Analyzing mistakes in family trees -- Part Two

The premise of this series of posts is that online user contributed family trees are essentially full of duplicated mis-information and errors. These online trees are uniformly disparaged by genealogical researchers. But most efforts to explain or qualify the errors are missing from the discussions. As I mentioned in Part One, it is way too easy to simply dismiss the online family trees as irrelevant to "serious research" and only valuable as possible leads to "real research." I wanted to begin a discussion about whether or not the causes of the deficiencies can be quantified and if there are some corrective measures that can be implemented either from a programming standpoint or from efforts by the genealogical community.

In the context of this second post in the series, I would remind the readers that I am not directing my comments at any particular online family tree program. I see the deficiencies in every one of the programs, more in some, less in others, but uniformly present. I started by discussing the impact of copied family trees and the perpetuation of errors through copies made with any review or correction by the new user/copier.

To start the present analysis, I used a widely available family tree program and searched in the family trees using the name of my Great-grandfather, Henry Martin Tanner. I choose him as the basis for any such search because I am already well aware of the number of family trees in which he is incorporated and the extent of the mis-information. Here are some observations from the search.

The program (not further identified) was searched with the following information:

• Name: Henry Martin Tanner
• Birth: 1852
• Location: California, USA

Let me emphasize, the only really significant issue involving records of this individual is the name of the county where he was born. The county is commonly recorded as San Bernardino County, but that county was not in existence at the time of his birth and should have been recorded as Los Angeles County. All of the rest of the correct information is extremely easy to obtain and recorded in dozens of freely available original sources and even books, online articles, blogs and other sources.

The search returned 132,221 results. So some addition information was added to cut down the extraneous returns, if possible. I did not indicate an "exact" search because I wanted to see the non-complying entries. I added his spouse's first name as Eliza. That addition had no effect on the results, so I added in a more specific location, San Bernardino, California, USA without specifying if it was the county or the city. This addition only reduced the total results by one. I decided to include and ignore a total number of "false positives" to explain the problem with the search engine. I might mention that none of the entries had more than 1 source listed. It occurred to me that one easy fix for this problem would be for the family tree programs to prioritize those entries with sources.

There was some discussion in the comments to the last post that sources were not an indication of accuracy. That is likely very true, but I will have to take up that issue in a subsequent post.

Here is the tally and the type of error: (Note, if an entry had more than one error, I counted each error so the numbers are greater than the total number of entries).

Name wrong  xx
Name incomplete xx
No birth location xxx
Wrong birth date x

The remaining entries were false positives and useless. Oops, then I realized I had put the birth date into the death date field. I got returns with this wrong search info. Interesting.

Next with the correct search information. This time I got 88,755 returns. Of course, I did not go through all of them.

Correct entry xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Wrong county xxx
No birth location xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Incomplete place information xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Wrong name x
Death information wrong x
Incomplete name x

It looks like the trends here are going to continue for a really long time and that the incorrect entries are going to far outnumber the correct ones. Almost none of these entries had more than one source listed and the source was uniformly another family tree. What is strange is that the correct information was certainly available from some of the family trees.

It appears that some already present programming features could correct the vast majority of these problems. There are already programs such as Rootsmagic.com that tell the user when they put in a county outside of the time when the county existed. Also, the programs could easily require county information if a date and state were present. The basic question is whether or not to allow entries online that are incomplete as to one or more of the places where events are listed? Would it be too much to expect that if an entry were made in a new family tree that duplicate entries in other trees would be checked and questions raised as to the conflicting information or the correctness of place information? Is uploading GEDCOM files the root cause?

On to Part Three.

Gadget or Tool -- What do you think?

I have noticed recently that a lot of the tech news writers use the term "gadget" whenever they want to depreciate a certain product or trend in the computer technology world. However, the term is not only being used in a derogatory manner, it is also being misused. A gadget is a small tool with a particular function. A specialized bottle or can opener is a gadget. A tablet computer or a laptop is not a gadget. All of the tech offerings are really general purpose tools used for hundreds of applications.

