How trustworthy is geni.com?

Note: I've posted this in the pre-1900 section as most people who will be using it will be looking at people born earlier than decent records have been kept. If a mod or someone thinks it should go somewhere else, please move it to the correct spot.

I've been using geni.com a little bit to try and figure out the relationship between various people who aren't immediately linked on Wikipedia or included on any family trees I have managed to find. However I have run into a number of instances that have caused me to doubt its validity and have taken most of the stuff on there with a grain of sand. For instance (sorry that these are all about 8th century people, that is simply the stuff I enjoy reading up on):
  • Childeric III is said to have had a son Theuderic at the age of 8. While biologically possible, it is extremely unlikely and similar situations appear an awful lot on there, especially when no-one is sure what dates to use. I am sure that Theuderic existed (Einhard or someone mentions him at one point), but he would have been born much later, probably around 750 or so.
  • Various birth and death dates are given without any other knowledge, contradicting other sources (wiki) or being completely made up (wives dying the same year their husbands did, or children being born to teenage- or younger parents. I realise 16 was considered a normal age for a child to be born, but 12? 10? I think I saw 6 once even.)
  • Theuderic (Childeric's kid) is said to have had a wife 'Theodora'. He was chucked in a monastery when he was a kid, so I highly doubt he would ever have married.
  • Karloman (Charlemagne's brother) 's second son is given the name 'Syagrius'. Wikipedia and every other source I have looked at have simply said that the name of this child is unknown, although the child is known to exist. I only ever found one Syagrius to have ever lived, and that was in the late 5th century, so it is unlikely Karloman would have chosen that name over something like Louis or Karl.
I am fine with trusting Wikipedia if there are no other webistes that say much, simply because the sources are listed at the bottom of 99% of pages and I am aware of extensive moderator action and things like that. However geni.com doesn't give any sources, except maybe a cut-and-paste of a persons wiki page occasionally. So I am starting to distrust it, except for the occasional figuring out of who was the parent of whom. Does anyone know of any sources it provides, or is it unreliable?

(Also if people happen to know the name of Karloman's second son, or can confirm Childeric's wife's name, that would be much appreciated.)

- BNC
 
I checked the site's relations for Lithuanian grand dukes of the Medieval era:

* Gediminas is mentioned to have had three wives, even though historians agree that only Jaunė was real and the other two, Olga and Vida, are fictional.
* Apparently the same fictional Olga is the mother of Algirdas and Kęstutis, which couldn't be farther from the truth, their mother was Jaunė.
* Also, they mention Vainius and Teodoras as Gediminas's brothers, but why not also include Vytenis? He is much more famous than those two.
* Apparently Gediminas's father was Skolmantas, which might be true, we have no idea. It might also be Butvydas.
* Skolmantas's father is Dausprungas. Okay, this is just completely made up out of nowhere.
* And Dausprungas's birth date is inaccurate. It is stated to be around 1215, even though he was mentioned in the 1219 peace treaty with Galicia as a legitimate duke.
* Mindaugas and Dausprungas' mythical father Ringaudas is also mentioned, and his birth date is even more false. Apparently he was born 19 years AFTER his son.
* And Palemon is there. And he was born in the 10th century. And apparently in Venice. Nope. Nope. So much nope.

And all of this was done not really paying attention to the dates and stuff.

I think Wikipedia is a better source than this.
 
I checked the site's relations for Lithuanian grand dukes of the Medieval era:
<snip>
And all of this was done not really paying attention to the dates and stuff.

I think Wikipedia is a better source than this.

That is astonishingly poor, especially for a website that claims to be tracing real people's histories.

Oh well, at least we now know not to trust it. :neutral:

- BNC
 
Top