Wikitree experiences?

[maggbill]

Would like any comments from current users of Wikitree. (Have looked at previous posts re people's impressions, but not many of them are very recent). Having researched my Tree for close to 20 years, i am not a newbie, but still find that there are lots to learn and I really know very little about the workings of Wikitree. I understand its "global tree, not record repository" concept.  A private Ancestry tree has served me well for many years, but a recent contact from a Wikitree user has raised some questions.  I have concern about loss of control,  errors or disagreements/conflicts etc. Years ago I shared some Ancestry tree  info with one very distant family connection, regreted it because the person had questionable interpretations of it.... On the other hand, I have little interest from family to do much with my years of research, once I join the "Great Tree in the Sky"!!   Anyway, would be interested in opinions of Rootschatters !!

[Biggles50]

I have used it, and all the other “Trees” that are available, at least those that I am aware of.

As usual “due diligence” is applied as much as my old grey matter can apply to ensure that what I use in my own tree can be included there as it fulfils genealogical criteria.

Going way, way back in time to when the so call nobility ruled life the universe and everything, it becomes more difficult to verify especially with Minor Nobility and the Offspring who soon become lost in the annals of time.

Comparing Wikitree entries with others like GENIUK can reveal anomalies in the entries.

So basically, I trust Wikitree as much as I trust Ancestry and Familysearch trees.

[maggbill]

Thank you for your reply Biggles,   I had never heard of Wikitree - or rather I had ignored it - not understanding its aim.  Is it a bit like Wikipedia - to be used with caution - we tend to believe and trust too easily?  I have always been super fussy about verifying info on my tree.  Not sure about its credibility once others have the option of amending/changing it.  Which I suppose is a crazy attitude to have.... the info is obtained through publically available sites...  knowledge which we have no actual ownership of!!!  And by adding to it, the work i have done for years may actually be of help, - rather than it being possibly ignored or even destroyed after I go!!

[Higpoidius]

I have used Wikitree, as I have a family line that (surprisingly!) goes through nobility. However, I have only considered material that had good sources listed, and I suppose the 'good' criteria is a moot point. I did find some of the arguments over source material very interesting, and it certainly opened up other possibilities for wider historical research. Like Biggles50, I only trust it as much as Ancestry, Family Search and FreeReg. In all of them I have found possible mistakes from the transcribers.

[HughC]

Wikitree requires source references, so should be more reliable than fAnciestree,
where the only rule seems to be "anything goes".

[David Nicoll]

Hi,
   As others have said, Wikitree is like all others, a source of possibly interesting material to be checked.
   As far as legacy goes, that is why I have made my Ancestry tree public, there may be mistakes, but many tears of research has gone into it.
   I am also trying to produces two “Books” one using readily availabile software, FTM or the like, which produces a remarkably readable story from tree data, the other being more of a story, of the memories and bits that are not bare dates.
   The book form seems much more inviting for non interested people.
   Also condensing info to the minimum. Only keeping non-researchable info, family bible, stories etc. A small well indentified box might at least be kept in an attic for a subsequent interested person to find.
  A relative in the 1930’s wrote a book which has inspired generations of family historians, just based on his memories of his youth in the 1850’s and 1860’s.