Genealogy Chat

Derek

I always tell people to be sure that records taken from the IGI are extracted
......... every single time I direct someone to that site or when I c&p something on to here

If I mention Submitted records, then I always say that they cannot be trusted because usually there is no backup documentation.

I always tell people not to add Submitted records to their trees unless and until they can find verification from elsewhere



and I have been villified for it by some members who tell me that I shouldn't tell my grandmother to suck eggs as they know that submitted records are not to be trusted

........... or who believe they know everything on IGI is absolutely accurate. After all the Mormons wouldn't lie would they?


I also have tried and failed to make contact with a submitter who has submitted many names from my fahter's family ......... some information correct, some wrong, and some I would like to check. She lived in a small town in Australia, and i went so far as to go online, find that town, and see if she still lived there (it was that small that I could do that!!).

Nada ........ she must have moved somewhere else.





sylvia

One can be fortunate with a submitted entry - I wrote to someone that had submitted an entry and was sent verified information :-)

Hi linda..........great..you've got the right idea..always verify Submitted entries if you can....Often they are fine..but it's great when a bit of extra work gives you the facts..in fact wherever your information comes from it best to try other avenues to confirm.........It's like EUREKA!!! when you find it all hangs together

Good luck

Derek

Please may I add for any new members Derek...

If I have found a submitted entry I have googled the library that holds the parish records of that particular area with the hope of verifying the entry.

I have found local libraries far more helpful than Record Offices.

Linda

If you want to be a bit pompous.then at least spell denigrated properly....

Personally, I will not have the IGI, Family Search, or Hugh Wallis batches denegrated.

I also agree that submitted entries should always be viewed with suspicion, as with all internet posted PR's nothing taken as truth until fully researched.

I will add however, I have five submitted records, fully researched, PR's copied and verified, without them I would have never confirmed Cooke to 1781 Nottingham.

Bob

Joan.......trouble is that several people can submit entries...totaly independent of each other..and often totally indepoendent from fact...so many Americans are desperate to latch onto even the slightest possible link to an ancestor in UK....they submit myth as fact..........bit like Wikipedia really!
I am a Gilchrist......hopefully from Scotalnd pre 1757....but I can't prove it..yet the American Gilchrists claim heritage back to 800 AD.......

Derek

well said Chrissie, its not about the number of names in you tree, more that those you do have are all accurately researched and verified...........


Good to hear that some of the submitted entries on IGI are in fact accurate...I am always very wary of them.


Nicky

Yes in my case the submitted entry was correct but I would still check info on any other submitted entry before using it on my tree. I don't care how few or many names I have on my tree, I want it to be accurate.

Chrissie

Excellent set of responses......point is really that Submiitted entries are to be viewed merely as a starting point.....and become really valuable when corroborated by other evidence.

Derek

Chris,

Hence my advice to corroborate wherever you can. Incidentally, in your example, was the submitted record correct or not?

It's a lways a good thing to remind members about the difference between submitted and extracted records especially for the info of new members. I found a marriage from a submitted entry but did not enter it on my tree due to the advice re submitted entries. Fortunately I then found it in Phillimores marriages. I've just completed my first year of research and am very grateful of any advice even when it's repeated.

Chris

Hi Joan..I know you do!! consider yourself exempted from my comments.
Keep up your good work.

Derek

To put the other side of the case:-

SUBMITTED records are also wildly accurate.....! It all depends on how meticulous the submitter was, so don't dismiss them all as rubbish - it could be seen as an insult to the submitter too.

The problem is that there is no way of knowing which ones are more accurate than others.

The other thing to bear in mind with submitted records is that some of the information may accurate, some guesswork. This can be particularly relevant where there is an estimated birth year on a marriage - the latter being accurate, the former not.

Both dates will appear on an IGI search as though they are separate, when in fact they are from a single submission. Be especially wary if the birth date is 21 years prior to the marriage.

EXTRACTED records are also only as good as the transcriber. There are also many I have seen where some of the detail, such as the date is incorrect, so don't always assume they are correct either.

As ever always try and corroborate your information independently.

There are loads of lovely peeps on here trying yo help loads of other peeps. But some of you send reams and reams of stuff straight off Family Search or IGI.

Please please note that there are novices on here who are not aware of the problems with IGI.

SUBMITTED records are very often wildly false...at best a guess, at worst complete fabrication..and novices take your i9nfo on board as fact..unless you make it clear its SUBMITTED

EXTRACTED on the other hand are direct from Parish records or other reliable sources, and can usually be accepted as fact.

Then i get asked to sort things out for peeps that are convinced they have right info.when they haven't.............very difficult!!

Derek