How reliable is the information in our tree? This depends on what you expect of a family tree.

There are several approaches to family tree research:

• Is it an exact record of certifiable data about people?
• Is it a genetic record of a family?
• Is it a story about a family?

Most people probably go for a mix of these, though some people get upset if you cannot produce, say, a birth certificate or equivalent evidence for Rollo, Duke of Normandy, born, according to our records, "about 846". Adopted and step children would not get a mention if you went for a purely genetic record, yet they are sometimes a key part of a family's story. Apart form the fact that we cannot be sure that people are the children of the people the (particulary early) records say they are.

In this tree, story is primary but that does not mean we do not have a responsibility for getting the facts straight. You should read the article "How reliable is our data?" in the Histories section (under the Media drop-down menu) where we identify key points in the family story that have question marks against them.

Be aware that birth years with "est" in front of them are not reliable. They are a device mainly to ensure privacy protection for living people - see the explanation for "est" in Abbreviations (in the Support menu).

You can help make the data more reliable by sending in your corrections - use the suggest or contact links. (The Contact link is at the bottom of the Info drop-down menu.) You should indicate how you know what you know. If you have a birth/marriage/death certificate you should quote the reference. If it is anecdotal, tell us where the story come from.