Author Topic: Questions - Still undecided about creating a tree on Ancestry following DNA test  (Read 2421 times)

Offline jillruss

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,409
  • Gt Gt Grandfather Shepherd from Aberdeen 1827-1910
    • View Profile
Re: Questions - Still undecided about creating a tree on Ancestry following DNA test
« Reply #27 on: Friday 16 February 18 14:34 GMT (UK) »
Thanks, Jane.

I think I've figured out now how to add some more to my tree. They don't make it easy for complete newbies to their site, do they? This has always been my moan about Ancestry - I've tried it a couple of times and find it extremely difficult to navigate - its probably just too big for its own good! Either that or my faculties are seriously flying out of the window!!!  :'(

Anyway, I'll (hopefully) carry on up to my 4x greats and stop there. I doubt my DNA results will come up with any earlier connections.

I've also found their half price membership offer for DNA participants. I'll wait for my results and then might very well take advantage of that - its very reasonable.

Sorry everyone for having been a useless pain in the whatsits today - it really is one of those days. It took me 5 attempts to switch the bloomin' TV on earlier! I swore at it - and it worked!  ;D
BRICKWALL - WILLIAM HORWOOD bn c.1779 in or near Berks. N.B. NOT s/o William & Joanna in Waltham St Lawrence.

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Offline hurworth

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,037
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Questions - Still undecided about creating a tree on Ancestry following DNA test
« Reply #28 on: Friday 16 February 18 18:46 GMT (UK) »
Out to 4th gt-grandparents should cover it. 

One of my cousins is a match to her gtgtgtgt-grandfather's sister's descendant (their side has crammed in more generations), so it can and does happen.  We don't know the names of their parents anyway.  They were born in the 1750s.




RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Offline sugarfizzle

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 619
    • View Profile
Re: Questions - Still undecided about creating a tree on Ancestry following DNA test
« Reply #29 on: Friday 16 February 18 19:06 GMT (UK) »
If you can go further back it will help you and others to make a connection.

Ancestry considers up to 4th to 6th cousins as fairly close, 5th to 8th cousins as distant cousins. That is, back as far as 5G grandparents for close matches, back to 7G grandparents for the more distant ones.

My successes have been in both groups. Look at this way - you are a match with someone, but you don't know where because you have no names in common in your tree. This maybe because you haven't added the branch by which your match is connected.  Or maybe you have a brick wall so haven't got the name of that elusive ancestor.

For further reading whilst you are waiting for your results read any ISOGG article, also Lost Cousins newsletters​.

Regards Margaret
STEER, mainly Surrey, Kent; PINNOCKS/HAINES, Gosport, Hants; BARKER, mainly Broadwater, Sussex; Gosport, Hampshire; LAVERSUCH, Micheldever, Hampshire; WESTALL, London, Reading, Berks; HYDE, Croydon, Surrey; BRIGDEN, Hadlow, Kent and London; TUTHILL/STEPHENS, London
WILKINSON, Leeds, Yorkshire and Liverpool; WILLIAMSON, Liverpool; BEARE, Yeovil, Somerset; ALLEN, Kent and London; GORST, Liverpool; HOYLE, mainly Leeds, Yorkshire

Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.go

Offline xinia

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 7,306
  • in memory of a special virtual friend xxx
    • View Profile
Re: Questions - Still undecided about creating a tree on Ancestry following DNA test
« Reply #30 on: Friday 16 February 18 19:25 GMT (UK) »
I am only making my basic tree public.. NO certs or photos or details added. 

name dob and general info only.

If and when the bloomin DNA results get here....

xin
Sutherland, Himsley, Finnie, Robertson Edgar Short  Patrick  Creighton, McCallum,Brown, Henderson, Stark Green, Draycott, Clarke, Yorke, Norris, Haywood, Moore, Argyle, Patrick,Tallack, Hellyar, Pope, Raven, Lobb.. Hook -Smeeton - Heafford - Freeman -Craddock - Crane - Smalley -Ashton Spriggs Swingler cotton riddington York gilbert mattock and more :)





One of the most difficult things to give away is kindness, it is usually returned.

