Thanks Rossey. You are effectively arguing for a subjective approach to tradition. So we are back to a Folk pot is less of a pot if we know the potter'. In the same breath you are arguing for qualifying degrees of Tradition. i.e. traditional style. age, etc. It does rather beg the question of exactly which tradition we accept as 'valid' and which is 'invalid'. Wonky memories are rather useful to the continuity of Folk songs. Last time I looked it was not a crime to be subjective, and I will admit I usually hide behind it in the argument of 'What is a folksong'. replying that I might not know what a Folksong is but I know what it isn't. However if you are entering a world of publication, or indexing, you might end up in the next volume of 'Fakesong' if there is one.
Baring Gould made value judgments we reckon we know better, until a song proves sexist or racist and then it's stamped upon. That said there is no excuse for poor research, but alleged 'False narratives' bring us into the area of the discipline of context. Welcome to the academic jungle, from one lost soul to another.