Donald J. Trump, 45th President of the USA - Were you once connected to Donald J. Trump and now you're not?

Wow...from the time I posted that, to the time I clicked back on it, it mutated...

Just for the heck of it, here are some Mackenzie dna...

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mackenzie/default.aspx?section...

And Curators LOCK our NA lines but a President can lose his cousins in the blink of an eye. This needs resolved and apologies all around.
IMHO.

The short lived false path was user error and was never curator validated.

“Official” presidential pedigrees are in the hands of the Gary Boyd Roberts team at NEHGS, who published a preliminary report in 2017; the Geni tree was conformed to that source at that time (some screaming from users then also).

At some point in 2018, because we missed a relationship lock, perhaps, a member merged Donald MacLeod from the Isle of Lewis into Donald MacLeod from Thurso: this person - Commissary Donald MacLeod, of Whitefield near Thurso

Revisions tab can be viewed

Commissary Donald MacLeod, of Whitefield near Thurso#/tab/revision

Why dont some of you get it? It is basic (genealogical) research knowledge: If there are not verified sources, there are no proven connection. It is so simply as that!

You are wasting the curators’ time valued spare time, which they could use on some real research issues ,with your endless discussions – trying to prove you have an unverified connection (with no verified sources)!

P.S.

Like many others, I thought I had a common ancestor link through Margaret Cameron. It may be so or not. Due to lack of verified sources, it cannot be proven. Too bad. However, I fully accept this as a common sense person (and a long-term genealogist and historian). Maybe some of you should do the same!

Ya know...I got into this with someone else about the use of "common sense". So I take it as you are saying the rest of us people DON"T have any "common sense". If the curators thought this was a "waste" of their time, they wouldn't respond. This is why we have discussions. Apparently, THIS discussion is a waste of YOUR time....so maybe you should "unfollow" it.

“If the curators thought this was a "waste" of their time, they wouldn't respond.”

An interesting remark.

It’s at heart a basic “modus ponens “ argument — if A, then B (if curators respond here, they do not think they are wasting their time)

But there is an assumption behind it that has not been argued nor proven:

#Curators don’t do anything if they think it wastes their time

And underlying that of course would be other assumptions about what it is that curators do, how they make decisions about what issues to get involved in, what the expectations are for curator behavior, etc.

At any rate.

That someone is doing something doesn’t necessarily mean they consider it to be a valuable, non-time wasting activity.

Just saying.

Diana Collins, if you have questioned the curators’ way to handle this issue, you should all instead have used your common sense.

I do not how many times the curators have told you people that there are no verified sources as evidence for the connections to the people you people refer to as ancestors of Donald Trump. Most of the refered to persons are ”famous people”. However, before Donald Trump’s father there seems to be no verified ”famous” persons . Actually their seems to very verified ancestors at all!

If you and other read this one, you will discover that like many other of life’s aspects, verified sources are step one to identify if something is correct or not!

https://www.thoughtco.com/verifying-online-genealogy-sources-1421690

Re: “However, before Donald Trump’s father there seems to be no verified ”famous” persons . Actually their seems to very verified ancestors at all!”

I’ve been thinking about approaches to building the tree for President Trump.

The Isle of Lewis housed a small isolate group for centuries, perhaps always. Sustenance level farmers and fishermen living in a harsh environment in a feudal economy. And like other isolate groups, you don’t see movement and connection until the 19th and 20th century, when industrialization made emigration possible. And as in other populations from Scotland, their diaspora was to the former UK Colonies: USA, Canada and Australia.

Before then, the islanders originated from somewhere (in theory), and there were perhaps outliers who married in, thereby connecting with a different isolate population. Who in their turn had an outlier married in from a neighboring isolate, and so on.

Or perhaps there was one “adventurer” - a wild card - who connects the Isle of Lewis people with a more distant population? I have someone like that in my own American farmers. But - again - this was 19th century, when he could take the train across the continent.

What I don’t think we will find is landed gentry (including their ministerial and army 2nd sons) marrying fishermen’s daughters, and really, really not the opposite - army officer daughter marrying crofter, for example. Because dowry.

I've been having the same thought, Erica. The way to find a path for Trump is to build horizontally, not vertically. It's the exact same scenario with my Bahamian family -- you look for the third cousin who married someone, not the grandparent who descended from someone. Work in spirals, not lines.

