Can it be required to have a source before temple work can be done?
I have seen many people on FamilySearch with no sources proving the information is valid. I have reached out to numerous patrons and asked for the source for someone they added or information they added, and 90% of the time, they have no idea where they got the information. Many many times, I have found the correct information and have had to delete relationships that are incorrect, even with temple work already completed for those individuals.
I know, I know, a lot of incorrect information is out there, but why not require a source? I have entered sources before that are from family journals, told to me by the son/grandson of that person, etc. Shouldn't there be something that proves that information to be true before the temple work is allowed?
Comments
-
FYI
I am a just another 'lowly' User/Patron ...
[ And, I happen to be a Member of the Church ... ]
Short Answer: 'No'.
This is a 'pet peeve' of mine ...
I am sorry, to say; but, it concerns me, when Users/Patrons suggest, that "Sources", in "Family Tree", of 'FamilySearch', should be REQUIRED, under ANY circumstances.
And, please understand, that not offence intended; but, I also believe, that it is somewhat 'blinkered' thinking, to suggest, that "Sources", should be required; BEFORE, "Temple" Work, is able to be undertaken.
"Sources" are NOT "Mandatory"; and, NEVER should they be, NOT even for "Temple" Work.
Even TODAY, there are People, ALL around the World, whose, "Birth"; and/or, "Marriage"; and/or, "Death", is NOT "Officially" recorded.
And, more often than not, any "Documentation"; and/or, "Sources", that there MAY be, can be somewhat quite elusive, to find ...
Even TODAY, for many Countries and Unions, throughout the World, there are, MANY, Many, many, "Official" records, that are NOT available 'On-Line'; and, if they even are, are certainly NOT for FREE.
[ And, NOT even, in the likes of 'FamilySearch'; &/or, the many other, Government; or, Commercial, websites ]
As such, MANY, Many, many, Users/Patrons CANNOT afford the funds to obtain a "Copy" of "Official" records.
And, 'Yes', even TODAY, there are individuals/persons entered, in "Family Tree" of, 'Family Search', that DO NOT have "Sources" attached.
Plus ...
There were COUNTLESS individuals/persons (and, in fact, entire Families), that where "Transferred", into "Family Tree", from its predecessor, "New.FamilySearch" (ie. pre.2012), the 'Transfer' of which, took over x2 Years, to complete and 'bed in'; plus, MANY; Many; many, more of those individuals/persons (and, in fact, entire Families), that were, EVEN, from BEFORE, "New.FamilySearch" existed; being, the likes of, Pedigrees; and, Family Group Sheet; ETC (ie. 'Hard-Copy'/'Paper'), were submitted by Members of the Church.
'FamilySearch', ORIGINALLY the "Genealogical Society of Utah", has been operating for over 125 Years.
And, the "Temple" Work tenets, of the Church, that Members of the Church follow, have been around for even longer.
Even some of the pre.Digital "Records" (ie. 'Hard-Copy'/'Paper'), had the "Details", of "Sources"; where, the "Information" was obtained.
And, "Sources" were not originally, in; or, later when included, made "Mandatory", in "New.FamilySearch".
Unfortunately, MANY of those "Sources", from BEFORE "Family Tree", were NOT transferred across.
There was an effort, in 2014, to "Transfer", the "Sources", from "New,FamilySearch", into "Family Tree"; being, "Legacy Sources"; but, that was NOT very successful; and, many of such, have subsequently been "Deleted"/"Removed", by User/Patrons, over the Years.
Now ...
All That Said ...
It would certainly be nice, if Users/Patrons, who DID NOT have "Copies" of "Official" (or, "Family") records; but, had the "Details"/"Information", from such, would INCLUDE that "Detail"/"Information", in the likes of "Reason Statements" (ie. "Reason This Information Is Correct:"), UNFORTUNATELY, many do not.
Such is life ...
The 'Question' (ie. problem/issue) is ... How "Restrictive" do they make, "Family Tree", of 'FamilySearch'?
Believe me ...
IF, "Family Tree", of 'FamilySearch', was TOO "Restrictive"; THEN, I can assure you, that, MANY; Many; many, People would NOT Participate in it; and, sadly, that would include MANY Users/Patrons, who are Members of the Church, that DO NOT have ready access to, "Documentation"; and/or, "Sources" (and, CANNOT provide such) - if "Documentation"; and/or, "Sources" (ie. Evidence/Proof) were mandatory.
Unfortunately ...
"Documentation"; and/or, "Sources", (and, even the "Details"/"Information", from such); being, REQUIRED, is excellent, in "Theory"; but, such is NOT so good, in "Practice" ...
Remember ...
NONE of us are PERFECT ...
We can ONLY do out best ...
HE, just wants to 'see' you, making an effort; and, doing the Work (and, of course, also doing your best) ...
Perfection is NOT required ...
Just my thoughts.
Again, no offence intended ...
Brett
ps: 'FamilySearch' ... Where "Generations" Meet ... I like to add ... BOTH, the "Living"; and, the "Dead" ...
.
1 -
I'm sorry it is a pet peeve of anyone's to make sure the right people are attached to the right people. I still feel it would be wonderfully fantastic if it was a requirement, which is why I gave examples of the problems I have found when people do not validate their entered information. Being sealed to the wrong people because validation was not present is not okay. That is not doing our best. Perfection is not required in our personal lives, but we certainly can attain perfection in some areas of our lives. I never add something/someone unless I can show why I added it. That is not too much to ask. I also gave examples of sources such as a journal or someone's own witness/words. I never indicated it needed to be an official document or a source found online or in any repository. But, if someone enters information, there should always (and I do mean always) be a reason/source for that information, even if it is what Great Aunt Joan has always said. We are told that projects have been underway for a long time to gather the verbal histories of people who do not have written records. That is a source, and if information is being put on someone's tree, there MUST be a reason why. That reason is the source. It is not too much to ask of anyone to give a reason for the information they present.
