Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Family Tree Online

Expand Messages
  • Joan Currie
    Very well said Paddy. I recently was looking at a tree on Ancestry, mentioning family of mine, and there were quite a few mistakes (facts that I have proved).
    Message 1 of 7 , Apr 4, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Very well said Paddy. I recently was looking at a tree on Ancestry,
      mentioning family of mine, and there were quite a few mistakes (facts
      that I have proved).
      I am not sure whether to make contact or not. What do you think?
      Joan

      >
      >
      > What you are saying should be a warning to all people who trawl the published family trees. Not just on Ancestry but all of them. Sometimes researchers get carried away thinking they have solved a brick wall when they come across a name that "seems to fit" use it in their own tree and still fresh from their "discovery" publish their findings on one of many sites. Then later when the error is realised they fix up their own tree and totally forget the incorrect info they leave published for ever unless they go back and change that as well. It is not hard to make an error, specially when the whole large family& descendants just drip with similar names and dates that 'could" fit if tweaked a tiny bit. I ran with a name like that early in my research and took ages to fix it all again.
      > I committed the biggest sin a researcher of families could do.... I did not prove or check this other persons work, and paid the price with a big muddle of James's who had brothers who had James's and they all called their offspring Guess????
      > So if you are searching through the results of other people's research do not take anything you see and use it without checking it and proving it three ways before you are satisfied it is or is not really related to your family. In case you are tempted in a later search to run with it Keep a 'possible blooper' folder somewhere easy accessed with a list of errors of judgement you did or nearly did. So when in doubt you can look back on this and find if it was helpful or was full of disaster for not checking.
      > Also in the era of digitised cemetery online records, transcription errors can happen when they are reading the scrawled names that can be found in cemetery ledgers. Not knocking the transcribers, their eyes must cross at the daunting amount of writing and squashed names into the old ledgers. e.g. My grandfathers name was Alfred, due to cramped writing? he was transcribed onto the disc the council was sending out to family history places as ALEXANDER. This is not the first one I have found. I requested a correction but was told that the disks had already gone out, sorry. At least my grandfather's name on his cemetery stone said ALFRED his correct name.
      > Online research if fine BUT until checked could be someone's mistake published and if left there will continue to lead us astray. Good to have the online info though, used as a guide not a gospel.
      > So this means that one should always try to check out and verify with BDM sites relating to the death.
      > End of Sermon!!!
      > regards
      > Paddy
      >
      >
    • Jenelle Mccarrick
      I ve got lots of mistakes and whatever on numerous branches of the family tree on ancestry..prove it when it comes to POLSON, COLLINS and so on.. Jenelle.
      Message 2 of 7 , Apr 4, 2012
      • 0 Attachment

        I’ve got lots of mistakes and whatever on numerous branches of the family tree on ancestry..prove it when it comes to POLSON, COLLINS and so on..

        Jenelle.

         


        From: suth_to_aus@yahoogroups.com [mailto: suth_to_aus@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Joan Currie
        Sent: Wednesday, 4 April 2012 5:41 PM
        To: suth_to_aus@yahoogroups. com
        Subject: [suth_to_aus] Re: Family Tree Online

         

         

        Very well said Paddy. I recently was looking at a tree on Ancestry,
        mentioning family of mine, and there were quite a few mistakes (facts
        that I have proved).
        I am not sure whether to make contact or not. What do you think?
        Joan

