Home› Welcome to the FamilySearch Community!› FamilySearch Help› Temple

Family number in Suffix field

Albin Dittli
Albin Dittli ✭
December 16, 2021 edited December 16, 2021 in Temple

Joe is, I think, a non member in Switzerland. He is doing a lot of family tree work for his, and my, Uri Switzerland ancestors. The Uri records we work with has a family number and letter for each person. As Joe enters them he puts that number in the suffix field of the name. See the attached example for Josefa Helena Brand 78 c - 24 March 1770 – LKVR-PQ4. Is it ok to leave those numbers in the suffix field or should I be removing them? Please let me know. He has entered many people with the family number in the suffix field. Will the numbers in the suffix field affect the temple work?

My email is dittlilds@gmail.com

Please let me know.

Thanks,

Albin Leo Dittli

Suffix question.png


0

Answers

  • Carla Tobler
    Carla Tobler mod
    December 16, 2021 edited December 18, 2021

    @Albin Dittli

    Thank you for posting your question in the Community.

    We have viewed the records on Family Tree containing the family numbers you have referenced. The numbers in the Suffix Field do not affect the ability to reserve ordinances. You can still reserve names and print a Family Name Card. Here is a link to an article in the Help Center regarding how to enter names in Family Tree.

    https://www.familysearch.org/en/help/helpcenter/article/how-to-enter-names-in-family-tree

    As to the Suffix field, it says:

    • Suffix—Enter words like “Jr.” or “Sr.,” or perhaps a Roman numeral, as in “John Smith III.” If a person lacks a suffix, leave this field blank. 

    As you know, if the family numbers were entered in the Name fields (first and last name) it would definitely affect the ability to reserve Temple ordinances.

    We are sending you a private message regarding this issue as well.

    Best Wishes!

    0
  • Brett .
    Brett . ✭✭✭✭✭
    December 16, 2021 edited December 16, 2021

    @CJTobler

    FYI

    Just in passing ...

    As an aside ...

    [ ie. From the original matter raised, in this post ... ]

    Please be aware ...

    That, although, "Numbers" are characters, that are NOT allowed, in a number of the "Name" Fields ...

    [ ie. in the Fields of, "Title'; "First Names"; and, "Last Names" ... ]

    image.png

    Surprisingly, "Number" are characters, that are ARE allowed, in the "Name" Field of "Suffix".

    As, evidenced by Josefa Helena BRAND 78 c ( LKVR-PQ4 ) ...

    Plus, easily, confirmed, by this simple "Test" ...

    [ Note: I input "2", yet, NO = The following characters are not allowed: \@#$%&*_+=|~/><[]{}();:0123456789 ]

    image.png

    Plus ...

    I suspect, that such (in the "Suffix" Field) is NOT a problem/issue, when it comes to "Temple" Work, either; as, I have 'seen' actual "Numbers", in the "Suffix" Field, of various individuals/persons (for various reasons); and, the Work, WAS available to "Requested" - without any impediment (of the "Name").

    [ eg. 4th Viscount of ... ]

    Just my thoughts.

    Brett

    0
  • Brett .
    Brett . ✭✭✭✭✭
    December 16, 2021

    @Albin Dittli

    FYI

    Just in passing ...

    I am just another 'lowly' User/Patron

    [ And, I happen to be a Member of the Church ... ]

    Although, I understand the 'intent', of using "Numbers" (ie. Whether, "Alphanumeric", or, not), in the "Suffix" Field ...

    Especially, when such possibly relates back, to one's OWN Personal Database; as, an identifier; or, reference, for the purposes, of one's own personal "Research" ...

    I would humbly suggest, due to 'nature' of "Family Tree", of 'FamilySearch', that including such "Numbers" (ie. Whether, "Alphanumeric", or, not), in the "Suffix" Field, of the "Name", for individuals/persons, in "Family Tree", of 'FamilySearch', is NOT appropriate.

    "Family Tree", of 'FamilySearch', is for ALL; and, NOT one's OWN (personal) place of "Research" ...

    And ...

    As an side ...

    I am certain, that no doubt, later 'down the track' (ie. in the "Future"), another User/Patron, WILL, "Rightly So", come along; and, "Delete"/"Remove" such a "Suffix" of (for example) "78 c"; as, totally irrelevant; and, unnecessary [ ie. NOT forming part, of an individuals/persons, actual extension of a, "Title" ( eg. 4th Viscount of ... ), or, the likes of ( Official ) "Post-nominal letters" ( eg. VC; KCG; DSO; DSO and Bar; OBE; TD, LOM; etc ) ].

    As an aside ...

    Just for reference ...

    Post-nominal letters

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-nominal_letters

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-nominal_letters

    List of post-nominal letters

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_post-nominal_letters

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_post-nominal_letters

    Just my thoughts.

    I know, that this may certainly not help/assist (ie. be what one wants to 'hear'); but, I hope, that this provide some additional, insight; and, perspective.

    Brett

    0
Clear
No Groups Found

Categories

  • 28.4K All Categories
  • 22.7K FamilySearch Help
  • 111 Get Involved
  • 2.6K General Questions
  • 420 FamilySearch Center
  • 431 FamilySearch Account
  • 4.1K Family Tree
  • 3.2K Search
  • 4.5K Indexing
  • 591 Memories
  • 6.1K Temple
  • 305 Other Languages
  • 34 Community News
  • 6.4K Suggest an Idea
  • Groups