. However, I remember all too clearly the last time I brought this subject up, and the cruel flamers comments- who yes-also populate this dry, history based site. I was treated to, “well, YOU are so perfect!” and a host of other infantile word projectiles supposedly from adults-protected by distance and their computer screen. Ok-call me perfect-but it bothers me that people screw up data and the truth about MY family!

]]>
By: Donnahttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/04/06/working-through-other-people%e2%80%99s-family-trees/#comment-45429 Donna Fri, 16 Apr 2010 22:51:45 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=3400#comment-45429 Frankly I cannot figure out why anyone cares if someone “copies” their research unless you are a professional and making a living doing genealogy research.

It does not diminish my enjoyment in any way to find a photo or document or research I have completed in another tree – with or without noting my work.

I do genealogy to please myself and what someone else thinks of me or my work is none of my business, although I love getting email from my “cousins”.

]]>
By: Kristinehttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/04/06/working-through-other-people%e2%80%99s-family-trees/#comment-45427 Kristine Fri, 16 Apr 2010 18:46:59 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=3400#comment-45427 Tonight view the latest episode of “Who Do You Think You Are?” and for some background information on Susan Sarandon you may enjoy this: http://familyforest.wordpress.com/2010/04/16/susan-sarandon-on-who-do-you-think-you-are/

]]>
By: NKWalkerhttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/04/06/working-through-other-people%e2%80%99s-family-trees/#comment-45425 NKWalker Fri, 16 Apr 2010 15:20:00 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=3400#comment-45425 Pam 19, I am far from being an expert but am able to spot obvious errors. I long ago gave up trying to point them out unless I know the owner and know she wants my input, although I very much appreciate corrections myself. One tree whose title contains a very common name spliced on a great swath of my relatives including my mother. Always hoping to find cousins, I searched their tree without finding any connection to mine, so I messaged the owners with the information that my ancestor had chosen an anglicized version of his name that happens to be the same as theirs. I asked that if they actually know of a connection between their tree and mine would they please point it out to me. I got no response. Their tree boasts more than 51,000 people, and I suspect many of them were cut and pasted rather than carefully researched. These people are not researchers, they are what mainstream genealogists call “collectors,” and they are doing something different from what the rest of us are attempting. Beyond taking my research they neither need nor want any help from me.

]]>
By: Franceshttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/04/06/working-through-other-people%e2%80%99s-family-trees/#comment-45416 Frances Thu, 15 Apr 2010 17:18:45 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=3400#comment-45416 Start with nothing – an adoptee with a quasi-identifying info from Ontario where records were closed for decades – add a birth father who chose not to acknowledge paternity, a grandfather that hid his true Jewish name from the family he moved into, a mother who relinquished one other child by leaving the child with the birth father, a grandmother who changed her name mid-life and put ‘em together and find a place to start….those of you who have ‘real’ birth parents have some history, if only verbal – those of us in the ‘adoption’ milieu have virtually little or nothing to work with. Be grateful for your small mercies, accurate or inaccurate and enjoy the search. For those of us without birth parents, we MUST go backwards, in order to move forwards in our lives.

]]>
By: Terrihttp://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/04/06/working-through-other-people%e2%80%99s-family-trees/#comment-45407 Terri Wed, 14 Apr 2010 18:46:26 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=3400#comment-45407 Like everyone above, I too have a love/hate relationship with online family trees and the info that some people put out there as fact. I have FTM 16 on my computer (have just added FTM 2010 also), and have just started adding some of my info on ancestry.com a couple of months ago. I also PRINT out hard copies of my files for quick reference as I am working. I started researching about 10 years ago, and my first step was to use an existing genealogy (which has been published, and widely copied on the internet), then try to prove or disprove the facts. This taught me how to research, and what materials were available, both in archives and online. I recently came across a inconsistancy in this original genealogy, and when I contacted the original researcher (who is a known family member), she agreed that my conclusion was correct-that the original info I was questioning (and that is published, and copied EVERYWHERE online) was due to a incorrect assumption she made 40 years ago, when she was researching! This just goes to show you that errors can and do multiply if you do not check out facts! ALL sources should be taken with a grain of salt! And as time goes on, as more serious researchers put their info online (with sources), the quality of trees will improve-with hope. I do want to say though that I too have met “cousins”, and have had help from other researchers that I contacted through their family trees, so I guess we will have to take the “good” with the “bad”.

]]>