tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post8776231921209307191..comments2023-04-20T12:46:11.858-06:00Comments on The Ancestry Insider: FamilySearch In a CornerThe Ancestry Insiderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02490682912125335188noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-89784624975753267182014-06-22T13:18:44.280-06:002014-06-22T13:18:44.280-06:00Just look at Wikipedia. One would think, at the ou...Just look at Wikipedia. One would think, at the outset, that it would be a cesspool of erroneous information. However, the accuracy of Wikipedia speaks volumes about the average internet user's desire and ability to supply valid, accurate information. Although the consensus of a million people doesn't always guarantee that the end result will be free of faulty opinions (politics?), a million "fact checkers" generally supply good facts.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10658818757547291498noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-18844134869773546512013-04-16T08:55:47.687-06:002013-04-16T08:55:47.687-06:00As hard as it was for me to sort parents, children...As hard as it was for me to sort parents, children, spouses and second spouses I will NOT put my tree "out there" for others to edit. There are several wrong versions "out there" right now, in fact they far out number the correct version. Would my tree be overruled by quantity as opposed to quality? I won't take that chance. I don't see this as being a good solution to the ancestor tree. It only lets more people have an opinion whether or not it is fact. I will leave my tree public at ancesty.com and hope that researchers will find it and do their own checking to see if those are their relatives. Examples are a man with his wife's parents as his, a woman married to her son, several children born after the husband's death but carrying his last name, children born when the mother is 3 years old, in a list of children born every 2 years one child is born in a state that the family never lived in the same year as another child that does belong to the family and so on. Too many people just aren't careful. But they will be invited to "correct" my tree? I don't think so!Thttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13256855136448978468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-2094087030401822752010-09-05T22:44:12.393-06:002010-09-05T22:44:12.393-06:00Dear Anti-Consensus,
If you have evidence and can...Dear Anti-Consensus,<br /><br />If you have evidence and can communicate it clearly, then I wouldn't worry until we see how this thing unfolds.<br /><br />See my Labor Day article for more information about how it will--hopefully--work. <br /><br />-- The InsiderThe Ancestry Insiderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02490682912125335188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-23996194070620723022010-09-05T08:56:43.433-06:002010-09-05T08:56:43.433-06:00Why should a "consensus" opinion determi...Why should a "consensus" opinion determine the correct answer to some puzzles?? GIGO still rules!!<br /><br />All the published info, including that of a HIGHLY respected professional researcher on a particular ancestor of mine assumes that he was remarried to a 2nd wife, back in the old country--<br /><br />Wrong!!! -- because I am a direct descendant of the couple, I KNOW that the first wife was actually the surviving spouse and I have a copy of her 2nd marriage here in the USA in her old age to show that she did not die decades earlier, as implied in the FHS films, etc...<br /><br />That is part of the problem of working in highly inbred ethnic groups... the same names/surnames can apply to many different people in closely spaced times and places...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-9420151881619942902010-08-31T18:27:15.392-06:002010-08-31T18:27:15.392-06:00The one thing I have been waiting for is for the F...The one thing I have been waiting for is for the FHL films to be available online. This would simplify my life in so many ways. <br />I, too, don't have much faith in certain IGI records and would be deeply disheartened to see my ancestor's erroneous marriage information carved even deeper into stone. Several people had to come together to correct an IGI perpetuated misstatement of the facts. It would be troubling if this work were ignored.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17514877313601379515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-33013243528850453392010-08-31T14:11:02.772-06:002010-08-31T14:11:02.772-06:00Dear AI, Thank you for trying to clarify any confu...Dear AI, Thank you for trying to clarify any confusion on my part.<br /><br />I posted the above genealogical mess because I am confident (abstractly, not having access to nFS Tree) that there are several copies of the target person in the Tree, probably all with wrong spouse, wrong parents, wrong marriage place, wrong place of death. Hence merging (which I do understand) will diminish server load but probably not increase truthiness.