PGM Changes to profile of John Deane

+7 votes
I'd like to propose the following changes to PGM profile John Deane.

1) Merge these two profiles keeping the name Deane:



This merge was proposed a year ago but we put on ice.

2) Change the LNAB of his wife Alice to "Unknown." Robert Charles Anderson and other sources say there is no evidence she is a Strong either (See his sketch on Strong).

3) On this profile remove the children named Abigail, Lydia and Elizabeth (Deane) Warner. Note they did have a daughter Elizabeth but his daughter Elizabeth married Josiah Edson.

4) Merge these two profiles keeping Deane:



Sources below. I recommend TAG for the list of children because it is concise and up to date:


<ref name=NEHGRV3>The Deane Family, New England Historical & Genealogical Register (Boston, MA: NEHGS, October 1849) Vol 3 p 375-387. See John Deane p 383, His children p 384. Thomas Deane and his children p 386 [ link]</ref>

<ref> Selim Walker McArthur, McArthur-Barnes Ancestral Lines. (Portland, Maine: Anthoensen Press, 1964),  Donald Lines Jacobus, ed. See Ancestor Tables 87-89 </ref>

<ref name=NEHGRV51>William Deane, The New England Historical and Genealogical Register (Boston, MA: NEHGS, Oct 1897)  Will of William Deane of Soutchard, Somerset, England, 1634 Volume 51, p 432-4 [ link] See also the Will of William Cogan p 434</ref>

<ref name=NEHGRV139>John B Threlfall, The New England Historical and Genealogical Register (Boston, MA: NEHGS, 1985)  Additions to the Deane Ancestry in England Vol 139 p 324-25 [ link]</ref>

<ref name=TAG50>David Kendall Martin, The American Genealogist: The First Wife of Shadrach Wilbore and Children of Walter Deane of Taunton MA (New Haven, Conn.: D.L. Jacobus, 1983) Vol 59 224-27 [ link]</ref>


<ref>Mayflower Descendants 17:158-9</ref>


<ref>Author Denorvan Genealogy of the Dean family descended from Ezra Dean, of Plainfield, Conn. and Cranston, R. I., preceded by a reprint of the article on James and Walter Dean, of Taunton, Mass., and early generations of their descendants, found in volume 3, New England historical and genealogical register, 1849  (Scranton, PA: F H Gerlock & Co., 1903)  [ link]</ref>


<ref name=Savage>James Savage, A Genealogical Dictionary of the First Settlers of New England Showing Three Generations of Those Who Came Before May, 1692 (Boston, Massachusetts: Little, Brown and company, 1880), vol 2, p 64:1261 [ read online]</ref>


<ref>Search for the Passengers of the Mary & John 1630, Volume 1 through present (Toledo, Ohio, 1985+) 26;22-25, 27:19,87-99</ref>
WikiTree profile: John Deane
in Genealogy Help by Living Baker G2G6 Mach 3 (39.8k points)
edited by Living Baker
I would put a hold on any of the merges on John Dean  into Deane-60.

NONE of the children on Deane-60 are those of John of Taunton.  Including son John born in Dedham, Norfolk, MA.  And the mother of all of them is Eleanor Cogan, the wife of Walter Deane, John's brother.

These profiles look like the result of some really bad merges, and this will only make it worse.
That's why I suggesting that we remove those children first. None of those children belong in this family I agree.

Looking at the children we need to detach:

She is listed in GM2 Vol VII p 244 - here's the link:

And see his comments on p 245-6 RE: Hammatt. Hammatt asserted that Elizabeth's maiden name was Deene. However, more recent research by Robert Charles Anderson published in the Great Migration: Immigrants to New England: 1634-1635, indicates this is in error. Anderson believes that Hammatt conflated the maiden name of Elizabeth with that of Sarah Dane of Ipswitch - another one of his family members. He states that there is no record of the surname Deene and no record of a marriage. He concludes that her maiden name and parents are unknown.

