IGI submitted entries

[Lydart]

Unfortunately, that's what a lot of so called family historians do ... some have a collection of thousands of names, and they know nothing about their lives ... its like collecting stamps !  

[Dancing Master]

You are correct about people who collect names without any evidence of relationship.

To me that is not doing "Your family tree" but adding unchecked imformation.

Computer sites are OK when used as a starting point or to see if you can fill in that awkward hole in your tree, but not as a substitute for proper research.

[Little Nell]

Please don't kill off Samuel no 1! He's my 2x GGrandfather.

Er, no, I can see that wouldn't be a good idea. 

One wonders what source they used for the guestimate of birth dates to submit.  It seems that perhaps they have definitely got something well and truly muddled.  Have you looked for another Samuel Birch of similar age in the census, just to see if there is a doppelganger about?  I hope not.

Nell

[Koromo]

Unfortunately, that's what a lot of so called family historians do ... some have a collection of thousands of names, and they know nothing about their lives ... its like collecting stamps ! 

Heh, talk to a serious stamp collector. They know more about the history, politics and geopraphy of the countries they have stamps for than most of us!

But, yes, a large chunk of my family is on LDS with many errors. I've even been in touch with the person who submitted it - who strangely stopped replying to my very polite suggestions that one or two things may be wrong!


K.

[Stumped!]

Nell
Yes, I had already done a search on the census for '41 and '51 and could not find another Samuel that was born about 1823 in Staffordshire.
I suspect that this family has been put together by someone using American terminology.
Why else would we have the son being called Jr. and the mother having her maiden name shown before her married name?
Peter

[aghadowey]

One wonders what source they used for the guestimate of birth dates to submit. It seems that perhaps they have definitely got something well and truly muddled.

Have you ever noticed on LDS site and other genealogy programs that when ages of husband and wife are estimated that husband always seems to be 4 years older than wife, and marriage is listed one year before estimated birth of 'oldest' child.

Forgot to add also that all children seem to be born two years apart!

[Stumped!]

Just as one final note.
I purchased the death certificate for a Stephen Birch a couple of years ago and just filed it as I didn't think it belonged in my tree.
It turns out that it refers to Stephen junior who died on the 13th August 1841 (not the 17th) after falling down a coal shaft.

For all it's faults, I wouldn't have got this far in my research without FamilySearch.org

Peter
Off to the local FHS to see if they've got the NBI

[aghadowey]

Yes Stumped! LDS site is absolutely fantastic (and free) but the submitted entries can be very strange at times. It would be nice if there was a way to add notes to correct mistakes or even attach contact details in case someone else is researching same family.

[Dancing Master]

I have a stamp collection from 1927. it belonged to my husbands uncle, the the treasures in it are quite wonderful.