<br /><br />This combination for this person is on the web in myriad copies. Only a few copies have succumbed to a decades-long correction campaign and show correct spouse and known parent. Two I have installed give supporting evidence.<br /><br />My point, perhaps poorly made, is that the fundamental (derivative, secondary and lacking reference to where the assertions are copied from) source materials for the nFS Tree do not give much guidance for accuracy.<br /><br />I am glad that the correction-of-conclusion process is heading in a more streamlined and rational direction. The Elephant in the Living Room is that countless numbers of rites have been performed based on erroneous genealogical accounts. Consequently there are persons who have an attachment to the mistaken assertions over and above the sheer weight of error-riddled trees on the web and their mistaken sources.<br /><br />It is to be hoped that a robust correction process will be able to prevent the 'wiki-war' phenomenon.Geoloverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12050268303916428230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-46904649826290696772010-08-31T11:28:03.572-06:002010-08-31T11:28:03.572-06:00Dear Geolover,
Perhaps I mis-communicated. In NFS...Dear Geolover,<br /><br />Perhaps I mis-communicated. In NFS today Combine mushes together multiple sources.<br /><br />In the NFS of tomorrow, sources (such as the IGI, AF, and PRF) are extracted and exist independently of the conclusion tree. Sources are associated with conclusions in the tree. But the tree can be "fixed" independent of information in the sources.<br /><br />Merging is used to "fix" multiple copies of the same person in the tree.<br /><br />Keep in mind that in "our tree," "fixed" is determined by the community. It happens like this: You or me applies "your fix" or "my fix." If no one objects, it becomes "our fix." If someone objects, they undo the change and engages the fixer in a discussion. When consensus is reached, someone makes "our fix." <br /><br />Once a discussion is underway, it is bad form to apply or re-apply "your fix" or "my fix." Doing so can result in temporary suspension.<br /><br />When consensus can not be reached, the decision goes to an arbitrator who decides "our fix." <br /><br />I believe that FamilySearch product managers are operating under the assumption that in any disagreement, genealogical practice and standards dictate a best "our fix." I don't believe that. It may be necessary to allow an appeal to a panel of experts who rule by majority vote.<br /><br />-- The InsiderThe Ancestry Insiderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02490682912125335188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-45048427540113249812010-08-31T02:16:53.389-06:002010-08-31T02:16:53.389-06:00Thank-you for this post, AI. I've told my Dear...Thank-you for this post, AI. I've told my DearREADERS this is a MUST READ.DearMYRTLEhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15684472865240981715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-26799837691193446782010-08-30T12:07:44.516-06:002010-08-30T12:07:44.516-06:00Occasionally I do a general search on the old Fami...Occasionally I do a general search on the old FamilySearch site for certain ancestors, just to see if any correct additions have been made there.<br /><br />For one search I did today there are 7 IGI entries, 1 Ancestral File entry and 2 Pedigree Resource File items.<br /><br />Of the 7 IGI entries one has correct spouse and birthplace; one has right birth year, right State and death date; one has the same as the previous entry plus wrong spouse; one has right birth year, wrong County, wrong parents; one has right birth year, right Township and County.<br /><br />The Ancestral File entry has 'right' birth date estimated from age at death on gravestone, right death date, wrong place, wrong parents, wrong spouse, wrong marriage place.<br /><br />The Pedigree Resource File has 2 entries: one with right birth year and State, right death date, wrong spouse. The other is the same as the AF entry except the County of death is at least spelled correctly (still wrong location there).<br /><br />No amount of merge-tinkering will wind up with correct parents and place of death. A doer of good might choose the correct spouse listed once if the IGI data is in the overall database.<br /><br />The wrong parents listed did not have a known child by the same name as the above subject, and the wrong spouse is not known to have married a person by the subject's surname, so at least a 'split' function is not required in this instance.<br /><br />However, there are certainly items in the above databases that merge different persons by more or less the same name.Geoloverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12050268303916428230noreply@blogger.com