General Chat

I found someone with lots of my family details on their tree, altho they had some names spelled incorrectly and such. I asked them what connection they had to my parents and it turns out they are related to a woman who is married to a late cousin of mine's son. It seems a bit strange to have such a distant connection recorded on her tree. She was most belligerent in her reply too, as if to say why shouldn't I have them there?

I haven't bothered to tell her she has wrong spellings ....


Lizx

Years back, someone from Genes (he doesn't post on the boards) contacted me about my dad's stepdad - who had an unusual surname. I quite happily told him all I knew, but none of his family were on my tree. In fact my tree on here was/is only my mum's side.
However, at this time, there was a 'glitch' that, because I had replied to him, allowed him to see my tree.
He then proceeded to attempt to copy everything from my tree, despite the fact that none were remotely related to dad's stepdad (dad was adopted aged 16, so his stepdad had nothing to do even with his upbringing). After a day or two I realised what he was doing and closed my tree.
However, in his rush to add names without connection, he 'assumed' a lot, and seems to have made guesses about where people were born, so has all my Suffolk ancestors born in Southampton, the Romsey ones born in Devon etc., and half the dates wrong.

Guess who he hasn't got on his tree? My dad and my grandmother, the only 'links' with dad's stepfather and my mother's side.

His tree, which is huge - is not only on here, it's on Ancestry - and is a pile of hogwash :-D

My reason for regarding Ancestry trees with suspicion: My sister, whose father (and mine) was b 1899, is alleged to have m a man b 1723. Sister and our dad are both in a lot of the trees. Many of the owners of the trees don't want to know, some say they are on x number of trees so it must be right. Totally innumerate.

I do look at the family my ancestors married into on the census as sometimes it turns out that 2 siblings married into the same family...........none of them seemed to want to leave Sussex and it wasn't highly populated back then, so it's hardly surprising.

if there are siblings marrying into one of my families I include just their parents and any other siblings, but no further or the tree would be so big it would topple over.

The person with him in his tree could be related via a marriage. So the relationship could be very tenuous.

Some people when doing their tree will add in all the family etc., of those who marry into their family, hence some trees being quite large.

I think many of us do not do this. I will add a spouse and any children from this marriage, but not take that family any further.

It is a matter of choice.

But this can explain how some of our ancestors end up in trees and we cannot see the connection.

Hope this helps

It did cross my mind that this person could be researching soldiers who died in WW1.
Certainly they can´t be a descendant because my chap was killed 2 weeks after the war started, aged 21 & he never married.......never got chance!!!
If it is a research project, it´s not really a family tree is it?

There are far more good trees on Ancestry than bad ones, but sadly we have all encountered the truly appalling ones on there.

I found one last week where they had added every hint to their tree as fact. Some poor sod died at least 3 times!!!! :-D :-D :-D

I don't trust too many of those Ancestry trees, since I know how extremely wrong some of them are.

I like your avatar too Shelly, you're a very kind girl.

thank you an
just wanted to make elizabeth feel i bit special for the day

love the avatar Shelly!! :-D

i have to keep reminding my self not to branch to fare side ways
trouble is when im board i just can not help my self

but my tree looks biger than it is as i have both my side of grandparents and the old mans joined together so properly looks off putting to some

True DC, all our dirty laundry and skeletons are out there somewhere................*goes off to search some more* :-D

Everything they will have found is in the public domain

;-)

Gwyn I have hardly got out of Sussex with mine......apart from the nomadic Newmans 3 of them were hiding in Manchester and Alfred went to London!!!! .

What a gadabout he was :-D :-D

I don't know how many names Kitty has on her tree now, but I wouldn't dream of claiming all of them, even though we found that we are distantly related.

(She wouldn't want mine either, with an English and a seperate Welsh set of JONES families, valleys full of DAVIES and fields full of tater pickers in Sussex and Herefordshire.)

Gwyn

Det.....that is what I do sometimes, but I am plain nosey :-D

that's not a tree - it's a whole forest :-D

Some times 'the hunt' can take you over - you spend ages tracking down a distant twig of a twig......just because you can! :-)

Mind you, 79399 names is rather excessive.