DNA Matches – Notes Section

Posted on by Kathleen

After my previous post, some of you may be wondering what goes into the Notes section of my Excel spreadsheet. This is actually the first time I’m writing down this process, so I’m hoping it makes sense to someone other than myself!

Step One

My DNA Matches – Step One

My first step is to take a visual look at my matches. The results you see above are my matches closer than 4th cousin. With my working knowledge of the family tree, I’m able to tell just by looking at these matches who 50% of them are. That’s including my father. I’ve obviously edited out the pictures and names of the matches to protect their privacy.

As you can see, most of my close matches aren’t sharing any kind of public tree. Except, of course, some of them are sharing unlinked trees. Right away, when I’m going through my fourth cousin matches, I will add a note if my third cousin shares that match. For example, if I share a match with my 2nd cousin then I put, Shared match with 2nd cousin. Using their member name in place of the relationship.

Step Two

My DNA Matches – Step Two

My next step is to go through each match and see who we both share a match with. The screenshot above shows that this 3rd cousin match is a match shared with my father and two other 3rd cousins. One of those third cousins is already on my known list. From that match alone, it narrows down where this match comes in significantly. Not only for the match who I am looking at but for the other unknown third cousin match.

For this match in her Note section would read, Shared match with ‘3rd cousin’ and ‘3rd cousin’. I don’t add that my father is a match because I already have a box for that in my excel sheet.

Step Three

My DNA Matches – Step Three

My next step shows how even an unlinked family tree can help determine which section of your family tree a match comes from. This third cousin match has a small family tree that’s not attached to their DNA results. That means I have no idea if the DNA results are for the home person on this family tree. I can’t know without asking. I’m not ready to ask yet because I’m still rebuilding my core family tree. The two surnames that are shown above (Theademan, Moyer) are very familiar to me though. My great-grandma was a Moyer. That means I’m comfortable making another change to my list.

Re-Visiting my List

Making Progress on my DNA Match list

Okay, so now I know where eight out of my ten matches are coming from. I used a different symbol to denote that while I think I know where the match comes from, I’m still not sure. This is still a clue to identifying someone in my 4th cousin match list. If any of these third cousins come up as a shared match, then it goes into my notes section.

The last two matches

My last two matches are the most difficult ones. The first one has a public tree, but nothing that looks familiar. The second match has a tree but it is private. The one thing going for me is that when I look at the shared matches for each one, the other is listed. That means all three of us match. That doesn’t mean we match at the same spot, but that we are all related to people in common somewhere.

Breaking the 4th cousin barrier

When looking at the matches, I realized not only did we have each other all in common. We all had a fourth cousin in common. That fourth cousin also has a public tree up. I recognized the Slusher name from this match. The funny thing about the Slushers is that I usually match with them as double cousins. There were 3 Mays siblings that married 3 Slusher siblings. That means we could all descend from different Mays/Slusher couples or the same one. One of us might not even be connecting through the Mays/Slusher mess but somewhere else. Without knowing those other two people, it’s difficult to say. As if DNA matches weren’t hard enough!

So now if I match with these third cousins and that particular fourth cousin, I add in the fourth cousin to my notes section. This gives me a starting point for my next level of analyzation. I sure am good at analyzing things to the point of exhaustion!

The Final List

My Final List of 2nd and 3rd cousins

Okay, the above screenshot shows my final list of 2nd and 3rd DNA cousin matches. The ‘i’ symbol on those last two matches shows that I just don’t have enough information on them. Now that I have a general idea where a lot of my matches come from, it doesn’t seem so overwhelming. That’s not the end though. There is one last thing I have in my Notes section.

What happens when there are no second or third cousin matches?

Yup. I have quite a few of those as well. There are many types of notes that aren’t using a cousin match.

  • Descendant of … : Usually, if they have a public tree that I see familiar names on.
  • Descended through: This one is if they are descended through a known sibling of my ancestors.
  • Only 1 shared match: There are 16 matches that only have one shared match.
  • Possible Surname connection: If I see a pattern or surnames that I’m familiar with.
  • DNA Circle: I only have a few DNA circles and they come and go depending on my cousin matches opening and closing their public trees. Though I feel like a lot of my sorting and organization is leading me to create my own DNA circles.
  • Unknown Connection: 213 of my cousin matches are still a mystery to me. I have 493 charted. That means about 43% of my matches still need more work. In the grand scheme of things, I think that’s a good start. That means I will probably be able to figure out over 50% of my matches without too much hassle.

