Ordinance dates and places listed in the IGI for members only
Comments
-
Heather McPhie said: Instead of putting this information into the IGI, they will be placing it directly in FamilyTree. The intention is that every piece of data that appears in the IGI will be attached somewhere within the tree (kind of like a source). You've probably noticed the new ordinance tab at the top of the person screen--that tab will allow you to view the IGI data with even more information than the IGI shows.0
-
Sandra Jarvis said: I know that what you are saying is true. However, sometimes, a person on the familysearch family tree is shown as not having their work done. I know the work has been done. I have a record in my files showing the date and the temple in which the ordinances were performed. I check for duplicates and there are none. I go to the IGI and find a record of the person-right name, right parents, etc, etc. But I do not see the ordinance dates. I know the person is in the IGI so I know the work is done. I have the date/temple in my own records which also proves the work is done. How do I convince "Salt Lake" that they need to put those ordinances on to the person's record in the tree? The process is too tedious. I have done it before.
It would be simpler if I could see the ordinances on the IGI as well as one the individual's ordinance site on the tree.1 -
Heather McPhie said: I think the solution to your problem is getting released on FS this summer. They are releasing a new interface that will allow you to request ordinances get moved around with a few simple clicks. I say to wait until this summer and then post on here again if it doesn't solve the problems you are experiencing.0
-
Janeen Lambert said: I have several ancestors with this same problem. It has occurred because some people were incorrectly combined in New FamilySearch. Now that nFS is read-only, we cannot go in there and unmerge these records. This caused some individuals to "disappear" and not show up in Family Tree. A new record has to be created. Since it is a new record, it also shows that temple work needs to be done. I suggest that you reserve these names to prevent others from repeating the temple work while you are waiting for FamilySearch to come up with a way for us to add the ordinance dates to these records.0
-
Heather McPhie said: The way to fix the problem should get released this summer. Help is definitely on the way.0
-
After so many years of losing access to the Temple IGI, isn't it time that those records were made available to patrons who hold a current temple recommend? It is nearly impossible to sift through the sometimes hundreds of record changes associated with our faithful ancestors. Please, please, please restore that precious access. It would save the temple office so much time if patrons could assist in the recovery and restoration of original records. If I go to Special Collections in SLC, I can find them but it is rarely possible to do so and I only live 2 States away from Utah. There must be thousands of skilled family historians of the non-professional variety such as myself that could assist in this precious work if we were given back access to do the legitimate searches. Just today I found 5 immediate ancestors that have been disconnected from their own living ordinance work and I was once again forced to put the work of finding those records on the shoulders of a FS missionary.
0