Terrible Trees On Ancestry

[coombs]

The terrible trees on Ancestry are worsened by the "Was this helpful" pop-up thing at the bottom right hand corner when looking at name results in the Ancestry trees list. Same with the "need help" pop-up on FindMyPast that keeps reappearing even when I click the x button. They are teaching me to suck eggs. Maybe I can change my setting to stop these annoying pop ups which also can obscure links and text.

[munchies]

I remember when I started doing family history research it involved actually travelling to a records office often for a full day to get the most out of it. searching through microfiches or church record books, cross referencing with census details checking dates, names, addresses parents names on marriage certificates. Especially when a relative called Thomas born in say 1790 had 13 children all of whom then called their eldest son Thomas  There was a lot of effort and cost getting all those marriage and birth certificates

Now you can lie in bed, click a button and add in something that looks like it fits possibly meaning to go back and verify it later it’s all got quite lazy.

I still need to have it on paper in front of me and visualise it for it to make sense. Once I have made sense though I love being able to add the detail to an ancestry tree with minimal effort.

[suedonym]

I have "Trees" on Ancestry.  There are a lot of erroneous entries, and it has caused me to pursue ancestors, that although they are correct, actually were the result of a marriage between a family ancestor that was incorrect.  It was his brother, whose tree went through to the Tyrrells, de Nevilles, Thomas Cramner, and right through to the 13th century.  There were even some Plantaganet kings, George Washington, and the Spencer branch of Sir Winston Spencer Churchill's family.  I put a lot of hours into this, until a birth certificate came up showing the wrong marriage, much earlier in the tree!  Thus causing everything to "move over" somewhat."  The air around me was a trifle blue for a while!  That's life - or should I be saying that on this site?

[coombs]

I have "Trees" on Ancestry.  There are a lot of erroneous entries, and it has caused me to pursue ancestors, that although they are correct, actually were the result of a marriage between a family ancestor that was incorrect.  It was his brother, whose tree went through to the Tyrrells, de Nevilles, Thomas Cramner, and right through to the 13th century.  There were even some Plantaganet kings, George Washington, and the Spencer branch of Sir Winston Spencer Churchill's family.  I put a lot of hours into this, until a birth certificate came up showing the wrong marriage, much earlier in the tree!  Thus causing everything to "move over" somewhat."  The air around me was a trifle blue for a while!  That's life - or should I be saying that on this site?

So do you mean that the link back to royalty has been disproven, and there is still a connection but only through marriage?

[sarah]

Message from Suedonyn who sent the message to me in error. The blue reply button is at the end of the topic Sue


Yes.  My information came from now deceased relatives, which was misleading and sent me down the wrong path.  My funndings regarding family links to James Tyrrell. Thomas Cramner, etc. are correct, but the marriage of a Squires relative was wrong.  The marriage that started the tree to the Tyrrells was a marriage of the brother my my great grandfather.  It could be argued that his tree is in the family, but ouf course, the further down the line of descent one goes, the further away that branch of the family goes.  Interesting research that took me back to the 13th century.  Ancestry data goes back to the early part of the 16th century and no further unless the tree is of particular interest, as in the case of the Tyrrell family. and their relatives.  Hope this clarifies what I had said previously. 

I wish Ancestry monitored members' input more closely as their are so many very obviously inaccurate and unreailistic entries, such as the ssame marriages being repeatedly entered several times and women bearing children at age nine, etc.  The faked up coats of arms are annoying as they are so very obvious.

[Mike in Cumbria]

I wish Ancestry monitored members' input more closely as their are so many very obviously inaccurate and unreailistic entries, such as the ssame marriages being repeatedly entered several times and women bearing children at age nine, etc.  The faked up coats of arms are annoying as they are so very obvious.[/i]

Hi Sue, and welcome to Rootschat. If you think about it, it would be completely unrealistic for Ancestry staff to check people's trees for accuracy. They provide the resource, but it is up to individuals to do their own research and fact-checking. They could improve their algorithms, though, to prevent some of the more ridiculous hints being offered.

[pharmaT]

Completely agree on the algorithms. Whilst we cannot expect the hints to definitely be the person we are looking for I really would like to see a major reduction in impossible hints.  Yesterday I had a hint for my gran. The hint is an entry in he 1895 electoral register under her married name.  She was born in 1896.  Then there was a 1961 electoral register hint for my grt grt grandfather who died in 1920. Both dates are on my tree.

[Stanwix England]

I do think that some of the blame for this, as others have said, lies at the feet of Ancestry. Impossible hints that don't make any sense come up all the time. The 'potential mother/father' new feature isn't great either.

[Euphonium23]

I'm glad to have found this subject. I was tracing my family and had obtained all the details of my grandmother's 12 siblings, including copies of each of their birth certificates, newspaper cuttings and WW1 records. But then I discovered other family trees with just some of the siblings and other people with the same surname registered in the same district who were nothing to do with my gran's immediate family. I messaged the two individuals with the correct details, but they neither acknowledged my messages or corrected their trees. I merely use other people's information as a guide that needs verifying.