RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: LizzieW on Sunday 21 March 21 12:25 GMT (UK)
-
One of Ancestry's hints led me to a tree of an American woman, where yet again the person had obviously copied wrong information, linking my g.grandfather to family A that has nothing to do with my ancestor and someone who has a direct link to family A has done a DNA test which shows there is no match. I contacted this American to ask her if she would kindly remove the information she had on her tree which related to my g.grandfather. I know family A has a man of the same name but he is not my grandfather. He is a couple or so years younger and the direct ancestor has researched and found he never left London, whereas my g.grandfather went to Hull, where he lived for over 50 years, dying there too.
Firstly I got a response on the lines of how dare I question her tree. I wrote back explaining why the information was wrong. She said she had done her DNA and that would prove she was right. Guess what - no link with my DNA. So I wrote to her again and said she had obviously found the information on another tree rather than researching it herself - red rag to a bull ::) ::)
Today, I got another reply saying it was no business of mine if she had the information about my g.grandfather on her tree. What? Now she's blocked me so I can't respond! She obviously knows she's wrong and that she's copied wrong info from another Ancestry tree - and there are lots of them, plus she has 35,674 people on her tree - I wonder how many of those she's copied from other trees, either rightly or wrongly. Of course, this wrong information is spread all over Ancestry. Sad really because in the future, another ancestor of my g.grandfather may be looking for answers as to their origins and find all these trees and think that because there are so many with the same info it must be correct. I know who put up the wrong information originally (a distant relative) and she removed it as soon as I asked her to, but it was too late the damage was done.
Actually, I have had a few DNA matches who link to each other too and having researched their family trees, either by myself or with their help, they all lead to the same Jewish ancestor. However, I can't find the missing link to prove which of the children/grandchildren of the ancestor is my g.grandfather's parent. My feeling is he was illegitimate and his birth not registered.
-
Perhaps it may be helpful to future generations if you make mention of this "error" of hers, within your tree - several trees have "picked up" a scottish born ancestor of ours, and translated /confused / merged him with a Cheshire born one of theirs, and refused to accept corrections, so I managed to put the incorrect information on my tree, captioned at every stage "NOT the same man....." - which kept me calm, and may help others in time.
You're obviously going to get nowhere banging your head against this idiot - get even, and be smug!
-
Oh, Lizzie that was a terrible response from someone, especially when most people try to help each other. 35,674 is a serious name collector.
Take Care
Sandra
-
Threlfall - yes I could do that. I doubt I'm ever going to find his correct date of birth and mother - or parents - but I could put by his name the people who are not his parents and a note that all the trees on Ancestry who have the wrong information probably have everything else wrong too.
I'm hoping that I might, eventually, get nearer to my g.grandfather's parents but I doubt it. At least on my private tree I can put a link to the 2nd tree I have - fortunately Legacy lets you run two trees side by side and point my ancestors to their long lost Jewish family. If, of course, they're even interested.
Sandra - Obviously a name collector and didn't like being pulled up about it. She has her photo at the top of her tree and all I can say is I wouldn't like to meet her in person. ;D
-
Good luck, LizzieW - For me it worked. Sorting and recording the two different chaps ( their wives had the same first name, even, and there were only a couple of years difference in their ages, so at first I wasn't at all surprised that someone had become confused, but "mine" was always Scots born,and lived in Scotland or Cumberland, and the "imposter started - and finished - as Cheshire born, with a sortie into Lancashire in the middle! Really couldn't see how -once they were told - any one could fail to realise the difference!
TY
-
I've renamed my George's parents as "Henry Wright is not his father do not copy wrong info" and his mother as "Priscilla Galliers is not his mother do not copy wrong info". Hopefully this will work. There is, however, a man with the same name as my g.grandfather who is the son of Henry and Priscilla and many trees have the correct information about this man. It's just the numerous other trees that have given their son, my g.grandfather's partner, children and grandchildren that annoys me.
-
You've done what you can. You can't do more. Pour a glass and relax, now.
TY
-
Excuse me for this - I don't have a tree on Ancestry, so I could be absolutely "talking out of my hat". :-*
I have found on numerous occasions that tree owners have the wrong information about my ancestors, and I have tried to contact them, without result. BUT what I have done is add a "Comment" against the tree individual, pointing out the error.
Question - can tree owners delete such "Comments", or are they there for eternity? In other words, am I wasting my time?
-
I don't know if they can be deleted. It was such a comment of mine that so annoyed the American woman who sent me a message saying she didn't like my "public" message and I should have contacted her privately. When I did the result was as I said in my OP. As she's blocked me I can't see if my comment is still there.
-
As far as I know the comments can be seen ..I had a similar problem a few years ago with a lady in Florida had all the wrong information on my Grandma's family attached to hers ..I got the same response as you Lizzie :( ..I also came across another person who has my Mother on her tree all the correct dates of her birth and death and she has a picture of a lady attached to my Mother and it's certainly not my Mother ???..I did leave a comment and sent a message but no response it's a bit annoying
Rosie
-
I really don't know what these people gain from adding all the wrong info to their trees. You'd think they'd want to trace their own ancestors not steal other peoples. It must just be a game to them, collecting as many names as they can.
-
I really don't know what these people gain from adding all the wrong info to their trees. You'd think they'd want to trace their own ancestors not steal other peoples. It must just be a game to them, collecting as many names as they can.
You might just have GOT IT IN ONE!!! :o :o
-
I got all excited the other day when looking through DNA matches thinking I might have found a missing link....
Oh dear how wrong you can be.... well actually they could be! Sadly a lady in America...
She’d got one of my ancestors marrying at 12 years old in Uk
Then a child born to him a year later in America...
Then he miraculously moves back to the Uk and dies aged 110!
All this in the mid/ late 1800’s ...
I ask you do these people ever join up the dots one in fact even look at the dates related to ages...
I’m not going to even bother to communicate as I know ..
A) I won’t get an answer
B) they wouldn’t correct it either...
Caroline
-
Why is it normally Americans who do this? It must be a competition to have more "ancestors" than other people.
-
Why is it normally Americans who do this? It must be a competition to have more "ancestors" than other people.
Because they get so excited :D Update just checked the tree that had the wrong picture attached to my Mother and it's been removed ..It would have been nice to have had reply but unfortunately not ::)
Rosie
-
Why is it normally Americans who do this? It must be a competition to have more "ancestors" than other people.
Two thoughts.......
Lots of American LDS who 'research' their ancestry as part of their religion and collect all and any data sending it in batches of 200 names/details to their church so it is added to their collections. It is not checked/verified and they 'feel' ( I am told by my oldest British friend who is LDS) that they gain a higher recognition by their church, some do research, some just collect and add whatever they find/or make up to get their 200 batch...so used to be called the IGI, now it is called 'collections' and we all know how great it is BUT also that it is just a clue to check and find IF there is a real record or not
and
America is a very big country, many assume because Britain/Ireland is small that there is only one person called by that name in Britain/Ireland added to the lack of geography knowledge about Britain/Ireland
-
I have had a similar experience & again with an American researcher. One of my ancestors married an English girl whose father was American.
The father is on 4 English censuses and I have his marriage & death certs plus daughters birth cert - all in England. Somebody else’s tree has all these events being in America.
I contacted the tree owner who responded that they were right and I was wrong - no other explanation. I offered to send copies of all 3 certs but was told my research was clearly wrong and they were in no doubt that their own research was correct.
Impossible to either help or reason with people with that type of attitude
-
Impossible to either help or reason with people with that type of attitude
I think we just have to accept that, if we are as sure as possible that we are correct and can back it up with proof, if they don't want help and are content to have a tree that isn't right, that's up to them. No point stressing about it.
-
Exactly. Pour that glass and .... relax....
-
;D
-
Why is it normally Americans who do this? It must be a competition to have more "ancestors" than other people.
I don't think Americans are any worse than any others in that respect, as I have mentioned in other threads there are a number of English families in the Heralds Visitations who have errors and indeed falsified family lineage written up by the Heralds. Some may have later helped to found America but most stayed here in England.
To single out any nationality is simply wrong.
Cheers
Guy
-
I suspect it's simply that we tend to notice them more.
-
I suspect it's simply that we tend to notice them more.
It could be that they refuse to accept their mistakes. I've contacted a few people in the UK and, everyone has accepted that I have my information correct, via certificates etc. and they are wrong and have either changed their trees, or deleted the wrong information.
-
Excuse me for this - I don't have a tree on Ancestry, so I could be absolutely "talking out of my hat". :-*
I have found on numerous occasions that tree owners have the wrong information about my ancestors, and I have tried to contact them, without result. BUT what I have done is add a "Comment" against the tree individual, pointing out the error.
Question - can tree owners delete such "Comments", or are they there for eternity? In other words, am I wasting my time?
-
I have similar situations in my husband's family line.
One British "researcher" has given the mother of an illegitimate son a mythical husband.... this person has half the royal families of Europe integrated to my husband now!!
Another refused to accept my query, and got very cross with me indeed, when I pointed out he had an ancestor whose daughter was stated to have been born several decades before her mother!
-
Of course, this wrong information is spread all over Ancestry. Sad really because in the future, another ancestor of my g.grandfather may be looking for answers as to their origins and find all these trees and think that because there are so many with the same info it must be correct.
Hi LizzieW
You make a good point and I didn't realise how important it was until recently.
A person on Ancestry has her ancestor Benjamin Winterbottom (1840 – 1871) of Oldham as the son of my 4th Great uncle, John Winterbottom (1772 – 1857) Woollen Cloth Manufacturer of Round Hill, Saddleworth.
