Thomas Morrell

They shouldn't have I, II or III, if the tree is correct, because Thomas I has a father named Thomas, and then HE has a father named Thomas, and HIS father is unknown (so might also be a Thomas).

Maybe they copied the names from an old book that was counting people in a list... Like the first one is I, 2nd one with info is II, 3rd one is III,, etc I see that in profiles often enough.

But probably the "II" and "III" are either meant to be the same but differ in death dates (since "II" isn't proven), or "III" with the "William" middle name is in the wrong family.

OR the "III" is actually meant to be the son of "II" but has wrong birth and death dates,, since "II" is linked to his son (1688-1732).

I would send a message to the profile manager to ask why, and also the person merging them back in 2020... Maybe there is a reason.

Otherwise, because "III" doesn't have any descendants, it might be better to merge into the son of "II" and making sure the dates and locations are correct. If in the future "II" had a brother Thomas William, he can always be added.

Since this is database management,,

you could also just leave Thomas William III alone since he isn't connected to anyone but the parents. It risks having someone mistake him for the II,,, but it seems there are other possible issues with that family group (not a lot have dates or spouses),,, so best to leave for someone doing hard research. He might provide a clue about who he is..

(but take out all the I, II, and III of the 3 men to avoid future confusion so that people use the dates and locations to distinguish..)

thank you