Genealogy Chat

I'm writing an article about researching etiquette. Can anyone give me examples of what they hate/like other researchers doing. A bad example could be showing your details on the internet, giving your details to others, quoting their research as yours etc. Or good examples could be sharing research with family members, keeping confidentiality etc. Real life examples would be even better.

Thanks

I've got a family tree website - a really basic one - that I've added a lot of details about my ancestors to, but I update it by making a report in my family tree programme and then skimming off any sensitive information or any details about living people (or anybody who's less than 100 years old).

The kind of information I might remove would be, for instance, any family stories passed down by word of mouth (although I keep those on my tree programme and make notes on which relative told me what). I definitely wouldn't put details such as whether a living person was adopted because it's happened to me and the person who did it didn't check that a) their assumption was correct (it was) and b) I was happy for them to share that information.

I did print out a 25-30 page report on immediate family groups on my dad's side which I've forwarded to some relatives and I made footnotes for it (a bit like I did in my dissertation - but less formally) to show sources ie. information given by X's grandson, or parish records held at Lancashire Records Office etc, so that if anybody wants to follow it up, they'd know where to find my sources.

(Deleted post below is mine - I double-posted.)

Thanks for the help! If anyone can think of any other issues then please keep posting.

Louise

If you're writing to someone using snail mail and hope for a reply always include a stamped addressed envelope. It is polite to do so and if they can't answer your query you're much more likely to get a reply if you've sent an SAE - and negative info. is often useful too.

Angela

Personally ...

I can't stand it when I look at someone's tree on (for example) this site and it's just the male line going back however many generations - no info on the women at all. Please research the distaff line!!!

Also, on the same sort of line, I cannot bear on programmes like WDYTYA where they put the family tree on line and the wives are shown with the husband's surnames!!! Drives me potty

Sorry - but good to get that off my chest!

Jill

I'll probably answer this in bits.

A bad example is not quoting your research at all, but just pinching your records and loading them into their tree.

A good example is people who are prepared to help you search for an obscure relative. Also people prepared to share information with you

Regards

Margaret

I have only a few generations each of my parents' sides and I have my OH's parentage (no siblings) back to 1675 - his Mum's side only two generations. All of this is ongoing but to date I have 400 people in my tree.

I don't like it when someone asks for access to my tree then they copy ALL of it - and gloat on another site that they have THOUSANDS in their tree! Who cares?

If they were closely related, I would know of them, and if they are distantly related say, on my mother's side - why would they want to copy everything about my OH's family onto their own tree? These are 'name collectors'. Does it matter how many names we have in our trees?

No Berona, lots of names does not mean anything on its own. On the other hand I have now researched 5 different families (all connected to me) - my own, my husband's (which most of us do), my cousin's husband, my husband's cousin's wife (birthday present), and latterly the family of my daughter's intended husband. I have just started on the family of my husband's cousins husband, at her request. That takes me to about 3000 names for 5 families.

Now the question arises as to how far down the line people go. If they start adding the history of siblings (and many do - I have not done so in the main), it can easily double or treble the size of a person's tree.

I am not unduly worried by a large tree, but more interested in where they have got the infromation from.

Margaret