I guess that I have to be the one that says something.

Question

If we wait for sources that will satisfy Wikitree, we may never get past Abimelec Pate.

Comments

I can understand how frustrated Howard must feel: believing that this time it has to be the right pair.  I've a couple of couples that are frustrating me similarly because I can't find a birth, or can't find the marriage, or can't find the death.  (One of them it's the former and the latter .. so he's designated a pod-person.)

It looks as though a lot of time has been put in trying to find the parents, so, hopefully, some day soon it will be the correct couple.

---

Maybe, but my mother is still my mother whether or not I added sources. That is the point I am making. Just because I don't put a source on her profile doesn't mean that she is not my mother. Now, do you people get the message. Not having a source does not mean the person is not my ancestor.

---

Dear Howard, we understand that your personal knowledge is sufficient to know your mother.  In this case, you have no personal knowledge of Abimilec's parents. When parents are disputed, it is better to post your new find(s) on the profile public bulletin board so that the new addition can be discussed.  Collaboration is necessary on WikiTree, especially when there is a dispute to be settled.

Your frustration with your brick wall is understandable.  We all have several brick walls to work on.  Sometimes, like the current profile, it is as far as we can go without a reliable source that is more definitive than somebody's guess.  Sometimes a reliable source comes along in a few years.  In this case, you need to collaborate with others on this profile and be patient for what the future presents.

---

In plain English, your ancestor is still your ancestor, with or without a "primary "source.

---

I didn't know that Wikitree had a public profile bulletin board. Also, when you get passed a certain point in time,you may never find a primary source or any source at all.

---

Kitty refers to the Comment boxes on the right-hand side of the profile page.  For genealogical purposes, no sources means it didn't happen.

---

Understood.  No one is questioning that you have ancestors, with or without your sources.  The question is, which set of parents, if any, are the parents of your ancestor.  We need something more reliable than someone's best guess; a primary, secondary or tertiary source.

Admittedly, it is hard to find any kind of sources in the southern U.S.  There  was a deep distrust of collected information in the 1800s.  Often, it was not considered important to maintain records, even family Bible records.  Of course, fires and changes in government ended in the destruction of many records that would be helpful for genealogists today.  I have trouble with my Tennessee ancestors for these reasons.

The public bulletin board is the comment section on the right side of each profile.  When you enter a comment there, it is emailed to the profile manager so it is a great place to add details for discussion.

---

I will agree that some people might put anything in their profiles and expect everyone to accept it. However, family trees are not just anything. I have added ancestors based on family trees,just to have them taken down. Also,I have added ancestors based on DNA projects,just to have them taken down. DNA profiles are impossible to deny,but it still happens.I rest my case.

---

Melanie,I don't add ancestors just because they look right. I add them based on family trees,DNA evidence and other sources.

---

Everyone,don't forget that Wikitree relationship finder shows people as related to you that you have never heard of. I promise you that if I didn't have a profile other than my own, I would have relatives that I don't have any clue about. Shall I continue this debate?

Answer 1

Looks to me like Abimelec is beautifully sourced.  1812 service record, Georgia Property Tax Digests, US 1830 census, and more.  Which sources do you think are missing?

Comments

I was referring to finding sources to connect Abimelec Pate to his parents.

---

Abimelec was born about 1790.  The US held censuses every year from 1790 - so maybe he (and his parents) will be found there? Just a thought.

---

Ros, our first six decennial censuses only listed heads of household by name.  It's almost impossible to connect a person definitively to his parents using US Census data before 1850.   

---

Ros, the only documents that will connect Abimelec Pate with his parents are baptism, church records and that is about it. They didn't list children with their parents until 1850.

---

Wills/probate records and land transactions may be beneficial also.

Answer 2

Geni.com has his name as Abimilee John Pate  https://www.geni.com/people/Abimilee-Pate/6000000007394006221

I think this makes sense there are "Bimly" relatives which kind of explains the Abimilee name.

Comments

The source you mention has incorrect name for Abimilec. I keep having to correct this everywhere online.  His name is just Abimilec/Abimelech/Abimileck NOT middle name of John.  There's a marriage for a John Pate to a different Susan and instead of accepting we just have a brick wall people try to add records that don't match the right people. I wish people that are not related would not add unreliable tree information such as geni.com as though it is fact when  descendants who have spent many hours on a family member and added as much as can be found.  I'm sorry but sometimes we just have to accept that we may not go farther back in a family.  There were several years people didn't even know about Abimilec Pate.  We can't just say we are a dna match so it must be that man that his father.  This is really frustrating because I want to know who Abimilec's parennts are too but I am not going to just add random men.