I'll look around and see if there's a resource, maybe a Gàidhlig one, that we're missing re: broader island genealogy.

The curators are not wasting their time in responding. They are listening to people, using sources when provided by the "non-curator" geni users. Have trees only grown on geni strictly by the hands of curators? I think not. Us "common" folks have contributed an enormous amount of documents, photos, and input to help bring these trees together. Everyone has a right to question something. Not everyone is aware of every discussion that has ever happened pertaining to each and every profile. Curators may have to repeat things because of this unawareness. It may get old, but all that it takes is for someone to uncover a source that was overlooked before. Personally, this has happened with me. I found a record pertaining to a family member that was hard to detect because the census record misspelled a first name. Everyone's input should be taken into consideration...no matter how insignificant it may seem at the time. (NOT SAYING TO CHANGE TREES BECAUSE OF IT) Down the road, there may be just 1 thing mentioned in this discussion that may lead to a "breakthrough" in the whole matter.

Diana Collins

Wow! I agree wholeheartedly with you Diana! The separation of "armchair Geni detectives (again, a snarky description imo) and Geni Curators with or without documented credentials" is a river wide and deep.
How can these folks bridge the gap and/or make themselves more user friendly? My husband likes to point out that taking credit for other people's work is basically dishonest. If the "club" doesn't let in "new members" their viewpoints or current knowledge (without any credited new info) becomes stagnent and stale at best and outright, recycled gobbledygook at worst.

Hello Heather...my 12th cousin. Pleasure to meet you.

Well, attacking volunteer curators who serve Geni and its members (and are also Geni members) is pretty much guaranteed to lose our attention. :)

There is no “we” here, though, and it’s no special club.

My suggestion is do the genealogy work and tag someone when you need a curator’s helping hand.

Diana Collins, it is wasting the curators’ time, when people who have been disattached to each other due to lack of verified sources, continues insisting on getting attached again and the profiles to be unlocked.
All this just so you and others can claim that you have a direct ancestor relation to US President Donald John Trump, which makes it ridiculous!

Heather McLean Olson, some years ago Geni was one big mess due to users had attached people to each other either without using verified sources or not using sources at all. Back then, US President Donald John Trump if he had been in the database then would probably have been a distant cousin of Queen Elizabeth II, Idi Amin, Muhammed Gadhafi, Saddam Hussein, Kim Jung and Pol Pot if they had been in the database.

I find it strange, that you due to you maybe not having a direct ancestor relationship with US ends up concluding, that the curators together form a club that is in opposition to you!

The curators have done a great job – putting a lot energy into it together with normal users – cleaning up the Geni database, and they constantly improves the database by checking what is entered is based on verified sources, so that database is as accurate as possible, and therefore they deserve our appreciation and credit for it!

I appreciate all the curators who have ...as you put it...."wasted their time" on this discussion, as well as all the ....hundreds?...or even thousands?? of other discussions going on.

It is NOT...and I repeat NOT ridiculous for ME to think he may be blood to me. I have many dna matches for Macleod, McLeod, MacKenzie, McKenzie, McIver, Mohr, Jager, Ludwig, Bogan, ....and even Trump!

The way I was connected to him was thru my Campbell line...which would have made sense because that is where I see most of these surnames.

I have not....yet....asked the curators to attach or unlock anything.

Of course it's not ridiculous to think Donald Trump might be related to you. By one estimate all people of British descent are at least 30th cousins, and Americans whose ancestors were here before 1850 are about 13th cousins.

But it makes very little sense to make an issue of it. The guru of presidential ancestry is Gary Boyd Roberts. He and people like him will keep researching his ancestry long after Trump has left office.

It's counter-productive to harass other researchers, curators or not. If you want to help, take the time to read everything you can find about the search so far before you start throwing out suggestions. Ideally, you want to avoid trying to reinvent the wheel.

Alas, dear Justin, there is another distinguished genealogist from Iceland who competes with the theory of that of Gary Boyd Robert. Diana and I have the right to pursue research and present our findings and to build consensus.

Oddur F. Helgason, is the acclaimed Icelandic genealogist with the opposing view:
https://icelandmonitor.mbl.is/news/culture_and_living/2017/01/24/do...