Planned Downtime

Posted on by Kathleen
NeuPaddy / Pixabay

My web hosting company will be planning some server upgrades one week from now (around October 31st). This is an upgrade that should only take about 45 minutes. My website might be unavailable for a short time while this upgrade takes place!

Regret Nothing

Posted on by Kathleen

  1. It is 9:24 PM on Thursday night and I am neck deep in Samuel Redfords.
  2. I deleted my Twitter account months ago because I never used it.
  3. I don’t want to bore my family with Genealogy stuff on my Facebook all the time.
  4. That means I have nowhere to post except for here.
  5. 3 Birth Certificates, multiple possibilities, and still no answers.
  6. I love this stuff.

Sucked into the DNA Trail

Posted on by Kathleen

Here I am again, after another absence. This one was partially on purpose. Sometimes you just need a mental break from genealogy. It’s not a bad thing. Over the years, I’ve learned it helps me to focus better if I just walk away from it for a week or two. The rest of my break, I have been working on learning about DNA. Oh, man has that been a journey! I’m obviously still learning and probably will never fully understand.

During Amazon Prime Day this year, I purchased three 23andMe DNA tests. I had previously tested myself and my Dad on Ancestry. I thought since I had never used 23andMe before, I might want to go ahead and re-test my Dad to see the differences between the companies. In addition to testing my Dad, I also tested my mother and her brother.

Information Overload

The biggest thing I’ve gotten from DNA test results is information overload! Learning from my fellow genealogists, I know that the cure for information overload is learning and organization. The overload comes from not understanding what you are looking at. That means I have to learn more and I have to find a better way for my brain to process it. Okay, that’s definitely something I can do!

My Dad’s Ancestry DNA matches

The image above is the Excel spreadsheet that I made to wrangle my DNA matches. This is after I watched about 10 DNA webinars, and some of them I watched twice. The main problem I have found from a research standpoint with Ancestry DNA matches is you have to go into each tree and click on multiple things to see all the information. From a research perspective, that’s a lot of wasted clicks and time.

Before carpel tunnel sets in, I wanted to have a way of pinpointing a focus subject without having to click 3,987 times. The following are my headers and the reason.

The Explanations

  • Username: Ancestry uses its own messaging system for DNA matches, so I made sure to put down the username of all my matches. In the case of someone who has a manager of their DNA test, I put Username (managed by Username).
  • Predicted Relationship: This is the relationship that Ancestry thinks I share with the person. I have 473 4th Cousin or closer matches and my Dad has 223. That’s a lot. Not only is that a lot but there are hundreds of pages of more distant matches. I chose to stick to the 4th cousin and closer matches except for the case of Shared Ancestor Hints. If I had a distant cousin match but we also shared an ancestor hint, I added them to my spreadsheet.
  • Shared Hint, Common Ancestor: This is my favorite column. This one shows me who is already showing as having an ancestor match with me. Before I actually started tracking these matches, I didn’t realize I had so many on my Dad’s side. I always assumed most of my matches came from my mother’s well-documented side.
  • Public or Private Tree?: This one speaks for itself. I’m able to tell at a glance if the tree is public and might hold a lot of clues, or if I’m going to need some caffeine and my thinking cap. Probably some patience too.
  • Unlinked Tree: This is one of those hidden, but wonderful clues into those Private trees everyone is so upset about. Sometimes, if you are lucky, someone has an unlinked family tree on their account. In Ancestry, you have to go in and link test results to a tree. People don’t always do that and they certainly aren’t required to. However, sometimes they might have a tree already online and just haven’t linked their results to it. Of course, you can never be sure unless you ask them if those results go with that tree, but it’s better than no information at all.
  • Shared cM: This is the section I know the least about. This number is how Ancestry determines that Predicted Relationship. Mostly what I know is the higher centi-morgans you share, the closer your relationship. There are tons of tools and charts out there that break this down much better than me!
  • Confidence Level: Ancestry gives every match a confidence level. It was pretty interesting to compare my results with my Dad’s. Some of those High results were Extremely High for him or even the other way around.
  • Shared Matches: A simple yes or no. There aren’t many no answers but now I’m able to see them with 1 click of my mouse.
  • Contacted: This column is for if I’ve contacted the person yet or not.
  • Matched with Kathleen or Dad?: The column says something different for each tab. On my test, it’s an easy way for me to see what is most likely a paternal match. On my Dad’s test, it was an easy way for me to filter out the yes answers and delete the no answers after copying the tab. It saved me from re-typing 83 matches.

