Adoptive Parents Incorrect

@Guaimar IV, prince of Salerno

In tracing out this line, it shows Gaitelgrima, daughter of Duke Pandulf II, as his adoptive mother when I view the path to me. I wondered who his actual parents were, so searched and what I found is that she is his biological mother. He was adopted, but not by the couple currently shown as his adopted parents. Here is what I found:

1) His profile currently has this notation: GUAIMAR di Salerno, [adopted] son of GUAIMAR III Prince of Salerno & his second wife Gaitelgrima of Capua ([1010/12]-murdered 3 Jun 1052)

2) But his profile also has a link to his Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guaimar_IV_of_Salerno, which says this:

He was born around the year 1013, the eldest son of Guaimar III of Salerno by Gaitelgrima, daughter of Duke Pandulf II of Benevento.

3) Then I found another source that says:

He was "adopted" by Emperor Konrad II. The Salerno couple were his biological parents:

Amatus records that Guaimar was invested as Prince of Capua by Emperor Konrad II, who also made him "his adopted son", on the latter's visit to Italy.

http://www.connectedbloodlines.com/getperson.php?personID=I15190&am...

this is interesting and actually probable even just looking at the dates ...

now give time to the interested parties to elaborate the thing.. (& the sources)
...notify some good (C) ..let's say one at random.. Erica Howton ? XD

I instead prepare the technical question:
do we include an adopted child of the couple or the individual?
--> Conrad II, Holy Roman Emperor

I have a g-uncle who was adopted by a well-known local family, although his biological parents are also known and documented. I had to disconnect the adoptive parents and just make a note of them in the About section of his profile, because the adoptive relationship kept taking priority over my natural bloodlines nearly every time I tried to use the Relationship Calculator.

It was nothing personal, I really do appreciate what they did for my g-uncle -- just that removing them from the Program as his adoptive "parents" made the Calculator work more efficiently for the rest of the family, for some reason. So because of that experience I would only apply adoptive parents in cases where the biological ones are unknown.

Livio Scremin Adoption in the Empire would have been father only, I believe.

A reference to the adoption & it’s importance

https://books.google.com/books?id=Gop3g_fuNQQC&lpg=PA32&ots...

The [adopted] at FMG refers to Conrad ll.

However my link casts doubt that there was a formal adoption.

So I would link within profile rather than tree adoption.

wow what wander-full speed teamwork :D

Do we want give to @Debbie the honor of doing the biological / adoptive switch?
(it's the drop-down menu to the right of the parents relations, really just one click to do, you can't go wrong)

& OK, someone write the 2 lines with the emperor's link on the info.

__________________
Look at that wonderful adoptive crossing to Matilda di Canossa, the Great Countess of Tuscany (serious safe and testasmental)... here for the first time I had to juggle with single adoption :D
(the system forces the couple to the point that you have to create an anonymous partner to be after deleted:) [save this info;]

Careful - my link says:

“... It is equally unlikely there was any ‘formal’ adoption of Prince Guaimar by the Emperor - ...”

Even though the phrase [lo fist fill adoptive] is mentioned on the previous page.

Norman propaganda...

Thanks everyone!

I've changed the connection to his connected parents to biological rather than adopted, but based on the info provided about how adding an adoptive connection causes confusion with the app, I didn't touch that.

I removed the note that was in his profile listing him incorrectly adopted by his actual parents and put notations about the "adoption" by Conrad and the link about that that Erica provided. If one of you wants to change what I put, I'm fine with that because some of you certainly have more experience with how to best notate important historical data.

I just noticed that he has two wives named Gemma. Is that correct or are those the same woman?

Wife: Gemma (deceased)
Wife: Porpora de Tabellaria (b. - 1036)
Wife: Gemma di Salerno (Capua), di Marsico (1010 - 1070)

SOLVED__________

I reduced to one line, but in the front row. (reading Erica in fact the adoptive connection should not be made.. I like those quotes "adoptive" )

PS.
-ehehhe removing MedLands from info is never an expert move :D
-however it writes it in square brackets :]
-among other things, from the upper father short menu that goes then expanded is not reported: I pasted that short part... (it's super documented, the other part too long)
-sore pain wikipedia: I have wholly integral, at least differentiating the chapters and removing menus ..
(I'll never understand why people want to read wikis here, without reading them in interactive mode:)

Good work, Livio.

Are both wives named Gemma valid or were they the same person?

SOLVED_____________
6 mount ago (19/4/2019 alle 0:26) I pasted directly on the profile of the first wife Porpora de Tabellaria what reported by MedLands (site of primary sources)

I had already posed myself that problem when I made these lines passable .. (even if you have seen profiles present for 10 years, this does not mean that they were connected to each other ;) {blessed you! who enter GENI and find all your grandparents of a thousand years ago already present all washed and ironed:}

MedLands comment unequivocally could not be the same famous documented wife .. of course if you find sources to merge them ... it's all another discussion :D

Thanks for confirming that.

As for ancestors already recorded, case in point with the adoption we just sorted out, the connections aren't always without wrinkles. I never take any of them at face value, especially when there are no sources provided. Even when there are sources, I like to trace it all out myself. It helps me learn more about the ancestors as well as assuring me whether the information is correct. That said, I do find more right that wrong on Geni, but I only know that because I double check all my ancestors as I work on my lines. I've had all these folks in my private tree for a decade but only started retracing them in comparison to Geni a few months ago. My goal is to have them match, so I have the world connection on Geni as well as a personal record. It's a long process! What's awesome is when my personal tree, Geni and DNA all validate each other.

Thanks for everyone's past efforts on these lines and on this collaboration to sort out the adoption. Great teamwork!

I added a curator note to clarify that it’s three different wives.

Yes, tracing out our own lines corrects and enhances the Geni world family tree, and teaches us history. And getting these bios in helps everyone else.

I especially like the solution shown on “adoptive,” because it opens up thinking about political alliances as part of “family.”

all the spam Wiki was unbearable, especially with many secondary but useful links below:
Maybe I found a solution (link to each chapter XD),
just an experiment for this profile, tell me if it's better, or with a click I put the 2 meter long wiki back :D

I really like to see parents, children & their spouses if possible listed in profile “about.” It is very difficult to keep the world tree orderly otherwise. And I don’t want to have to leave a genealogy site to do ... genealogy.

The Wikipedia spam was definitely too much. Maybe can find a little bit more to describe his notability better.

https://www.historyfiles.co.uk/KingListsEurope/ItalyApulia.htm

Maybe an extract from here which explains the coming of the Normans.

https://viaggiart.com/en/salerno

“Around the year 1000 prince Guaimar IV annexed Amalfi, Sorrento, Gaeta and the whole duchy of Apulia and Calabria, starting to conceive a future unification of the whole southern Italy under Salerno's arms. The coins minted in the city circulated in all the Mediterranean, with the Opulenta Salernum wording to certify its richness. However, the stability of the Principate was continually shaken by the Saracen attacks and, most of all, by internal struggles. In 1056, one of the numerous plots led to the fall of Guaimar. His weaker son Gisulf II succeeded him, but the decline of the principality had begun. ...”