Do I tell?
 

A couple of months subs to Ancestry has really opened my eyes to the complete and utter garbage that most Ancestry trees are.


On my Skillings line, quite a bit of the info looks as if it came from me originally (though I know that someone else was researching the family pre 1970s)


Unfortunately, Ancestry's hints have created chaos in some of the trees, the sources for which are that vast pool of data from trees which Ancestry has snaffled.

Part of me would like to put the record straight. The other part doesn't want the precious data that I spent years beavering away, poring over original documents to discover, to be taken by a subscription service.

I have absolutely no intention of putting my tree on Ancestry, since most of the information that took so long to gather is now available online and free for anyone who has the patience to find it.

I agree.

I know several of the ancestry trees were copied from my private trees, mistakes and all (some I sent print outs or gedcoms to family connections). I have corrected mine, but nobody else has.

I have made a family connection which nobody else has and I am not telling them, because it is so easy to find if you only look.

I have a private tree on ancestry so I can let other family members see what I have found, and I don't mind if they copy it, its their family too after all, but I would like to get some credit if someone else asks them about it. And I would like them to check mine from time to time and see if they need to update theirs.

Very few people contact me "out of the blue" on anestry now, so I can only assume they are copying from the other trees, or no-one else is researching our families.

I am waiting for the day someone asks about the BROWN connection !!

I feel smug too !!

Di

Lol, Di.

I have exact dates of baptism on some of my trees, which ought to prompt the question: if you know that, surely you know the parents? But I have NEVER been asked.

Similarly, I have linked two people together as man and wife without having ever found the marriage and despite him being baptised several miles away and being old enough to be her father. The proof is in some grubby records at TNA, which I'd proudly share, if only someone would ask.

I'm happy to share info if I know the people are researching the same family - however I made a mistake and for awhile one of my trees was public (now private again) and someone connected to it - taking the data I'd acquired. However they weren't the same family and as yet I haven't found a connection. In the end they did remove the connection.

If I spot a mistake and can prove it I contact them but not many are happy about it as they could have gone a lot further back on the wrong line (which I did initially too).

On OH's tree I connected to someone who said he couldn't be connected as the man never married!! lol - anyway he then got the certificates himself off scotlandspeople which he copied onto ancestry (I thought I'd given them to him so was in danger of being caught for copyright but I thankfully hadn't). However his public tree is now imblazened with illigitmate son of ........... and he isn't even a direct descendant which I did feel a bit iffy about.

Oh to be asked a question like that!! I have quite a few examples of info on my tree which should generate similar questions, but I've never been asked either.

I wouldn't. I'm in the same position - there are a lot of trees on Ancestry where I was the original researcher who willingly shared info on GR and the majority of people can't even copy correctly! A few years ago I put all my trees on Ancestry but I keep them all private now. It might be a bit mean but I'm still cross about things like people with distant connections putting my near family on public trees.

I agree with the others. My tree (which is now private and not on Ancestry) has been taken and copied by several people. Some info is wrong, but I'm not telling them. They don't give me any credit even when there is info which no one else would know but me.

A while ago, I did extensive research into lost street names. A real challenge, but I managed to identify what the streets were now called or if the street had been demolished, where it was located. The info was compiled from a wide range of orginal sources. I made my reseach available to people who were interested. Recently, I came across a new book on the subject, which I thought would be of use to me to expand my lost street database. However, on checking a couple of entries, it became clear the author had used my research, because some of the errors I originally made were in the book. I'd subsequently corrected these errors. The author had never asked me about the research and there was no acknowledgement in the book. Grrrr.

I don't understand how people can have wrong info on their ancestry tree when the records are actually on ancestry. I check other trees to see if I am missing things and I'm amazed how we differ because they aren't looking at the available records.