More moans about Ancestry

mallog · Post by **mallog** » Sun Apr 26, 2009 8:42 pm

I've just looked up one of the hints and found a tree which includes my rellies. Although a census return gives their person as a nephew to my rellie, they seem to have changed his name and made him a "son".

I'm so

or

I can't be bothered even asking them what's going on

Post by **paddyscar** » Sun Apr 26, 2009 9:24 pm

Hi Mallog:

These are the problems of people being so anxious to fill in their trees, that they don't bother with silly things like Facts and the idea that More is better!

The very sad part of it, is that the more repeated these errors become, the more they are cited as source and therefore 'correct'.

Frances

mallog · Post by **mallog** » Sun Apr 26, 2009 9:39 pm

I also think folk look up the IGI and reckon if they find a result it must be their relative not realising that it doesn't cover everyone and also the amount of people who shared the same name.

Ann In the UK · Post by **Ann In the UK** » Sun Apr 26, 2009 9:46 pm

I posted a thread about this very subject the other week!

That really is starting to get to me on Ancestry I looked at my hints the other day only to find they've now more than doubled - and, when I looked into them, it wasn't because they'd found new sources of information, it was because several people had copied parts of my tree and Ancestry was sending theirs back to me as though it was new - it's MY b***** information!!

(If you get what I mean

)

But, again, looking even further, none of it made sense - chunks of it had been ignored, or changed, and some of it didn't even belong together. I'm beginning to think it's so called 'professional' researchers using Ancestry's trees to store all of their old and new lines of inquiry or something - what do they care if they skew everyone else's research in the process?

I think if Ancestry don't do something about this potentially destructive menace very soon, people - like me - are going to start abandoning it in their droves!

Post by **Tracey** » Sun Apr 26, 2009 10:00 pm

Hi Mallog

Long story and i wont go into it but................

I have a tree on roots web, the original one i removed due to it being copied once or twice without the people concerned contacting me, telling or asking me, and they wernt strangers either so, i took it off and replaced it with just names places and years and i also added a few "fairies" so now i know who hasnt done their homework if it appears elswhere

wicked i know so dont discount they havnt possibly done the same.

daj · Post by **daj** » Sun Apr 26, 2009 10:32 pm

I find IGI to be so inaccurate I just do not rely on it at all. Example, today I had built a new branch of my tree via SP and I thought I would have a cursory glance on IGI/FamilySearch. I found the male I was looking for but he was married to both a Catharine McIntosh and a Kathrine MacKintosh both with the correct marriage date. Clearly the same person but very poorly transcribed.

I have better results in sharing my tree with Genesreunited users and exchanging questions. I never make my tree public so they need to ask to share data.

My rule is to always validate and cross check data before it hits my tree.

There does seem to be an ethic out there with some people that they simply grow there tree by grabbing what they can.

mallog · Post by **mallog** » Sun Apr 26, 2009 11:16 pm

Ann I knew there was another post somewhere about this but I couldn't be bothered tracking it down so I just started a new one

Tracey wrote: replaced it with just names places and years

That's mostly what I've done. I've split my family into several trees and I've only made one public. If I think someone is genuine I will allow them access to the relevant tree but even at that they are getting the bare minimum.

mallog · Post by **mallog** » Sun Apr 26, 2009 11:21 pm

Ann In the UK wrote:several people had copied parts of my tree and Ancestry was sending theirs back to me as though it was new - it's MY b***** information!!

I'm getting my own tree back as a possible result when I search

It says I've to ask nicely and this person might let me see their tree

Ann In the UK · Post by **Ann In the UK** » Sun Apr 26, 2009 11:29 pm

I'm getting my own tree back as a possible result when I search It says I've to ask nicely and this person might let me see their tree

Me too!

Post by **Anne H** » Sun Apr 26, 2009 11:32 pm

I don't have any public trees, but does anybody have Catherine of Aragon in their tree?

Apparently I do, if the submitter to the info on IGI is to be believed.

I thought I had found a link about a year ago with someone on IGI who had lots of the same families as myself, so kept a note of his information intending to contact him after I had thoroughly checked everything out...never got around to it! Anyway, last week I was browsing the Pedigree files, which I hadn't done before, and up comes this same person with not only Catherine of Aragon but many, many others...even several with dates B.C.

I don't think I'll be contacting him afterall!

Let's face it...you have to take some of these people with a pinch of salt.

Regards,
Anne H