Home› Ask a Question› Family Tree

Removing unrelated children

System
System admin
August 9 in Family Tree
This discussion was created from comments split from: New Edit Interface - Adding a New Name To Not-Indexed Records.
0

Comments

  • maryellenstevensbarnes1
    maryellenstevensbarnes1 ✭✭✭✭✭
    August 9 edited August 9

    @Alan E. Brown What should I do in this scenario? I found a Jacob Ryerson and a John Ryerson attached to parents who lived almost 200 years before they did — so I researched the exact source used , read it for myself and found that Jacob and John Ryerson are NOT my 6th great-granduncles thru Walter Stevens (1830-1914) PID KWZS-V1Z—instead they were his contemporaries because the documents below show they owned a tract of land in 1869 as shown in The New York genealogical and biographical record; cited as [https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QHV-R3LG-N3HF?lang=en&i=762] — I read several pages of this New York Record; then went to the Ryerson Family Genealogy Book (about 700 pages) and read enough to confirm my information.

    I need to remove them as children from
    Marten Reijersz (1637-1687) PID 237Q-9NL and Annetje Jorise Rapalje (1646-1695) PID L1S3-JNQ
    Because they are DESCENDANTS not Children

    I will try to contact the person who added their names to have him delete this Jacob and John but what if that doesn't work, can FS help?

    I also know that records about both Jacob and John are already in FS Historical Records, but they are not among my priorities right at the moment - so I guess I can add them as new people (what's a few more duplicates😂) mark them as following and then check on them occasionally as I go through my list of 100+

    Thanks, Mary

    0
  • MandyShaw1
    MandyShaw1 ✭✭✭✭✭
    August 9 edited August 9

    @maryellenstevensbarnes1 I can't see why you wouldn't just remove the offending child/parents relationships yourself, with a suitable reason statement (and assuming the sourcing you have found is reflected on the profiles, obvs). That's the whole point of a collaborative Tree. I probably would warn the original contributor via a Chat message, so they can follow up by putting the correct relationships in (or you could do that yourself too, if you are sure of the information).

    2
  • LAFerg
    LAFerg ✭✭
    August 9

    @maryellenstevensbarnes1 I agree with @MandyShaw1 Make sure you reference the documents you are referring to for your reason statement. You may also want to add a note that warns people that Jacob and John are descendants and not children. And, of course, following them so that you can check up on them from time to time :)

    1
  • maryellenstevensbarnes1
    maryellenstevensbarnes1 ✭✭✭✭✭
    August 10

    @MandyShaw1 Thank you sometimes I make things so difficult for myself and you've put me straight 😉

    1
Clear
No Groups Found

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 47.6K Ask a Question
  • 7.6K Family Tree
  • 6.2K Search
  • 5.5K General Questions
  • 7K Get Involved
  • 1.2K Memories
  • 342 Other Languages
  • 82 Community News
  • Groups