Hints

Do you use the hinting system found on some of the genealogy websites? Or, are you one that only searches for specific information?

When I first started researching my family history, my process was centered around locating specific information. In reality, this research involved locating specific types of records and then using those records to search for my famiily.

Today, I am spoiled. Even though I will search for a particular set of records or county histories, I spend most of my research time following those hints. Since I primarily use Ancestry, those leaf hints often take me to obvious sources such as census records, Find a Grave memorials or vital records. Sometimes, they lead me to a record that I wouldn’t have thought to research.

That is the case with a hint for my great grandmother, Josie Winifred Hammond Crawford. I had already done quite a bit of research on Josie. Thus, when I saw a new hint, I thought it would be to another Ancestry member tree. Instead, I was surprised to find the hint leading to an obituary.

Since I live in Kansas, I have access to a wonderful newspaper collection at the Kansas State Historical Society. Thus, I had already found my great grandmother’s obituary in the Dodge City Daily Globe. This find was in my early days of research, when I transcribed portions of the obituary and took notes on the other parts.

Even though many of the Dodge City newspapers have been digitized, the 1954 issues have yet to be digitized. Thus, I was surprised to find that the Ancestry hint led to a copy of Josie’s obituary. This obituary was published in The Wichita Eagle (Wichita, Kansas) on 28 Sep 1954.

Pioneer of Kansas Dies at Dodge City

(Special to the Eagle)

Dodge City, Kan. Sept. 27 – Mrs. Josie W. Crawford, 79, widely known resident for many years here, died Monday morning in Trinity hosptial where she had been a patient briefly for treatment. She had been active until her final illness.

Born Feb. 9, 1875 in Know County, Ill., she came with her parents, Mr. and Mrs. Richmond F. Hammond to Pratt County. Two years later the family moved to a farm in Ford County southwest of Dodge City and later moved to Dodge city.

Miss Hammond was married to Judson F. Crawford Dec. 24, 1890. Mr. and Mrs. Crawford celebrated their golden wedding anniversary in 1940. Mr. Crawford died in February , 1949.

Mrs. Crawford had been active in Methodist work since girlhood and received her 50 year pin several years ago. Among her many public services Mrs. Crawford helped organize and was an active member of the East Side Bible Class organized in 1917 and still active.

Final rites are slated for w p.m. Wednesday in the First Methodist Church here with the Rev. Alvin W. Murray officiating. Burial will be in Maple Grove Cemetery here.

“Pioneer of Kansas Dies at Dodge City,” The Wichita Eagle (Wichita, Kansas), 28 September 1954, page 11; digital image, Newspapers.com (www.newspapers.com : viewed online 5 September 2021).

Without the Ancestry hinting system, I doubt I would have found this particular obituary for my great grandmother. Thus, I will continue to work thru these hints.

Panic

(Note: This was written on Thursday, August 5th – the morning after my panic.)

Do you ever read about some software update or change on an Internet site and think I need to do something NOW? Having been a building technology coordinator for over 20 years, implementing software updates sometimes required an immediate reaction. Thus, when I hear about a bug fix or a major change in an often used website, I tend to respond immediately.

On Wednesday of this week, there was a blog post written about a change in Ancestry’s terms and agreements. The post, One Big Change at Ancestry, by Judy Russell captured my attention. And I reacted – or looking back I panicked.

My thoughts were along the lines of

Ancestry is going to sell my pictures. I don’t want Ancestry to sell my pictures.

So, I started looking at how to take down my pictures. I don’t know why I was so concerned. I have had a genealogy website for years. And my genealogy work, including images, has been out there for others to see and use. I would guess that some of the family photos have been so widely spread that even though I have the originals in my possession, I probably can’t claim ownership. Because I shared them freely, they now belong to the greater family.

But, I panicked.

And I had over 670 screens of images in my media gallery on Ancestry. With 24 images on a screen, that is over 16,080 images.. Many of those images are of census records and other Ancestry sources. Buried in that multitude of images are the family photos. So in my panic, I started scrolling thru and deleting the photos and stories.

