Email with Sandy Patak

Date: 14 Mar 2022 [unknown]
Location: [unknown]
Surname/tag: Glendinning-394

Mary (Glendinning) Gillespie Glendinning-354 GENEALOGY/Wikitree/United States/Virginia/Gillespie/Glendinning Amanda Torrey <amanda.torrey@gmail.com>

Mar 14, 2022, 7:16 PM (2 days ago)

to Robin, Sandy, Scott Referenceing Free Space document: Connections to Glendinning family

First I'd like to introduce Scott here to two formidable "experts" on Wikitree that understand genetic genealogy and can help us with our process. I get that I am just a student struggling to utilize our genetic research Wikitree is developing in order to support colonial profiles when sources are scarce. Scott and I are part of the Glendinnings who was always suspected as Mary's family, but never substantiated because there's been a lack of sources which I hope the Southern Colonies can help us with.

Again, there is a Gillespie who tried to prove I was mistaken that William Gillespie I connected here never left Scotland through records in Family Search. I went into Scotland's people and found Parish Records by bringing out the data base to show where his record came from on the same screen as the one that came here to the colonies. I returned because there has been a huge problem with this family concerning probably hundreds of people and their ties to parents and children.

But also I was convinced after walking away from this family thinking it was impossible to prove, I by chance found trace DNA matched to connections to Esther Mayes, her mother, not only with me, but Pennsylvania descendants as well. I returned and began gedmatching with her siblings and found more traces. One or two traces are chance...over 50? not so much. Additionally, I included Relationship to me and found the MRCA to be Mary Glendinning with her children. Once I connected her with her parents, the DNA connections who were curious about Archibald and Esther were showing up on Archibald's profile.

Also, there's a man who pulled up a y-test from a One Named Study from Family Tree who was substantiating Gillespies that turned out to be from a different city. Our gillespies are from Falkirk, the one he's using is a scholar from Kirkcaldy. They do NOT mix, but he's used that on this family's profiles for almost 10 years. He's old now, but you see that he gets on as PM somehow and he nests there.

I am accumulating proof of where these people belong. I am able to see where the false information is. I have no problem taking the time to clean house and clarify these wonderful stories. Scott needs to believe that the steps he makes here on Wikitree are solid as he's working with another family tree. I'm getting Thank Yous from Glendinnings that want to see his "parents" to Archibald Glendinning removed and he doesn't want to disrupt other people's work from other trees

Justin who you'll see on the comments was not the most respectful. "Justin" created a profile from her husbands DNA which she described on his Wiki profile and apparently she's a lawyer. and yes, she thinks I'm full of shit and it would be nice if I could show I'm not so foolish to waste so much time on this one family. Lord knows I have other profiles. But she makes some good points. There is no where out there that has shown Mary has a legitimate claim to the Glendinnings. What's ironic here is that the Gillespies were actually the rich plantation owners with 3 different large profitable plantations. The Glendinnings were okay, but not nearly so much. Why on earth would I do that?

Please help me convince Scott that I'm actually building a case for Mary being attached to this family. Once done, I'll start clean up the 11 children whose profiles need a lot of help and chase out vermin.

Thank you two for your consideration

Amanda

Sandy Patak

Mar 15, 2022, 10:31 AM (1 day ago)

to me, Robin, Scott All -

As a genetic genealogist, I am not sure I can ever convince anyone to jump in a DNA quagmire but I always love seeing more people on WikiTree using DNA for research purposes. To me, DNA research is WikiTree's secret research tool when Profile relations are correct and with DNA Statements.

To that end, regardless of WikiTree's Profile accuracies, I must confess that I agree that the small sample of DNA is not conclusive. Personally, I have found that anything under 7cM (actually, most of the time, my threshold is a bit higher) is not useful without documentation. If there is documentation, it can be added to the DNA theories but still not conclusive at such a low cM level. BUT, inconclusive does not mean it is not useful. I see zero issue with documenting lower cM connections in Research Notes (or a Space Sandbox Page) to try to prove, or disprove, a theory. I see zero issue with Amanda researching the possibility of Glendinning parentage... just be prepared for some stop and go hard research. Indexing happens every day so who knows when source documentation might pop up.

The best advise I can offer on this one is polite communication, collaborative work space (which appears to be this) and be prepared for the long haul of research. One other thing I might suggest, on Mary's Profile, is that you detach the unsourced parents and add a text box to explain that Archibald and Ester as parents are speculative. (See Isaac Gregory Profile) This might appease both types of DNA researchers. :)

For Profiles before July 4, 1776:

Hope this helps and finds all well,

Sandy