why not state parents if known?

+7 votes
515 views
I have noticed that some profiles do not identify parents, yet the parents' names are clearly stated in the source references. Why not give parents names if known?
in WikiTree Help by David Putnam G2G Crew (430 points)
If there are no profiles for the parents, profile view will always say "unknown".

Perhaps there is not yet sufficient souring to create those profiles.
If I am doing the ln laws of my third cousin, I might mention who the parents are but  I do not add them,  I am more interested in my direct relatives. Also as above by Melanie Paul there may not be sufficient knowledge except for example  a mention in a book and just the name no dates and no other sources.

3 Answers

+13 votes
 
Best answer
If I only have names for parents I usually keep them mentioned in the biography until I have further sources (DOB, DOD, places, marriage or similar).

A profile without anything else but an estimated DOB or DOD based only upon one record for a child  could be way off and cause for confusion.
by Christiane Berger G2G6 Mach 2 (20.2k points)
selected by Carol Wilder
Same here. Often I know the parents' names from a census return (which gives an approximate date of birth). In that case I'll put what I know in the biography so that I have a 'starting point' when I get round to researching the parents.
+17 votes
There are several reasons why someone didn't add the parents' profiles.  Most often, in my experience, is time.  I get interrupted often while I'm working on WT.  I have kids, dogs, a spouse, etc.  Someone is often asking me for something at any given moment.  When I get interrupted, I sometimes lose my train of thought about what I'm doing and may forget that I was going to add the parents.  "I'll add them tomorrow" but "tomorrow" ends up 8 months from now.

  I've been helping out with the various Connectors projects.  Sometimes my "path" to connection is rather zig-zag.  Sometimes I'm adding a spouse or a child to find the connection and then follow that path for a bit.  I chase the connection rather than filling out the tree.

Sometimes I might be unsure about spelling of the LNAB or the birth/death dates.  I like to be fairly sure about those before adding a person.

But mostly, it's lack of time at that moment.
by Lynnette Hettrick G2G6 Mach 5 (55.3k points)
I'm right there alongside you Lynnette. Sometimes I only have enough time to get a particular profile entered, and generally I try to add at a minimum a biography that states something like: Son/daughter of x123 and y123 and Husband/Wife of a123 or b123.

I figure if I go back to the profile at a later time, I can continue to work the line. But much of my work is similar as I'm trying to get to a connection, and unfortunately, once I get the connection, I'm off to the races with the next one.
Usually it is because I can’t find any source info. I don’t create profiles until I have something to prove the connection. There are just too many duplicate names to guess. This is particularly hard before Census records started.

Lynette & Scott, that's me too!  Besides that, I'm new to Wikitree but have half a century accumulation of raw data. Chicago Style documentation wasn't in widespread use until 15 or more years after I got my degree. (I feel like a dinosaur with a fluffy brain) I'm trying to cram on formatting my documentation so I can better contribute. I could very easily appear as a bull in a china shop. My dad's immigrant ancestors seem nearly all to have been Great Migration and must have run out of steam, for none of my direct ancestors went farther from MA than NH, ME, RI, or CT. It's intimidating-there have been so many generations of professional genealogists obsessed with my family history. There have also been thousands of curious descendants scattered all over the world who have been trying to track themselves back to these same people and their results need to be checked out also, whether or not they seem to be adding to confusion. I have to remind myself that I still may have something to contribute because while the profession has evolved in ways that have improved our understanding, the primary sources have not changed and I am in a good location to help find them. 

Same here. I've still got about 20,000 profiles I want to add from my own database, but unfortunately can't do all at once. Thus, a lot of my profiles have parents, spouses and children listed in their biographies, but many of the profiles are missing. I hope that I'll get around to them some day.
+3 votes
Maybe a descendant was working up that line, went out on errands, got caught up in daily tasks and forgot. On what date was the profile created? Can you see if there are recent edits or sources added? Is there a profile manager for the profile of person whose parents have yet to be acknowledged?

I'm trying to summarize what I know of the family group in a research note or comment on the profiles I'm creating, but my priority is posting the source data as well as I can, so that someone else can pick up building the family where I left off, or more easily confirm their connection-just in case something happens with me.

Some people and locations are known to have been plagued by published errors that persist in being reproduced. There's a lot of that in my tree but I have learned many of the trouble spots from past research and a dozen years on ancestry.com. I've noted several of these cases on ancestry, and in my personal notes. In those cases, I do a lot of searching around wikitree scouting out the existing profiles several generations back, beating the bushes back and forth and out from the children, to take notes on all the connections that should be made between existing profiles. That takes time! I'm working this process now with the Hall family in Medford, MA, where it seems there are errors in a widely distributed town history. It will be necessary for me to find a very patient, experienced Wikitree genealogist who is willing to look over what I have found and to collaborate with me. In this case, I know the version published in the history of Medford was called into question a long time ago in the NEHGS Register by W.H.W., who I assume is William Henry Whittemore, and it bears investigation.
by Anonymous Reed G2G6 Pilot (176k points)
edited by Anonymous Reed

Related questions

+1 vote
2 answers
+6 votes
3 answers
+4 votes
1 answer
+3 votes
0 answers
56 views asked Feb 7, 2018 in WikiTree Help by Nadine Hayward G2G Crew (620 points)
+2 votes
1 answer
69 views asked Aug 5, 2021 in Policy and Style by Nick Terstal G2G6 (6.5k points)
+10 votes
2 answers

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...