Knowing that there was no way I was going to be able to go thru 670 screens of images, I started looking for the ‘easy’ button to remove those images. And the only ‘easy’ way to delete the images is to take down the tree and put up a new one without the images.

Now, I knew I didn’t want to mess with my tree. I knew I didn’t want to mess with my tree!

• My tree is linked to 4 DNA tests and I didn’t want to loose those links
• My tree is linked to my RootsMagic file via TreeShare
• I knew that a new tree on Ancestry is virtually invisible to other users until it is indexed. Indexing trees does not happen very often.
• I like getting the light bulb hints in RootsMagic that are only possible because my RootsMagic file is linked to my Ancestry tree.

I knew all of this and I still panicked.

• I uploaded a new gedcom file without images to Ancestry.
• I connected that new file to my DNA kits.
• I tried to delete my original tree. Fortunately, Ancestry’s slow response saved me!
• I even disconnected my RootsMagic file from Ancestry.

Then, I realized that those light bulb hints in RootsMagic were gone. And, what I thought at the time, the only way to get those light bulb hints back was to create a new tree by using RootsMagic to upload my file to Ancestry.

I didn’t like my options. And I totally regretted my panic!

Then, out of curiosity, I wondered whether I could restore a backup to my RootsMagic file and restore the RootsMagic connection to my original tree. So I dug in my folder for backups to RootsMagic 7 for the most recent file and restored it.

AND the light bulbs were back!

Since I am in the habit of backing up RootsMagic several times a day – with unique file names, I didn’t loose much. This is especially true since I have been spending most of my time in the preview version of RM8. Restoring the backup file undid most of my panicked reaction. I was even able to restore my RM8 file and get it connected to my Ancestry tree.

There were a couple of voices of reason out there that I did not read until after my panic. The first one I read was a Facebook post from Michael John Neill.

The second voice of reason was from Randy Seaver. His post, Ancestry.com and Your Ancestry Member Tree, provides a good perspective on the issue.

As I was deleting images last night, I found that I had the exact same image of an individual in my media gallery multiple times. It made me wonder whether deleting the images would help Ancestry reduce their server load.

Hopefully, I have learned my lesson from this panic. Hopefully, the next time, I will sit on an issue for 24 hours before proceeding.

I am VERY thankful that I had recent backup files for both RootsMagic 7 and RootsMagic 8.

I am VERY thankful that my backup file restored my link between RootsMagic and Ancestry!

Making Connections

#CousinBait #52Ancestors

I know I’m going to date myself, but I remember the joy of finding Everton’s Genealogical Helper in our mailbox. I would pour through each issue looking for an ad that might connect me with a genealogical cousin. Finding such an ad would cause me to compose a letter with a pedigree chart or family group sheet attached and send it off with a SASE (Self Addressed Stamped Envelope). I would then wait for a reply. Sometimes, I would be the person posting such an ad. Again I would anxiously await any replies to my ad. [See article: Pre-Internet Cousin Bait}

Thru time, mailing lists, surname lists and message boards replaced the ads in the Helper. Even though those resources may still exist, I rarely use them. Browsing Anestry’s message boards and seeing fewer and fewer messages posted and many with no replies, it is obvious that others are not using this resource either.

So, what is being done to connect with cousins. My husband has successfully used Facebook groups for his ancestors to connect with living cousins. Even though I have befriended a lot of cousins on FB, I have not had the success that my husband has had. That is likely due to the fact that he is very active in his groups and tends to ignore anything and everything else on Facebook while I’m not very active in my family groups.

Instead of Facebook, I’ve been concentrating on this blog. I’ve shared photos, ancestral biographies, lists of descendants, sources and analysis of local records in my various blog posts.

In terms of sharing my genealogical data, I concentrate on my Ancestry tree, Heartland Genealogy. I am also adding sources and memories to the FamilySearch tree. Since I’m using RootsMagic 7 for my genealogical research, I also have a free site thru RootsMagic for my data.

Another way in which I try to connect with cousins is thru DNA. My Ancestry tree is connected to the four DNA tests I manage on Ancestry. To help make connections with DNA cousins, I am researching descendants of my 2nd and 3rd great grandparents. By doing this research, I’m hoping to provide a connection between my tree and a DNA match’s tree.

