Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Ancestry/Genealogy

icymist

(15,888 posts)

23. I use the trees at ancestry as a first source...

Reply to grasswire (Original post)

Thu Dec 5, 2013, 05:22 AM

Dec 2013

only to be confirmed by a second source when attached to one of my trees. My shoebox is quite full. Constant searching on outside sources (THOSE OTHER THAN ANCESTRY) have made my research satisfying and confirming. In other words, I use the family trees at ancestry.com as a tool, sometimes a source but, only with a second source. A lot of the information I find from searching ancestry outside of family trees will be true. Still. check. Re-check. Then check again.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

28 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Question: If bad info is entered into ancestry.com, do they correct it somehow? [View all] grasswire Sep 2012 OP

Does this happen often? Unfortunately, it appears that the answer is "Yes." AnotherMcIntosh Sep 2012 #1

The Decorah Norwegian Heritage Genealogiest deemed "Interent Genealogy is kickysnana Sep 2012 #2

This message was self-deleted by its author seaglass Sep 2012 #3

I let myself be led completely off track on one of my maternal branches polly7 Sep 2012 #4

something similar happened to me grasswire Sep 2012 #7

Can't always rely on books retrogal Sep 2012 #10

This happened to me with one of my maternal lines. AverageJoe90 Nov 2013 #21

When researching it is usually the researchers responsibility to use the generation rules to check jwirr Sep 2012 #5

They have a function that allows you to submit corrections to census indexing errors. kestrel91316 Sep 2012 #6

Yes CountAllVotes Sep 2012 #8

Oh no!! retrogal Sep 2012 #9

Frankly it irritates me CountAllVotes Sep 2012 #11

I understand... retrogal Sep 2012 #12

same here CountAllVotes Sep 2012 #13

I love Ancestry to a point, but damn those trees GobBluth Sep 2012 #14

I have decided to do this: only accept public records as truth grasswire Sep 2012 #16

Yes, this. /|\ PAMod Sep 2012 #19

even that can be annoying... grasswire Sep 2012 #20

Not with their user-submitted trees they don't Spider Jerusalem Sep 2012 #15

No and the user submitted trees are usually terrible kdmorris Sep 2012 #17

Hey, I'm dead! PatSeg Sep 2012 #18

Like some of the others... pipi_k Nov 2013 #22

I use the trees at ancestry as a first source... icymist Dec 2013 #23

Too many "errors" CountAllVotes Dec 2013 #24

I would use the user submitted trees as clues, not sources. OnionPatch Mar 2014 #25

Up to each editor of a tree and viewers to inform of any mistakes. I've come applegrove Mar 2014 #26

I sometimes write a message to one who has entered an egregious mistake - No Vested Interest Mar 2014 #27

I did that pipi_k Mar 2014 #28