Genealogy "do-over"

[Sue from Southend]

I've just come across this blog that suggests going back to the beginning and starting your tree all over again and doing it properly ie recording all the sources and evidence at time of "finding" etc

http://www.geneabloggers.com/announcing-genealogy-doover/

He talks some sense - I own up to not having recorded all my sources and those that are cited are not always done the correct way and some are recorded twice due using different software. I have on several occasions made desultory attempts to clean up my tree but more often than not get side tracked into new research :o. But as much as I like the idea of a fresh start I'm really not sure that I could it, that initial thrill that I had when I started has dissipated and I think it would become as much of a chore as editing the existing tree!

Has anyone here ever gone back to the beginning or considered it?

[kiterunner]

Well, he says his reason for doing this is "Did you start your research the same way I did, by just collecting names, grabbing stuff from other online trees, or pasting text into your genealogy software?"

I should think for anybody who started that way and hasn't thoroughly checked everything, it would be a good idea to go back and check, but if you have checked everything from the start, I don't think you would exactly need to start all over again.

But I do go back through my tree reviewing it all the time, seeing if there is anything new I can add to each person's entry, any more children I can find for a couple, etc, since new stuff is becoming available all the time.

[Jill]

I haven't begun again but I'm grateful for the "Take one great grandparent" etc. threads - all my direct ancestors are quite tidy and presentable now as I have had to review them and smarten them up for public consumption.

[ElizabethHerts]

I haven't begun again but I'm grateful for the "Take one great grandparent" etc. threads - all my direct ancestors are quite tidy and presentable now as I have had to review them and smarten them up for public consumption.

I agree with Jill. The "Take xxx great-grandfather/mother" thread gives me the opportunity to re-visit past research and add to it, and also to record sources.

I couldn't start again, but I do try to tidy up my direct line. For some families I draw up a timeline. It is quite interesting to see the overlap of generations.

[Merry]

Well, he says his reason for doing this is "Did you start your research the same way I did, by just collecting names, grabbing stuff from other online trees, or pasting text into your genealogy software?"


Erm??? NO!! I didn't have a computer when I started researching!

I think I have sources recorded for 99.9% of the info on my tree. That's not to say I wouldn't do it differently if I started again, but that ain't happening!

One I would do differently is to use the facility on my tree program to record what I need to do next when I get stuck with a person/family. I should make more of an effort to record info about my parents as I rather glossed over them in my rush to go backwards!

[Phoenix]

Probably thirty years ago, I attended a lecture where I was told I was doing everything all wrong, and I should do it in a different way. So I started this new method. It was rubbish.

My old, pre-computer, method listed all my research in chronological order, cross referenced to index cards, supported by hand-drawn, dated trees.

The new method lasted about a year, but I never went back to my old ways.

To save time, I transferred the trees onto computer (pre internet) but of course not quite everything went on.

In the current absence of a home computer, so no access to my computer data, I have been sorting out my papers. I have a HUGE box of unfiled materials and the answers to several urgent questions that have been bugging me.

Go back to the start, AGAIN? No way. This is my tree, for my amusement.

As others have said, take one x grandparent has been excellent for focussing on dim and dusty aspects of my tree, but any refinement will be piecemeal, not wholesale.

Besides which, I have a certain smugness in the solutions which are not online, that I but nobody else has found, and nobody else has ever queried.

[JBee]

I'm just trying to get all my paperwork filed properly and it's a nightmare - I keep getting side-tracked - so starting at the beginning would be a no-no for me.

However I am trying to tidy up my online trees (several) and seeing what's missing. As most records are attached then it should be correct.

Have just gone back onto Take one x grandparent etc and Kite has already helped me. Thanks Kite.

[Olde Crone]

I sort of did! My tree was on paper - pre internet research. I decided to put it on Tribal Pages and because I had to enter everything that gave me a chance to check and look into holes that I'd left.

I do wish I had done proper sources and citations but it was SO BORING. My paper tree does have copious notes about where I looked and where I found things so I can usually back up my info if challenged! (Which I never, ever am).

OC

[Sue from Southend]

I think the reason this blog attracted me was because I had to redo a large part of my tree earlier this year after a massive computer failure and then discovering that my perfectly backed up FTM file wouldn't open on my new, all singing, dancing Microsoft Surface. I invested in Legacy (brilliant, by the way!) and downloaded an incomplete tree from Ancestry and began the task of re-entering a large amount of my tree checking sources and citations as I went. But I still don't think I could start completely from scratch - far too soul destroying!

As an aside I found the Take 1x gt grandparent etc very helpful in re - entering my tree!

[Kit]

The thought of starting again is horrifying.

I do go back and visit the main, and interesting (not always the same thing) parts of my tree to see if there is new information online so I do check what I have done in that respect. I would not do it all again though.

[JBee]

However it's worth looking at unfiled paperwork.

I was just about to send for a death certificate yesterday but thankfully didn't as I found I already had it in a box file of miscellaneous info (and it was wrong too).

[Kit]

That's lucky Julie. To buy 2 certs would be bad enough but to buy 2 wrong ones would be awful.

[Margaret in Burton]

That's lucky Julie. To buy 2 certs would be bad enough but to buy 2 wrong ones would be awful.

I've done just that. Ordered a death certificate, realised it was the wrong one when it arrived and went to file it with my other wrong certs and then realised I already had it.

[Rick]

However it's worth looking at unfiled paperwork.

.

Or as I call it, paperwork :d

[JBee]

I have filed paperwork in folders and properly sorted and unfiled paperwork in piles or boxes relating to different trees and different people Rick lol

[Rick]

I do have folders from years ago when I needed to buy certificates, but I haven't actually filed anything in them for ages !! I just have a big wobbly pile of papers that the cats like to topple over every now & then.

I am doing my own version of a do-over though. I used PAF for my tree for 10 years, but never did the sources properly - just recording them in the notes field. 2 years ago I exported a GEDCOM of 12,500 people and uploaded it to Ancestry. My intention was to revisit every person, confirm I had it correct and attach all the sources.

I've deleted about 200 people who were not correct, but added 1,700 more. I reckon it will take another 2 years to finish the exercise. My filing pile will be even more wobbly by then :)

[JBee]

wow Rick that is a big tree.

I'm working on about 6 trees at the moment and only have about half of that number all told and that is overwhelming.

What I'm trying to do is go through all the direct lines making sure I have everything attached correctly to each person. Then I plan to print all the certificates, census's off and file them - just in case I lose the internet I have written proof.

[Janet in Yorkshire]

I've found that making a new contact often results in me having to focus on outlying twigs, highlighting the need for further research on "forgotten" people. I always try to add some sort of "source" as I go along, mainly so that I can revisit the info if needed. My record might just say "1851 census Ancestry, recorded as Dudman; or LDS - PR image 132, but it gives me the necessary pointer.
I also print off some images and store others in computer files, but not attached to my tree.
I constantly do blanket searches for my main surnames in any new resource I come across, in the hope of finding new information.
Start again? I couldn't! I've been at it for 30 years and I doubt I'll still be here in another 30 years time.

Jay