Rodolfo I Aldobrandeschi - Debbie Gabel

There is a Rodolfo I and Rodolfo II. Maybe you looked at it while I was still working on. As they were, none of them had any sources at all. I've spent all day searching online for sources and they are pretty much all in Italian and have to be translated but those sources can be viewed and are better than having no sources at all. If you think I have something wrong and you can provide sourced material that indicates the error, I'll be happy to change anything.

When I click on the links you posted, they're all the same person, one profile, not three different ones. Like I said, maybe you were looking at them before I was finished working on them.

I looked at a lot of translated sources and they all had the same basic information on the people in the lines. When I found multiple sources that offered additional information, I included those.

Given that these people are part of Italian history, it makes sense they have better documentation on them. I wouldn't just have spent hours tracing the lines and comparing documentation, etc. except for any other reason to verify their accuracy since they're ancestors of our family as well. I definitely want the information to be correct, which was the point of all I did today.

Debbie Gambrell # VJ294190C1, mtDNA H2a1 ha scollegato Rodolfo Aldobrandeschi, II dai suoi genitori Gerardo I Aldobrandeschi e da suo fratello Rodolfo Aldobrandeschi, I.
4 ore fa
Rodolfo Aldobrandeschi, II was connected to Rodolfo Aldobrandeschi, I as his son by Debbie Gambrell # VJ294190C1, mtDNA H2a1.
4 ore fa

Rodolfo Aldobrandeschi, I é stato aggiunto come figlio di Gerardo I Aldobrandeschi da Debbie Gambrell # VJ294190C1, mtDNA H2a1.
4 ore fa
...
Il profilo di Rodolfo Aldobrandeschi, I è stato aggiornato da Debbie Gambrell # VJ294190C1, mtDNA H2a1: suffisso
4 ore fa · guarda
Geni Pro badge
Rodolfo Aldobrandeschi, II was disconnected from his parent Rodolfo Aldobrandeschi, I by Debbie Gambrell # VJ294190C1, mtDNA H2a1.
5 ore fa
Rodolfo II Aldobrandeschi was connected to Rodolfo Aldobrandeschi, I as his son by Debbie Gambrell # VJ294190C1, mtDNA H2a1.
5 ore fa
Debbie Gambrell # VJ294190C1, mtDNA H2a1 ha scollegato Ildebrandino Aldobrandeschi, IV dai suoi genitori Rodolfo Aldobrandeschi, I e da suo fratello Rodolfo II Aldobrandeschi.
5 ore fa
Ildebrandino Aldobrandeschi, IV was connected to Rodolfo Aldobrandeschi, I as his son by Debbie Gambrell # VJ294190C1, mtDNA H2a1.
5 ore fa

Il profilo di Rodolfo I Aldobrandeschi è stato aggiornato da Debbie Gambrell # VJ294190C1, mtDNA H2a1: nascita, morte, nome e altri 2
5 ore fa · guarda
Rodolfo I Aldobrandeschi was disconnected from his parent Rodolfo Aldobrandeschi by Debbie Gambrell # VJ294190C1, mtDNA H2a1.
5 ore fa

<privato> Homs è stato aggiunto come amministratore del profilo di Rodolfo I Aldobrandeschi.
5 ore fa

Il profilo di Rodolfo I Aldobrandeschi è stato aggiornato. cognome da nubile
5 ore fa · guarda
Il profilo di Rodolfo Aldobrandeschi è stato unito a quello di Rodolfo I Aldobrandeschi da Debbie Gambrell # VJ294190C1, mtDNA H2a1.
5 ore fa · guarda

si si ho capito va ...
tanto il fesso che rimette apposto c'è sempre.

Oh, I think I see the one you're talking about.

Rodolfo I Aldobrandeschi

I tried to merge that one and it wouldn't let me merge it so that he was the husband of Willa di Capua. Neither can I delete it. So it got left "as is" for that reason. Perhaps you can merge it or delete it since I can't. You had added and manage one of them and George J. Homs had added the other that you're also manager on. So I didn't add either of them if you'll notice the folks who added and manage. All I've done is go in and add sources and tweak a bit of the data on existing profiles.

This is the only one I added because he had been omitted from the lineage, based on the sourced material I found.

