triple check!

[Finley 1]

it is so sad when searching family trees on you know where to see how many 'HONEST' errors are made, and when you see how hard these people have worked their tree - you know - that they will not be happy to realise they have traced the wrong line.  (I search in case I can find a close cousin to communicate with - no luck yer!!)
Some of it is Ancestry's fault, by putting things like Leicester Northamptonshire.. (just an example)

and then of course they follow the wrong john smith instead of going to St. Margarets maybe they end up in Brixworth.  And cos details of people are so so similar .. then its the wrong line......

they will positively no doubt believe that this picture they found of their 'rellie' is actually theirs and he did climb mount everest.  when his name - birth date - and parents names are probably all the same - but the year may be slightly wrong... and he just went down the mines..

I am praying that I have NOT made a similar error within my tree... but it seems so easy to do.

I suppose if you do NOT get to see the actual record ! then your guestimate is where it all goes wrong.  and for those who dont know Englands counties etc, then yes an easy error.

Today I found a tree with some of my rellies on and thought how lovely a picture of him.. he was born in Lubbenham and ended up in Lancashire as a Big wig with horses.

Sadly NO he died age 29 in lubbenham and without the Parish reg details to look at - I could well have 'been impressed' with this find.

I dont want to waffle on about copying 'trees' cos we all know how dangerous it can be to do so.

If this is just a light hearted hobby - then fine... copy who the heck you like.  But if it is a serious game...
CHECK and triple b.....min check  - is what I say.

ho hum...

xin

[tillypeg]

I sent a message to a lady who had a 2xgt uncle of my OH on her tree.  She had some lovely photos supposedly of "his" parents and siblings, full family type all in lovely outfits etc but she had failed to check the father's name & occupation on the gt gt uncle's marriage.  I sent her the link to the excellent Cornwall Online parish clerk website clearly showing the groom's father's details, which did not match hers.  Have had no response even though I could offer her the correct photo of the groom concerned.  Even have a 4 generations photo which I could have forwarded.  Shame she had overlooked a basic fact but was quite happy to go back three or four more generations based on this.  Especially since the correct info was available free online.

[coombs]

I always triple check or quadruple check. If I think someone is my ancestor but cannot yet get total proof I keep in mind the small bit of doubt but keep checking to see if anything new comes up. I dont just go on name, birth era or location alone. If they died before the census era it can be trickier.

I have an ancestor Matthew Bradford who was born c1766 in either Cambs or Suffolk as he was in Essex in 1841, not born in county but died in 1849. Several Matthew Bradford's lived in the Suffolk and Cambs area, that is even if my Matt came from there, he may have came from further afield. I researched a Henry Bradford of Barling in Essex, a few miles away from Matthew and found through a poor law record he came from Cambridgeshire, and he was buried in 1828 born about 1752. Parents Thos and Ann Bradford. My Matthew had a son Thomas. But as I have not found any link yet I have not added Henry to my tree.

Some people would say, that is enough evidence, but for me, no, I have learned from experience to question things until I find good evidence. In some cases I have exhausted everything and and evaluate the situation on logic. I even research other scenarios and float theories as it can help me.

[dowdstree]

Hi,

Yes, its very easy to make a mistake and pursue the wrong line have done it myself !!! but hopefully got most of it right now.

Know exactly what you mean - its easier with more recent ancestors as you can easily access records for BDM - after 1855 in Scotland when registration became a legal requirement. Prior to that its sometimes very difficult.

Like you I wish that others would take heed of any wrong information they may have and correct it when given proof. One time I found that someone had my GG grandmother dying on the other side of the world - Not correct as I have  a copy of her death certificate and have visited her grave. Happily, the person in question responded to my email - it was a genuine mistake - and amended her tree.

One thing that is still really annoying me is that a photograph of my husband's grandfather has been wrongly named by other researchers - obviously the snowball effect - and the person who originally posted it was at fault and others copied this. Despite emailing those concerned only one has changed the name the others have not responded and granddad still has another relatives  name. Also, his mum and dad's wedding photo has the wrong people's names and the position is still as above.

Why do some researchers refuse to accept that they may be wrong?

Oh the frustration !!!!!

Dorrie

[panda40]

I've got a Thomas Matcham born C.1790. There are two deaths very close together in date and villages but only one birth found in the parish records. Everyone else has assumed that there is only one Thomas Matcham so he must be the right one to fit the tree. Until I find evidence of the other Thomas's birth and I can make a definite connection, I choose to sit on the fence and not update my tree. Unfortunately he is my 4 X great grandfather and the gateway to one side of my tree.
Regards panda

[StanleysChesterton]

I know I'm off track if they've got a good job.  I know I'm on the right track if I find them in the workhouse or court/prison

It's partly the 'fault' of the sites and the information they present, but it's also the 'fault' because all records don't exist.  If you've a John marries Joan and it's in the right parish, or next door, sometimes you just have to pencil it in .... because the surrounding 6 parishes aren't online so you "take a punt", pencil it in, then hope there'll be some other evidence you guessed right that presents itself.

I nearly went wrong the other week when a man had disappeared - then I found his mother and when I looked at the census, guess who was next door?  I was all excited, there he was!  It was only when I filled in my jottings that I realised that the man next door was purely a coincidence of name as the ages were out by 10 years.  My guess had involved the usual guessgymnastics of: Look, the illegitimate boy's using his father's last name as his name now ...and living next door to his mother ...and he's married some bird. 

That made perfect sense. But, that "further evidence" proving it failed at the first hurdle: age was 10 years out, so a big fat X went through that pencilled record