In order to connect with cousins who may have tested their DNA on a different site, I have transferred my Ancestry DNA to GedMatch, MyHeritage and FamilyTree DNA. Thanks to the use of GedCom, I have transferred my genealogical data to these sites. Thus, I have a tree connected to DNA on MyHeritage, GedMatch, and FamilyTreeDNA.

Thanks to my brother agreeing to do a yDNA test, his results are part of the CRAWFORD yDNA project. This project has a fantastic administrator and an associated Facebook group. I am also participating in the GedMatch project for Germanna descendants. Both of these projects are helping me connect to DNA cousins with ties back to the 1700s.

So cousin, if you find a connection to your research in my research posted on my tree or in my blog or via my DNA results, please contact me. I can be friended on Facebook as Marcia Crawford Philbrick, messaged in Ancestry or reached via email using mcphilbrick at gmail dot com as my address.

DNA Stats

Do you track your DNA statistics? At times, I’ve tried keeping track of these statistics but got frustrated when the way the information was reported would change. Thus, it became difficult to compare current data with previous data.

After seeing Randy Seaver’s post, Randy’s Autosomal DNA Test and Analysis Summary – 29 Dec 2020, I decided to compile my own DNA statistics.

ANCESTRY DNA

	Me	Brother 1	Brother 2	Parent
Total Matches	110,981	125,144	115,182	74,618
Immediate Family	3	3	3	3
1st Cousins (As defined by Ancestry)	1	1	1	4
2nd Cousins (as defined by Ancestry)	4	8	3	9
3rd cousins	33	40	9	36
4th cousin sharing 64 cM or more	11	13	7	13
Close Matches – at least 20 cM	3701	4641	3914	2709
Distant Matches 6-20 cM	107,280	120,503	111,268	71.909
Distant Relative group (6-8 cM)	67072	74374	68405	44670

When it comes to ‘common ancestors,’ I couldn’t find the number reported by Ancestry. Since I don’t want to have to try and count them, I’m going to guesstimate. I recently posted my ThruLines Summary thru my 4th great grandparents. For my ‘guesstimate,’ I’m going to use 1/2 of the total number of ThruLines thru my 4th great grandparents. This isn’t an accurate calculation.

	Me	Brother 1	Brother 2	parent
1/2 ThruLines thru 4th Great Grandparents	1065	1013	926	787

MY HERITAGE

	Me	Brother 1	Brother 2
Matches	14,725	10,746	10,281
Theory of Relativity	28	30	31
Smart Matches	3	5	4

GEDMATCH

	Me	Brother 1	Brother 2	Parent
64 cM or closer	12	13	11	17
34 cM or more	95	91	70	127

FAMILY TREE DNA

• Total autosomal matches to my DNA – 6257
• Total autosomal matches to brother 1’s DNA – 1677

FAMILY TREE DNA – yDNA results for brother

• yDNA matches at 111 markers with genetic distance of 4 – 1
• yDNA matches at 111 markers with genetic distance of 6 – 8
• yDNA matches at 111 markers with genetic distance of 7 – 4
• yDNA matches at 111 markers with genetic distance of 8 – 6
• yDNA matches at 111 markers with genetic distance of 9 – 3
• yDNA matches at 111 markers with genetic distance of 10 – 1
• Big Y R-^88686 haplogroup matches – 3

With over 100,000 matches for one DNA test, there is NO WAY I’m going to be able to document all of those matchers. However, I’m using the ThruLines matches to help support my paper research. Thus, all of those matches are important to me.

ThruLines Summary

It’s approaching that time of year when on reflects on the past year and looks forward to the next. Like most people, I’m ready for this pandemic to be over. However, I do like to look back on my genealogy to see how much progress I’ve made. In order to do that, I have to collect data for future comparison.

Thus, I’m going to collect data on my Ancestry DNA Thrulines. I am MC, my siblings are DC and TC and my parent is RC.

