This page is designed to point out examples of misleading information being distributed about families with names like Slaton, Slayden, Slaydon, Slatten, etc. Many posters of such material have been requested to provide documentation to support these lines, but many either refuse to do so, or give out patently false information. I believe that significant undermining of research into these names has been committed by certain parties, using assumed names & occasionally using real names of real people without permission. For more information about the statements above, please feel free to contact me.
I continue to receive passwords to this forum, genealogy.com, indicating that someone is using my information to gain admission as me.
Here are some pointers for all researchers:
I have already noted that postings were made under false names & real names without permission of the bearers of those real names. These include answers to queries on “public” Internet forums, publications, & Family Trees submitted either under a false name, or the real name of a researcher who did not grant permission to do this. “Red flags” for any postings anywhere:
1. Full names, birth dates, & birth places for individuals born before 1800. Citations of parish records & Family Bibles should be pursued if provided. They should not be entered into your research until you (or a trusted colleague) have seen originals, or photocopies of originals.
2. Detailed locations that appear in land & tax records are sometimes cited as places of residence or birth with no supporting evidence of birth or residence there. Precise birth locations (“Cubb Creek”) should be approached with caution for this reason. People bought land & paid tax for land they rented out. Veterans received land that they never lived on. Women gave birth wherever they happened to be, not always in their own homes.
3. Language such as “his brother” and “his father” in anecdotal forms tends to bolster what may be a conjecture. Do not accept such language as proof of research. If this comes from a family member within a generation or two of the story, remember that information is sometimes garbled or suppressed in the “passing down,” before accepting as fact.
4. All Family Tree postings should be viewed with great suspicion, especially those broadcast in websites with “World” in their titles. Many individuals are displayed without permission & without an opportunity to correct the material. Many individuals who are not genetically linked to a family, such as adoptees, & some who are, i.e., products of incest and “race – mixing,” cannot & generally will not be presented in a truthful fashion except within a tightly focused research group which is usually made up of descendants, not independent researchers. Many conjectured linkages discussed & published in text form should NEVER be included in Family Trees, which are best used for well-proven descendant-based research, not broad one-name study projects. The impetus behind the proliferation of these is the ease with which a book can be generated from genealogical software, but the “Trees” generated thereby may be worthless since alternate theories cannot be adequately noted in a “Tree,” while a book generated from such sources, when edited responsibly, can leave room for alternate theories or signs of doubt on the part of the presenter.
On this forum, a page by James P Rodes publishes information about a family of William Slatton & Mary RODES that has no existence in records. The poster was requested to provide citations & in doing so, referred to non-existent articles (I read through the cites provided.)
1) There are no proveable connections of most Slatons in America to a European line.
2) There are no provable connections between William Sladding, Abraham Sladding, John Sladden & Arthur Sladyen found in pre1750 VA records. I would much rather be using this page to post good news about the state of research into thes name