Some amazingly well researched trees

[jinks]

When My Grandfather told me about the link with
James Hargreaves (the Inventor) I was 9, so
I said how we dont have the surname in the
family, in due course I found the surname exactly
when he stated (which generation)!!

so far so good but she was born Mellor, I have now
found her father born Little Harwood, so still not
at Stanhill.


You probably know that James Hargreaves actually
died in a workhouse in Nottingham, but his
daughters did marry Lancashire Lads, ie. From
Manchester area.

From the research I have so far (IF I am related it will
be indirectly) maybe through an Uncle.

James Hargreaves as far as I am aware only had
one sister.

Jinks

[MaryA]

Many exceptionally well researched family trees tend to appear on the famous site mention of which I believe has been carefully avoided already in this thread.

I recently made contact with somebody who had my ancestors on their tree.  They suggested that they would be pleased to hear if they had their facts correct and  to hear about any errors.  I discovered that I really shouldn't exist since they had my direct ancestor married to another lady. 

Yes I pointed this out, plus an additional couple of siblings who were impossibly connected and who appeared to have a father with a totally different occupation to that of the others.

Should I be surprised that since I told them this they have not been in contact with me?  Do they just want to believe their own errors?

Suddenly there was another contact on the same site, who allowed me access to their tree without making any comment, I did find the same error.  Their tree was very large and I could find no connection between my family and the poster, however I did find the names of the first contact in the tree, so maybe they know each other??

I had a wander around this tree to see whether there were any sources listed, none of course but I found a branch quite interesting -

Abraham was born 1798
His father was William born 1779 and his mother Elizabeth born 1805
This William's parents were William born 1911 and mother Unknown Mary born 1911  (he also had another wife, Mary again born 1889)

Even if it was a slip of the finger and typo should be 1711, I have my doubts that a 68 year old woman would have a baby!!!!!!!!!

Where DO these people get this stuff from!

[Ian]

Yes...I found what seemed to be a close match on a family tree posted on ancestry. When I looked, my relative born in 1839 had married someone born in 1562!  Needless to say, I didn't learn a lot!
That said, I have discovered a great deal from "relatives" I have found on various sites and been more than happy to share information. I think you develop an instinct for whom you can trust and, if you have done some work yourself, you are usually in a good position to make a valid judgement.
Parts of my tree do read  - A Relative b 1842 etc but I am trying to fill the gaps! I'm not wealthy enough to buy all the certificates but enjoy sifting through Parish Records and wandering around graveyards!

[Ian]

oh, by the way, where can I get the census returns for BC101?

[Hackstaple]

oh, by the way, where can I get the census returns for BC101?

I think they were destroyed when Attila sacked Rome and those for 1AD were lost by Pontius Pilate when returning to Rome on an unseaworthy galley. Pity 

[Ian]

That's why I can't find my ancestor! Thought I found him on the BC91 census though.

On a more serious note, I am spitting blood tonight!  A few weeks ago through a well known site, a reasonably close relative made contact and I gave her details about the family.
I've just looked on said site and find everything I've done posted there. I've never even had a thank you nevermind information about that side of the family! Not even a reply so I am furious.

Now I'll help anyone but a "thank you" is always nice. Soooo.....I'm going to add some bogus details to said site and see if they get copied too!

aarrghhhh!  Sorry, had to let off steam somewhere!

[tazzie]

   Ian.....vent away.....


  Some one "aquired " my 4x great grandfather and claimed him as their own. I did contact them to point out the error all I got was a rather short "are you sure?" The error is still on their tree and they won't answer e-mails. Some people want it too easy and milk the hard work of others. I spent £28 on certs and have all the proof about MY James from birth to death.

 I know I am right so I will watch to see what else gets added to the other tree .....hmmmm I wonder   (sneaky ideas at the ready)

                           Tazzie

[MrsLizzy]

My dog was insisting that she was descended from Charlemagne. Now I can prove she is exaggerating.

My cat is definitely better bred than me.  Although she does think we're her parents, she's beginning to suspect the truth - she's actually adopted.  I just hope she doesn't go looking for her real mum.

[lostnconfused]

I have found this thread really interesting, no honestly i have.

My wife and I (mainly the wife more recently due to work etc) have been working on the family history for about 6 or 7 months. Yes we are new to this arent we.

We have conducted everything online to date (4 kids below the age of 7 dictate that) but we have been very strict and only add members to the tree if we can find the evidence to corroborate the link.

There have been many occasions where we could have been tempted to just accept the 'guesswork' and fly off into the distant past, but that isnt the point is it.

The biggest surprise for us is the unbelievably bad evidencing from seemingly 'expert' or 'experienced' family historians.

The worst of it is the attitiude that some have about us newbies and the assumption that we are in it for an easy job, thats simply not true.

Yes we are working almost fully online at present and yes we are starting to hit problems. But thats the best bit for us, we have a puzzle to solve and it WILL need us to go out and about.

We have certificates proving EVERY person and EVERY link on our tree and we have many that DISPROVE links but theyre just as valuable arent they.

The are annoying pillocks who dont evidence their findings who have even contacted us to point out errors on our tree. When we prove our work, which is done by PDF copies of certs if need be, there is a stoney email silence.

Another worrying aspect is the fact that we were offered the services of a professional genealogist who made a few 'suggestions' about our tree. Ha! What a chancer - we were right and he was way off the mark but would he listen, nope. So gosh knows what his clients are getting in exchange for £20per hour!

Well now i do feel better after that, ahhhh.

Anyway lets not get too down about the fools that are out there.

Perhaps we should start a capaign for laws that require trees to be evidenced before being pubished in any format. That way we could sue for mispreprentation of our history. Just a thought.


Andy