What is the best way to handle notifying others of errors in trees on other sites?

Question

Hi, again.  On at least one genealogy site, the 1940 census has been "transcribed" showing my Dad's step-mother as his Mom.  On many trees that I've come across in the meantime, this error is perpetuated.  I have put a "Notice" on the profiles for my Dad, his Dad & the step-mother's that this is wrong & emphasized that she is NOT my grandmother.  Since Dad was living w/ his Dad, the relationship is listed as son, but it doesn't say son of wife.  That's an error that will probably show up more & more in the future.

Is there a better way to handle this?

Answer 1

You might compose a note explaining the mistake, then when you come across a tree with the wrong information, pull up your note, personalize it with a greeting to the tree owner and send it. At least you would not have to create a note each and every time. I am not sure how many people will actually change their tree but it is worth a try. Even if a few make the change, eventually, maybe the new info will be copied instead of the wrong information.

Good luck!

Answer 2

Were you able to change the relationship in family search and ancestry for that census?  I don't know if that field can be edited but it is definitely worth a try, if you haven't done that.

Comments

I'm not sure about FS, it can be done on Ancestry.

---

From what Suellen has said, it doesn't sound as is if the census record itself is incorrect or ought to be changed.  If Granddad was listed as Head of Household, and Dad was living in the household, then Dad's relationship to HoH is correctly stated as Son.  It's the assumption that Wife of HoH = mother of son that's the problem, but you wouldn't expect that those who indexed the census record created that problem.  It's those who are creating profiles and trees from the record who are making the assumption.

Answer 3

Transcription errors exist on all sites.  These are common mistakes and are also compounded by the errors make by the Census Takers and even the person giving the information, add in the genealogist that perpetuate those mistakes and you have at least 4 people providing information and interpreting the Census.  Most of the sites have the ablity to either edit or report the error.  I do that freqently on Ancestry and FamilySearch.  But, I aways look at the original if possible and corrobrate with other evidence if I can.

Transcription errors aside, the more destructive errors are those who create or change a profile for a large variety of reasons.  Not using sound evidence based processes such as the Genealogical Proof Standard being one such example.

So, errors, mistakes, and outright fabrication exist on all publicly shared sites.  Each site has it's own method for contacting the perpetrator or the site for "correction" but the degree to which they actually see and respond to your request varies greatly and is often ignored.   

WikiTree has the best response rate of them all.  But even if you can not get a PM to respond, WikiTree will.  Anyone who has a genuine interest in correcting a WikiTree profile has several ways to get the change made.  And if it is deemed appropriate per WikiTree policies, it will be changed.

I use WikiTree as my homebase.  I do that for many reasons but one is that sharing a WikiTree URL is easy and anyone can see it with out having to be a member of WikiTree.  Since I try to make my profiles as accurate as possible, WikiTree is where all my evidence and reasoning resides.  Then, if I need to "correct" another site's profile I can just share my work via a WikiTree URL and include a short explaination.

Whiile I am currently exploring ways to provide WikiTree links on those sites in hopes of stablizing their profile changes, I hold no illusions that they will get corrected. Essentially I have given up "correcting" all the other sites save FamilySearch.  

I have seen the same errors reoccuring in cycles no matter what approach I use. They get corrected and the error comes back.  Interestingly however, I have also seen some significant changes happen on other sites after crafting well documented and well reasoned profiles on WikiTree.  I am seeing this new "correct" information replacing those errors.  It is kind of like that expression, "A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on." (Winston Churchill - Or did he?)

For me, FamilySearch is a Love / Hate relationship.  They would have such huge potential if they understood how WikiTree handles a Single Family Tree.   But they have been improving over the years, they just move slowly.  Maybe with good reason.  And after attending RootsTech 2023, I have caught wind of some changes heading our way to improve the back and forth battles that rage on their Family Tree.  So I continue the battle there as there is still hope.

Comments

Yes, there are multitudes of errors on census and other records. Sometimes it is the order of entries that cause the problem

On the page for Mary a great grandmother on a English census, it has her correctly identified as HoH and a widow.

The next person is described as a daughter, which is also correct, the daughter was described as a widow, but for reasons unknown is listed directly under her mother but under her maiden name.

The next person is her son and his children, he is a widower.

The transcription given is that the daughter and son are married to each other and that the children are the children of my great grandmother.

Though looking at the ages should make it clear that my grt grandmother cannot be the parent, she is 78 and the kids are about 12 and 15.

The relationships as described are:

Mother, daughter, son, then son then daughter, when in a perfect world the kids should be described correctly under relationship to the HoH as grandson and granddaughter.

I have lost track of how many people have attempted to find a marriage for the son with the person who really is his sister.

