Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Some Ancestry Trees, ROTFL

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Some Ancestry Trees, ROTFL

    Just been having a glance through some Ancestry trees claiming names from the One Name Study I'm involved with.
    I was very puzzled by some names of couples who were allegedly married in the 1500s (no sources of course!)

    The names seemed familiar to me .......
    ... then I looked at my records. The names of the couples (added to about 30 public trees!) are the same names as couples who married in the 1800s and even in one case 1908!
    How on earth they managed to leap back in time to before Parish Records started is beyond me! (Maybe a Tardis was involved!)

    I know they all copy from each other but one person must have started the trail! Gave me a good laugh anyway :D

    Anne

  • #2
    It used to amaze me in the early days of Family Search. Much of the submitted information consisted of things like "Mr Jones, son of Mr & Mrs Jones" going back 4 or 5 generations!

    This is collecting ancestors for the sake of it, with no real research involved. A bit like some people I know who have several thousand Facebook friends!
    Co-ordinator for PoW project Southern Region 08
    Researching:- Wieland, Habbes, Saettele, Bowinkelmann, Freckenhauser, Dilger in Germany
    Kincaid, Warner, Hitchman, Collie, Curtis, Pocock, Stanley, Nixey, McDonald in London, Berks, Bucks, Oxon and West Midlands
    Drake, Beals, Pritchard in Kent
    Devine in Ireland

    Comment


    • #3
      Ah, Pete, but there WAS a point to the "Mr Jones son of Mr Jones" entries on familysearch! Members of the LDS church have a religious duty to identify and posthumously baptise their ancestors, back at least four generations. They are told that where there are no records, or there is confusion, to name them as above (Mr Jones son of, etc) so that they can be baptised - you may not know who they are, but God will!

      Of cours, as with any hobby, some people are better at it than others and some people read the rules, others don't. Which is why my 4 x GGM Mary Slater had 45 children, the last one born when she was 69, five years after her death. Some born in USA, some born days later in Lancashire.

      I often have a snigger at all the trees which have Mary Trafford as their ancestor. As she died aged 4 it seems unlikely. When challenged to give details of her marriage (about 1751) no one can come up with anything, BUT...I must be wrong and everyone else must be right because she's on 30 trees!

      OC

      Comment


      • #4
        I know I'm going to regret asking Anne but to show my ignorance, what is ROTFL............Research of the Family ? perhaps.

        Comment


        • #5
          ROTFL=roll on the floor laughing=
          Angelina

          Comment


          • #6
            I admit that I do sometimes cheat & add information from other trees but at least I then go on to find the information to back up who they are etc. I only add them before I forget who they are & where I found the information from, if they aren't part of the tree then I delete them. Simple as that. I'm sure plenty of people have done that one but to add a whole new tree into yours that dates back as far as 1500 Century is just plain thieving to me.
            Lennon. Phillips. Thomas. Peacock. Tubridy. Burton.

            I am the girl from that town & I'm darn proud of it.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by lennon2011 View Post
              I admit that I do sometimes cheat & add information from other trees but at least I then go on to find the information to back up who they are etc. I only add them before I forget who they are & where I found the information from, if they aren't part of the tree then I delete them. Simple as that. I'm sure plenty of people have done that one but to add a whole new tree into yours that dates back as far as 1500 Century is just plain thieving to me.
              That's the reason my tree is now private in ancestry! too many people annexed my tree to theirs incorrectly and if they had only thought to check they would see how wrong they are. They don't even reply when I tell them the true scenario or correct their mistake.
              Margaret

              Comment


              • #8
                I contacted someone with a public tree on Ancestry recently, as he had one of 18 trees which had my 4G grandmother in married to the wrong person. I just wanted to double-check all these people didn't know something I didn't. I was very polite and just said there were some discrepancies between our trees and would he like to discuss them. It turned out that this chap was responsible for 10 of the 18 trees and that the other 8 had copied him and quoted him as their source. I asked him why he had picked the (slightly improbable) marriage to the other person rather than the one aged about 21 in her home parish and he said they were "his findings". I sent him proof that he was wrong and he replied he was "happy with my findings thank you very much".

                By this point I realised he didn't care what was right or wrong and out of curiosity I looked more closely at one of his trees. It contained 120,000 people, including William the Conquerer and the entire royal descent from there on down !! If you want a good laugh, then have a look how many trees have him in, or even better search for Adam with a wife Eve.
                Rick

                Comment


                • #9
                  There's actually 1 tree that had my Nanna Mavis on with Granddad Albert and all of her children and yet out of those children only 1 had their children listed and that was Mum's kids. My tree is private (I hope) so I couldn't understand why they were hidden, I've messaged this person every month without a reply. It's only recently that I've found out the person I have on FB & have been emailing is that person's Son.

                  I'd sent over some photos that I was sent on Genes to see if they knew who they were and the next day I had a new hint on Ancestry. Yup you guessed it, it was one of those photos I'd sent. The original tree owner was the Grandson of Thomas Tubridy, making them Nanna's Nephew and it's his Son that I've been talking to as he did say that he'd send them to his Dad to see if he know who they were.
                  Lennon. Phillips. Thomas. Peacock. Tubridy. Burton.

