I note that on family catalogue in family search, there is only one Sculcoates. It is written England, Yorkshire, Sculcoates. So no confusion there as there is only one mentioned. I never looked to see what Latter Day Saints had filmed for Sculcoates. Edie ------------------------------------------ From: Victor Markham <victor@markham.me.uk> To: eamca@bigpond.com; yorksgen@rootsweb.com; Subject: Re: [YORKSGEN] Sculcoates Edie I understand what you are getting at What people need to do is put place names like this Any town, Any County, Country. That is clear enough. The addition of the county is the clue. In the US they say things like York County. They always add County whilst we simply just give the county name. Nothing to stop the addition of UK but it means more words to be added. There are people around who just give the place name like Perth giving no idea whether that is Perth Scotland or Western Australia It all comes down to a matter of choice but the important thing is for others to have a clear idea which place, county and country the name is referring to Victor On 31/03/2016 10:59 PM, eamca@bigpond.com wrote: > Yes, I can see the sense of putting England rather than UK Victor, but I dont think it hurts to put both as there is a England in the USA and a Scotland as well. If you are an American researcher, you might automatically think the England being referred to is the one in the USA. But definitely to put UK instead of England would be confusing as well. I shall watch not to do that in future. > Edie > > Victor wrote: > Every place name should end in England, if that is where it is. UK > covers other countries. By putting England. Wales, Northern Ireland or > Scotland gives you an idea where the place is. Putting UK alone doesn't > help much. Place names followed by the county name does help but doesn't > help those who are unfamiliar with the county locations. > Whatever anyone decides to do they should make it the same for consistency.