        >
        >
        > What you are saying should be a warning to all people who trawl the
        published family trees. Not just on Ancestry but all of them. Sometimes researchers get carried away thinking they have solved a brick wall when they come across a name that "seems to fit" use it in their own tree and still fresh from their "discovery" publish their findings on one of many sites. Then later when the error is realised they fix up their own tree and totally forget the incorrect info they leave published for ever unless they go back and change that as well. It is not hard to make an error, specially when the whole large family& descendants just drip with similar names and dates that 'could" fit if tweaked a tiny bit. I ran with a name like that early in my research and took ages to fix it all again.
        > I committed the biggest sin a researcher of families could do.... I did
        not prove or check this other persons work, and paid the price with a big muddle of James's who had brothers who had James's and they all called their offspring Guess????
        > So if you are searching through the results of other people's research do
        not take anything you see and use it without checking it and proving it three ways before you are satisfied it is or is not really related to your family. In case you are tempted in a later search to run with it Keep a 'possible blooper' folder somewhere easy accessed with a list of errors of judgement you did or nearly did. So when in doubt you can look back on this and find if it was helpful or was full of disaster for not checking.
        > Also in the era of digitised cemetery online records, transcription errors
        can happen when they are reading the scrawled names that can be found in cemetery ledgers. Not knocking the transcribers, their eyes must cross at the daunting amount of writing and squashed names into the old ledgers. e.g. My grandfathers name was Alfred, due to cramped writing? he was transcribed onto the disc the council was sending out to family history places as ALEXANDER. This is not the first one I have found. I requested a correction but was told that the disks had already gone out, sorry. At least my grandfather's name on his cemetery stone said ALFRED his correct name.
        > Online research if fine BUT until checked could be someone's mistake
        published and if left there will continue to lead us astray. Good to have the online info though, used as a guide not a gospel.
        > So this means that one should always try to check out and verify with BDM
        sites relating to the death.
        > End of Sermon!!!
        > regards
        > Paddy
        >
        >

        No virus found in this message.
        Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
        Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4913 - Release Date: 04/03/12

      • Judy
        Ancestry can be such a trap for people. The Add to your tree button is tempting and for the newbie can be such an issue if later the info is incorrect. If
        Message 3 of 7 , Apr 4, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          Ancestry can be such a trap for people.
          The "Add to your tree " button is tempting and for the newbie can be such an
          issue if later the info is incorrect.
          If they no longer subscribe then they can't even fix it even if they knew
          how!
          Judy

          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "Joan Currie" <jocurrie@...>
          To: "suth_to_aus@yahoogroups. com" <suth_to_aus@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2012 5:40 PM
          Subject: [suth_to_aus] Re: Family Tree Online


          > Very well said Paddy. I recently was looking at a tree on Ancestry,
          > mentioning family of mine, and there were quite a few mistakes (facts
          > that I have proved).
          > I am not sure whether to make contact or not. What do you think?
          > Joan
          >
          >>
        • paddy walsh
          To Judy & Joan Unfortunately, the data Ancestry shows is only as good as the person/s who provided the info.  If you could see the problems I have had again
          Message 4 of 7 , Apr 4, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            To Judy & Joan
            Unfortunately, the data Ancestry shows is only as good as the person/s who provided the info.  If you could see the problems I have had again with the Byrne families I research.  The name James in at least two main lines from Wicklow to NSW seems to have been used over and over in both lines Then they have more of them and then they may have started showing middle names so THEY can keep tabs on them, then they all started copying the middle names and the generation dates seem to often be similar enough to make a temptation to go with one that did not belong (guilty of that.) Now I am at the stage that I feel that the original solution was correct all along.  I shudder to think how many research Rookies are still puddling around in this confusion and publishing all sorts of misleading and in error data.   In the early days of recording BDM in NSW the certificates (if indeed they even registered these events and when they did, when) the certificates that are provided for the events are not always full of the data of the later ones. You might get the name of the deceased, a rough estimate of how long in the colony, in the case of death aslo a rough guess by an informant as to the age at time of death. then for much of the rest of the info you just get "not stated".  You may not get the burial details you are looking for.  It might only state "married"  ???   grrrr....who to and when.  I don't think the convicts liked to give much info about their past. Much info can be obtained through the Transportation records held in Aust Nat Archives. you might obtain the 'alias' of the person as well.
            I have a pile of the early certificates that were little or no help.  Also, the informant in those days may not have had a clue about the deceased past.  They may have only known them for a year or two.  Depressing isn't it. 
             