UK Census info. Crown Copyright, from www.nation

Offline jillruss

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,409
  • Gt Gt Grandfather Shepherd from Aberdeen 1827-1910
    • View Profile
Re: Questions - Still undecided about creating a tree on Ancestry following DNA test
« Reply #31 on: Friday 16 February 18 20:10 GMT (UK) »
I shall carry on going then! May as well do the thing right. I can see what you mean, Margaret, and will at least try another couple of generations, though some lines get a lot more patchy.

Xinia, I'm assuming you got the same email as me this week saying the results will be delayed? From the way they worded it, I don't think they've even started processing my test and I know we submitted ours at about the same time. Oh well, on the positive side, it means there will be more and more people to compare our results with!!
BRICKWALL - WILLIAM HORWOOD bn c.1779 in or near Berks. N.B. NOT s/o William & Joanna in Waltham St Lawrence.

Offline Pheno

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 879
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Questions - Still undecided about creating a tree on Ancestry following DNA test
« Reply #32 on: Friday 16 February 18 20:36 GMT (UK) »
Which is why Jill I overlook those matches that don't have a tree attached as you will find that you have pages and pages of matches and can't possibly message them all.

You have to filter somehow, obviously names and places, but even then a lot of matches so I assume that those without info attached either don't know or don't want to know - it still leaves me with more matches that I can deal with.  I can always come back to those without trees later.

Pheno
Austin/Austen - Sussex & London
Bond - Berkshire & London
Bishop - Sussex & Kent
Holland - Essex
Nevitt - Cheshire & Staffordshire
Wray - Yorkshire

Offline xinia

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 7,306
  • in memory of a special virtual friend xxx
    • View Profile
Re: Questions - Still undecided about creating a tree on Ancestry following DNA test
« Reply #33 on: Friday 16 February 18 21:24 GMT (UK) »


Xinia, I'm assuming you got the same email as me this week saying the results will be delayed? From the way they worded it, I don't think they've even started processing my test and I know we submitted ours at about the same time. Oh well, on the positive side, it means there will be more and more people to compare our results with!!


Yes two letters explaining away delay :( 

xin
Sutherland, Himsley, Finnie, Robertson Edgar Short  Patrick  Creighton, McCallum,Brown, Henderson, Stark Green, Draycott, Clarke, Yorke, Norris, Haywood, Moore, Argyle, Patrick,Tallack, Hellyar, Pope, Raven, Lobb.. Hook -Smeeton - Heafford - Freeman -Craddock - Crane - Smalley -Ashton Spriggs Swingler cotton riddington York gilbert mattock and more :)





One of the most difficult things to give away is kindness, it is usually returned.

UK Census info. Crown Copyright, from www.nation

Offline jillruss

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,409
  • Gt Gt Grandfather Shepherd from Aberdeen 1827-1910
    • View Profile
Re: Questions - Still undecided about creating a tree on Ancestry following DNA test
« Reply #34 on: Saturday 17 February 18 12:14 GMT (UK) »
As I carry on inputting my tree, just pondering....

Should I omit any branches where I'm taking an educated (but not fully proved) guess at where it goes, or should I include them to see if they can be 'proved' by DNA association? Or would it not make any difference either way in that, if wrong, they won't come into play anyway?

I'm thinking that, since I've decided to make my tree public (to get the best from my DNA test) the only casualties might be those tree scavengers who just take great swathes of others' trees without asking. In which case, they deserve to have possible wrong information. Years ago, on Genes Reunited, I went to great lengths to inform someone that a particular branch was my theory and not to take it as gospel, only to find a few weeks later that, not only did it appear on their tree but on quite a few others as well. Since then, to be honest, I've taken zero notice of other peoples' trees and that is why I've had to do a lot of soul searching to come to the conclusion that I need to 'join the party' again to take full advantage of the DNA test.

Ramble over...

BRICKWALL - WILLIAM HORWOOD bn c.1779 in or near Berks. N.B. NOT s/o William & Joanna in Waltham St Lawrence.

Offline jonw65

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,052
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Questions - Still undecided about creating a tree on Ancestry following DNA test
« Reply #35 on: Saturday 17 February 18 13:16 GMT (UK) »
Remember that to show up in the index (eventually), names in your ancestry tree will have to be sourced.
http://www.geneamusings.com/2017/12/ancestry-member-trees-indexing-rules.html