Is it possible for Familysearch to prevent people from adding sources from paid websites? Some of us can't afford to use them.
@Deborah Crain We sympathize with the frustration of seeing a link to a source you can not open. It is a gift when the contributor will also add enough information about the source, in their description for others to examine, But, unfortunately , that does not often happen.
FamilySearch.org is sponsored by the Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints and has made agreements with third party paid web sites to provide free accounts to members of the church. Therefore sources from those paid web sites are very welcome on our site as they provide a wider range of sources to our Family Tree. Please review this knowledge article: https://www.familysearch.org/campaign/partneraccess/ for further information.
Deborah some sources are only available from other websites or even personal collections. Having a source can be invaluable in documentating a person and their family.
These articles may help:
Another thing to consider is that many paid sites offer a free trial period, during which time you can explore the databases that are offered and check out those outside sources that have been added to an individual's record in Family Tree.
Thanks for your question. It is not the purpose of FamilySearch to prevent others from adding sources from other sites. On the contrary, We welcome information from many outside sources that help authenticate the records we do have. The ultimate purpose is to connect the entire world family in one world tree that everyone is connected to. See the attached article:
I for one - am always grateful for being made aware of a SOURCE to back up and support a particular fact.
EVEN if that is a reference to a paid resource.
Its a matter of perspective - - lets be grateful for the work others do!!!!
FamilySearch is not in the business of censoring data input here . . .
Joining the chorus to point out one detail that I think is crucial: it's perfectly fine to cite a source that's behind a paywall, as long as you do so usefully, i.e. in such a way that people who cannot just click the link can still know what the heck it is that you're citing.
This is no different from citing a book you looked at in the library, really: you need enough information so that both you and others can find that same information in that book again, and a sufficient summary that you shouldn't need another library trip under normal circumstances.
totally agree with Julia.
Deborah - can you point us at a few real concrete examples that triggered your comments?
(ID of person and some idea of source/link)
I still think it's unfair for people to cite paid websites when some of us can't afford to use. Even with a free trial,that's only for a very short time. What if we need to see a paid website after a free trial has expired?
There should be a better method.
everyone would be joining the church just to get free access to paid websites. Is that fair?
actually I consider it a very literal miracle - that such an incredible amount of genealogical information is available for free inside FamilySearch - billions of records - that have been paid for by FamilySearch - that we have the blessing of accessing for FREE.
that some people can cite some additional records that happen to be fee based - but support the facts - - to me is nothing whatsoever to feel concerned about. - I very much welcome it.
Sites - like Ancestry are out there to make a profit (which is their right) - where as we FamilySearch users have access to billions of records - with no charge from an organization which is not out there for the profit;
seems to me a case of "Glass is half full or glass is half empty"
one could call the "unfair" claim on virtually anything in this world that happens to cost money . . .
Is it just as unfair to cite a book in some distant library - that I cant get to because its too far away - and no one has a copy of the book online?? just because we don't have access - is not a reason to call "unfair"
Too many of these sources are added by users with just a URL link.
This is poor practice for two reasons:
(1) Probably more than half of FamilySearch users do not have free access to these commercial websites.
(2) The URL might only be active for a relatively short period.
I'm quite happy to be advised, for example, there is a record for an ancestor in Find My Past, but please add as much detail as possible about the source content, as I won't be able to see this information via the URL link, which for me (and many other users), just links to the website home page.