Problem with Findmypast Kent records

[BumbleB]

Apologies Gadget, but Ash-next-Ridley is included in the "Kent Parish Lists" - Baptisms entry is attached.

[BumbleB]

I've just tried the browse option and entered only 1855 and Ash-next-Ridley.  The first 5 items are those found by TOTH - dashes in all columns!  And I've done the same for 1890 - same result!

Added:  It seems to appear only with baptisms - marriages and burials have a complete list.

[BumbleB]

Ah - if you specify "Ash-Next-Ridley" in baptisms then you will see the 5 "dashed" entries BUT if you specify the parish as "Ash Next Ridley" then the "dashed" entries do NOT appear.

And to confuse us even more -

1850 - Ash-Next-Ridley - 35 results - including the 5 "dashed" entries
1850 - Ash Next Ridley - 15 results

 

[Gadget]

Why not just ignore the blanks - I sometimes get them on other parish listings. They are usually at the end of the listing. They're of no use so I don't look at them.

[Gadget]

BB

I went in  a different way and the Ridley option didn't come up/ in the llist below the last page of the listing//.  I've found another listing where it does, so it seems inconsistent.

[Top-of-the-hill]

  Thanks for your thoughts; I don't think we have found a way to get rid of the rogue Ash next Ridley entries? I just wish I didn't keep being shown them when I have no interest in the place!
   

[BumbleB]

Oops - I thought that you were searching in Ash next Ridley.   

If I search for the name you have shown - Joseph Gambril in 1855, I only get one result - Deal St Leonard - transcription and image.

[Top-of-the-hill]

  If you put no date, no place, and tick variants for both names you should get 18 entries, including the stray 5 Ash ones.

[Gadget]

  If you put no date, no place, and tick variants for both names you should get 18 entries, including the stray 5 Ash ones.

I got them straight off by putting in what you did T of H