Genealogy Chat

Glen - I know the sort of stuff you are talking about, 71 year old mothers etc and it drives me mad. The biggest drawback for me as far as GR is concerned, is not being able to quickly judge what standard of proof other members work to. OC

OC Granted i could have missed a few from the couple,but my contact insists the last child was born when the mother was 71 years old,and the extracted IGI records together with a few PR searches do show that at least 9 entries would appear to be incorrect. I do know that there are some possible errors in my tree (and are recorded as 'still to confirm',but they are not kept on here or my FTM). We find ourselves heading back to verfying other trees for other researchers,but as you once said we don't really have the time do we. What does dissapoint me at times is the willingness of some people to only accept one version of events,the 'they aren't in the census so must be some other family' gets a little tedious after a while. I'm still a 'newbie' really,just six months or so into my research,yes i do spend many hours researching and looking at the boards,perhaps you are right when you mention about the standards we expect. Sorry Brenda,not meaning to hijack your thread,just 'soaking' up some useful ideas again and thinking out loud Glen

Ah, Glen, maybe you should dig a bit deeper.... I had a William Stubbs who appeared to be 3 different men although I could only find one baptism. These men had 29 children between them over a period of 52 years. I thrashed away at trying to find the other two William Stubbs until a lovely lady from GOONS sent me some Monumental Inscriptions. It was ONE man, married 3 times (I had the marriages, nowhere did it say widower!), twice married to a woman called Mary (first and last wife). William's last child was born when his eldest son was already a Grandfather! OC

Vert true OC I have a couple of marriages in my tree,and with copies of PR know they had children who would not appear on the census,being born after one and dying as infants before the next,several contacts have told me i am wrong,but i do know differnetly,however they won't be swayed. Another contact attaches any child born in the district with the correct surname to a couple,he claims that this couple have 27 children born over a forty three year period! Now call me an old cynic but i don't think that they did somehow.the bride was 29 when she married,perhaps i should dig a little bit harder you never know!!!! Glen

Yes, I second what Merry says! Nearly had a stroke trying to convince someone that she had the wrong 'join' to my tree - like Merry, I have lots of evidence (including a Death entry in the PR, aged 4 LOL) but contact did not believe me, even though she didnt actually have a marriage for this dead child. Reluctantly, I let it go in the end, although it still stings to see this rubbish on GR - and I know she has passed this incorrect information to 3 other genes members who have swallowed it whole. But its hard to accept that we cannot force our own standards of proof onto other people! OC

Brenda If flattery works then then as one of the most talented,resourceful,wisest and patient people on the boards you should send a message,here's hoping that it works for the benefit of both of you. Can you tell i'm still pondering over this will?LOL Glen

I agree that once is probably what you should aim for....... My 4xg-granddad appears on about a dozen other peoples trees, either on this site or on Ancestry One World Tree. Every single one of them has him marrying someone with the correct first name but wrong surname. Some of them have then followed the tree back from the wrong woman which means they are wasting their time and money! I am 100% (maybe even 200% lol) CERTAIN that I am right and they are WRONG and I have lots of evidence to back up !!! BUT.......No one wants to know. Either they don't reply (obviously I am a whole lot more tactful than above when I have contacted them!!!), or they have replied telling me that I am wrong, yet they have no evidence whatsoever to back up their assumptions! So, unless you want high blood pressure, just send one message and leave it at that. Trying harder will probably bring no further results! Merry

Phoenix As I cannot bear to see any of MY ancestors with incorrect information (LOL) yes, I would email once with the correct info. If they dont reply then leave it at that, you have done your genealogical duty. OC

Hi Sharon Flattery will get you everywhere! You're right, of course. I've just got to practice deep tact, as it's presumably their ancestors as well as mine. Not quite up to it tonight, though.

Brenda, I'd give it one go. I've made a fantastic friend and possible rellie ( once I manage to get a few days up at the archives ) Her tree got a bit skewed but we've sorted it out . I've seen a few others with the wrong line ( blinking neighbouring villages) and I've tried to contact them with no reply but I've tried. Also found a possible link for her and after a bit of questioning person admitted there were a lot of mistakes in their tree.... ( sigh, royalty grabber) go for it, see what happens but don't worry about it! Catch you at Kew soon! I've got loads of questions that you might be able to point me in the right direction on! You're a wonderful fountain of Knowedge! and I'm a sponge! :D Sharon x

Years ago, I corresponded with a distant cousin and traded information. Only recently I have put that branch onto GR and my correspondent appears as a hot match because of a collateral marriage. So do three other people. Our mutual branch doesn't match because they have adopted one standard spelling and I used another. No problem in that, but they have taken the place of marriage as being the place of baptism. The village they assume it to be is on the IGI, so you might wonder why none of their entries appear. In the interests of truth and our shared ancestors I really ought to contact them, but is it really worth it?

.