Hi Jacqui Are you sure that the data you are finding in other peoples trees is uplifted from your posts to lists? Isn't it far more likely they are just coming to the same assumptions that you did, only they haven't followed it through I find it a little hard to believe that someone is computer literate enough to find your post and yet doesn't realise its a question which needs more work done on it The answer re the earlier posts would be to have posted the corrected conclusion once established I do not know of any online tree site that mandates a source for the information added, it would not be in their favour generally as it would put some people off and the site owners would not want that As far as I can see there are only two courses of action Either don't put anything online, or post the correct verified information with sources, at least then the information copied would be solid data Some though, appear to me to think the source is their property so don't add it False genealogy is not a modern concept, its gone on as long as man has walked the earth, I don't see it ending any time soon All we can do is make our own research as accurate as we can Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 03/06/2014 05:02, Jacqui Gee wrote: > Like many others I tread carefully on Ancestry.Com and do not accept > anything as fact until I am able to validate or verify the information from > original documents and/or source, and establish a link as to how the > information got onto Ancestry.Com in the first place. As I do with any > "discoveries" made during my genealogy "detective" searches. > > Amazingly I am increasingly finding information that I have posted on > various rootsweb lists popping up as fact on Ancestry.Com and other > pay-to-view or free genealogy sites. For example, when making initial > queries and requests on rootsweb lists for assistance I have made reference