Now according to James’ baptism record he was born at Round Hill, Saddleworth and according to his monumental transcription he died at Round Hill, Saddleworth.
His children were born at Round Hill, Saddleworth. He inherited Round Hill from his father in 1806 (WCW/Supra/C673B/22, Will of Henry Winterbottom Clothier of Round Hill, Saddleworth).
He was entered on the 1841 Census as a clothier living with his wife Mally and children at Round Hill, Saddleworth.
The 1835 and 1848 West Riding Poll Book has him entered as James Winterbottom of Round Hill Saddleworth.
And he is entered on the 1852 General and Commercial Directory of Manchester and Salford as James Winterbottom woollen cloth manufacturer of Round Hill, Saddleworth.
He is entered on the 1857 Yorkshire Post Office Directory as a woollen cloth manufacturer of Round Hill, Saddleworth.
But Wait there’s more!
He was entered on the 1851 Census as an 80 year old retired cloth manufacturer living with his family at Round Hill, Saddleworth.
Whereas, this person has the supposed son of John Winterbottom (1772 – 1857), Benjamin Winterbottom (1840 – 1871), on her tree as entered on the 1851 Census as an 11 year old son of a married couple James, a cotton spinner, and Mary Winterbottom of Oldham, Lancashire.
Now I don’t believe that my 4th great uncle was an 80 year old bigamist who could be in 2 places at once, 11 kilometres apart, on the night of the 1851 Census.
But I thought it really isn’t my concern what this person does and can only do the best for myself.
However, I did get titchy when I is saw what she did to my 5th great aunt, Betty Winterbottom (1753 – 1773). See attachment.
She has given her this name on the profile - Betty 'Roberts' base born 1753–1773
Yes, Betty was born 2 years before her parents married, but this is very crude. Betty was buried as Betty Winterbottom. The only records for Betty are her burial and baptism records. Is this how she should be remembered - base born. No, in all probability she was very much loved by her family for so many reasons. I think of the pain they must have felt when Betty died so young.
I contacted this person and explained very nicely that she was not related to my family for the above reasons, wished her good luck in her family research and asked if she would remove the ‘base born’ from Betty’s profile. 6 months have gone by and I have not heard from her and the words base born remain on Betty’s profile on.
How many more trees is this going to be propagated on for how many years?
Quite disturbing.
Cheers Karen
-
Question - can tree owners delete such "Comments", or are they there for eternity? In other words, am I wasting my time?
I have never had a comment added to my trees, and haven't added a comment to someone's tree in a while, so I'm not sure how things stand at present.
I have found my comments deleted in the past - sometimes this is because the owner has used the information in their tree and doesn't need the comment to remain there, which is good. Sometimes the owner just removes the comment.
-
Sad really because in the future, another ancestor of my g.grandfather may be looking for answers as to their origins and find all these trees.
I really don't think that is likely to happen. ;D
-
Sad really because in the future, another ancestor of my g.grandfather may be looking for answers as to their origins and find all these trees.
I really don't think that is likely to happen. ;D
;)
-
I have found that adding 'Comments' to a person's profile can help, especially where there is dispute/confusion, and also sometimes by adding a couple of asterisks before or after a particular person's name...which will then lead anyone to read the comments.
-
I have found that adding 'Comments' to a person's profile can help, especially where there is dispute/confusion, and also sometimes by adding a couple of asterisks before or after a particular person's name...which will then lead anyone to read the comments.
Hi lydiaann, yes adding the asterisks can help. For example Betty "Roberts" Winterbottom.
But why would it be necessary to put 'base born' in her profile name.
In the case of Betty Winterbottom (1753 - 1773) there is no confusion or dispute regarding her parentage.
She was baptised in 1753 'Betty Daughter of Lucy Roberts, Spinster & Henry Winterbottom, Clothier'. She wasn't recorded as the reputed daughter of Henry, which would indicate she was accepted as Henry Winterbotttom's daughter.
The register did not say she was 'base born' or allude to anything of that nature.
Her parents married in 1758 'Henry Winterbottom, Clothier of Thorns and Lucy Roberts, Spinster of Saddleworth'.
And she was buried in 1773 'Betty Daughter of Henry Winterbottom, Clothier, and his Wife Lucy of Round Hill'.
In between her parent's marriage and her burial, 5 of her siblings were born at Round Hill, all entered in the baptism registers as Son/Daughter of 'Henry Winterbottom, Clothier, and his Wife Lucy of Round Hill'.
If Betty's identity needed further clarification, wouldn't it be more useful to add a 'Marriage of Parents' Fact/Event to Betty's profile and enter the date and place where her parents were married. You can even attach their marriage register to her profile, but this does take a little tinkering around.