WeRelate:Old GEDCOMs Archive

Archive: Users uploading GEDCOMs in 2007 or 2008 without any contributions in 2009 or later

This page serves as an archive for Old GEDCOMs, which is becoming too large to edit easily. As GEDCOMs are reviewed and the recommended action is completed, they are moved to this page. This removes noise from the original page, making it easier to identify outstanding work.

GEDCOMs that were recommended to be retained

The following GEDCOMS have been reviewed, and cleaned up as recommended (including removal of living individuals).

• 3133 view deletion impact -- Retention recommended (see talk page)
• 4foster view deletion impact -- Retention recommended (see talk page)
• A-marsh view deletion impact-- Retention recommended (see talk page)
• AVolkert view deletion impact-- Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Ambalasis view deletion impact - Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Ambar view deletion impact - Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Acts2:38 view deletion impact-- Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Adohner view deletion impact-- Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Ahitzeman view deletion impact-- Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Ahitzeman view deletion impact-- Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Ahitzeman view deletion impact-- Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Ahitzeman view deletion impact-- Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Amatter view deletion impact - Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Angel view deletion impact - Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Antayaje view deletion impact - Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Aunthoot view deletion impact - Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Auralierose view deletion impact - Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Azion view deletion impact - Keep (see talk page)
• Bakerfamily78 view deletion impact - Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Barbsnow view deletion impact - Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Bartsimpson view deletion impact -- Retention recommended (see talk page)
  • Sourced and connected - --Cos1776 19:57, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
• Bartyen82 view deletion impact - Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Bcinkoske view deletion impact - Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Bcordon view deletion impact - Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Beccalovesbooks view deletion impact - Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Becwith view deletion impact - Reviewed/no substantial issues--Amelia 06:05, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
• Beddoeg43 view deletion impact - Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Beejayel view deletion impact- Reviewed/no substantial issues--Amelia 06:05, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
• Beejayel view deletion impact- Reviewed/no substantial issues--Amelia 06:05, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
• Binney view deletion impact - Reviewed/no substantial issues--Amelia 06:05, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
• Bjstock view deletion impact - Reviewed - few livings mostly cleaned, small but probably cleanable. Retention Recommended. Daniel Maxwell 09:43, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

All living individuals removed. A generational error was cleaned up, but the tree could stand being run through an editor to see if there are others.--DataAnalyst 23:43, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Run through an editor and errors corrected.--DataAnalyst 01:45, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

• Bjwebb view deletion impact - Reviewed/no substantial issues--Amelia 06:05, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
• Bkuennen view deletion impact - Reviewed/no substantial issues--Amelia 06:05, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
• Blitz view deletion impact - Reviewed/livings removed/no substantial issues--Amelia 06:05, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Lacking in sources. Some questionable data removed/fixed. Some formatting errors should be fixed.--DataAnalyst 01:38, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

• Bonnieaz view deletion impact - Reviewed/no substantial issues. --Amelia 06:05, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
• Borisweden view deletion impact - Reviewed/no substantial issues. --Amelia 06:05, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
• Bpearce view deletion impact - Reviewed/no substantial issues. --Amelia 06:05, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
• Brannon view deletion impact - Reviewed/no substantial issues. --Amelia 06:05, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
• Brannon view deletion impact - Reviewed/no substantial issues.--Amelia 17:30, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
• Brannon view deletion impact - Reviewed/no substantial issues.--Amelia 17:30, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
• Brannon view deletion impact - Reviewed/no substantial issues.--Amelia 17:30, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
• Brian89 view deletion impact - Reviewed/no substantial issues.--Amelia 17:30, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
• BrightLight16 view deletion impact - Reviewed/no substantial issues.--Amelia 17:30, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
• Brose13 view deletion impact - Reviewed/no substantial issues.--Amelia 17:30, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
• Cahabariver view deletion impact - reviewed / small / no substantial issues. --Amelia 05:08, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
• Camentrum view deletion impact - Reviewed/small/no substantial issues.--Amelia 00:11, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
• Carlk668 view deletion impact - Needs work. Lots of Unknown.--Amelia 00:11, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Appears to be good now. One page for a possibly living person has been marked for delete. No other potential livings, and no first names unknown.--DataAnalyst 13:38, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

