One more thing: We will be receiving notification through regular channels when the change in the ruling is "official". Sue On 2/9/2012 10:07 AM, Sue Maxwell wrote: > I haven't jumped into the discussion because there were so many > conflicting comments going around at Rootstech about the 95/110 rule > change. However, I was in a meeting at the very end of Rootstech with > (Elder) Dennis Brimhall, the new CEO of FamilySearch, and a couple > others. They purposefully have not notified consultants of the change > because the system isn't ready, and the change has not made it through > all levels of approval yet. However, we did talk a bit about it. > > There already is a 110-year-rule where, if the person has no death date > entered, then nFS assumes the person is still living if the birth date > is less than 110 years ago. (This protects someone from trying to do > work for my 103-year-old mother-in-law who IS still living. It does > nothing if someone makes up a death date, however.) > > The current 95-year-rule says you need permission from next of kin even > if you have a death date for a person and the birth date is less than 95 > years ago. The new 110-year-rule will make both rules the same at 110 > years. However, permission will only be required from ONE of the closest > living relatives (current wife, children, parents, siblings - in that > order). This rule change protects those family members who may be the > closest living relative and have chosen not to do the work YET. > > And, now we don't have to stop and think about which rule fits; both > will be 110 years. Bottom line, if you are not the closest living > relative, WAIT or GET PERMISSION. If you are the closest living > relative, the go get the work done. > > Sue > > > On 2/8/2012 10:33 PM, W David Samuelsen wrote: >> 1. long-standing 110 year rule for no death dates, still in effect for >> long time. >> >> 2. Abolished 95/100 year rule for doing family ordinances without >> permission and replaced with stricer 110 year rule. Written permission >> is required before death. I asked this question specifically to clarify >> the new rule. >> >> I can send to anyone who want to see what was presented, in PDF format >> (needs Adobe Reader), contact me direct. Details are laid out. Please >> note the 95 year in pdf had been superseded by decision barely 2 weeks ago. >> >> W. David Samuelsen >> >> -- Sue Maxwell http://granitegenealogy.blogspot.com/ Vice President - Utah Genealogical Association Sandy Utah Granite South Tri-Stake FHC

I haven't jumped into the discussion because there were so many conflicting comments going around at Rootstech about the 95/110 rule change. However, I was in a meeting at the very end of Rootstech with (Elder) Dennis Brimhall, the new CEO of FamilySearch, and a couple others. They purposefully have not notified consultants of the change because the system isn't ready, and the change has not made it through all levels of approval yet. However, we did talk a bit about it. There already is a 110-year-rule where, if the person has no death date entered, then nFS assumes the person is still living if the birth date is less than 110 years ago. (This protects someone from trying to do work for my 103-year-old mother-in-law who IS still living. It does nothing if someone makes up a death date, however.) The current 95-year-rule says you need permission from next of kin even if you have a death date for a person and the birth date is less than 95 years ago. The new 110-year-rule will make both rules the same at 110 years. However, permission will only be required from ONE of the closest living relatives (current wife, children, parents, siblings - in that order). This rule change protects those family members who may be the closest living relative and have chosen not to do the work YET. And, now we don't have to stop and think about which rule fits; both will be 110 years. Bottom line, if you are not the closest living relative, WAIT or GET PERMISSION. If you are the closest living relative, the go get the work done. Sue On 2/8/2012 10:33 PM, W David Samuelsen wrote: > 1. long-standing 110 year rule for no death dates, still in effect for > long time. > > 2. Abolished 95/100 year rule for doing family ordinances without > permission and replaced with stricer 110 year rule. Written permission > is required before death. I asked this question specifically to clarify > the new rule. > > I can send to anyone who want to see what was presented, in PDF format > (needs Adobe Reader), contact me direct. Details are laid out. Please > note the 95 year in pdf had been superseded by decision barely 2 weeks ago. > > W. David Samuelsen > > On 2/8/2012 10:26 PM, [email protected] wrote: >> What do you mean 95 year rule is abolished? >> >> If less than 110 but more than 95 AND you have a death date, can yo udo the >> work? >> >> Or, 110 years period with or without death date? Your comment below was a >> little confusing. >> >> Michele >> >> >> In a message dated 2/8/2012 6:26:38 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, >> [email protected] writes: >> >> they're online already, go to youtube.com >> >> You must have missed those two FamilySearch sessions, no mention of new >> and stricter 110 year rule for doing ordinances for near relatives >> without *written* permission. I was there and asked Amanda Terry to >> clarify of this 110 year rule. That is what she meant and in turn I >> learned from other consultants who said they had problems with those >> patrons flouting the rule of permissions. >> >> Also 95 year rule is abolished and replaced by long-standing rule - 110 >> year rule without death death, no matter what. >> >> Amanda Terry listed 10 points. I will have to ask her for copy if it is >> not in the syllabus. >> >> David S. -- Sue Maxwell http://granitegenealogy.blogspot.com/ Vice President - Utah Genealogical Association Sandy Utah Granite South Tri-Stake FHC

