 |
| by Cindy Shebley |
I recently began a tree at Family Search, home to the Family Search Tree, for the express purpose of taking advantage of the hints they now send relating to your ancestors. At the time I was leery of the fact others can come in and make changes to this tree, it's not really "your" tree but I thought, it's a trade off for the hints, how bad can it be? Pretty bad. Yesterday I received a hint; upon taking a look, I saw some changes had been made to my late mother's profile. Someone had changed the year of her birth. By one year. Because of a census record. Really? I know what year my mother was born and found that quite annoying. But there was more.
The branch where Mary White Driscoll resides had been altered beyond recognition. Her daughter Catherine Ellen who appears in the 1870 census of Palmyra, New York and in the 1880 census of nearby Manchester, New York with her parents is clearly stated to have been born in New York. She's still in Manchester in the 1892 census. But now she had been transported from New York to Massachusetts and had a brand new husband and children. Which pretty much defeats my original purpose since in some instances the hints I'm getting are not even for my family. How did the person doing the editing get it so wrong, was this a bad merge? To top that off, the site won't allow me to delete the erroneous data because several people apparently agree with it. How many times have you seen trees on Ancestry that are carbon copies of each other and are all wrong? Sadly, not everyone doing genealogy is holding to a standard of proof. And some are so married to their version of the facts they won't consider changing their online trees. Even when presented with documents proving they are incorrect.
I no longer try to sway other researchers with facts. No matter how tactful one tries to be it seems for the most part to irritate them, but when it's your own mother's data being played with that's another story. I've never been overly concerned about identity theft, all my trees are open, but I also leave out some personal data about close relatives-- that isn't possible with the tree on Family Search. Yes, you can omit facts and surnames, but a busy little bee will be right behind you adding them in.
In light of this, I've decided it's best for me to not participate in the global tree, I just don't have the patience or temperament. Who has time to keep an eye on this and constantly correct mistaken data added by others? Not me, I'm sticking with Ancestry.com. Even though the cookie cutter trees there perpetuate errors, at least I can post the correct information in my tree to counter it. I'd just delete my section of the Family Search Tree, but the site in all likelihood won't allow me to.
That tree is crazy. My husband has a 2ng ggf and ggm. We know the father was born 1780-1847, name unknown for mother. Somebody added the mother and she had a death certificate for a child that died in 1945.
ReplyDeleteCommon sense is lacking that someone who died in the early 1800 can not have a child in 1945 I think I gave up on it too.
I agree Claudia, that tree IS crazy. It seemed like a lofty idea when it began but I don't think they counted on the number of contributors who as you said, don't display common sense.
DeleteThis is why I only use collaborative trees as clues. Life isn't long enough to keep fixing all the mistakes on them. I'd be really annoyed if it was my own mother whose info had been changed!
ReplyDeleteBelieve me, I was. Almost as annoyed as I am at Ancestry for years later still listing my elderly mother as being "killed in action".
DeleteI'm with you as well. I look at that tree from time to time to see if something credible has shown up, but no way am I trusting it with my research, knowing it could all be changed.
ReplyDeleteI agree!
DeleteThat tree is no doubt the reason a lot of ancestry trees are wrong. I look at familysearch trees, too, just in case, but as a whole they are wrong to the point I don't recognize my distant family. Sometimes I don't even recognize my immediate family!
ReplyDeleteGood for you for trying. And thank you for sharing your story - a cautionary tale that I'm afraid only adds to my already suspicious nature.
ReplyDeleteLinda
Just hope everyone is aware and don't assume a tree on the net is automatically correct.
DeleteI have the same feeling. Life is too short to waste time filling in information (that you have worked long and hard to confirm) on a tree and then have someone change it. At least if I look at someone's tree on Ancestry.com and the information is wrong, I can let them know and if they don't change it; I can make a note for future researchers.
ReplyDeleteI'm with you!
ReplyDelete