Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search


  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Merge trees

ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date


CarldeHynton Report 21 Jul 2012 17:08

If we could export GEDCOMs of other people's trees that we have access to. Then we could merge them offline, and import it all back in. That would save so much typing!

Or better still GR could provide a merge facility!


Kense Report 21 Jul 2012 19:40

That facility would appeal to name harvesters or tree scrumpers but is frowned upon by serious family historians. You should not copy from someone else's tree without thoroughly checking what you are copying. The typing involved is a tiny part of that activity.


SylviaInCanada Report 21 Jul 2012 23:23


This is the worse thing to have proposed.

My tree ...... admittedly very small ..... would be immediately removed from GR if merging was ever allowed.

My tree on ancestry is Private, and access to it has been removed from Mundia

There are far too many people who acquire names from other trees that have nothing to do with their own genealogy.



RolloTheRed Report 22 Jul 2012 09:01

This is a very silly idea but is a common wish with beginners. It is based on the idea that other people's trees are accurate. Even with great care 100% accuracy is very hard to achieve for all sorts of reasons. A far better approach is to recheck each and every entry on another tree before admitting the candidate. Yes, this takes time, effort and determination. The possible bear traps are legion.

Ancestry have something like this in that a person and his/her immediate tree can be copied into one tree from another. Commercially this is popular. It has had the effect of making a large proportion of the better researched trees go private, invitation only.

Beware of what you ask for.


Catherine Report 22 Jul 2012 14:10

I have too often given access to my tree and found branches (and more) pilfered that it's disheartening. Here you are - time and money - into researching your tree and some whatsit rolls in whispers sweetnothings and suds off with the lot. To think, CarldeHynton, that there could actually be a button to click and make the 'copying' easier, well I don't know what to say...
Catherine xxx


DazedConfused Report 22 Jul 2012 14:18

NEVER add anyone elses data to your own tree without checking and rechecking first.

The only person whose research I trust is my own!!!!!


MargaretM Report 22 Jul 2012 15:51

I can just add my voice to others here. Never, never add someone else's tree to your own. Use it as a guide but never add a name to your tree unless you have confirmed the data from other sources. You wouldn't believe some of the mistakes on on-line trees.


Porkie_Pie Report 22 Jul 2012 17:11

Simple answer is NEVER



James Report 1 Oct 2014 20:46

Fair enough that you shouldn't copy other peoples data into your own tree, but it would be nice to be able to identify someone in my tree is the same person as someone in a tree shared with me. I'd love to be able to browse linked trees. Entries from other trees could be in a different color so you know it's not your own and that you should take it with a pinch of salt.

Not every user of Genes Reunited is a hardcode genealogy researcher. Some of us would like to look at the hard work of others in a bigger context.



SylviaInCanada Report 1 Oct 2014 21:34


you can do .......................but you have to get the PERMISSION of the tree holder to do it

............. and many people on here, with any experience at all, will only give that permission if it has been established that there is indeed a true connection between you and the other person.

Many more will only give information concerning the small part of the tree that actually concerns you

I think that is fair enough, do you not?

Once again, I repeat what I said above ......................

if free access to browse my tree is provided on this site, I will remove whatever tree still remains on here.

If you contact me, and an exchange of pms proves to me that your "person" is indeed a match for my "person" .................. then I will be most willing to help you, by giving the fruits of my research, and my spending of money to prove the facts.

BUT it will only be for the immediate people and their close families ......................

too many people take every name from other trees ............... whether they are related to them or not.

Just consider ................. we might have a joint relation on my mother's side, 150 years ago ...................... that does NOT mean that you are related to the ancestors on my father's side, and most especially, not to the ancestors on my spouse's branches of the tree.

In my opinion ................. people who want to be able to access and take information from other trees want it easy and want it cheap.

This is not an easy, nor a cheap, hobby.


Marian Report 2 Oct 2014 22:33

When I was very new on here with only 200 or so people on my tree, some con artist contacted me and persuaded me to send him a gedcom of my tree. I was related to an aunt of his and he explained it was easier for him if I sent the gedcom and he would take relevant bits off and add them to his. I sent it but then found that he had added ALL of to his tree when only a handful of people were his relations by marriage. That was bad enough, but later, trying to find more info for my tree, I looked on the Familysearch site and found 90% of my gedcom had been added to it! What the idiot didn't realise was that I'd made a fair few errors in my very new efforts at genealogy and now they are on Familysearch to mislead others!


SylviaInCanada Report 3 Oct 2014 01:40

Marian ..............

I think many, if not most, of us have been caught out at least once!

and I think many of us have also had the experience of wrong information being taken ..................... and having a little laugh about it :-D

I have someone still trying to collect information from me ............... a "married in", living in the US, who has decided to be the holder of all information on a particular name ........................ but takes everything form the tree, as well as wanting copies of all bmd certificates.

I'm now very cautious with what I send.

But the funniest one I had, happened because I had set up a, luckily, small tree on ancestry as somewhere to "park" a great aunt and her husband until I found more information about him.

I forgot it was there, so didn't make it private

Then I got a leaf hint that someone had a match with me.

Yes, they did .................... having taken gt aunt and uncle from my tree.

Problem was .................. about 100 years difference in time

The tree owner had an ancestor and husband with exactly the same names, born in the same county, and emigrating to the same place in the US ......... except mine went in 1902, and his went in about 1820.

His had children, mine did not ............... until he acquired them and made them parents of children born at least 50 years before they were :-)

Fortunately, he was very receptive to the message I left on his tree ................. and removed my aunt and uncle within 3 days of me spotting them


Simon Report 28 Oct 2014 09:13

To all those expressing consern about the origonal suggestion - stop worrying!

Judging from their track record over the past 3 or 4 years, Genes rarely read these threads and, certainly, never take any notice of any suggestions... If they did, the current tree would be much more 'user friendly'.


DazedConfused Report 28 Oct 2014 15:17

Do not think anyone is worrying about GR actually doing this.

More advise (albeit quite stongly worded) against not checking any information for yourself.

Along with all our horror stories :-D :-D :-D