So glad you have changed your mind Richard on the Ringroses.
I knew my research last year was correct but no one believed me!
I took a leap of faith and deleted my incorrect part of the tree about a year ago, everyone else including yourself & Donald Ringrose still have their trees as Nottinghamshire ancestry.
I knew as soon as I found the the miss transcribed census that this was a crucial bit to my tree, as it linked Ann and Samuel as brother and sister, granted it did not help that Samuel did not know where he was born, but on the previous census 1851 his sister was very specific, this also lead me to find their other sibling Benjamin who was in Southwell Nottinghamshire on the census records and he also states he was born in Hather/ Heydour. The final piece to confirm my findings was the non-conformist baptism At the New Connection Methodist church Parliament Street, Nottingham. of Edward and Ann Marriot's daughter Mary where Ann gives her father name as Benjamin Ringrose (Senior) of Haydour Lincolnshire.
From these two key documents I was able to get the tree back to 1684 with a baptism of John Ringrose father Moses,(Miller) and with research from another poster (She knows who she is!) the tree is looking like it be taken further back.
Welcome to the other side!
The other reason why I changed my mind was because of this (which I have been thinking about lately haha!):
The original Nottinghamshire lineage tree of Samuel Ringrose had him being born: "abt.1783 in either Sutton on Trent/ Normanton on Trent Nottinghamshire."
He was put down as being a son of William Ringrose, and Sarah Andrew who were married on the 21st of April 1783, in Normanton on Trent Nottinghamshire.
His siblings were put down as being baptised in: Normanton, Swinderby, Lincs, and there was one (Maria) baptised in Langford, Nottinghamshire, in 1793.
Samuel had 11 siblings on that "Nottinghamshire Tree".
My main problem apart from what had been discovered regarding the "Hather Lincolnshire Lineage" was the fact that all of Samuel's other proposed Nottinghamshire siblings, all eleven of them, their baptisms had been found, but Samuel's hadn't been.
If a baptism does appear for my Samuel, I will of course change my tree.
However, there doesn't appear to be much room to "squeeze him in anywhere." Haha!
Especially if you bear in mind the fact that he was born in 1784-1785, according to census records, his burial record, and his death certificate. The 1841 census image shows his age to be "56", but has been transcribed as: "50". It is 66 on the 1851 census, and 76, on the 1861 Census.
He died on the 6th of July 1867 and his age on the death certificate was put down as 83.
These are children born baptised to William Ringrose and Sarah Andrew, before 1788:
William Ringrose Andrew (born before parents were married). bap 19 Jan 1783, Normanton on Trent.
John Ringrose. bap 28 Jan 1784, Swinderby, Lincs.
Thomas Ringrose. bap 4 Oct 1785, Swinderby.
Mary. bap 25 June 1787, Swinderby.
Looking at this, some might suggest that he could have been baptised in 1786. But I believe if he had been baptised in 1786 in Swinderby, it would have been found. This is because further baptisms of the above Ringrose's baptised in Swinderby between 1787-1791 can be found.
So, in short, even though there appears to be no baptism for Samuel in Hather, Lincs for those years (or his sister Ann Ringrose): I feel that it is much more likely that he was born in Hather, rather than in Sutton/ Normanton on Trent Notts, for the above reasons and the evidence found on the 1861 census and baptism registers of two of Ann Ringrose's children.
I find it strange that in the 1851 Census, Samuel's place of birth was put down as: "Not Known". I wander why this would have been? Could it have been because he was asleep? Haha!