Link between Hacker-62 and Hacker-63

Question

I'm new here, so I apologize if this question has already been done to death, but I keep seeing the claim that Francis Hacker III is the father of William Hacker the 1731 immigrant to Virginia. What I can't find is any evidence that this might be the case.  In fact, what I do find points in different directions.

Are there sources that link H-63 and H-62, or should I start looking in those other directions?

I observe that Ancestry DNA links me to all my known ancestors up to William but at that point, nothing connects me to Francis or his family.

Answer 1

Go to the top right of this page to Find. Look down the Find menu to Connections. Enter Hacker-62 and Hacker-63 at the connection finder. You will find the connection that way. It's very close.

Comments

Yes, this is what I see all the time.  But where is the evidence?  What are the sources?  I'm not seeing any.

---

Lois, I confess that I did not look at the two profiles in question, but unfortunately there are many profiles on WikiTree that have no sources, very poor sources, or even downright incorrect ones.  This community is working very hard trying to find good sources to add to profiles that don't have them and fix all the relationship inconsistencies.  It sounds like you have found one of these that is in need of work.

You can go for it - if you find sources, you can add them to the profiles if the profiles are open or, in the case of pre-1700 or pre-1500 profiles, if you have qualified to work on them.  Otherwise, you can add a comment on the profiles, which will automatically be emailed to the profile managers.  If a profile is what we call "an orphan", meaning that it has no manager, then you can either "adopt" the profile, thereby becoming its manager, or you can post something in G2G to start a discussion of the issues.  Can you perhaps add the information about what you have found and what direction it points in?

---

I often see here, where a profile says "unknown", that very unknown information is presented in the biography or notes.  Seems odd.  But perhaps the standards are stricter. Fear to tread.

---

You're probably referring to profiles resulting from many years old gedcoms that used to be imported very badly without any checking.  They ended up with information in the bio like FirstName: John/Joe and some notation that the import process couldn't determine the name.  Since it couldn't determine the name, Unknown was entered in the name field.  Unfortunately, there are still a lot of those profiles that are still untouched by human hands.  It's not a question of standards and your treading is desperately needed - please have no fear!

---

I still need more information.  Where did this change to Andover come from?

I see it that way on Findagrave, along with a totally fascinating tale about William being a seaman like his father, who is listed as Francis III, who was surely not a seaman.  Where did this come from?  I've asked the profile manager there but have yet to see a response.  Until I know more about this, it would be premature to make changes.

The Andover link is key, but Andover wasn't a port town, so how a seaman?

---

It's been almost a year since I first asked this question here, and I've done a lot of research on the Hackers and made a lot of progress - leading to the conclusion that the origin of William Hacker-62 is entirely unknown. The Andover theory does not pan out in any respect.

Yet just within a week, I have seen it resurrected and added to the profile.