I, myself, have not used the sources listed as unacceptable; however, I
have used others that should be on that list. To name just one: 
WILKINSON AND KINDRED FAMILIES by M. M. Wilkinson. It's been accepted by
the Dames and many other lineage societies as the "Bible" for Wilkinson
genealogy. I've used it for supplements on file with Colonial Dames XVII
Century; but this doesn't make Mr. Wilkinson's data correct. According to
it my William Wilkinson of NC was a lineal descendant of Lawrence
Wilkinson who came to RI ca 1650. Nothing could be further from the
truth. John Wilkinson of PA was the father of William of NC. And where
was the proof found????? In LA, just about the last place on earth I
would have even thought to have looked for it. Also, I used a different
book by Boddie as a "proof" for the Dames and had it kicked back for
additional proofs from different sources.

I agree about the percentage of accuracy in our research. Would 50%
accuracy rate be a fairer one??????

By serious, I mean those who are researching to fullfil the requirements
for membership in various lineage societies. Just helps to know which
ones will and those which will not be accepted. Saves time.

Sorry if I ruffled feathers. That certainly wasn't my intention.


==== SCROOTS Mailing List ====