So we should change her maiden name to unknown and detach her first. I added a note and a source to her profile.
The second child, John Dean of Dedham should simply be removed:

I left a note on the profile.

This profile conflates John Deane of Taunton with John Dean of Dedham. Marion Deane Cooper wrote a genealogy of John Dean of Dedham in 1956 and states that his parents and origins are unknown. he was born about 1650 and died in 1727.<ref>Marion Deane Cooper, Descendants of John Dean (1650-1727) of Dedham, Massachusetts (1957) p 5-7 [ Link to Book]</ref>

John Deene of Taunton was born about 1739 and died in 1717. There is no known relationship.

This John Deen of Dedhem is a real person but should be detached from these parents.
The third child Abigail Dean:


This person does not exist. Neither John nor his brother Walter had such a daughter. For a list of their children see:

David Kendall Martin, The American Genealogist: The First Wife of Shadrach Wilbore and Children of Walter Deane of Taunton MA (New Haven, Conn.: D.L. Jacobus, 1983) Vol 59 224-27 [ link]

The best thing to do would be to turn her into Abgail Dean daughter of Isaac Dean c 1646 - 1710 son of John Deane. This Abigail was born Nov. 16, 1680. Then move her to Isaac Dean:

Taunton, Bristol, Massachusetts, United States. Vital Records of Taunton, Massachusetts, to the Year 1850. (Boston, Massachusetts: New England Historic Genealogical Society, 1929, c1978), Vol. 1, p. 121.

DEAN, Abigall [TPR Abigail Deane], d. Isack, [born] Nov. 16, 1680.

[TPR=Taunton Proprietors Records]
The fourth and final child:

This person does not exist. Neither John nor his brother Walter had such a daughter. For a list of their children see:

David Kendall Martin, The American Genealogist: The First Wife of Shadrach Wilbore and Children of Walter Deane of Taunton MA (New Haven, Conn.: D.L. Jacobus, 1983) Vol 59 224-27 [ link]

The best thing to do would be to turn her into Lydia Dean daughter of Thomas Dean c 1642 - 1697 son of John Deane. This Lydia was born Lydia about 1679 Taunton d 22 Aug 1726 m George Hall

See sources on Thomas Dean here:

 Samuel2 Hall, in Smith, Dean Crawford, and Melinde Lutz Sanborn. The Ancestry of Eva Belle Kempton 1878-1908. (Boston, Massachusetts: New England Historic Genealogical Society, 1996-2008), 4:334.

"… Lydia Dean, born Taunton 1679, died in Easton, Mass., 22 August 1726, daughter of Thomas and Katharine (Stephens) Dean."
I posted a note and sent a PM to each profile manager regarding these changes.
Last point - regarding Jean Dean's wife:

She isn't actually attached to him - just the bogus children. So once they are removed that will resolve itself.

Two of the people who imported the incorrect children contacted me after reviewing the sources and discussion and instructed me to remove them. John of Dedham as been removed and now has no parents as it should be.

Lydia was given the spot as the first documented child named Lydia Deane in Taunton:

We now have two profiles left to remove before we can complete the merge of the two PGM profiles of John Deane:

Abigail managed by Ellen Smith:

Elizabeth (Warner) Denne who is managed by Chris Hoyt:

Per the sources posted above and on their profiles they should both be detached.

Chris and Ellen Please let me know when this is done or what obstacle remains for the removal so we may remedy it.

A discussion was already posted about the second profile:

I can start a discussion on the first profile if you prefer.
I see that you edited the original post 10 minutes ago, Roland. It looks like this may have been a major edit. Could you do us the favor of summarizing what it was you changed (what you deleted and what you added) so the rest of us can keep track of where we are in this complex conversation?
I changed the spelling of one word in the tittle from "changled" to "changed." As for myself I am no longer in the PGM project so I'll leave this to the rest of you.
Thanks for "changling" the title and explaining your edit, Roland. :-)

I do wish you would reconsider your decision to make a dramatic exit from the PGM project.

