With all this talk about Rootsweb and Ancestry being flawed and then NFS will be flawed, which it already is. I have found just about as many "Published Books" to be flawed. The only difference, is that MORE people access these flawed internet recourses than buy the books. So yes, it appears that the internet has more flawed data, it just get accessed more and faster.
I have found that Rootsweb and Ancestry have been great resources, but one needs to verify ANY resource regardless of the source, internet, books and even family contacts. It also helps the verify those "transcriptions" that one is using, including the censuses. Remember that all of this rubbish is from us users and these company are just hosting the users data. We the users are responsible for this rubbish and we ALL have provided some one time or other. Sometimes, this rubbish is the result of a typo and gets spread. I have found more rubbish in data of my lines to be the results of improper abbreviations and postal codes. I try NOT to use any abbreviations or postal codes as they can be applied to the wrong country and/or state, i.e., CA is the postal code for what state and/or countries? Thanks, David C Abernathy Email disclaimers ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This message represents the official view of the voices in my head. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.SchmeckAbernathy.com == All outgoing and incoming mail is scanned by F-Prot Antivirus == -----Original Message----- From: Mike Fry [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 3:41 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] It's official - Legacy 7.5 is now available On 2011/01/19 13:35, David Hook wrote: > Ancestry and Rootsweb are also flawed databases. Census records and BMD > records have mistakes in them as well. The IGI is no different from every > other genealogical source - you have to look at all the information > objectively and come to your own conclusions. Anyone expecting any resource > to be 100% accurate and 100% reliable so that they can blindly copy the > information without putting any thought into it is just being lazy and isn't > doing proper genealogical research. And the big almost-certainty is, that the rubbish on Ancestry is going to find its' way on to the NewFamilySearch site. > As for this new feature, I'm probably not going to use it myself, but then > again I don't use all of the features in Legacy anyway. If it is helping > others with their research then I'm all for it. Neither will I. Particularly if I would lose control over whether I wanted to share information with the re-jigged site. -- Regards, Mike Fry Johannesburg Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