I would try calling or sending feedback to familysearch. I have heard of cases where they could intercede when the person asking is closely related; and the person who reserved the name did not ask permission. Doris Bateman > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 08:16:31 -0800 > Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT Digest, Vol 7, Issue 17 > > So am I interpreting this correctly, that within a month or so, the icon > would appear? And what happens to the ones who are reserved by someone who > has reserved names they should not have reserved, but have not done any of > the Temple work for? They are "reserved," not in progress. > > A relative of an uncle (by marriage only) of one of my mother's other > sisters has reserved her for Temple work. She hasn't even met the 95-year > rule yet, let alone the 110. He offered to release the name for me a couple > of years ago, and I pointed out then that he needed permission of her living > children first, before proceeding. I just checked, and he still has her > reserved. I would hope that by the time he gets around to printing up the > cards that a pop-up appears with this information. However, if it's like > the current method, it can be over-ridden, I expect. > > Alice Allen > Ward Family History Consultant > Oakhurst Ward, Vancouver WA Stake > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Scott and > Tammy Stevenson > Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2012 6:12 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT Digest, Vol 7, Issue 17 > > Re: Clarification of the new 110 years rule as is applies to those "in > progress." > > Just one more little bit of clarification on the 110 year rule for those > persons who already are working on names in that time frame. I ask about > those names I already have "in progress" who now fall within this new rule. > I was told after the class, I think it was by Amanda, that I should keep > those names which were close to the 110 years and do the ordinances once the > 110 years had passed. On those persons with a birth date closer to the 95 > years, she suggested that I "hold" them for about a month and then release > (unreserve) the names back to the nfs system. The one month delay in > releasing would assure the updates were made to the nfs system and those > persons would then appear with the "needs permission" icon with their name. > If those names are released now, they would appear "ready" and those not > aware of the rule change could scoop them up and do the ordinances without > complying with the new rules. > > Tamara Stevenson > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > [email protected] > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] 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 [email protected] > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I would try calling or sending feedback to familysearch. I have heard of cases where they could intercede when the person asking is closely related; and the person who reserved the name did not ask permission. Doris Bateman > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 08:16:31 -0800 > Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT Digest, Vol 7, Issue 17 > > So am I interpreting this correctly, that within a month or so, the icon > would appear? And what happens to the ones who are reserved by someone who > has reserved names they should not have reserved, but have not done any of > the Temple work for? They are "reserved," not in progress. > > A relative of an uncle (by marriage only) of one of my mother's other > sisters has reserved her for Temple work. She hasn't even met the 95-year > rule yet, let alone the 110. He offered to release the name for me a couple > of years ago, and I pointed out then that he needed permission of her living > children first, before proceeding. I just checked, and he still has her > reserved. I would hope that by the time he gets around to printing up the > cards that a pop-up appears with this information. However, if it's like > the current method, it can be over-ridden, I expect. > > Alice Allen > Ward Family History Consultant > Oakhurst Ward, Vancouver WA Stake > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Scott and > Tammy Stevenson > Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2012 6:12 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT Digest, Vol 7, Issue 17 > > Re: Clarification of the new 110 years rule as is applies to those "in > progress." > > Just one more little bit of clarification on the 110 year rule for those > persons who already are working on names in that time frame. I ask about > those names I already have "in progress" who now fall within this new rule. > I was told after the class, I think it was by Amanda, that I should keep > those names which were close to the 110 years and do