Wasting Peoples Time checking every Green Icon

LegacyUser

Jacques Fortin said: New Temple Icons cause more work and suck up time. I used to know if an Icon was GREEN that the Temple work was not done. NOW I have to check every person with a GREEN Icon what a waste of TIME.

LegacyUser

Amy Archibald said: There are just over 1 Billion names in the Family Tree and estimates of 110 Billion people that have lived on the earth.

The focus is now on finding the missing 109 Billion people via historical records (many of which are indexed) and ADDing them to the Family Tree (for which if you are related you can then reserve temple ordinances).

The temple file is FULL of names of person's whose work needs to be done. There isn't a need for users to search the Tree to find green temples to submit to the temple anymore.

Most users who are looking for a green temple are those who are wanting a name to take immediately to the temple themselves.

The Ordinances Ready process will pull names already shared with the temple file and will also search the Tree for related names still needing temple work (green temples). Users can now also find a "green temple" and reserve it for 90 days (because it was shared with the temple previously).

The FamilySearch software now can find the green temples in the Tree via Ordinances Ready.

There is no longer a need for other users to search for them to then share to the already Full temple file.

LegacyUser

Jacques Fortin said: Sorry you do not understand what I was saying. I do a lot of checking of my relationship families. If I had a dollar for every incomplete ordinances of these people I would be rich. So before I would pull up the family click on each child and could see right away was what not done. Many have half done ordinances. Now I have to go into each child'sfile then click on the ordinance list then read each green icon listed. It is a step backward from before for what I do to check my familes.

LegacyUser

Eric J. said: Do you actually work for Family Search and know these things for a fact?
You also contradicted yourself with "there's not need to submit names" and "Ordinances Ready process will pull names shared with the temple" ....someone has to be sharing them.
From working in the baptistry for over 8 years, the temple file is NOT full.

LegacyUser

R Greg Leininger said: jacques:
my same concerns: some people do Fam Search to find new names thru new research. others like me use record hints to link to family members. Using those hints plus looking at persons' already linked sources such as marriage records and Find a Grave, I have found many NEW names to add to Fam Tree.

But when i am looking through family lists, i would like to know that the Green icon is EITHER for names that are ready and unreserved OR names that are ready to pick but are ALSO shared w the temple. I wont take a look at the ones shared already w temple. i only want to look at the unreserved names so i can see if there are any errors to correct, any new records to link, and any children, spouses, siblings, etc to add. THEN I share them w the temple. See below of one of my posts:

some of us find names from census record links but have too many to take to the temple ourselves. You can do one of two things:

1. you share that name w temple, or

2. you unreserve the name and hope that someone else will come along who has the time to do it NOW.

I did an "experiment" for about 8 months, where I had 10 male/female names for each ordinance and shared w temple. I kept them in one pouch to monitor.

I then took a similar number of male/female names for each ordinance, and unreserved them as green icons for anyone to reserve. But I kept them in another pouch to montior later.

8 months later, about 60% of the "shared w temple" persons had their baptisms and confirmations done by then, yet only 1 of the "unreserved" group had been claimed and had their baptism/confirmation done in the same time period.

so it appeared better to me to share all my names w the temple, assuming they would get done sooner. So it is helpful to me if the green icon is for names shared w temple OR unreserved names, not both.

If already reserved w the temple, i dont want to open up that profile, but if it is unreserved, then i will, in order to correct any potential errors, link any new records and then share w temple. I think their work will get done sooner than leaving them unreserved.

So a diff color icon to tell between shared w temple and unreserved helps, so i dont "waste my time" opening up the names of 8 kids in a family, only to see that they have already been shared w the temple.

LegacyUser

Gordon Collett said: My wife's family is from an area where a lot of extraction work was done in the 1970 to 1990 period. When that was stopped, it resulted in hundreds of names that are now in Family Tree with just baptisms and confirmations completed. This are all 8th cousins or closer, variously removed.

After we collect these, fix and document the records, and merge duplicates, we now have two choices:

1) Leave them alone and hope that sometime in the next two hundred years another relative will stumble across them or will be given them through Ordinances Ready, knowing that there is a chance these will never get completed

2) Reserve them and share them with the temple and be confident that these will get completed within the next couple of decades.

Her reservation list has enough to keep us busy for the next couple of years so we are not adding to it.

If we choose (2) and other researchers in the same area are doing the same, pretty soon the majority of green icons we come across and want to make sure are properly shared, will be already be shared. Leading to a sense of futility regarding checking green icons and then to a multitude of green icons that are never shared with the temple and individuals who never have a chance to get in line to have their ordinances completed.

LegacyUser

Jacques Fortin said: Thank you for explaining it better.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: It is immaterial what Amy has said when it comes to this issue. Let each person have their own opinion, please even if you disagree with it.

It is a problem for those who previously used the green icons as a flag to help them make sure the profile of the person was fully "fleshed out". That often led to discovering family members who were not in the tree. I use a different method to research my families, but the result is the same -- newly discovered family members who are not in the massive tree.