• Carolbmoss view deletion impact - Reviewed / no substantial issues.--Amelia 16:08, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
• Cath view deletion impact - Reviewed / no substantial issues.--Amelia 16:08, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
• Ccourty view deletion impact - Only 9 people. No living.--Amelia 05:02, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
• ChrisAOConnell view deletion impact - abt 1500 English people, back pretty far. Not really sourced, but there are dates and places and notes. Keep.--Amelia 16:30, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
• Clairebirkbeck view deletion impact - Retention Recommended, just 2 people and are OK quality. Daniel Maxwell 06:37, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
• Cmcculloch view deletion impact - Retention recommended, fair quality, a few livings. Daniel Maxwell 06:37, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Living and potential living pages removed/resolved. Some pages based on OneWorldTree cleaned up. No further issues noted.--DataAnalyst 19:37, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

• DaClyde view deletion impact - 800 people, 200 overlapping, a couple hundred sources, reasonably clean. Retention recommended. --Amelia 15:33, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

No potential livings. --DataAnalyst 14:56, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

• Debbie V. view deletion impact - keep. no potential living persons. no further review required --DataAnalyst 20:21, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
• Debbie V. view deletion impact - keep. no potential living persons.--DataAnalyst 19:33, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
• Debbie V. view deletion impact - keep. no potential living persons.--DataAnalyst 19:33, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
• Debbie V. view deletion impact - keep. no potential living persons.--DataAnalyst 19:33, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
• Dmer view deletion impact
• Emen7 view deletion impact - 30 people, no places, basically one line. No overlap. Could be deleted, but the names and dates are specific enough to match. Recommend keep.--Amelia 05:48, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
• Ernied1 view deletion impact - 75 people, reasonably detailed 18th/19th century England/US. Recommend keep.--Amelia 05:48, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
• Escwell view deletion impact - 80 reasonably detailed people, border states in 18th/19th century. Recommend keep.--Amelia 05:48, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
• Espenki view deletion impact - 90 Norwegian people. Not extremely detailed, but no obvious red flags to quality. Recommend keep. --Amelia 05:48, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
• Evanlivie view deletion impact - 600 people, 2/3 overlap, mostly Virginia families. The rest appears to be older generations, from Ancestral file. But given the overlap with other trees, deletion will probably cause more of a mess than it's worth for 200 people. Recommend keep.--Amelia 05:48, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
• Ferguson5060 view deletion impact - Just 16 people, all with dates, places. Keep.--Amelia 05:48, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
• Firmware view deletion impact - 230 people, about 180 of which have no names or places, and most of them are descended from the handful of people with dates in the last 200 years. Recommend delete.--Amelia 05:48, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
• Fitzjohn view deletion impactRetention recommended; around 25 livings, but most of it is 19th century and has dates, could be cleaned up. Daniel Maxwell 13:26, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
• Friendlyskies view deletion impact - Retention recommended - 600+ people, most have dates, no livings. Daniel Maxwell 01:49, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
• Gelder4 view deletion impact - Keep. No potential living. Reasonably complete. No further review required.--DataAnalyst 23:36, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
• Gelder4 view deletion impact - keep. no potential living persons.--DataAnalyst 19:33, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
• Gelder4 view deletion impact - keep. no potential living persons.--DataAnalyst 19:33, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
• Gelder4 view deletion impact - keep. no potential living persons.--DataAnalyst 19:33, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
• Gelder4 view deletion impact - keep. no potential living persons.--DataAnalyst 19:33, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
• GenDetective view deletion impact - Keep. No potential living. Decent sourcing on many pages. No further review required.--DataAnalyst 14:50, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
• Genebug2 view deletion impact - Retention recommended. Mostly Norwegian. Have added sources to most pages and fixed most surnames as per conventions. --cos1776 22:10, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
• Genebug2 view deletion impact - Retention recommended. Most pages have been cleaned and sourced. --cos1776 19:27, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
• Genebug2 view deletion impact - Retention recommended. Have added sources to most pages. --cos1776 00:06, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
• Genebug2 view deletion impact - Retention recommended. Most pages have been cleaned and sourced --cos1776 04:27, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
• Gokey4 view deletion impact

