Locating a date source

Cynthia Magner · September 21, 2021

How can a person locate the source of a marriage date on FamilySearch when the source is shown as "FamilySearch" ?

Obviously the date came from someone and has migrated at some point in time but it couldn't have been pulled out of the air.

The data is : Thomas Johnson (KCYH-1DQ) married E Mulligan (KH8S-FZV) 25 May 1853 San Francisco, California USA. SS 11 Oct 1997 J.River

No source, no children no personal data. Most likely an extraction project but again what is the source?

Cynthia

Lois.P · September 21, 2021

@Cynthia Magner

Hi Cynthia,

https://search.ancestry.com.au/cgi-bin/sse.dll?indiv=1&dbid=50015&h=708370&tid=&pid=&queryId=fadc83883b75333c3b1f6b8e3468c77e&usePUB=true&_phsrc=SKP5&_phstart=successSource&geo_a=r&geo_s=us&geo_t=au&geo_v=2.0.0&_ga=2.191767214.524043468.1632187345-584186113.1632187345&o_iid=41019&o_lid=41019&o_sch=Web+Property

Norma J H D · September 21, 2021

Hello, Cynthia.

Lois Pinnell gave you a source for this marriage but thought you might like to know more about FamilySearch showing as the contributor of information, if not in this case for future reference. Much of the information in Family Tree transferred from a previous system named new.familysearch.org.

For information that the system transferred, Family Tree lists either a specific contributor or FamilySearch. The date is the date of the information transfer to Family Tree, not the original contribution date. If a user changes the information in Family Tree after the information transfer, the contributor information shows the actual contributor and change date.

I have attached the url for the article.

https://www.familysearch.org/help/helpcenter/article/why-is-familysearch-a-contributor-in-family-tree

Cynthia Magner · September 21, 2021

I have read both articles before I posted the question and they do not answer my question for the source of the marriage date.

Cynthia Magner · September 21, 2021

the above answer from Lois Pinnell for the source is the UK site of Ancestry.com which will not allow me to sign in. The source has to be in the US

Gordon Collett · September 21, 2021

@Cynthia Magner

If this really was from an extraction project, then finding the source is very straight forward because all extraction records are contained in the historical record databases. I agree that this one probably was, because the initial 2012 import appears to have had just the couple's name and the marriage date a place.

Since extraction records pull directly from a primary source, allowing for transcribing errors, take the information there as your starting point.

Marriage Place: San Francisco - so this would obviously be from an index of California marriage records. On the main search page under Find a Collection there are three choices:

Screen Shot 2021-09-21 at 11.47.19 AM.png

Going to the Research By Location page for California at: https://www.familysearch.org/search/collection/location/11?region=California I can actually search all three of these at once using exactly the names as originally imported and seen in the Change Log: Thomas Johnson and E Mulligan and the date. Be careful, the names in the change log next to the person icons are the current names of the individual, not their original names in the source we are looking for.

Which gives no results. That means this is probably not an extraction or indexing record after all but may be instead an IGI record that was a patron submission. These have the same format as extraction records.

You can search for these under Genealogies: https://www.familysearch.org/search/family-trees and filling out the form, again with exactly the information that was imported in 2012.

And there is it: https://www.familysearch.org/search/family-trees/results?q.anyDate.from=1853&q.anyDate.to=1853&q.anyPlace=san%20francisco&q.collectionId=5&q.givenName=Thomas&q.spouseSurname=mulligan&q.surname=Johnson

Screen Shot 2021-09-21 at 12.18.49 PM.png

Two copies, in fact. So there should have been a duplicate to merge in in Family Tree.

These patron submissions that ended up in the IGI may or may not have had any sources with them originally. Either way, the process that put them into the IGI stripped them of all sources so all you are left with is the two names and the marriage date. Also, who contributed this information is private so you can't tell who that person was.

Part of the purpose of Family Tree is to stop this repetitive routine of submitting information without sources then someone else needing to research all over again to find the original source and figure out who this Thomas and E really were and if this information is correct.

Gordon Collett · September 21, 2021

@Pinnell Lois, when I try the Ancestry link you posted, for some reason all I get is a looping sign up page. Could you try posting a different link to the page or just how you got to the record? When I try to search for this couple in Ancestry, I can't find them.

Cynthia Magner · September 21, 2021

Gordon Collett you gave me the most thorough answer I have ever received on ANY FamilySearch forum and I thank you for your diligence !! I usually use these forums as a last resort because the questions I ask never get aswered. That being said I asure you I had exausted all the usual sites and had come up empty. Fresh eyes on a problem do help and in this case I should have remembered to go the IGI route.

Long ago, if I remember correctly, a person could find who performed an ordinance by using the batch number of the submission. I wonder if that is still the case when the submitter is unknown? I am trying to find any relative that may have more information than I do on this couple.

Again thank you!