My use of the iPhone is a prime example of a general purpose tool. For example, with the newest versions, there is a built-in app for using the photo flash on the back of the iPhone as a flashlight substitute and I have used it for that purpose many times. The way my iPhone as a general purpose tool is used continues to expand as I find out more about its capabilities and the hundreds of thousands of applications or apps available.

From time to time, I have been accused of "buying all the latest gadgets." This is technically not true. I have been guilty of buying very specialized tools used for a specific repair or whatever, but I do not buy gadgets as such. One thing is certain, I do buy computers. I once figured out that I had spent more money on computers than all my other purchases combined including cars and houses. Of course, it helped in this calculation that I was in the computer business for many years. But now I do have the quadruple threat of the computer world: the desktop computer, the laptop computer, an iPad or tablet computer and a smartphone or iPhone. Why do I "need" all those devices?

Let me give you one good example of buying a device. Some years ago, I was asked to do a presentation about genealogy. I have taught classes all my life and even taught at a local community college for about five years, but this was a "presentation" with a PowerPoint and all the formalities. I decided to buy a video projector, just in case I might need one for that presentation and maybe a few in the future. I was quite concerned that I was buying another electronic device that might not get used much. Well, that turned out a lot differently than I expected. That Epson projector has been used hundreds of times and dragged all over the country.

I think that when a device becomes integrated into your day to day activities, it stops being a "gadget" and becomes a tool. I have building contractor friends carry around a truckload of tools almost everywhere they go every day. My wife always surprises me with the things she carries around with her every day also. My lineup of tech devices has become a basic day-to-day part of writing, presenting and teaching almost every day of the week. I am constantly trying new ways to speed up the process of writing and preparing for a seemingly endless series of classes and presentations. Don't get me wrong. I am not complaining. I enjoy teaching and writing. It is what I do. But don't begrudge me my devices as I attempt to cope with the huge flood of information every day.

A last note. All of my devices are connected. My calendar, my files, my apps, my genealogy files, everything is connected. So I can pick up my iPhone and start working while I am sitting and waiting in line or for some other event. This is actually what I dreamed about being able to do many, many years ago. So, in effect, I am living the dream.

The next time you head some one referred to as a "gadget" collector, make sure that is really what is happening.

Keynote Speakers selected for RootsTech 2014 - Bloggers Rule

I was quite interested to see the lineup of the Keynote Speakers for RootsTech 2014. The selection represents a pretty dramatic break from the CEO lineup of past years since only one of the six speakers is actually the head of a genealogy company. It is a big recognition for Bloggers and I realize they desperately had to do something different after my performance as a Keynote speaker last year.

The first Keynote Speaker is Ree Drummond. I actually owe part of my own reason for blogging to her very indirectly. I started blogging, in part, due to a challenge from one of my daughters after we had looked at several blogging sites, including Ree Drummond's The Pioneer Woman website. This was about six years ago. If you could see the impact this decision has had on me, I guess you could say that The Pioneer Woman was part of my initial inspiration. Interesting how things come around. Obviously, I did not end up on national TV but maybe I would have if I had chosen to write about something as popular as food or whatever. Now, that is a pretty scary thought. I am the antithesis of a cook. I am not even a bad cook. Oh well, I guess genealogy will have to do.

Here is the lineup:

Thursday, February 6 

Ree Drummond, blogger and author, The Pioneer Woman 
Ree is an award-winning blogger and New York Times bestselling author. Her popular website, The Pioneer Woman, was founded in 2006 and showcases her cooking, photography, and stories about country life. 

Annelies van den Belt, CEO, DC Thompson Family History 
Annelies is changing the way digital genealogical records are published and organized. Her company hosts 1.8 billion genealogical records across a family of online brands. 

Friday, February 7 

Dr. Spencer Wells, project director, National Geographic Genographic Project 
The Indiana Jones of genetics, Dr. Wells has traveled the world and captured the DNA of more than a half-million people to tell the story of the human journey. 

Judy Russell is a certified genealogist with a law degree who enjoys helping others understand the interplay between genealogy and the law. She blogs and maintains The Legal Genealogist website.

Saturday, February 8

Stephanie Nielsen, blogger and author, NieNie Dialogues 
Stephanie's story of survival and recovery after a plane crash captured the hearts of the nation. She has inspired others through interviews with Oprah Winfrey and on the Today Show. 

