From roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com Sun Feb 26 17:14:40 2006 Received: from mail.rootsweb.com (mail.rootsweb.com [192.168.65.34]) by admin.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k1R0Eejb031595; Sun, 26 Feb 2006 17:14:40 -0700 Received: from roots-l.rootsweb.com (roots-l.rootsweb.com [66.43.16.22]) by mail.rootsweb.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k1R0Ebmc029085 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2006 17:14:37 -0700 Received: from roots-l.rootsweb.com (roots-l [127.0.0.1]) by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id k1QLj3FI006018 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2006 16:45:03 -0500 Received: (from roots-in@localhost) by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.8/Submit) id k1QLj3cm006017 for roots-approved@rootsweb.com; Sun, 26 Feb 2006 16:45:03 -0500 Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [66.43.27.41]) by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id k1QGEiFI005390 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2006 11:14:44 -0500 Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) id k1QIi6ar027293 for roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com; Sun, 26 Feb 2006 11:44:06 -0700 X-Envelope-From: Kith-n-Kin@cox.net Sun Feb 26 11:44:06 2006 Received: from mail.rootsweb.com (mail.rootsweb.com [192.168.65.34]) by admin.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k1QIi6jb027284 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2006 11:44:06 -0700 Received: from fed1rmmtao08.cox.net (fed1rmmtao08.cox.net [68.230.241.31]) by mail.rootsweb.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k1QIi3Cf012062 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2006 11:44:03 -0700 Received: from TOWER ([68.0.155.47]) by fed1rmmtao08.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20060226184103.EMIH26964.fed1rmmtao08.cox.net@TOWER>; Sun, 26 Feb 2006 13:41:03 -0500 From: "Kith-n-Kin" To: "'Cairril'" , Subject: RE: [ROOTS-L] WILDER: How to record conflicting research Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 11:44:01 -0700 Message-ID: <008801c63b04$9f516f20$6401a8c0@TOWER> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.52 on 192.168.65.34 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.52 on 192.168.65.34 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by admin.rootsweb.com id k1QIi6jb027284 Sender: roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com Presumably the "split" occurs with a specific ancestor couple? In other words, going back in the line, at some point the "wrong" parent(s) are entered? Depending on your software, you can put in both lines. The Master Genealogist will allow you to have "father-candidate", "mother-candidate" etc. One couple, or parent, you set as "primary" but the other line is still there, and listed on the page where the split occurs. I have trouble getting around the idea that you would have "either/or" entries for very many people -- except for cousin marriages, perhaps. I checked the website you mentioned and find that the discrepancy would be at best in one generation, and the ancestors of that person. As to researching the sources of the "new" material, of course you have to! Just as you were checking sources for the first set, and found this "contradiction". In entering the "new" candidates and their respective ancestors, siblings, etc., I would simply list Ralph Dean Clark and the website as the source. Then, as you have the time and inclination, check Ralph's sources. Look at it this way -- you trusted a book that wasn't well sourced, surely you can trust what appears to be pretty well researched, as much. I can't say whether Reunion will allow for "candidate" parents, but I'd give it a try, if I were you. The other option is to "unlink" the "old" parents and "link" up the "new" lineage. This would leave the "old" in the database. A note at the "end of line" in both directions would help you keep track. And, in the "new" lineage, a note should be at the juncture to explain why you have chosen this set of parents over the other. But you don't have to remove any of the information. Good luck. Pat (in Tucson) |-----Original Message----- |From: roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com |[mailto:roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Cairril |Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 22:13 |To: ROOTS-M@rootsweb.com |Subject: [ROOTS-L] WILDER: How to record conflicting research | | |Hello, | |I have entered a considerable amount of information into my genealogy |program (Reunion for Mac) about the WILDER family based on "The Book |of the Wilders" by Moses Wilder. | |I've just come across a website |(http://ralphinla.rootsweb.com/wilder.htm) which asserts that Moses |Wilders' research is unreliable. It offers a very different genealogy. | |I'm now faced with deciding which lineage to put into my software |program. I can't have "either/or" entries for each person, and there |are tens if not over a hundred entries that this could affect. I |don't have the resources to research every primary source this |website offers, so can't double-check everything myself. But I do |want to be as accurate as I can. But I don't want to lose any data! | |Anyone have suggestions for how they've dealt with this sort of thing? | |Thanks! |Cairril |www.millsgen.com |-- |Cairril.com Design & Marketing, Inc. |Smart Work. Great Results. |www.cairril.com | ph 812.331.1045 |cairril@cairril.com | fx 413.647.0238 | |