Proper Way to Disconnect a Family Group from a "Myth"

Question

I have been researching for about 15 years, but didn't begin to fill out my own tree here until a few days ago.  I am extremely thorough when I come to a brick wall, and will exhaust every extant record that can be accessed either online or in person.  Sometimes, rather than a brick wall, I find a myth in my way, as I'm sure everyone has or will at some point...  My question is, in a situation where records are scant, but point to a different reality than one that was invented and published many years ago, how should I approach correcting the myth that has been repeated here?

Specifically, over a century ago, a researcher for a Brown family in Pennsylvania published a book that included speculation that the father of a McCausland/McCaslin man from Scotland, who had married into the Brown family, must have been "Robert" because that was the name of the oldest known son in the younger family.  This speculation was then copied and published in a much larger volume of McCausland/McCaslin research, but the second publication failed to mention the speculation caveat!  From this mess, folks online here and elsewhere, seem to have identified an actual Robert McCaslin [McCaslin-23] who was born in Scotland at around the right time.

I have compiled all extant land, tax, marriage, military records, etc., built land-ownership maps, and correlated all the data to show that the actual father was likely a man named James McCausland...  What is the best way to detach this family from the Scottish Robert McCaslin (who may or may not have actually existed), connect it to a properly-researched "new" progenitor in this country, and ensure that the correction/explanation is seen by the maximum percentage of folks who come here searching for the myth?

Comments

I have both (Pennsylvania) Brown and McCaslin relatives.  I'd like to look into the question.  Do you have profile IDs for any of the Browns involved?

---

McCaslin-22 & Brown-4675.  Both were abandoned, so I adopted them...  Are they connected to your branches?

---

No, they're not.  Thanks for the information.

Answer 1

There are tons of Wikitree profiles that include Disputed Origins sections.

I'm thinking of many that start with: "A previous version of this profile claimed, citing... that .... was the son of Robert... (including links to profiles mentioned)... Extensive research, detailed under Research Notes below, has concluded that his father was James..."

Once you've collaborated with and hopefully received agreement from the current profile manager, that's the kind of text you could place at/near the top of the profile  before detaching the inaccurate parents and connecting the new...

Answer 2

As a first step, contact the Profile Manager of Robert's profile and explain your reasoning.

Answer 3

Robert has a profile manager, who was last active in January.  You should contact her and present your case and your sources for the changes you believe necessary, and collaborate to make them happen.  That is where to start.  Good luck!

Comments

I wasn't clear (probably too long-winded)...  I don't need help collaborating.  I came looking for advice on how best to bust this myth...  I want maximum exposure, and suspect that having two profiles would be the best way to do that--especially since this Robert McCaslin person from Luss might have been a real, but different, person.

---

Sorry, David, but that isn't how WikiTree works.  You need to show the PM the basic courtesy of communication.

---

I'm still being unclear...  Sorry!  Collaboration is great!  Collaborating will ensue!  But my question is not about that.

---

So it's at least a two-part problem.  I understand you want to replace Robert with James, and for that you must collaborate with Robert's PM.  That was part of your question.

Second, to distinguish between the "myth" Robert and a real Robert, creating another profile makes sense (unless, of course, they really were the same person).  You can use Research Notes in the biographies to discuss sources and lore and reconcile them as appropriate.  You might also consider creating a free space page on the subject of the McCausland myth, to which you can refer on the profiles rather than writing the story twice.  I think this part requires collaboration as well.

---

There was no "real" Robert in Pennsylvania, but I get your point.  Thanks for the free space suggestion.  I wasn't aware they existed, but will look into them...