Genealogy Chat

Alice Just a thought, if u add something in family tree maker that u are not sure about just add the comments in the sorce box, good idea to do it anyway so u can always refer to it if u wonder where the info came from Tony

Hi Alice just remembered your thread, I've been putting a lot of extremely distant rellies on my tree and just today realised it is a good idea as anyone looking for these is eventually going to get to the person I started with and I can then help them get back to my earliest ancestor if needs be. AL

Alice It's through going for the broad brush approach that I have contacted, or been contacted by, dozens of contacts in the two years I have been on here, several of whom have supplied information which has assisted in the main tree. In return I have been able to give several people information that has helped them back three or four generations on their main line.

Thank you everyone for replying. Lots of tips for me and I'm sure other people picked up things too. I think I will carry on chasing my twigs - but make sure I know where info etc came from as suggested by na=many people. I still have not found a genuine rellie - however distant - to share my research with - so maybe I'll strike lucky with my new tactics! Alice

My tree is very 'sideways' indeed. Without the benefit of census returns and bmds going directly back can be a bit boring....so I find myself pursuing the lives of the marriage witnesses, the families of people who married my relatives...even the neighbours. Yes, it's a wonderful opportunity for a glimpse of social history. I don't think we should be too pedantic about all this. My direct line is well documented and certified but I am very curious about everyone they came into contact with as well. Find myself sending off for certs of really obscure people!

Hi Alice, I've got very little on here - just direct rellies I am sure about. I haven't traced many family 'twigs' either - I've been chasing friends of the family. For example, I have a 'Marjoram' as a witness on a marriage certificate in the late 1830's. I didn't think much of this until I read some letters to my gran in the 1920's from her cousin, whose surname was Marjoram!! Then traced back, the two families had lived in close proximity for 90 years, and my G G aunt had married a Marjoram!! My GG grandfather and his siblings had a joint christening with the Toomey family. Found them moving around the country together as well. These people chose to live together - after all you choose your friends - not your relations, so I think they're a lovely view of social history. maggie

Glad that I'm not the only one that gets a bit carried away with my tree! I tend to put my main tree into my family tree programme and on here, (most of it proven with certificates), but I also have a PAF from Family Search which I use for anyone who is slightly related, from census records etc. When I hit a brick wall with my main tree I plod along happily with the other one! My hubby thinks that I am a real saddo!! At the end of the day your tree is yours to do whatever you want. Maggy

I put all connections in, but always try to include the source in the notes. This may, for example be a relative, GR contact, census, certificate, IGI etc.. However, I never include guesswork. Information on a particular family which is not linked goes on a spreadsheet for main lines or in notes for more distant possible relations. I can then do my own verification a necessary from 1837, freebmd, parish registers, etc. and update the source note.

I put all the 'twigs' in if I am sure there is a link. Then for each person in my tree I have a personal information excell spreadsheet listing aall the certificates i should have censuses checked, whether I have any other written evidence etc. When i look at the spreadsheet for a person I can see if I have 'proof' in writing or not. Ann glos

I add possibles to my notes on my FTM2005 and some have come up as being correct. If I put it on paper Im sure I would lose the info or forget it so the FTM is handy for keeping possible connections.

Hi, I put 'likely looking' IGI information in FTM and put (IGI) in brackets. This isn't just for my benefit but for those I send info on to. If info is passed to me I put the initilas of the person who passed it in brackets. When I have checked original sources I remove the brackets or correct the info in FTM. I never put IGI estimates in, though, only those with batch numbers from controlled extractions. Gwynne

Thank you all for your good ideas. I feel better about it now. I will try your idea Kat as I am a bit woeeied I will forget which have yet to be really 'proved' GHoing to be busy tonight putting all the new names on GR - hope someone contacts me as a result! Alice

Hi Alice I've just been adding 3rd cousins five times removed to my tree, but I am out to prove everyone is related (well at least in England anyway), I was wondering if I was getting a little carried away, but I enjoy it, because one of my twigs let to quite a large tree, AL

well ,alice i know what you mean~i am driving my family up the wall too! no one understands my joy,of finding ive been proved right on sumthing i thought was right!! its so frustratin that noone else cares less what gt gt gt grandads name was! i admit ive followed very distantly related ancestors , just to see wat happened to them. then found their kids and their kids kids!! i just want to get as much info as poss on whoever i can , but i agree it might be better to keep those twigs separately. just for sanity's sake!

Louise, Yes well that is sort of the way I was thinking - but I wouldn't do it with my Smiths - I have some unusual surnames and can track them really easily and accurately on Ancestry. They do belong to me and I suppose we can never be 100% certain once we getr back to parish records, especially if there are Christian names which run in the family - last week I found 3 possible ancestors born within months of each other in Middlesex. All born pre 1837. It will be difficult to prove which one belonged to me even if I could find their baptisms. Ho Hum....

Hi Alice I understand your dilemma, but you should not add these 'twigs'on to your tree. Internet genealogy is not the real thing. The only way to prove your ancestry is to find it in documentation. I know it is only too easy to add on a few rellies because you are 99% positive they are yours. But are they???

Lois. That is sort of what i think I should do. I enjoy chasing them too much to stop finding them - but they are not really closely related by the time I've finished with them (even if I only use the censuses on ancestry)

I have a few family groups on my tree which are not direct antecedents, but I kinda like them and end up following them through censuses to see what happened to them. Try to make a note of sources and use ? after a name or event if you're not sure you've got the right one.

Helen Good idea. Two trees would solve the problem. I think I would feel cheated if I didn't follow all the twigs! Alice

Lizzy, I guess you are right , and after all, I am only really doing all this for me. Children have no interest and say it can 'all go in the bin' as far as they are concerned, so i guess we do what ever we want. Alice