Genealogy Chat

Beware the member with over 50,000 names in her tree!

It would appear that the problem on Genes Reunited is no one is compelled to enter a community name so the board name ( i.e. Frank )is used by default. When I joined and attempted to enter a community name, I was knocked back three times ending up with Frank 06.

Come on GR...................

It is only Board Names that have to be unique, not User Names. As stated, it is the membership No: that will identify one member from another, not the name.

By far the majority of members on here neither have Board Names, nor I suspect ever read the boards, never mind posting on them.

I have only tried to merge a tree from someone else once. This was several years ago when I was just starting. It was from a reputable source and there was no issue with the accuracy of the information.

Maybe because I wasn't used to the merge process, or was just rather green at the time, it was a bit of a disaster and took me weeks to sort things out.

By far the biggest single problem was with individuals having different years of birth. Unless you spot it you end up not with a merge but with an add ing the person so they are on twice. Then there is the fallout, multiple marriages where there shouldn't be wrong children linked to parents, etc etc the list is endless.

I have seen many trees like this on GR, Ancestry and other sites, and can now spot them a mile off, so I know what these people are doing and treat what they tell me with extreme caution.

Whilst I will on occasion use information provided by other members it is only after independent checking - against census and bmd records, for example.

Going back to the issue of dates, many people have the wrong year because they have used the age on the census to work out the year of birth.

Let me explain. If we have someone aged 11 on the 1891 census, it is usually assumed the the yob is 1880.

Wrong.

As the census took place around the end of March there is only a 3 in 12 chance that the person was born in 1880. On the other hand there is a 9 in 12 chance that the person was born in 1879, so it is actually better to use 1879, at least until you have confirmed the correct date.

As a minimum I always try to find the entry in the BMD index, not always possible but if your name is not that common it is often possible to do so with a high level of confidence. At least from this you know the birth was no later than the end of that quarter.

Sites such as Ancestry have a lot to answer for as their calculations are flawed in the same way.

Obviously this doesn't apply to dated before 1837 and the 1841 census, but if you can check the original parish record transcript it often has the exact dob, so in many ways earlier dates can be more accurate.

I recently made contact with another GR member, who is actually a fairly close relative as they go - her grandmother was my mother's first cousin. She sent me photos I had never seen, and in return, I sent her a very large amount of information, including family stories (my mother is in her late 90s and is able to remember a great deal about them). My tree, in places goes back to around 1600 - verified as carefully as I am able.

I have heard nothing more from her, several weeks later, although all the information and my close family * have popped up on "Hot Matches". To be fair, on her tree they are "hidden", and I have no real objection to this, but I do feel rather as though I have been milked and dropped!

* No, I know its not recommended, but one of the reasons I started this was to be able to show my grandchildren their English heritage - their mother is European. I find the GR tree format very easy for them to understand.

Hi guys,

Thanks for all your comments.

Sylvia sorry that you had that happen to you. Not sure what motivates people sometimes!

Kay I can't see the numbers, I wish there was something that everone had to have unique names like most sites do!

Cheers all!

Pat,

You share a same name..................but your membership numbers are poles apart so unlkess you have another paid account it can be seen there are 2 Patricia's,,,,just slide your mouse/curser over the name and membership number should appear along bottom grey area of your screen,,

there are many posters who share a same christian name,,,,,,,dont worry about it..

I would just like to say that I did not write the reply under my user name Patricia signed Pat yesterday at 19.08!!!!!

Who is posting under my username????

Pat

and how many times has it happened in the past????

Margaret



something similar to what you postulate has happened to me


My borther was 10½ years older than me


The One Name Study group on my father's name published a CD of all the names, circulated it at a meeting of "the" name some years ago. People incorporated the information into their trees ...... they're now from all over the world (a very prolific family back in the 1800s!!)

I got hold of that CD in 2006 ............. when I looked at it


I had the right mother
Dad had disappeared
my Brother was my father
I had no brother


trying to get this sorted out is what led to the owner of the One Name Study being thrown out of the group .............. see the thread on One Name Study.

www.genesreunited.co.uk/boards.asp?wci=thread&tk=1188499


sylvia

My tree is mine, researched to my standards. That might be better or worse than other people's. But it is mine. Done mostly by me. I have sometimes added names from other people's trees - people that I have confirmed are related and ascerained that the research on their branch is sound. One day I will check it out thoroughly, but for the time being I have imported into my tree. But this is not from complete strangers, it is from people who have explained their connection, and many have provided me with copy certificates, photos, arguments, details of their research etc.

Just be reasonable, I say.

