Johann GREYLING - Use of Myheritage family trees as sources

The entries that I, Koos Greyling entered are from the document " DIE GREYLING FAMILIE IN SUID AFRIKA" so I think that they are correct. I cannot be sure about other entries made.

Koos Greyling

The correctness of the entries in this profile are not the issue. My issue is using the Myheritage trees as source documents.
I did not intend to imply that these entries are incorrect and apologise if i created that impression. I needed a starting point for my argument.

A better example would be this profile
Dina Judith Geertruida Woudrina Cronjè, b3
Her maiden surname is given as Rall, Rail and Rahl.
My wife is her direct descendant and the family all use Rall.

Peter, I understand what you are saying on this - MH have many trees which are straight replicas of GENi using GEDCOM downloads - many of them with errors that have since been corrected on GENi (because we have this amazing collaborative network of people working to get the most correct tree) but which have not been followed up on MH. So I do not quote MH as sources although I confirm the match which removes the blue bubble. Where there are blatant errors it is not a bad idea to contact the manager and say so - hopefully we will be able to make comments some time in the future. Confirming the match doesn't use it as a source - it is just an acknowledgement that the match is correct - that it is the same person. It doesn't confirm the data, and where there are errors in the MH information it is a good idea to draw attention to the conflicts in the about section of the profile.

However - every so often I do come across a Smart Match that does provide new information, and then I treat it like any other source - I look to see if I can confirm the information in some other way. So in conclusion - we need to use them as best we can and with the same integrity we use with all our research.

June , as you point out the MH profiles sometimes contain new information. My objection is the use of these profiles as sources.
In the profile we are using for the discussion they have been listed as sources upwards of 60 times. The actual source " Die Greyling Familie in Sud Afrika " is never mentioned.

I have been so free as to indicate Not a match if the MH profile definitely has errors. The idea was to prevent an enthousiastic Geni manager who does not have the facts from indicating it as a match and then another enthousiastic Geni manager starts to add the incorrect information on Geni, simply because the second enthusiastic Geni manager gained the impression that the match could be a source as well. Hope this approach does not get me into trouble :-)

I hesitate to go along this path again. To indicate that it is not a match or indeed to communicate with the creator of the profile you need to pay a subscription to MH. I used to have one but abandoned it in favour of Geni. I feel as if i am been held to ransom.

Understand that, Peter. Did pay a subscription and discovered a section of my family that was completely unknown to me. Do not know who I would have found them otherwise in the same time span. That discovery was worth the subscription fee for sure, but I do not guarantee others will have the same positive results :-) :-)
Plan is to walk through the main branches and check my brick walls to see if something new turns up within the year that my subscription is valid and then I intend to stop it for a number of years at least. Almost done with the checking now after about six months...

I agree, Peter. The option 'add this match as a source' should not be used. The mere fact that another researcher has found that there is a match can never make it a source.

I've found profiles with 19 'sources' - all MH matches in which the information don't always even agree.

I agree Jansi - I do not use the source button UNLESS there is definitely new information there. I would sooner have them as confirmed matches than blue balloons!

My Penny is - be polite. Don't just remove unless you have asked the person who added it. Sometimes it could be that the one you delete is one that somebody has cone the extra mile and actually went to the Archive, or Church Archive or LDS Centre and not just grasped it of the internet.
I have long ago added sources that I myself, have reseached in the Archives, etc, added and then suddenly found it removed. That irritated me heavily. June will remember the actions.
And the I don't take matches from these so called sources on this other programme. I was there, paid my fee's and found so many wrong information that I stopped there completely. I don't want to say the name but you all know what I mean.

My three sources for Jan(Johann) Greyling SV are all the same:
Jan (Johann) Greyling v. Linz in Sakse. Aank. 1725, soldaat, later burger op Stellenbosch, messelaar. x 31.8.1727 Johanna Lübbe; xx 9.10.1735 Jacomina Peltzer.

I made the mistake of using MH as a source for my grandmother, because it added information only to realize that her date of death on the MH source was 1953 instead of 1983 - I would also stay clear of using MH as source from now on. Like Private User I shall still use MH for a year as a research tool, but thereafter I am following Peter Dennis...Gone fishing!

peter, if you check eGGSA and GISA you will find that spelling od surnames differed because the person writing the baptism register used his own idea of spelling the surname eg greyling - greijling so anything is possible.

My objection is to using the MH profile as a source document as was done in this profile. Rather use the original documentation.
I am well aware of differences in spelling on official documents as well. Not always the fault of the official either often the result if the informants lack of knowledge. However that is not the point of the argument.