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

Stubborn "Possible Matches" in Helper section

W D Samuelsen
W D Samuelsen ✭✭
February 13 edited February 23 in Temple

Here is the list. These are in my family

I went through everything possible. No duplicates can be found at all.

  1. No duplicate spouses
  2. No duplicate parents
  3. No duplicate children
  4. No duplicate child in laws
  5. No duplicate parents in laws
  6. No bad merges to undo with any of these above.

Why are they still listed despite the allegations of possible matches when none were found?


image.png


0

Answers

  • DavidBeck1
    DavidBeck1 mod
    February 23

    @W D Samuelsen

    Hello William

    Did you try running the Merge by ID Tool? If so did you find any corresponding information to qualify those listed in the jpg attachment as duplicates?

    0
  • W D Samuelsen
    W D Samuelsen ✭✭
    February 23

    to David Beck

    I always checked on that as first step for any obvious duplicates. Even the ones that are far apart but otherwise obvious alleged duplicates to check and verify.

    Yester there was one new addition, went through everything and discovered one duplicate, not to the primary person her mother-in-law. Checked everything else, and she is still on the list.

    0
  • Graham Buckell
    Graham Buckell mod
    February 23

    @W D Samuelsen

    I checked my list of duplicates in the Helper section. I had six entries. I checked them all and found only three had possible duplicates listed on the Details page. I dealt with these and, in the process, one of the remaining three dropped off the list leaving only two! My suspicion is that this feature is buggy. But remember that it is only there as an aid and that you can ignore it.

    Sorry this is not very helpful!

    Regards

    Graham Buckell

    0
  • PiperTWilson
    PiperTWilson ✭✭✭
    February 23

    Mod Note - The image has been edited to remove possibly personally-identifying information of a living person.

    0
  • W D Samuelsen
    W D Samuelsen ✭✭
    February 24

    Piper- there were NO living persons in the "alleged duplicates" I have. You assumed without checking through. Kirsten Sorensdatter born in late 1600s per her husband.

    Living persons are NEVER listed in this "alleged duplicates". No one else can see any living persons that are in my lines. I can't see any living persons in others' lines.

    0
  • PiperTWilson
    PiperTWilson ✭✭✭
    February 24

    @W D Samuelsen - I apologize. I still have the original image. Would you like me to put it back?

    0
Clear
No Groups Found

Categories

  • 22.6K All Categories
  • 355 1950 US Census
  • 45.9K FamilySearch Help
  • 91 Get Involved
  • 2.3K General Questions
  • 327 Family History Centers
  • 323 FamilySearch Account
  • 3.1K Family Tree
  • 2.5K Search
  • 3.6K Indexing
  • 430 Memories
  • 4.3K Temple
  • 250 Other Languages
  • 28 Community News
  • 5.3K Suggest an Idea
  • Groups