2 Answers

+2 votes

I agree that the Deans of Taunton, Massachusetts, are a mess. I also strongly agree with Chris that it's premature to merge profiles (or to shuffle children between parents). I have limited time for WikiTree at the moment, so I've not been able to dig into this situation as much as I should, but I do have some thoughts and observations.

Before these kinds of changes are made, the biography sections of the various profiles need to be revised to document:

  1. what we know about each of these people,
  2. where each specific bit of information comes from (the 11 footnotes at the end of the first paragraph of don't provide that kind of documentation),
  3. conflicting/erroneous versions of their lives that have been seen (whether in published articles or on Ancestry Family Trees or anything in between) and details of the reasoning for selecting one version over the others. Saying "this person didn't exist" (as has recently been done on some of these profiles) is not sufficient because it doesn't help a prospective contributor (or the person who contributed a  profile that got merged away) understand the reasoning -- and it may seriously upset a person who thinks this nonexistent person is their 9G Grandmother.

And we need to be very careful not to merge different families. I think there were multiple early New England settler families named Deane, Dean, or Dane, and thus a very real potential to inadvertently merge different families and people together. (I don't necessarily know who the different Deane/Dean/Danes were, but I seem to have multiple families of this name in my early New England ancestry.) The fact that most early Taunton, Mass., records were lost makes it particularly important to be cautious about drawing firm conclusions about these people's biographies and relationships -- lack of baptism and marriage records for a person doesn't necessarily mean that person wasn't born or didn't marry.

Also, I don't think Roland has finished cataloging the different Deanes yet. Walter Deane -- -- appears in many respects to be the same as Walter, brother of the John Deane about whom this G2G was created (compare ), but currently is attached to a different father named William Deane (compare and ) -- and his family includes yet another profile for a brother named John Deane -- . Before these two Walter Deanes and the three different John Deanes get merged, let's be sure that we have a reasonable basis for determining how many William Deanes of South Chard, Somerset, had sons named Walter and John who may or may not have gone to Taunton, Mass.

by Ellen Smith G2G Astronaut (1.3m points)
Roland sent me multiple invitations to this discussion because I am listed profile manager for , an orphan profile I adopted a few months back and matched with . Both profiles have the same mother, but they have different fathers. Roland has edited both profiles to say that Abigail didn't exist, and has proposed merging this profile into the profile of another Abigail whose poorly sourced profiles shows she was born 8 years later to different parents . I don't know how many Abigails existed, but before she is merged away, I'd like to know more about the sources on which these various profiles were based.
Thanks for your reply on the road. I hope you are enjoying your trip.

Regarding the suspect daughters. I contacted the person who originally imported them and this is what he had to say:

"I would not have probed very deeply into her records. She is not very important to my data base.  If she is problematic - or her existence is in doubt, I won't be upset if you take her out of the data."

I asked if he could recall what his source was and he didn't recall having one.

None of the Deane genealogies disagree about these daughters. So there is nothing I can post to debate about how the genealogies disagree. They don't disagree. They simply are not listed in any genealogy. There was no Lydia or Abigail Deane in any of these genealogies during this period.

Regarding the John of Dorcester the genealogies don't disagree about him either. He simply has unknown parents.

So to answer your points:

1) What we know about these people RE: Lydia and Abigail is that they are not listed in any known genealogy. That's been posted. What we know about John of Dorcester is that every genealogy published says his parents are unknown. That's been posted.

2)  While the the biography could be clearer I agree that doesn't have anything to do with the issue at hand. The issue at hand is we have two identical John Deanes with the same parents. Once had the correct children. One does not. The only thing that needs to be clearly footnoted is his children for the purposes of the current proposed changes. As Chris pointed about above we do not want to merge these profiles until the incorrect children are disconnected.

