One could assume, but one must not, right?
UK, England, Northumberland—Nonconformist Church Records, 1613–1920 [Part B][MSP3-SLQ]
These records are laid out in columns with no titles at the top. They look like either birth or baptismal records, for instance:
1789 Feb 2. Thomas. Edward & Jane. McKay. New Street.
No titles, just the info. If you look back it is all the same. If you look forward about 5 pages, one page has "was baptized" written by each row, but only on that one page.
I am reviewing and the original indexer is assuming these are all baptismal dates even on these unmarked pages, but should we do that? I hate to lose all the info, but they are making the assumption on these untitled pages.