Liverpool & South West Lancashire FHS - Forum

I was reading a report about a talk given by an American genealogist on a blog recently. The talk was about the future of genealogy. It predicted that in the future collaborative research, sharing of research with others, would be enhanced by technology to make it much easier to document family history. The vehicle for this social media style of genealogy will be the subscription or advertisement supported websites. We will all be connected up as part of a networking community and all the information will be centralised.

One site linked to Ancestry came to my attention recently via a hint on my tree. I discovered a number of records for people with information taken from my research on their site and a lot of mistakes. I could have ignored them but I thought for the benefit of other researchers I would try to put things right so that mistakes were not adopted by other researchers. It took me a few hours to compile the text for these records with the edits highlighted. They've been sent on and hopefully will be implemented by the person who originally submitted these records. Doing this made me realise how collaborative centralised record systems can encroach on your own research.

I’m happy that we have more and easier access to genealogical records these days but fear the rise of the Big Brother corporate entities who will host your family on their site and make you jump through hoops to get information changed or photos removed. I hope the future of genealogy is not up one big corporate tree with administators and editors wielding power over what can be changed and what can’t be changed. I dislike the idea of centralising people’s family history I hope the future of genealogy is in the hands of individual researchers doing as much of their own research as possible.


Blue

Blue70 wrote:I discovered a number of records for people with information taken from my research on their site and a lot of mistakes. I could have ignored them but I thought for the benefit of other researchers I would try to put things right so that mistakes were not adopted by other researchers. It took me a few hours to compile the text for these records with the edits highlighted. They've been sent on and hopefully will be implemented by the person who originally submitted these records. Doing this made me realise how collaborative centralised record systems can encroach on your own research.

This I believe is the main reason AGAINST this sort of collaborative genealogy. There is no knowing where others have acquired their data from, or whose trees they have purloined it from, and definitely no knowledge of it's accuracy.

I still prefer the knowledge that I have verified my research to the best of my ability however, will share it with those who can prove a relationship to me, especially if they can prove their own line also.

I agree with you Mary, any of my research only goes to those people who have proven i.e. documented relationships to me. I haven't put any of research on any of the Internet providers.

I hope we're not going to have more sites operating like Find a Grave. A centralised burial record site that makes appearances via hints on Ancestry trees suggesting burial details that have been taken from various sources including your own and have collected numerous errors in the process. The biography side of these records is a particular concern they can be quite detailed. They can go beyond the basic facts of cemetery, section and grave number and give other information about your family.


Blue

The reason I have a website and online tree is to show relatives, both close and distant, the correct information about the family to avoid errors and to avoid the spreading of errors. Find a Grave are putting out an error filled version so I feel obliged to try to get it corrected so that others don't adopt the errors. This will be the last time though that I deal with Find a Grave edits.


Blue

Perhaps rather greedy of me, I have only taken photographs when I was quite surprised to discover them - American cemetery headstones that have given me a lot of useful information.

I agree with all 3 of you. I too spent a long time explaining to some one with a tree on Ancestry that they had made a big mistake. (In 1841 census there were 2 families with very similar details, but looking at where they lived separated them). I got an answer back saying that they didn't care because they had got back to 1600 or earlier....
I'm amazed when people say they have FINISHED their tree. Not sure if that is possible.

Another agreement from me. However, I do make a note of the details in any related trees that I find on the internet, but I never take their word as gospel until I find all of the evidence myself. Some are well researched and have helped me move my own research on, however, there are a few that can take you off on the completely wrong track.

There was one who had my paternal GG Grandmother as a prisoner in the Main Bridewell in the 1871 Census. She was entered under her married name, however, I know for certain that her and my GG Grandfather didn't actually get married until November 1871

Still no response from the person on Find a Grave who used information on one of my websites to create records on Find a Grave, making lots of mistakes in the process. They have one of my surnames in their other created records but they don't seem to be related, they're in the USA. Perhaps they are thinking "one name study" so want to get everything on the surname they can. I've taken two of my family history websites offline as I can't protect them I would have to pay to password them and I've deleted my trees from Ancestry. I'm no longer showing surnames on my online signatures. There are a lot of well mannered people out there but there's also some people who take without permission and badly reproduce the research and spread errors.


Blue

I once took a couple of photos of someone's tree, I knew they were related to an old family friend who was delighted with the photos of family members. All the information on the tree online had come from the work I did for the tree poster's father and I had spent a lot of time on it and some money on it and posted it to the USA. It took nearly a year to get acknowledgement of the package arrival so I felt justified but naughty!

A couple of times I have made contact, one was a researcher who had obviously spent a lot of money on certificates as she had uploaded copies of originals to her Ancestry tree. I was quite naughty and "stole" a couple just in case she denied me a copy, but I did ask as well and she generously shared, so I shared help back, never mind doing somebody a favour at the Record Office if they can help me out.

Somebody else I was sorry that they never replied to my request was a cousin of mum's so perhaps no longer living, so I was glad to have a picture of how she looked anyway.

I think we've all adopted or had bits and pieces adopted through contact with people doing the same tree. I think it's a bit creepy though when someone you don't know, who you haven't had any contact with, who doesn't appear to be related, lives in another country, reproduces the burial information and bios for three generations of your family from looking at your website, makes a lot of mistakes in the process and those details start appearing as hints on your Ancestry tree Is this the future of genealogy? Having your family history centralised on sites like Find a Grave whether you want it or not?


Blue

Blue70 wrote:Is this the future of genealogy? Having your family history centralised on sites like Find a Grave whether you want it or not?

This is the precise reason why I'm not a fan of online trees/genealogy software.

Give me a good piece of standalone genealogy software any day.