3 ms·

WikiTree: The Free Family Tree

19 points by bigjimmyk3 1y ago

net01 1y ago
© 2008 - 2025 Interesting.com, Inc. Content may be copyrighted by WikiTree community members. Interesting.com > domain name for sale? — Interesting!
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
gwbas1c 1y ago
A couple of things: Use query parameters (GET) for search. It's extremely useful to be able to share a URL to a search. (IE, Wikipedia and Google do this. Example: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=query+parmaters&title=Special%3ASearch&ns0=1 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=query+parmaters&... Example: https://www.google.com/search?q=query+parameters&oq=query+parameters https://www.google.com/search?q=query+parameters&oq=query+pa...) Don't open new tabs when clicking links to narrow down a search. (To be quite honest, links should almost never open a new tab. Users who want to do this know how to do it and you don't need to make the choice for them.)
bigjimmyk3 1y ago
I recently started doing some genealogy work for my family, and I was not excited at the prospect of using most of the paid family tree sites -- dark patterns, etc. I recently ran across this site and it seems much more agreeable. I like the wiki-style collaboration, and the emphasis on primary sources is also a big plus vs "this is what I was told."
BrandoElFollito 1y ago
I am not a fan of these sites. One day I discovered that me and my family (wife, children) were added by some random dude without asking me if I agreed. I could not reach him so I used the EU law to remove my days forcefully but this is very annoying.
- lcall 1y ago
  There is another called familysearch.org which is free and allows adding but not publicly viewing info on living persons. The site is backed by an institution with staying power, has many helpful resources for research, and also has a wiki-like approach to building a single family tree for humanity. (I used to work there.)
  - bigjimmyk3 1y ago
    I agree that familysearch.org is a goldmine for primary sources, I'm very grateful for their digitization initiatives. I'm also glad that there are multiple non-dark-patterned options for people who want to preserve their family history.
- bigjimmyk3 1y ago
  WT's process for living persons attempts to head this off. It's not perfect, but I think it's a pretty good method. When you enter data about a living person, you are required to include an email which "invites" that person to WikiTree. If they don't respond within 30 days, their record (which was already private) is anonymized to last name and decade of birth. Each record's privacy is configurable by its maintainer, or by those to whom the maintainer has granted access. Obviously there are ways to goof this up or act maliciously, but I don't think the site makes intentional doxxing any easier than it already was.
zvr 1y ago
I use Gramps to maintain my genealogy data. Keep in mind that this data includes information for individuals not only in the distant past, but also in the present (remote cousins, etc.). Making such PII available on the Internet seems irresponsible (and probably illegal).

19 points by bigjimmyk3 1y ago

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

A couple of things: Use query parameters (GET) for search. It's extremely useful to be able to share a URL to a search. (IE, Wikipedia and Google do this. Example: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=query+parmaters&title=Special%3ASearch&ns0=1 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=query+parmaters&... Example: https://www.google.com/search?q=query+parameters&oq=query+parameters https://www.google.com/search?q=query+parameters&oq=query+pa...) Don't open new tabs when clicking links to narrow down a search. (To be quite honest, links should almost never open a new tab. Users who want to do this know how to do it and you don't need to make the choice for them.)

bigjimmyk3 1y ago

I recently started doing some genealogy work for my family, and I was not excited at the prospect of using most of the paid family tree sites -- dark patterns, etc. I recently ran across this site and it seems much more agreeable. I like the wiki-style collaboration, and the emphasis on primary sources is also a big plus vs "this is what I was told."

BrandoElFollito 1y ago

I am not a fan of these sites. One day I discovered that me and my family (wife, children) were added by some random dude without asking me if I agreed. I could not reach him so I used the EU law to remove my days forcefully but this is very annoying.

lcall 1y ago
There is another called familysearch.org which is free and allows adding but not publicly viewing info on living persons. The site is backed by an institution with staying power, has many helpful resources for research, and also has a wiki-like approach to building a single family tree for humanity. (I used to work there.)
- bigjimmyk3 1y ago
  I agree that familysearch.org is a goldmine for primary sources, I'm very grateful for their digitization initiatives. I'm also glad that there are multiple non-dark-patterned options for people who want to preserve their family history.
bigjimmyk3 1y ago
WT's process for living persons attempts to head this off. It's not perfect, but I think it's a pretty good method. When you enter data about a living person, you are required to include an email which "invites" that person to WikiTree. If they don't respond within 30 days, their record (which was already private) is anonymized to last name and decade of birth. Each record's privacy is configurable by its maintainer, or by those to whom the maintainer has granted access. Obviously there are ways to goof this up or act maliciously, but I don't think the site makes intentional doxxing any easier than it already was.

zvr 1y ago

I use Gramps to maintain my genealogy data. Keep in mind that this data includes information for individuals not only in the distant past, but also in the present (remote cousins, etc.). Making such PII available on the Internet seems irresponsible (and probably illegal).