Census sources not showing on profile
All of a sudden when I link in a census to a profile and attach it to other members of the same household/family, the information that is usually shown upon doing that on the profile page is not showing up.
The census year and place usually show up under Other information. Now it doesn't show up at all on the profile you have to go to sources and wade through to see what if any census this person has appeared in.
Is this a coding fault or a browser issue?
And the same problem with burial: attaching a source does not create an event in the record.
I saw @NTychonievich in another bug report, so I add your name in case this bug is also assigned to you0
I'm having the same problem. Started about 5 days ago. What do we do?0
Agreed, never seen something like this before. Happening for me as well. Source goes on timeline but not into the 'Other Information' nor does it allow you to standardized it BEFORE it is attached, which..it is not doing correctly!0
Same issue here in California. Everything that is attached as a source has to be added manually under "Other information" for Census Records and into the Burial Information above. Something is NOT working as it normally does.0
Here are a few (!) of the threads that have been started in the past few days about this problem.
Thanks for all these very quick replies. Has anyone come up with a work around. other than manually entering the data of course.
Does anyone know if Family Search are actually working on this?
On a side note.. The UK 1871 census is now showing up in many records, where prior to this you had to pay another web site for the info. So check anyone in your trees in 1871 before they realise and remove the records again.0
Paul W ✭✭✭✭✭
This proves the worth of visiting "Community" regularly and viewing the other posts!
As illustrated by Julia, the issue in question has been raised many times in recent days. Yesterday, I requested a positive acknowledgment from the engineers that work is underway in resolving the issue.
Similarly with the point you raise on the 1871 E&W census records. This has been discussed here several times over the past ten days or so and, as you confirm, many of us are already been aware that the 1871 census is back. However, there still are possibly issues in accessing a small part of the collection. As you say, best to attach these as sources asap, in case there's another reversal and all they're gone again!1
@Paul W said: "I requested a positive acknowledgment from the engineers"
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA <passes out>
Don't get me wrong - I would wish for the same thing, but FS never, EVER, provides any transparency at all with regard to defects or prioritization that I've ever seen. "Thanks - we reported it" is all you'll ever see, and even that is rare, after the 10^24th report of an issue.
Non-LDS contributors are just free anonymous crowdsourced labor - there will be others to take our places if we ever get truly fed up and leave, and their support posture reflects that. <shrug>0
Paul W ✭✭✭✭✭
My feelings exactly, at this point. I have added my feelings of disappointment at https://community.familysearch.org/en/discussion/127818/first-thing-on-monday-a-familysearch-engineer-should-acknowledge-the-source-linker-problem#latest, on what effectively amounts to a complete lack of empathy and respect from FamilySearch towards its loyal users.
The very first item in the Community Code of Conduct includes the advice to "Be kind (and) respectful". With the constant refusals to acknowledge any errors or damage - either by accident or design - some FamilySearch employees are not reciprocating in this expectation of our behaviours.0