As an aside, I started this forum as I am of Scottish descent and changes to profiles of the Macleod family affect my tree. It just so happens that Donald J. Trump has a pedigree also which include the Macleod clan from his mother's side.

I'm currently studying THE HISTORY OF THE MCLEODS to ensure recent changes to the family line have not been made in error. I have every right to do so.

Feel free to unfollow the discussions if the topic does not interest you.

I would like to redirect focus to the changes made by Tamás Caldwell-Gilbert here:
Isabell Campbell

The full discussion of Tamás Caldwell-Gilbert's changes are found here:
Isabell Campbell

To summarize: He discovered a new path which claims that Donald Trump is descended from the Kings of England. His premise is that the path was false. The path he questioned was namely that "Isabell Macleod," wife of Roderick Campbell, was the daughter of Roderick Macleod and Isabell Bannatyne, which he claimed was not true.

I am still currently investigating.

Sorry the discussion is here:
Isabell Campbell

There is another scholar who disagrees? Yes, of course. We all know that. And I think that any experienced genealogist knows that if you have two experts who disagree then you haven't proven anything. Nada. Zip. We're waiting here, as in some many places on the tree, for evidence that is acceptable to any reasonable person and is supported by a majority of experts.

Nick MacGregor Sadolin

Thanks for thinking of me. So sweet but how odd to make blanket statements about my connections to President Donald Trump? smh It matters not to me whether I am "related" to famous people. I am curious about this particular topic because I have ancient Scottish roots. That's it. It is also very interesting to read the deep and intelligent findings of folks who are putting so much effort into hashing out the old history books.
Correct me if I am mistaken ...... Nikolag ........but are you accusing me of paranoia? I do not need your schooling but I can appreciate that you, (like everyone else) have an opinion. I do not have to agree with it. What I said and proved by linking the discussion tab from several weeks ago ......was this. Geni curators have repeatedly ignored my attempts to correct and point out when other users (including MyHeritage) take pictures and documents and family tree information from your research and use said info in their own "versions" BUT LEAVE OUT THE TRUTH! i.e. In the case of my maternal uncle Fred James Frederick Maclean who had a wife but was an unrepentant philanderer who produced three children (that we know of) with two women outside of his marriage. Now, this would not matter one bit if there was not money involved. When someone dies intestate and there are monies to sort out, it can take a herculean effort to prove or disprove who the deceased's true heirs are.
So, it really does matter if the evidence produced (DNA, documents) proves whether or not a couple were married or not married when a particular child was conceived. Think of John Snow? Bastard or not a bastard?
I think Geni is AWESOME and many Geni Curators are amazing, talented and dedicated people. Thank-you to them all. Still, there are weaknesses in every good leader. It should not be offensive or cause for dismissal to have them pointed out.
Yes, I was connected to President Trump before the new adjustments. Now I am not. No big deal.

Erica Howton

I lost your attention at .......?

(No Name) You have “never” requested an action for a curator to take on “your behalf” for a profile that falls into “your” privacy zone. We are not allowed without explicit instructions and on the “curators please assist” discussion (stickie) that curators monitor.

Nor are Geni volunteer curators “at all” responsible for policing other sites “or” the actions of “your” relatives; not on Geni and certainly not on the internet at large. Where are you getting this assignment of responsibility from? Not the Geni FAQ: help link at the bottom of every geni Page.

And my first question would be - why aren’t you just fixing it yourself? If there’s an error in my tree, I take care of it, including Geni Customer Support intervention as need be?

My next question is - what in the world does this have to do with the genealogy of President Trump?

I’m sorry for your difficulty but please - stay on topic.

If there’s something curators can do for you, repost with extremely explicit instructions please:

https://www.geni.com/discussions/192543

“ATTENTION Curators, please assist” (sticky discussion, please “follow”)

Heather, you’re not new to Geni, so I’m really taken aback.

Alpha-Beta-Omega

Just sayin' ........

Further - Heather is a PRO subscriber, she has enhanced edit rights and expedited ticket rights:

https://help.geni.com/hc/en-us/requests/new?mobile_site=true

Point taken Erica Howton .......you have "learned me some again".

(Deep and reverent bow.)
I will not trouble you ever again, wasn't that the goal?

Of course that’s not the goal. Keeping genealogy discussions easy to read and follow is.