Rodolfo I Aldobrandeschi

I don't read Italian, so all that you posted, I can't read. I can tell you copied it from the Revision tab, where I read it in English. Yes, I definitely did some revisions - adding the sources materials, adding any titles, dates, etc. that were documented in the sourced material, etc. I'm not apologizing for working on these lines. They belong to everyone descended from them and I didn't just throw junk in. As I said, previously they were unsourced and at least I made those improvements.

https://www.geni.com/merge/view?revision_id=75060170660 this was not the same

I agree and I think the confusion there was that Rodolpho I was missing from the mix, which I later added him as I traced the lines out in comparison to the sources lineage info. As it worked out, Rodolpho I was the son of Gerardo I Aldobrandeschi and then Rodolpho II was the son of Rodolpho II. It has been hours since I was working on that and as I worked on it, that "fix" came into play later and sorted itself out. So any merge requests you got earlier that don't make sense can be disregarded. They were pretty complicated lines to trace out, with so many same-named people in them and that one missing Rodolpho threw things off.

ora se hai finito sistemo io ok?

today Another changes, merged old clippings abandoned
on Anselmo I, marchese della Liguria Orientale & Aleram, 1st marquis of Montferrat & Guglielmo "the Pagan", conte di Torresana & signore del Monferrato

Erica Howton i need cut end destroy the new incoming branch merged by @Debbie

Gisela di Liguria, TRASH (5 profiles cutted and abandoned from 2014, 1 admn only: for sure a cut-out of some curator who had settled before me, in fact they are clones, but with wrong degrees of kinship from those we already have)

Debbie Gambrell you're doing it the wrong way, the medieval tree rarely needs merge, for sure not at such an ancient level! (you are moving in under 1000 zone!) certainly not of branched branches years ago! if someone had cut them there was a reason! (for some months now the (C) do not abandon clone like this anymore, now have the request cancellation button (thankfully)

Livio Scremin Can you label in the suffix the incorrect profiles? I put in “duplicate tree do not merge” so i know it’s a branch to be isolated and sent to Geni for deleting.

Gisela of Tuscany has descent so I’m unclear where the disconnect should be - this is her grandson. Manfred di Savona, TRASH

I started looking where it came from..

I have pasted the source online on the about,
that site is sometimes reliable?(asking),
but in this case the site itself uses "probable" term everywhere.

Gisela of the Obertenghi, of Milan [MP] is locked whit Father of that line online (I pasted JPG and lick) but also the other part where perhaps the scheme would like to attack, I did it all myself (with you that you sometimes supervised) and all that part has no line "probably" attached

XD this: Manfredo del Vasto, marchese di Savona!
it doesn't even match that site: is all wrong XD
There was a reason they had taken it off :D
only they didn't have to let it float so I hired to fall on my shoes 5 years later to make me lose hours XD

https://fabpedigree.com/s046/f018136.htm Is pretty bad. It was popular some years ago, and it was a reasonable “start point” for some medieval tree profiles because easy to find. And - as you say - they have lots of ??, so we should know immediately it’s unproven.

I have to find the disconnect point - I do this by checking the relationship path between me and the profile. In this case it’s Anselmo I, marchese della Liguria Orientale so disconnecting him from bad wife & son should enable the twig to be isolated.

Thank you for the suffix, makes it easier to see.

Livio Scremin

I am confused. Are you suggesting we delete this profile:
Manfredo del Vasto, marchese di Savona

It is an MP profile and has been here since 2007

??

Bernard

And done! Your golf clubs await ...

Bernard Joseph Albanese He’s good! There was a bad wife, child & copy of him Identified.

Erica, Livio has been in my face about all this and has posted publicly to stop me. I don't see that I've done anything wrong. As I already explained to him, I was just tracing ancestral lines, came to those, saw most had no sourced references at all and since they're old lines and unfamiliar to me, I researched each and every one for sourced information on them to make sure they were even valid people. You can see the sourced references I posted in their profiles, which I've always thought is a good thing to do. Livio is upset that I even touched them. But I consider his asking others to stop me in public forum over this is harassment and it needs to stop. I spent hours working on all those profiles trying to document them. You've seen enough of my work and helped me with enough to know I try to document everything and don't go into a line trying to mess things up, which is what Livio is making it sound like I've set out to do. He seems to feel he owns the lines and I'm not supposed to touch them. He needs to understand this is a world, collaborative tree with lots of descendants of all the profiles in the world tree and that no one person owns them. I'm not perfect and may make an honest mistake now and then, but as I told him, if he see something I've done wrong, just tell me and show me the evidence that it's wrong, etc., not all this negativity toward me that is totally disrespectful.

