RootsChat.Com
Beginners => How to Use RootsChat (Please don't post requests here) => Topic started by: jbml on Tuesday 10 January 23 08:30 GMT (UK)
-
We're all got them somewhere in the tree we've researched, haven't we? Connections that we're just not entirely sure about.
Maybe the ages don't match between various records, but "there's nothing else it could be", so we assume that an age has been massaged, or mis-stated, or simply not known so it's been guessed.
Maybe a name doesn't quite match up so we assume a transcription error.
Maybe an additional child suddenly appears in a family between censuses, with a stated age which implies they should have been on the previous census but they weren't, and we can't find a birth, or a death, even though they're not in the previous census and disappear without trace before the next one.
Maybe we're having to pjectect from one side of a missing census piece to the other, or through a damaged or missinf parish register (like Kimbolton) and have made reasonable assumptions, but the solid evidence base isn't there for them.
Or maybe we've "borrowed" some reasearch from someone else and incorporated it into our trees, but something about it just "doesn't feel right" and we can't put our finger on what it is.
I've often thought that for situations like this it would be really useful to be able to tap into the Rootschat hive mind by posting a summary of the evidence I have, the assumptions I am making and the conclusions I am drawing, and in viting people to put forward not an alternative conjecture, but a piece of evidence (or reference to it) which clearly shows those conclusions to be incorrect (or at least suggests or implies a possible conclusion). And indeed I have sometimes posted this sort of query as "Lookup" requests ... and had some really wonderful contributions from our super-sleuth members who really enjoy the thrill of the chase. But I've also felt a little bit diffident about posting them as "Lookup" requests ... because that;s not REALLY what they are, is it.
Soooo ... would people find it helpful to have a separate section of the board dedicated to this sort of problem? Or do we generally feel it would be unnecessary / unhelpful / unjustified additional complexity to the site, etc?
(I should also say that I really love reading the discussions on queries such as this - whether my own or someone else's - for the insights they give me into the ways other people approach research problems because it proves beyond all doubt that there's always more than one way to crack an egg, and I've picked up lots of new ideas and research strategies in this way. Having all queries of this sort in one place so that I knew where to find them when I wanted a little inspirational reading would be great. But maybe that's just me ... )
So what do other people think?
-
We used to have “Scavenger Hunts” but they seem to have fallen by the wayside. They used to be very popular.
Another thing that could be done is just post this sort of query in the Common Room but add a prefix to the subject heading eg “Challenge - Smith family Warwickshire 1790s”. Links to any previous threads would need to be included so helpers don’t spend time going over old ground. (Numerous threads asking the same question usually don’t go down too well.)
I think a board exclusively for these sorts of queries is a fair idea, but it would be up to Trystan to management to the decision and do the necessaries to add the extra board. :)
-
I do not think that we need an extra board, as Ruskie has reminded us that the scavenger hunts were very popular and could go in the common room :)
Regards
Sarah
-
Yes, I would love to submit an argument to prove my 3rd great grandfather is the son of who I think he is, but there is a nagging doubt I can't shake. Being told by peers I think you have jumped the gun or looks sound to me would be very helpful
-
I do not think that we need an extra board, as Ruskie has reminded us that the scavenger hunts were very popular and could go in the common room :)
Regards
Sarah