I wanted to drop in and thank you for your fine research into this ancestor and the problems regarding modern "crowd-sourced" historical/genealogical research. You are one of a very few who openly warn and advise Ancestry users regarding the simple acceptance of information provided as factual or accurate. I find on Ancestry that transcription errors common, due to untrained though well-meaning users' lack of awareness regarding penmanship, language usage, spelling and other common writing patterns of the time in which the record was produced. Additionally, inaccurate information - such as the "Constance Dudley" kerfluffle - makes its way into the genealogical narrative without research, fact-checking or usage basic research protocol (note to world: Wikipedia is *not* a primary source...for *anything*!)...
My initial rush of research using Ancestry.com incorporated members' family trees; I no longer utilise this option because of egregious lapses in research such as you have expertly outlined here. I arrived at your post here due to my efforts to clean up and correct many inaccuracies I incorporated into my own early research.
Again, thank you for your diligence, hard work and most importantly, for sharing!
K W Mundstock