Thank you all for such interesting and comprehensive inputs. I should say that I have checked the full IGI record which includes patron submissions (7309916) and Bishops Transcripts (M007493) and the problem is not that they provide a misleading entry, but that the entry I wanted to share with other researchers (who probably don't have the PR transcriptions made by CFHS) is not included. I hadn't been aware of what seems to be a fairly widespread acceptance that 10-20% of entries could be missing, and I hadn't thought of the possibility that BTs could have lost a page or two on the way to York. Both are things I shall have to be aware of in future, along with that ever-present possibility of human error. I've done it myself: writing out a list, you go back to a line where you thought you'd stopped only to realise on checking that it wasn't the same line. But I DO check, and I would think the LDS do too, I don't think of them as careless. So I think you have provided at least one answer to my question of why isn't the entry in the IGI. With regard to my wider problem, I always use the "3 bits of evidence" test where possible - I picked that tip up from Roy some years ago, and it is something I always use, especially in the pre-1837 days. That's exactly what I'm trying to compile now: a set of siblings for William Jagger, in order to confirm his (and their) mothers when the birth and baptism records aren't giving me enough information. I haven't really picked up from the discussion what I would gain by getting copies from the church, of the original parish records for birth and baptism. I know Lydia existed, when and who she married and when she gave birth to a named child 24 years later. Which kind of says it wasn't a late marriage for her. I want to find out what other children born in that 24 years were hers. Would Coley and Northowram churches have more detail in their birth records about the mother than I find in the IGI? I seriously doubt it. I did use the Coley microfilm at Wakefield a few years ago and it is dreadful condition for the period I'm looking at, I think the LDS did a great job of deciphering what they have done. Other evidence is thin on the ground. I've looked at entries in the 1841 census, and they indicate one firm brother of William who called one of his daughters Lydia. But the others seem to have died, and no, I haven't yet found burial records, but that's my next task. Definitely a longterm one! Anyway, I am very grateful for all your useful suggestions and information. Maggie -----Original Message----- From: Andy Micklethwaite <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 8:18 Subject: Re: [WRY] IGI differs from parish record At 23:24 18/03/2010, Dora wrote: >Seriously, first of all, most of the records in the IGI are individual bmd >events submitted by individuals from their own work. I think we must positively distinguish between member submissions and batch records. I'd like to hear again Roy's view on that - although I'm sure I know it!!! There is a huge temptation to say "I've found an event on the IGI submissions and the name fits so it must be mine" - forgetting the old rule of 3. I know I did that when I started this hobby and have had to go back and re-write my tree. Unfortunately member submissions don't seem to get corrected - is it actually possible to correct them once submitted? >But maybe Andy is one of the rare people who never makes mistakes, and >therefore he can contentedly conclude that if someone did make a mistake, >something is really wrong with them. Of course I neevr maik mistooks - nor did I make the conclusion Dora invented for me - but an omission rate in copying from the PRs (or, as was said, more probably BTs) of 10 to 20% is very high - especially compared to FreeBMD, UKBMD etc. IIRC correctly (my memory isn't what it was - see above) many omissions are there even when compared with the BTs on microfilm. However it's a lot better than nothing, especially when you can't get (for whatever reason - geographical or medical) to the original records. You just have to be aware of its limitations. Good on you Maggie for doing the research on the original records and finding a better quality result. Best Wishes, Andy. Some useful websites - FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message