Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Tree on Ancestry got my family so wrong ?

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

    Tree on Ancestry got my family so wrong ?

    Just seen a tree on Ancestry with one of my aunts in it , she is attached to completely the wrong parents and also the wrong grandparents its so wrong its laughable, plus she has nicked the photo I have of her without asking or thanking me .
    Now I know why I made my tree private.:(


    Val

    #2
    It is so annoying, isn't it.

    Mostly these days I just laugh it off, but I was once very upset when I saw my father married to entirely the wrong woman, along with MY comments about a family matter. I had made the comments to a contact in the days before I realised that not everyone thinks certain things are not for public view!

    OC

    Comment


      #3
      Yes OC am very annoyed actually as she has not done any research on my side by the looks of it, and as she took 2 of my photos she may as well have copied the right family names too.
      Dont see what they get out of it if its all wrong ???
      Nobody should put stuff in their tree unless they are asked if anybody minds I always do.
      Last edited by Val wish Id never started; 04-04-13, 22:41.


      Val

      Comment


        #4
        I know what you mean I found 2 trees one obviously copied from the other, they both had my my 2nd grate grandmothers parents wrong so i sent a little message nicely explaining the mistake and sent proof to back up what i was saying, one wrote back and had a go at me for looking at thier public tree and i got no response from the other. they have both been online since and not changed the mistake.

        Iv given up trying to help people unless they genuinaly want to share.

        Comment


          #5
          On one Ancestry tree, my father (who is still alive) is shown as being born in 1867 - so I guess he's not doing so bad!! It's partly my fault as some time ago I supplied that part of my tree to a distant cousin. I had privatised the dates of living people but not the names. I can see that he has then looked up the name on FreeBMD (it's a fairly unusual name), found a match and just assumed it was right without even thinking about the dates. Needless to say I have not paid much regard to the rest of his tree!

          Comment


            #6
            Don't forget to leave a comment ON THEIR TREE pointing out the errors of their ways. These comments are available for everyone to see.
            Elaine







            Comment


              #7
              people are funny aren't they ? a while ago I contacted somebody on Ancestry pointing out a person who was a bigamist in his tree, he wasn't happy said he had just started doing his tree so wasn't a good start ,and he didn't know about it, he never thanked me or contacted me again , why do people try and take the blame for what other people did ??? I love finding juicy stuff it makes it more interesting .


              Val

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Elaine ..Spain View Post
                Don't forget to leave a comment ON THEIR TREE pointing out the errors of their ways. These comments are available for everyone to see.
                Elaine

                If you leave a comment - can they remove it ?

                Vivian

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Vivian View Post
                  Elaine

                  If you leave a comment - can they remove it ?

                  Vivian
                  Yes they can unfortunately!!!
                  I was sure that when they first introduced the comment system, the only person who could delete was the person who made the comment.
                  However, I suppose this is open to abuse.
                  I just find it gives me the satisfaction of doing all I can to point out where I disagree with the research shown.
                  If it is seen by others, all well and good.
                  If the tree owner removes it then at least I know the message has got through to him/her!

                  If you look on this link, under the heading "Who can comment on my tree", there is a short explanation.
                  http://www.ancestry.co.uk/cs/legal/P...YourFamilyTree
                  Elaine







                  Comment


                    #10
                    As a sideline to this discussion:

                    to post a big puzzle. Mary Ann Claxton, who was born in the Bale area of Norfolk c1834 has a number of branches in different trees giving different husbands.

                    Mary Ann Claxton, who was the wife of James Herbert (in my tree), has appeared on two census after that marriage with a child called Herbert Arthur Haines, born c1856.
                    I have found the marriage that resulted in that child, Mary Anne Claxton married Thomas William Haines 1851 and I have found two children; Elizabeth 1853 Bale Norfolk (Later appears as a pauper with a two month child) and Herbert.
                    She remained married to James Herbert and has 9 children with him between 1858 and 1874 (all confirmed via census lists) One, Dorcas being my Gt Gt Grandmother
                    James dies 1879. But there are trees that has her married to a James Raven Claxton (Which is not correct) And married to a William Lynes where they later emigrated to Canada All this at the same time as her marriage to James Herbert.