the ordinances once the > 110 years had passed. On those persons with a birth date closer to the 95 > years, she suggested that I "hold" them for about a month and then release > (unreserve) the names back to the nfs system. The one month delay in > releasing would assure the updates were made to the nfs system and those > persons would then appear with the "needs permission" icon with their name. > If those names are released now, they would appear "ready" and those not > aware of the rule change could scoop them up and do the ordinances without > complying with the new rules. > > Tamara Stevenson > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > [email protected] > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] 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 [email protected] > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Just thought I'd add a few notes from other sessions to this useful list from Dr. Snow: 19. For one-step conversion programs for alphabets, calendars, mathematics, enumeration districts, ZIP codes, and much, much more, see www.stevemorse.org If you ever get a chance to see Steve present, take it. 20. Kory Meyerink discussed the various types of Internet searches: phonetic, wildcard, truncation, Phrase search, Boolean, field searching, limiting, proximity, string, controlled vocabulary, and nesting or grouping. Tips: usually less is more; look for Help; use Advance Search options; think of alternative search terms (what else could this be called?). 21. Ian Testor from Findmypast at BrightSolid talked about the importance of story in research, particularly in motivation. He urged us to explore ethnic myths, legends, and ethnography of the culture being searched. He explained why the use of a celebrity in "Who Do You Think You Are?" motivates so many people. Tip: use alternative records, such as newspapers, dog license databases, and court documents. 22. Dan Lynch, www.danlynch.net taught a couple of hands-on sessions on Google searching. If your FHC has his book, I'd recommend a look through it. Consider searching a particular site type with site:com or site:gov, added to the terms. Find file types with added terms like filetype:ged or filetype:doc. Watched for cached records (usually affiliated with "site not found) by means of those faint arrows). Use a ? after a word to cut off stemming; jump?, not jumped, jumping, etc. Use Google translate. The ~ is replacing the + in searches. 23. The Barefoot Genealogist and Ancestry Ann gave us considerably more than the advertised 5 new things at Ancestry.com. Some tips: look at the "What's happening?" to keep up with changes. To find the card catalog hover the curser over the word Search and follow the bottom option. They have maps. 24. James Tanner, an attorney from Arizona, explained copyright law extremely well in his under-attended presentation. It's a slippery thing, but protects the researcher as well as the author. Item: The Supreme Court recently ruled that the United States must protect foreign copyright. If a book were first copyrighted in Europe, for example, and that copyright has expired in the US, but NOT in its home country, we must consider that it is still copyrighted. Google the Berne Convention of 1886 for more treaty information. The USA signed on two years ago. China never did. 25. Ron Tanner presented FamilyTree in NFS. Here is the information on Open Edit we've been hearing about. Download his notes for more understanding. The goal is nothing less than to document the genealogy of mankind and preserve it for generations to come. 26. Ideas for FHCs include: training and classes as a priority, using off-site training locations, collaborating with local libraries and genealogical associations, and inviting the Spirit of Elijah, among many other things. 27. Top Ten issues in NFS presented by Amanda Terry and Merisa Robbins included invented ancestors, missing data, unchecked GEDCOM submissions, body snatchers, proper name submission, not adding notes, symbols, or numbers in the name field, incorrect combinations, long lists of reserved names, incorrect gender, etc. Do regard a name as sacred. Several instructors mentioned extending the 95 year rule (not submitting persons born in the last xxx years without permission of the closest family member) to a 110 year rule. It will be functioning on the website shortly with a full explanation. We are living longer. As a staff worker once advised me: "Never do the work of someone that someone living may remember, without getting permission." She was referring to collateral line work, not direct line. Getting it in writing is a good thing. File the letter. Do visit the Rootstech website and download the syllabi. If I can do it, just about anyone can. If you plan to go next year (in March), wear sensible shoes and don't carry more than you must. You're on cement for three days. The food vendors are excellent. The workers at the Salt Palace are great. The FamilyHistory staff is dedicated above and beyond. They were all wonderful. Jerry Cowley Boise, Idaho ------------------------------------------------------------------- SOME THINGS I LEARNED AT ROOTSTECH 2012 2-4 Feb 2012, Salt Palace, Salt Lake City, Utah ?2012 by Donald R. Snow These are not in any particular order and are only a few of the things I learned and, undoubtedly, other people learned many other things. This is posted at http://uvtagg.org/classes/dons/dons-classes.html and may be used for any non-profit purpose, newsletter, etc., but please let me know if you do use it. Thanks. [email protected] . 