The Persistent Problem of Misattributed Ancestor Photos

We’ve all been there: you use a photo of an ancestor in a post or on a page, only to find it later on Ancestry (or another site) completely misidentified. Once those family trees are copied, the error propagates indefinitely.

There is rarely an easy fix. Even after a friendly correction, most users will thank you for the insight but leave their digital trees untouched, allowing the error to persist.

You can’t control what other people put in their trees, but you can write up the info that you know to be correct. Include the specific evidence—such as dating of clothing, hairstyles, or the type of photograph (like a tintype or daguerreotype)—that proves who the subject is (or isn’t). AI could help you to do this.

Copy the evidence info into a Google Doc, include a small version of the photo for reference, and then take a screenshot of that entire page. Upload that screenshot as an image to the ancestor’s profile. This ensures that the evidence and the image are permanently linked, making a real effort to stop the error in its tracks. Even if it doesn't stop the error from being passed, and it likely won't, at least you will have made an effort in getting the correct information out there.

Understanding Errors Made During Microfilming

 Bedford County Tennessee deed books O-R were microfilmed by the Tennessee State Library and  Archives and are digitally available via FamilySearch in Image Group Number 008150799.  I'm so thankful to have these records and others like them available to access from home.  

The IGN 8150799 images might be confusing to some because of errors in the target images.  Target images are documents added that give additional information about the item being microfilmed. Some examples are: End of roll, End of item, Tight Binding, Smeared Ink, etc.  Volume O contains deeds for 1821-1822 and has an index for those deeds at the front of the book.  While the dates covered are correct the book is more than an index.

Volumes P, Q, and R are also listed incorrectly as Index Books on the target images but now we have an additional error.  The person who created the handwritten target pages wrote 19 instead of 18 for the first two numbers of the year. 

 

Volume P

Volume Q

Volume R

Thankfully, FamilySearch has it listed correctly on their site. It is essential that you know what records you are using. A citation is more than just a road map back to the source, it requires understanding the why and when of the record creation as well as recognizing any errors made in the transferring of that record to a different format. This is just one example of errors you might encounter while researching.

Notes:  

Bedford Co TN Deed Books(w/ front index) IGN 008150799

Volume O   Images 6-227
Volume P    Images 229-457
Volume Q   Images 459-659
Volume R   Images 661-931

Trying Ancestry's Pro Tools Suite: Tree Checker

Ancestry recently introduced their new Pro Tools which is an add-on subscription. As a current subscriber to Ancestry with a US Discovery Membership, I was given the option to add the tools which I did for a monthly fee of $9.99. My plan is to cancel the Pro Tool add-on before next month's charge.  This will allow me to test drive the tools and see if they are an option for which I can justify spending money. 

I have a good number of trees with my main tree containing 18000+ people.  It took it awhile to index my main tree.  

Tree Checker--I am all for anything that allows us to make corrections more easily.  Possible Errors had only two tabs on mine:  Possible Duplicates, and Other Possible Issues.  You can further filter the list by clicking on More Filters 

Family Line
    Direct Line
    Paternal Line
    Maternal Line
    End of Line

Events & Places

    Birth 
    Marriage 
    Death 
    Lived In
    Any Event

Possible Errors

    Possible Duplicates
    Other Possible Issues
Hints
    Has Hints

I noticed that once I corrected or merged I was given the option to View All Errors.  This was not helpful.  It had opened the selected issue up in a new tab(I'm on Chrome.) An option to close this window and refresh the previous screen would have been more helpful for the process. 

Beyond the duplicates, the error that I noticed the most in my tree was caused when I'd added the 1940 census.  Some of the children who were under 5 in 1940 had gotten a residence fact associated with their profile.  I believe this was corrected at a certain point and it's no longer necessary to remember to uncheck that box when adding those under 5 from the census record.  It would be nice if there was a way to work on specific errors other than have them all lumped in the "other possible issues" category.

It discovered a "floater" in my tree and displaced this error when I clicked on the  "!"

Sometimes my floaters are intentional--other times they are from me sloppily deleting a parent, spouse or child of that person and losing them within the database.

We can expect to see changes in how the tool works these next few weeks errors and bugs in how it works are reported and modified.  It is hard to get a workflow going for the error connection process. I don't feel that the Tree Checker should be part of a paid tool suite, mainly because of the value it brings to Ancestry's tree database when people use it and make corrections. It should be available to anyone who is building trees at Ancestry because the accuracy of those trees help to improve the Hints, Thrulines and Suggested Records etc.

The Tree Checker is just one of the tools in the Pro Tools suite.  I will be trying out some of the others in the next few days and share my thoughts on those.  I am excited about the Map Views but that's a topic for another day.

Hide and Seek in the US Federal Census

I was looking for a census entry for the Waynick family and found this entry which is an excellent example of why we should always check the census images AND surrounding households.

The census entry as it is indexed makes it appear that 5 year old Dillard is living in the household of John Jordan. If you look at the image below, you will see what has happened. The census taker M.F. Shelton has realized that he omitted Dillard.  He has added Dillard at the bottom of the page in the middle of another household entry.  The 9 year old twins are on the next page.  Yes the census taker does note that Nancy and Missouri Lee are twins.  I wondered if they were actually supposed to be in the Jordan household.  Who knows.....No notation is shown beside their names other than noting that they are twins.

The household # 47 where Dillard belongs is shown below

This entry is from 1860 Federal Census Middle District of Dickson County Tennessee.

I would also like to add that it is good to check the very last page of each District in which you have an ancestor.  This is especially true if someone isn't in the census and you think they should be there.  Several times I've found that the enumerators listed folks that hey had omitted from the household.  I've also found several mothers who list all of their married adult children as still living at home.  Duplicate entries can also occur with people listed in different districts and when a person is living/working in homes other than that of their parents.  Does this hold true in your census research as well?