Thanks Peter! I always research from scratch for the very reason that too many of these submitted trees are copied and/or badly researched, which is a real shame. I so far have James and Ruth with 8 children in total between 1879 and 1897, when I believe James dies. This is entirely from the census records, and no hints that any of the children are only half-siblings (the Stephen you mention is hubby's direct ancestor - he is listed in one census as b 1892). I will have to cross-reference, which I've not done yet, but it looks pretty straightforward from the records I've checked so far - it's the generation above that has really stymied me! It looks as it Kevin may have found them though, so I'll be looking into them. Many thanks, and look after yourself! Louise On 31 December 2013 05:43, Peter R Booth <pbo08596@bigpond.net.au> wrote: > Louise, > > Sorry, I'm not feeling well at the moment,.so I was only able to take a > brief look and will have to leave.any checking and follow up to you. > > Ancestry has a couple of submitted trees that suggest James Golding and > Ruth Snook had six children between 1778 - 1887 > > They then go on to say that there were two half siblings Herbert 1890 > and Stephen 1892, but strangely neither parent has died.It could be just > poor data entry, but typically the whole thing "whiffs" of poor research > and > degree of copying. Most of these matters can be resolved relatively easily > by reference to all available census records and cross matching them to > FreeBMD. > > I apologise in advance if this leads you down a dead end. But I'm on so > many different medications at the moment, I feel like the local street > corner addict.. > > Peter > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > SUSSEX-PLUS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >