U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-22-2013, 10:22 AM
 
Location: 2016 Clown Car...fka: Wisconsin
738 posts, read 771,028 times
Reputation: 1180

Advertisements

While I'm always delighted to find ancestors I'm looking for..."by accident"...I now find it 'amusing' when I peruse the census data and find those...ahem...discrepancies. I've gotten to the point that should I encounter data that is either absolute or questionable, I am compelled to dig deeper.

Admittedly, I am a bit OCD when it comes to my research; regardless of who it's for. So when I'm double checking my data against something I find, I have to prepare myself for the inevitable 'let down'. As I posted in a different thread, I used to attempt to contact individuals and initiate a discussion about their data if for nothing else than to double/triple check my own data. The operative words in that sentence are used to...I no longer try. And this is probably a good thing since I was creating a flat spot on my forehead from banging my head on the table in pure frustration...

PA2UK is correct: "It's true that some people make some pretty careless and obvious mistakes, usually because they are not that interested or involved in the work it takes to really investigate records. Some more dedicated genealogists just love to jump on their high horse and look down their noses at these people but you know, not everyone has as much time, energy, interest, or money to dedicate to it as we do. It's a hobby for most of us and everyone is entitled to take their hobbies as far as they want to or are able to" Yes...sigh...

For me, it is truly the 'thrill of the chase'. I just love finding that elusive ancestor that simply disappeared, or discovering that a female ancestor who claimed she was widowed in the 1900, 1910 and 1920 census, actually had several other legitimate husbands in between who were found married to other people, or reading an obit that has completely re-written a person's history. Genealogy may just be a hobby for some people, but because I am chronicling someone's history, I feel a responsibility to document their lives as accurately as possible. It's important to me that I have the facts. Why would I, or anyone else for that matter, want someone in my tree that doesn't belong there???

But I digress...not every researcher operates according to my standards. And while maddening, I have had to get over myself...well, sort of......still working on it...

RVcook
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-22-2013, 11:20 AM
 
Location: Niagara Region
1,298 posts, read 1,422,946 times
Reputation: 4413
Quote:
Originally Posted by PA2UK View Post

So many people are quick to criticize other people's trees when they themselves probably have errors in theirs too. It's true that some people make some pretty careless and obvious mistakes, usually because they are not that interested or involved in the work it takes to really investigate records. Some more dedicated genealogists just love to jump on their high horse and look down their noses at these people but you know, not everyone has as much time, energy, interest, or money to dedicate to it as we do. It's a hobby for most of us and everyone is entitled to take their hobbies as far as they want to or are able to.
Yes, we all make mistakes but I do think some mistakes are unforgiveable, lol. And the real problem is, that these really bad, ficticious family trees are blindly copied by hundreds of others. These sorts of mistakes:

-- Child born 100 years before the mother, or several years after the mother's death.

-- One sibling listed as being born in Isle of Wight, Virginia, USA and all the others coincidentally are born in the Isle of Wight in England.

I don't think it would bother me as much if these trees weren't just copied verbatim, so many times over and over. But I don't think Ancestry.com cares -- they want people to find information on their site especially if it promises to lead them all the way back to Charlemagne.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2013, 11:46 AM
 
Location: Native Floridian, USA
4,896 posts, read 5,868,917 times
Reputation: 6050
I agreed with everyone and everything that was said in this thread.....LOL. I have encountered them all. The thread made me truly laugh out loud. Thx.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2013, 03:28 PM
 
1,851 posts, read 2,910,140 times
Reputation: 2346
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnnieA View Post
I agreed with everyone and everything that was said in this thread.....LOL. I have encountered them all. The thread made me truly laugh out loud. Thx.
^^This! ROFLOL...

It is a hobby for me and I used to get upset when I saw other people's trees with mistakes, then I thought...HELLO...they are likely thinking the same about my tree.

It's all fun. I soon learned to take it lightly and all in stride. I found out my late aunt married a man in Vegas and never told a soul! My mom and uncle were shocked - oops! Didn't intend to dig that bit of info up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2013, 02:08 PM
 
548 posts, read 1,771,612 times
Reputation: 186
I found that many of the "mistakes" are often due to census reports. I was going through my husband's tree and discovered at least 4 different census' data giving birth year different by 10 years. I finally tracked down birth records through familysearch that weren't available when I first did the tree that show the actual birth date and it wasn't any one of the dates on the census...I don't know who answered the questions but one had a man listed as 20 when he was only about 8. Ten years later he was still 20... And yes, it was the correct family because all the siblings matched and husband and wife matched. Normally I try and verify his actual ancestors and just fill in the siblings with whatever information might show in a census but I started going deeper and found that the birth dates didn't match from census to census even as one sibling got older so I turned to Family Search and found the baptismal records showing birth date, baptism date and parents name as well as priest who baptised them. Key entries are often cause of errors as well but the worst for me are those who put a relative in a country they've never been and refuse to remove them from their tree. It's obvious they have the wrong person but they don't want a hole in their tree so they leave it. Sad.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top