Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"gedcom" ??

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    This thread reminded me to create a new, up-to-date gedcom and upload it to my "myFTDNA" pages. So, thanks!

    Now I have a more complete list of surnames whose bearers could have contributed to my autosomal dna, all in preparation for the Family Finder test I have on order.

    Yeah, baby!

    Comment


    • #17
      Well the only one I have used is Ancestry.com and since it is free I recommend that one. It is very easy to start your tree there. Click on the Family Trees tab on their homepage and choose start a new tree. Simple and hassle free really.

      Comment


      • #18
        What is the purpose of Gedcom ? Is it a website ? Who does it show your family tree to ? Does it involve DNA ? I have taken the y37 test

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by 507 View Post
          What is the purpose of Gedcom ? Is it a website ? Who does it show your family tree to ? Does it involve DNA ? I have taken the y37 test
          gedcom is a family tree. if you upload your gedcom/family tree to FTDNA only your DNA matches can see your family tree. Your gedcom should block out any living info from being seen

          Comment


          • #20
            What is GEDCOM

            If you really want to know why not look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEDCOM

            As for Ancestry.com, I wouldn't load my family tree there for any amount of money. There is far to much TRASH out there. There are many more wrong trees there than there are correct trees and people just keep copying the wrong trees because they must be right because so many people have that information. If you don't think they are TRASH download a few into a GOOD family tree program that will check for logic errors.

            Ancestry.com is great for searching of microfilmed records. I have subscribed for many years and will renew in the next day or two. If you want to search their family trees only look at those that have documented information. Having been copied from another tree is not documentation.

            I said before and I'll say again. If all you want is a free family tree/GEDCOM program get PAF.

            Comment


            • #21
              Personally, I wish FamilyTreeDNA just had a page where a person could fill in information, let's say through great-great grandparents. That would eliminate a lot of anxiety people have over gedcoms.

              Ancestry.com? I do like to examine other trees, but yes, it's always wise to look for documentation along with those trees. I love the census records. To me, they are the basic documentation of a family tree, along with birth, death and marriage records. The immigration records are nice too -- I found my great-grandfather's photo twice in those records (we have his portrait in our home). Whenever I get a hold of an obituary (from outside ancestry.com) I like to attach that to members of my tree too.

              For a while, I used the international records on ancestry.com. For me anyway, those were most helpful when researching my French-Canadian ancestors. Church records are invaluable in French-Canadian genealogy. Thank goodness someone had the sense to microfilm a lot of that in the 1950s or so. I do like the Canadian census records too though -- I keep track of the border hoppers in the family that way! (French- or English-speakers.)

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Jim Barrett View Post
                If you really want to know why not look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEDCOM

                As for Ancestry.com, I wouldn't load my family tree there for any amount of money. There is far to much TRASH out there. There are many more wrong trees there than there are correct trees and people just keep copying the wrong trees because they must be right because so many people have that information. If you don't think they are TRASH download a few into a GOOD family tree program that will check for logic errors.

                Ancestry.com is great for searching of microfilmed records. I have subscribed for many years and will renew in the next day or two. If you want to search their family trees only look at those that have documented information. Having been copied from another tree is not documentation.

                I said before and I'll say again. If all you want is a free family tree/GEDCOM program get PAF.

                Most of the people who have accurate trees on ancestry keep their tree private. You can tell in speaking to someone if they order records or are "Cut and Pasters" and copy off of someone else with no proof. My family on public trees has been mutilated and why my tree is closed off. I only share my records with other people who order records and we share the bill for records. Many people out there want others to do the work for them for free.

                Comment


                • #23
                  I like Ancestry

                  I like Ancestry and its true lots of trees there are done in a half you know what way or even less. Common Since comes into play and not everyone has it I used public tree's to give me a direction to search in and a name to place in a blank space. We all have blank spaces and I can guarantee no one has ever looked at a black space and found a Common Ancestor. If I find a tree with 18 sources and 9 records and there is one with 2 sources and 1 record common since tells me that the person with the most sources cares about their research and has done a good enough job to use it, but I still check it out. I get tiered of people knocking online researchers I find plenty of mistakes from old school researchers and where they have researched their whole life and died never finding what they were looking for and I find it in five minutes on-line.
                  Last edited by EdwardRHill; 16 January 2012, 04:08 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I don't pay much attention to the family trees of others at Ancestry.com. If I do see something of interest, I check to see that it is actually supported by evidence, real evidence, not a record that actually has no bearing whatsoever on the thing claimed. If there is no evidence, but the thing claimed is important, I will write the tree's owner to find out where he or she got the information and how reliable it is.

                    Grabbing unsupported "facts" from trees at Ancestry is a recipe for genealogical disaster, or at least chaos.

                    I like Ancestry, too, but it pays to be cautious.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Ancestry is ok for accessing census records. I would certainly not rely on it for the accuracy of family trees. According to some of the trees on their site I am a descendent of ancestors from virtually every continent on the planet! I KNOW that my family never left Devon in England until the late 19th C. Its a form of Chinese whispers, best to be avoided I think. As far as Gedcom software is concerned I use Ahnenblatt which is freely available to download and is very simple to use.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        The trees on ancestry.com point you in a direction, but it up to each of us to check out where that information came from, I believe. Still, the actual records on that site are wonderful, especially the census records. What used to take some of us hours of searching through indexes and then reels of microfilm at public archives now takes seconds. (Most reputable archives and libraries actually carry a subscription to ancestry.com today.) If anything, ancestry.com allows us to check the old genealogies which were largely based on records obtained through the mail from some long-distant depository. What I am trying to say is that ancestry.com allows us access to "back up" records that were never so easily accessible to the old time genealogists.

