Incorrect gender

JohnLove2

The record below has the gender of Margaret Reed and and Arthur Walls interchanged. The edit option is not available record for this record.

"England, Yorkshire, Parish Registers, 1538-2016", FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:66GG-JGRX : Sat Mar 09 13:49:27 UTC 2024), Entry for Margaret Reed and Arthur Walls, 2 November 1859.

David Alan Webber

When I look this up, as of 27 April 2025, I'm seeing Margaret listed as Male, the father, Arthur Walls, listed as Male, and the spouse, Charles Broadhead, listed as Female.

Margaret Reed, "England, Yorkshire, Parish Registers, 1538-2016"

Adrian Bruce1

The citation on the index record indicated above does not credit anyone - in particularly it doesn't credit Ancestry, who do have the image and index record in their "

Áine Ní Donnghaile

The collection landing page credits the Borthwick Institute. We have discussed this problem before, with the genders transposed on Borthwick records.
https://www.familysearch.org/en/search/collection/4439317

Here's a previous thread.

Adrian Bruce1

Áine - thanks for your memory being better than mine.

When I looked at the FS collection landing page, it credits a number of archives and it wasn't clear to me which one had "supplied" the original and where the index for this record had come from. FS has apparently (and sensibly) tried to assemble all the Yorkshire Church of England PRs into one collection - unlike Ancestry. I found that particular one in Ancestry's South Yorkshire collection (IIRC) (ie Sheffield etc), but whether S Yorkshire "supplied" the stuff to FS, whether Ancestry was involved, and whether the Borthwick had anything to do with it (or whether it's just a memorable name) I can't tell without access to the images. Possibly not even then, of course. (That was what I was going to write above until the Community editor threw a wobbly on me). If FS has indeed assembled several sources of info into one collection, then there's an argument for expanding its citations because at the moment, without access to the images, we can't tell the source of the source.

There was an interesting contribution from one of the mods(?) on the linked thread or one further down again, where they outlined one possibility for the exchange of this data during the indexing process. Fixing it didn't seem trivial if true.

Áine Ní Donnghaile

Hi Adrian. Yes, I probably should have said "Borthwick and others." Not meaning to blame one of several possible sources.