Too many hands in the kitchen!

LegacyUser

Pat Hatchel said: I have explored my personal genealogy, for over 30 years, yet when I inquire FamilySearch about them I find numerous inconsistancies, by multiple sources. Therefore, for my family research, FamilySearch is totally unreliable.

Eldon F Hatchel Jr
7rtsgjyv@gmail.com

LegacyUser

Jordi Kloosterboer said: Then you can confirm sources and fix as necessary, right? Looks like you are an expert and you can be of tremendous help for others

LegacyUser

Pat Hatchel said: So you’re suggesting that I do all my research again just to verify that somebody else has put it in incorrect or correct. That’s such a waste of time. My suggestion is go to the horses mouth rather than guessi at Correct dates and times and sources.

LegacyUser

Jordi Kloosterboer said: You can just check your notes that you made when you found the sources whenever you did in the past 30 years when there are inconsistencies. Then you can add that source on FamilySearch and make good reason statements etc. There is also the possibility that there are more sources available now that contradict what you first thought which requires more research. What were you expecting from FamilySearch when you came here exactly?

LegacyUser

Juli said: Pat, you appear to have completely misunderstood what FamilySearch even _is_.

First (and foremost), FS is vast and varied. There is a very large amount of information available on the site, but it is not all the same *sort* of information.

FamilySearch's Family Tree is an open-edit One World Tree. The intent is to have one -- and only one! -- profile for every person who has ever lived, with appropriate connections to family members and source documents. Open-edit means it's kind of like Wikipedia: anyone can edit anything, after signing in. Other than initially uploading profile data from the current system's predecessors, FS does not do anything much with Family Tree's information. It's all user-contributed.

The other big category of information on FS is Historical Records. These are records about people, generated by governments, churches, schools, families, and other entities, and they come in various forms. The original records were generally made on paper (or parchment), but there are direct-to-digital record types (such as the Social Security Death Index). FamilySearch has some material on paper (usually published books, such as of parish register transcriptions), a lot of material on microfilm, and digital versions (scans) of a large proportion of the microfilm and paper. You can find these materials using the Catalog (https://www.familysearch.org/search/c...) or the new Search - Images feature (https://www.familysearch.org/records/...).

For some Historical Records, FS also has a searchable database of indexed information: a transcription of the key names, dates, and places on a record, which allow one to find the entries pertaining to one's relatives. Most of the index entries were contributed by volunteer indexers on FamilySearch, but there are also indexes provided by other entities (such as FindMyPast and JewishGen). Search - Records (https://www.familysearch.org/search/) is the interface for this database.

Anyone can contribute to the searchable database of indexed information by participating in Indexing (https://www.familysearch.org/indexing/). You can also now improve the accuracy of some entries in the existing database, using the index correction function that was introduced less than a year ago.

FS also has:
- a Wiki (https://www.familysearch.org/wiki/en/...), focused on genealogy topics in general and on FS's holdings in particular;
- a Genealogies section (https://www.familysearch.org/search/f...), which is (static) family tree files uploaded by other users;
- a Books section (https://www.familysearch.org/library/...), with a wide assortment of genealogy-related publications in digital format;
- a Community Forum (https://community.familysearch.org/s/) for genealogy assistance and discussion; and
- this Customer Forum (https://getsatisfaction.com/familysearch) for technical assistance and discussion.

LegacyUser

Robert Wren said: Well Done, Juli!!!

Perhaps FamilySearch could adopt it and provide it to NEW USERS to provide them with some understanding of what to expect.

(Another point that might be added is that 70% of all of FamilySearch databases have NOT yet been indexed!)

Hopefully, Pat Hatchel, will join with us, fellow users, in assisting to make this universal tree even better SOURCED and reliable.

LegacyUser

Christine said: One of the most important aspects of the famiysearch tree is to gather data together in one place so that all descendants of a common ancestor, many unknown to us, can see sources and learn information about their ancestors.

Sadly, one of the greatest causes of loss of genealogical information is death of the person holding the records.

Several years ago I did research on a historical figure. I was able to find one grandnephew, who died just a few months before I found him. When I contacted his widow, she said that they had no children; he had no siblings or cousins. And because he had no family to give the papers and pictures of his family, he burned them before his death. What may we have learned about the assassination of Lincoln and the trial of the conspirators through those family papers (the historical person I was researching was one of the defense attorneys for one of those convicted and executed).

My plea to anyone who feels it is a waste of time to duplicate research they may have already done, is to check family search tree and see what you can add from the volumes of research you have. So many pictures, documents, histories, stories are sitting in boxes in attics and basements and offices (mine included) which will be lost unless someone scans and shares them to familysearch.

LegacyUser

David Newton said: "And because he had no family to give the papers and pictures of his family, he burned them before his death."

That's not a problem of lack of family. That's a problem of lack of imagination. There would likely have been an archive that would have accepted such papers if there had been anything much of more general interest in them. However the person concerned decided to destroy them rather than even to try and preserve them.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: If nothing else, a local historical society is almost always open to accepting collections of this type.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Given the nature of the tree and that it is open-edit (as Juli talks about), it is very important that you maintain a private copy of your family tree. There are three fully-certified-to-work-with FamilySearch FamilyTree in the Solutions Gallery. All three have free versions, which gives a person who want to get one, the opportunity to see which one they like the most.

The three are Ancestral Quest, Legacy, and Roots Magic. Each have their fans and each have similar features (to become fully certified), but may vary in the way they operate.