Trevor Grismore

My focus right now has been on the Grismore family strictly on WikiTree and Ancestry, but I'm quickly approaching the end of mapping them all out. I plan on exploring other closely related branches once that's done, including the Flinders. They are actually pretty closely related in the grand scheme of things, I think the closest connection is either my 3rd or 4th cousin.

Thanks again!

Trevor

I've been adding some of my immediate family to WikiTree, and citing either first or second hand sources for them. For some of my more distant family (like 5th cousins, 2x removed or 6x great-granduncles, as examples), I've been citing a genealogy I have, written by my 4th cousin, 4x removed John Richard Grismore, written in 1958. I'm not sure what sources he used to compile it. I imagine it was also first and second hand sources, given the details he included and biographies he wrote for them. But unfortunately, he died in 2009, so I have no way of verifying exactly if that is where he sourced his material from.

Everything he wrote seems to be correct, and I've been able to verify a lot of details naturally while I was turning that paper genealogy into a digital family tree (Going through vital records and census records that popped up on the Ancestry leaf hints). That's not to say that I've checked all possible censuses, vital records, etc. along the way though to verify every piece of information. But the only mistakes I've been able to find are typos, like an 1823 instead of 1824, or Tmma instead of Emma, all of which I was able to correct. Also, while there were people missing, there was never anyone incorrectly linked to anyone else.

Would you consider a source like this to be a valid one to cite? I hesitate to think of the daunting task ahead of finding all of the vital records and census records for all of these people again if his genealogy cannot be cited, but I also don't want to cite something that WikiTree would deem invalid or not properly sourced. Personally, I've found his genealogy to be correct and incredibly detailed, but I thought I would get your opinion before I go any further. I've cited his genealogy in about a dozen or so profiles as of right now, I would have asked sooner if the idea had crossed my mind.

Thank you for your help on this!

Trevor

It's critically important to record where information comes from.

If your aunt tells you your grandfather's birth date, don't just record the date. Record that your aunt told you the date.

Even better, ask your aunt how she knows his birth date and record her answer. It might sound silly, asking your aunt how she knows her own father's birth date. She may tell you she's always known it. But sometimes the day that a family celebrates isn't the birthday that's recorded on official documents.

The best thing would be to ask your aunt if she has any documents that show your grandfather's birthdate. Ideally, you should make a copy of them. (Making a copy can be as easy as taking a picture with your phone!)

When someone tells you a date, it's considered second-hand or derivative information. That doesn't mean it isn't true. It's just slightly less reliable than primary or original sources.

For more on this, see Sources and our page on Uncertain Information.

We know this might sound overly formal. You might just be a casual family historian, not a genealogy scholar. But like we said, most genealogists end up regretting that they didn't record their sources when they were first getting started. If you use WikiTree, it's a requirement that you record your sources.

So yes I would consider this a valid source, especially since you have verified a lot of the information. Just be sure, as it says above, to put in where you got the information. Hope this helps.

Rhonda

Thank you for your help! I first took an interest in genealogy when I was really young, just a child. I hardly documented my sources the first 4-5 years I worked on it. It wasn't until I was older that I realized the hole I had inadvertently dug myself into. I documented and used good sources after that, but I hadn't fixed all the original work that hadn't been sourced well (looking back, it was like building a nice house on a cracked and broken foundation). I decided to stop for about 5 years before I got back into it, and fixing all of my initial work has been an ongoing sporadic project ever since.

I've had to retrace just about every step I had taken for years to add sources, properly format my info, etc.. I've made good progress, (I'm certainly closer to the end of fixing it all than the beginning), but there is still plenty left to do. If I knew then what I know now, I would have done it from the very beginning or waited until I was older to start!

Thanks again!

Trevor