I am so upset .....

[Glen in Tinsel Kni]

I regularly add 200 examples of a single surname to my tree in a day just building out the tree or a match and that will include GRO refs, address from census,1939, probate and burial where available  along with the address, witnesses and such from the marriage cert if it's one of the areas Ancestry have registers for.
If I just want bare bones names and dates using hints or copy and paste it would be far quicker. I can't see duplicating an 800 name tree being too difficult to do if someone sets their mind to it.

[Nottschick]

How annoying, no wonder you are upset.  The person with 60,000 on their tree is clearly one of those who does no research but goes around hoovering up other people's work at will.  Likely they also guess at anything which nearly fits their purpose, not bothering with little things like baptisms, marriages and child deaths which mean that someone cannot have their own children.
Basically you need to zip it up to Private and if anyone asks to see it say no but give them some specific detail if you wish to do so. 
False information is all over the trees.  I once deliberately told someone a wrong death year of an aunt - 2000 instead of 2012 to test their integrity and that has been copied to many trees since.   

[jaywit]

Yesterday I replied to the owner of one of the dodgy trees. I pointed out that some dates etc. could be easily checked in the parish records on Free REG and sent her a link.

I also asked her if she could tell me where she had got the obviously copied wrong information from as I had been searching for it for a long time without success.

I have not received a reply from her but looking at her tree this morning she has removed the obvious wrong people etc. and changed the dates to the correct ones.

[Steve3180]

It is strange how we all follow the same pastime but we view it differently.

I don't see it as collecting ancestors which I then possess, I see it as shedding light on my ancestors. The great and the good (and the bad) will always have their history's written, we are writing the histories of the unwashed, unlettered and up til now forgotten people. I publish this on Ancestry because I want others to see it, copy it, use it, extend it. I want others to tell me if they think it's wrong, I want to (and have done many times over the years) collaborate with others to improve my family's history. I have seen connections that I have found after years of looking (intermittently) get copied and begin to outweigh the nonsense trees on Ancestry. None of this could happen if my tree wasn't public.

I think of what I am doing as like the child spending years researching and writing the autobiography of their famous parents, I want to publish, I want to show the world these people and I want it to understand their lives.

[Essnell]

Hi Everyone, I have just ead this entre thread and It has opened a wound i thought I had got over.

Many years ago i started n my gandmother's family lines. i came across someone whom I thought i could trust. they appeared genuine and we emailed each other for ages with informatioin etc.  then i sent them three or four private family photos. one in articular was of my grandmother. No one else could possibly have had this as i have the original in /sepia in an old ovval wooden frame.  but there was also a small colored one that had been commissione by her daughter ata commercial photographic studio some years later. 

i emailed this along with one that had her sisters's young family c 1900 and again in 1912, plus one of her two daughters as kids. 

I was absolutely gutted to fine that the family photos are now on the internet as well as the colored one of my grandmother. 

I found this a betrayal of a private connection. I have a limited family tree which is private and it will stay that way. 

I have just helped two DNA matches with parts of this tree. what they choose to do with it remains to be seen but it's a part that most are not interested in. 

my point here is that people break your trust and that hurts.  an copying a whole tree of 800 people is similar. 
Essnell.

[George E. H. Haydock]

  I fined that trust today ,every one is your friend, then trust is beyond most including family,
the only one you can ever trust is YOU.

      Cheers George

[Marianthompson47]

I had a similar occurrence with a young man from South Africa who had the whole of my tree, including every single photo, certificates etc. In his tree.

I queried this and he said he had an interest in my family and that was that.
It left me fuming.



quote author=Heb66 link=topic=890297.msg7640889#msg7640889 date=1742556399]
Hi lovely rootschatters,

Yesterday I logged into my Ancestry account as I do daily to check my new DNA matches and do a little family history research on my family tree which I have built up with my own verified research over the last 25 years.

I noticed a lady who I have brief cordial messages with, no more than half a dozen exchanged between us due to the fact that she shares very distant DNA between us only 10cm and a closer match with my son 124cm on his paternal line in which we both know how my son is connected to her.

I noticed yesterday she has the whole of my family tree and research appeared on her own Ancestry page listed as B family tree.

How on earth has she managed to transfer the whole of my tree onto her Ancestry page ?

I definitely have not given her an invite to share my tree over to her although my tree is public on Ancestry.

My tree has only 800 names on it all totally verified with lots of hard graft and money dedicated to it,hers has nearly 60,000 people on.

What would you lovely rootschatter do ? Message her regarding this or ignore it ?

For me this is really upsetting....any advice would really be appreciated. Thank you so much for taking time to read my message.

Warmest regards...Helen.
[/quote]

[Biggles50]

It is strange how we all follow the same pastime but we view it differently.

I don't see it as collecting ancestors which I then possess, I see it as shedding light on my ancestors. The great and the good (and the bad) will always have their history's written, we are writing the histories of the unwashed, unlettered and up til now forgotten people. I publish this on Ancestry because I want others to see it, copy it, use it, extend it. I want others to tell me if they think it's wrong, I want to (and have done many times over the years) collaborate with others to improve my family's history. I have seen connections that I have found after years of looking (intermittently) get copied and begin to outweigh the nonsense trees on Ancestry. None of this could happen if my tree wasn't public.

I think of what I am doing as like the child spending years researching and writing the autobiography of their famous parents, I want to publish, I want to show the world these people and I want it to understand their lives.

Sorry but all this will do if further expand the number of error strewn family trees that exist on Ancestry.

I do not believe that very many who are interested in a specific family will undertake due diligence, they will simply add the people to their own family tree on the assumption that the source tree is correct.

By far IMHO the best method on Ancestry is to set your Trees as Private but Searchable, then proceed with caution should anyone wish to have access.

[hurworth]

The random ahnentafel numbers make it clear that these "foreign" trees haven't been built the hard way.  There is obviously some means of cobbling together different ancestry trees with minimal clicks/keystrokes.  I've taken an Ancestry DNA test and it seems thrulines may be how it happens.  Click on any ancestor with matches on the thrulines page, if in the Relationships (tree view) tab there are individuals in green with "evaluate" against them, a few more clicks seems to be all it takes to add entire branches.

Jane :-)

The green "potential ancestors" that appear, with Thrulines but also if you have a parentless individual in your tree is definitely how much of this happens.  Also Ancestry used to provide in hints to three other trees at a time with trees that have the same person in their tree, and it took a couple of clicks to link everyone.  Now it's just one tree.  I suspect many do not notice is the green EVALUATE button next to the potential ancestor in Thrulines.

Most of my trees are private including a large (30,000+) quick and dirty tree for when I'm playing around with ideas and still searching. I became very frustrated with incorrect info about one set of ancestors (in the 1970s was printed and distributed at a family reunion) that I have made that tree public with images from parish records, newspapers etc.  I regularly make contact with the incorrect info based on the 1970s info and send them a link to the tree (as many do not have a sub).  It's slow work....  Five years on from working out who were the correct parents of my Scottish gtgtgtgt-grandmother was there are still numerous trees that show her from Alloa, not Fife, and with the wrong parents.  And Ancestry brings up the wrong parents (in green) for her.