1 -
And I'm sorry you feel like you are a "lowly" anyone, but Brett, I would appreciate and kindly request that you refrain from beginning all of your posts with you being "another lowly User/Patron" because you are not. No one is. And stating "another" in your response to me implies that you are saying that I am one as well, which I am not. I am a delightfully wonderful daughter of God who has infinite worth and potential and I am not "lowly" in any way nor in any circumstance. Please know that it really has been quite offensive and hurtful to see you begin your messages that way and imply that we are all "lowly." I have read enough to see that you feel your voice is not heard. The scope and magnitude of FamilySearch are nearly incomprehensible. I do not expect every comment or whim I have to be addressed or answered, but it won't stop me from making positive (emphasis on positive) and informative posts and suggestions. Please (kindly requested) stop stating you or the rest of us are all lowly users/patrons. No one is. We can use FamilySearch discussion boards in a positive way, even when we may have complaints.
1 -
FIRSTLY ...
That is certainly taking my 'Comment', well out of 'context' ...
And, rather 'sad', by somewhat implying, that it is a 'pet peeve' of mine (and, others), to NOT "... make sure the right people are attached to the right people ...".
I, said; nor, implied, NO such thing ...
I am so sorry, that you do not seem to, understand; and, comprehend, the nature of my 'Comment' ...
'Yes', it certainly would be nice ... if ALL Users/Patrons, did as you desire ...
But, unfortunately, we make mistakes ...
SECONDLY ...
Like it or not ...
I am just another 'lowly' User/Patron, with no 'standing' ...
And, I DO NOT purport, to be from 'FamilySearch' (nor, a "Official Representative" of, 'FamilySearch') ...
Unless, one, is from 'FamilySearch' (or, an "Official Representative" of, "FamilySearch'), we (ie. the rest of us) are simply Users/Patrons, of 'FamilySearch', regardless of our experience.
I certainly, DO NOT imply, anything, about the 'standing', of OTHER Users/Patrons.
It matters not, if my 'Voice', is not 'Heard' ... I am but, one of "Countless" ...
I have been participating, in the various "Feedback" Forums (including, this one) for a number of Years.
And, I have helped/assisted MANY, over those Years; and, will simply continue to do so.
Personally, I prefer, that both "Sides", of a matter be canvassed, where possible.
I like Users/Patrons, to be aware of, as much as possible.
How about, we just leave it at that, on these matters.
Enough said.
Good Luck.
MAY THE LORD BLESS YOU IN THIS IMPORTANT WORK.
Brett
0 -
Seeing both sides is amazing. That's why we have these discussion boards. I appreciate posting because it invites others to state a different view. It is wonderful! I love it. However, in your response to me, I felt (key words, here) you were giving another perspective, but it was stated in a way that said, "This is another view, and therefore your idea will never work." That is not giving another viewpoint, but telling me that all my points would never be successful. That is not what I was posting for. I still feel it is possible. I was suggesting something that is needed because of what I see with incorrect relationships, etc., and incorrect people being sealed together. It should not happen. I understand that it is not likely that people will always give sources, I've seen plenty of examples. That does not stop me from being uber-positive about the prospect of it happening. It should happen. It should be required. We are talking about things of eternal significance and therefore should be kept to a higher standard. Those are my feelings about it and I still hold fast to wanting that to happen and keeping a positive outlook about the possibility, regardless of what people are most likely to do. I will always hope for and expect the best possible outcome from everyone.
And again, I respectfully request you refrain from saying "another" lowly patron/user. That implies that others are as well. We should refrain from labeling anyone. I definitely felt labeled. I am not another lowly anyone or anything and never will be. I am a fantastically positive patron/user who loves genealogy work and tries to contribute as best as I can.
Thank you so much for all your insight and answers and enthusiasm for this great work!
1 -
I am also quite distressed by the absence of sources. I refuse to do temple work for records that have NO source information. As they say, genealogy without sources is mythology.
I recognize that not all sources are equal, but even "Aunt Matilda told me" is a source.
I am also quite unhappy with "Legacy Sources," since that is totally non-specific.
I must confess that I was trained in college in 1973 by a professional genealogist. In many cases sources are MUCH easier to obtain now than they were then. My grandfather was a genealogist long before I was born - in the days of trips, letters, and checks.
1 -
@Carol Hennum Kendall I just wanted to let you know I am a recipient of a "legacy source" through my aunt, so I wanted to explain it. Yes, I do wish it would have transferred over with more information, but basically, when she passed away, her daughters gave permission to FamilySearch to transfer all of her work over to my user account, so none of her work or contacts that came through her work would be lost. It is a glorious thing! I am so thankful for that, because I have had a lot of people contact me because of her additions to FamilySearch that were transferred to my name through her "legacy." It's pretty cool. But yes, I agree, it's quite unclear when that is all you see.
When there are no sources, I like to look at who added the information, and I will try to contact them to see where that information came from. Quite a few times now I have had the opportunity to instruct them how to add sources and they get to learn something new! Unfortunately, most of the time, I never receive a response, but at least I try!
Good luck in all your family history endeavors!
0
