What to do with this family of single-letter last names?

Question

Looking at single letter last names, I found E T and his family. None have sources or locations. It continues to a private son born in the 1890s. The most recent contribution from the PM is 2014.

Comments

It's interesting that the profile manager created some pretty well-sourced and fully named profiles in addition to these cryptic ones.  For example, https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Coulbeck-176   Then in January of 2017, the manager may have stopped working on any Wikitree profiles.  E. T. seems to be one of their earliest profiles.... maybe they intended to get back to it and forgot?

Reba

Answer 1

Looks like Anonymous T was taking privacy just a little bit too seriously?

Shouldn't the private great grandson (born 1890s) be opened up?

I wonder how Aaron and Abby knew that the great grandson's mother, E L (L-283) was really Lowther-685

Comments

The Father was listed as A Lowther (L-284) on the original L-283 Profile. I am starting to source them starting from Arthur and Sarah Lowther. I have found birth, Marriage and death sources for them.The profiles are a bit messy but I am adding what sources I can find and working my way towards the T profiles. It seems to be the last name of Timby according to a marriage record for Charles John Timby and Ellen Lowther I found.

---

Thanks. I’ve been going through single letter last names looking for things to cleanup. Most don’t show up on a data doctor report. I was too tired to tackle this yesterday. Many are married women with initial instead of unknown for last name. I’ve found sources for some. Slowly working backwards thru the alphabet.

---

Nice work Darren. I missed seeing the father's connection.

---

I found a connection to the main tree through a wife yet the profile manager rejected the merge request then redid the same request in his name the exact same way I had done it. You have to wonder why some people create hassles for those of us who want to improve the tree.

Answer 2

It is apparently an attempt at anonymization, but it is not the proper way of doing it and the profile is too old (nearly 200 years) for this.

The best thing would probably be to go through the Unresponsive Profile Manager procedure, which would result in orphaned profiles (and account closed and really private profiles deleted).

Comments

I have found sources and named them for all the connected profiles I could find. The only thing is that the profiles are still listed as T-number instead of Timby-number.

Do we need to change the Last name at birth by doing a merge or doing a unresponsive profile manager route?

---

Unresponsive manager would mean less redirects.

---

The "right" thing to do would be to post a message on the profile(s) to ask the manager to correct the last name. You may also make a Trusted List request. In the case of a manager who has been inactive for this long, you may follow up with an unresponsive profile manager request if there is no reply after one week. (This was clarified in another thread a few days ago... can't find it).

In both cases, changing the LNAB will in effect create a new profile and the misnamed profile will be merged into it.