General Chat

I read that the IGI now has 32 billion entries. A few too many as far as Im concerned, they could trim it down by getting rid of the following, for a start: Marriage. Helen Grimshaw. Spouse - Helen Grimshaw Reason for removal: Extreme narcissism, should have been sectioned, not allowed to marry herself. Marriage. George Holden. Spouse - my 3 x greatgrandmother. Reason for removal: 1. She was much too old for him. 2. Illegal. Marriage. James Holden to Margaret Slater. Reason for removal: James was five years old, Margaret was 37. Margaret was also his mother. Same couple: they had 44 children, nine of whom were called Margaret. Three of the Margarets, born 1805, 1807 and 1811, married the same man. Theyt all became Mormons and went to US, hubby died and the Margarets married again, on the Wagon Trail. The three Margarets had a child, who died, and within a week, Margaret was back home in Lancashire, being buried. Not a bit put off with being dead, she returned to US, caught up with the wagon train, married again and had another child, all in less than seven months from her death. Reason for removal: Stretching incredulity to the giddy limit. Entry: Inle Ololeden Reason for removal: His name is really John Holden. Entry: Place name: Rochdale, Lanarkshire, Scotland Reason for removal: Rochdale is in Lancashire. (Ditto Oldham) Would anyone else like to add to this list, which I will forward to the IGI in due course.

Yes please. William Deeks of Pebmarsh Essex on IGI belonging to the wrong parents. Can't remember their names, but the correct ones are John Deeks & Louisa Pye. It really bugs me when he turns up in searches in the wrong place! Helen

Nice idea - alas the IGI will not be amended or augmented.

Why not Kate? If it is incorrect it should be ammended surely. Margaret

Why not Kate?

I don't know why not, it doesn't make sense from a genealogical point of view - but then again, neither does encouraging random guesswork to connect people! This from their FAQ: Q. Can I make changes to a record in the International Genealogical Index record if I can prove it is in error? A. No. The International Genealogical Index contains information as it appeared on the original record or in a submission. It cannot be changed. An alternative to correcting the information is to submit the accurate information to Pedigree Resource File by visiting www.familysearch.org and using the Share option.

Thanks for that Kate. I suppose if they - the IGI - were asked to change things, it would take too long to verify who was right & who was wrong. Just goes to show, you should always double check all info that you find for yourself. Helen

I can see that the LDS don't want to change original information, but when it has been submitted by individuals who haven't checked their info, and then you are told to add the correct record as an EXTRA record, the IGI will soon contain more people than actually populated the world! My relatives seem to be relatively accurate, but I did once check out someone who apparently got married several years before he was born. nell

nell very clever your ancestors then, hee hee Joanne

A bloke who I work with is listed on IGI as dead! He was born in UK, went to live in the States as a child, but when he left, in his early twenties it seems as his Social Security details were cancelled, they have noted him as dead!

Gosh, it was only a joke everybody! Im quite aware that the IGI wont correct anything, although I really fail to see what use Helen Grimshaw married to Helen Grimshaw can ever be to anyone. Seriously, what a shame, this could have been such a wonderful resource, well, still is in part, its just that you have to wade through piles of rubbish to get anywhere.

Hi Marjorie, I sent them my tree with details which I know to be correct and where I didn't know put (approximate date of birth, marriage, death). That was 2 years ago, and they still have not inputted my data to the LDS site. Why, I wonder??!! Margaret

Hi Lesley Thanks for your offer to submit mistakes to the IGI! I am not talking about the genuine mistakes we all make, like going down the wrong path, Ive done that often enough, but that's only a mistake in that they arent connected to me, the information is still sound and presumably will be of use to someone. What I am talking about is the incomprehensible entries which just take up valuable space and slow everyone down. What use is "George Holden: Spouse - "My 3xgreat-grandmother" - this isnt a name, and as we dont even know who "My" is, its utterly useless. This is only one example, there are many many more, which often consist of two names, married, England. Useless, a guess on someone's part, presumably entered in the hope that they will one day find out more information. But this is supposed to be an INDEX of people who at least existed and had a name, not a sort of repository of your incomplete family tree. Or have I got it wrong?

Yes please - I am getting fed up of mountains of information which is completely useless. Places in Britain which seem to have moved (since when has Cambridge been in London and where is the county of "Stratfordshire"?) , names recorded a dozen times but with no other information and records which show a complete disregard for common sense (people marrying at the age of 2 or after they are dead, etc.). I am sure a great deal of it has been submitted to gain "brownie points" with no regard whatsoever for accuracy. I only ever believe a record if it can be traced back to a parish register batch number. Please, please, please would anyone submitting information make sure that it is or at least has a chance of being accurate.

JOAN - tee hee, no I havent actually, but if they have taken it off site to clean it up, then I will, of course, expect all the credit and everyone's undying thanks!