Is the nosorigines site for Canadian genealogy an acceptable source? [closed]

+9 votes
I have worked a lot with French Canadian ancestors and have encountered this site numerous times:

My impression of the site is that it is much like WikiTree.  It has a family tree and you can click on different people to see their data.  I thought that, like WikiTree, this site was user-generated, meaning that anyone could go in and add information.  This would mean that it is NOT suitable as the only source for information on a WikiTree profile (just like how you shouldn't use member trees, or any other user-submitted family trees, as your only source; instead, you find where the information came from and cite that).

Recently, though, I have encountered a whole lot of profiles where a link to this site is the only source (it appears as though someone was following along and copying the names and relationships given on the site).  I was especially troubled by one (Moisan-61) because I have looked at original records in the Drouin Collection and I am certain that the information on nosorigines is incorrect.  (You can see my comment on the profile.)

I do not see any sources at all listed on the nosorigines site.  There appears to be an icon that you can click on which says "Notes, Information" but when I click on it it asks me to register for the site, which should not be necessary if I just want to know what the source of the information is!

Am I missing something?  Or am I correct in thinking that this site has user-generated trees and anything with this site as the only source should be marked "Unsourced" until a primary source is found and cited?
WikiTree profile: François Moisan
in Policy and Style by Sarah Heiney G2G6 Mach 5 (52.2k points)
closed by Sarah Heiney
I've been trying to tell the "NosOriginers" that they need to be citing better sources for French Canadian ancestors. I'm afraid they are quite recalcitrant.
I personally despise that site, have found too many errors there, or omitted data.  Have filled in some bio for your François-Xavier Moisan.  As a note, the marriage to Julie Moisan is spurious, François-Xavier's wife Louise Drolet had her last known child in 1861!  Cleaning up the various profiles in this group, adding IGD sources (Drouin institute, membership site, sorry).  There appear to be two brothers François and François Xavier, who got mixed up together in this profile.  François married Julie Moisan and then Marie Gauvin, François Xavier appears to only marry once.
I have found errors and contacted the person to correct it by citing a source like the Drouin Collection.  However, the Drouin Collection does have errors also, but not many. I have found deaths listed as births and vice-versa. I also contact them to correct the errors so that other people can have the corrected info. Also, with nosorigens I have found many marraige records that were not corect. A lot of people enter the "Marriage INTENTION contract" which is different than the actual marriage. Hope this helps.
Nos origines may be used as a guideline, but nothing more. I check everything I find there and constantly find mistakes or missing information that is easily located elsewhere.

1 Answer

+14 votes
Best answer
Welp, never mind, I found my answer here:

Consensus is clearly that nosorigines is not an acceptable source.
by Sarah Heiney G2G6 Mach 5 (52.2k points)

Nosorigines suffers from the same malady that all (including WikiTree) user contributed genealogy sites suffer from: they are only as good as the contributor makes them. There are nosorigines entries that do have good sources and a lot that do not. If we accept a sourced entry as valid we should also accept a sourced nosorigines entry. This begs the question, though, if we do have good sources listed why not go to the sources directly?

You're right.  I wouldn't accept a sourced link or a sourced nosorigines link as the only listed source.  I would click on the link, check the sources, and then list them directly on the profile.  Personally, I don't even want nosorigines links under the "sources" section, because it is not a source.  I would probably put it under a "Notes" section.  The "Sources" section should only be for actual sources that show where the information comes from.
Nos origines can be used as a source, but not as the only source. There have been errors and mistakes in the Tanguay collection, in Denissen's genealogy of the Detroit families, as well as the way records are indexed on ancestry. The entire process of family research is an ongoing one. It's correction, upon correction. All sources are good. Though not one source is an acceptable one.. if it is the only source cited.

Related questions

+1 vote
1 answer
133 views asked Jan 15, 2020 in Genealogy Help by Judith Srom G2G6 Mach 1 (11.0k points)
+4 votes
5 answers
328 views asked Dec 27, 2021 in Genealogy Help by Scott Lacey G2G6 (6.3k points)
+4 votes
2 answers
+9 votes
8 answers
270 views asked Nov 17, 2017 in Genealogy Help by Janet Wild G2G6 Pilot (319k points)
+10 votes
2 answers
+5 votes
2 answers
+4 votes
2 answers
+15 votes
5 answers

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

disclaimer - terms - copyright