Author Topic: Ancestry  (Read 4052 times)

Offline Annie65115

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 5,255
  • HOLYLAND regd with guild of one name studies
    • View Profile
Re: Ancestry
« Reply #18 on: Wednesday 22 July 09 10:09 BST (UK) »
I share people's annoyance with those who put details of those still living onto their public trees.

I'm happy to share info about shared ancestors but my ancestry tree is private and my GR tree has living relatives anonymised.

Nonetheless, I sent a couple of old family photos to someone with whom I shared quite a close ancestor, and now there are pictures of my mum as a baby on her public tree - I haven't even put them on my tree. My mother has not given permission for all and sundry to look at her baby pics!

Still, that has taught me to be more careful with whom I share pictures.
Bradbury (Sedgeley, Bilston, Warrington)
Cooper (Sedgeley, Bilston)
Kilner/Kilmer (Leic, Notts)
Greenfield (Liverpool)
Holyland (Anywhere and everywhere, also Holiland Holliland Hollyland)
Pryce/Price (Welshpool, Liverpool)
Rawson (Leicester)
Upton (Desford, Leics)
Partrick (Vera and George, Leicester)
Marshall (Westmorland, Cheshire/Leicester)

Offline Nick29

  • Deceased † Rest In Peace
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • ********
  • Posts: 6,273
    • View Profile
Re: Ancestry
« Reply #19 on: Wednesday 22 July 09 10:21 BST (UK) »
Ancestry do have a strict policy on photos.  If you tell them that this person is using your photos without permission, then they will force them to remove them.  I have to say though, that if someone sends me photos, I would assume that they might expect me to put them on my tree, unless they have specifically indicated otherwise.

RIP 1949-10th January 2013

Best Wishes,  Nick.

Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline Springbok

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,194
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Ancestry
« Reply #20 on: Wednesday 22 July 09 11:00 BST (UK) »
GR is very prompt in removing living relatives from trees if you complain.

Before I "knew better" and had "living" relatives on my tree, one person assured me that details would be removed, but then stopped my access.

Just searched my name to find that she had not done so. Contacted GR and all details were removed within hours

Spring.
Dorset: Ackerman,Bungey,Bunter Chant,Hyle
Islington:Bedford, Eaton,Wilkins
Beds,Fulham: Brazier
Shoreditch: Burton,Coverdale
Essex ,Clerkenwell:Craswell,Cresswell
St.Lukes Middx:Doughty, Dunkley
Andover/IOW/Fulham:Gasser
Fulham: Neal
Bucks:Putnam,Wingrove
Bullwell.Notts:Wilkinson
Clerkenwell/Islington:Wyllie
Herts/ Tottenham/Walthamstow:Young

Offline Jay9

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 57
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Ancestry
« Reply #21 on: Wednesday 22 July 09 13:22 BST (UK) »
Hi

"With regards to the original message where a death was on Ancestry within 6 weeks I'm thinking that it had to come from someone pretty close originally, they would be the ones I would be having a quiet word with. (well perhaps not so quiet)"

The original poster on Ancestry was a fairly close relative who had been informed of my mums death, but she found all the details on line in the local paper in the obituaries, as has been said we do not own the information on our ancestors, but I felt that putting it on a public tree so soon was insensitive, but thats just my feelings.
                                                                Jan

Sussex - Barnes, Reed, French, Gower, Walter, Diplock, Holter, Willard , Kennard

London/Surrey - France, Pittman, Follows, Harris

Somerset - Cox, Burt

Hampshire - Ellis

Surrey - Aldridge


Offline bikermickau

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,156
    • View Profile
Re: Ancestry
« Reply #22 on: Wednesday 22 July 09 15:02 BST (UK) »
I have my family tree on Rootsweb. I'm also on Geni connected with other LEWIS relatives.
The tree on Rootsweb will also show on Ancestry.
I may have bits and pieces scattered on other sites from 2001,2002

One brother died 2004, I have that information on both sites.
My father died June 2008, I have that information on both sites.

I come from a large family, theres my Mother, surviving 8 siblings, 25+ nephews and nieces and some of them have children.
None have objected.

I do believe living persons details should not be shown. (names are fine as per obituaries)

I've also had 3 new relatives contact me this year after finding the tree on Rootsweb/Ancestry...all LEWIS

Added
Mick

I'm also aware that some of the information is being Gathered
Jeffs - Northamptonshire to Leicestershire to Queensland, Australia
Lewis - Wales to Gloucestershire to NSW & Queensland, Australia
Iddols & Baylis - Gloucestershire
Mary Jones - born 1863 Staffordshire, died 1948 Queensland, Australia
daughter of James Jones and Eliza Aston
Dorans - Ireland to Scotland to Queensland, Australia
Ralph - Ireland to Scotland to Queensland, Australia
Jillett - Robert, Transported Convict from Surrey
Christison - Edinburgh,Scotland
Cameron - Edinburgh, Scotland

