tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post3645924747006071784..comments2024-03-21T19:08:05.737-07:00Comments on Genealogy's Star: What are the benefits of a unified family tree?James Tannerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02989059644120454647noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-36907426297631231892014-03-21T08:52:11.942-07:002014-03-21T08:52:11.942-07:00Some edits in FS FT would also be nice. I had one ...Some edits in FS FT would also be nice. I had one where the birth year was entered incorrectly so she died before she was born. That said, both Puzzilla and CreateFan have tools to assist with the data cleanup. I think FS FT is a good place to share research, but I plan to keep my own copy of my tree.Laurihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09312025277661530407noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-8658054819613483682014-03-19T08:38:26.556-07:002014-03-19T08:38:26.556-07:00OK - I can happily accept that there will almost c...OK - I can happily accept that there will almost certainly be *a* connection somewhere. As I said, Robert is there back home in Dundee (you just have to do a bit of work to get there). I also have a line linking into what I might call the heartlands of FSFT as one of my Bate relatives from Cheshire ended up in Utah. Ironically, that line doesn't show FSFT at its best as it's affected by the issues with the link to the LDS membership software, so every few months 4G GF becomes his own father in FSFT. Or is it his own son? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-73871578746796493712014-03-18T16:57:12.650-07:002014-03-18T16:57:12.650-07:00Thanks for the encouraging comment. Thanks for the encouraging comment. James Tannerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02989059644120454647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-24604540962564015272014-03-18T16:56:54.949-07:002014-03-18T16:56:54.949-07:00I guess I wasn't very clear. What I meant to s...I guess I wasn't very clear. What I meant to say was if you keep following your ancestry back a few generations, you will almost always connect with the tree if your family comes from Western Europe. Not every line but there will be a connection. James Tannerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02989059644120454647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-47737661857013456542014-03-18T11:33:53.513-07:002014-03-18T11:33:53.513-07:00Your "arguments" for a unified family tr...Your "arguments" for a unified family tree are mighty. I have shared them with my class and have remarked that I hope someone at FamilySearch will read the last paragraph over a few times. Thank you for your input, always!Family History Hathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01141405973726760265noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-52023715600284061382014-03-18T10:43:10.052-07:002014-03-18T10:43:10.052-07:00"When the tree reaches a point that it has in..."When the tree reaches a point that it has included a significant percentage of any given ethnically related community, it will contain all of the people needed to establish links with almost all families. Because of the number of people in the FamilySearch.org Family Tree, I assume that this critical mass was reached some time ago for ethnic groups coming from Western Europe"<br /><br />Hmm. I am very dubious about that. Thinking about the people in a photo of my GG GF's brother, taken in 1916 in San Francisco, I'm finding it difficult to find them in FS FT. The brother is indeed in FS FT in his birth family back in Dundee, Scotland. Now that's good because I didn't put them in, someone else must have. ("FamilySearch" did, of course! Gee thanks, please see all previous conversations!) But there's no sign of his wife, who is Baltimore born, in FS FT. And, of course, none of their 2 daughters. No way either of linking the California Robert to the Dundee Robert. <br /><br />No sign of son-in-law number 1, nor his daughters. Son-in-law 2 *is* in FS FT - slightly shambolic in the data, but he's in with his birth family, unlike son-in-law 1's birth family which is missing.<br /><br />So, if I take you literally and just look at FS FT, we are rather short of critical mass - though obviously this is hardly a statistically significant test. But what *is* true is that the relevant data is there in the US censuses, which I presume are all in FS Records. <br /><br />So, I think the point is that descendants of Robert from California cannot stick bits together inside FS FT. They have to do old-fashioned genealogy with records, outside FS FT. Not that you or I have a problem with that!<br /><br />I don't have a problem with the idea of a critical mass - it's just that I think that (outside the Mormon community maybe???) we're light years short of it in FS FT. But not necessarily if you look at US and UK censuses in FS Records.<br /><br />Adrian Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com