Read on Twitter
Today in random #genealogy tips: As I work on trees, I so often see people who've fallen into easily avoidable traps and added the wrong people to their trees.
I like the metaphor of a logic grid puzzle.
You have to make sure all the facts about each person line up.
I like the metaphor of a logic grid puzzle.
You have to make sure all the facts about each person line up.
That means if you're looking at someone who was born in Lithuania in 1875 and whose eldest daughter was born in Lithuania in 1905, the arrival manifest for an unmarried man with a similar name who arrived as a child in 1880 is probably not your guy.
One trick I use if a naturalization is not readily available to pinpoint the arrival is to look for the arrival of the children. It's sometimes easier to find them on manifests than it is to find their parents.
In the case I've been looking at this morning, multiple trees say one arrival manifest is the guy I'm looking for. But that guy was headed to Ohio, where he was naturalized in 1913; the guy I'm looking for lived his entire life in NY/NJ. Disambiguation is so important.
And I'm pretty sure I've said this before, but it is SO IMPORTANT to remember that not everything is online.
You can't assume that just because records pop up with the same name, that they must be correct because that's all there is. There's so much more out there.
You can't assume that just because records pop up with the same name, that they must be correct because that's all there is. There's so much more out there.
And -- AND! -- when you work on immigrant trees, as I do, soooo many names are mangled or different on manifests. If you're only searching and expecting the name to come up spelled pristinely as you know it, you're going to get it wrong.
Meaning, you're attaching the manifest of a "Jacob Goldenberg" to your tree because that's the name you were expecting. But your actual great-grandfather's manifest is indexed as Jankel Goldsbert.
Also, I assume everyone knows this, but maybe not: other people's trees are not sources. Only documents are sources. Don't copy people out of other people's trees just because they're there. Build it yourself and confirm each fact is documented. Be a gatekeeper, not a vacuum.
BTW, you can *see* on Ancestry, at least, when the only source is another tree. Bad sign.
And finally (maybe?), if you think I'm being a killjoy, let me assure you: when you work carefully and accurately, the rewards are SO much greater than if you amass a tree with a million people in it who aren't actually your family.
Oh! One more thing: the clues are often there in the documents if you pay close attention. A PA death certificate saying someone's lived in Philly for 40 years should tell you that it's probably not the death certificate for someone who recently immigrated to NYC. READ carefully!
Sometimes it helps to transcribe ALL the info from every document. Writing it down can make the lightbulb go on.
And that has been your Saturday Morning Genealogy Lesson.
I've just been "well actually'd" on this, so I'll amend it.
Only well-documented facts are sources. Those well-documented facts may appear in other people's trees.
What I meant (and what I thought was clear) was that you can't just copy trees.
#nogooddeedgoesunpunished
Only well-documented facts are sources. Those well-documented facts may appear in other people's trees.
What I meant (and what I thought was clear) was that you can't just copy trees.
#nogooddeedgoesunpunished
Basically it all comes down to sourcing.
I spent 20 years as a reporter before I got into genealogy.
And in journalism, the old joke is "If your mother says she loves you, get a second source."
Always always always scrutinize *where* your info is from.
I spent 20 years as a reporter before I got into genealogy.
And in journalism, the old joke is "If your mother says she loves you, get a second source."
Always always always scrutinize *where* your info is from.
Also, follow @wtfgenealogy!
