nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Off topic: chat

pinkypinky

I know there's not much going on the genealogy world but there's no reason we can't chat.

So this is a first for our board: an off topic chat thread. Please be nice!

So where's everyone gone these days? Are you all on summer holidays?

I'm not but I did just sit outside on freshly cut grass enjoying my lunch and my book (Ready Player One by Ernie Cline - love it!)

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Hermy

The Genealogical Society of Ireland have just posted this article to their Facebook page which reports that the JSTOR academic resource is now free to all to access.

Hopefully the current international shut down will lead to more announcements like this one.

L1011

I am slightly tempted to start a blank tree and going from basics again and only putting in things I have proof of - no family lore, no fudging - and see if I find any clangers from the work I started as a newbie years and years ago.

However, I've been doing 10 hour days since this all looked likely to kick off and its only calming down now, and my other history project has something more pressing, by virtue of being topical, so it may be a project for a few weeks away!

pinkypinky

Interesting way of looking at things.

I don't ignore the oral history from the family but if I can't verify it I don't put it in the tree. For example, my Dad always mentioned there were cousins called Ryan and it took me years to figure out who they were & add them to my tree, and then a few more to realise that, in fact, 2 sisters of my great-grandmother had BOTH married unrelated men called Ryan. So Dad was right, but unfortunately it was too late to tell him, and he really wasn't into genealogy!

Deja Boo

You would think that simply compiling the random pieces to the puzzle is what genealogy is about, but nooooooooooo... It's more like untangling Christmas lights! :eek:

I've more than a few genealogical riddles that will go unsolved.

kanadams123

I've been spending a lot of time on genealogy these times, like you all,!!

I've managed to find a number of incoming passenger lists to the US of some ancestors in the late 1890's early 1900's.

Does anyone know why Monticello, Iowa or Hanson County, North Dakota would be places of interest for Irish immigrants.

My great-grandfather's brother was destined to a cousin in Monticello, Iowa in 1899 when he first immigrated, even though he had a brother, sister and brother in law all living in New York.

He declared his intentions to become a citizen in the Circuit court of Hanson, North Dakota in 1903 when living in Alexandria.
Iowa and North Dakota are very far away from the port of New York, and there doesn't seem to be much in Alexandria, ND or Monticello, Iowa
.
He ended up in New Jersey in 1904 He also came back to Ireland in Oct 1904 until March 1905. I also wondered about this as his parents didn't pass away untill the 1920's and he only had one brother remaining in Ireland who lived till the 1950's.

When he returned to New Jersey he married in 1907 had a large family and lived in Hoboken, about a 5 minute walk from his brother and a 10minute walk from his sister and her family. Untill his death a few decades later

Deja Boo

I can only venture a guess at the thriving mining industry in Iowa at the time ?

I was wondering similarly about Pennsylvania migrations.

pinkypinky

Have a look at whatever local history society might cover the place he came from Ireland. They will often know the places that particular town chain migrated to and why.

Hermy

Hermy wrote: »

The Genealogical Society of Ireland have just posted this article to their Facebook page which reports that the JSTOR academic resource is now free to all to access.

Seems that article wasn't quite correct and has since been amended.

Deja Boo

Given the new trend of people posting icons like this (below) as profile pics on ancestry (which ugh :rolleyes: shows up as a hint on others trees)...

I have a sensitive question about personal famly photos please... Since any picture posted on ancestry becomes ancestry.coms property and people freely copy them to their own trees, I was wondering, how would you feel about having your old (some faded and torn) family photos copied, retouched and re-coloured? I have seen shared pictures being darkened and enlarged for detail - would the same apply to redefining and colouring your old pictures?

pinkypinky

I guess if I was willing to put them on Ancestry, I have to be prepared for what will happen them in the wild.

Deja Boo

I don't wish to be disrespectful to, nor misrepresentative of anyone.
...a few other ancestors pics were extremely faint, so just trying to get a clearer representation of what they must've looked like... is all.

spurious

Deja Boo wrote: »

I don't wish to be disrespectful to, nor misrepresentative of anyone. It's just that my dads only pic (whom I never met) was ripped to pieces.
...and a few other ancestors pics were extremely faint, so just trying to get a clearer representation of what they must've looked like... is all.

If you (or anyone here) would like any old photos scanned and fixed up a bit, I have nothing much to do for the next couple of weeks.

No charge, obviously (unless mental numbers of photos). PM for a postal address.

pinkypinky

That's a very kind offer, Spurious.

spurious

pinkypinky wrote: »

That's a very kind offer, Spurious.

It's not that hard to do, in fairness.

pinkypinky

Still, I'm sure it's beyond some people's ability.

I've been playing with that colourising tool on My Heritage: it's quite fun.

