Find A Grave Frustration

Question

I am not a big fan of FindAGrave to begin with, and this week I had two great examples of why. I was working on the profile of [[McGroarty-150|Patrick McGroarty]] and the FAG memorial includes a biography cut and pasted directly from the work of John Goodfellow, who died a few years ago in Ireland. It was from the recollections of a McGroarty relative shared in 1937 with yet another relative, who shared it with John Goodfellow. I have no real problem with the information, but it is an unsourced recollection from a family member in 1937. Not really a source, although sources exist for the information, and plagarized to boot.

Then a few days later I was working on my error report - I had two errors, both for the same person, [[Blain-270|Frances Blain Elliott]]. In both cases it was a date discrepancy with FAG. In both cases FAG was wrong. The stupid part of it is that the FAG record includes a photo of the gravemarker with the correct dates clearly visible.

I don't care that Blain-270 turned up on my error list - better safe than sorry - but I am surprised that as a group we seem to give undeserved credence to FindAGrave, when it seems that it is no better than an unsourced family tree from Ancestry, Geni, or any other site.

Just my two-cents worth.

Comments

Ellen, Thanks for retagging. I completely forgot to do the tags.

---

I love find a grave. I trust what I see printed on the gravestone, only until I have uncovered conflicting information. A great thing about Find A Grave is finding cousins who are researching the same people as me. I can make contact and tell them about wikitree. A place where someone is buried is very important information. When FindAGrave is used as intended, this is vital information, and when started, Find A Grave was the best way to collaborate doing that. And I argue, still the best way.  As with all genealogy sites, people use its structure to help them do what they try to do elsewhere, and that is build their family tree and history. As much as you may dislike it, It is a great and popular software that can build family trees. I say, embrace it, and if you, like me, are super interested in collaboration, use it when you can build connections with your cousins.

My ancestors are buried in one place. When people visit their Find A Grave sites, I want to know, I want them to contact me, I want them to make improvements.

One person's frustration is another's opportunity.

---

Not all gravemarkers are correct. I know for a fact that my father's marker had the burial date Jan 13, 1972 and not the death date listed. The newspaper printed the obituary on the 10th. But then that was a newspaper that had "DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN" on the front page.

---

Thanks for bringing up this potential error as I've marked the status box of it as "F-A-G is often wrong" so many times.  Yet, the ability to compare any possible internet information that is free is a "win" as I view it.  Just yesterday I located a birth registry that did not agree with the info at F-A-G. Upon looking at the "memorial" there, the care-taker was a distant cousin of mine and so I sent my evidence to them requesting how I might be wrong and where did he get his info.  In his response, he noted that his grandmother had always celebrated her birthday on that given date and that he had a birth cert he needed to dig out.  Later, he replied that I was correct and his mother had always told him grandma lied about her age by over a year; but, since that was the date she had claimed F-A-G will remain with those dates.  Details that are important to some are looked at differently by others.  At least it's somewhat close...

Answer 1

Hi Mary,

You have faced the same hurdle that a considerable amount of other genealogist have gleamed. Find A Grave I use as a reference only I consider it a bread crumb into finding more information however in of itself it is not a source. I have worked for a grave stone company and sometimes there is errors done on stones either through neglect of the office or the information got filled out wrong. However families often accept these headstones because there is huge prices to fix these stones if it was there error. Sadly sometimes companys give these family's incentives to take the stone at a reduced price. However unfortunate all these different factors are its always best to have multiple sources/references to ascertain information before marking it Exact or certain. To see a list of uncertain references vs mostly reliable information feel free to check out this link https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Uncertain#What_are_examples_of_sources_that_provide_uncertain_information.3F

I will however say this list is not inclusive. Hence why it very important genealogist explain situations in the biography along with {{Estimated Date}}

Best regards

Comments

Interesting insight .. th'xs ..

---

You're quite welcome I can't say these things are always the case however it is always safe to check before marking certain or exact.

---

That is really interesting about the head stone companies. Never considered that. I always assumed (my bad!) that if the monument maker messed up he'd be responsiable or fixing the mistake. Who Knew!  And I agree that at best FAG is merely a breadcrumb. I don't use it often enough for it to cause me big problems, I do treat it like an ancestry member tree.

---

My grandfather's stone is in error because he had no idea when he was born.  My great-great-grandfather's stone is in error because he lied about his birth year to get a larger pension.  I am still correcting errors in the official city records for my home town.  Last year, I found a woman who died in 1938.  Her stone said 1939.  My theory is that by the time her husband died a decade later, and they ordered the stone, no one in the family quite remembered what year she'd died.

---

Steven,

You are so right!  My Mother's grave marker has the wrong date by 4 days and the cost is really a bunch to make the change.  It will be corrected before I die, but it will take a while.  Because of my experience, I am a little skeptical of dates on markers.