The information on is irrelevant because all the information is already on the profile he is set to be merge into: However, I'll copy it to -60 so they are in sync. The question is about the children which do not belong to him. His children are all carefully footnoted. The nice part about John Deane's genealogy is there isn't any controversy about who his children were. John was very nice to us and named all his children in his will. So from the earliest genealogies to the most current genealogies the list of children has never been debated. The source for his list of children is his will.

3. Per the above response from the person who originally imported these daughters - he is not seriously upset. he says go for it. He basically doesn't have any idea where he came up with them. What else can you say besides they don't exist? Is are no other versions of the stories to discuss. They all agree. And as for the son John his genealogies have always stated that his parents are unknown. There isn't any conflict in the genealogies here.

So now let's get back to Elizabeth. That is the only one of these four children where this has been any uncertainty regarding her maiden name and identity. I think the profile clearly explains this uncertainty and Anderson's explanation. This is the only child where any sort of controversy exists. However, even so no source ever proposed that she was the daughter of John as far as I know. The debate is about her maiden name only. So source has ever proposed who her parents might be.
Just a question of clarification. In the answer immediately above it says Deane-60 is set to merge into Dean-140. However, in the initial question, the merge direction is reversed.

Which direction is being recommended?
The best Last Name at birth would be Deane. So a merge into Deane-60 would be my suggestion.
I too would be interested in learning more about where the name Abigail came from. They seem to exist in quite a few places based on the number of hits I get when searching for Abigail Dean/Deane. That doesn't make them exist, but there is some information somewhere that started them being attached to Walter or John.

I think if the children's profiles are completely disassociated from their parents, they will be added back by a well-meaning person with "their" tree. Can that be avoided if we PPP John Deane-60? I know it works for parents, but not sure about children.

I agree with Ellen that it would be nice to know more about the origin of Abigail as a daughter of John, and enter that into her profile. Couple that with adding what we do know about who John's children actually were, along with the Questionable template that is very eye-catching, and hopefully all of that will give someone pause before attaching the wrong children again.

Kudo's to Roland for doing so much research on this family!
Has this thread been fully handled? It looks like some progress has been made but have all the requested changes been made? If so, we should close it. If not, what remains to be done? Thanks .

John Dean 1639-1717 of Taunton  

is not the same John of Dedham  who died there in 1728 and they should not be merged

+3 votes

Three months later, I guess it's time for me to acknowledge that my overseas vacation is over and I have internet access, etc.

I researched these families with my main focus on one little bit of this mess: trying to figure out what basis there is for the Abigail Dean profiles, one of which I adopted as manager. Here's what I think I have found (consider this a "lite" version, without citing sources):

  • I fully agree with Roland that there are no birth, baptism, or marriage records for this Abigail Dean. That doesn't necessarily prove anything, since most BMD records for that period in Taunton, Mass., were lost.
  • Records from household head counts in Taunton in 1643 and 1659 show that John and Walter Dean each were recorded with six children who survived infancy and may have reached adulthood. (There may, of course, have been additional children who died young.)
  • There are records of the names of John Dean's six children, none of whom was Abigail.
  • From various sources and lines of inference, Walter Dean has been determined to have had four sons: Ezra, Joseph, James, and Benjamin. He called Bartholomew Tipping his son-in-law, indicating that a daughter (name undetermined) was married to Bartholomew Tipping. The sixth child has been determined to be a daughter named Mary; she was married to Shadrach Wilbore.
  • The WikiTree profile for Walter Deane currently shows approximately 10 children. Sons connected to the profile or listed in the text include Ezra (not connected, just listed), two Josephs, James, and Benjamin, and also a William, Isaac, and a Jonas (not listed, just connected). Daughters are Mary (Dean) Wilbore, Abigail, and Lydia (not connected, just listed).
  • Page histories of Abigail's WikiTree profiles show that the profiles were created with Ancestry Family Trees and the Ancestral File as sources. I didn't learn much from the cited Ancestry Family Trees, but in the Ancestral File I found 52 entries for this Abigail Dean. (Aside: With that many representations of her "out on the Internet," we couldn't simply assert that she didn't exist and erase her profile without the expectation that new profiles will appear and need to be dealt with, in an endless game of Whack-A-Mole.) Most of the Ancestral File "records" (which aren't entirely identical) show Abigail born in about 1646 and married to Joseph Wood and/or Bartholomew Tipping at a date in the range 1665 to 1670.

