How do I tell them?

[DavidG02]

I was contacted by someone viewing my sons tree and pointing out he thought there was a connection along the way

I did some '' quick '' research and wasnt happy with their conclusions and wrote back saying I couldnt see a connection and named the reasons

Their response was '' but no this is where the connection is '' - I did some more looking and still feel there is a missing piece

But I am also quite happy to investigate further using their information - but at my own pace

So yes it may seem I am ignoring them but in reality I am taking a slow approach and working on it in my own time

That may well be the case with some people as well

[Ruskie]

Several years ago I had a DNA match with someone on My Heritage. It was one of my higher matches and he had a small tree and we had some names in common, so I contacted him though some of his tree didn’t agree with mine, I wanted to confirm. He didn’t seem too concerned about the anomaly and insisted he was right. I left it.

A couple of years later (long story) I made contact with a fourth cousin from the same line who had an extensive thoroughly researched tree. His research aligned with mine.

About a year after that I had a DNA match with someone on Ancestry. He had the same incorrect tree as my previous My Heritage match. I contacted him, and he seemed willing to concede that his information may not be correct - he had been “helped” by his cousin, the My Heritage match. The sad part about this is that this new Ancestry match had written and recently published a book about his parent’s war time romance and he had included a family tree which was wrong !

If only his cousin had taken notice of me years before. The My Heritage match didn’t seem interested in what I had to say which puzzled me at the time. I wasn’t sure why, but perhaps he didn’t want to accept that he was wrong.

The mistakes were really obvious, and my fourth cousin even knew some of the people involved and had photos of some of them so knew the correct relationships first hand.

It’s always worth confirming any differences, even published works.

[coombs]

Same for those who have 2 people of the same name and similar age mixed up, and the Ancestry hints throw up suggestions for both people. I just click ignore on the ones I know are untrue. My ancestor was William Thomas Coombs born 1860, St Pancras, and there was another William Thomas Coombs born 1861 in Chelsea, and Ancestry hints throw up suggestions for both men who are not related. I just ignore the ones for the Chelsea guy. I think another tree has some results for my WT Coombs in their WT Coombs tree.

[Biggles50]

I have just had a batch of siblings all come up as new DNA matches, all in the 20+cM range so very distant.

They all have trees on 98,000 people.

The time is took to write this is probably 20x more time than I spent looking at them.

Not worth any effort at all.

[Ayashi]

I once delicately pointed out some very obvious issues in someone's tree (think of the "married at the age of 7" variety) and was told that she knew, she'd done it on purpose to see who was a legit researcher and who just copied unthinkingly. I guess I passed?

[coombs]

In my Ancestry tree I often add notes under life events, or add custom events or Residences, or probate, explaining my findings so as to help others researching. A concise way to explain the sources of my findings, especially for pre census and BMD era.

[Josephine]

Same for those who have 2 people of the same name and similar age mixed up, and the Ancestry hints throw up suggestions for both people. I just click ignore on the ones I know are untrue. My ancestor was William Thomas Coombs born 1860, St Pancras, and there was another William Thomas Coombs born 1861 in Chelsea, and Ancestry hints throw up suggestions for both men who are not related. I just ignore the ones for the Chelsea guy. I think another tree has some results for my WT Coombs in their WT Coombs tree.

This is why I always say that ruling someone out is just as important as ruling someone in. It takes some extra time and effort, but it's essential, IMO.

[coombs]

Same for those who have 2 people of the same name and similar age mixed up, and the Ancestry hints throw up suggestions for both people. I just click ignore on the ones I know are untrue. My ancestor was William Thomas Coombs born 1860, St Pancras, and there was another William Thomas Coombs born 1861 in Chelsea, and Ancestry hints throw up suggestions for both men who are not related. I just ignore the ones for the Chelsea guy. I think another tree has some results for my WT Coombs in their WT Coombs tree.

This is why I always say that ruling someone out is just as important as ruling someone in. It takes some extra time and effort, but it's essential, IMO.

If I do rule out a potential ancestor as being someone totally different, I am not too peeved as it can create new leads and at least I know. I can soemtimes find out it was a namesake cousin or 2nd cousin, as well as just purely coincidence. If a cousin, then a "half coincidence" if there was 2 cousins who both married women called Mary, Anne or Elizabeth, and the one you think is yours was the other.

I have a Susan Riches who wed in 1725 in Norwich to Henry Helsdon and had my beady eye on a 1694 baptism in Norwich to Isaac and Eliz and was tempted to add her but then found she married another man in 1744 thanks to many Norfolk marriage licenses coming online. And her late father Isaac Riches was mentioned in her husbands will in 1756, showing it was a totally different Susan/Susannah Riches. I have worked on all the Susan Riches born 1685-1715 in Norfolk and eliminated virtually all of them except a 1689 one but that would have made her 48 in 1739 when she had her final child. Also when you get back that far, not all baptisms have survived for every parish, and some were baptised at a NC chapel or not at all.

[julianb]

I think it is best to avoid, if possible, telling them they are wrong and limit your reply to why you believe what you do. It may be possible to steer them in a better direction after further communications but it can be very delicate. People can be very possesive of their ancestors.

I think this is very good advice, and I have practical experience of being on the other end of this approach from around 20 years ago.

Someone contacted me to say that she thought we were cousins and shared the marriage register entry for her great grandparents with me - the groom was the same name, age, occupation and had the same father as one of my great grandfathers.

After a very quick flash across my mind of "how dare they", I realised this marriage record was kosher, and concluded that the research info I had inherited wasn't; my great grandparents hadn't married and I had already uncovered a mistake in the research on my great grandmother. 

I therefore set off looking for a "rival" person with similar name, age, birth location.  I found one but also found he married someone who wasn't my great grandmother and he died in the wrong place in the wrong year (we were confident about where and when my GGF died).

When the 1911 census came out my GGF was shown with my GGM (and the woman in the marriage register entry was shown as married on her census return, but with no husband, just children). I could compare his writing and signature on the first of those census returns and on the marriage register. Extremely similar.

So we were now in a position  where we were probably sharing a GGF, and that became a sure thing when a number of us second cousins and half second cousins took their DNA tests, and we were all matches, and we'd proved that our common GGF was a very naughty boy!  Fuller explanation and conjecture about practicalities should you be inquisitive  https://baker-carterfamilyhistory.blogspot.com/2024/10/you-mean-you-might-not-be-who-you-say.html