Restricted Films in Catalog

Troy Goss

I spent 30 minutes on Live Chat with the help desk seeking information about the "partner site" when trying to access microfilm 1198806.

https://www.familysearch.org/search/film/102744343?cat=380767

The best we could determine is that it is not only restricted to FHC's, it is also restricted to the help staff.

My issue is with the misleading and unhelpful mouse-over "This film is viewable with additional restrictions." 

Even the Research Wiki explanation about a "partner site" appears to be misleading:

https://www.familysearch.org/help/helpcenter/article/what-are-the-image-restrictions-in-historical-records

I suggest that the restricted film mouse-over read as something to the effect of "This film is not yet available to view online."

Brett .

@Troy Goss

Troy

Welcome to the "Community.FamilySearch" Forum.

I am just another 'lowly' User/Patron ...

FYI

In relation to the FHL Microfilm number 1198806 ( DGS number 102744343 ) ...

I am sorry; but, I must disagree ...

Please be aware that ...

FIRSTLY ...

The 'mouse-over' of : "This film is viewable with additional restrictions." ... is certainly NOT misleading.

That 'mouse-over' is CORRECT; and, that is supported when the "Camera, with Key" Icon is selected.

[ Where the "Key" is an indication that there are "Restrictions" on viewing/accessing the "Images" ]

Resulting in:

SECONDLY ...

As indicated, that 'FamilySearch' "Research Wiki" Article, that you reference, is certainly NOT misleading about 'FamilySearch' "Partner" Websites.

FINALLY ...

Your suggested enhancement, to the wording, of the 'mouse-over', of something to the effect of: "This film is not yet available to view online." may be factually INCORRECT; as, the "Images" of that particular FHL Film, MAY, in fact, be 'viewable'/'accessible' to OTHER Users/Patrons of 'FamilySearch' BOTH,

(1) in/through 'FamilySearch'; and/or,

(2) by visiting the 'FamilySearch "Partners'" websites or the Legal Record Custodian (where fees may apply).

Now ...

That Said ...

Also, please be aware, that Just because; as, individual Users/Patrons, we MAY not be able to 'view'/'access' certain "Images" ('On-Line') in 'FamilySearch', that DOES NOT mean that OTHER Users/Patrons of 'FamilySearch' CANNOT.

[ As, the various "Restrictions", imposed by the Legal Record Custodians, are all different; and, very varied ... ]

Plus, OTHER Users/Patrons, may ALSO be able to 'view'/'access' such "Images" ('On-Line'), by visiting one of the 'FamilySearch "Partners'" websites or the Legal Record Custodian (where fees may apply) - especially, if such Users/Patrons, have "Paid" Subscriptions to the "Partners'" websites; or, the Legal Record Custodian - or, "Pay" for such.

Just my thoughts.

Brett

MaureenE123

I am not a LDS church Member.

The chances are high that the film you are interested in is available to Church members on their home computers, but is not available at all to non church members. The restriction wording "You may be able to view this image by visiting one of our partners' sites or the legal record custodian (fees may apply)" has only applied since about October 2019, prior to that the wording was "Sign in to Familysearch.org as a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints".

If you are a non church member you will need to look at sites other than FamilySearch

I made aa similar comment recently in the topic  Different Access Levels? Church vs. Non-church Accounts

FamilySearch's failure to be upfront about the current situation is causing wasted time for so many people.

@N Tychonievich

A van Helsdingen

I endorse the remarks of @MaureenE123 . The message that appears is an euphemism, since it appears that FamilySearch is embarrassed to admit that for some records religion plays a role in determining who has access.

ANY record on FamilySearch COULD be available on another (possibly subscription-based) website. The comment that appears is thus next to useless. I know of many examples of records with that message that are not available anywhere on the internet.

A van Helsdingen

P.S.

I notice now that @Brett . 's screenshot seems to be from a LDS account, since he has redacted the word "Temple" at the top of the page.

So perhaps this example is different.

That doesn't affect the validity of my earlier comments. In some cases, FS staff, or fellow FS users who are Latter Day Saints have confirmed to me (or others) that particular records are LDS-only. In other cases, the record custodian has verified that they intended for the records to be LDS-only.