Considering all that, I suggest that we (i.e., "WikiTree") conclude that the "Abigail Dean" profiles were intended to represent the unknown daughter of Walter Deane who married Bartholomew Tipping (a real person who doesn't yet have a profile). and treat them as such. The first name on the profile would be changed to Unknown, but the text of the profile should note that many records in the Ancestral File give her name as Abigail. (Maybe she really was named Abigail.) Objections? Comments? Does anyone know anything about Joseph Wood?

by Ellen Smith G2G Astronaut (1.3m points)

I've searched for men named Joseph Wood in New England in this time period, and I've not found any records suggesting that a Joseph Wood married a woman named Dean in or near Taunton, nor any indications of Joseph Wood in that area with an unknown wife or a wife Abigail with unknown maiden name. Taunton marriage records do exist for men named Joseph Wood marrying Hester Walker in 1679, Abigail Paul in 1697, and Mary Reed in 1703. [Record page]

Accordingly, I see no need to deal with the rumor of a Joseph Wood possibly having a wife from this family.

On July 3, 2015 (not 2016) Sharon Hill first requested removal of a child of John Deane. Over a series of threads, personal messages, profile postings, etc. spanning over a year we have been trying to perform the simple task of removing four children and merging two profiles. At the top of this thread are all the peer reviewed sources required by PGM guidelines to get the requested edits approved and executed. Why are the requested edits not completed yet? Have we not had enough time to discuss it? Perhaps Robert Charles Anderson isn't a good enough source to have the remaining daughter removed so we can merge these profiles?

There is in my mind a disconnect between the PGM project goals and the lengthy one year period to edit connections and merge a profile representing a single man and his children. It seems to me that the PGM project was set up to improve the efficiency of these types of edits by outlining exactly what type of sources qualify (and don't qualify) to get disconnections and merges done. Robert Charles Anderson says that Elizabeth is not a daughter of John. Chris refused to merge the two Johns until Elizabeth is removed. PGM states that the Anderson source I presented is all we need to have this edit completed unless someone produces a higher quality or more recent source. I don't understand what is making this edit so incredibly convoluted that we have to agonize ad nauseam about "Whack-A-Mole," "unsourced family trees" and "Ancestral Files" for over a year. The PGM project is supposed to be about next-generation evidenced based genealogy. I don’t see anything in the mission statement that says we should be holding up merges based of "Whack-A-Mole," "unsourced family trees" and "Ancestral Files."

Please complete Sharon’s disconnection now please. And then please merge the two profiles of John.

Related questions

+6 votes
0 answers
107 views asked Apr 12, 2016 in Genealogy Help by Debra Allison G2G6 Mach 3 (38.3k points)
+1 vote
2 answers
189 views asked May 20, 2018 in Genealogy Help by Kevin Dean G2G1 (1.1k points)
+1 vote
0 answers
63 views asked Mar 23, 2020 in Genealogy Help by Jeremy Stroud G2G4 (4.5k points)
+4 votes
1 answer
125 views asked Jul 15, 2016 in Genealogy Help by Chris Hoyt G2G6 Pilot (771k points)
+3 votes
3 answers
+5 votes
0 answers
+4 votes
1 answer
306 views asked Apr 17, 2016 in Genealogy Help by Richard Deane b1942

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

disclaimer - terms - copyright