Hi. I don't really think caroleW was being aggressive. There is such a lot to read in this topic and its links.
Having just glanced at it and looked briefly at Family Search and FreeCEN, I can see, in 1841, your James Yates senior, an agricultural labourer, aged "65" (i.e. potentially 64-69 because of the recording system for ages then) (probably) as a widower. He is not in the 1851 census, so was presumably dead by then. He was not born in Fife, but the 1851 census shows his children, James and Mary, were born in Culross (Perthshire). Family Search also shows children, Anna and William born in Culross.
That means James senior was born outside Fife between 1772 and 1777. There is no way you can tie him in with a previous generation unless the names of witnesses at the baptisms of his children, Anna and William, point in the right direction (e.g. mention a witness as being a relative). Unless you find this, you can assume nothing about his parentage or place of birth (except it isn't Fife). This, of course, is very frustrating and we have all been there!
I have not looked at Anna Strachan, but with her (seemingly) being dead at the time of the 1841 census and her marriage not being recorded to point to a parish of residence/origin, you are again having to rely on the witnesses to the baptisms of Anna and William as potentially a pointer.
The only other possibility is if they had been guilty of antenuptial fornication (i.e. their first child was VERY
premature) or they had their first child before their marriage, the kirk session would have looked into the matter and some details would have been recorded in its minutes. As you don't know where the were married and first settled, it would be a long shot, but you could try Culross first.
