I've made a Match!!

[peter]

Two of my matches are not blood lines - one was a mistake inadvertently caused by me clicking ''ancestor'' instead of ''employment'' in the early days of LC

The employment category (and other similar categories) exist so that matches can be made between researchers who, whilst not related, have common interests. If you're not interested in making those sorts of connections it is best not to enter people who aren't your relatives, as it can only lead to disappointment and confusion for other members.

the other is an adoption, although I have now emailed the contact to make data available to him if he's interested.

The children of the household were adopted, but you are also related to the other member by marriage.

 

[cfbandit]

Holy wow, I have a match! 1st cousin 4x removed, but its something. I hope they respond!!!

 

[Bryman]

Holy wow, I have a match! 1st cousin 4x removed, but its something. I hope they respond!!!

Congratulations. Let's hope they do respond.

However, for my enlightenment and understanding, do you really have four extra generations down one leg of your tree? ie 2 generations in one leg and 6 generations down the other, with those at the end of each leg alive at the same time?
That seems unlikely, or have I misunderstood how cousin relationships are calculated?

 

[Liberty]

Congratulations. Let's hope they do respond.

However, for my enlightenment and understanding, do you really have four extra generations down one leg of your tree? ie 2 generations in one leg and 6 generations down the other, with those at the end of each leg alive at the same time?
That seems unlikely, or have I misunderstood how cousin relationships are calculated?

Bryman, I THINK that's what a 1st cousin 4 times removed is - e.g. his Grandfather is my 4G GF (all mine are long dead) Perhaps cfbandit found a 4th cousin? (which means you have a set of great-great-great-grandparents in common) I have found few of those.

 

[Alexander Bisset]

You are right Liberty "Removed" means generations apart 4 generations apart is possible for 1st cousins but not that likely as it requires a radically different age profile in each branch. Still it is possible if its the youngest child on one branch vs the oldest at the head of the other. That would give you a say 20 year gap right off the bat. Similar either end of the spectrum for each generation and the gaps open up.

 

[AndyMick]

Wow! 2 matches in a week. I got really excited. Then I discovered that one of them (on my own tree) was an existing contact. Still, the other (on my ONS) has proved really useful for non-genealogical matters. Neither contact was for data recently entered. So now I'm just mildly excited

 

[Tim]

It's all good news.

 

[Bryman]

A word of warning to other forum members in the hope that you will not waste a lot of time like I have just done.

I added the 1911 census reference for the future wife of my blood relative, together with her parents and younger sister who were in the same household, ie four new additions to My Ancestors. I clicked the search button expecting 0 new matches. I was very pleasantly surprised when the search resulted in 4 new matches and I immediately went looking to find who the new 'relative' might be.

I scanned down the list of entries in My Ancestors looking for 4 red ticks against the new single household and thought I had missed them. The task is beginning to take some time as my entries have now climbed to about 900. I hesitate to ask for help from Peter but there must be many other LC members with much bigger lists than me. A direct link to the newly matched entries, or a list of them, would be a great help.

At one point, I found the household with 4 red ticks but it was the wrong surname so I assumed that I was looking at a previous match and continued my search. When I reached the end of the list without finding any more red ticks, I thought that something had gone wrong and the new matches had not been marked. I checked My Cousins and did not find a new entry there either. I went back to My Ancestors and sorted the list by Name but that did not show any ticks against family members with the new surname. I then went back to My Cousins and checked the number of matches indicated against each relative with the number of matches that I record in the notes box. At last I found where the new matches were indicated. One of my previous contacts had added 4 new census references and my search for matches had found them rather than the 4 that I had just entered. Confusing.

I was relieved that all was working correctly but was annoyed with myself for not thinking of that possibility right at the beginning. I hope that this post will avoid anybody else going down the same path.

 

[peter]

If you find someone new then the message about new matches on your My Ancestors page will end with the words "Please check your My Cousins page" (and when you visit your My Cousins page you'll see a new entry in the New Contacts section).

