Errors in Ancestry Trees

[At home in NZ]

Most of those I have contacted re errors are quite grateful, but many don't then carry out any correction to their trees

I have experienced the same, it's paying lip service and I wonder if they take it with a pinch of salt.

 

[JoyNor]

I came across an Ancestry tree today which told me all kinds of things about my ancestor that I didn't know before!

I have him marrying just once with 14 children to follow, but according to this tree he married 6 times, including twice before he was born and twice on the same day to different women.

By one wife he had two children, one born before he (my ancestor) was born and the other 34 years later, and by another wife he had 34 children within 25 years. It seems the other 4 wives didn't produce any children, which may have been something of a relief to him.

How do people manage not to notice what utter rubbish they are adding to their trees?

I was browsing through some old topics on the forums here and although this has been dormant for a while nothing changes does it! I just searched a name on Ancestry of a man born in 1685, who may be an ancestor so I was curious to see who else had him in their tree. I found 28 pages of public/private tree references and the vast majority have Johannis born 1685 and dying in 1804. That was a ripe old age! Not one of them had any source or reference other than a few that I checked had obviously just copied someone else's Ancestry tree (so assume that is what they had all done). I wish there was some way on Ancestry to mark, for your own future reference, that you have seen these trees and dismissed them as utter rubbish! Another person on the same line had married his own mother 4 years before he was born!