Thanks Audrey!! Sometimes I long for the old days of library research, sending out a letter and waiting for it's return with proof of the information, walking the cemeteries, etc. Of course I can still do that... if I can get myself away from the computer. :) Thanks again! Kathye NiteOwl226@aol.com wrote: > Thought I'd pass on this excellent article. He does a better job than I do > of pointing out the pitfalls of web genealogy. Audrey > > EASY GENEALOGY VIA THE INTERNET -- BE CAREFUL > > by Gordon Johnson, Aberdeen, Scotland <Kinman@ifb.co.uk> > > It seems at first sight heartening to read of tales of people finding their > family links through WorldConnect and other Internet resources. What worries > me is when people say that by this means they found their ancestry right back > to the 1500s or > 1400s. I shudder at this assumption that what you find on the Internet will > be accurate. > > Most of it is posted by amateurs who have done their research to the best of > their ability, but do not necessarily use the standards of proof that > professional genealogists and dedicated amateurs would apply. It is a sad > fact that very few genealogies ever lead back into the 1500s or 1400s on the > basis of provable fact. The few which do are always of royal or noble family > descent, and even there the evidence for some of their genealogical links is > tenuous. > > May I make the point that you can never research your family properly by > simply copying someone else's results. You are accepting work done by some > whose standards may be very sloppy, and so the genealogy may be completely > wrong! I am able to say this based on many years as a professional librarian > helping people with their research, my later years as a professional > researcher, and my involvement in newsgroups and genealogy lists. There is > simply no substitute for doing the research > properly. If you obtain someone else's research results, establish what > sources were used and what level of proof was used in making links. > > It doesn't matter whether a professional or an amateur is doing the research; > what matters are the standards being applied. Many amateurs do a grand job > and I happily applaud their work; others make assumptions and guesses due to > lack of knowledge, and come up with wrong conclusions. A simple example: An > amateur > researching his/her Scottish ancestry may use Scots Origins or > FamilySearch.org to search for an ancestor, find in both only one possible > solution, and decide that this is the answer. What the researcher should > realize is that both sources are indexes > primarily to Church of Scotland registers, and do not include Roman Catholic, > Baptist, Free Church, Congregational, Secession and Relief churches, and the > fact that there are many missing or damaged registers resulting in register > entries being missing. Being unaware of essential background facts, errors > are made and are perpetuated when a wrong genealogy is posted on the Internet > and faithfully accepted without question by innocent newcomers. > > The above is sent not to denigrate, but to allow newcomers to > view what they find on the Internet with a clearer vision. > > ============================== > Search ALL of RootsWeb's mailing lists in real time. > RootsWeb's Personalized Mailing Lists: > http://pml.rootsweb.com/ -- Kathye Snyder-Knight Carthage, Missouri kathyek@earthlink.net http://home.earthlink.net/~kathyek/index.html