What about Notes? What about those 23andMe results?

Well, I’d like to tell you all about it but I can’t! The Notes section will take a little bit more space to explain and this entry is already really long. As for 23andMe, GEDMatch and other DNA results, I’m still figuring out how to organize them. This is a work in progress, but you can be sure I’ll keep my family and friends updated!

Moore Children

Posted on by Kathleen

Last time that I wrote here, I was wondering why Mary was so contrary. In that post I decided that I would need to search out more records for Mary’s children. I just didn’t have nearly enough evidence to decide if the family that lived on Long Island was the right family. The first step in that journey was to order the birth records of the other two known children in the family.

The Moore Children Birth Certificates

All three Moore children

The Things that match up:

  • Place of Birth is the same for all children
  • M. Friedman, M.D. was present at all three births.
  • Parents names are the same on all three.
  • Father is listed as an Insurance Agent on all three.
  • The birth order is correct (Mary first, Robert second, William/Lawrence third)

Things that are slightly off:

  • Marion Moore is the name the oldest child and only daughter is known as in all other records. In her birth certificate she is listed as Mary Florence Moore.
  • Mary Johnson-Moore’s birthplace is listed as Brooklyn on Robert’s birth certificate and Babylon, L.I. on Mary/Marion’s birth certificate. On William/Lawrence’s certificate only U.S. is given.
  • Great-Grandpa Moore’s birth certificate is listed under Lawrence Moore. In all the documents I have for him, he lists his name as William Lawrence Moore. Grandpa Moore even told me that his father had a hard time finding his birth certificate when going to the Vital Records office. The middle name being listed as the birth name makes sense. I also have a certified copy of the same certificate dated for 1942.
  • Chicago, Illinois is the listed place of birth for the father, Robert Moore Sr. The family was living in Chicago at the time of Robert’s birth but unfortunately Chicago couldn’t find a birth record for me at the time. William/Lawrence’s birth certificate only lists U.S. for the place of birth.

Conclusion

Just basing my conclusion on the three records above I can say some things for certain. Mary Florence Moore, Robert James Moore, and William Lawrence Moore are definitely siblings. They are definitely the children of Robert James Moore and Mary Johnson. They lived at 518 Railroad Avenue between 1898 and 1901. Robert James Moore Sr. was working as an Insurance Agent between 1898 and 1901.

Using the same three records, I’m strongly leaning toward a few conclusions as well. I’m almost certain that Robert Sr. was born in Chicago and Mary was born in Babylon, Long Island. I can’t say for certain that the Johnson family from the last post is Mary’s family, but it’s definitely moving in that direction.

The last conclusion I can make is that my family, in general, does not like to use the names on their birth certificates. We still do that today! 🙂

Mary, Mary, Quite Contrary

Posted on by Kathleen

It’s not fair of me to call Mary contrary. I don’t even know Mary. However, her blood is running through my veins. Maybe that gives me a little wiggle room to be a little cross with her for being so hard to track sometimes. The funny thing about Mary is that before my Genealogy Do-Over, I didn’t even think Mary was that contrary. It’s all these new rules I put in place for myself. They keep me second and third guessing everything!

Records of Mary’s life

Mary E. Johnson is the first time that my Genealogy Do-Over has made me sweat. It would be easy to just add in the family I believe to be hers and continue working off that assumption. The problem with that being, can I prove that is actually her family? The answer to that is nope, not even a little bit. It’s going to be so bad of me to admit what I thought before, but I have to do it. That’s the whole point of starting fresh.