                  I am the girl from that town & I'm darn proud of it.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Rick View Post
                    I contacted someone with a public tree on Ancestry recently, as he had one of 18 trees which had my 4G grandmother in married to the wrong person. I just wanted to double-check all these people didn't know something I didn't. I was very polite and just said there were some discrepancies between our trees and would he like to discuss them. It turned out that this chap was responsible for 10 of the 18 trees and that the other 8 had copied him and quoted him as their source. I asked him why he had picked the (slightly improbable) marriage to the other person rather than the one aged about 21 in her home parish and he said they were "his findings". I sent him proof that he was wrong and he replied he was "happy with my findings thank you very much".

                    By this point I realised he didn't care what was right or wrong and out of curiosity I looked more closely at one of his trees. It contained 120,000 people, including William the Conquerer and the entire royal descent from there on down !! If you want a good laugh, then have a look how many trees have him in, or even better search for Adam with a wife Eve.
                    It makes you wonder why these people even bother if the 'truth' is not what they want

                    It just makes me mad to see some of my ancestors wrongly attached to other trees.

                    Margaret

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I think Pete nailed the answer above, Margaret. They are collecting names for the sake of it and have no interest in real research.
                      Rick

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I had someone query the tree I have on my website, actually calling me an idiot for getting it wrong. I replied to him, accepting that I might be wrong as this was my German roots and I was relying on German parish register images (I don't speak or read German, and 18th and 19th century German script is very difficult to read), and if he could provide me with his sources and proof I would gladly change my tree.

                        All he managed to come up with as proof was a screen dump from his own family tree program; no original record sources at all. He added that he lived in the village my family came from, and that was all the proof he needed! He also argued that the remnants of the family living in the area were nothing to do with my family, despite my cousin having a box full of postcards and letters sent to my Grandmother from that very village!

                        Fortunately I had researched this section of my tree in colaboration with an expert in German genealogy, and after double checking our research concluded that we were definately correct, and we sent him the proof. He continued with a flood of very rude and insulting emails and would not accept our proof at all. I ignored him and he eventually went away.
                        Co-ordinator for PoW project Southern Region 08
                        Researching:- Wieland, Habbes, Saettele, Bowinkelmann, Freckenhauser, Dilger in Germany
                        Kincaid, Warner, Hitchman, Collie, Curtis, Pocock, Stanley, Nixey, McDonald in London, Berks, Bucks, Oxon and West Midlands
                        Drake, Beals, Pritchard in Kent
                        Devine in Ireland

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Is anyone else descended from the Greek gods? Someone who believes she is related to me has them on her tree...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by PeteW1959 View Post
                            All he managed to come up with as proof was a screen dump from his own family tree program; no original record sources at all. He added that he lived in the village my family came from, and that was all the proof he needed! He also argued that the remnants of the family living in the area were nothing to do with my family, despite my cousin having a box full of postcards and letters sent to my Grandmother from that very village!
                            So does that mean that I'm wrong when I give the correct birthday's of my grandparents & great grandparents? After all apart from Nanna Mavis & her parents they are all Stockton born & I'm currently living in a Stockton house, granted I do only have my parents births & marriage certificate here. ;)
                            Lennon. Phillips. Thomas. Peacock. Tubridy. Burton.

                            I am the girl from that town & I'm darn proud of it.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              My birth father died age 6 in the USA.................................. according to someones tree on ancestry.

                              It is the right family just that they got this bit wrong - as his parents and siblings are correct.
                              Last edited by JBee; 03-01-14, 19:36.



                              Researching Irish families: FARMER, McBRIDE McQUADE, McQUAID, KIRK, SANDS/SANAHAN (Cork), BARR,

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                Oc as always has the funniest experience! Generally if people have royals in the tree, it is laughable. But many have legitimate lines from royals in their trees. When you see Adam and Eve haha run for the hills! I have many ancestors attached to American pedigrees, and that infuriates me. Some people just add names for the sake of it, others are sloppy. But simple searching will prove many mistakes I have seen.

                                Comment


                                • #17
                                  My dad appears on an Ancestry tree - according to that, he was born in 1867. Not bad going, since he's still alive today!

                                  Comment


                                  • #18
                                    According to some Ancestry researchers, I am descended from Adam & Eve, through my mother's line - her maiden name was ABEL.

                                    Of course, one tree holder had to go one better - Abel, begat by Adam & Eve, DUST, then GOD

                                    I so wish Mum had still been here to enjoy the laugh.

                                    Jay
                                    Janet in Yorkshire



                                    Genealogists never die - they just swap places in the family tree

                                    Comment


                                    • #19
                                      And do you know that the free family tree programme provided by the LDS has room for ONE THOUSAND generations! That'll take you back 30,000 years approximately...........it's just encouraging them, in my opinion!

                                      OC
                                      Last edited by Olde Crone Holden; 04-01-14, 11:17.

                                      Comment


                                      • #20
                                        That one I mentioned up the top actually has 1 tree with over 16,652 people within it and I can tell you that most of those people can be found in any book about Royals no matter what the country is.
                                        Lennon. Phillips. Thomas. Peacock. Tubridy. Burton.

                                        I am the girl from that town & I'm darn proud of it.

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X