Genealogists often start their research and family history exploration because of an interest and a desire to discover more. Most of them (myself included) make mistakes along the way and realize their research approach, organization skills, citation awareness, and understanding of records have changed over time.
Or at least hopefully they’ve gotten better.
But the decision for many genealogists is: what needs to be redone?
I don’t really have a good answer. It depends upon how egregiously “wrong” your initial methods and analysis was. Errors in conclusions need to be fixed and should be given high priority. Do you need to go back and redo those labels you put on digital images of photographs? Do you need to retitle and refile all those digital images of census and other records? Only you can decide whether or not that is important based on competing research goals and the like.
But give a little thought to what may need to be redone and how helpful that may be to you and other researchers later. Is it worth your time to redo everything or should you continue working on current problems?
No matter what you decide, some review of what you have done for the correction of errors in fact is not a bad thing.
But do you need to fix everything and is it worth your time?
No responses yet