Analysis: Mixed quality. At least one bad branch has been deleted. About half the remaining approx. 4400 person pages do not have a birth date. Cleanup started. --DataAnalyst 21:08, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Cleanup completed. No living persons left and no obvious errors. However, quality was mixed and many sources unreliable, so there are undoubtedly still errors in this tree. --DataAnalyst 17:23, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

• Guru view deletion impact - deleted all potentially living persons, leaving a 7-person tree. looks reasonable--DataAnalyst 00:33, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
• HFP view deletion impact - 6-person tree, all with death dates. no sources but looks reasonable--DataAnalyst 00:31, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
• Hamenarin view deletion impact - a couple of very small trees left after deleting living individuals. not sourced, but looks reasonable--DataAnalyst 02:34, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
• IRelate view deletion impact. Retention recommended.
  • Analysis: 462 pages (288P/172F/1A/1I); deletion impact = 662 links; not well-sourced but heavily interconnected with other trees, esp. in Middle Ages; 4 Livings marked for SD at this time (may be others). --Cos1776 16:31, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
• IanBanks view deletion impact - Retention recommended.
  • Analysis: 57 pages (34P/12F/11MS); deletion impact = 0 links; couple of Livings marked for SD; some pages sourced well with MySource censuses which could be converted; place/date format issues have been corrected. --Cos1776 17:46, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
• In genealogist view deletion impact -- Retention recommended (see talk page) -- Cleanup completed --DataAnalyst 01:03, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
• Inator view deletion impact - Additional opinions requested.
  • Analysis: 11278 pages (8055P/2885F/16I/320MS/1S); deletion impact = 3030 links; BIG tree; user has created pages for himself and immediate family members, most of whom are living and some of whom were also watching the pages in 2008 (creating multiple watcher issues); outside of his immediate family for which some primary-ish sources are included in MySource format, most pages are either unsourced or sourced by reference to personal email addresses or websites (and occasionally tombstones) which contain no details; contains uploaded images from Find A Grave with permission not indicated. IMHO this tree was mostly created by attaching other trees in ancestry.com. From what is there, it is impossible for me to ascertain the accuracy without delving into the details. Since this tree ties into so many other established lines - I will hesitantly recommend retention to allow for other interested users to fill in the sources later, but I encourage others to weigh in on this. In the meantime, I'll add SD templates to the Livings and rename some incorrect page titles. --Cos1776 00:31, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

I've been working on the tree and it should be kept. Lots of pages are missing any dates, but from what I have been working on so far, the family connections are reasonably accurate. I have been adding dates / approx years to 19th century records where whole families are missing dates. I am deleting pages for potentially living individuals, and doing other cleanup.--DataAnalyst 12:29, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

I have finished all the cleanup I plan to do. There should be no more living people in the tree, and I have addressed all the glaring issues that I noticed. There are still many missing dates and places, but the tree proved to be reasonably accurate overall.--DataAnalyst 23:40, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

