Ancestry family trees full of lazy errors

[alan o]

I have checked some other tree hints and have seen total rubbish for example:

B Chard
Baptised Notts
Baptised Cornwall (some years later)
Married Taunton
Child 1 born Chard
Child 2 born Portsmouth
Child 3 born Chard
Census Cornwall
Census Chard
died Illminster
buried London

Half of those entries are clearly spurious with a little investigation or thought but people just click accept.......

[LizzieL]

I have checked some other tree hints and have seen total rubbish for example:

B Chard
Baptised Notts
Baptised Cornwall (some years later)
Married Taunton
Child 1 born Chard
Child 2 born Portsmouth
Child 3 born Chard
Census Cornwall
Census Chard
died Illminster
buried London

Half of those entries are clearly spurious with a little investigation or thought but people just click accept.......

You're lucky to get the events in that order.
I have seen people baptised before their birth (by several years) married at 6 years old. Buried before they died and giving birth to multiple children after their death.
I have also found that some tree owners have the greatest reluctance to accept that their ancestors had illegitimate children or were pregnant on their wedding day.

[alan o]

 

So very true.

[Nanna52]

I was helping a friend.  A clue came up which meant that her grandmother during WW1 left her children, hopped across to the USA from England.  Changed her first name slightly and married an American then hopped back to England to have a third child with her English husband.  What was worse I found out the tree owner was a direct descendant.

[ThrelfallYorky]

! Incredible! But we all read it all the time.
Sometimes people simply see, or read - what they want to encounter. No matter how much evidence was presented to the contrary, a relative of mine simply would not accept her Irish ancestry - right up to her death, insisted she was Scottish ( and descended from Robert the Bruce, no less!) despite reams of evidence from myself and others, diligently researched, that prior to the 1870s both parents on one side had been firmly Irish.
Had she done an online tree, she would firmly have accepted and incorporated anything Scottish, and "lost" anything Irish. A really good job she'd no I.T. skills, or all the people who simply copy from other trees would all have got her - and us, I suppose - as relatives and descendants.
TY

[alan o]

I am clearing the hundreds of hints about my Portland lineage.  I have an ancestor whose surname is stone but 2 children of the same name were born in the same year to 2 separate sets of parents.  However the fathers are in fact brothers so the grandfather is the same man!  Con toss time as there is no way of working out who is the actual father as the baptism record does not help.  However whilst looking at other hints I came across this doozey that sum up the challenge of using at other peoples trees with double checking.

[LizzieL]

Burial before death and military service afterwards - happens all the time 

That's why the safety coffin was invented
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safety_coffin

[coombs]

I have seen trees with, for example, a "John Smith" "born in Framlingham, Suffolk", in 1720, and then "Baptism" in 1721 at St Michael Bassishaw, London, London, England. He then dies in 1798 in Framlingham and is buried in 1804 at St Mary Matfelon, London, England.

[alan o]

Some one was really keen to find that prior to their ancestor George Hart living in Somerset they had Irish roots!

I have checked and Yes the tree owner is an American.

George was baptised in Combe St Nicholas on 13 Apr 1701 and his father was Hugh Hart who is buried in the same place in 1722,