Great-Grandparents

Ancestor	MC	DC	TC	RC
Judson Crawford	8	8	8
Josie Hammond	8	8	8
Hiram Currey	3	3	3
Winnie Hutchinson	3	3	3
Edward Briles	8	8	8	8
Frances Ricketts	8	8	8	8
Charles Mentzer	9	9	9	9
Nettie Wells	9	9	9	9

2nd Great Grandparents

Ancestor	MC	DC	TC	RC
Washington Crawford	11	12	11
Mary Foster	11	12	11
Richmond Hammond	10	10	10
Sarah Ralston	9	9	9
Hiram Currey	8	7	8
Angelina Burke	8	7	8
Albert Hutchinson	25	22	22
Julia Harding	25	22	22
Noah Briles	10	10	10	10
Sarah Thompson	10	10	10	10
James Ricketts	9	9	9	9
Rachel Christy	9	9	9	9
George Mentzer	14	14	13	14
Emeline Minnick	14	14	13	14
Thurston Wells	16	14	15	16
Salome Crandall	13	13	12	13

3rd Great Grandparents

Ancestor	MC	DC	TC	RC
Nelson Crawford	12	15	11
Martha Smith	12	15	11
Zebulon Foster	15	19	19
Caroline Ostrander	15	19	19
Horatio Hammond	20	28	27
Louisa Fisk	20	28	27
James Ralston	30	34	30
Nancy McCormick	29	33	29
Hiram Currey	17	7	18
Rachel Harris	17	7	18
Henry Burke	8	7	8
Elizabeth Bland	8	7	8
Aaron Hutchinson	24	21	21
Sarah Merry	25	22	22
William Harding	51	40	56
Elizabeth Fowler	49	37	53
Alexander Briles	18	19	17	21
Sarah Rush	19	21	20	23
William Thompson	10	13	11	12
Polly Evans	10	13	11	12
John Ricketts	11	11	10	12
Orilda Reed	11	11	10	12
Samuel Christy	16	16	14	20
Lyda Gallmore	12	14	11	14
Phillip Mentzer	21	26	22	25
Orinda Miles	3	3	3	3
John Minnick	16	15	14	17
Elizabeth Jones	16	15	14	17
Ozias Wells	26	21	23	33
Mary Kennedy	26	21	23	33
Lewis Crandall	16	16	12	16
Almira Nafus	16	16	12	16

4th Great Grandparents

Ancestor	MC	DC	TC	RC
James Crawford	25	24	18
Sarah Smith	27	29	21
_____Smith	12	15	11
Hannah _____	12	15	11
Richard Foster	43	48	45
Rachel Browning	43	48	45
Edward Ostrander	30	31	25
Margaret _____	30	31	25
Jason Hammond	27	34	38
Rachel Hale	27	34	38
Jonathan Fisk	25	26	27
Mary Arnold	13	7	12
David Ralston	46	47	39
Hannah Barr	46	47	39
James McCormick	4	4	4
Sarah Hall	28	31	26
Hiram Currey	21	14	25
Sarah Reagan	21	13	28
Peter Harris	16	6	17
Rachel VanArsdale	16	6	17
John Burk	45	42	33
Elizabeth Graves	51	47	37
Eli Bland	9	12	9
Sarah Anderson	9	12	9
Aaron Hutchinson	21	19	19
Hannah Nettleton	21	19	19
Whiting Merry	22	20	20
Elizabeth Peabody	22	20	20
William Harding	66	48	76
Elizabeth Flewelling	66	47	76
Thomas Fowler	45	37	50
_____ _____	45	34	48
John Briles	150	120	57	200
Nancy Beckerdite	147	120	57	196
Noah Rush	82	102	84	112
Sarah Clark	82	101	84	111
John Thompson	13	22	25	39
Sarah Iglehart	13	22	25	39
James Evans	14	20	26	32
Sarah Garret	14	20	24	30
Edward Ricketts	10	9	8	10
Sarah Story	10	9	8	10
John Reed	39	27	24	42
Mary Buckles	59	47	37	66
Ebenezer Christy	29	28	29	41
Rachel _____	29	28	29	41
Isom Gallimore	70	66	46	97
Judith Bentley	69	66	46	96
Phillip Mentzer	18	22	18	21
Isabella Motes	18	22	18	21
Oliver MIles	24	23	22	26
Sarah Joslin	24	23	22	28
_____ Minick	5	3	4	5
Esther Schiedel	18	15	15	16
Henry Jones	17	16	21	24
Catherine Bovey	17	16	21	24
Green Wells	33	29	27	37
Abigail White	33	29	27	37
John Kennedy	26	24	23	35
Anna _____	7	5	7	10
Hampton Crandall	34	34	32	34
Freelove Butler	34	34	32	34
William Nafus	30	30	14	32
Salome Carpenter	28	27	13	28