Offline PK2

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Ancestry
« Reply #23 on: Thursday 23 July 09 02:52 BST (UK) »
I think you assume too much Nick 29 I thought the original post was really about insensitivity in someone inserting information about the very recently dead to me the very recently dead is anyone close to you that has died within your memory.
Actually I never feel the need to visit Gene's whatever or Ancestry or to copy information from the Trees. As for Census and BMD there are many other sites that give far more interesting and accurate information about ones ancestors not forgetting c.d's etc. I find the actual act of just collecting information using such a narrow band rather boring and would sooner have a tree that relates directly to my ancestors than one that has hundred's of loosely connected relatives for which one has only a passing interest. It looks too statistical {to me!}. But that is my opinion and I do not expect anyone else to share this, but I really cannot understand the obsession to gather data that really has little interest to oneself or family. But also if this is what they want to do surely the onus should be with the responsibility to get it right and verify when the trees cross into into another's more direct line? Sometimes the only way to do this is via a baptism or a certificate or a burial record. Rootschat has listed many such links.
It has nothing to do with copyright just good taste and some understanding for the bereaved when the event is recent.

PK2

Offline danuslave

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,882
  • My fashion sense isn't any better now!
    • View Profile
Re: Ancestry
« Reply #24 on: Thursday 23 July 09 03:02 BST (UK) »
Quote
I'm also aware that some of the information is being Gathered

Can you explain what you mean by this?  I think I know as I keep seeing trees with 10s of thousands of names on them, but I'm not absolutely sure.

Thanks
Linda
MOXHAM/MOXAM - Wiltshire & Surrey
SKEATS - Surrey
BRETT - Kent & County Durham
and
SWINBANK - anywhere

Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline bikermickau

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,156
    • View Profile
Re: Ancestry
« Reply #25 on: Thursday 23 July 09 03:18 BST (UK) »
@ Linda, yes name gathers, just adding to your family tree from other family trees.

@ PK2 Geni is more a joint project, ie my LEWIS family tree there is connected to several other trees.
I have approx 50 to 70 of my LEWIS's there, (from me up) the others have more or less, the connection between us all so far is being descendants of Edward LEWIS and Mary Louisa DREW.

As far as I am aware you need to be invited before you can view the Trees.

Mick

OOPs, just realised I missunderstood your post
Jeffs - Northamptonshire to Leicestershire to Queensland, Australia
Lewis - Wales to Gloucestershire to NSW & Queensland, Australia
Iddols & Baylis - Gloucestershire
Mary Jones - born 1863 Staffordshire, died 1948 Queensland, Australia
daughter of James Jones and Eliza Aston
Dorans - Ireland to Scotland to Queensland, Australia
Ralph - Ireland to Scotland to Queensland, Australia
Jillett - Robert, Transported Convict from Surrey
Christison - Edinburgh,Scotland
Cameron - Edinburgh, Scotland

Offline Nick29

  • Deceased † Rest In Peace
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • ********
  • Posts: 6,273
    • View Profile
Re: Ancestry
« Reply #26 on: Thursday 23 July 09 08:47 BST (UK) »
I think you assume too much Nick 29 I thought the original post was really about insensitivity in someone inserting information about the very recently dead to me the very recently dead is anyone close to you that has died within your memory. Actually I never feel the need to visit Gene's whatever or Ancestry or to copy information from the Trees.

That's what the thread was originally about, until you turned it into a rant about people on Ancestry.  Strange how you know so much about Ancestry and Genes, when you claim you never go there ?

As for Census and BMD there are many other sites that give far more interesting and accurate information about ones ancestors not forgetting c.d's etc. I find the actual act of just collecting information using such a narrow band rather boring and would sooner have a tree that relates directly to my ancestors than one that has hundred's of loosely connected relatives for which one has only a passing interest. It looks too statistical {to me!}. But that is my opinion and I do not expect anyone else to share this, but I really cannot understand the obsession to gather data that really has little interest to oneself or family. But also if this is what they want to do surely the onus should be with the responsibility to get it right and verify when the trees cross into into another's more direct line? Sometimes the only way to do this is via a baptism or a certificate or a burial record. Rootschat has listed many such links.
It has nothing to do with copyright just good taste and some understanding for the bereaved when the event is recent.

PK2

Well it's just as well that we don't all think the same as you, because otherwise we would have no information at all !  How do you think that any of the sites that allow internet searches actually get the dusty old census and church record books into a format that can be searched on a computer ?   They're transcribed by an army of people whose interest in family history extends beyond their own families, and they're often unpaid.  The same goes for genealogy CDs - without the dedication of people in Family History Societies, they wouldn't exist.  You think you're doing all your own research, when in fact you're tapping in to the work done by hundreds of other people, even if you don't crib off other people's trees.

As for the actual subject of this thread - it doesn't pay to generalise.  My cousin very recently lost her father and her step-mother in the space of two weeks, and on both occasions she immediately emailed me to ask me to change my family tree to show her relative's deaths.  It affects different people in different ways.

RIP 1949-10th January 2013

Best Wishes,  Nick.

Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk