Bud, please understand I am not denying in anyway that there are known docs that state that Catherine and Edmee were living within Native community areas, they could well have been a part of a native community thru families or marriages or adoptions, steps/halfs, etc. I would be the last to deny anyone their ancestors' cultures/heritages/histories. But i will continue to say... don't attach without documented proof. Now do I NOT agree that the only proof is a primary source doc- birth baptism marrg census or death cert. NOr do I agree on Acadian Subjects that S W is the ONLY Source to Accept when no other sources seem to be available. (I have found sources when he and others have said there were none and I knew of Jeanne leJeune Briart being n8v b4 testing was ever done, and it was not based on info that others were quoting & fighting about w. another "genealogist" whose Acadian website is constantly touted as law on Acadian.- And that genealogist still doesn't like to accept the results of many who have come up thru Ydna or Mito as N8v and even still has over the years touted those results as questionable. No I don't agree with primary source only issue because to stick to this tight knit demand is to deem all as having records available. We all know that thru-out history there were multiple displacements, forced removals, falsified "color" on docs, and many that did not follow the euro path of required docs.. just one result of all of this is the "slave" populations that will never find most of their connections! So to deam this as you must have this or this or this to be "real" sme families may only have a family bible of info, or the gr gr gr granndfathers "freedom release doc" or some note..if this is a tie to their only history, who the heck are any of us to deny them the ability to try to connect into their relatives... For many who did abide by the primary source things, the docs usually can be found, but again, due to fires, forced removals/ displacements/ invasions, many docs either never existed or were destroyed in one fashion or another. I do think in these cases that if ANY reference is found to a parent or child, through say an older book, Lanctot, Jette, PRDH, Bemish Murdock, Jesuit Relations, Recollect Journals/communication letters/ fur trader/trapper journals, explorer journals, Wills, Land Deeds, Magistrate records, Prison/Prisoner Journals, or ANY other type of old "forgotten" Book /or Journal or document that may have been created during or near to the time periods in question are MORE likely to be useable information as temporary or even permanent sources if one uses the sources as a reference point to continue searching. Hopefully thru the continued searches, other docs ref. will arrise from the original "questionable source" that will help confirm that hey..this "questionable source" is most likely tru for this person/couple/ children/granparents.
When it comes down to the whole Catherine and Edmee Lejeune issues. You don't have to agree that with anyone on wikitree, but the purpose of the tree is 1 profile for each individual, and to connect all into the tree and together to show how we all are actually related. Wikitree is meant to be different from other sites in that each of us agrees to the code of honor, to find the truths, and attached sourced proof of our findings, even if we have to attach temporary proof.. we also agreed when we signed up that the use of say "others online genealogies although they maybe downloaded into the tree for connection purposes, unless the sources are verified viable sources, all sources are suspect basically (accept the primary, and possibly secondary if they have additional sources that also show the initial secondary to be the most likely correct answer. At least that is how I myself see the use of being on Wikitree.
Do I find myself at odds with ppl over my direct line ancestors, many many times, most of my direct lines ancestors of 1700's back are all under ppp & it irritates that daylights otta me, because i may have tons of info for some of them, but rather than argue with the "groups protecting the profiles, i will just place those things that i know some may argue about on my private trees off this tree. Is just easier than arguing with those that don't want to hear possible alternative facts.
Is Catherine LeJeune actually Jeane Lejeune.. NO she is not, they have completely different mito, proven thru decendants mtDna tests.
Is arguing this fact a moot point, no it is not. why because if we allow one person to change one ancestor into someone they are not, we actually are helping to destroy ancestral lines of others ancestors, denying them their right on the wiki to connect to their actual true ancestors that do belong in those lines. I have grands that've not connected to their known lines on wikitree, many infact, because i don't have the verified proof they are children of them, so until i find it, I won't approach a ppp profile about the add. why waste my time on the arguement, even if i know i'm correct, its easier to find the proof then send with their name. Then the ppp has no choice add them, or I go over their head if necessary to get it done. (not had to do this yet but will if i need to- I've seen the dang fights on here already too many times over who belongs and who doesn't, and have seen enough removed from lines to know, the aggravation isn't worth it , is easier to add to private genealgy where i do all my main research)- I am a direct line descendant of Jean Blanchard, Jeanne, Catherine, Edmee, Martin, LeJeunes and Briart/Briards, I am also a direct line descendant of R.Lambert and of Gallant and Como and Pitreand Richards and have watched for years the battles of they are they aren't. I know who I am, noone has to accept it or approve it, but my genealogical fight is to Prove who my Ancestors were, because that was denied to many of them. Only way to do that is fill in the blanks with recorded truths and genetics
Sorry this is so long- but felt especially with the LeJeune & Briart names and confusions this needed saying.