Deadbeats sitting on names .... for years ...? No. It's likely that these were submitted by elderly members who have since aged out ... members who struggled with computers and weren't sure how do deal with the files; members that thought when they "submitted" their names that they would be worked on and completed and have no idea that they are still sitting there waiting for them to take further action. The every changing submission seems 'easy' for us to navigate - but for others it is a maze of buttons, rules, options that are difficult to comprehend. That's why only 1% of the Church is actively submitting names. Think back. The only way to 'submit' a name 6 years ago was to 'reserve' it for 'you' to do. The members didn't necessarily understand that. Submitted - in the general understanding is that it's in the system - it's being taken care of. So - if they submitted 200 relatives - it would take them decades to do that much Temple work. At the same time there was no easy way for them to flip those names in to the general Temple file. Difficult to follow - hard to understand computers - ever changing Temple submission rules/programs - it would be easy for handfuls of names to become millions of names stuck in the system. The default should be that all names are set as 'submitted' to the general Temple - with an opt out to reserve only the few names that you can realistically do. This new "Share" button makes it easy to flip the names to the general Temple file. But require the member to opt in to take further action. If we could have the 'default' - set to submit all names to the general Temple file - with a check box option to select out the few names/ordinances that we want to do - it would dramatically reduce the huge backlog of 'reserved' ordinances going forward. This "Share" button is really handy for accomplishing that - we should make sure the members we work with are using it. On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 1:41 AM, <JCBrooks@aol.com> wrote: > It just occurred to me that maybe the reason the list is definitely > shortened is because they don't want us to see how many ordinances are not > getting done :-) > > I'm finding a lot a stale ordinances in my temple list that are due to > the fact that someone else, some Legacy submitter with no contact info, > submitted the names for work pre-2008 and has never completed it. Then I > came > along and added parents and a sealing to parents request. My request will > not be done until the deadbeat (for lack of a better word) submitter > problem > is resolved. > > I sure hope they are working on that serious problem. It is a result of > names that went missing in action after the switch to NFS (cards in temples > went to limbo), people who printed cards and lost them, people who printed > cards for a "must do" baptism and never completed the other ordinances, > and > people who either died or lost interest. > > Michele > > > In a message dated 4/25/2013 10:34:14 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > dsam52@sampubco.com writes: > > I show at the moment > > Family Tree > 132 reserved > 75 shared > 3 printed > > in new.Familysearch > 205 total (that is the combined of 132 and 75 because I retain sealings.) > > Anyway, I had been told at least in nFS it is 400 the limit or it freezes. > > Nothing is said about the limit in Family Tree. > > The only limits I am aware is 50 records per batch to be printed. > > And in Getsatisfaction, it had been reported there are multiple issues > with Temple lists right now. > > > David Samuelsen > > On 4/25/2013 8:04 PM, Thomas Jay Kemp wrote: > > I like this new feature. > > > > Does it list all submitted names - or to a number limit? > > > > For example - in nFS - I see a count that is double/triple the count > that > > is showing in the Shared (Reserved/Shared/Printed) combined counts. > > > > It seems like the new Shared count is up to a capped limit. > > What is correct? > > > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in > the subject and the body of the message > > > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the > subject and the body of the message > > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

If you discover that there are names reserved for more than 3 years you can write in and ask for them to be released. Be nice they make the decision based on multiple issues. Please be sure to include your helper information in every email. Family Tree isn't bringing over the correct helper information unless you have gone into settings in Family Tree. (They are working on this) It seems the engineers are working super hard to make changes and additions very quickly! I'm keeping them in my prayers. Be sure you hover over the colored boxes, use the help center, update your helper information, try things out, give feedback on both things you like and then suggestions other than"give me back the old site" because that won't happen. Progress is great! Hope to see more happy posts on this list.