Thanks, Cindy

Answer 2

Mary:

I don't really think most of the genealogists here consider FindAGrave a great source.  Still, I know that FindaGrave has pointed me in the correct direction many times.  I consider the error checking on WikiTree as more of a discrepancy finder. I've definitely made notes on the profiles where I know I have the correct dates and places and noted that FindAGrave is incorrect.  I guess I do give FindaGrave a bit more credence than a family tree from some web site because I can easily go to FindaGrave, see whether there is a picture of the gravestone.

Comments

As Steven put it, breadcrumbs. And that's what I was looking for with these two profiles. Blatant cut and paste just works my last nerve, and is just plain dishonest. And to have both birth and death dates wrong when the picture is right there with the correct info is just sloppy. Like I said, I have never thought much of FAG, and these did nothig to improve my opinion. And I hope you are right about most not treating them as a real source.

As far as error reports - I love them. I check it every Monday like clockwork, and try to keep mine down to zero. 

 

---

I spent hours last summer working with city staff to correct our cemetery records.  We added over 150 names to the cemetery list.  I'm still working on this project  In my home town cemetery, we found out that one woman with a tombstone isn't buried here.  Her parents were angry because her husband scattered her ashes, so they put up a tombstone anyway.  Another man has an official stone, but no burial permit.  I know where his ashes were scattered, in the mountains near by, because his grandson showed me.  There are people with tombstones, but the occupant is still at home on the mantel, awaiting another's death.  There are memorials for people who drowned in the river and whose bodies were never found.  One little girl who died in the late 1800s was moved into the charity area because her parents never paid for her plot.  She has a beautiful tombstone, and I am still trying to convince the city that she should be added to the official list.  Then there's the man who has an obituary from the 1940s saying he's buried in the cemetery; he has a tombstone; but the former manager wouldn't add him because he said he isn't there.  He proved it to me by probing for the coffin.  He theorizes that the headstone belongs in the charity area, but got moved to its present location.  Then there's the man who is buried--maybe--in my cemetery, but he never had a burial permit, and the stone lists his grandfather's and father's names, but they are *definitely* not buried in my cemetery--one is 80 miles away, and I still haven't found the location of the other one.  So it's just a memorial because they thought it would be cool to have all three names on it.  Even if the city kept good records; if the person who made the memorial got everything right; if you attended the funeral and watched them lower the body into the ground, the tombstone can still be wrong.  Add in all the volunteers who mistranscribe information on tombstones and don't source a darned thing, and it's a modest miracle that most of it is probably correct.

---

Great story -- made me laugh and considering how true it all can be.

---

Thanks for sharing your experience. Mine isn't as extensive but I have certainly come across similar circumstances. Officialdom can be a right pain sometimes.

Answer 3

Someone said, "To err is human, . . . to really foul things up takes a computer." ;-)  

All sources that we use are open to human error.  That is why we need to include as many sources as possible on each profile, and note when we find a mistake.  The Help Index says:

• A source is the identification of where you obtained information.
• Sources are critically important for genealogy. Some even say that genealogy without sources is mythology.^[1]
• You must include your sources when you put information on WikiTree. It's in our Honor Code.

I look at the == Sources == section a different way.  I consider each profile a repository for all the information known about that person. This is our opportunity to correct misinformation that has been propagated up and down the internet.  This is our opportunity to correct information recorded in good faith in 1900 that has been proven wrong by DNA. This is our opportunity to correct the errors of the past to the best of our research abilities.

"Our community's mission is to grow an accurate single family tree that connects us all and is freely available to us all." 

My cup is half-full. 

 

Comments

I like your very broad view of the sources.  We can easily make research notes about the discrepancies in the biography or if it is too much info, use a free space page and link it.

Thanks for expanding my view.  I never fail to learn something or see another's point of view reading these discussions.

---

Kitty, If your cup is half-full, then I suggest that you have too large a cup.

---

Probably so.  :-)

Answer 4

Find a Grave is ok IF there is a photo of a readable headstone, with dates. I've also encountered some with published obits. Many contain lots of information that is totally unsourced, usually from Ancestry. When, not if, you find an error or 2 or 3 or more, it is impossible to contact the contributor. WT has tens of thousands, or more, profiles with the primary source being FAG. With FAG, in my opinion, being on the same level as Ancestry trees, WT should be very skeptical of accepting it as a valid source.

Comments

Bob, I think of a source as the answer to the question "How do I know this?" every time I make a statement of (what should be a) fact in a biography.  I would love to have an unimpeachable source for every statement I make in a biography, but I don't always have one so I use the best one I can find and, just as we say that a biography is never "finished", I am always hoping to find a more reliable source. 

Thus, I cite Find a Grave memorials when they are the only information I have, just as I (admittedly less often) sometimes cite online family trees.  In the case of the online trees, I ALWAYS include "A more reliable source for this information is required." (in italics, as shown here) at the end of the citation.

WikiTree considers "memory of so-and-so, as told to so-and-so" to be a "valid" source ... with that in mind, anything that answers the question "How do you know this?" is "valid" ... "good" or "primary" is a whole different matter, though!

---

Gaile, This is the great thing about WikiTree. We each have our own feelings, but we all work together for e common goal - ONE TREE where everyone is connected and there is one profile per person. It's just what we do.