I gave up some time ago on trying to correct the masses. It takes time away from actual research and from making progress on challenging research puzzles. There are a few of us who really want to know (as best we can) the correct wife of John Rucker who died in Virginia in the 1740s and of Edward Tinsley who died there in the 1780s, but there are others who really just want "a name" for a wife, regardless of how that information was obtained or how long it has clearly been proven wrong. It is faster to simply copy something from an old book than try and ferret out correct information from records that require slow work and painstaking analysis. I also find that (usually) those with a desire to be as accurate as possible tend to gravitate toward others of the same mindset. A handful of correspondents who are concerned about accuracy, precise in their work, and adept at catching (nicely and politely) flaws in the work of others are worth hundreds of correspondents who refuse to learn the difference between testate and intestate.