Deja Boo

wow, very kind spurious... there's a colour tool on my heritage?

Deja Boo

pinkypinky wrote: »

Still, I'm sure it's beyond some people's ability.

I've been playing with that colourising tool on My Heritage: it's quite fun.

ok that is incredibly cool, i tried myself colourising a face with ipiccy.... but this tool does the whole picture - wow!

Deja Boo

Spurious, that is seriously very kind of you. Thank you!

Deja Boo

lol, the colourizing tool on my heritage is hit and miss - some body parts get missed entirely... the limits of computerized images I'd say.

BowWow

BowWow wrote: »

When I started Genealogy a couple of years ago I went off on several tangents with the families of those who "married in".
My rule now is to put in full details of just the parents of those who married in. I look at this as a link for others to see what happened to a member of their family.

srmf5 wrote: »

I also restrict myself to just giving the parents' names of unrelated spouses. I like to include parents to give a bit of context for the spouse in terms of age and where they were born.

pinkypinky wrote: »

I stick those details or maybe a census link on the notes for the person but I don't include them in online versions of my tree, which is never the most complete or sourced version.

Done a lot on my tree over the last couple of weeks.
I decided to remove parents of "married in" where I had good details of the actual "married in" person. e.g. Things from like Birth record, Baptism, Census entry etc. I'm keeping notes on the parents if there' something interesting there. Tree is looking a lot "cleaner". Glad I did it.
Where I'm not happy about the details on the married in, I leave the parent(s) on the tree for further attention in the future

pinkypinky

I never include the families of married in people and don't research them, unless I think they're related in another way. I think it artificially bulks the tree.

KildareFan

pinkypinky wrote: »

I never include the families of married in people and don't research them, unless I think they're related in another way. I think it artificially bulks the tree.

I too, usually, confine married in information to parents on my Ancestry tree.

Unfortunately, at one stage I followed a red herring family for my great grandmother who was born on an island - there were two men of the same name & surname as her father on the island and for some reason I picked the wrong one.

As shown by DNA & it turned out that my line were not related to any of the families with the same surname on the island; my line were blow ins, possibly a coast guard in the early 1800s. I had accumulated vast amounts of information about the descendants of the red herring line. I hadn't the heart to shift the red herrings off my Ancestry tree as some of their descendants married into my family. So some people on the tree are still there because they are "aunt of the wife of second cousin once removed" or "great grandfather of husband of first cousin twice removed" ...

I have so many other genealogical decluttering tasks to achieve that I'm not sure if I'll get around to bumping the red herrings off my tree....

pinkypinky

Just a tangent thought, which I don't know if people do already but maybe it'll be helpful.

We all like to make use of the Ancestry hints and sometimes it's worth speculating about a possible parent to see what hints it suggests.

However, I never do this with my main tree on Ancestry. Instead, I create a new tree with the main relevant parties and add the speculations there. If it pans out, great, if not, my main tree is not contaminated.

Similarly, if I have a suspected branch but not yet enough evidence to tie them definitively, they go in a separate tree until I have it. This means I can still make contact with others researching these people and avail of hints, etc.

Deja Boo

That is so smart pinkypinky! ...thank you!

Can you transfer over your suspected trees data to your main tree easily, or must you reinput it all again?

pinkypinky

There's no way to merge trees at the moment, which is one of the reasons I make the speculative trees as small as possible and don't spend time adding the sources Ancestry suggests.

BowWow

Bought a grave record on the Glasnevin Cemetery site the other night. Just noticed on my debit card the reference is -

"Bohernabreena Cemetery(C/O South Dublin County Council).

Strange...

Rmulvany

Family Tree brick walls... is there any where on Boards where I can look for help with one?
It's my 2 x great grandparent. I cannot seem to find their marriage cert, and without that I am not certain of their parent, births etc to continue down that line.
Cheers

JDERIC2017

Rmulvany wrote: »

Family Tree brick walls... is there any where on Boards where I can look for help with one?
It's my 2 x great grandparent. I cannot seem to find their marriage cert, and without that I am not certain of their parent, births etc to continue down that line.
Cheers

if you want to give me the details here on private message, I will try to help you.

Hermy

Rmulvany wrote: »

Family Tree brick walls... is there any where on Boards where I can look for help with one?
It's my 2 x great grandparent. I cannot seem to find their marriage cert, and without that I am not certain of their parent, births etc to continue down that line.
Cheers

This is the place.

Start a new thread if you like detailing what you know and I'm sure we'll be able to help you out.

Rmulvany

JDERIC2017 wrote: »

if you want to give me the details here on private message, I will try to help you.

Hermy wrote: »

This is the place.

Start a new thread if you like detailing what you know and I'm sure we'll be able to help you out.

Cheers guys, I will start a thread sure