The RED and all the other colors have a hover where if you put your cursor over one you will get more information. Please try it. I love the changes and there are many more to come. On Apr 25, 2013 1:15 PM, <JCBrooks@aol.com> wrote: > I liked seeing the progress and knowing that things were not being held > up...a prompt for me to check further. > > All red tells me nothing. Even if I share them, I still feel a > responsibility to those persons. > > And yes, I wondered what happened to all those earlier ones. My list is > also much longer than now being shown. This really doesn't help me follow > up where there might be problems, especially since I add names on a > regular > basis. > > One step forward, two steps back. > > Michele > > > In a message dated 4/25/2013 11:10:57 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > sjkelsey@msn.com writes: > > I think the update is better---certainly the colors are much more cheerful > and I don't have the feeling > I am in the morgue. This is great, but there are a few things which would > help. > 1) You cannot tell in the printed list which ones are ones you have > printed > and which ones > the temple has printed so it is harder to tell how you are doing and what > cards you are > supposed to still have. This would help to see if you have lost anyone > which you cannot do now. > We need to know which ones the temple has printed and which ones we have > printed.. > 2) Sorting would still be valuable. > 3) There is a much lower limit on what is displayed. It would certainly > help to know > what you actually have in the lists---the number of lines displayed is > valuable and helps > to see how things are going. NFS displayed in the 5600 to 6200 range of > lines. > FT now stops in the shared list at about 2600 and I know that I have many > more than that. > 4) datewise it stops in shared sometime in Feb 2012 and the earlier ones > are > not displayed at all. > > Steve Kelsey > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <JCBrooks@aol.com> > To: <LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2013 10:39 AM > Subject: [LDS-WC] Shared Temple Ordinances > > > > Well, they "updated" this page AGAIN. > > > > Now instead of yellow triangles for everyone, I have blood red > ordinances > > for everyone which according to the legends means "shared." I don't > know > > if they are printed or waiting any longer. > > > > At least they added a counter. > > > > Anyone know what's going on? > > > > Michele > > > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the > subject and the body of the message > > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

It just occurred to me that maybe the reason the list is definitely shortened is because they don't want us to see how many ordinances are not getting done :-) I'm finding a lot a stale ordinances in my temple list that are due to the fact that someone else, some Legacy submitter with no contact info, submitted the names for work pre-2008 and has never completed it. Then I came along and added parents and a sealing to parents request. My request will not be done until the deadbeat (for lack of a better word) submitter problem is resolved. I sure hope they are working on that serious problem. It is a result of names that went missing in action after the switch to NFS (cards in temples went to limbo), people who printed cards and lost them, people who printed cards for a "must do" baptism and never completed the other ordinances, and people who either died or lost interest. Michele In a message dated 4/25/2013 10:34:14 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, dsam52@sampubco.com writes: I show at the moment Family Tree 132 reserved 75 shared 3 printed in new.Familysearch 205 total (that is the combined of 132 and 75 because I retain sealings.) Anyway, I had been told at least in nFS it is 400 the limit or it freezes. Nothing is said about the limit in Family Tree. The only limits I am aware is 50 records per batch to be printed. And in Getsatisfaction, it had been reported there are multiple issues with Temple lists right now. David Samuelsen On 4/25/2013 8:04 PM, Thomas Jay Kemp wrote: > I like this new feature. > > Does it list all submitted names - or to a number limit? > > For example - in nFS - I see a count that is double/triple the count that > is showing in the Shared (Reserved/Shared/Printed) combined counts. > > It seems like the new Shared count is up to a capped limit. > What is correct? > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I'm not seeing mine shortened - it increased, by dividing into two pages, one showing shared with temples and one you do yourself. David On 4/25/2013 11:41 PM, JCBrooks@aol.com wrote: > It just occurred to me that maybe the reason the list is definitely > shortened is because they don't want us to see how many ordinances are not > getting done:-)

I show at the moment Family Tree 132 reserved 75 shared 3 printed in new.Familysearch 205 total (that is the combined of 132 and 75 because I retain sealings.) Anyway, I had been told at least in nFS it is 400 the limit or it freezes. Nothing is said about the limit in Family Tree. The only limits I am aware is 50 records per batch to be printed. And in Getsatisfaction, it had been reported there are multiple issues with Temple lists right now. David Samuelsen On 4/25/2013 8:04 PM, Thomas Jay Kemp wrote: > I like this new feature. > > Does it list all submitted names - or to a number limit? > > For example - in nFS - I see a count that is double/triple the count that > is showing in the Shared (Reserved/Shared/Printed) combined counts. > > It seems like the new Shared count is up to a capped limit. > What is correct? > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

I like this new feature. Does it list all submitted names - or to a number limit? For example - in nFS - I see a count that is double/triple the count that is showing in the Shared (Reserved/Shared/Printed) combined counts. It seems like the new Shared count is up to a capped limit. What is correct?