• J0601 view deletion impact - Retention recommended.
  • Analysis: 1334 pages (1063P/254F/16MS); deletion impact = 56 links; mostly England/Wales family groups in 18-19th century; many capitalized surnames & months; some red Place links; 39 Living pages (I'll mark for SD). Although most of the pages have few links to WR Source pages, many of them do contain info and sources in the Personal History text box. Hopefully, interested researchers will reformat this as they encounter it - and some already have. --Cos1776 16:00, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
• Jacob F. Roecker view deletion impact - Retention recommended.
  • Analysis: 44 pages (30P/14F). Very small tree containing LDS families connected to Founder Joseph Smith. Few sources. --cos1776
• JanessaRoberts view deletion impact - Keep
  • Namespaces: Family (262) MySource (88) Person (707). Last action 2008. No activity since upload. Some syntax issues to clean up, but mostly fine. --cos1776 21:47, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
• Jannef view deletion impact - many wives are entered with married name; may be more living persons to delete --DataAnalyst 17:20, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

All except 3 pages deleted - rest were living.--DataAnalyst 04:01, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

• JoDonahue view deletion impact - no living individuals and reasonably clean and well-sourced. Retain.--DataAnalyst 14:08, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
• Joevans3 view deletion impact - Keep. Have cleaned and sourced most pages. --cos1776 23:47, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
• Joevans3 view deletion impact - Keep. Have cleaned and sourced most pages. --cos1776 14:33, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
• Jonjay view deletion impact -- Retention recommended. At 60000+ people this is one of the bigger trees on WR. It has about 6500 Livings Daniel Maxwell 13:11, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Living individuals have been removed. Cleanup of unknown maiden names has been completed. Tree now has 42,342 person pages and 14,475 family pages.--DataAnalyst 14:02, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

• Just Alf view deletion impact - Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Kaipix view deletion impact- Reviewed/no substantial issues--Amelia 06:05, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
• Kurtkrouse view deletion impact - Living individuals (over 50% of tree) have been deleted. Rest looks OK.--DataAnalyst 01:42, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
• LeRoy60 view deletion impact -- pages for living individuals need to be deleted.--DataAnalyst 00:48, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Most of the tree was deleted by the original contributor. No living individuals remaining.--DataAnalyst 02:25, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

• Maubus view deletion impact - living people have been removed. This is now a very small tree that looks fine.--DataAnalyst 16:51, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
• Mayflowermadam view deletion impact -- Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Max rempel view deletion impact - a few very small trees that look OK. Pages for living individuals have all been deleted.--DataAnalyst 12:46, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
• Mizeguy view deletion impact -- Retention recommended (see talk page)
• Pcaverly view deletion impact - Lots of living individuals removed. Remainder of tree appears fine.--DataAnalyst 01:51, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
• Pcaverly view deletion impact - No significant issues.--DataAnalyst 01:51, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
• Rossnixon view deletion impact -- Retention recommended - I have deleted all living persons and the rest looks good.--DataAnalyst 15:13, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

GEDCOMs that were empty

The following trees were empty (no pages).

• Auldjeannie view deletion impact - Empty
• Bernice view deletion impact - Empty
• Boic view deletion impact -- Empty
• Côme view deletion impact - Empty. Daniel Maxwell 19:34, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
• Ccbreland view deletion impact - All overlaps. There would be no "deletion."--Amelia 05:02, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

This tree no longer has any pages.--DataAnalyst 19:37, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

• Cfsneed view deletion impact - Reviewed. About 4000 people; 300 living, but mostly named that or marked speedy delete already. Otherwise reasonably clean, and enough overlap that it's not worth deleting. --Amelia 01:42, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

This tree no longer has any pages.--DataAnalyst 19:37, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

• Dblocher51 view deletion impact - Empty
• Fearfeasa view deletion impact - Empty.--Amelia 15:33, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
• Jacobsdottir1 view deletion impact - ???
  • Analysis: Not really a tree, just the one User page. Last action 2007. --cos1776 19:26, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
• Maplady view deletion impact - empty tree--DataAnalyst 00:45, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
• Orphan Account 2 view deletion impact - tree probably still exists but cannot be reached with this link
• Orphan Account 2 view deletion impact - tree probably still exists but cannot be reached with this link

GEDCOMs that were recommended to be deleted

The following GEDCOMs have been deleted.

