Ordinances unavailable

MargaretMillerAtkinson

My ancestor Thankful Vail lq52-lc1 vitals are standardized but ordinances not available,

MMmama

Please see private message

Western Detective

Hello Sister @MargaretAtkinson

Thank you for bringing this to our attention.

We have corrected the record for Thankful Vail LQ52-LC1 so now her completed ordinances display.

All the best,

MargaretMillerAtkinson

Thank you!

MargaretMillerAtkinson

Brett .

FamilySearch

Data Administration

( Also ATTENTION: @Kerrebee )

I am just another 'lowly' User/Patron ...

[ And, I am a Member of the Church ... ]

Please advise if I am NOT able to 'see' ...

As, I DO NOT want to "Unmerge"/"Restore", the "Merged"/'Combined" individuals/persons ...

But ...

That Said ...

There could (ie. well, may) be a Problem/Issue with regard to "Temple" Work for Thankful VAIL ( LQ52-LC1 ).

I checked the "ChangeLog" for Thankful VAIL ( LQ52-LC1 ).

Accordingly, initially created with the "Gender" of "Male".

I checked the "Temple" Work for Thankful VAIL ( LQ52-LC1 ).

Currently:

▬ Ordinances of "B"; "C"; "I"; &. "E", were "Completed" between 12 and 13 of November in 1878 at the "Saint George Utah Temple". [ ie. Very OLD "Temple" Work ... ]

▬ Ordinance of "SP" was "Completed" on "2 March 1904" at the "Manti Utah Temple".

▬ Ordinance of "SS" was "Completed" on "9 December 1921" at the "Logan Utah Temple".

DOES that aforementioned "Temple" Work relate to the ACTUAL "Temple" Work for Thankful VAIL ( LQ52-LC1 ); BEFORE, (1) the 12 February 2019; and/or, (2) the 8 December 2020; as, a "Male"?

Because ..,

IF, such is the case; THEM, I would venture to suggest that such "Temple" Work done as a "Male", would (in fact) be INVALID; as, Thankful VAIL ( LQ52-LC1 ) is CURRENTLY, "Female".

The reason that I ask, is that, there were TWO (x2) "Merges"/"Combines" where Thankful VAIL ( LQ52-LC1 ) was "Merged"/"Combined":

(1) 12 February 2019

..... with Thankful VAIL ( LHNQ-ZS9 ) [ Original Name: Thankful TWIN Vail ]. ORIGINALLY as "Female".

------------------

This is where the 'Gender' of Thankful VAIL ( LQ52-LC1 ) appears to have been "Changed", from "Male", to "Female", during the Process of the "Merge"/"Combine".

------------------

(2) 8 December 2020

..... with Thankful VAIL ( MMT1-RC1 ). ORIGINALLY as "Female".

Hence, my confusion; and, concern, with regard to validity of the "Temple" Work.

Question: So WHOSE "Temple" Work appears on "Ordinance" page/screen of Thankful VAIL ( LQ52-LC1 )?

▬ Thankful VAIL ( LQ52-LC1 ), done apparently as a "Male"; OR,

▬ Thankful VAIL ( LHNQ-ZS9 ) [ Original Name: Thankful TWIN Vail ], done as a "Female"; OR,

▬ Thankful VAIL ( MMT1-RC1 ), done as a "Female".

And ...

IF, the "Temple" Work was ORIGINALLY done as a "Male"; and, relates to that 'Gender' of "Male"; THEN, has that been RECTIFIED; and, CANCELLED, in both, the "Temple" (System) Database; and, Physically (ie. Hard-Copy) "Temple" Records?

IF, the latter had NOT been RECTIFIED; and, CANCELLED; THEN, I would suggest that there is a definite Problem/Issue, than NEEDS immediate attention.

Whereas ...

IF, the "Temple" Work NOW relates to, either, Thankful VAIL ( LHNQ-ZS9 ); or, Thankful VAIL ( MMT1-RC1 ), where both, were done as "Female"; thereby was CORRECTED for "Gender"; THEN, there is no Problem/Issue.

Can you please investigate; and, advise.

The REASON that I am concerned, is predicated on the indication in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch', through "View My Relationship" (which I have just discovered), that I am somewhat related to Thankful VAIL ( LQ52-LC1 ), in my "Ancestral" Lines; as, she is "THE WIFE OF MY 10TH COUSIN FOUR TIMES REMOVED".

'Thank You' in advance.

Submitted for your, information; attention; and, consideration.

Kind Regards.

MAY THE LORD BLESS YOU IN THIS IMPORTANT WORK

Yours Faithfully,

Brett

Western Detective

Hello @Brett .

The ordinances currently showing for Thankful Vail LQ52-LC1 were performed for a female.

All the best.

Brett .

@Kerrebee

G'Day, Compatriot (from over in the West)

'Thank You' so much, for that information.

That is good to know.

When one looks at the "ChangeLog", such is a little concerning, certainly NOT clear.

I have come across situations, where such was NOT the case; and, needed to be addressed/fixed.

After all, she is "Connected" to me too - although, distantly, through "Marriage".

Again, 'Thank You'.

Brett

ps: I certainly DID NOT want to do any "Unmerging"/"Restoring" ...