-----Original Message----- I noticed the red boxes a few days ago. It was quite a surprise. The "shared" list can include ordinances you have reserved if you have also shared some of them with the temple. You can hover over the squares and see if it is you or the temple that have that name reserved. Keep in mind that your lists will seem shorter because the temple reserved list has been split into three sections now. I have gone back to NewFamilySearch and printed out the temple list there to keep track of which ordinances are reserved only for me and which are turned over for the temples to do. I have found that if I change something on FamilyTree it does show up quickly in NFS and vice versa. Just refresh the pages. Sincerely, Carrie Taylor in VA

In not a few cases, we have watched names given to the temple file in Family Search stalled for some unknown reason. I mean like over a year between endowment and sealing to parents which is indicative that something is not right. Without a variation in color on the shared list, I can't tell if things are progressing or not. Like I said. One step forward, two steps back. Michele In a message dated 4/25/2013 12:00:12 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, jbcowley@rmci.net writes: As I understand it, Temple names are sorted by Reserved - Ordinances are reserved but not printed (gold) Shared - Given to the temple (coral/red) Printed - If the temple prints an ordinance, we cannot take it back to do; if I print it I should have a card (green) Opportunities - (light blue) The program suggests possible names. The incidental user may like this; I believe it is too limited. I'd like to see more extended possibilities show up. I'd also like to see names requiring permission to go to the back of the line. I believe this is progress, not perfect yet, but certainly goes in the right direction. Might prevent re-printing cards unnecessarily. Jerry __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 8267 (20130425) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I liked seeing the progress and knowing that things were not being held up...a prompt for me to check further. All red tells me nothing. Even if I share them, I still feel a responsibility to those persons. And yes, I wondered what happened to all those earlier ones. My list is also much longer than now being shown. This really doesn't help me follow up where there might be problems, especially since I add names on a regular basis. One step forward, two steps back. Michele In a message dated 4/25/2013 11:10:57 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, sjkelsey@msn.com writes: I think the update is better---certainly the colors are much more cheerful and I don't have the feeling I am in the morgue. This is great, but there are a few things which would help. 1) You cannot tell in the printed list which ones are ones you have printed and which ones the temple has printed so it is harder to tell how you are doing and what cards you are supposed to still have. This would help to see if you have lost anyone which you cannot do now. We need to know which ones the temple has printed and which ones we have printed.. 2) Sorting would still be valuable. 3) There is a much lower limit on what is displayed. It would certainly help to know what you actually have in the lists---the number of lines displayed is valuable and helps to see how things are going. NFS displayed in the 5600 to 6200 range of lines. FT now stops in the shared list at about 2600 and I know that I have many more than that. 4) datewise it stops in shared sometime in Feb 2012 and the earlier ones are not displayed at all. Steve Kelsey ----- Original Message ----- From: <JCBrooks@aol.com> To: <LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2013 10:39 AM Subject: [LDS-WC] Shared Temple Ordinances > Well, they "updated" this page AGAIN. > > Now instead of yellow triangles for everyone, I have blood red ordinances > for everyone which according to the legends means "shared." I don't know > if they are printed or waiting any longer. > > At least they added a counter. > > Anyone know what's going on? > > Michele > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

