Cannot find a referenced IGI entry

EarlMarshall if it isnt documented it didnt happen

H O Marshall, 9KH7-TTY, has a source attached to him that states "This extracted IGI record was used to create this person." But I am unable to find the IGI record. It seems to me that if we could locate the IGI record referenced, that would point us to individual ordinances that would have been performed for this person.

Gordon Collett

You are correct. It does not look like any ordinances were ever completed. I don't see any merges on his record or any shifting around of sources that could have separated the record from his ordinances. I think this is the first case of this I've seen where no ordinances at all were done, but am not particularly surprised to see it. When the old record extraction program which supplied temples with names was ended, they did not discard extraction records just because ordinances were not completed but did keep them in the databases. I thought they were primarily added to the Pedigree Resource File, but maybe this batch did end up in the IGI.

The document information that is in the full source record includes the IGI batch number. Clicking on it searches for everyone in that batch: https://www.familysearch.org/search/record/results?count=50&q.batchNumber=C00528-0

Picking a random one, https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/details/G371-XMY, the person has that same IGI source type that you see on H.O. Looking at that person's ordinances, B/C are completed but on the day after someone reserved the rest of his ordinances which is pretty convincing to say he also had no ordinances complete bases on his IGI record.

Picking a third one, this time a woman, https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/details/9JBT-FFN, you can see she did have ordinances based on the IGI information.

Looking at one more man, https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/details/9KHW-7SL, once again no ordinances done.

This I have run across before that in one extraction batch the B/C and sometimes more were completed for just the women or just the men but not the other.

Gordon Collett

The IGI entry is the historical record source you are looking at. In Family Tree the IGI was divided into two main parts, the user submitted names and the indexed names. The first are located under Genealogies. The second are found among the historical record collections.

Regarding temple work, when you see a notice such as you reported, the ordinance dates associated with the IGI record are the dates you see on the Family Tree person under the ordinance tab unless there are earlier ordinances for the person.

Gordon Collett

Here is a clear cut example that should help clarify my explanation because this particular Family Tree record has not had anything done to it since its initial import into Family Tree.

On this person's source page is:

This is the IGI record. You can see a different version of the IGI record in a bit different format and with fuller source information by clicking on the URL https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:NCY2-BQX

This database which is now called "Norway Baptisms, 1634-1927" was part of the IGI. It was separated out and properly identified to clarify what these IGI records were.

The ordinances associated with this IGI record are those currently found on his ordinances page. You can tell these were done via the extraction program because of their pre-2012 dates, the fact that the only information on his detail page is identical to the IGI information, and because his change log shows nothing has been done to his record since the initial import to Family Tree in 2012.

EarlMarshall if it isnt documented it didnt happen

Thanks for this explanation. So are you saying in the case I identified that the IGI contained the historical record, but no ordinances were performed based on that entry?