Mary Bennett - Pg 3 of the document in my documents

Hi, Stacey

I don't see that document listed as a source for this Mary Bennett ... do you have a link to it?

Just to clarify, of course, this Mary Bennett is NOT the mother of the Mary Ball who married President George Washington. (Read the about of the Joseph who *is* President Washington's grandfather: Colonel Joseph Ball, of "Epping Forest")

Are you saying that this Mary Bennett should be the wife of (Joseph Ball, of Coan) Joseph Ball, not his father Joseph Ball (Colonel Joseph Ball, of "Epping Forest"), and that she died roughly the same time (same year) as her daughter (1708) was born? That doesn't seem to be consistent with the current Geni tree.

I see you have added a Mary as the husband of that younger Joseph, with a child of George Washington, but that is not correct. Further you added that Mary-wife-of-younger-Joseph with the same birth&death dates as daughter Mary.

Do you need some help straightening out the connections & duplicates?

8. COLONEL CAPTAIN JOSEPH7 BALL (COLONEL WILLAM6, WILLIAM5, JOHN II4, JOHN PARIS3, WILLIAM2, ROBERT1)
was born 25 May 1649 in England, and died 11 Jul 1711 in Oakley, Lancaster, Virginia. He married MARY
BENNETT Abt. 1703. She was born Abt. 1688 in Westchester, England, and died 1720.
Notes for COLONEL CAPTAIN JOSEPH BALL:
Children of CAPTAIN BALL and MARY BENNETT are:
i. JOSEPH JR8 BALL, b. Abt. 1704; d. 1728.
10. ii. MARY BALL, b. 1708, Virginia; d. 1743, Virginia.

http://media.geni.com/p13/e4/c3/21/c2/5344483a95cb78b6/pdfgene2_ori...

ITS ON PG 3 oops srry bout the caps lock .

yup I could use some help ... but not sure if you have the right info or me. lol

o I c what happened . . I think I originally had the right info. but I ok'd some merges or duplicates and messed it up I think ..... lol I also had some pics taken down of my great grandfather and his wife .... who knows

FYI ... I've started working on unraveling the Ball family. The mess started well before the first Ball you have listed in your document.

... stay tuned ...

I've done some work, but it is nowhere near complete. For example, this person (John Ball I, of Wokingham) has way too many children by one wife, and more than properly belong to the 2nd wife, too.

FYI: Your document looks to be somewhat similar to this web site:
http://www.angelfire.com/tx4/custer/ball.html

I haven't everything yet; may be details down 7+ generations to complement each other; we'll see!

There is also this very interesting and useful site I'll be looking at as well.
http://www.newenglandballproject.com/index.htm

Always be on the lookout (with suspicion!) for an intermingling of the Ball's of New England vs. those who stayed in England vs. the Ball's of Virginia. I'm finding I have to check at least two generations on either side of a profile to make sure I'm not 'crossing generations' when there are no dates or locations associated with a profile!

someones been messing with my tree. I had photos taken down too..... I doubt ill stay here long cause of the pictures being taken down... we'll s4ee if I can figure it out this weekend ... im scared to look.

re: pictures

Look at the "Revisions" tab on the profile, see if that gives any clues.

I've heard some rumors of very recent bugs affecting pictures as a result of a merge, but nothing definite yet. Private User, if you have a specific example that the Geni staff can look at, it would be VERY helpful. Pictures should NOT disappear!

Private User ... I'm sorry to break the news to you, but the document you have listed in your 4/1 note has a major problem with the Fifth and the Sixth Generation (e.g.: Col. William Ball, #6). While the date of birth seems quite a bit too early (1615 is more likely than 1580), the clincher is in the Notes, citing Stanley G. Smith and the myth of the "6 Brothers" -- see this link for more details on that 'myth': http://www.newenglandballproject.com/ui15.htm

There are indeed different Ball lineages in New England & Virginia, but DNA testing confirms that they are not brothers -- or even closely related.

Also, the 'angelfire' document has the same problem with regard to it's Sixth & Seventh Generation.

That 'problem' with those documents doesn't mean that the remaining information before and after that point are necessarily incorrect -- just that they should not be taken at 'face value'!

I've not yet begun making the Geni tree reflect these issues; there is still more investigating to do. Any other references and sources you have would be appreciated!

Why do you care about the Ball Family , Dan? Just wondering why it is being studied by you?

In reply to the message from Dan on 4/3 about John P. Ball - I see only 10 children listed for him, and that was not the least bit unusual for one wife to have that many children. I have many families in my earlier ancestral lines that had any where from 8-12 children, all the same mother. If the man was married twice or more, it is not uncommon to see 15-18 children documented. I have that occasionallly also. Disclaimer-I'm married into the Ball family but not researching back this far, so have no specific information to add.

re: too many kids -- I was not implying it wasn't feasible to have that many kids from one mother; that comment was based on the information in the "About"s and some of the references. My own paternal grandmother, for instance, was one of 14. It's less likely, however, with "serial spouses" to have that many by each of them. Just something to be looked at, particularly looking at dates and timelines.

re: Ball Family: why do I care?

1) As a curator, I care about the World Tree being as accurate as feasible; that usually starts by noting "tree conflicts", and often grows from there.

2) One of the roles of a curator can be to help sort-out conflicting and/or incorrect information. In this particular case, I'm not at all claiming to be an expert on the Ball family history, but I was intrigued enough to do some looking at various sources and noting what was documented by others in some of the existing profiles.

The flip side of that coin, however, is that it is not expected that a Geni Curator (a volunteer role) will do all the work in "filling out" and entering data for someone's personal family tree. But most of the 'mess' at the present time seems to be the result of various branches of the Ball family -- based on a variety of different sources of varying accuracy -- getting connected together a various points.

So, in some ways, having started on this, I do feel some degree of 'curatorial' ownership for helping to straighten out and minimize the likelihood of it just devolving back into another 'mess' in a few years.

Once the relationships are straightened out, based on the best information currently available, one of the curator tools we have to help with this is the "Master Profile" capability. As an area / family is well documented, it can be helpful to have all the profiles made into "MP's" ... then, in the future, as others "connect into" those (Ball) families, if they have profile which don't match-up with the documented MP's, then either they are incorrect -- or there is some new information which needs to be documented.

I certainly appreciate volunteer curators such as yourself that are so dedicated to keeping the integrity of the family trees. I try to keep mine as accurate as possible and always appreciate any corrections being brought to my attention (of course with accepted documentation). Thanks so much for all you do.