people have been deleted from my family tree
Several ancestors were deleted from my line. I do not want them deleted. My line is: Joe Perkins - Erick Perkins - John Luther Perkins - John Albert Alexander Perkins - Reuben Perkins. The following names were deleted: William Perkins, Moses Perkins, Richard Perkins II, Richard Perkins and John Parkins. Can we please put them back on the genealogical line?
Best Answers
-
Just to add a comment. The merges were seen in the latest changes of that ancestor. Often you can use the latest changes to see how your ancestor was changed and restore your records. It was a great idea to message the other person working on the same line.
1 -
Hello @joe perkins_1,
@Gordon Collett left some great illustrations on how to try solving your problem about people changing your tree. Here are the links to a few articles in the Help Center with the steps he describes. You can print them if you need a handy reference.
Here is the process to contact the other User:
- In Family Tree, from the ancestor's person page, in the Vitals or Other Information section, you see the words “Last Changed,” followed by the date of the most recent change and the contact name of the contributor who made it.
- Click the contributor’s contact name.
- Note: If the contact name is listed as “FamilySearch,” then the change was made by an automatic update or before FamilySearch kept track of each contributor’s changes.
- In the pop-up that appears, you see the user’s contact information if the user made it public. You can use it to contact him or her.
- If the contributor did not provide contact information, send a private message through the FamilySearch messaging service instead:
- Click Send.
- Enter your subject and message. You must enter a subject in order for the message to send.
- Click Send Message.
Best Wishes!
1
Answers
-
If you mean on the FamilySearch tree, it is a single collaborative tree. It's not your tree or my tree; the aim is to have one tree for everyone.
Check first to see if the names have just been detached or had the name changed. If you added those names, someone else cannot actually delete those profiles, but the connections or names can be changed. You can also "follow" any profile so you know if any changes are made. If you would like some help, it would be great if you could share the profile numbers.
And, to help others know that you are actively working on those people, add sources and statements to help back up the family connections.
Hope this helps.
0 -
The names you listed were complete enough that I think I have found the people you are talking about. If you go to Reuben Perkins GWWX-LRW and look in the right hand column at his Change Log, you will see that several recent changes have been made in relationships:
Scroll down the page a little further and click on Show All to go to the full Change Log:
Last December some merges with going on with Reuben's parents then last week Reuben was removed from the family. First thing to do is decide if these merges were correct or not. If not correct, two or more different William Perkins could be have been confused with the result not being your William Perkins but a different one who did not have a child Reuben. This would explain why Sandra removed a child that did not belong in her family.
Probably the best thing to start with is to click on Sandra's name and in a very polite, friendly, co-operative way ask her about her family and why she removed Reuben from it. ("Hi, cousin! How are you? I see you've been working in Family Tree" NOT "Hey, why did you ruin my tree?") The two of you need to figure out if you are working on the same William Perkins and Mary Jenkins or two different ones. If they are the same, then what does she know that shows Reuben does not belong? If they are different, then you need to untangle the two families.
Going to the William Perkins that Sandra removed, I see that he has completely lost his wife and the whole family is a mess. Among other things, he has five children born between 1805 and 1807. So I think you two have a lot of work to do.
Good luck! I hope the two of you can get this straightened out well.
2 -
Given the mess that @Gordon Collett references, I would not use the restore feature. There is some confusion here. To detangle it, often I let the merge remain while I work all around the couple: parents, siblings, children. Then I stand back and assess the couple. Often it will then be apparent what should happen next. Often, it is a case of there being two couples mashed together.
1 -
There were a lot of Perkins in North Carolina prior to the American Revolution in 1776, so in British Colonial America. A surname study would probably help a lot of families sort out their ancestor trees.
The surname Perkins is not registered with the Guild of One Name Studies, but the guild has a lot of records nonetheless. That reminds me to mention that much confusion can result due to new Perkins arriving in America, mixing with others already there.
-4 -
Not to be contrary but just because there are many ways to accomplish tasks in Family Tree, I have to say that I would restore both of Reuben Perkins' parents just to keep everyone hooked together as you work on this record.
Then, Joe, you have a very important task before you and if you find it is beyond your skills, then contact your local Family History Library and have them tell you who you can sit down with and fix things in this family.
What I have personally had the best luck with, is starting with the youngest child, in this case, Mary Ann Perkins. Open her change log, go to the very first entries, and restore her to her original set of parents, William Perkins and Jennie Jenkins. William still exists, but Jennie has been deleted in a merge. Then get to work and research Mary Ann to determine who she really is and who her parents really are. She has no sources at present. Get as many sources attached as you can. Document her thoroughly. Then you will have a real understanding of her and her parents.
The do the same with Lacce. Determine whether she and Mary Ann really were siblings or not. Get sources on her. It really is concerning that eight of you have been working on Lacce and there is not a single source on her record. Then go step by step up the family. At some point, just from looking at the family as it is now, you are going to find siblings that do not belong there and find you have two or three or even more William Perkins you are working with.
As you are putting all the documentation you can find into Family Tree, others working here will be able to follow your reasoning and see the evidence as to who these people really are. By the time you work through all 17 children currently attached to William, you will have a well documented, well constructed family, or maybe four families. You may even find that Sandra is right and your Reuben was never with the right parents.
Twenty-six people have contributed to the current William Perkins. Message as many of them as you can to get as much information as you can about who they think their William Perkins is and to assemble documentation about all of them.
I wish you success with these efforts. If this does not make sense or you need help, again, get to your local Family History Library and ask them to set you up with the most experienced user of Family Tree and 1800's US research in your local area that you can sit down with and work to untangle these families.
5 -
I would restore both of Reuben Perkins' parents just to keep everyone hooked together as you work on this record.
Keeping the PIDs linked is helpful. But, reverting another contributor's most recent changes may unnecessarily irritate the other contributor.
To keep the peace I would simply follow Reuben Perkins, and perhaps add a label with a note about the problem. Then, exactly as Gordon Collett recommends, sort out one by one all the other children still attached to William Perkins.
1 -
Joe has started another thread on the same topic. https://community.familysearch.org/en/discussion/comment/371013
2 mods have commented on the other, later, thread.
We need consensus about duplicate posts. One needs to be closed to keep those who would help from wasting time and research efforts instead of mods rewarding bad behavior by commenting on the "new" post.
3
