Thought this to be of interest to us researchers; From: Baldwin <[email protected]> Subject: Dealing with Gustav Anjou sources and subsequent corrections Questions regarding Gustav ANJOU. As a relative newbie (I have been doing offline research for many years now) to online research, I am revising my notes to adhering to strict source documentation and citation, I am now starting at my birth entry and working backwards in my tree to ensure proper documentation and source citation has been used. For the first year as an online researcher, I simply gathered names and paid little bother to the notes and sources other than cut and past method. Now that I am at the point of being able to share substantial documented info on several lines I want to make sure my work is ethical and documented at a professional standard. I don't want to add any more horror stories to those out there already. Yesterday gathering info to send a distant cousin, to my horror, I have hit a major amount of research on at least one line that includes several hundred if not more individuals based on research I have gathered from a family tree online obtained at Ancestry.com that used Gustav Anjou work as the main source. (see below) Sources: Abbr.: Wilson History Author: Anjou, Gustave [USE WITH CAUTION!!!] Several years into intense research I now am familiar with just how fraudulent or a criminal Anjou was. The person who posted this info and used it in her tree is having her work copied and passed around in many forms some without this warning... To avoid anymore disasters and wastes of time, should I just unlink the individual where the bogus information might start, and move it to possible notes for future use. Or as disheartening as it may be, should I completely fo rget about info obtained from this citation altogether. I run a large amount of reports and do not want to include bogus or suspect information. Since there is a growing number of newbie researchers for this family grouping and I am seeing the bad info being passed around often without the warning message, should I take on the role of a "Nosy Nelly" and post in message threads the problems associated with Anjou's work, or should I just include it on my own pages when dealing with the source info and contact information for the various researchers out there. Should I use a statement that includes the documented fraudulent and criminal nature of  Anjou as a warning. Reason being. There is another researcher in a separate line that wrote a well used book on our family lines that contains many many errors, but this was due to his careless errors or genuine mistakes. That I have always seen as "use with caution" but to issue a simple "use with caution" message when finding Anjou's work seems to bee too much of an understatement. Any advice would be appreciated ... thank you. Stephen