See how many errors you can find before reading my comments after the jump. Please comment if you find more ;-)
Place of death: It’s possible the user either clicked on the wrong auto fill result or connected to an erroneous tree without reviewing the information. (I'm trying to be REALLY generous here.) So no, she didn't die in Afghanistan. She died, and is buried, in Georgia.
Surname: You may think that the user erred by not using Mary’s maiden name but that part is correct. Her grandfather (Daniel b. 1791) and her husband’s father (Mark b. 1807) were brothers.
Source for death information: The user purposely attached a census record as a source for the death information. This is not unheard of if the person died during the census year. I have a census record somewhere on my tree with all the information filled in and a line through all of it with "deceased" written at the end. But a 1900 census for a 1919 death? You can't tell from just looking at the profile but that census record is not the same 1900 census that is a source for the 1900 residence event. This census record is for a Martha Douglass (user submitted alternate, Martha Lott) b. 1858. So this user would have to believe Mary Martha Lott was a bigamist who, at some point, also lied about her age and began giving birth at the age of 9.
Children: There are more children but you can see what the user did with the few that there. With each record children were added, even if they'd been added because of a previous record. This may have been done before the match/not a match feature was available so it's less likely, I hope, to happen now. Guess the few seconds more it would've taken to add the record to the already existing child was just too much effort for this person to handle.
PREVIOUS POST: In The Beginning
NEXT POST: The Living Dead
MARY MARTHA POLLIE LOTT
B: 28 Dec 1845 in Georgia
M: 1866 to James Preston Lott
1900 Coffee, Georgia
Source: 1900 US Census
1910 Coffee, Georgia
Source: 1910 US Census
D: 21 Jan 1919 in Cem, Samangan, Afghanistan
Source: 1900 US Census
Spouse
James Preston Lott (1845 - 1920)
Children
Jesse Lott (1867 - 1921)
Wayne Lott (1868 - 1938)
Jesse Lott (1869 - 1921)
Waine Lott (1870 - ????)
John Lott (1876 - 1953)
Martha Ann Lott (1879 - 1955)
Johnnie Lott (1880 - ????)
Johney Lott (1880 - ????)
B: 28 Dec 1845 in Georgia
M: 1866 to James Preston Lott
1900 Coffee, Georgia
Source: 1900 US Census
1910 Coffee, Georgia
Source: 1910 US Census
D: 21 Jan 1919 in Cem, Samangan, Afghanistan
Source: 1900 US Census
Spouse
James Preston Lott (1845 - 1920)
Children
Jesse Lott (1867 - 1921)
Wayne Lott (1868 - 1938)
Jesse Lott (1869 - 1921)
Waine Lott (1870 - ????)
John Lott (1876 - 1953)
Martha Ann Lott (1879 - 1955)
Johnnie Lott (1880 - ????)
Johney Lott (1880 - ????)
ⓑⓐⓡⓚⓘⓝⓖ ⓤⓟ ⓣⓗⓔ ⓦⓡⓞⓝⓖ ⓣⓡⓔⓔ
Surname: You may think that the user erred by not using Mary’s maiden name but that part is correct. Her grandfather (Daniel b. 1791) and her husband’s father (Mark b. 1807) were brothers.
Source for death information: The user purposely attached a census record as a source for the death information. This is not unheard of if the person died during the census year. I have a census record somewhere on my tree with all the information filled in and a line through all of it with "deceased" written at the end. But a 1900 census for a 1919 death? You can't tell from just looking at the profile but that census record is not the same 1900 census that is a source for the 1900 residence event. This census record is for a Martha Douglass (user submitted alternate, Martha Lott) b. 1858. So this user would have to believe Mary Martha Lott was a bigamist who, at some point, also lied about her age and began giving birth at the age of 9.
Children: There are more children but you can see what the user did with the few that there. With each record children were added, even if they'd been added because of a previous record. This may have been done before the match/not a match feature was available so it's less likely, I hope, to happen now. Guess the few seconds more it would've taken to add the record to the already existing child was just too much effort for this person to handle.
PREVIOUS POST: In The Beginning
NEXT POST: The Living Dead
I have Cem, Samangan, Afghanistan showing up on my tree for a 1869 death. Were is Afghanistan coming in?? Any idea?
ReplyDeleteI do to, but I don't think it is right.
ReplyDelete