Genealogy Chat
Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!
- The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
- You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
- And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
- The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.
Quick Search
Single word search
Icons
- New posts
- No new posts
- Thread closed
- Stickied, new posts
- Stickied, no new posts
Is the IGI a reliable source?
Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
---|---|---|---|
|
Lisa J in California | Report | 11 Apr 2004 17:40 |
A very kind ancestor wrote down names, births, deaths, marriages and relationships of his/her line. I compared that information to the IGI and found that two dates were off by one year (the IGI had 1796 instead of 1797) but otherwise the information was perfect. On the otherhand, I shared POSSIBLE information with someone researching the same name as mine. She knew it had not been confirmed, and now that information is on the LDS site! I agree with others. Parish records COULD be correct; however, I will not include information that others have submitted on my records. |
|||
|
Judith | Report | 10 Apr 2004 17:18 |
I agree Jeannie, the variation on spellings of names can be confusing although with my family the problem arose in the original parish registers with my Everett line being spelled Everett, Everet, Evered, Everit and Everard all in the same parish records, and often on the same page of the register - I don't think my ag lab lot could read and write so the vicar or clerk could choose his favourite spelling. Again beware of the IGI - it groups variations of spellings but inexplicably doesn't put all possibilities together - so my Everard ancestor does not appear if I key in the other variations. |
|||
|
Susanne | Report | 10 Apr 2004 16:44 |
I did find someone on there that apparently married at the age of 3 !?! Not quite sure how reliable that one is :-) |
|||
|
Jeanie | Report | 10 Apr 2004 15:51 |
Hi Judith, they are a great start but they have recorded many of my names incorrectly. Having hunted high and low for a Benjamin Brewerton I found him as Burton. There have also been Brutons etc. Having said that many mistakes were at the actual local office where they had been wrongly recorded into some records. |
|||
|
Judith | Report | 10 Apr 2004 12:40 |
If the record is described as having been extracted... and has a reference number starting with a letter it has been transcribed from parish records and is fairly reliable, but not all parishes are covered, errors in transcription do happen, also the IGI doesn't include many registered burials so you may end up claiming an ancestor only to discover that they died in childhood - really you need to look at the parish registers yourself - usually at the county record office for the area, and to check burials as well. Other entries described as having been submitted by individuals and with a number only reference may have been carefully researched but equally may be guesswork eg 'born about ...' usually means that someone has counted back from a known marriage and assumed birth in the same parish Hope this helps Judith |
|||
|
Caroline | Report | 10 Apr 2004 12:11 |
I have found quite a few rellies on the IGI but how reliable is it and how would I go about verifying the information myself? |