Editing sources into pre-1700 sources that are "Private" ...

+2 votes

I do not understand the relevance of the message that I had received (apparently I was not removed as active manager from a Project Protected Profile; I have done so in the meantime), nor the intention of the editor of the information that was edited into the biography of the profile: 

"left research note and sources. The ancestry tree from which this profile was created is PRIVATE so I could not look at it." Has this anything remotely to do with the new GDPR-compliancy? Regardless, how do User-generated family trees that are mostly private and generally by WikiTree not considered trustworthy as "sources" go, need any qualification, after the fact? The "source" <Book A - Wills and Letters of Administration in the Surrogate's Office, Seneca County Courthouse, Waterloo, N. Y./> is equally mystifying to me, as it is added without provenance and I as reader of the biography cannot vouch for it's validity either.

WikiTree profile: Isaac Van Cleef
in Policy and Style by Philip van der Walt G2G6 Pilot (160k points)
edited by Philip van der Walt
Since the data on the profile can't  be verified  as the only "source" is inaccessible, essentially the profile is UNSOURCED .
I wouldn't say that though. Yes - as Always the user-generated Ancestry "sources" are useless, but it does still constitute a "source", even if it is invalid. As does the secondary mentioned, which points to primary sources. What puzzles me is the message though I do get that the editor is just trying to be thorough.
And thanks Eddie … ;-) for the message …

2 Answers

+4 votes
No, it's got nothing to do with GDPR.  Ancestry members can have their tree public or private (mine's private to prevent people stealing information and putting it somewhere incorrect), which of course makes it impossible for a WikiTreer to look at what they've found...

They've been able to do this for ages.
by Ros Haywood G2G Astronaut (1.5m points)
That's what I thought as well ...
+4 votes
Surely this is a research note, not the 'finished' profile. The person making the edits, informed the pms of changes.

The profile has been basically untouched since it was created several years ago. It documents what has been checked/found.

The last editor (today) took  time to check the ancestry tree source, found it to be private. It didn't therefore add any information immediately. (though the tree owner could be contacted)

Then a will abstract was found. I agree that the abstract would be better with   a fuller citation (who abstracted/transcribed it) Nevertheless, this is only a note and  there are full details as to the origin of the will. Using this one would be able to contact the courthouse for further details (and in many cases  this would be necessary, not all records will be digitised)

However, because of the detail given,  it didn't take long for  this reader to find an image of the will  ( and I've never looked up a US will before )

"New York Probate Records, 1629-1971," images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:33S7-9YC1-HR1?cc=1920234&wc=Q7PR-4WL%3A213303101%2C214071701 : 28 May 2014), Seneca > Wills 1804-1838 vol A > image 94 of 664; county courthouses, New York

Maybe this was the next step for the original note maker. This research note section was only started today.
by Helen Ford G2G6 Pilot (390k points)
edited by Helen Ford
Yes so much was clear to me (most project profiles are "works-in-progress"). I guess that I just got confused as the message was adressed to me and I had never done a GEDCOM in my life. As if it were my unsourced private tree on Ancestry.com … I have stopped researching New Netherland (and what follows time-line wise) profiles at least a year or so ago, as the sources and the fashion of editing is unfamiliar to me (my focus is on another project). Thanks to the editor though for trying though, and you for extending the search.

Related questions

+4 votes
1 answer
+15 votes
4 answers
+6 votes
2 answers
191 views asked Jun 10, 2018 in WikiTree Help by Paul Mason G2G2 (2.4k points)
+6 votes
1 answer
+5 votes
3 answers
298 views asked Oct 24, 2018 in Policy and Style by Karen Lorenz G2G6 Pilot (101k points)
+6 votes
1 answer
+11 votes
3 answers
243 views asked May 23, 2018 in WikiTree Help by Bob Hanrahan G2G6 (8.2k points)

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

disclaimer - terms - copyright