The following record is the first record I am able to use to see into Mary’s life before she married. My great-grandfather’s birth certificate just gives her maiden name, which helped, but doesn’t say anything about her parents.

Mary Johnson and Robert Moore Marriage, 1896
How I know this is the correct couple
  • The names of Robert, his father Wm. H., and mother Mary all match up with what I know.  This is the first instance I have of Mary’s maiden name. (Robert’s mother)
  • In 1900, my Robert does list his occupation as an Insurance Collector.
  • While the address given for Robert’s residence isn’t familiar, his brother’s ran a printing business just down the street at 1567 Broadway. Maybe the brothers decided to move into an apartment together close to work?
  • I have found records for Robert’s siblings that also give their mother’s maiden name as Starret.

Where I Went Wrong Before

Previously, when I did a search for Mary I just typed in what I knew and I went with the top result. Not just because it was the top result, but because it was the only result of Arthur, Ann, and Mary Johnson in a household with the right ages. Jackpot, this must be them! Oh boy was I green.

Most of the Mary Johnson’s I was finding didn’t have an Arthur as a father or the parents weren’t born in Ireland. In fact, I was getting a lot of Sweden results when searching for Ireland. Maybe I should reverse that and look for Sweden to see if more Ireland pops up? The family below is the only family living in the New York City or surrounding area to fit the bill. I know Mary was born in New York. The family below was living on Long Island in the village of Babylon. So far there is nothing to connect my Mary Johnson to this family. For now that means not linking this family into my main family line.

Arthur Johnson household. 1880

The Temporary Solution

I’ve already found this family in the census returns between 1860 through 1880. That includes the 1865 New York State Census. The 1875 State census would be grand but Suffolk County, where this family was living, was lost. What to do with that information? It’s a waste to just throw it out. Technically while there is nothing to say this is my family, there is nothing to say that it isn’t. The dilemma was how to keep track of this family without adding them in and possibly assuming in the future that they belong there.

Adding an Un-linked Person to Legacy

My solution is to add the family un-linked into my main genealogy file. This allows me to follow all my same procedures and keep things organized. If after researching them, I decide they are the right family I can just merge them into my main line. Carefully of course!

What Next?

My Orphaned Johnson Family

My plan for now is to keep researching this Johnson family. I will try to build the family out from this starting point. If I can rule them out of my search, I will consider moving them to a separate file. Another option is to start a Johnson file where I can research multiple Johnson families and keep track of them. I don’t mind having one orphaned family in my working file, but anymore and I’m afraid it will turn into a mess.

Some of you might be wondering why I didn’t start off with a new Johnson file to begin with. While it would have been better keeping it away from my working file, I didn’t have other families in that area at the time that looked promising. Had I found 2 or 3 families that were living around each other, I probably would have gone that route.

Open to Suggestions!

I am going to be open to suggestions when it comes to the Johnsons! My main priority is still going to be my Do-Over. That means gathering as many documents for my Mary Johnson’s children before spending too much money buying records trying to identify her parents.

Current Research Plan tab

For the curious, I’ve included a screenshot of what my plan tab looks like right now in my Research Log. The List tab is the big list of names as I’m verifying them. It’s what tells me who is next to document. This is really working for me! I don’t know how I would keep it all straight otherwise.

Hopefully, I’ll be able to update everyone again soon!

Genealogy Do-Over: Not Found

Posted on by Kathleen

Today I am going to be writing about my recent experience with the New Jersey State Archives. I previously told you about what they did find for me. This time I’d like to tell you about what they didn’t find. As always, if you’d like to learn more about the Genealogy Do-Over, head over to Thomas MacEntee’s page, now called Abundant Genealogy.

My order from the New Jersey State Archives

Back on May 24th, I made an online order to the New Jersey State Archives. I am trying to fill in where I’m missing documents for my ancestors. That means my first step is heading to the Order List of my Genealogy Log, where I’ve been tracking the records I need to find. Note: These are also entered as “To Do” items in my genealogy management program.

Genealogy Research Log – Order List

As you can tell from the screenshot, I only have Priorities “Done” and “High” checked in my Priority column. Filters are my favorite thing about Excel. With this New Jersey order I decided to start putting what date the records came in. This way I can start tracking how long it usually takes to get a records request back from somewhere.

