I'm a bit late in adding my two bits (getting ready for the Gulf storm), but I've run into this occasionally. First, I would remove the controversial ancestor from my line (cutting his links to his parents, wife and children, but leaving him in my database), retaining all Tags relating to him. I then would enter the newly-acquired information for a duplicate individual, connecting him to your ancestry, using the lineage as explained in the two publications because it seems more authoritative. Finally, I would have a Note Tag (I don't use Anecdote Tag) at the very beginning which outputs prior to the date of birth explaining the controversy over the lineage. I would keep the former ggg within your project, entering a duplicate Note Tag for him containing the same explanation. I would make certain that all ancestral linkages are connected to my newly-entered ancestor. This way, if, in the future DNA are run which prove the earlier ggg (it would probably take multiple Y-DNA and autosomal tests for this to meet the GSP), I could switch out the two men, substituting your earlier man in place of the more-recently entered man's connections to parents, wife and children. It will take a bit of time to connect the wife and all the children of the original ggg to the new man, but TMG makes this relatively easy (for his children, click on the father of each child in Person View replacing him with the newly-entered man, etc.). I once had a similar problem - family books (not footnoted) which I'd first used had it one way; an article in the NGS' quarterly publication (thoroughly documented) presented something different. I went with the peer-reviewed NGS article, but explained the issue thoroughly, with footnotes, in the beginning Note Tag. This way, should I send a report to someone, it's explained why my work may differ from what they had. Whenever I run into a lineage where I'm up against a brick wall OR the material I find is untrustworthy, I use a similar beginning Note Tag to explain exactly what the various issues, as well as possibilities are - with every issue/idea thoroughly footnoted. In one case, where I lack only proof for a great-grandfather's parents, I entered his lineage (back to the English Civil Wars) which was traceable up to that of his parents into one of these beginning Note Tags. So far, I've found not a single record to substantiate which man of three sons was his father. My sisters now can see this lineage and why I can't connect this man to a father thanks to the documented explanation in the beginning Note Tag. Regards, Toby