Also, it has been my understanding that it's a good thing to merge duplicates, which I do when I come across them. It helps keep the tree "clean" of too many paths for the same person, which that can cause paths not to connect correctly, etc. I thought I was doing a good thing to merge them. I have no control over what notes are kept when two profiles for the same person are merged. The system makes that determination. Geni isn't perfect and neither are we who use it, but most of us are sincerely trying to do our best.

I'm not finished tracing my lines and I'm sure I'm likely to have more ancestors in common with Livio. I don't know which people those are and there is no way for me to steer clear of "his relatives" so I don't upset him. But, as I've said, he doesn't own those ancestors anyway. I have a right to trace my lines to wherever they go. I don't understand the continued references to the time frame. We all have ancient ancestors on Geni and I work on other lines that obviously aren't related to Livio and never have encountered anything like this. In some cases profile managers have thanked me for fixing problems on the lines and curators have commented on my good notes. So, this is a new and very unpleasant experience.

@Bernard and I would also say that you are confused XD
Debbie Gambrell you have no control over what GENI writes after the merge !? Then you need a lot more practice before shooting around antiquity /!\ and absolutely around italy under 1000 just freshly FIXED this year!

no wait I say it seriously seriously STOP merge wandering twigs to the ancient tree.
At this level it is not even the Middle Ages... it's really rare antiquity.
There is nothing automatic behind it. it's just volunteer work hours /!\

if you find old duplicates, around, post in the group to which they have already registered you:
https://www.geni.com/projects/Historical-Tree-Clean-Up-Please-Park-...

Debbie Gambrell I didn’t look at your profiles; I just dealt with the misplaced duplicates (not ones you had worked on).

But let us explain a little more about the medieval European tree.

We “don’t” want to merge there. I know this is counter intuitive from building the world family tree, but it’s become more and more obvious that it introduces too many conflicts into perhaps already ambiguous area.

So this doesn’t mean the genealogy work is done, far from it. It does suggest, however, we need different approaches.

For example, this discussion was just started:

https://www.geni.com/discussions/202678?msg=1334706

And we’ve had the “Medieval duplicates” project going for several years:

https://www.geni.com/projects/Historical-Tree-Clean-Up-Please-Park-...

Hope this helps, and glad to explain more. I’m not worried about you documenting, Debbie; as you say, I have ample examples I’ve seen for myself of your documentation approach to genealogy, and so much appreciated.

Erica Howton, thanks for the helpful information and links. I'll definitely read and learn. I knew about the Medieval project but not about the Tree Clean Up, which is great to know about because I've frequently encountered wandering duplicates, as Livio so aptly calls them, and not known what to do about them other than try to merge them.

And as for so-called "fixed" lines, I agree with your approach that the work is never done because earlier this year I ran into some glaring errors in some lines I was told had been researched for years by professional genealogist and had no errors. II didn't want to make waves, but the errors were staring me in the face and I found a will that provided validation for the corrections I saw need of. The will was reviewed by involved parties and they agreed the lines were, indeed, wrong after all and they thanked me and said I had been a huge help. I think in that particular case it's just that I came across information they hadn't seen in years past and it made all the difference. If I had adopted a "hands off" approach because of how certain the others were there were no errors, the corrects would never have been made and all the connections would have continued to be wrong. So there is never any harm in having fresh eyes on the lines or more validation being done on them.

There are always going to be newcomers like myself to Geni who are going to trace out their ancestral lines as a new trek for them personally and no idea whether the info is right or wrong unless they verify it for themselves, and I think that is a good thing for all concerned. I'm thankful for the work each individual makes in collaborating on our shared world tree and thank you and all the other curators who help all of us try to make the world tree better and more accurate so that all our connections are more correctly made.

Debbie Gambrell Be aware of the Colonial America dups project also, and please try to separate where you “park.” The reason is we have curators who have been working on the “big American” lines for years, so it’s a lot easier & faster for us to deal with. And conversely, we know what might need more research help. I’ve gotten “stuck” on how to fix things and been bailed out by fellow researchers.

Yes, I've got to learn about parking the duplicates. So much to learn! Thanks again for all your help!