                    My Mary Ann Claxton was from a hand written tree I was handed many years ago and as yet I have not been able to trace the actual marriage to James Herbert, c1858 And I would assume Suffolk/Norfolk.
                    So what is the correct line?
                    In my tree I have put THREE Mary Ann Claxtons for recording the three known lines as the children of William Claxton and mary Ann Huggins, now that really confuses people who come across the tree
                    Avatar is my Gt Grandfather

                    Researching:
                    FRANKLIN (Harrow/Pinner 1700 to 1850); PURSGLOVE (ALL Southern counties of England); POOLE (Tetbury/Malmesbury and surrounding areas of Gloucestershire and Wiltshire (1650 to 1900); READ London/Suffolk

                    Comment


                      #11
                      I sort of assume if you have a 'public' tree on ancestry (which I have) then you are giving others permission to use your 'stuff' as you've published it openly? I agree it is good practice to ask first but we should know that if we make it public then people will use it. Isn't that the nature of the site - sharing info to help us along?

                      I always contact people who get something wrong if they use my info and it's up to them if they want to do the work to check it out for themselves. If they don't, that's their problem as the warnings about getting your facts right with genealogy are so widespread. If they don't put their tree right, you can block them from connecting with your tree I believe so you are not seen to validate their tree facts? I agree leaving a comment on their facts is a good idea to help prevent others being led astray.

                      I've had so much help and good info by sharing, including others pointing out things I've got wrong(!) it far outweighs the risks of others using my stuff and sometimes getting it wrong.

                      Corinne

                      Comment


                        #12
                        I agree with you EssexCorinne. Everything I put on a public tree I do so fully expecting others to use and share. I'm pleased to occasionally come across some pictures of my mother that I'd posted; to me she isn't forgotten if another person discovers her photo & happily saves it to their tree. In other words--I'm deliberately putting this info out there in the hopes that it isn't lost or forgotten! Those things that I wish to remain private do so on my FTM tree.

                        Having said that, since joining this forum I now realize that not everyone shares this opinion, and I respect that. So I've modified my approach and if I find a public photo or other data which I wish to add to my tree I will use that photo or data and send either a message or make a comment on the data thanking the original poster for making it available.

                        If I encounter a tree which differs from mine I'll double-check my facts, then contact them to try and resolve the difference. I can't recall an instance where we weren't able to sort out where the error crept in and resolved it. I've had so much success sharing with other Ancestry members, and receiving treasures back, that I really don't think I'd enjoy working on the family tree without the sharing and interaction with others.

                        I do like Elaine's approach of putting a Comment on a questionable portion of someones tree though. If worded nicely, a responsible person should leave it there for others to see and make their own choices over. Yes, responsible is the key word in that sentence.
                        Last edited by Prairie Chicken; 06-04-13, 16:01.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Corrine and Prairie its not so much they copied the photos ,fair enough at that time my tree was public ,point is while they did that why not copy the right parents etc ??? the info was there , and I think its only polite a small hope you dont mind me using your photo is nice.


                          Val

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Yes Val, that's a bit odd, taking the photo but not the info. If they didn't trust your info, why take the photo?

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Coz some people are more interested in gathering things that they do not already have.

                              In birdwatching, those who are more interested in gaining as many 'ticks' as possible and are not really interested in the actual 'watching' of behaviour etc are known as Twitchers.

                              I wonder if we can have a genealogy term for this?

                              Originally posted by Prairie Chicken View Post
                              Yes Val, that's a bit odd, taking the photo but not the info. If they didn't trust your info, why take the photo?
                              Avatar is my Gt Grandfather

                              Researching:
                              FRANKLIN (Harrow/Pinner 1700 to 1850); PURSGLOVE (ALL Southern counties of England); POOLE (Tetbury/Malmesbury and surrounding areas of Gloucestershire and Wiltshire (1650 to 1900); READ London/Suffolk

                              Comment


                                #16
                                I call them "harvest bugs" - those little, late summer, critters that bite when you're in the great outdoors and cause great irritation.
                                Janet in Yorkshire



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

                                Comment


                                  #17
                                  we get those too Janet drive us mad have to come indoors , even your head itches, so maybe a good name for name collectors too.


                                  Val

                                  Comment


                                    #18
                                    Originally posted by TrevorFranklin View Post
                                    Coz some people are more interested in gathering things that they do not already have.

                                    In birdwatching, those who are more interested in gaining as many 'ticks' as possible and are not really interested in the actual 'watching' of behaviour etc are known as Twitchers.

                                    I wonder if we can have a genealogy term for this?
                                    "Tickers"?

                                    Comment


                                      #19
                                      I like "Tickers"myself, but then I don't find them annoying enough to qualify as harvest bugs. Those sound nasty!

                                      Comment


                                        #20
                                        Tickers sounds good to me


                                        Val

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X