                        I see the trees on ancestry.com as "trees in the making." They are sort of the notes on information each of us has found on our family so far. The trees change over time, based on new information we have found.

                        Related to all of this: Virtually all records of historical significance -- other than sensitive records like birth and adoption records -- those connected to topics other than genealogy even -- are being put in electronic form more and more -- and often available online. Libraries, archives and other public depositories have to do this to protect and preserve especially paper documents often bound in old-time volumes. I am a person who is very at ease searching through these giant old volumes in court houses and the like, but in general, those days are coming to an end.
                        Last edited by mixedkid; 17 January 2012, 12:39 AM. Reason: fixed spelling error

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by mixedkid View Post
                          The trees on ancestry.com point you in a direction, but it up to each of us to check out where that information came from, I believe. Still, the actual records on that site are wonderful, especially the census records. What used to take some of us hours of searching through indexes and then reels of microfilm at public archives now takes seconds. (Most reputable archives and libraries actually carry a subscription to ancestry.com today.) If anything, ancestry.com allows us to check the old genealogies which were largely based on records obtained through the mail from some long-distant depository. What I am trying to say is that ancestry.com allows us access to "back up" records that were never so easily accessible to the old time genealogists.

                          I see the trees on ancestry.com as "trees in the making." They are sort of the notes on information each of us has found on our family so far. The trees change over time, based on new information we have found.

                          Related to all of this: Virtually all records of historical significance -- other than sensitive records like birth and adoption records -- those connected to topics other than genealogy even -- are being put in electronic form more and more -- and often available online. Libraries, archives and other public depositories have to do this to protect and preserve especially paper documents often bound in old-time volumes. I am a person who is very at ease searching through these giant old volumes in court houses and the like, but in general, those days are coming to an end.
                          Thank you... you had the words and explanation I was looking for.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by mixedkid View Post
                            Personally, I wish FamilyTreeDNA just had a page where a person could fill in information, let's say through great-great grandparents. That would eliminate a lot of anxiety people have over gedcoms.

                            Ancestry.com? I do like to examine other trees, but yes, it's always wise to look for documentation along with those trees. I love the census records. To me, they are the basic documentation of a family tree, along with birth, death and marriage records. The immigration records are nice too -- I found my great-grandfather's photo twice in those records (we have his portrait in our home). Whenever I get a hold of an obituary (from outside ancestry.com) I like to attach that to members of my tree too.

                            For a while, I used the international records on ancestry.com. For me anyway, those were most helpful when researching my French-Canadian ancestors. Church records are invaluable in French-Canadian genealogy. Thank goodness someone had the sense to microfilm a lot of that in the 1950s or so. I do like the Canadian census records too though -- I keep track of the border hoppers in the family that way! (French- or English-speakers.)
                            Actually, one can do that by filling in surnames and places from profile page. Many do not do that. I realize some are adoptees and cannot do that.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by mixedkid View Post
                              The trees on ancestry.com point you in a direction, but it up to each of us to check out where that information came from, I believe. Still, the actual records on that site are wonderful, especially the census records. What used to take some of us hours of searching through indexes and then reels of microfilm at public archives now takes seconds. (Most reputable archives and libraries actually carry a subscription to ancestry.com today.) If anything, ancestry.com allows us to check the old genealogies which were largely based on records obtained through the mail from some long-distant depository. What I am trying to say is that ancestry.com allows us access to "back up" records that were never so easily accessible to the old time genealogists.

                              I see the trees on ancestry.com as "trees in the making." They are sort of the notes on information each of us has found on our family so far. The trees change over time, based on new information we have found.

                              Related to all of this: Virtually all records of historical significance -- other than sensitive records like birth and adoption records -- those connected to topics other than genealogy even -- are being put in electronic form more and more -- and often available online. Libraries, archives and other public depositories have to do this to protect and preserve especially paper documents often bound in old-time volumes. I am a person who is very at ease searching through these giant old volumes in court houses and the like, but in general, those days are coming to an end.
                              I agree.

                              Futhermore, by making my trees public, I have made many good contacts with family members.

                              Plus, another thing that worked for me was asking a match to submit a copy of his tree, which he let me edit. As editor, was able to find our connections, easily. One can make it a private tree that a person can fiddle with.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Have a couple of more comments:

                                Re: Gedcom programs - there is a forum here at FTDNA, where people can rate the diverse programs that are available - check the forum list for that.

                                As to adding surnames to profile pages (I cannot use apostrophes as I get cut off and that is why my replies are sometimes stilted) - people really need to add any info they can in their profiles. It helps so much in connecting, when they do that.

                                When a match of mine has provided either a surname list OR a gedcom, I have often but not always, been able to zoom into a connection right off the bat. When a match has done neither, I do not always even bother to contact them but sit back and wait for them to contact me if they want to pursue their family history.

                                Some people know quite a lot about their family history but are only interested in figuring out a particular mystery, breaking down a particular brick wall. To each their own, but my advice to people who think that way, is that they need to examine ALL their family lines in order to have any success in breaking down those walls.

                                So, my advice is for people to list every surname they know of in their profile, even though the surname may be speculative.

                                JUST DO IT! We can all sort the wheat from the chaff later, but we cannot sort anything without people supplying whatever data they have or think they have.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X