Alternate Names

Have you learned thru the years that spelling matters when doing an Internet search? On the other hand, have you found that spelling of names varies — and thus a specific spelling doesn’t matter any more? That need to be able to search for various spellings of a name was behind the development of the Soundex code.

Soundex code was very valuable in pre-Internet days for locating census records. It can still be used today with searches of Ancestry’s databases. Unfortunately, this concept isn’t used when Ancestry’s computers compares the trees of people who have a DNA match to identify the common ancestor. Instead, the computer is looking for an exact match.

As I’ve started researching an ancestor that Ancestry identified as a potential match, I’m running into spelling issues.

This new ancestor is a revolutionary war veteran, Major Simon Van Arsdale. In addition to his revolutionary war service, Simon Van Arsdale was part of the Low Dutch Settlement that migrated to Kentucky.

The discovery of Simon Van Arsdale as a potential ancestor is opening up doors to other potential ancestors and a lot of interesting history. Unfortunately, the spelling of the Van Arsdale name is making it difficult to locate records and to identify DNA matches. So far, I’ve identified the following spellings for this surname:

• VanArsdale
• Van Arsdale
• Van Arsdalen
• Vanarsdall
• Vannarsdall
• Van Artsdalen
• Van Osdol
• Vanosdol

For the most part, clicking to also use Soundex when searching Ancestry databases will help me get around the many spellings of the name. However, that option isn’t available when working with DNA matches. I recently learned that I should use the ‘alternate name’ fact to add variations on the spelling of a name.

This morning as I was thinking about the need to add ‘alternate name’ facts for Simon Van Arsdale, I saw a Facebook post questioning why Ancestry’s computers can’t find common ancestors when both parties of a DNA match have large trees. I believe the same post also talked about how changing the spelling of a name (Fannie to Fanny) caused the number of matches on a ThruLines to drop. In the comments on the post was a suggestion to add an ‘alternate name’ fact for the different spelling of the name. (Unfortunately, I haven’t been able to find this post back. Thus, I can’t give credit to the parties who wrote the post and the comment.)

In thinking about this question as to why the computers aren’t finding the common ancestors, I realized that spelling of surnames and name variations could be a big issue with my tree. I have a lot of places in my tree where the name I have could be slightly different from the name another person might have in their tree. However, I have one surname where this could be a big issue: CURREY.

Over the years, I have found that when the name is spelled with the ‘e’, the record is usually for someone in my line. I have also found records using the CURRY spelling that are for individuals in my line. Thus, the name could be spelled CURREY or CURRY. Since I only have the CURREY spelling in my direct ancestral line, I’m going to experiment with adding CURRY as an alternate name to see what happens to my ThruLines.

Below are the number of ThruLines matches for each generation of my CURREY line:

• Hiram Currey – Dodge City – 1866-1943 —– 3 matches
• Hiram Currey – Leavenworth – 1835-1901 —– 7 matches
• Hiram Currey – Peoria – 1787 – ? —– 16 matches
• HIram Currey – Ohio –? – ? —– 22 matches
• Thomas Currey — Ohio — ? – ? —– 16 matches

I will add the ‘CURRY’ alternate name for each ancestor and their children. Then I will re-check my numbers in a few days. Hopefully, I will see the number of matches increase!