The red squares indicate that those ordinances have been shared for the temple list. If you selected "Share" and then selected all the ordinances you have turned them over to the temple to perform. You can select individual ordinances, such as Initiatories and have those done by the temple and leave the rest on your to do list. Look in the right corner of the temple information for the Legend to see what each color code means. Miles Meyer Jacksonville, FL "Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It's not." - Dr. Seuss, The Lorax On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 12:39 PM, <JCBrooks@aol.com> wrote: > Well, they "updated" this page AGAIN. > > Now instead of yellow triangles for everyone, I have blood red ordinances > for everyone which according to the legends means "shared." I don't know > if they are printed or waiting any longer. > > At least they added a counter. > > Anyone know what's going on? > > Michele > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Thanks! In a message dated 4/25/2013 10:55:24 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, dsam52@sampubco.com writes: Posted question on getsatisfaction site about this all red because I am showing all red 75 endownments at once on shared page, too. They have been fixing a lot of issues we howled about (wiki is a lot closer click-wise and name change from Research Help to Wiki), and so many other stuff including "Watch" being fixed. W. David Samueslen On 4/25/2013 10:39 AM, JCBrooks@aol.com wrote: > Well, they "updated" this page AGAIN. > > Now instead of yellow triangles for everyone, I have blood red ordinances > for everyone which according to the legends means "shared." I don't know > if they are printed or waiting any longer. > > At least they added a counter. > > Anyone know what's going on? > > Michele > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Ron Tanner who is product manager, took notice of this problem and is acting on it now. David Samuelsen On 4/25/2013 1:43 PM, JCBrooks@aol.com wrote: > In not a few cases, we have watched names given to the temple file in > Family Search stalled for some unknown reason. I mean like over a year between > endowment and sealing to parents which is indicative that something is not > right. > > Without a variation in color on the shared list, I can't tell if things are > progressing or not. > > Like I said. One step forward, two steps back. > > Michele >

I have 75 red endowments in Shared which is impossible at once. Something is not right. I asked question about it because they can be recalled by the family to do if still not printed. Red does not tell us one bit. W. David Samuelsen On 4/25/2013 12:58 PM, Jerry Cowley wrote: > As I understand it, Temple names are sorted by > > Reserved - Ordinances are reserved but not printed (gold) > Shared - Given to the temple (coral/red) > Printed - If the temple prints an ordinance, we cannot take it back to do; > if I print it I should have a card (green) > Opportunities - (light blue) The program suggests possible names. The > incidental user may like this; I believe it is too limited. I'd like to see > more extended possibilities show up. I'd also like to see names requiring > permission to go to the back of the line. > > I believe this is progress, not perfect yet, but certainly goes in the right > direction. Might prevent re-printing cards unnecessarily. > > Jerry > > > > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature > database 8267 (20130425) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > http://www.eset.com > > > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

As I understand it, Temple names are sorted by Reserved - Ordinances are reserved but not printed (gold) Shared - Given to the temple (coral/red) Printed - If the temple prints an ordinance, we cannot take it back to do; if I print it I should have a card (green) Opportunities - (light blue) The program suggests possible names. The incidental user may like this; I believe it is too limited. I'd like to see more extended possibilities show up. I'd also like to see names requiring permission to go to the back of the line. I believe this is progress, not perfect yet, but certainly goes in the right direction. Might prevent re-printing cards unnecessarily. Jerry __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 8267 (20130425) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com

Well, they "updated" this page AGAIN. Now instead of yellow triangles for everyone, I have blood red ordinances for everyone which according to the legends means "shared." I don't know if they are printed or waiting any longer. At least they added a counter. Anyone know what's going on? Michele

