Just a note to everyone I will read every post and reply. Thank you all for taking the time to respond. Kind regards David Potter

I must admit to being old & cynical and take the attitude that information in records is probably wrong until proved otherwise. Birth certificates and christening records should be fine but ... It has

On Tue, Feb 4, 2020, 09:40 Nina Jenkins <... ideally confirm each piece of evidence from 3 sources before trusting it totally. Even there, we have to be sensible about it - it does say, "ideally"

My best is my paternal Great Great Grandfather Henry NOYCE born in 1843 and his birth certificate from the GRO says that he is a “Girl” I tried once to get an answer from the registration district

Hi If I may add to the conversation, in my 30 years experience of BMD certificates I would say that any details contained therein will still need checking as in each type of certificate there can be

John forgot to explain the significance of 42 days. The law said Births had to be registered within 6 weeks (6 x 7 = 42 days). Regards, Mike Tate

Victor, Yes, date & place of birth on UK Death Certificates only started in 1969. Yes, census records and all certificates are prone to errors. But the younger the person the more likely the

John, My list was not meant to be definitive, but simply that each Source document must be judged on its merit. That is often governed by how contemporary the details are with respect to the event

Pauline One of the first things I look at when doing my advice sessions these days is the number of days between birth and registration – 42 is always a good indicator that the birth date might be

When I started family history over 30 years ago I was told to ideally confirm each piece of evidence from 3 sources before trusting it totally. I have always found that excellent advice

I’ve got a couple of very dodgy certificates. The first is a death certificate where the lodger was the informant and was five years out with the age. That caused a brick wall which was finally

I also agree with John. The information on the certificate or printout is only as good as the information that was given to the informant. And that information may not have been right in the

I agree death certificates can easily be wrong, my husband incorrectly recorded his mother's maiden name, I only found out when doing his tree and we still have not corrected it, although we have been

On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 04:31 PM, ShaneB wrote: This decreased is shown as having been widowed and having no kids. In fact, he was still married and had five children. Argh! "This decreased" should of

I have a death certificate that shows how questionable the data on a certificate can be. This decreased is shown as having been widowed and having no kids. In fact, he was still married and had five

Mike Only the modern death certificates gave place of birth and date. Perhaps it started from the 1960's. I have just checked a 1969 certificate that gives date and place of birth

Whilst I will agree with Mike on the theory behind his list from having looked at so many certificates over the years there are pitfalls with all certificates I remember helping at the FindMyPast

Whether a Marriage or Death certificate gives better information depends on a number of factors. The following refers to the UK. Many early Marriage Certificates simply say of Full Age which only

I would say any marriage certificate would be before death certificate. These would be more important than census details which you can think of as being supplementary to the certification. This is

Yes, it advises that you import the MyHeritage GEDCOM into FH as a New Project. If you have Media that needs to migrate into FH then use the MyHeritage Family Tree Builder rather than the Online