1. The entire RootsTech 2012 syllabus and program schedule is online at http://www.rootstech.org for anyone to look and/or download regardless of whether they attended the meeting or not. Those were posted 2 or 3 weeks before the meeting so attendees could look at and print off what they wanted, but it has also been available to everyone. I think it's a very helpful thing for family history everywhere. 2. The keynote presentations and classes that were in the main lecture room all day long each day, Thursday through Saturday, were streamed live on the website and were recorded. They are now posted there for anyone to watch. Jay Verkler's keynote address on the first day about what's in the future for family history and technology was really spectacular. 3. RootsTech 2013 will be 21-23 Mar 2013, so it will be 6 weeks later in the year than this year's meeting. 4. Ancestry has several new things on their website, including some new search techniques. On their census images they now have a way to put a colored background behind the entire family you want and a different color on the particular line of that family. With that it is much easier to follow the entire census form across the page. They have lots of other new stuff too. See their notes. 5. Dallan Quass of http://www.werelate.org has posted on his website a table of name variants, 200,000 for sunames and 70,000 for given names. These help greatly in genealogy searching. He has already put it into operation on WeRelate and is asking people to fine-tune the list as they do searches, if they see names that shouldn't be in the list or know of others that should be. Anyone can download the table to use themselves. I think Dallan also has a place variant list, but I didn't attend that talk. 6. Someone mentioned that all the talks were being recorded and would be posted along with the PowerPoint slides synchronized, but I didn't hear that officially. 7. The class on Evernote discussed how it can be used for personal and family history uses and that it has some really helpful stuff. Also, there are add-ons for browsers that are helpful for Evernote and many things, e.g. "Clarify" is an add-on that makes text from websites show up with better formatting so it is easier to read and copy and paste. Do Google searches for Clarify for the browser you use. 8. Barbara Renick's 19 pages of notes for her SnagIt workshop are posted and have lots of helpful information. SnagIt is a very useful, but commercial, screen and video capture program. 9. Fold3 http://www.fold3.com says they have the largest collection of U.S. military records on the web. Much of it can be searched and used for free. They had a half-price deal on their subscriptions for RootsTech attendees, but also said that since Ancestry now owns them, that anyone with an Ancestry subscription can get the half-price subscription to Fold3 at anytime. On Fold3 there are Memorial pages set up already for millions of people, e.g. already for everyone in the Social Security Death Index, and you can set up others for free. You can then add data, images, stories, etc., and link to the memorial page from anywhere else, including from (new) FamilySearch. Eventually, FamilySearch will allow us to upload images, etc., but not yet, so this makes a good way to post images and data now and put the link into nFS. 10. There is a beta test of (new) FamilySearch going on right now to add sources and active links into nFS, but you have to be invited. 11. Many of you are aware of the free 9-generation pedigree fan chart that Matt Misbach's TreeSeek company is providing with your FamilySearch data - go to http://www.createfan.com and log in with your LDS account to generate it. You can view it and save off the pdf or have it printed in various ways. Matt told me that you can do free 9-generation fan charts starting with other PID's by going to his http://www.treesee.com , using your LDS account, and entering the starting PID in the box. 12. Darrin Lythgoe has just released version 9 of "The Next Generation" software - http://www.tngsitebuilding.com . It is a commercial program that makes web pages with your genealogy data for posting online, but the web pages can also just be run on your own computer to show your data in various ways. It requires the free PHP which can be installed on your computer using a free download from http://www.wampserver.com/en/ . 13. The Family History Library has a project of scanning FH books that you bring in. See details on http://books.familysearch.org/ and there are already over 40,000 FH books scanned and online there from the FHL, BYU Harold B. Lee Library, Allen County Public Library, Houston Public Library, and others. To have a book scanned you must hold the copyright and give them permission or else it must be out of copyright so it can be posted online. You take the book to the basement of the FHL and they will have it scanned for you in a couple of hours. This is a major resource of FH data. 14. MarkLogic http://www.marklogic.com has a program that organizes and searches large databases that are not in uniform format. It allows many different types of searches and updates the searches as new data is added to the database. It is mainly for very large databases that companies want to be able to search. The software is free and the program is free to use, if the database is smaller than 40 gigs. I haven't tried it yet, but it may be just what I need for the text file database I have made of the personal letter collection of Erastus Snow and his family. We have about 300 family letters and that many more official and Church letters. The transcribed personal letter collection alone is several hundred single-spaced typed pages with combined file size of several gigs. I am anxious to learn how to use the program to see if it is a good search tool for such a database. It has proximity and other types of searches. 