What Common Errors Are Being Made in the FamilySearch Family Tree? Part One

z

All online family trees are often perceived by a certain segment of the greater genealogical community as error-ridden traps for the unwary genealogical researcher but taking that attitude immediately implies that those making that assumption have somehow achieved perfection. Valid and defensible genealogical conclusions are based on careful systematic research into historical records which by their very nature are prone to errors and omissions. It is certainly possible to assiduously follow both academic and professional genealogical proof standards and still make egregious errors.

The real basis for historical or genealogical research accuracy consists of a healthy dose of skepticism combined with the ability to see through conflicting historical records. Correct conclusions are not arrived at by being enveloped in an ivory tower of research isolation. In genealogy, accuracy will ultimately be achieved on the battlefield of the community based and compiled family tree programs such as the FamilySearch.org Family Tree.  The opinions of those who ignore this reality will ultimately be lost to obscurity.

One good example of isolationist superiority is the history of the acceptance of Wikipedia as a source of reliable information. There are still academic holdouts who condemn Wikipedia in its entirety out of hand regardless of the source citations attached to any given article. Likewise, there are those in the genealogical community that condemn the FamilySearch.org Family Tree who have not so much as registered for a look at the website and who also uniformly dismiss all other user-contributed family trees in every other program.

From my perspective, I would find it impossible to construct my own family tree relationships by basing my research solely on my own examination of historical records and academic journal articles. For example, in my own surname line, I have yet to find even one professional genealogist who has contributed anything of substance. However, the "crowdsourcing" efforts of all of my relatives have actually produced an extremely accurate family line up to the point where the records are apparently not available or are unavailable.

Of course, the FamilySearch.org Family Tree is not without its share of errors. So what are the errors or problems that continue to appear? The Family Tree is not a dead, isolated opinion in an academically oriented journal, it is a living, breathing entity that grows and changes every day. But just as beautiful gardens need to be tended and the weeds removed, the Family Tree needs constant attention.

One way that the Family Tree can grow with accurate and reliable information is for those who contribute to the Family Tree to become aware of the most common errors. Any assessment of the accuracy of the Family Tree must be based on some kind of objective criteria and fortunately, we have just such a mechanism. Some time ago, by virtue of a partnership between FamilySearch and MyHeritage, members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints were able to use the MyHeritage website for no charge. One of the more recent advantages of that arrangement is the fact that those members who have actually availed themselves of the advantages of using the MyHeritage website, can now create a synchronized file between the two websites by importing up to 8 generations from the Family Tree into a new MyHeritage family tree. As a result of this importation, the MyHeritage website automatically begins to examine the contents of the imported file using the sophisticated Consistency Checker program.

Some time ago, I created a synchronized version of my first 8 generations on the FamilySearch.org Family Tree in a new MyHeritage family tree and almost immediately received a report of the number of errors in my portion of the Family Tree. The report checked 3,520 people in the imported family tree. Keep in mind that I have been working on correcting the entries in the FamilySearch.org Family Tree for over 37 years. Here is the report from the Consistency Checker:

It takes a while for the whole report to be compiled, so what this screenshot shows is only 365 errors of a usual 720. Wow! That many errors? That is about a 20% error rate. The error rate shown above with only 41% done is 24% But what is being measured? The category with the largest error rate is for photos tagged with an inaccurately reported death date, i.e. a date inconsistent with the the one showing in the individual's detail section. Other common errors are as follows:

• Child born after death of parent
• Fact occurring after death
• Fact occurring before birth
• Siblings with close age
• Multiple marriages of same couple
• Disconnected from family tree
• Siblings with the same first name

There are possibly many more types of errors. Stay tuned for more information about the errors and why they occur.