Todd Hansen, TV host, The Story Trek 
Behind every door there is a story. This TV series consists of random door-to-door interviews to discover who lives behind those doors and their real stories. 

Free Birth and Death Certificates?

A Commentator suggested the following post topic; the best resources to get copies of birth and death certificates, free if possible. Now that is a challenging question. My first response would be to show the commentator the FamilySearch.org Research Wiki. Since there was no specific location mentioned in the suggestion, I can assume that the answer needs to be quite general. The Research Wiki has a Vital Records category for all of the states and every county in the United States and many other countries outside of the U.S. The status of the vital records (i.e. birth, death, marriage) are explained. It is important to note that some (most) states are not giving away their certificates for free. There are a very few states that have free copies of their records available to the public. My state, Arizona, is one of them but only during a very limited period of time, birth records are available online from 1855 to 1937, death records from 1861 to 1962 but it is also important to note that before 1906 very few of these records were kept.

Now, that said, there are a whole bunch of websites that would like you to order vital records through there website so they can make some money providing you with what you can get at the best price directly from the states.

Another thing to know is the birth and death certificates are a relatively new invention. Each state has a date when that type of record is available. Going back to the Research Wiki, you can look up the states you are interested in and see if there is a certificate possible for your ancestors. If not, there is a long list of places to look for alternative birth and death information. The Research Wiki has the answers.

Analyzing mistakes In family trees - Part One

It seems that one of the hallmarks of the online family tree programs is the proliferation of inaccurate and down-right sloppy genealogical information. I could give a huge number of absolutely outrageous examples from a whole variety of sources and I probably will at some point in this post. But I am not picking on any one of the dozens (hundreds) of family tree programs. These comments apply to all of them collectively as well as individually. They all have these same problems.

Responses by genealogists to these examples of poor research and recording practices extend from those who shun family trees altogether, to those who are simply mildly amused by the content. But with all of the genealogical commentary and complaints about user generated online family trees, I find there is almost no analysis of the types of errors that are common and why that might be occurring. It is too easy, as I could have done at the beginning of this post, to simply shrug your shoulders and dismiss the problems, but this is a serious issue and needs some serious consideration. If we are truly concerned about the problems, perhaps we need to start thinking of ways to solve them rather than dismissing the whole issue as a lost cause. I am sure there are those of us out there that, when confronted with a messy family tree, wish there was some way to divorce our relatives.

Enough of the frustration and now to the problem. The first and most obvious issue is that of copying existing family trees without any critical analysis of the contents. If I go online and see a huge family tree of all my relatives and I have no prior experience, I would normally believe that the online record was "correct" merely because it looks complete and I have nothing to compare it to. Unfortunately, this is a problem that is not likely to respond to anything genealogists can do. Most of the people uploading a copy of someone's file likely has little or no interest in genealogy as such, but merely thinks there is some reason to have a copy online. I am certain that there are some who think that they are "doing their genealogy or family history" simply by virtue of the fact that they put something (anything) online. As long as the hosting entities indiscriminately advertise the huge numbers of of people they have on user submitted family trees as if that had some meaning, this situation will continue to exist and grow even larger.

For every copy online there is some "original" that is being copied. If you examine the online family trees you will soon see the patterns of copying because there will be family trees with exactly the same mistakes over and over again. In the past, I have written about some of the possible variations that have occurred just in a few of my own ancestor's listings in family trees online. But the reality is that there are some files that have been copied more than others. This likely occurs because of a commonly held access to a surname book. For example, in my Tanner line, there are several surname books about our common ancestors. The mistakes in these books have been copied over and over again. It is relatively easy to see where the information originated because of the replication of the same errors in the same individuals.

One of the most obvious common errors involves place names. These errors can be minimized by having a suggested or mandatory standard place name. But the use of standardized place names give rise to another set of problems. As genealogists, we should be recording the place at the time the event occurred. So that this issue of accurate place names also involves recording the place name with geographic and jurisdictional information different than those applicable at the time the event occurred. This usually involves entering a present county for the locations when historically, the event occurred in an older "parent" county. This issue also arises when there has been a change in the name of an ancestral location, either due to some local issue or because a new ruler has taken over the country.

