Jane was born about 1714[1][2] in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania,[3] or possibly in County Down Ireland, of unknown parents. When she was about twenty-one, she married john Laughlin, son of Iain and Dolly (Unknown) Laughlin possibly in County Down.
John and Jane are thought to have migrated from Ireland to Chester County, Pennsylvania, with three sons and three daughters about 1740.[4]
Is Jane your ancestor? Please don't go away! Login to collaborate or comment, or
contact
a profile manager, or ask our community of genealogists a question.
Sponsored Search by Ancestry.com
DNA Connections
It may be possible to confirm family relationships with Jane by comparing test results with other carriers of her mitochondrial DNA.
However, there are no known mtDNA test-takers in her direct maternal line.
It is likely that these autosomal DNA test-takers will share some percentage of DNA with Jane:
Mathews-3658 and Mathews-278 appear to represent the same person because: same name, same father, same spouse, same birth info, similar death info, year needs to be resolved. Please merge.
Has anyone contacted "Sanford, John < [email address removed] gt;" for more information?
His data on Genforum shows her POD as Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, but the same page shows her children being born in Holston,Washington,Virginia before her death and her husband dying there after her death. This would lead to the thought that her dying in PA is unlikely, but he does request being contacted for more info on Jane.
I have set them as "Unmerged Matches" for now, as it is quite clear that they do in fact represent the same person, but more research is needed to reconcile the POB and POD differences.
The DNA connections are actually more reason to go forward with the merge rather than evidence of them being different people. As the design currently operates, WikiTree does not actually compare or anylize the Genomes of the decendants. They merely rely on the accuracy of the genealogical mapping and index the connections based on the branches they are connected to by user entered data. The DNA matches from one of the profiles could possibly benefit from seeing their connection with the matches from the other duplicate profile. Therefore the duplicates, in this case, degrade the integrity of the DNA match indexing and should be resolved in as timely a manner as possible.
In my quick scan through the sources, I could not find any rock solid proof (Primary Sources) to support or deny the details in question. Do you have any indication in your notes as to where any of the conflicting facts originated?
It may also be most expediant to set the questionable details as "unknown" and make careful notation in the biography describing the different possibilities with a request for more research/sourcing...
Matthews-1769 and Mathews-278 do not represent the same person because: Matthews-1769 and Mathews-278 set as a Rejected Match because they have different places of birth and death. And, both have DNA matches, with no common matches between them.
Thank you for the work you are doing to make wikiTree more accurate.
B
Matthews-1769 and Mathews-278 appear to represent the same person because: This merge request actually represents the merger of 4 profiles into one. Everything seems to match except the spelling of her LNAB. The only sources listed for the 2 Matthews profiles use the spelling Mathews. If we can coomplete this merge, I'd be happy to help out with the cleanup editing and format.
Both have the same name and are married to the same man.
His data on Genforum shows her POD as Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, but the same page shows her children being born in Holston,Washington,Virginia before her death and her husband dying there after her death. This would lead to the thought that her dying in PA is unlikely, but he does request being contacted for more info on Jane.
I have set them as "Unmerged Matches" for now, as it is quite clear that they do in fact represent the same person, but more research is needed to reconcile the POB and POD differences.
The DNA connections are actually more reason to go forward with the merge rather than evidence of them being different people. As the design currently operates, WikiTree does not actually compare or anylize the Genomes of the decendants. They merely rely on the accuracy of the genealogical mapping and index the connections based on the branches they are connected to by user entered data. The DNA matches from one of the profiles could possibly benefit from seeing their connection with the matches from the other duplicate profile. Therefore the duplicates, in this case, degrade the integrity of the DNA match indexing and should be resolved in as timely a manner as possible.
In my quick scan through the sources, I could not find any rock solid proof (Primary Sources) to support or deny the details in question. Do you have any indication in your notes as to where any of the conflicting facts originated?
It may also be most expediant to set the questionable details as "unknown" and make careful notation in the biography describing the different possibilities with a request for more research/sourcing...
Thank you for caring!
P Rich
Thank you for the work you are doing to make wikiTree more accurate. B