When I was looking through my Pedigree, I realized I still have an “Abt” date for the birth of Jane Parkin. That was my deciding factor in ordering the birth records of Jane Parkin and Clifford Redford. Adding Clifford’s in was a little bit of a bonus because I knew what his date was from multiple records. Since I was asking for a search for Jane’s record,  I added a bit of a guarantee that I would at least get something back when I added in Clifford’s record.

What I received from the New Jersey State Archives

The response to my Record Search

Now the question becomes, What do I do with this information? It might be easy to shrug off and say, Oh well! The problem being 10 years down the road, I won’t remember what I actually searched for at the Archives. That’s not helping my new and improved tracking methods either. The great news is that I have a Search Attempt tab in my Genealogy Research Log. I’m not trying to re-invent the wheel here, I just need to write down what was searched and what was found… or in this case, not found.

My Search Attempt Log

My Search Attempt Log

This log was up and going months before I sent away for my New Jersey records. What I found reassuring was that when I went to enter in information for this search, I didn’t have to change a single thing about my log. The required fields were already in place. I must be doing something right these days!

The Archives gave me what databases they searched and the criteria used. That made is easy to just fill those into my log like I actually did the physical search myself. I made sure to add that the index record on Family Search was a newspaper article.

Not Quite Done

That’s not the end of the line yet. I still have one more step to do.

The last step

As you can see, at the top of this list of files is the scan of the form the archives sent back to me. It’s right there and at a glance I can see that I still need the birth record and I can see quickly what was already searched.

Man, I just can’t believe how sporadic my research has been over the last 8 months, but how the organization methods and processes are keeping me right in line! I can also update you a little and say that since this record search, I found Jane’s siblings in a birth index with their father being listed under his middle name Walter. So that’s my next step!

Still Here, I Promise

Posted on by Kathleen
Image Credit: pixabay.com

Still Working

Never fear, I’m still working on things! I haven’t disappeared from the internet. I had some trips to take this summer. One was a family reunion in Upstate New York and then I made a quick trip to Southern Florida to visit my brother and his family. Now I’m back for a little while. I do have another quick trip planned in August but hopefully I can get a post up before then. I’m also hoping to start updating my database section in the near future too, it’s been awhile!

Computer Problems are Happening

I am having a slight computer problem. I’m working on troubleshooting it, and I think I have it figured out. Leaving my computer on for my times away probably wasn’t the best idea, but I liked having access to some of my stuff. Learned my lesson and won’t be doing that anymore! It’s anything major from what I can tell but it’s enough to have caused quite a few headaches since I got home Thursday night.

I hope everyone out there in cyber space is doing well!

New Jersey State Archives: Above and Beyond

Posted on by Kathleen

I’m currently working on a post about how I deal with negative searches from repositories. Today, I’d like to shine a spotlight on the New Jersey State Archives. Recently I ordered 3 records from them. Two were birth certificates and one was a death record.

A Little Background

The death record is connected to the William Wallace Love and Jane Menzies thing from 1890. No one that I’ve talked to has been able to find her death record yet. One of the reasons seems to be confusion surrounding her actual day of death. The family record that was passed down to me gives the date as September 17th, 1890.

Typed Family Record, Llewellyn’s Boxes, 1986; privately held by Kathleen Moore, [ADDRESS FOR PRIVATE USE,] Lexington Park, Maryland. 2005. This collection was taken from Llewellyn Thorward-Moore’s house after her death. They resided with her son until 2005, when they passed to Kathleen Moore.
However, from the Newark Evening News article, published September 23, 1890:

Mrs. Love died yesterday from the effects of her injuries.

That would put her date of death as September 22nd, 1890. Thinking about the circumstances surrounding her death and the trauma that the children must have experienced, I can understand the confusions over the date. I can’t even imagine what those children were going through.

Another perspective to factor in is the date of my family record. The most recent death on that record is my 2x Great Grandmother Jennie Love-Thorward in 1960. According to my previous family tree, the next death would have been Agnes Love-Wambough in 1966. That means my family record was written between 1960 and 1966, almost eighty years after the event. Agnes would have been 11 and Belle only 2 years old when their mother died.

