At 05:04 PM 11/28/01 -0500, you wrote: >Let me expand a little on the message by Barb, it seems to me that some >people have been putting out information and it is being accepted as fact, >with no solid proof, that it is valid. Dear Tom: I empathize. In February I wrote, privately, to the research director, pointing out five errors in a published reply to an online query. I was informed that some of them had been submitted by the group leader, whose petition would be considered for inclusion in an updated JFMF. My comment at that time was that "the disclaimer fails the straight face test - "the latest and best Pennington family information available to date" indeed. The requirement of a three-tiered petition process for the presentation of corrections or new, documented data defies all common sense." If the disposition of the group leader's petition has ever been made public, I failed to see it. I guess it is time to put my data here: 1. ...Atkey Pennington, b. 1759, d. 1800, m. Martha Ryland, is NOT John Atkey Pennington, b. ca 1744, d. 1826. (see various probate records) 2. The father of Atkey Pennington, b. 15 Sep 1759, was NOT Benedict Pennington, who, incidentally, was b. 13 Sep 1728, and m. Naomi Goldsmith (see various bonds and deeds, Sussex Co, DE); Atkey's father was Benedict's brother James, b. 2 Oct 1723, m. Elizabeth Beastin 11 Dec 1742 (see Early Anglican Church Records of Cecil County, by Henry C. Peden, Jr and settlement of Mary (Atkey) Pennington Ricketts's estate). 3. I am unaware of any evidence that an Abraham Pennington b ca 1670, d. ca 1733, was the father of William Pennington, b. ca 1692, d. Jul 1737; however, there is a strong body of evidence sugggesting a different lineage. 4. Lastly, Marie Pennington who m. Jesse M. Dushane was NOT dau/o Atkey Pennington. Her parents were James & Hannah (McDonough) Pennington; her paternal grandfather was John Atkey Pennington (proven in various deeds and wills). I have not checked the data for the other children listed for Atkey and Martha. When PRA announced the revision of its research and data storage and dissemination policies, I had high hopes this would mean the adoption of high standards in each instance. Alas, this has not happened. And as long as the same old unfounded assumptions and unsourced "facts" are regurgitated, a disservice is being done not only to all persons seeking their Pennington roots but to the genealogical community in general. Sincerely, Isabel Tuell Coburn <dickiz@lincoln.midcoast.com>