Small cM DNA Matches

Do you remember having conversations with your parents similar to ‘Why can’t I? Everyone else is doing it.’ Well, that is how I sometimes feel when it comes to my DNA research strategy. In other words, I often haven’t had a specific strategy, but was following the ‘crowd’.

That was at least true when I submitted my spit to Ancestry to have an autosomal DNA test completed over 4 years ago. At the time, I didin’t know much about DNA but was hoping that it would help break down the numerous brick walls in my family tree.

It was only after getting my results back that I started learning about the perceived limitations of these results.

• Autosomal DNA can help identify ancestors within last 5-7 generations. (Family Search DNA FAQ)
• Small cM matches are often false positives (When Is a Match a False Positive)

Since my tree was already complete thru 5 and 6 generations and mostly complete thru 7 generations, my hopes of using my Ancestry DNA results to prove a new ancestor were dashed.

Then came the summer of 2020 when Ancestry announced that it had plans to remove the 6 and 7 cM matches from our lists of matches. Since Ancestry had also recently announced that over 18 million people had had their DNA tested by Ancestry, I knew that these smaller matches were adding to the data load. Thus, I looked at this move for what it was – a cost saving measure.

That was until I looked at my own ThruLines data and realized that I had ‘brick wall shattering’ information in my ThruLInes that utilized quite a few of these smaller matches to build these connections.

Thus, I started working to tag these smaller matches — starting with those identified as having a common ancestor. In working thru these matches, I found matches to support my paper research identifying Rachel Harris, daughter of Peter Harris as my third great grandmother. These matches helped me identify Peter’s wife along with the parents of Peter Harris and his wife, Rachel Simonse VanArsdale. This discovery led me to three revolutionary war ancestors and a very rich family history going back to the 1600s.

Knowing that there had to be other ‘yet to be identified’ common ancestors lurking in this pool of 6-7 cM matches, I decided I was going to try and tag as many of these matches as I could. Roberta Estes provided some guidance on how to do this in her blog on July 16: Ancestry to Remove DNA Matches Soon – Preservation Strategies with Detailed Instructions. So, I started by searching these matches for some of my surnames and then tagging them. Since this was a slow labor intensive process, I knew that I wasn’t going to be able to save very many of these matches.

Then I saw a post by Roger Froysaa on the Facebook group, Ancestry DNA Matching where Roger shared a script that could automatically tag these 6 and 7 cM matches. Roger not only shared several versions of his script but also wrote a script to cause the list of matches to scroll to the bottom. These scripts worked — to a point. I would either get an ‘Aw Shucks’ your browser crashed OR a message from Ancestry that their backend servers were overtaxed. Charles Updike shared changes to the script, including a different script to scroll to the bottom.

This morning, I saw another post on the AncestryDNA Matching group about these scripts. This post was by Kay Simpkins where she shared a script written by Earl Haiks. I found the script in one of Kay’s comments on her post and copied/pasted it into Notepad.

After reading all of the comments on Kay’s post, I realized that I didn’t have to sort out the 6-7 cm matches, I just had to run the script. I renamed my ‘6-7 cM Matches’ group and called it ‘Distant Relatives’ so that I wouldn’t have to edit the script shared by Kay. I then ran it on my matches — and it was QUICK and I didn’t get any of those error messages. In about 4 hours early this morning, I was able to run this script on five tests. I still have one test to run the script on but am waiting until tonight when it should run faster than midday.

Below are the stats for these five kits:

SUCCESS AT LAST!

Now, I just have to continue researching ancestors / descendants on my tree so that Ancestry’s computing power can figure out the common ancestor for these distant matches.

None of this would have been possible if others had not been willing to share via a blog post or Facebook community. Thank you Roberta Estes, Roger Froysaa, Charles Updike, Kay Simpkins and Earl Haiks for your contributions to this conversation. Also a shout out to Jason Lee for creating and administering the AncestryDNA Matching Facebook group.

Help Needed!

As with many other genealogists, I’m struggling with the upcoming loss of small matches from my Ancestry DNA match list. I have no idea how many of these matches I have but I’m guessing it is in the thousands.

