In a message dated 5/23/2000 12:42:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time, KDale60909@aol.com writes: > Beware--a lot of those records are not valid. They were extracted from > Ancestral Files (submitted by the public) as well as copied documents. If > you > check through carefully, you can often spot WHICH ancestral file a record > came from--or you'll see several files on the same person, some with actual > dates, others estimated. > You misunderstand what the IGI is. It contains both submissions from the public (LDS and non-LDS members) and extracted records. The AF is entirely separate. If you look at the batch numbers, if they are preceeded by the letters C, E, J, F, and M (except M17___ and M18___ records) then they were extracted from parish records, court records, town records, etc. The LDS' extracted records program used at least two double-checks of the records and is noted for a high degree of reliability. There was also, at one time, a special LDS unit devoted to medieval records (pre-1600) and the extracted records are included in the IGI. However, mistakes do happen. Also, there is no guarantee that the actual records being extracted are 100% accurate. My particular specialty is medieval genealogy, especially as it pertains to New England descendants, but the same methodology applies to southern US research as well. The extracted records in the IGI are generally accepted by medievalists but verified "when we get to it." :-) Vickie Elam White