• Abolcen view deletion impact
• Amjadfarooq view deletion impact
• Angelina erickson view deletion impact
• Arcadium view deletion impact
• Bonnid view deletion impact
• Ghodasara view deletion impact
• Maheep view deletion impact
• Nyamweyafamily view deletion impact
• Zojx view deletion impact
• Zzz279 view deletion impact

• Al Beitchman view deletion impact -- deletion recommended (see talk page)
• Angelbaby276 view deletion impact -- deletion recommended (see talk page)
• Baborge view deletion impact - Deletion recommended (see talk page)
• Bassani view deletion impact - Deletion recommended (see talk page)
• BluesQueenBee view deletion impact - Deletion recommended (see talk page).
• Bluesqueenbee view deletion impact - Deletion recommended (see talk page).
• Cfmartinez view deletion impact - Mostly living, no overlap, less than 20% have dates or places. Deletion recommended.--Amelia 06:10, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
• Charzycat view deletion impact -- deletion recommended (see talk page)
• Christopherjperez view deletion impact - 64 people, not a single place or date. Deletion recommended.--Amelia 16:30, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
• Danitra55 view deletion impact -- deletion recommended (see talk page)
• Felipep view deletion impact -- -- deletion recommended (see talk page)
• Gusriobr view deletion impact -- deletion recommended (see talk page)
• Irarum view deletion impact - Deletion recommended.
  • Analysis: 25 pages (22P/3F); deletion impact = 0 links; No firm dates; No places; No sources; it looks like mostly Livings. --Cos1776 19:21, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
• JKAMD view deletion impact- Deletion recommended.
  • Analysis: 473 pages (366P/107F); deletion impact = 3 links, but all within tree itself ; No places; extensive incorrect Person page titles; IMHO it would be best to delete, fix the GEDCOM and reload. --Cos1776 16:48, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
• Jayso view deletion impact - deletion recommended (see talk page)
• Kalpeshptl view deletion impact - No dates or places. Deletion recommended (see talk page).
• Kirstythestar view deletion impact - deletion recommended (see talk page)
• Linner1228 view deletion impact - one person and one MySource (Social Security death index) - I deleted them because there is no genealogy.--DataAnalyst 01:08, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
• Little-italee view deletion impact - one person (from Social Security death index) - I deleted the page because there is no genealogy.--DataAnalyst 01:10, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
• Maktbua view deletion impact - had 1 person page with no dates, now deleted.--DataAnalyst 02:19, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
• Meatman view deletion impact- Has been deleted (except for 1 page that is in someone else's tree)--DataAnalyst 13:43, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
• Mune72 view deletion impact - deletion recommended (see talk page)
• Neuman5022 view deletion impact - deletion recommended (see talk page)
• Nitemares view deletion impact -- deletion recommended (see talk page)
• Omskirk view deletion impact -- deletion recommended (see talk page)
• Pc-keving view deletion impact -- deletion recommended (see talk page)
• RainbowOzGrl view deletion impact -- deletion recommended (see talk page)
• Richardwelchcolumbus view deletion impact -- deletion recommended (see talk page)
• Rush00121 view deletion impact -- deletion recommended (see talk page)
• SRDA view deletion impact -- deletion recommended (see talk page)
• SandManMattSH view deletion impact - -- deletion recommended (see talk page)
• Stevenkoolen view deletion impact - -- deletion recommended (see talk page)
• ThomasWorman view deletion impact - -- deletion recommended (see talk page)
• Treks view deletion impact -- deletion recommended
• Crolidge view deletion impact - Deletion recommended. Only 4 people and a few mysources. Only one person has dates, so this tree could probably be removed. Daniel Maxwell 19:34, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
• Fbarriga view deletion impact - 200 people, no places, only a couple dates from the late 19th century - most people are their descendants. Deletion recommended.--Amelia 15:33, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
• Fuddin view deletion impact - Deletion recommended. Very few dates, 650+ people. Daniel Maxwell 01:41, 28 April 2015 (UTC)