Errors on the census records are frustrating but in this case looking at the previous census would have shown the daughter as a widow living with her mother, and the son as married with kids about 2 and 5.

All this really means that looking at one record is not enough.

---

M. Ross: Indeed!

And your answer demonstrations the begining of the type of analysis needed to rationalize the relationships based on evidence from multiple sources.  You demonstrate and show how to account for descrepancies and offer a rational explaination based on the evidence available.

It is this kind of analysis and rationalization that is often needed to overcome the commonly posted errors.

Well done.

Answer 4

There's some good ideas here.  Unfortunately, I've tried most of them.

• The standardized note helps me contact 4th cousins on 23andMe in hopes of finding the 3x ggf listed as "Illegitimate" on 2x ggf's marriage record.
• I've  made lots of corrections to my name & to relatives on 1950 census.  I am not JULIEN as one site has it.
• One "correction" I couldn't make was for my sister who was born in 1950 & wondered why she wasn't listed ... until she realized her birthday is in Oct & census was done in April.
• Additional problem is that I don't pay for memberships to all the different sites.  I use ancestry thru the local library which works well most of the time, but I can't contact managers of family trees.  I also have the free account but that doesn't let me do everything either.  Last time I tried using it, I wasn't allowed either.

The strange(?) thing is that with all the other censuses before, when Mom was still living, it's correct, so why would someone pick out the one that's wrong to post as "true"?

Comments

The answer to why people pick the wrong record can be as simple as they are just collecting names and dates, they really are not interested in accuracy.

When online genealogy became 'trendy' 25+ years ago lots of people got involved and thought it would be much simpler than it really is. Those people still exist, we see questions in G2G from new people, stating my version of this family is correct no matter what the sources and research show.

If you have created your family history on WT perhaps the simplest way to approach this issue is do what you believe is accurate and ask for help if needed. You will probably never be able to convince others that they are wrong. Banging your head against the wall about other people's errors doesn't get the results you want.

I don't know anything about US research so I can't help with records. And I have not done DNA, though several family members have, so I can't offer any advice on that either.

Perhaps a solution...I know several people who use Ancestry as an intermittent resource, they have a monthly membership, and then renew it as and when they have 1. the funds to do so and 2. when there is a good chance that there will be time available to do some serious concentrated research.

I just looked at accounts on Ancestry and you can pause an account, I don't know if this is new.

This is the Canadian site link

https://support.ancestry.ca/s/article/Pausing-a-Membership?language=en_CA

---

I just finished some time looking at newspaper obits on ancestry.  This must be new because I don't recall seeing them before tonight ... at least not to the same extent.  I don't know whether to laugh or cry, but I won't bang my head against the wall.  Thank you, M Ross.  Just the basic info is there but it's all messed up and I couldn't see the originals.  Because my Mom was often a sister or daughter of the deceased & listed as "Mrs" Dad's name, Dad is listed as female & HIS name is on the "survived by" list.  That doesn't begin to explain the misspelled names.  One of my engagement or wedding announcements has me graduating from the wrong school on the wrong yr and working at a job I never held.  I fear for the future of genealogy online if such stuff persists ... and undoubtedly it will.

As for checking the facts, when I first started, a cousin said you shouldn't believe it until you've found it 3 times.  That only works so far.  My ggf has at least 3 sources saying he was born in Ohio.  I have no idea why.  But the oldest record of his birth is from Mercer County, Virginia (now WV).  That's what I go by.

---

Is it a Newpapers.com record on Ancestry?

If so it is an additional cost to see the records and as most of them are done with optical scanning it often has names and other information messed up.

The actual scanned newspaper articles are okay but the small images that available through ancestry are blurred.

They do have occasional free weeks or weekends, when you can clip and save announcements or articles.

Sometimes you can find obits, wedding announcements just by doing a Google search for the person, applicable dates in the appropriate locations.

---

I use ancestry.com thru the local library.  My grandmother's obit was the worst of those I saw.  https://www.ancestrylibrary.com/discoveryui-content/view/856176895:61843 may not work for others.  It doesn't allow me to see the actual clipping.  No problem there as I already have a copy printed from the microfilm at the library in Charlottesville, VA ... as close to the true original as I can get.  I did a google search, but the online clipping doesn't come up.  Different search words didn't help.  The info in question is "in the U.S., Newspapers.com™ Obituary Index, 1800s-current." 

I have my info & know what is correct within the facts as presented from family knowledge, original obits, etc.  My concern is what will show up in the future that others may swear is true when they haven't looked any further to verify.  I'm seeing too much of that already.  But I also realize I can't do anything more about it.

Maybe it's just me thinking out loud. 

M