15. The website http://www.geni.com/ claims to be the world's largest family tree with 61 million profiles (names). They have a basic plan that is free and two higher commercial levels which have more features. Some of their information is free and they have projects that people are posting such as about the Mormon Battalion, the Nauvoo Legion, Early Mormon Pioneers, early Mormon leaders, and many others. You can upload GEDCOM's, photos, and documents, and they have a facial recognition program that when you identify an ancestor in a photo it searches the rest of your photos to see if it can find other photos with that person. There is a way that libraries and organizations can sign up so their members can use the Geni Public Access program free - see http://www.geni.com/corp/geni-public-access-program/ - but I don't know what that includes. 16. Family history consultants could attend certain classes for free and those were all recorded and will be posted online at the Consultants Training website. The schedule of FH Consultant talks is at http://rootstech.org/trainingschedule and I think the Consultant website where the notes and videos will be posted is https://www.familysearch.org/consultant/ . 17. There was lots of information at the conference on mobile apps for FH with entire classes on apps for iPads, etc. 18. FamilySearch is looking for lots of volunteers to index the 1940 U.S. Census as soon as it is released on 2 Apr 2012. They estimate that it will take several months to do the indexing and are encouraging people to sign up at https://familysearch.org/1940Census . There are already sites that help you find the 1940 Enumeration District, if you know the address, so you can find your people before the index is complete. One of the talks was by Steve Morse who has written about 200 "One-Step" programs to search various websites or do various genealogy tasks, one of which is how to find the 1940 Census Enumeration Districts - see http://stevemorse.org/ . I learned lots more than this, but this is a start. It was a good conference with something for everyone and we appreciate FamilySearch, BYU, and all the other sponsors spending their time, money, and efforts for us. Don Snow -- Dr. Donald R. Snow, Retired Professor of Mathematics, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah - [email protected] __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6871 (20120209) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com

So am I interpreting this correctly, that within a month or so, the icon would appear? And what happens to the ones who are reserved by someone who has reserved names they should not have reserved, but have not done any of the Temple work for? They are "reserved," not in progress. A relative of an uncle (by marriage only) of one of my mother's other sisters has reserved her for Temple work. She hasn't even met the 95-year rule yet, let alone the 110. He offered to release the name for me a couple of years ago, and I pointed out then that he needed permission of her living children first, before proceeding. I just checked, and he still has her reserved. I would hope that by the time he gets around to printing up the cards that a pop-up appears with this information. However, if it's like the current method, it can be over-ridden, I expect. Alice Allen Ward Family History Consultant Oakhurst Ward, Vancouver WA Stake -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Scott and Tammy Stevenson Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2012 6:12 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT Digest, Vol 7, Issue 17 Re: Clarification of the new 110 years rule as is applies to those "in progress." Just one more little bit of clarification on the 110 year rule for those persons who already are working on names in that time frame. I ask about those names I already have "in progress" who now fall within this new rule. I was told after the class, I think it was by Amanda, that I should keep those names which were close to the 110 years and do the ordinances once the 110 years had passed. On those persons with a birth date closer to the 95 years, she suggested that I "hold" them for about a month and then release (unreserve) the names back to the nfs system. The one month delay in releasing would assure the updates were made to the nfs system and those persons would then appear with the "needs permission" icon with their name. If those names are released now, they would appear "ready" and those not aware of the rule change could scoop them up and do the ordinances without complying with the new rules. Tamara Stevenson ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to [email protected] ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Re: Clarification of the new 110 years rule as is applies to those "in progress." Just one more little bit of clarification on the 110 year rule for those persons who already are working on names in that time frame. I ask about those names I already have "in progress" who now fall within this new rule. I was told after the class, I think it was by Amanda, that I should keep those names which were close to the 110 years and do the ordinances once the 110 years had passed. On those persons with a birth date closer to the 95 years, she suggested that I "hold" them for about a month and then release (unreserve) the names back to the nfs system. The one month delay in releasing would assure the updates were made to the nfs system and those persons would then appear with the "needs permission" icon with their name. If those names are released now, they would appear "ready" and those not aware of the rule change could scoop them up and do the ordinances without complying with the new rules. Tamara Stevenson ----------------------------------------------------------------------

What do you mean 95 year rule is abolished? If less than 110 but more than 95 AND you have a death date, can yo udo the work? Or, 110 years period with or without death date? Your comment below was a little confusing. Michele In a message dated 2/8/2012 6:26:38 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected] writes: they're online already, go to youtube.com You must have missed those two FamilySearch sessions, no mention of new and stricter 110 year rule for doing ordinances for near relatives without *written* permission. I was there and asked Amanda Terry to clarify of this 110 year rule. That is what she meant and in turn I learned from other consultants who said they had problems with those patrons flouting the rule of permissions. Also 95 year rule is abolished and replaced by long-standing rule - 110 year rule without death death, no matter what. Amanda Terry listed 10 points. I will have to ask her for copy if it is not in the syllabus. David S. On 2/7/2012 2:33 AM, Donald R. Snow wrote: > 6. Someone mentioned that all the talks were being recorded and would > be posted along with the PowerPoint slides synchronized, but I didn't > hear that officially. Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to [email protected] ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

1. long-standing 110 year rule for no death dates, still in effect for long time. 2. Abolished 95/100 year rule for doing family ordinances without permission and replaced with stricer 110 year rule. Written permission is required before death. I asked this question specifically to clarify the new rule. I can send to anyone who want to see what was presented, in PDF format (needs Adobe Reader), contact me direct. Details are laid out. Please note the 95 year in pdf had been superseded by decision barely 2 weeks ago. W. David Samuelsen On 2/8/2012 10:26 PM, [email protected] wrote: > What do you mean 95 year rule is abolished? > > If less than 110 but more than 95 AND you have a death date, can yo udo the > work? > > Or, 110 years period with or without death date? Your comment below was a > little confusing. > > Michele > > > In a message dated 2/8/2012 6:26:38 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, > [email protected] writes: > > they're online already, go to youtube.com > > You must have missed those two FamilySearch sessions, no mention of new > and stricter 110 year rule for doing ordinances for near relatives > without *written* permission. I was there and asked Amanda Terry to > clarify of this 110 year rule. That is what she meant and in turn I > learned from other consultants who said they had problems with those > patrons flouting the rule of permissions. > > Also 95 year rule is abolished and replaced by long-standing rule - 110 > year rule without death death, no matter what. > > Amanda Terry listed 10 points. I will have to ask her for copy if it is > not in the syllabus. > > David S. > > On 2/7/2012 2:33 AM, Donald R. Snow wrote: >> 6. Someone mentioned that all the talks were being recorded and would >> be posted along with the PowerPoint slides synchronized, but I didn't >> hear that officially. > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > [email protected] > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] 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 [email protected] > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

they're online already, go to youtube.com You must have missed those two FamilySearch sessions, no mention of new and stricter 110 year rule for doing ordinances for near relatives without *written* permission. I was there and asked Amanda Terry to clarify of this 110 year rule. That is what she meant and in turn I learned from other consultants who said they had problems with those patrons flouting the rule of permissions. Also 95 year rule is abolished and replaced by long-standing rule - 110 year rule without death death, no matter what. Amanda Terry listed 10 points. I will have to ask her for copy if it is not in the syllabus. David S. On 2/7/2012 2:33 AM, Donald R. Snow wrote: > 6. Someone mentioned that all the talks were being recorded and would > be posted along with the PowerPoint slides synchronized, but I didn't > hear that officially.

