22 May 2013

The person with the most records...

...does not win.

Comments after the jump.

 Gloria Jean Lanham
 B: 18 Feb 1946 in Covington, Kentucky
 D: 7 Aug 1946 in Laurel, Kentucky


 ✿ 1930 United States Federal Census  1, 2, 3
     Virden Abney, male, born abt 1907
     Wife Margaret, children Audra & Mariline
 ✿ 1940 United States Federal Census  1, 2, 3
     Verden Reese Abney, male, born abt 1907
     Wife Margaret, children Audrey, Marceline & Farrell
 ✿ Kentucky, Birth Index, 1911-1999  1, 2, 3
     Gloria J Lanham, 18 Feb 1946 in Kenton County
 ✿ Kentucky, Death Records, 1852-1953  1, 2, 3
     Gloria Jean Lanham, 7 Aug 1946 in Laurel County
     Born 18 Feb 1946 in Covington, Kentucky
 ✿ Social Security Death Index  3
     Virden Abney, born 22 Apr 1906, died 1 Dec 1992
 ✿ Web: Kentucky, Find A Grave Index, 1776-2012  1, 2, 3
     Virden R. Abney, born 22 Apr 1906, died 1 Dec 1992

  1  Source for birth
  2  Source for death
  3  Source for name

ⓑⓐⓡⓚⓘⓝⓖ  ⓤⓟ  ⓣⓗⓔ  ⓦⓡⓞⓝⓖ  ⓣⓡⓔⓔ

Errors like this actually take some effort. A death index record might automatically attach as a source for a birth if the birth date is on the record but a birth index will not automatically attach as a source for the death date. This person had to make an effort to attach the birth index and the censuses as sources for Gloria's death.
In no universe would the names be interchangeable, Gloria Jean Lanham versus Virden Abney. One is female, the other male. One born in 1946, the other in 1906. One died in 1946, the other in 1992. These two have nothing in common.
Of course this isn't an isolated incident on this tree. Willie Maedrue Sinclair (1900-1990) has two records from the United States Obituary Collection attached. The records are for Marceline Furnish (d. 2009). Virden Reese Abney has 18 sources for his place of residence in 1920. Included in those sources are the Kentucky Death Index, a 1960 U.S. City Directory, and 16 Ancestry Family Trees attached. Somehow each tree citation is attached separately (I didn't even know that was possible) but they are only citations. There is no link to view the individual trees and there is no 1920 census attached.
How does someone put this much effort into a family tree and get it so wrong?

If you have a profile to suggest please send a link to buwtree(at)gmail(dot)com.

PREVIOUS POST: Her Parents Must Be So Proud
NEXT POST: Puritan Playboy

1 comment:

  1. While I agree that it takes some effort to create some of what is found in that tree, at least 2 issues may have been created by ancestry.com problems.

    For a few weeks, FindAGrave hints were totally out whack - different name, location, age, sex. It took several weeks of screaming on the message boards and by direct contact with Tech Support for the issues to be corrected. True, one should always pay attention to the accuracy of a hint, but we know that not everyone does.

    The same problem existed (perhaps still exists) with City Directories. I wound up with a few deaths with a City Directory as the source citation. It was invisible at save - only noticeable after the record had been saved to the ancestor. Again, I have reported multiple times to support ...