Hints/Potential Ancestors
Shockingly, Ethel Neel went missing! My great-grandmother disappeared from Ancestry’s ThruLines® one day. DNA matches to close and distant Neel relatives proved my relationship to that family. This was an odd glitch. Where 8 great-grandparents should be listed, only 7 and a blank spot remained. No alternate ‘Potential Ancestor’ showed up to replace her. Technical support pleasantly accepted my report without identifying the underlying cause of my vanishing ancestor. The suggested process was to search through the trees of every DNA match to find any discrepancies and contact the tree owner to fix them.
Was that even possible? Daunting, but… detective hat on! Just call me Holmes. Sherlock Holmes.
First, I spent some time on my own tree. Maybe I had caused Ethel’s sudden disappearance. I verified relationships, genders, marriages, and all appeared correct. I even tried disconnecting Ethel and her husband from the family line. Both suddenly appeared on ThruLines® as my Potential Ancestors, which suggested all DNA matching was still intact. Reconnecting them didn’t help. Great-grandfather, Robert Guthrie, reappeared, but his wife Ethel Neel did not. The glitch remained.
Days went by before I found it. I kept returning to the scene of the crime determined to find a clue. Searching through my matches, I discovered that the Common Ancestors for a close cousin listed my great-grandfather Robert Guthrie as his own spouse. A connection error in their tree was at the root of the problem causing a vanishing ancestor on my ThruLines® list. My cousin fixed the error. Fortunately for me he was still active on Ancestry and willing to alter his tree. Ethel has now made her reappearance.
If something looks a little off in your ThruLines® connections, it might not be you or your tree that is the cause of the problem. A little investigative work might be in order, not to mention a need for collaboration with cousins near and far.
The way we list the people in our individual trees can affect whether or not the ThruLines® algorithm will pick it up. In addition to looking at the relationships in your tree, it pieces together information from trees belonging to your genetic matches, and everyone else with a similar tree in order to fill in the blanks. This creates those Potential Ancestors. It also excludes some of your genetic matches from your list if their tree data is different enough that it doesn’t match your tree. Given names, nicknames, surname variances, dates of birth/death, and locations can determine if the algorithm places your cousin on your ThruLines® list and if it puts them in the right place.
People who share ancestry with you may show up on your DNA match list, but they might not be on ThruLines® if their tree has alternate information. The algorithm may add them in an incorrect way because they have a difference in their tree, or because there are enough errors in multiple trees to override what’s listed in yours.
One of ThruLines® greatest potential uses is the identification of Potential Ancestors. Keeping in mind that these hints are taken from multiple trees that may or may not have any actual research behind them, please consider the listed ancestors as clues. Do not simply copy the data to your trees.
My ancestor Hugh Barnett McWhorter was married twice. The first wife, who was the mother of his children, remains unidentified. He married his second wife, Elizabeth Ludderdale, when they were both in their 60s having no children of their own. ThruLines® listed Elizabeth as my Potential Ancestor indicating I had over 90 DNA matches to both of them. The actual genetic matches belong to Hugh’s unidentified first wife, not Elizabeth Ludderdale, but until everyone listing her name as their ancestor removes it, the algorithm will apparently continue to place her there. I have (passive aggressively) added “Unidentified” as the name of Hugh’s first wife, which now shows up on my ThruLines® page with zero matches. It cannot substitute the actual wife’s family name because the technology is simply pulling data from attached trees. While it can extrapolate data, it won’t necessarily overrule what it considers the majority result even when that result is an identity error.
My recent frustrations with Ancestry’s ThruLines® are just an example of the hurdles amateur genealogists face when building and maintaining our Family Trees. It is very exciting to use genetic clues and the tools that help us add newly discovered generations. We cannot overlook the fact that this is still a developing technology that draws its information from us. We are not infallible, and as long as human errors pop into our trees, there will still be a need to slow down and look at the clues one by one. ThruLines® is here to enhance our research, not replace it.
Nicely written short story. I did not know that one bad tree could overrule yours and others in ThruLines. Thanks for the heads up. I too have a couple distant ancestor suggestions that the are very dubious based and probably not correct. These are clearly caused by other poorly sourced trees.
Unfortunately, our tendency to cut/paste easy info into our trees sets us up for trouble. Even a tree with seemingly good documentation should be considered a clue rather than fact. Today’s programs pull the random information attached to our trees into a seamless family story. Finding the same information in twenty trees does not make it correct if the original tree owner made an identification error. Five minutes of research might reveal that the suggested ‘ancestor’ had no children who survived to adulthood, or that the data posted for one person is actually merged data for two unrelated individuals. Anyone who disagrees with the data posted in a tree or a website (including this one) about shared ancestors should strike up a conversation. Family trees and sites like this one are public for a reason. Genealogy is meant to be shared. Sometimes we have to come together to discuss those theories and suggest corrections.
Thanks for the insight Ann!
This helped explain some of the frustrations I have had with ThruLines and a stepgrandfather I have. I could NOT get him out of my ThruLines without completely deleting him from my tree. I felt bad, but it was literally an entire line of actual biological ancestors gone. Too many dna matches listed him as my mom’s biological father in their trees because legally he was her father. My grandmother had an affair while married to her first husband (DeRousie). My mom was born while she was still married to the first husband and he is on her birth certificate. Although my grandmother eventually did marry my mom’s bio dad (Larsen), her maiden name was DeRousie, and not Larsen. Now I did make a “work-around” and changed my mom’s maiden name to her bio dad’s name (Larsen), and that seemed to solve the problem for me. I understand folk’s confusion. I did leave many comments on my mom’s profile explaining why I had done this. But it also allowed me to add the stepgrandfather (DeRousie) back into my tree without affecting my ThruLines.
I have a tendency to ignore the “potential” ancestors given in ThruLines, but I will start taking a close look.
Kelly
The situation with your grandfather and step-grandfather is a great example of the human factor in this computerized cascade effect. It’s a case of seeing but not comprehending. I am guilty of cut/pasting when I collect data, but I do try to work through basic verification, too. Eventually, more detailed research comes into play. In your situation, I can see how that error might spread because people are looking at dates of birth/marriage and don’t have the story behind it unless they take the time to read your notes.
Those “potential” ancestors are definitely worth exploration. They are there for a reason. That reason might be a well-documented lineage, or a complex series of blunders, but the time and research you put into reviewing the family connections could actually lead to further legitimate discoveries for your family tree.
Thank you, Ann! I’m sure each of us has some form of this problem, but unlike you, we don’t go the extra mile to find the answer.
And thank you for all your continuing hard work for all of us.
Pat Dunford
Excellent article!