Great thoughts, there are also a whole lot of "tree collectors". At least that's what I call them. A tree with 50,000 to 150,000 people in it should be a bit suspect. I have written asking for a persons connections to an ancestor of mine only to be told, "oh, uh, not sure, I'll get back to you". Just my opinion, Jan S - Orlando, FL -------Original Message------- From: Sally Viada Date: 8/20/2010 4:26:48 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [LAORLEAN] Ancestry Place Name Error I found the same thing concerning One World Tree and Ancestry.. I do not rely on the pop up place names, etc and put my own information on Ancestry. Lots of the family trees that come up are incorrect. Especially if there are no sources, census etc. I think the problem with One World Tree is when it first started, researchers did not have the information/documents available to them now, and relied on oral histories a lot. One "family name" book that I know of that's been published for years, has me as my mother! When I questioned it, I was told that an aunt of someone told the writer that is what she thought. In this Internet age so many documents are available, I just hope people use this source to correct things. Just my opinion. ________________________________ From: Kathleen Deao <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Fri, August 20, 2010 3:05:34 PM Subject: Re: [LAORLEAN] Ancestry Place Name Error Norm, I sincerely wish you good luck with getting the place name fixed. And I apologize in advance for using this issue as a place to jump in and vent . . . but the worst thing Ancestry.com ever did, in my opinion, was One World Tree. Their computer stitched together "probables" [their word], and matched my mother-in-law to the brother of her actual husband. I wrote to them, and spoke with tech support and supervisors . . . and they can't/won't fix it, remove it, or give me a place to add a comment. The data was originally submitted correctly by a distant relative. And now the mistake will be perpetuated. . . ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I' m glad someone else mentioned this. While the Ancestry website may be valuable for records, it's a hash of poorly researched and virtually undocumented trees when it comes to LA. Personally, I've questioned 4 people about their huge trees with 2 no answers and 2 snippy replies. Their goal seems to be attaching as many people as possible. Frankly, when a tree gets upwards in the thousands, I think it loses its usefulness/credibility. Not to mention those who truncate their trees where it suits their agendas--deleting relatives they don't want to acknowledge. I don't understand why they bother. If you have a tree with 50,000 people on it, without ONE attached record, what exactly is your point? What exactly are you trying to accomplish? And if you don't want to include ALL of your direct antecedents and descendents, then keep your tree on your own software. Some of the attempts to "disguise" data are laughable, when they can be cross-checked with other sources and shown to be deliberatley fraudulent. While Ancestry provides records, they take no responsibility for the erroneous info posted by their subscribers. They only care about the subscription fees $$$ they collect. Anyone willing to pay the fee can post family trees that begin on Neptune, Jupiter, Mars, or Pluto. I am grateful for the work done by NOVA, without which I would have been lost in a morass of error. And I started with NOVA's site in the mid 90's. Remember when most genealogy sites were FREE? Ancestry.com bought most of them out and then started charging subscriber fees! Thank God Ancestry.com doesn't control library research. > Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 16:48:12 -0400 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [LAORLEAN] Ancestry Place Name Error > > Great thoughts, there are also a whole lot of "tree collectors". At least > that's what I call them. A tree with 50,000 to 150,000 people in it should > be a bit suspect. I have written asking for a persons connections to an > ancestor of mine only to be told, "oh, uh, not sure, I'll get back to you". > > Just my opinion, Jan S - Orlando, FL > >

I am not tree collector but I have over 100,000 people in my tree. I say about 80% are sourced now and I am still working on the rest. When I started this in 97 I didn't always put a source in the file since I had paper files, Now I am going back putting the paper into pics and attaching to the person or putting the source in from books and papers. But my tree is also NOT on anything ancestry owns. Enless you are Bruce Voelker, who had got a copy of my old tree from someone else around 2000 or so and has it up there, without sources and then leaves comments about dates saying it is unlikely this person married this person the dates put their ages to far apart. Well I have told Mr Bruce, I have the documents to prove that Johanna did marry Louis and yes Johanna was 20 years older then Louis. I know this is right I have the pics of them, I got first hand knowledge from her three granddaughters and her daughter-in-law who was the half sister of Johanna's husband Louis. So what it breaks down to is Johanna's third husband was her son's wife's half brother. My Great great great grandmother was the first cougar on the block(northshore). But anyways this is why my stuff is not on there. If people want to know who I am related to check out my site. I have reports up and if need be I can send proof for most right now and get back to you when I scan the rest. So not everyone with big trees or name/tree collectors. I am working on piecing a lot of my families together as they all come from the same area and we have so many cousins marrying cousins. Dee -------------------------------------------------- From: "Jan Strickland" <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, August 20, 2010 3:48 PM To: "LAOrleans" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [LAORLEAN] Ancestry Place Name Error > Great thoughts, there are also a whole lot of "tree collectors". At least > that's what I call them. A tree with 50,000 to 150,000 people in it > should > be a bit suspect. I have written asking for a persons connections to an > ancestor of mine only to be told, "oh, uh, not sure, I'll get back to > you". > > Just my opinion, Jan S - Orlando, FL > > > > > -------Original Message------- > > From: Sally Viada > Date: 8/20/2010 4:26:48 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [LAORLEAN] Ancestry Place Name Error > > I found the same thing concerning One World Tree and Ancestry.. > > I do not rely on the pop up place names, etc and put my own information > on > Ancestry. Lots of the family trees that come up are incorrect. > > Especially if there are no sources, census etc. > > I think the problem with One World Tree is when it first started, > researchers > did not have the information/documents available to them now, > > and relied on oral histories a lot. One "family name" book that I know of > that's > been published for years, has me as my mother! When I questioned it, > > I was told that an aunt of someone told the writer that is what she > thought. > > In this Internet age so many documents are available, I just hope people > use > this source to correct things. > > Just my opinion. > > > > > > ________________________________ > From: Kathleen Deao <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Fri, August 20, 2010 3:05:34 PM > Subject: Re: [LAORLEAN] Ancestry Place Name Error > > Norm, I sincerely wish you good luck with getting the place name fixed. > > And I apologize in advance for using this issue as a place to jump in and > vent . . . but the worst thing Ancestry.com ever did, in my opinion, was > One > World Tree. Their computer stitched together "probables" [their word], and > matched my mother-in-law to the brother of her actual husband. I wrote to > them, and spoke with tech support and supervisors . . . and they > can't/won't fix it, remove it, or give me a place to add a comment. The > data > was originally submitted correctly by a distant relative. And now the > mistake will be perpetuated. . . > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes > in > the subject and the body of the message > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >