How Not to Ancestry

[rbasin]

I may have already mentioned it here but for some unknown reason around 1800 one of my Irish ancestors apparently changed Connelly or Conley to the Italian-sounding Connella???

Was it him or the census taker. Some of those Irish lads had a heavy accent.

 

[Reconstructed Rebel]

Was it him or the census taker. Some of those Irish lads had a heavy accent.

And some of those census takers couldn't spell very well

 

[lupaglupa]

And some of those census takers couldn't spell very well

Or write with a legible hand

 

[SandiD]

Our genealogy "guru" is deep into Scottish research--and this is her main online site. Another site you might try is GenUKI (https://www.genuki.org.uk/); it's free.

I know from doing Norwegian genealogical research that many of its international Norwegian records are available for free on a major Norwegian site. The "good" thing is that Ancestry suggests links which (just as with the American suggestions) may--or may not--be accurate. A downside is that some of the transcribers don't seem to speak Norwegian and have made some misleading translations (such as translating "fadder" as "father" when it actually means "witness").

I used that and it referred me to Scotland's People for the information I needed.

Some of the transcribers of the Scottish records on Ancestry/Family Search have a similar issue with translation since place names are guessed at in the transcription in some cases, especially these - Brechlarach, Kilmaluag, and Auchadaduie. Had I not accessed the actual birth records and parish registers, I would have never found the places. Even had a resident of the area tell me he never talked to an American who knew where they were or could spell them correctly. LOL.

 

[Zella]

If it's from a census, I don't rule out the error being on the census. I found one from the 1930s, and the results for my Appalachian relatives are pretty weird. My great-great uncle J Mood (yes, that was his name) ended up as Jimoudy. I am assuming the census taker couldn't handle the accents and guessed.

 

[SandiD]

If it's from a census, I don't rule out the error being on the census. I found one from the 1930s, and the results for my Appalachian relatives are pretty weird. My great-great uncle J Mood (yes, that was his name) ended up as Jimoudy. I am assuming the census taker couldn't handle the accents and guessed.

The 1900 Federal Census in NY, Adelaide ended up as Annie. I knew from the parents, sibling, and age that "Annie" was "Addie" short for Adelaide.

1905 NY State Census has Adelaide as Edlyn and knowing the parents and siblings, I know that was her. LOL

In the 1910 Federal census they got her name correct but the transcribers at Ancestry added a child from the next family on the census to my grandmother's family!

 

[Fairfield]

If it's from a census, I don't rule out the error being on the census.

A colleague's mother appeared on the 1930 as a child whom the census taker identified as a boy. S/he wasn't with that family on the 1940 census--what had happened was that she was sent to live with a kindred family. But some tree compiler assumed that the "boy" had died and that is what went on his tree. My colleague contacted the compiler and tried to correct both errors (the misidentification of sex by the census taker and the assumption of death by the compiler. To no avail: the compiler absolutely believed what he found and refused to reconsider. Inaccurate census taker and amateurish genealogist--which is worse?

 

[Zella]

Inaccurate census taker and amateurish genealogist--which is worse?

The genealogist! Because you can sometimes work around the census taker's nonsense.

 

[Fairfield]

The genealogist! Because you can sometimes work around the census taker's nonsense.

Agree...common sense and in-depth research often can point to accuracy. However, with online trees being swapped and copied without check, there's a lot of damage that can be spread by a clueless enthusiast If challenged, I'd never dismiss without really checking.