Ancestry.com Strikes OR Strikes Out Again

They Have Been Posting this Error for Over '12' Years!

ID: I30678 
• Name: Mary Dibble HENDER
• Surname: Hender
• Given Name: Mary DibbleSex: F
• Birth: 10 Oct 1910 in Layton Davis Utah USA
• Death: 30 Oct 1976 in Salt Lake City Utah USA
• _UID: 97EA2196D63A6B4180AEF6657C7F65F5D23A
• Change Date: 3 Feb 2002 at 11:29:22
 How many people will see this page?
 How many will start looking for Mary?
 How long will this be posted in error?
 It should be corrected immediately or
 even removed, because it is just wrong.
 My Aunt's name is May NOT 'Mary'.
 She is my dad's sister. Albert Hender and Laura Antoinette Dibble are my grandparents. They are NOT some far removed remote database 'relative'.
Ancestry Hints for Mary Dibble HENDER

     4 possible matches found on Ancestry.com

'Mary Dibble Hender'
 Does not exist-She is a created fiction.
And THEY have found her 4 matches?  
Father: Albert HENDER b: 21 Jan 1878 in East Looe Cornwall England
Mother: Laura Antoinette DIBBLE b: 29 Oct 1874 in Centreville Davis Utah USA
 Albert HENDER is not Mary's parent.
 Laura Antoinette DIBBLE isn't either.   
Every family contained here is in some way connected to my family. In compiling this large database, there could be UNintentional errors so please always confirm data BEFORE using!!
 NO ~ They ARE NOT kidding, but the 
 WARNING ought to state that there is
 almost always UNintentional errors.
Not that one cannot get some 'leads' and use from browsing Ancestry.com, it is just that they publish so many errors when so many people pay them money and put their trust in them. And without accepting the responsibility for a standard of accuracy and correctness, they just end up falsifying people's ancestry. I'm afraid Ancestry.com's 'not our fault or responsibility' attitude just isn't concerned with all the additional work and foul-ups that they are is causing in the Genealogical system of mutual trust and the free exchange on the internet super-highway and its ability to be self correct and readily address and communicate these errors without having to pass through a 'paid $$$$$ proprietary control' to do so.

I would think that they at least ought to have some 'standard' level of screening before they post. Decades of errors being posted going unchecked is not acceptable when it takes little time and effort to check some of this out before just throwing it up for ages without any care in the world about it but the bottom line.

Oh, by the way, if you missed it above, this person is my Aunt May NOT 'Mary'. Its amazing that Ancestry.com touts that they have '4' POSSIBLE MATCHES FOUND ON ANCESTRY.COM for a fictional character. If they can 'throw' it through their system to find the 'possible matches', 'Why is it so hard to to find the obvious errors and avoid publishing them in the first place or at least to stop posting them in the extended long run?'

I guess there must be some use in it, but sad if true, that such as 'Ancestry.com' seems to stand as CHURCH APROVED. And I do suppose that we will have a 1,000 years to sort out all of the errors. I'd just like to see it being done now, especially when an organization is being 'paid' for what they are doing and/or not doing.