I think it is very dangerous to allow people to just import your tree into theirs. You might end up with your father apparently married three times to totally incorrect people when he only married once to your mother. Who knows what some government department might make of that! And worse things have happened when trees have been "pinched".

I only give access to people who can work their way down from my ancestor to themselves. And then I am delighted to have a new living relative of my ancestors, and we stay in touch and share new information.

Margaret

My tree is mine, researched to my standards. That might be better or worse than other people's. But it is mine. Done mostly by me. I have sometimes added names from other people's trees - people that I have confirmed are related and assumed the research on their branch is sound. One day I will check it out, but for the time being I have imported into my tree. But this is not from complete strangers, it is from people who have explained their connection, and many have provided me with copy certificates, photos etc.

Just be reasonable, I say.

Margaret

Hi all,

In reponse to your comments:

Hawkwind the tree only contains names and approx dates no marriages deaths etc. If it was the sort you say would the person who contacted me say that?

MInnie the tree contains multiple surnames, if it was a one name study would it not concentrate on one or a couple of surnames.

Patricia I have been asking the person how we are connected and for more details but no response. Bear in mind that they contacted me not the other way around. I understand your view on sharing trees and I am quite happy to do so when someone can reasonably be sure of a link. I'm sorry but I figure with all the time, money and effort I have spent on my tree that the information in it should not be handed out willy nilly just to "share trees". The free information people can obtain if they are looking for it. If the person was genuine then they would have replied to my my requests I guess. That's my own opinion you obviously have a differing one and that's all right too, that's your business. I was merely asking what people thought of a tree that large, would it be likely to be authentic or not not starting the question of should I share a tree or not.

Thanks everyone for your comments.

Dear All,
Why does it matter if someone copies your tree? Surely the more information that is shared, the more knowledge and information that everyone has, the better for everyone?
If the 'name collectors' just copy trees at random and do not check for themselves then that is their misfortune and it should be obvious if they do not quote sources. It would be very expensive to obtain all records, some people do not have the money to do it. But if they enjoy just obtaining information from censuses and free bmd and internet information and putting it into their tree then what harm is it doing?
(I always regard it as amusing about 'my' tree anyway, as statistically it is highly likely that along the way someone was not the Father, and so we are only tracing names, not necessarily relatives.)
Pat

My wife is descended from a family whose origins go back to the Norman Conquest and before.

We are members of a private website on 'My Family' of some several hundred members from around the Globe, all of whom share a connection to the family. Members are encouraged to supply details of their own family tree which is then added to one master copy. I'm not sure how many names it contains currently but we are talking tens if not hundreds of thousands of names.

In addition there are some 20 or so other trees available to members, generally specialising on some specific area of the family and its' connections.

The site has various spreadsheets detailing virtually every birth marriage and death since records began in 1837. These are checked against the original transcripts and submitted to Free BMD on a regular basis. In fact you will find records on Free BMD right up to December 1983 for the family.

Name collecting? Some may think so but it is nevertheless a priceless resource for anyone wanting to research the family.

These people could be doing a one name study
Check GOONS before you dismiss them

Had a similar message a couple of weeks ago from a lady with a huge tree.
Asked her where my rellies fitted in & was told they are not actually family, but are "in her tree", Wonder how?
Marion

She is not necesarily a name collector in the way that we imagine, but it is unlikely that she has fully checked out every link to her diverse family. Unless she has spent a lot a lot of money (which she might have done).

I would still, however, want a person to tell me how they are related to my relly. I have about 3,000 in my tree (which I consider big!), and if someone contacts me I try to take them through it, e.g. start with Fred Bloggs 1796, his son Fred 1822, his daughter Mary 1835, her son Joe 1870, his son Fred 1900, his son Ludicrous, and my dad Fantastic.

So people can see that I have done the research, and can see how I fit in.

Margaret

Thanks,

No I am very careful about who I give access to, I have just never seen a tree so big!

I have asked twice for more information but no response from her.

I can't imagine why anyone would want to "borrow" someone else's family really especially mine, who seem be be your average family, no titles or wealth etc amongst them! A few criminals but that's about it!

Dear Rachelle

My advice, for what it's worth, is never to give access to your tree to someone if you are not sure how they are related to you.

If, like me, you like to be polite, ask questions and give a little information where appropriate.

I have been a fool in the past and there are quite a few 'copy cats' who have my tree on Genes. I don't update it any more so if they want more they'll have to do some work!

I can't see how she could possibly have verified and checked all the info necessary to gather 50,000 names. More likely is that she is a 'name collector' and is just adding the names / copying the trees of anyone that has even a distant connection.

Personally I would steer well clear unless you want all your tree details added to hers as well!

Sam x