I think the update is better---certainly the colors are much more cheerful and I don't have the feeling I am in the morgue. This is great, but there are a few things which would help. 1) You cannot tell in the printed list which ones are ones you have printed and which ones the temple has printed so it is harder to tell how you are doing and what cards you are supposed to still have. This would help to see if you have lost anyone which you cannot do now. We need to know which ones the temple has printed and which ones we have printed.. 2) Sorting would still be valuable. 3) There is a much lower limit on what is displayed. It would certainly help to know what you actually have in the lists---the number of lines displayed is valuable and helps to see how things are going. NFS displayed in the 5600 to 6200 range of lines. FT now stops in the shared list at about 2600 and I know that I have many more than that. 4) datewise it stops in shared sometime in Feb 2012 and the earlier ones are not displayed at all. Steve Kelsey ----- Original Message ----- From: <JCBrooks@aol.com> To: <LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2013 10:39 AM Subject: [LDS-WC] Shared Temple Ordinances > Well, they "updated" this page AGAIN. > > Now instead of yellow triangles for everyone, I have blood red ordinances > for everyone which according to the legends means "shared." I don't know > if they are printed or waiting any longer. > > At least they added a counter. > > Anyone know what's going on? > > Michele > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Posted question on getsatisfaction site about this all red because I am showing all red 75 endownments at once on shared page, too. They have been fixing a lot of issues we howled about (wiki is a lot closer click-wise and name change from Research Help to Wiki), and so many other stuff including "Watch" being fixed. W. David Samueslen On 4/25/2013 10:39 AM, JCBrooks@aol.com wrote: > Well, they "updated" this page AGAIN. > > Now instead of yellow triangles for everyone, I have blood red ordinances > for everyone which according to the legends means "shared." I don't know > if they are printed or waiting any longer. > > At least they added a counter. > > Anyone know what's going on? > > Michele > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Being Dane I have a certain opinion on how to do Danish places. IF one use the small village, the farm or other place in the parish other than the part of the parish where the church is situated, it may cause severe confusion for others, so I ALWAYS use the parish name for both birth and christening. North of Copenhagen there is a parish called Søllerød (just to take one with funny Danish letters) - it is a place with 3 villages: Søllerød, Vedbæk and Mårum = Maarum. All 3 have later become parishes in their own right, making it totally confusing. Since there is no ongoing extraction on Denmark - only Indexing of civil marriages (coming close to 70%) - maybe we should just be grateful for past efforts and shortcuts and correct past mistakes to smooth the path for others. Helle Hirschmann Centredirector Slagelse ward Denmark Copenhagen stake -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com] På vegne af Karen Tippets Sendt: 24. april 2013 02:44 Til: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com Emne: Re: [LDS-WC] combining individuals I can't answer for Denmark, but I know that many European countries have several small villages that surround the one that has the local church that everybody goes to. Therefore, unless the record specifies which specific village or farm the family is associated with, the only place that you can give with any certainty is the parish church in which the child was christened. Karen On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 6:42 PM, Steve Kelsey <sjkelsey@msn.com> wrote: > I am now spending probably 90% of my time combining individuals. A > lot of this is caused by extraction. Apparently the rules for Danish > extraction are that the patronymic is ALWAYS used for the child's > surname regardless of whether the father has a surname or not. Most > of the people I deal with are of the upper class who had surnames and > the surnames carry over so because they insist on extracting as > patronyms and others put the name in with the surname, duplication is > always there. Also I note that extraction usually puts in the birth > date WITHOUT any birthplace and then the christening date and > christening place. The birthplace is usually given in the record and > is often the same as the christening place but apparently their rules > say DO NOT PUT IT IN. A little sense with this would be very helpful. > Steve Kelsey > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > -- Finding ancestors is like eating potato chips--you can't stop with just one! Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

-----Original Message----- From: Helle T. Hirschmann Sent: 4/24/2013 1:13 AM To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] combining individuals Being Dane I have a certain opinion on how to do Danish places. IF one use the small village, the farm or other place in the parish other than the part of the parish where the church is situated, it may cause severe confusion for others, so I ALWAYS use the parish name for both birth and christening. North of Copenhagen there is a parish called Søllerød (just to take one with funny Danish letters) - it is a place with 3 villages: Søllerød, Vedbæk and Mårum = Maarum. All 3 have later become parishes in their own right, making it totally confusing. Since there is no ongoing extraction on Denmark - only Indexing of civil marriages (coming close to 70%) - maybe we should just be grateful for past efforts and shortcuts and correct past mistakes to smooth the path for others. Helle Hirschmann Centredirector Slagelse ward Denmark Copenhagen stake -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com] På vegne af Karen Tippets Sendt: 24. april 2013 02:44 Til: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com Emne: Re: [LDS-WC] combining individuals I can't answer for Denmark, but I know that many European countries have several small villages that surround the one that has the local church that everybody goes to. Therefore, unless the record specifies which specific village or farm the family is associated with, the only place that you can give with any certainty is the parish church in which the child was christened. Karen On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 6:42 PM, Steve Kelsey <sjkelsey@msn.com> wrote: > I am now spending probably 90% of my time combining individuals. A > lot of this is caused by extraction. Apparently the rules for Danish > extraction are that the patronymic is ALWAYS used for the child's > surname regardless of whether the father has a surname or not. Most > of the people I deal with are of the upper class who had surnames and > the surnames carry over so because they insist on extracting as > patronyms and others put the name in with the surname, duplication is > always there. Also I note that extraction usually puts in the birth > date WITHOUT any birthplace and then the christening date and > christening place. The birthplace is usually given in the record and > is often the same as the christening place but apparently their rules > say DO NOT PUT IT IN. A little sense with this would be very helpful. > Steve Kelsey > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > -- Finding ancestors is like eating potato chips--you can't stop with just one! Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message