            Joan,
            re trying to contact the people who had left their errors in publication and probably just didn't think or fogot they were there ready to mislead future researchers, I tried that and found that they had usually moved on, having fixed their own tree (hopefully) and never gave a thought to the mischief they cause a whole lot of researchers who solidly believe that if it is
             on the computer it must be OK.
            You could try Joan, I had no success, they either ignore you or have changed their email contact addresses.  I had a small success once, got told to mind my own business and refused to believe there was anything wrong with what she published.
            Having said all that, Ancestry is not the only one that publishes unchecked info as supplied.  Any info provided to any of these programs could be wrong, and at the time the providers truly believed it was correct.
            It's a minefield out there!!!!!  Beware, check check check
            Paddy 
             

            From: Judy <raigmore@...>
            To: suth_to_aus@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Wednesday, 4 April 2012 8:46 PM
            Subject: Re: [suth_to_aus] Re: Family Tree Online

             
            Ancestry can be such a trap for people.
            The "Add to your tree " button is tempting and for the newbie can be such an
            issue if later the info is incorrect.
            If they no longer subscribe then they can't even fix it even if they knew
            how!
            Judy

            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "Joan Currie" <jocurrie@...>
            To: "suth_to_aus@yahoogroups. com" <suth_to_aus@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2012 5:40 PM
            Subject: [suth_to_aus] Re: Family Tree Online

            > Very well said Paddy. I recently was looking at a tree on Ancestry,
            > mentioning family of mine, and there were quite a few mistakes (facts
            > that I have proved).
            > I am not sure whether to make contact or not. What do you think?
            > Joan
            >
            >>

             
          • paddy walsh
            Jenelle, The only way to look at the suspect data published by some researchers is to treat all info as clues/guides only.  Sure investigate but prove before
            Message 5 of 7 , Apr 4, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              Jenelle,
              The only way to look at the suspect data published by some researchers is to treat all info as clues/guides only.  Sure investigate but prove before use.
              Paddy

              From: Jenelle Mccarrick <jmac2005@...>
              To: suth_to_aus@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Wednesday, 4 April 2012 6:18 PM
              Subject: RE: [suth_to_aus] Re: Family Tree Online

               
              I’ve got lots of mistakes and whatever on numerous branches of the family tree on ancestry..prove it when it comes to POLSON, COLLINS and so on..
              Jenelle.
               
               
            • Jenelle Mccarrick
              That s what I do.. Jenelle. _____ From: suth_to_aus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:suth_to_aus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of paddy walsh Sent: Thursday, 5 April 2012
              Message 6 of 7 , Apr 4, 2012
              • 0 Attachment

                That’s what I do..

                Jenelle.

                 


                From: suth_to_aus@yahoogroups.com [mailto: suth_to_aus@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of paddy walsh
                Sent: Thursday, 5 April 2012 8:09 AM
                To: suth_to_aus@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [suth_to_aus] Re: Family Tree Online

                 

                 

                Jenelle,

                The only way to look at the suspect data published by some researchers is to treat all info as clues/guides only.  Sure investigate but prove before use.

                Paddy

                 

                From: Jenelle Mccarrick <jmac2005@...>
                To: suth_to_aus@yahoogroups.com
                Sent: Wednesday, 4 April 2012 6:18 PM
                Subject: RE: [suth_to_aus] Re: Family Tree Online

                 

                 

                I’ve got lots of mistakes and whatever on numerous branches of the family tree on ancestry..prove it when it comes to POLSON, COLLINS and so on..

                Jenelle.

                 

                 

                No virus found in this message.
                Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4913 - Release Date: 04/03/12

              • Judy
                Definitely :) Judy Jenelle, The only way to look at the suspect data published by some researchers is to treat all info as clues/guides only. Sure investigate
                Message 7 of 7 , Apr 4, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  Definitely :)
                  Judy
                   

                  Jenelle,

                  The only way to look at the suspect data published by some researchers is to treat all info as clues/guides only.  Sure investigate but prove before use.

                  Paddy

                   

                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.