If you don't see that extra wording then the matches you've found are additional matches with an existing contact: they'll still be marked with red ticks, however.

It's worth re-reading the Help information on your My Ancestors page as this explains hows everything works (click How to use this page). There's a similar guide on your My Cousins page.

When you do find a new contact the best first step is to view the My Contact page for the relationship, as this shows which relatives you share and how each of you are related to each of them.

 

[Liberty]

I agree that it's worth checking relationship before getting too excited. Today I had my 'invitation to make contact' accepted by someone who is doing a one-name study, the name being someone who married a blood-relative of mine. It may yet be a fruitful contact but we pretty certainly aren't related!

 

[Britjan]

The employment category (and other similar categories) exist so that matches can be made between researchers who, whilst not related, have common interests. If you're not interested in making those sorts of connections it is best not to enter people who aren't your relatives, as it can only lead to disappointment and confusion for other members.

Going back to a quote by Peter much earlier this year I'd be interested to know how many LC members have made a match of interest in the employment category. I still have the faint hope that I might find a relative of the harness maker my 14 year old grandfather was apprenticed to in the 1881 census. One of my female relatives (2nd great grand aunt 1821-1853) was a mantua maker who had apprentices including one at the time of the 1851 census, so anybody interested would have to backtrack to the 1841 census to link with me. I'd certainly be happy to share what I know about her early life.
I realise this doesn't necessarily help find any cousins (although servants etc have been known to marry into the family) but it does help flesh out the ones I already know.

 

[Bryman]

I recently made a match with someone who turned out to be a 5th cousin although LC still regards us to be only possibly related by marriage. This seemed very strange so I looked further to find out why there was such a discrepancy. The reason appears to be due to incomplete entry of census information.

The match was made for an individual that my relative married. I had entered all census household members on to My Ancestors page.
The other LC member is a direct descendant of the matched individual but presumably only that head of household was entered so the relationship was not apparent to the automatic matching in LC. If the wife's details had been entered as well then the match would have been noted as a blood relationship. When we are pressed for time, it is only natural that we follow up blood relative matches move avidly than those which are more distant.

I think I remember that this incomplete entry of census references has been discussed elsewhere (but I am too rushed/lazy to search) but have added this post as a reminder that we should all ensure that all family members are entered from each census transcription to get the best return from LC.

 

[peter]

It's particularly important to enter additional relatives before attempting to make contact with a new relative - remember that you only get one chance to make a first impression.

 

[Tim]

As part of Peter's 2014 Christmas Competition, I've made a new match!!

 

[Tim]

As part of Peter's 2014 Christmas Competition, I've made a new match!!

Make that 2 matches, but still waiting on a response from both of them.

Did no one else make any matches?

 

[Pauline]

Make that 2 matches, but still waiting on a response from both of them.

Did no one else make any matches?

I did mention it in another thread somewhere but I matched up with 6 new contacts - 1 cousin and 5 relatives. Still awaiting a response from 4 of them.

 

[Tim]

6 new contacts, that's very good! That's the highest so far.

Pauline has the new score to beat!

 

[peter]

If you don't get a response within 14 days please let me know! Some people will be away or otherwise unable to deal with their email, but in some cases it might have ended up in their spam folder.

 

[Pauline]

If you don't get a response within 14 days please let me know! Some people will be away or otherwise unable to deal with their email, but in some cases it might have ended up in their spam folder.

Yes, will do, thank you, Peter. So far only one of my non-responders has been outstanding for more than 14 days, and then only just, and I'd been thinking it might be preferable for all concerned if I waited until after new year before contacting you about it.

Last time you followed up a non-responder for me it did the trick.

 

[Pauline]

Realised yesterday that I had omitted one family when entering additional 1881 entries - and now I've made another match! And it's another cousin - and they responded to my contact almost immediately.

This latest one wasn't during the competition, I know, but 7 new contacts in just over a fortnight can't be bad.