errors on trees

[Bee]

What would you do?

We all know to treat the family trees on Ancestry with caution but if you find a mistake on a tree that contains members of your family, should you contact the owner and ask them to make a correction?

There are several trees on there that contain member of my family and they have all connected my 3xgt grandmother to the wrong parents.

Bee

[Jomot]

Its a difficult one to answer because if I had made a mistake then I would want someone to let me know and I'd be delighted to hear from them, but whenever I've politely made contact for anything similar I've been completely ignored, with only one exception.

Not too long back I contacted someone about my grandmother (they'd given her three siblings that were nothing to do with her & missed one off entirely) but they didn't bother replying or correcting their tree so now I just look to see if any of the sources are other trees and if they are then I don't bother anymore.

[BumbleB]

If you can't get a response from the owner, then do as I do - leave a comment for the person/s concerned, stating your reasons and source of supporting information.  Not foolproof, but at least you've tried.   

[dobfarm]

I think the best way is to make your own tree correct, and show proof, or where to find it, of what you believe is correct, if possible and its up to the other tree owners what they do with their own tree, but if you provide proof in your tree ! others will soon pick up on your tree, if its a public one. Only facts and proof tell true fact! not beliefs without proof. (Even if the belief is right)

 

[Jebber]

This question often crops up, and there are different opinions on whether to contact the tree owner.

I always look to see how big the tree is, if there are thousands of names, I know the owner is not interested in the true facts, they are just collecting names, do there is no point in contacting them. If it is a sensible sized tree, and the owner has recently been active on the site, I send a polite message giving the correct facts and my sources, sometimes I am ignored, other times I have had a grateful response,  twice I have had a rude reply.

Jebber

[tillypeg]

I had an offer from Ancestry recently - 4 months' subscription to Premier Membership for £20 so thought it would be useful.  I haven't put my tree on Ancestry and am still in two minds about that.  Yesterday I sent off 4 messages to tree owners who had my OH's gt gt gt grandparents on their trees erroneously.  Backed up all the info with marriage details, father's name, Postems on FreeBMD entries etc.  One had the 13 children who were all born in/near Hackney then had tagged on "their" relative as the 14th child - being born in New York thus "claiming" all the previous generations!  I have had one reply from another tree owner acknowledging that their tree is incorrect.  Whether these people will try and untangle the incorrect lines is anyone's guess!

However, I have found out a couple of useful things which I have then researched and double-checked.

Still undecided about putting my tree on there.  I am getting to the stage where I want to do something with all my info before I become just a birth/marriage/death date on my own tree! (well, I've achieved the first two). Seems such a waste if it all goes to landfill (but I know this subject has been discussed on RC many times before) but we all like to voice our frustration.

[smudwhisk]

I always look to see how big the tree is, if there are thousands of names, I know the owner is not interested in the true facts, they are just collecting names, do there is no point in contacting them.

As has been discussed before, not everyone with "thousands of names" on their tree is simply a name collector, some people do research properly and want to share their research with others.  I also know of at least one public tree on there that is very large but if you actually look at it, it has been properly researched because the owner has attached all the relevant records and also has been purchasing numerous certificates and other documents to back up their research.  I accept though they are the exception to the rule.

I have several trees with thousands of names, but they HAVE been properly researched with the necessary evidence to backup the research.  I don't want to think how much we've spent in the last 16 years to obtain copies of documents and microfiche copies of parish records.  That said, they are not, and never will, appear on ancestry. 

Its not fair to generalise that everyone with large trees are name collectors because they are not.

[rosie17]

If you can't get a response from the owner, then do as I do - leave a comment for the person/s concerned, stating your reasons and source of supporting information.  Not foolproof, but at least you've tried.   

That's exactly what I did and it worked 

[dobfarm]

I have a 2nd cousin doing his tree, who put my mother down as her uncles daughter, truth was she did come from Derbyshire to live with her uncle in Yorkshire for a time, later becoming a maid, and married in my dad in Yorkshire . He some how knew from his family my mother was connected to my Gt uncle ( The cousin was from this uncles family line), but just thought my mum was this uncles daughter. I corrected him on the issue and he accepted it, but it was only after he had put my mother down as her uncles daughter on loads of different family tree websites and he said it was too much fath to correct them all as he had thousands in different people in various trees. I used to get bothered about it but these days, there are that many that are wrong anyway, that its become a laugh and getting my own facts right is what is important. Other people will do their own thing anyway, which way or right way or wrong way.