totally tempted to tell

[spices]

 When helping in our research library I often tell people to do a TIME LINE and to remember to do this when checking dates, movements etc.

Poor Annie, according to others, died age 10 months HOWEVER still managed to emigrate from the UK to US and have children.

I know we all have seen these glaring mistakes. I know I will have transposed numbers but when it is pointed out I look into it.

[groom]

The thing that amazed me on my great x 2 aunt's one was that they had it all on their tree, with this odd and obviously wrong second marriage stuck in the middle. If they'd only looked at it they would have noticed it was wrong!

I'm sure a lot of people just put things on without a second thought or look. How often do we see someone's death and then they appear in the next census?

[anne_p]

Spices,
Although the connection that you posted earlier is ridiculous, I can beat it!

I stupidly allowed someone to have access to my family tree as I honestly thought that the person was only interested in our "Shared Ancestry" and their descendants.
Unknown to me, the contact proceeded to copy my entire family tree onto his own and made it public.
 I was not a happy bunny and told him so.
Half of my paternal side, ALL of my maternal family  and NONE of husbands family belong in his tree, so what was he doing?

He tried to quantify it by claiming that everyone in my family tree was related to him in one way or another and therefore belongs in his tree?
It explains why his tree contains more than 80,000 names but he has very few direct ancestors.

I chose my husbands great uncle ( yep! he copied all of this too) and asked him to provide me with  the exact connection to himself.

I promise you... this was his extremely proud response which I have copied and pasted from his message that I kept.

"1st cousin 1x removed of wife of brother-in-law of sister-in-law of 3rd cousin of husband of sister-in-law of paternal grandfather of wife of brother-in-law of 1st cousin 3x removed of wife of 2nd cousin 3x removed of husband of 1st cousin 2x removed of husband of aunt of wife of 2nd cousin 2x removed"

Classic name collector who cannot grasp  the concept that an in-law has no biological link to himself.

[spices]

"1st cousin 1x removed of wife of brother-in-law of sister-in-law of 3rd cousin of husband of sister-in-law of paternal grandfather of wife of brother-in-law of 1st cousin 3x removed of wife of 2nd cousin 3x removed of husband of 1st cousin 2x removed of husband of aunt of wife of 2nd cousin 2x removed"

Thanks anne_p  better than cryptic crosswords
 

[aspin]

I don't like this either
I had photos of my late father in my ancestry tree and some more photos grt grt grt grandmother
and her family
While searching I noticed these photos were in someone else's had added tree  and beside they had added she had put the photos in
I was so annoyed I wrote and asked her the relationship to my tree .
She was related to my grandmothers full cousins wife
No blood relative to my grandmother  at all I have now deleted my photos
At the moment I am in contact with some one in Australia who has looked at my tree and has told me I have some mistakes I'm not bothered I have sent him a copy of the family I have and hopefully he comes back with the corrections .I have also allowed him to look  at my tree .I don't pay to Ancestry just on an odd occasion  if I really want to see something
Elizabeth

[shellyesq]

If you don't want something out there, my suggestion would be don't put it in a public space.  I think you lose the right to complain if you do. 

I'm an adoptee who has researched her adoptive family, as well as her husband's family, so I don't think you're required to be biologically related to someone to be interested in them. 

Some of the people on my Ancestry tree are a best guess or something I may look into more in depth later.  If someone wants to politely point me in the right direction on someone, I will happily accept the information.  If they just want to tell me that I'm wrong, that's not going to go over so well.

[groom]

If someone wants to politely point me in the right direction on someone, I will happily accept the information.  If they just want to tell me that I'm wrong, that's not going to go over so well.

I think that about sums it up - it is very much how some one approaches it. If I had a message from someone saying that I was wrong as they knew that they were right, I'd probably ignore them. If however they worded their message to perhaps ask how I'd come to that conclusion and was I certain as they had found ......  etc. I'd be more inclined to take note and reply.

[jettejjane]

I too agree with shellyesq. I don't have a tree online but have many posts in here about my family that anyone can access. If anyone used any of that information it would be correct. Anyone can Google dad and get a lot about him and then make the rest up. But why?

If I contact incorrect tree owners I never say they are wrong just ask where they got info. Mygt X 3 Grandfather from Sussex emigrated to USA and most American tree have him wrong. Dob, place birth and wife's name incorrect. I have tried to find this mystery person and wife  but he doesn't seem to exist. They do however have children correct which if they researched would give parents. I have parish records they could get them too. These tree owners are all copying  names, this means they can't go back any further. I on the other hand can and have done so.

Jane

[MaecW]

The best I came across recently was one of those nonsensical trees, regrettably too common from the USA, which had numerous claims of descent from pre-Norman and Dark Age Europe .  In this case they not only had a date of birth for their revered ancestor ( a minor post-Roman British kinglet ) but also had his date and place of death : "Papua New Guinea". 

If they have any supporting evidence for that one it'll require a complete re-write of the history books.

Maec