Vera Floretta Glasgow appears in the family catalogue. The supplied vital locations are Alabama, United States and Birmingham, Jefferson, Alabama, United States.
No parents named in the supplied model.
Relationship labels belong to each link. Partners are not assumed to be parents of every child.
No entries of this type are dated in the supplied material.
Dated assessments, source transcriptions and earlier working notes remain available in full. Where those disagree, use the current conclusion above and inspect its reasoning.
No separately maintained research assessment in this snapshot. The available records are preserved below.
One-Tree export profile fields are search leads, not sources; relationships are shown only where the export supplies parent links.
WikiTree profile export for Johnson-184651
No sufficiently specific citation match found.
Precision: Country-centre fallback for profile locality
No claims in this category have been formally assessed.
No claims in this category have been formally assessed.
No formal open question is recorded for this person.
Source or provenance: quality describes the record layer, not every conclusion drawn from it.
Preserved imported material. It may include superseded assertions; the current display assessment is shown at the top of this dossier.
At a glance
Tree links organise the family; documentary status still varies.
Comparison context
These child positions and checks are the subject details used to rank possible parents below.
Naming sequence used by the parentage model
Known-position checks: 0 support · 2 conflict. Ordinals retain unnamed children and recognise reused names.
Relationship comparison
Compare scored leads with the subject details above—not proof.
Possible Mother
same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)
Deductions and cautions: same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)
Possible Mother
same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)
Deductions and cautions: same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)
Possible Mother
same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)
Deductions and cautions: same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)
Automated leads use birth surnames—not married surnames—as parental eligibility, role-specific biological age limits, bounded and approximate-date uncertainty, household chronology, specific time-aware localities, mapped distance, tenancy succession, migration destinations and sex-aware Scottish naming positions across generations. People already attached as the subject's parents stay in the identity summary and are excluded from this alternative-candidate list, regardless of relationship confidence. The main calibration uses clues available on disconnected profiles; existing parent and sibling links are retained as comparison context rather than treated as transferable evidence. Common ordered names and grandparent-to-child echoes receive a small non-zero weight, so a John or James match can support several independent criteria without producing a lead alone. Rare names, repeated bearers and bundles across otherwise distinct branches receive substantially more weight according to catalogue frequency. An exact migration place is weighted by its rarity and repetition across both branches; a shared destination country is worth only one point. Extra weight is added only when at least three independent clue types converge: naming, locality, specific migration, household chronology or collateral networks. Sparse profiles retain a clearly labelled chronology-only fallback instead of disappearing. Countries, states, counties and research clusters do not count as a shared locality, and fallback, broad representative or kin-inferred coordinates are excluded from distance scoring. Shared descendant profiles are removed before branch-name comparison. A candidate already recorded as a parent-in-law is excluded. A confident or independently supported parent is treated as settled; uncertain and unassessed attachments remain open to alternative comparison. A different linked parent, an uncle/aunt or grandparent path, and a matching existing child profile prevent an alternative from being classified as a strong direct-parent lead until the underlying tree conflict or duplicate is resolved. Familiar forms such as Bessie are normalised. Surname remains an eligibility filter worth zero points.
Naming customs, shared farms and occupations are circumstantial. Children, spouses and collateral relatives may be missing, and tree-derived family networks are not independent evidence. Scores rank research leads; they do not prove parentage.
Same-name candidate
No indexed conflict
Conflicts: No indexed conflict
Dates are eligibility gates, not merely deductions: chronologically impossible people are excluded. Dates, places, spouses, parent certainty and children's profiles and names are then compared. A high score is a prompt to inspect records, not a merge recommendation.
Captured technical material loads when opened. Read the preserved source fragment directly.
Original exports stay unchanged. The public display uses explicitly approved decisions where available.