Can you add a link to the source for a map to show where the record came from?

tamelajoyashlock1

I am always opening maps and wondering how far this source might be in comparison to a previous confirmed source. I am always looking at the record, and trying to find where each record was and what is the distance between records to determine if it might be the source for my ancestor.

For example: If I have confirmed DNA matches in Kentucky, they I'm trying to figure out where a record is. So I leave FamilySearch site, I bring up google and search it. I ask myself if it is close to everything else? Was it a days buggy ride away? If so, it might be a viable record.

It would really help if we had a map link on the record where you could go to that city or county and then you could search distances, etc. Can you guys add a link to the site that will take me to the place/map where the record is? IE: I had family in Kansas, Maybe

Paul W

@tamelajoyashlock1

I find I have Google Maps open most of the time I am using FamilySearch / Family Tree and am constantly entering two places there and getting the distance between them calculated for me. The problem with a similar feature being introduced to FamilySearch is that its "Auto-standardization" exercise has meant many places being redesignated as locations half way across the world from their actual location. (For example, Auckland in County Durham, England might now be labelled Auckland, New Zealand.) Hence, if the location was based on the current place shown in a source, you could be provided with the impression two places you were comparing for distance (to test the likelihood that two sources were for the same person, say) might be shown as thousands of miles apart, instead of the (say) 5 miles apart that really was the case!

Given that factor and that there is already the Google Maps alternative, I really don't think it is necessary (or a good idea) for FamilySearch to develop a tool like this.

Adrian Bruce1

@tamelajoyashlock1 - you're absolutely right to check the distances (thank you in fact, because so few do!). But just to reinforce what @Paul W says from a slightly different angle, there are many sources where the indexed place bears little resemblance to the place that's (geographically) relevant to the person. One classic problem is the probate collection England and Wales, National Index of Wills and Administrations, 1858-1957. During WW2, the central probate registry for England & Wales moved from London to Llandudno on the North Wales coast - some 250 miles. Anyone who died in England & Wales during that period who had their probate done via the central registry (which could already be miles away from where they lived), would have had it done 250m further still in Llandudno.

Better by far that you sort out such oddities yourself because you can read the stuff and hopefully decide what it means, rather than try to specify rules to the computer about what items to check for.