Should the father of Joseph Collier be changed? [closed]

Question

The profile for Joseph Collier-867 originally indicated that he was born about 1638 in Southwark, Middlesex, England and that he was the son of Joseph Colyer-3.  The text on his profile indicated that he was born about 1641, that "he was the first of his name in Connecticut arriving about 1660."

In November 2019 Joseph's birth information was changed to show that he was born about 1625 in Pinefield, Hartford, Connecticut, and that he was the son of William Collier-19. Notes added to his profile at that time indicated "There are over three hundred Family Search profiles that state that Joseph Collier was the son of William Collier who was born in 1585 in Surry England and died in 1671 in Massachusetts. They all state that Joseph was born in 1625 in Pinefield, Hartford, Connecticut and died in 1691 and there is only one which states he was born in 1625 OR 1641 in Connecticut." The profile also has a link to a Find A Grave memorial (with no headstone) showing William as Joseph's father. The FamilySearch profiles and the FAG memorial appear to be the only sources for that changed birth information.

The Great Migration Begins entry for William Collier-19 (page 448) shows that he had several children who died in St Olave, Southwark, Surrey, England in 1625, and that William didn't migrate to Plymouth until 1633. Anderson does not indicate that William had a son Joseph, and there's no possibility that he had a son Joseph born in Pinefield, Hartford, Connecticut in 1625.

I believe that the profile of Joseph Collier-867 should be restored to the data as it was on 18 November 2019, to remove all information related to his being a son of William Collier-19.  I think information should be added to Joseph's profile to indicate that the Find A Grave memorial is incorrect and that there are many FamilySearch profiles for him with incorrect information, so that he isn't re-connected to the wrong father.

Are there any objections to my making these changes?

Comments

The whole Pinefield Hartford Connecticut at anytime is majorly incorrect. Although there might have been a field designated as the Pine field. I don't believe there is or ever was such a civil place in Connecticut.  And of course as you know there was no English man born in Connecticut before it's founding.

I agree that he should be removed from William etc.

Answer 1

As Anne says, this is utterly bogus.  The English showed up there around 1633, and Hartford wasn't settled by the English till 1635.  There were some Dutch trading posts in the area, and that's it for Europeans.