When I searched to see if this had been posted, I came across posts from people who'd had problems with Wikitree. It's true that I've run into a few problems, but recently I started posting to trees on Ancestry and Family Search, and those experiences have sent me running to Wikitree to "cleanse my palate" so to speak. Ancestry encourages bad research by letting you use other trees as sources, which newbies then copy verbatim to their trees. Real sources? What are those? The Family search tree is not only far more awkward to use, with a much steeper learning curve, but although one goal is to have a collaborative tree, the "collaboration" can be as useless as someone asking a question 3 years ago about a potential relative who has no sources attached, not even a "personal knowledge" so how do they know that this person is actually part of this tree? In this case, I know the poster via email, and I may email her about it directly, but I also know that there's a good chance that she may not respond. If she'd provided a source, I could at least try to check that source. So even though I know Wikitree is imperfect (hey, if you're detaching my guy from his parents could you tell me why?) (hey, if you got that photo from Find-a-grave, it really *isn't* okay to post it to a Wikitree memorial unless you took the photo yourself), but compared to the inaccurate redundancies in Ancestry and the invisible editors in Family Search trees, it's a pretty wonderful place to be. So why do you love Wikitree?