Which information should we keep for birth, parents?

+6 votes

This profile appears to be a conflation of two different people:

  • An Elizabeth Doolittle was born to parents Abraham and Elizabeth Doolittle, in about 1703, in Wallingford, Connecticut, per Families of Ancient New Haven.
  • An Elizabeth Doolittle was born to Humphrey Doolittle in Kidderminster, Worcestershire England, March 1601-2 

Neither Elizabeth appears to have a duplicate already on WikiTree.

The profile is orphaned, with two apparently inactive members of the trusted list. There aren't any sources for any of the information.

It probably doesn't make a lot of difference which Elizabeth this profile is edited to be; I was curious whether we have a preference for using birthdate/place or parents as being the set of data we feel more confident with, in this case?

WikiTree profile: Elizabeth Armstrong
in Policy and Style by S Willson G2G6 Pilot (165k points)
If it were my problem, I'd make a new profile for one of them, so that both sets of facts/parents are not lost.  Back in 2012, there were two profiles merged into one, this is probably when the problem began.
Thanks, Tom. I agree that a new profile for one of them will be required at some point.

I checked the profile that was merged in, and it didn't have the other birthdate. Only through researching it today did I learn of the possibility that the father could have been Humphrey for the one born in 1602. My research also found the info supporting the parents listed and previously unknown birth year of 1703.

2 Answers

+1 vote
Best answer
As a general rule.  I would leave the profile the first one created. or The one that needs the least reconnecting. In this case they are both the same. Leave Eliz. with her parents and whatever her correct data is. (The Kiddermeister date was merged in and not there originally)

A second profile would be created for the Kiddermeister Elizabeth if it's needed. But if she wasn't connected to anything. I don't think I would bother.
by Anne B G2G Astronaut (1.2m points)
selected by S Willson
0 votes
Re Elizabeth Doolittle: Since they were about 100 years apart it would make sense that the one born in the 1600's was either a grandmother or a great-grandmother in all probability. Was it not the custom in some places to pass on a first name of a parent to his/her son/daughter?

Related questions

+4 votes
1 answer
208 views asked Jul 2, 2013 in Genealogy Help by Abby Glann G2G6 Pilot (534k points)
+1 vote
2 answers
+23 votes
3 answers
+3 votes
1 answer
47 views asked 14 hours ago in Genealogy Help by Edie Osterhues G2G Crew (320 points)
+4 votes
0 answers
+2 votes
1 answer
+3 votes
0 answers
52 views asked Jan 28 in Genealogy Help by Jack Day G2G6 Pilot (377k points)

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

disclaimer - terms - copyright