So in the online family trees the copying errors can come from previously shared pedigrees and family group records or from "helpful" suggestions from those who want "standardized" place names. This would appear to be an intractable problem, but the solution, from the standpoint of the user is obvious. Watch for indicator errors. Look for those variations in individuals in a family tree that indicate that the pedigree was copied. In addition, look to the source citations. This is perhaps the easiest way to determine if an online family tree is worth examining. If there are no source citations, then it is highly probable that the information was all copied, all at one time from a previous family file.

One of the most common responses to my concerns about online family trees is that the trees are valuable because they may provide suggested ancestors that later turn out to be valid. I would certainly agree that this is possible, but, as I have said before, I doubt that I would take the time to examine hundreds of un-sourced family trees on the mere possibility that there might be an entry that would be helpful. It would appear to me that the most expedient way of resolving this issue is to block any family tree entries that were not support by some-sort of the evidence. Another group of people come back to me with the comment that we should be extremely lenient with family tree people that are just starting out and not hurt their feelings by forcing them to add something to their photo, story or document that they don't care to do and do not see the utility of. Hmm. Well, that is a consideration but should we simply allow the continued proliferation of duplicate family trees? Where does the researcher fit in this process. I am not aware of any online family tree hosting service that refuses postings based on the lack of supporting citations of sources. Maybe someone should try that tactic.

More later, of course.

Suggest a Blog Topic

If you have been reading my blog for a while, you may recall some topic that I have not fully covered. I always appreciate comments and many of the comments lead to subsequent blog posts. But for a change, I thought I would ask my readers for topics they would like to see me talk about. So, if you have been wishing for a post on something dear to your heart, let me know and I will schedule it for an upcoming blog post. Thanks for all you out there who read my blog. I enjoy writing it and hope to keep going for a long time.

No, I am not running out of things to say, I have a very long list of topics. But I did think it might be a good idea to ask.

The Great Awakening -- A Free Accessible Online Library for America

This short video summarizes the whole idea of personal access to information. This is the most important development , I am aware of, in providing this access to everyone with access to the Internet. The impact we have seen, as genealogists, from online access to records is but a small sample of what is happening right now. If you want to know what is really going on in the world, you need to watch the libraries. They are the heart of our culture. As genealogists, if we are not aware of these developments and begin to utilize them we will be ignoring some of the most valuable tools we have. Listen, Look and Learn.

The Digital Public Library of America.

Just a note about my life in libraries. When I moved to Phoenix, Arizona, I was eight years old. At that time, Phoenix was vastly different than it is today. Our home was only a relatively short distance from the main Phoenix Public Library and I could easily ride my bike to the library whenever I wanted to do so. I would ride to the library and check out the seven book maximum and then ride home and read the books and then return. This was an important part of my life in those hot Arizona summers. I kept up this habit to the present day, although with all the online access, I don't go physically to the library as much as I did previously.

My habit was and is, to start at some point in the library stacks and look at every book on the shelves. I would then check out every book that seemed interesting to me at the time. By doing this, I could systematically work through thousands of subjects. When I became interested in genealogy, I did the same thing. I simply read through every book I could find on the subject. This has been my approach to every subject. Now, I use the Internet to find the information I want to know about any subject. Sometimes to write one blog post, I will read dozens of websites and review dozens of documents.

When I was attending the university, my first job was as a Bibliographer at the University of Utah Library. I worked in the library all during both undergraduate and graduate school. When I was in the Army, I was a research analyst and had access to a very good small library in Panama for two years. Then when I returned and went to law school, I was a research desk librarian for the years I was in School at Arizona State University. I am now, again, working in a library, the Mesa FamilySearch Library.

Maybe by reading this, you can get glimpse of why I would feel so strongly about library access and the tremendous impact this will have on our lives and culture. We are reaching the point where education and knowledge are going to be virtually free and available to anyone who wants to avail themselves of the opportunity of learning. Which of us and our children and grandchildren will take advantage of this great awakening?