Since I will never have the time to work thru thousands upon thousands of matches to figure out how we connect, I’m hoping to use Ancestry’s computer technology to help me. Thus, I’m concentrating on my ThruLines matches, including the “potential ancestors”.

I have done a lot of descendancy research which I believe is helping Ancestry’s ThruLines technology connect me to DNA matches who have very small trees. Seeing the words ‘No Tree’ or ‘Unlinked Tree’ in my list of matches means I will scroll right past the match and will never take the time to figure out our relationship.

Thus, I need my over 100,000 matches to have a searchable tree attached to their DNA test(s).

• Tree size doesn’t matter – put in as much as you know (parents, grandparents, etc.) [Getting Started, Lesson 1 – Starting Your Tree]
• Private or Living can be used for the name of a living individual in your tree
• Adding brothers and sisters for each generation will help connections be made
• Make your tree searchable [Family Tree Privacy]
• Attach your DNA test to this tree [Linking an AncestryDNA Test to a Tree]

PLEASE help me figure out our DNA connection by attaching a tree to your DNA results.

Completeness Part Two

Have you seen Ancestry’s recent news that they will be dropping smaller matches from our list of DNA matches? (Ancestry to Remove DNA Matches Soon) With over 100,000 matches on my list, I’m not sure I will miss most of those small matches.

However, I decided to look at my ThruLines and Common Ancestors matches to see what the impact might be. Since I have four DNA tests to manage, including my mother, I decided to start with the 5th great grandparent ThruLines. My goal is to add color coding dots and notes for ALL of the matches for each match listed on ThruLines.

As I’ve worked my way thru all of these 5th great grandparent ThruLines, I observed some matches with very small trees where the common ancestor was identified.

After finishing the 5th great grandparent ThruLines, I then looked at 6-7 cM matches who have an identified common ancestors. Going thru that list, I again observed quite a few small trees showing up as having a common ancestor.

Since I have done a lot of descendancy research, I’m guessing that all of that research is helping Ancestry’s computers to make these ‘common ancestor’ links between these small trees and my larger tree.

Unfortunately, there isn’t a magical report to ‘grade’ me on my research of descendants. However, seeing these DNA matches with small trees showing up with common ancestor connections is enough validation for me.

Thus, I will continue to work on my descendancy research — after I get done marking my 6-7 cM matches that appear to have a known connection.

For more information on how to do descendancy research, check out Crista Cowan’s video: What Is Descendancy Research.

ThruLines Error

Recently Jason Lee posted a Facebook poll asking whether readers agree or disagree with the statement, “All ThruLines errors are because of errors in trees.” As of today, 802 people agree with that statement, while I am in the minority of 120 people disagreeing.

The reason, I disagree with the statement is that the ThruLines for my 2nd great grandfather, James Crawford. This ThruLines suggests that William Monroe as a child of James Crawford based on a DNA match with a known 3rd cousin once removed.

Even though this match has a very small tree, she has enough in her tree that our trees should connect. Eugene Beggs, son of Walter Beggs and Ethel Anita Lighter is in both of our trees. My match’s tree includes Eugene Beggs’ father, Walter, but not his mother, Ethel Lighter.

Thus, our common ancestors are Washington Marion Crawford and his wife, Mary Foster. Not only is ThruLines suggesting an incorrect connection on the Crawford line but also on the Foster line. This time, it is suggesting Margaret E. Jordan as a daughter of Zebulon Foster.

In hopes of getting the algorithm to correct these ThruLines, I added this cousin to my tree several months ago. Unfortunately, I haven’t observed any change in the ThruLines. Not only do I have Eugene Beggs and his link to Washington Marion Crawford and Mary Foster in my tree, I have also researched these families and attached sources.

I keep hoping that the computer algorithm for ThruLines will discover this connection and show the correct way our lines connect.

Although I haven’t researched all of the suggested connections thru ThruLines, I haven’t found other errors. For the most part, I have been able to document the suggested connections. Because the ThruLines tool helps me see connections between myself and my DNA matches, I appreciate the information provided. However, I wish there was a way to report this ThruLines error to Ancestry. Unfortunately, I haven’t found such ability.