Double standards ?

+8 votes
192 views

Having asked about the disconnection of unsubstantiated parents on a New Netherlanders Project profile, the following answer was given.

," for all of the uncertainties, that is the reason that is it New Netherland Settlers project policy to not detached unproven relationships, otherwise almost all of the parents of the New Netherland settlers would be orphaned and unconnected profiles floating in the nether.

The New Netherland Settlers Project does not disconnect profiles that have an unproven relationship. Until a relationship has been disproved, the project uses the Uncertainindicators, and the {{Uncertain Family|New Netherland Settlers}} template as needed, to show that a relationship is not sourced.

From https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Project:New_Netherland_Settlers#Project_Policies

See also: https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Uncertain

This family lived in pre-church record Albany and Schenectady, where details must be patched together through all other available records as the church records were destroyed prior to 1683. Documents for this area are still being translated, so her research is far from complete.

One theory for her origins ignores that Pieter Jacobsz Borsboom was in New Netherland much earlier than is accepted. https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Boorsboom-2#.22Beverwijck_lots_and_occupants.22

answered 11 hours ago by Carrie Quackenbush G2G6 Mach 6 (69,180 points) 
edited 10 hours ago by Carrie Quackenbush""

 

 

But in the PGM and Euro Aristos projects, among others, the SAME sparsity of documentation exists. And unsubstantiated family connections are disallowed.

Should such a double stsndard exist ? Doesn't such a double standard allow any one of us to defend spurious connections and insist such connections remain intact as the profile creator  declared they should be ?

asked in Policy and Style by Eddie King G2G6 Pilot (360k points)
recategorized by Jillaine Smith

3 Answers

+8 votes

I haven't connected my ancestor John van Skiver to his New Netherlands ancestor Willem Woulterse Van Schyuven as I haven't found the documentation as of yet.

answered by David Hughey G2G6 Pilot (332k points)
Miss Carrie Q says you don't need proof, Mr Hughey
I don't believe that is what she is saying at all. It sounds like more like she is saying without proof of a connection, disconnect.
Please refrain from personalizing your comments that criticize the policies of WikiTree and specific WikiTree projects, Eddie.
The quoted answer says the NN does NOT disconnect unproven.
Let me say that I appreciate David Hughey's good judgment in not connecting ancestors for whom he has no documentation.

Unfortunately, not everyone shares his willingness to refrain from connecting people without a solid basis for doing so. The New Netherland Settlers project did not create these profiles, but the project is trying to merge duplicates, resolve conflicts, and improve data quality without being overly heavy-handed in revising members' information (and goodness knows that the project gets accused of heavy-handedness).

Connections like the one between Grietje and von Rotmers have been published in a variety of places, and while we have not found a sound basis for them, we also don't have a sound basis for rejecting them, so it's hard to justify the heavy-handed action of breaking up many members' family trees. This isn't like the situations of Euroaristo and PGM that deal with thoroughly researched populations, or even New Amsterdam, which has reasonably good vital records.  As Carrie has said, there are no vital records for the Albany or Schenectady area prior to 1683, but there are a variety of historical documents that may shed light on these people's lives when they are transcribed and/or translated. In this context, lack of documentation doesn't prove much of anything...
+6 votes
Is “unsubstantiated” equivalent to “disproved”?
answered by James Applegate G2G6 Mach 5 (53.1k points)
It shouldn't be.  "Disproved" would mean the relationship has been rejected. "Unsubstantiated" could mean "disproved," but it might mean that the search for the connection is still ongoing.

Jim Bailey was adopted, but due to evidence in letters to him from a third party, he is convinced that his grandfather was Bill Bailey of Albany, Washington though his conjecture is unsubstantiated.  The connection is unproven, but not disproved...  if that makes any sense.
+3 votes
I would not call this a double standard but rather different standards. Each project sets their own standards, and that is fine. You and I may disagree with some of them but It is their right to set their the standards as they see fit and as long as I know about them I try to follow them.
answered by Dale Byers G2G Astronaut (1.2m points)

Related questions

+8 votes
3 answers
141 views asked Sep 21, 2017 in WikiTree Help by Bob Jewett G2G Astronaut (1m points)
+5 votes
2 answers
+3 votes
2 answers
+3 votes
2 answers
+22 votes
12 answers
+6 votes
2 answers
+4 votes
1 answer
+3 votes
1 answer

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

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...