Steven Gibbs wrote :- "Peter, that fact that a record doesn't show as part of an extracted batch in the IGI doesn't mean that it doesn't exist in the original PRs. Extractions are not always complete; in particular you have to note the LDS approach to duplication. If an extracted record and a user submission are identical, then the extracted record will be removed from the IGI. So, in this case, the only way to find out is to look at the PRs themselves." I wonder if Steven would mind revealing the source of this information. I would be very useful to know. I struggle to understand why a user submission would take precedence over an extracted record. Peter

Don't we all Peter! But it's a fact all the same. When the LDS had a clean up of the IGI, if a member submission was identical to an extracted entry then it was the extracted entry that was deleted. Thus debasing the IGI Ours is not to reason why... David > De: Peter Booth <pbo08596@bigpond.net.au> > >     I struggle to understand why a user > submission would take precedence > over an extracted record. > >     Peter > > > > > > > > > > The List Guidelines > > http://bedfordrootsweb.blogspot.com/ > > The Bedfordshire Surnames List > > http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~hughw/bedf.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BEDFORD-request@rootsweb.com > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the > subject and the body of the message >

David, Thanks for straightening me out. (How's the weather over there ?) Apologies to Steven. I wasn't trying to be critical. One can only wonder at the logic of LDS, or lack thereof. In some cases I have seen up to a dozen different user submissions for the same person. And if one matches an extracted entry, the extracted entry gets deleted, yet all the erroneous ones remain. Peter