WDYTYA - tiny gripe

[smudwhisk]

I never said anything about Babs that was critical.  I just said she did act surprised that she had Suffolk roots. BTW I think I am distantly related to her through her Deeks line.

Sorry but I think you'll find there is little or no evidence that the Bures Deeks line have any connection to those in Glemsford.  No factual evidence anyway, just wishful thinking by some researchers wanting a famous relative.  There are Deeks families in parishes surrounding Bures, and the Bures PRs are pretty unreadable in places as it is, so more likely to be related to that family than those in Glemsford.  Also there are claims that the family weren't in Bures that far back but my evidence from the PRs suggests otherwise.  Deeks is a very common surname in that part of Suffolk and north Essex and highly unlikely all are related.

[heywood]

I quite enjoyed it. The first story showed that you shouldn't always take family stories as true and it was very sad.
I liked the South African story too. It was quite a revelation.
The link to the Da Costa family couldn’t be found or wasn’t revealed. The man at the end who put forward the possibilities e.g wet nurse did say that any connection was ‘supposition’.
I also found her a bit irritating with her responses at times. I wonder if she was just surprised to see him as a patient when she questioned that but the mixed race part did seem a bit odd as, as Rishile mentions, that was the purpose.

[Melbell]

I wanted to know what happened to poor Dorothy, the adopted orphaned little girl in Boston.

Also, one of the Otto children was called Clara, like Shirley Ballas's great grandmother, but she didn't react at all to that - or at least it wasn't shown if she did.

Melbell

[Finley 1]

I felt it was a real  'FAKE'  WDYTYA   I felt it was a new programme called  INABIMTR  or I need a boost in my tv ratings..

She made or it seemed ... cos I think it was extremely scripted....... (whoops dots again ) she made,   too many assumptions - so little evidence or fact.

I could run through what lead me to think this, but those who watched it will know.  A WASHER WOMAN was a NEEDED TRADE   did she go to Uni to acquire those skills.

Nope   not a favourite.

I appreciated the mix of races and the evidence of slavery but ... 

no more to say


xin

[coombs]

I never said anything about Babs that was critical.  I just said she did act surprised that she had Suffolk roots. BTW I think I am distantly related to her through her Deeks line.

Sorry but I think you'll find there is little or no evidence that the Bures Deeks line have any connection to those in Glemsford.  No factual evidence anyway, just wishful thinking by some researchers wanting a famous relative.  There are Deeks families in parishes surrounding Bures, and the Bures PRs are pretty unreadable in places as it is, so more likely to be related to that family than those in Glemsford.  Also there are claims that the family weren't in Bures that far back but my evidence from the PRs suggests otherwise.  Deeks is a very common surname in that part of Suffolk and north Essex and highly unlikely all are related.

I can assure you that I am not one of those wishful thinking types. I have a few other verified famous relatives anyway through London lines. I do not go out looking for famous relatives or royalty.

[mike175]

I'm not finding the current series anywhere near as good as the last one but, to my surprise, I found this episode quite interesting and informative. Shirley, who I'd never heard of before, asked some intelligent questions as you'd expect from someone with no experience of genealogy trying to understand the old terms, etc. and there was some interesting social history along the way. Of course she made a few huge assumptions about her ancestors based on little evidence, as most of them do . . . I may even have been guilty of a little of that myself in the early days   

Mike.

[cati]

For me this was the worst programme I've seen where assumptions were made with no documentation for evidence.

Have you seen ALL the documentation unearthed by the various researchers?
They do say that for every 1 hour programme, 10 hours of filming end up on the cutting room floor
And we have no idea how many hours of combined research goes into each programme.

A few years ago I went to a talk given by Nick Barrett, who was involved in the early series of WDYTYA: he said that they usually ended up with 100 hours of filiming, which was cut down to the most interesting 10 hours: then they cut that down to a one hour programme.

Cati

[smudwhisk]

I never said anything about Babs that was critical.  I just said she did act surprised that she had Suffolk roots. BTW I think I am distantly related to her through her Deeks line.

Sorry but I think you'll find there is little or no evidence that the Bures Deeks line have any connection to those in Glemsford.  No factual evidence anyway, just wishful thinking by some researchers wanting a famous relative.  There are Deeks families in parishes surrounding Bures, and the Bures PRs are pretty unreadable in places as it is, so more likely to be related to that family than those in Glemsford.  Also there are claims that the family weren't in Bures that far back but my evidence from the PRs suggests otherwise.  Deeks is a very common surname in that part of Suffolk and north Essex and highly unlikely all are related.

I can assure you that I am not one of those wishful thinking types. I have a few other verified famous relatives anyway through London lines. I do not go out looking for famous relatives or royalty.

Perhaps then you'll not keep repeating the claim of a link between the Bures Deeks and the Glemsford Deeks without any documentary evidence.  It isn't the first time you've made the comment and I've responded that there is no evidence to back it.

[sallyyorks]

As with the big paywall genealogy sites, these programme makers are in it for the money and the gongs at the end of the day and the truth is often cast aside to make the story more profitable.