Search for content in message boards

family data collection pay attention to dates.

family data collection pay attention to dates.

Posted: 1302368784000
Classification: Query
i have noticed that many people do not read the family data collections they just save them to there tree, many people who have the same family members that i have, save records that say people are born in massachusetts in the 1580's that is not true, englishmen did not come to massachusetts until 1620. and another point when you fill in the data on people in your tree, you can not be born in the united states before 1776. You would be born in New England or other colonies not the United States

Re: family data collection pay attention to dates.

Posted: 1302374616000
Classification: Query


Facts that should known about the early census records -
All census records [1790 – 1840] prior to the 1850 census ONLY listed the head of household; whether male or female.
NO specific age was stated for any family member
NO place of birth was stated – city, state, or country
NO city, town, or village is stated – only the county; however some census takers listed the township
NO street address was stated
NO marital status was stated – single, married, widowed, or divorced
NO family relationship was stated – brother, sister, cousin, son, daughter, wife, inlaw, etc…
NO occupation was stated
NO parental birthplaces are stated
NO race was stated [but assume “white”]

1850, 1860 & 1870 census records do not show family relationships, marital status or parental birthplaces.

Step children are not enumerated as “step” children
Adopted children are not enumerated as “adopted”
Grand children are not enumerated as “grand children”
Orphaned children were not enumerated as "orphan"

1850 is the 1st census that shows all family members

1880 is the 1st census that shows parental birthplaces +++

Re: family data collection pay attention to dates.

Posted: 1302590802000
Classification: Query
I completely agree. As a professional genealogist I have cleaned up so many trees because people see the quaking leaves and get excited or they link up with others that are (or seem to be) relatives and they almost always become a jumbled mess. I am all for people getting the genealogy bug and wanting to know more. I am also all for people doing the work themselves, but you cannot cut corners with family research. You can't look at a tree and accept it as truth. You have to get the records yourself. It is not a quick and easy process. It takes time and energy, and a family tree is NEVER done.

Re: family data collection pay attention to dates.

Posted: 1303093887000
Classification: Query
I believe the family data collection is made up of information extracted from user trees. Using it as a source is basically copying from a tree but in a different format.

I used to marvel at the crazy dates and mistakes, but now I just ignore the family data collection altogether.

Re: family data collection pay attention to dates.

Posted: 1303146034000
Classification: Query
Thomasker2 said:
"All census records [1790 – 1840] prior to the 1850 census ONLY listed the head of household; whether male or female.
. . .
NO place of birth was stated – city, state, or country"

--There are exceptions. Some of the Maine enumerations for 1810 stated County of birth of the head of household.

"NO occupation was stated"

--There are exceptions. The 1810 enumeration for Jefferson Co., (West) Virginia gave occupations, for example.

"NO race was stated [but assume “white”]"

--This is just incorrect. The 1790 through 1840 enumerations have some 'racial' designations such as 'black', 'free black', non-taxed Indians. Each enumeration varies as to category and whether age-ranges are given. The enumerations that count "slaves" should not be assumed to be listing just what the enumerator might perceive as African-Americans. And the enumerators' perceptions may or may not be the same as what a person today might say. Since there actually is no such thing as "race," and a variety of intermingling of various geographic ancestries' blood took place, physical appearance was and is not a very good guide to what those ancestries might be.

Re: family data collection pay attention to dates.

Posted: 1336712467000
Classification: Query
LoL
being a newbie I for one see the quaking leaves and get excited. Just look at all the years of painstaking work that has been done, Just for me!

When on close examination I found 2 or more children born in the same year, or a parent b.1740 of a child b.1690 I know something is wrong with what I have imported. Duh, Whats with that?

Than I have 11 William, 5 Thomas, and a untold number of Sarah, Elizabeth, and Mary given names for the same surname.
tracing back to 1000 AD so far. It makes attaching documents to the correct individual tedious. Having the same given name over many generations sure has helped me to follow my line tho.

One thing that has helped me sort things out is to include the birth year in the Suffix box of the name line..
Helps me quickly identify to Whom I am attaching something to.. My old eyes easily pick out the the BOLD date following the Name in list view..

Duplicates caused me some problems when I first started if entered as a name or other variation. I found it hard to find the active individual in the tree.. I wish their was a way to merge individuals into one. beginning to sound like WFT eh.

I too was bothered by ancestors prior to 1776 being listed as born/living in USA but have found it impractical to try and sort out Virginia colony, Carolina colony etc. tho I do try to list the parish and such.

Just had to comment on your frustration as the cleanup of my own line has frustrated me..
per page

Find a board about a specific topic