Recent Find

Screenshot of FamilySearch result

Technically, this isn’t a recent find. I actually saw this a few years back and decided I’d look into it later. However, I was already ordering from the Archives and I was kind of comfort-spending anyway, so I decided to look at this again and see if it warranted a record order. I decided that it did! The date is the right time. The husband’s name fits. I even told myself that because the coroner was involved, the death certificate just might have been filed in Trenton and that’s why it has been so hard to find! Without any other thought, I sent off a record request and made a note to them that I had found an index entry on FamilySearch for Mrs. Love but that it might be Jane or Jennie Love.

Results

My results took a little under a month to come back. The envelope came pretty thick, I didn’t know what to think. All 3 record responses came in the same envelope. Only one of requests was found in the archive. When a repository can’t find a record you’ve requested, they send you a form showing what they searched. I keep those “Not Found” responses for my records so I can keep track of what I’ve already paid for.

Death Search, Not Found

As you can see from the scan above, the Archives tried really hard to find what I was looking for. They checked their internal sources and the online sources. Searching the online index didn’t help me either, which should have been my first hint. The surprising part comes when I got to the comment section. You’ll remember I mentioned in my record request that I found Mrs. Love on a death index on Family Search. Until I got back this response, I had forgot to even look to see what the index was for. It was listed as a collection of New Jersey Deaths, so I just assumed it was some sort of Death database.

What It Actually Was

My Results

Turns out that my Mrs. Love actually appeared in a Trenton, NJ newspaper announcing her death. It seems the person fulfilling my request looked up which FamilySearch index I was talking about and found it for me. They ended up sending me a copy of the article, the front page of the newspaper, and gave me specifics on where my article appeared in that paper. How is that for genealogy kindness?

Can we all just hug an archivist employee today? Thank you for being so kind as to go above and beyond for us genealogists who sometimes just send a request off without much thought.

Update to the Parkin Children

Posted on by Kathleen

I have a breaking genealogy update for you! This is less than an hour old for me. I was so excited, I just had to share it.

The Parkin Children in 1905

This is an update to the entry I wrote about the Parkin Children in 1905. I concluded that entry by assuming the three youngest Parkin children were living in an Orphan’s home but couldn’t be sure. I did go the long way around to that answer. This afternoon, I was reading my Facebook groups and a helpful member posted that the images were now available on FamilySearch to everyone. Well, alright then, let me put down my lunch and go look, STAT!

Finding Them Again

The great news is I was able to just go right to the transcription from before. The images were already digitized on FamilySearch, just not viewable outside a research center.

“New Jersey State Census, 1905,” database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/search/collection/1928107 : accessed 07 June 2017), entry for Orange Orphan Society; citing film no. 1688595, image 641, family 78.

From the image, I can definitely say the children were living in the Orange Orphan Society in 1905. I believe they fudged Hazel’s age to get her in since children 10 and under only were allowed. Hazel would have been 10, maybe even close to 11 at the time.

Excuse Us but you were in the middle of a Do-Over? Bright Shiny Object Distracted you?

Well, technically yes. However, I had already done the Parkin children in my Do-Over so technically, I don’t feel bad! Actually, I will go back for everyone that I have a 1905 New Jersey State Census citation for and update their information. Since the database now has images, the citation has to be written slightly different to include the fact that there is an online image.

…

What is it? You definitely want to say something else.

Okay, so if I’m being completely honest, and I try to always do that… Okay, I looked up the father of the Parkin children. I was curious, I jumped ahead. Even though technically he’s further down on my Do-Over list. I know you guys will agree with me it was okay to jump ahead a little bit.

“New Jersey State Census, 1905,” database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/search/collection/1928107 : accessed 10 May 2017), entry for Ann Parkin household; citing film no. 1688600, image 339, family 857.

Guys, I think the oldest Parkin child, Anna M. Parkin, might have lived to at least 1905! There at the last entry of the Parkin household is May Parkin, born May 1893. Anna Parkin only showed up on the 1900 US census for me so far, but in that census her birth date was listed as May 1892. This could be her with her father, uncle and grandmother in 1905. How exciting! There might yet be a lost branch of the Parkin family tree.