Author Topic: Should we include false information?  (Read 5224 times)

Offline downside

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,208
  • Make my day
    • View Profile
Should we include false information?
« on: Tuesday 30 May 06 11:44 BST (UK) »
Hi Folks

Once upon a time I bought Family Tree Maker and entered data into it - like everyone does.  One day it prompted me to submit my tree to that great database in cyberspace.  I must have been a bit naive because I said OK without thinking about the consequences of what would happen to all my precious and expensive research.  Then in September 2005 I joined GenesReunited and I came across a entry for someone who looked like my grandfather Walter Slater West, except someone had entered it as Walter Statten West - same birth date.  So I sent that person a message and they said they had got the name from ancestry.co.uk and they would write to them to get it corrected.  I then came across another person on GR who also had this Walter Statten West charater in his family tree and he said he had got it from the same source.

So what happens to our data if we submit it to Family Tree Maker?

Should we deliberately invent a fictious person to include in our family trees so we can spot who has stolen/borrowed our data?

downside
Sussex: Floate, West
Kent: Tuffee
Cheshire: Gradwell
Lancashire: Gradwell

UK Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline suttontrust

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,850
    • View Profile
Re: Should we include false information?
« Reply #1 on: Tuesday 30 May 06 22:11 BST (UK) »
Trouble is, if you put your information online in any form you are giving it away.  Whenever I've found a tree on the net from which I can get information I try to contact the owner - but often the email bounces back. 
Godden in East Sussex, mainly Hastings area.
Richards in Lea, Gloucestershire, then London.
Williamson in Leith, Vickers in Nottingham.
Webb in Bildeston and Colchester.
Wesbroom in Kirby le Soken.
Ellington in Harwich.
Park, Palmer, Segar and Peartree in Kersey.

Offline downside

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,208
  • Make my day
    • View Profile
Re: Should we include false information?
« Reply #2 on: Tuesday 30 May 06 23:57 BST (UK) »
Hi suttontrust

I don't object to the principle of sharing information, but there are certain genealogical organisations that want you to upload data and then sell it on to their customers.

You do all the work and meet all the costs of your own research and they get the information free.  Something is wrong somewhere.

If you include one or two spurious facts in your tree you can at least spot the mistakes and ask them where they got their data I guess.

downside
Sussex: Floate, West
Kent: Tuffee
Cheshire: Gradwell
Lancashire: Gradwell

UK Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline mafric

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 248
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Should we include false information?
« Reply #3 on: Wednesday 31 May 06 00:03 BST (UK) »
I dont know about including false info, but i do agree that it is infuriating that companies like the one behind FTM can make money out of our trees. I have no problem with sharing data, which is why i have put my tree on rootsweb, but when my FTM program asks me to share i always say no.
Marie
STAFFORDSHIRE -- Critchlow, Crutchley, Broadhurst, Meakin, Cordon, Corden, Berrisford, Hall, Heath, Ashley, Tittle, Bailey, Bayley, Webb, Wade

CHESHIRE Beamer, Bailey, Bayley, Ellis, Potter, Schofield

LANCASHIRE Conway, Beamer, Teasdale, Rice, Lees, Parkinson, Ellis, Potter, Palfreyman, Law, Schofield

DERBYSHIRE, Palfreyman

YORKSHIRE, Spence

IRELAND - Conway, Houlighan, Rice and Mahoney (DUBLIN), WOODLEY (COUNTY CORK, Leades house)

Wales - Pembrokeshire - Summers, Jenkins, Bowla


Online RJ_Paton

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 8,494
  • Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
    • View Profile
Re: Should we include false information?
« Reply #4 on: Wednesday 31 May 06 00:17 BST (UK) »
I don't think "false" entries are the way to do it I do know that if I put information online I restrict it differently for each site and I keep a careful note of what information I have placed and where.

Offline downside

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,208
  • Make my day
    • View Profile
Re: Should we include false information?
« Reply #5 on: Wednesday 31 May 06 00:26 BST (UK) »
Hi Falkyrn

I got the idea from the people that compile the London A-Z.  Apparently they put a select number of false entries into their street maps so that they can catch parasite companies that reproduce their information without permission.

If you are in contact with genuine people then of course you would let them know about certain spurious facts that you have included in your tree.

downside
Sussex: Floate, West
Kent: Tuffee
Cheshire: Gradwell
Lancashire: Gradwell

UK Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline suey

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,843
  • The light is on but there's no-one at home!
    • View Profile
Re: Should we include false information?
« Reply #6 on: Wednesday 31 May 06 12:11 BST (UK) »

To be honest I think there is enough 'false information' on some peoples trees as it is without making a bad situation worse  :(

At least you have the satisfaction of knowing yours is correct.

I had a look at the worldconnect website a day or so ago and up popped one of my 2 x great aunts!  Great!?
Actually no, there are six different trees obviously all copied from the same source and only one tree has a note to say that her husbands father was born in Wadhurst and no other information has been found on his ancestors...the other five have the wrong parents, wrong place of birth but by golly they can trace his ancestors back to 1550!

All census lookups are Crown Copyright from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
Sussex - Knapp. Nailard. Potten. Coleman. Pomfrey. Carter. Picknell
Greenwich/Woolwich. - Clowting. Davis. Kitts. Ferguson. Lowther. Carvalho. Pressman. Redknap. Argent.
Hertfordshire - Sturgeon. Bird. Rule. Claxton. Taylor. Braggins

Offline kerryb

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 12,902
    • View Profile
Re: Should we include false information?
« Reply #7 on: Wednesday 31 May 06 19:31 BST (UK) »
I tend to agree with Suey, there most definitely is enough false information out there without adding to it. 

I don't think I like the idea of my tree being used by organisations though. 

I started my tree on Ancestry and on GR but found updating 3 trees too time consuming so now if I ever have contact with a relative after various questions building a rapport so they couldn't possibly want to steal my tree and run I direct them to my website.

Kerry
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Searching for my family - Baldwin - Sussex, Middlesex, Cork, Pilbeam - Sussex, Harmer - Sussex, Terry - Surrey, Kent, Rhoades - Lincs, Roffey - Surrey, Traies - Devon & Middlesex & many many more to be found on my website ....

Offline Michael72.

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 406
  • Getting back to my Roots.
    • View Profile
Re: Should we include false information?
« Reply #8 on: Wednesday 31 May 06 22:43 BST (UK) »

I don't upload anything with regard to my respective trees now, because there are Companies out there that grab it, and make out it is through their research that this information has become available..........

Consequently, if I decide to place a little snippet somewhere, I also place a 'Bomb' in it so that I know if it has been pinched, and I see nothing wrong in that...

These Companies want paying for every bit of information they provide....so why should I give them my hard earned and quite often costly, research for nothing...


Michael72.
My email is not working sorry
GILBY, Lowestoft and Cleethorpes.
COO, Horncastle/Grimsby/Cleethorpes.
MADIN, Sheffield/Cleethorpes.
AYERS, Yorkshire, Grimsby/Cleethorpes.
Clark, Cheltenham, Hull, Cleethorpes.