I am fuming!

[Doug Laidlaw]

So many family trees are merely copy-and-paste jobs, without any
consideration for whether they are realistic. I just copied a woman
onto my tree. Everybody agreed on the facts, but on my tree, she had
her first child at age 9 as well as an additional, unexplained married
surname. On further investigation, the family that the others had was
English, while the people on my tree were all born in NSW.

In my Laidlaw tree, there is a child born to a woman in Scotland when
she was 8. She lived on the East coast, and her husband lived on the
West coast. In an American case, a girl was supposed to have married
the Irish composer Wallace, but she was only 1 year old when he died in
France.

Doug.

[Percival P. Cassidy]

Post by Doug Laidlaw
So many family trees are merely copy-and-paste jobs, without any
consideration for whether they are realistic.  I just copied a woman
onto my tree.  Everybody agreed on the facts, but on my tree, she had
her first child at age 9 as well as an additional, unexplained married
surname.  On further investigation, the family that the others had was
English, while the people on my tree were all born in NSW.
In my Laidlaw tree, there is a child born to a woman in Scotland when
she was 8.  She lived on the East coast, and her husband lived on the
West coast.  In an American case, a girl was supposed to have married
the Irish composer Wallace, but she was only 1 year old when he died in
France.

Perhaps it's time to expand the old saying (of which there are many
variants):

"There are lies, damnable lies, statistics, weather forecasts, political
'promises', advertisers' claims, -- and now 'family trees'."

Perce

[a***@xtra.co.nz]

Sorry Doug - I do not really understand your post. Maybe it's too early
in the day . . . .
Are you saying that you added all of THIS LADY'S data to your tree
before verifying any of it, OR
Are you saying that she sent you erroneous data that was ridiculously
inaccurate and had obviously not been verified, OR
Are you saying something absolutely different that I have completely
missed . . . ?
Beth

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: I am fuming!
From: Doug Laidlaw
To: ***@rootsweb.com
CC:

So many family trees are merely copy-and-paste jobs, without any
consideration for whether they are realistic. I just copied a woman
onto my tree. Everybody agreed on the facts, but on my tree, she had
her first child at age 9 as well as an additional, unexplained
married
surname. On further investigation, the family that the others had
was
English, while the people on my tree were all born in NSW.
In my Laidlaw tree, there is a child born to a woman in Scotland
when
she was 8. She lived on the East coast, and her husband lived on the
West coast. In an American case, a girl was supposed to have married
the Irish composer Wallace, but she was only 1 year old when he died
in
France.
Doug.
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GENANZ-***@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message

[Doug Laidlaw]

Sorry Beth. I am noted nowadays for being obscure. MyHeritage gives us
almost no choice but to accept what they have found, and to keep costs
down, they don't match against anything that they have to pay for. That
boils down to other trees and uncorrected OCR notices from Trove.

I imported the whole entry. I refuse to do that as a rule, but the data
seemed reasonable and they all had it (a good reason to suspect it.) It
was all copied from one mistaken original. One Golden Rule from AFTC
magazine (I hope it comes back) is never to accept other people's data
without checking it. Even researchers whom I would respect any time,
have been known to make mistakes.

Doug.

Post by a***@xtra.co.nz
Sorry Doug - I do not really understand your post. Maybe it's too early
in the day . . . .
Are you saying that you added all of THIS LADY'S data to your tree
before verifying any of it, OR
Are you saying that she sent you erroneous data that was ridiculously
inaccurate and had obviously not been verified, OR
Are you saying something absolutely different that I have completely
missed . . . ?
Beth
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: I am fuming!
From: Doug Laidlaw
So many family trees are merely copy-and-paste jobs, without any
consideration for whether they are realistic. I just copied a woman
onto my tree. Everybody agreed on the facts, but on my tree, she had
her first child at age 9 as well as an additional, unexplained married
surname. On further investigation, the family that the others had
was
English, while the people on my tree were all born in NSW.
In my Laidlaw tree, there is a child born to a woman in Scotland when
she was 8. She lived on the East coast, and her husband lived on the
West coast. In an American case, a girl was supposed to have married
the Irish composer Wallace, but she was only 1 year old when he died in
France.
Doug.
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
quotes in the subject and the body of the message

[Lance Buckley]

I agree. I have received information from various sources including My
Heritage and have never downloaded anything until I cross-check it and have
actual documentation to prove info is correct. I have a cousin who was
accepting everything on My Heritage without checking correctly and I have
told her numerous times CHECK, CHECK, CHECK before you accept any
information.

Regards,
Lance
***@bigpond.com

Researching Ayling, Buckley & Tubb



-----Original Message-----
From: GENANZ [mailto:genanz-bounces+buckles7=***@rootsweb.com] On
Behalf Of Doug Laidlaw
Sent: Sunday, 10 December, 2017 11:36 AM
To: ***@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: I am fuming!

Sorry Beth. I am noted nowadays for being obscure. MyHeritage gives us
almost no choice but to accept what they have found, and to keep costs down,
they don't match against anything that they have to pay for. That boils down
to other trees and uncorrected OCR notices from Trove.

I imported the whole entry. I refuse to do that as a rule, but the data
seemed reasonable and they all had it (a good reason to suspect it.) It was
all copied from one mistaken original. One Golden Rule from AFTC magazine
(I hope it comes back) is never to accept other people's data without
checking it. Even researchers whom I would respect any time, have been
known to make mistakes.

Doug.

Post by a***@xtra.co.nz
Sorry Doug - I do not really understand your post. Maybe it's too early
in the day . . . .
Are you saying that you added all of THIS LADY'S data to your tree
before verifying any of it, OR
Are you saying that she sent you erroneous data that was ridiculously
inaccurate and had obviously not been verified, OR
Are you saying something absolutely different that I have completely
missed . . . ?
Beth
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: I am fuming!
From: Doug Laidlaw
So many family trees are merely copy-and-paste jobs, without any
consideration for whether they are realistic. I just copied a woman
onto my tree. Everybody agreed on the facts, but on my tree, she had
her first child at age 9 as well as an additional, unexplained married
surname. On further investigation, the family that the others had
was
English, while the people on my tree were all born in NSW.
In my Laidlaw tree, there is a child born to a woman in Scotland when
she was 8. She lived on the East coast, and her husband lived on the
West coast. In an American case, a girl was supposed to have married
the Irish composer Wallace, but she was only 1 year old when he died in
France.
Doug.
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
quotes in the subject and the body of the message

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GENANZ-***@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes
in the subject and the body of the message

[John Maher]

Post by Doug Laidlaw
So many family trees are merely copy-and-paste jobs, without any
consideration for whether they are realistic.  I just copied a woman
onto my tree.  Everybody agreed on the facts, but on my tree, she had
her first child at age 9 as well as an additional, unexplained married
surname.  On further investigation, the family that the others had was
English, while the people on my tree were all born in NSW.
In my Laidlaw tree, there is a child born to a woman in Scotland when
she was 8.  She lived on the East coast, and her husband lived on the
West coast.  In an American case, a girl was supposed to have married
the Irish composer Wallace, but she was only 1 year old when he died
in France.
Doug.
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I once did some research on a difficult ancestor, and found someone in
England with this particular person in her tree. When I read the info I
noticed a spelling mistake. I checked her facts with mine, and
discovered in my tree the same spelling mistake.....