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