An additional problem exists that now the same icon is used for pulling names that previously required extensive processes to obtain the name to take to the temple. Now any member can pull any name (they do not have to be related) and ordinances to take to the temple. This was behind the move to use a single icon (according to Jim Greene) to help clear out the backlog of shared names. He did not mean that research should stop, but that now it no longer takes a time-consuming process to "pull (shared) ordinances and go" to the temple.

The other problem is something I didn't know and never used -- reserving names by clicking on the green icon on the pedigree pages. With the newly introduced method of being able to reserve (for 90 days) shared names, there is no way to tell if ordinances have been already reserved (and shared) without clicking on the icon and opening an uninformative reservation popup. There are other places where the green icon appears, but its functionality is inconsistent.

I cannot think of any good solution for this problem, so it is something that FamilySearch really needs to look at.

LegacyUser

Jacques Fortin said: Yes the amount of just baptisms and confirmations completed I have seen has been stunning!

LegacyUser

Jacques Fortin said: Amazing information, I was not aware of all this.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Hm. I forgot to mention that when I have finished researching a name, I tend to leave it unreserved. But if I reserve the name, I also share it with the temple system. By using the same color icon, I don't know that I have finished researching the name and shared it with the temple system, or if I need to research it further. There is no way for me to dismiss the icon so it no longer appears when I am in the mode of looking for names that still need research and have not been reserved.

I actually use a different method for that purpose, but many do not use an external program like I do. So the problem exists for many users with the new feature and ability to "grab and go" with ordinances.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: I agree, but do not have a solution. The green icon is being used (per Jim Greene's comments) as a means to help clear out the backlog of ordinances in the temple file. That doesn't mean we stop research, only that now, a person wanting to go to the temple can "grab and go" (reserving is part of that).

The problem is that many people, like yourself, have used the green icon as a flag for further research. That no longer exists with the new system.

LegacyUser

Gordon Collett said: You can assume these are all from the old extraction program. If you are not familiar with this, in short, starting about 1970 the church took microfilms of birth records, generally between 1800 and 1880 or so, had people extract name, birth information, and parents names. Then these records were sent to the temple. This had a couple of purposes. One was to keep temple patrons busy. The other was to get these names in the International Genealogical Index so researchers would find them there. Most of the Historical Record databases on FamilySearch had their start this way.

The practice varied somewhat through the decades, apparently, because some of these extraction batches had all ordinances completed, some had just baptism and confirmation done, and still others had just sealing to parents done. This was sufficient to get them in the IGI so that their descendants could find them and complete the rest of the ordinances.

When found in FamilyTree, these always have a corresponding entry in the proper historical record database. Sometimes this will already be attached as a source, but not always.

LegacyUser

Gordon Collett said: Let me make an exception to the above, if the baptism dates are consistent with the above, being before about 2005, that is what is going on.

If the baptism dates are more recent, say since 2015, then there is another possibility. From what I have read on this board over the years, there are many people who will research their families, reserve all the ordinances, give the baptisms and confirmations to their children or grandchildren to complete, then because they don't have the time to do all the other ordinances, un-reserve everything else and leave the rest of the ordinances for other relatives to find and complete since if they shared them with temple those other relatives would not then have had, previously, the opportunity to complete them.

LegacyUser

Eric J. said: Tom how is it a "problem" that people use the green as an indicator, why do you care so much that people work differently than you do? Why do you care so much about this issue period?

LegacyUser

Eric J. said: Very easy solution, leave green how it was, and since you're so bent on it being green, take the old dark green and have THAT as shared with the temple yet still good to take from someone else. Thus everyone is happy, you get your green, and everyone else gets a distinction between greens.
Since when did "grab and go" become a good thing? People still need to do research, and if they aren't, then "grab and go" should be names shared with the temple. They've had so many issues with duplicates a. because some are not researching and just "grabbing and going", and b. the app on the phone is/or at least was flawed, and would return the exact list of names (even if they had already been printed). My niece and I tested it, she got the same name, I did, and it was already printed, thus 3 of us potentially could've had the same card printed at the same time. How about we look at solutions to fixing things instead of declaring everything as a "problem".

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: It is for those who used the icon for a different purpose. It would be for me if I did the same thing, but I use my local database for that purpose, rather than anything on FamilySearch. I have simply indicated how I approach FamilySearch as a site and its features.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Leaving the green how it was will require rolling back the change and producing new code to use more than the four icon colors. While it is a valid request, the solution is not easy to implement within the current FamilySearch structure.

LegacyUser

R Greg Leininger said: jacques: From my "experiment" i mentioned recently on some related posts, I have also found many persons selected from my extensive "share w temple" list who NEXT needed their initiatory work done are also getting picked up rather fast by the temples (at least pre Covid).

It "bogs down" once you get to the Endowment phase: those of mine are hardly ever getting picked up, WHETHER they are Unreserved or Shared w Temple, it doesn't seem to make a difference from my experiecne.