SOME THINGS I LEARNED AT ROOTSTECH 2012 2-4 Feb 2012, Salt Palace, Salt Lake City, Utah ©2012 by Donald R. Snow These are not in any particular order and are only a few of the things I learned and, undoubtedly, other people learned many other things. This is posted at http://uvtagg.org/classes/dons/dons-classes.html and may be used for any non-profit purpose, newsletter, etc., but please let me know if you do use it. Thanks. [email protected] . 1. The entire RootsTech 2012 syllabus and program schedule is online at http://www.rootstech.org for anyone to look and/or download regardless of whether they attended the meeting or not. Those were posted 2 or 3 weeks before the meeting so attendees could look at and print off what they wanted, but it has also been available to everyone. I think it's a very helpful thing for family history everywhere. 2. The keynote presentations and classes that were in the main lecture room all day long each day, Thursday through Saturday, were streamed live on the website and were recorded. They are now posted there for anyone to watch. Jay Verkler's keynote address on the first day about what's in the future for family history and technology was really spectacular. 3. RootsTech 2013 will be 21-23 Mar 2013, so it will be 6 weeks later in the year than this year's meeting. 4. Ancestry has several new things on their website, including some new search techniques. On their census images they now have a way to put a colored background behind the entire family you want and a different color on the particular line of that family. With that it is much easier to follow the entire census form across the page. They have lots of other new stuff too. See their notes. 5. Dallan Quass of http://www.werelate.org has posted on his website a table of name variants, 200,000 for sunames and 70,000 for given names. These help greatly in genealogy searching. He has already put it into operation on WeRelate and is asking people to fine-tune the list as they do searches, if they see names that shouldn't be in the list or know of others that should be. Anyone can download the table to use themselves. I think Dallan also has a place variant list, but I didn't attend that talk. 6. Someone mentioned that all the talks were being recorded and would be posted along with the PowerPoint slides synchronized, but I didn't hear that officially. 7. The class on Evernote discussed how it can be used for personal and family history uses and that it has some really helpful stuff. Also, there are add-ons for browsers that are helpful for Evernote and many things, e.g. "Clarify" is an add-on that makes text from websites show up with better formatting so it is easier to read and copy and paste. Do Google searches for Clarify for the browser you use. 8. Barbara Renick's 19 pages of notes for her SnagIt workshop are posted and have lots of helpful information. SnagIt is a very useful, but commercial, screen and video capture program. 9. Fold3 http://www.fold3.com says they have the largest collection of U.S. military records on the web. Much of it can be searched and used for free. They had a half-price deal on their subscriptions for RootsTech attendees, but also said that since Ancestry now owns them, that anyone with an Ancestry subscription can get the half-price subscription to Fold3 at anytime. On Fold3 there are Memorial pages set up already for millions of people, e.g. already for everyone in the Social Security Death Index, and you can set up others for free. You can then add data, images, stories, etc., and link to the memorial page from anywhere else, including from (new) FamilySearch. Eventually, FamilySearch will allow us to upload images, etc., but not yet, so this makes a good way to post images and data now and put the link into nFS. 10. There is a beta test of (new) FamilySearch going on right now to add sources and active links into nFS, but you have to be invited. 11. Many of you are aware of the free 9-generation pedigree fan chart that Matt Misbach's TreeSeek company is providing with your FamilySearch data - go to http://www.createfan.com and log in with your LDS account to generate it. You can view it and save off the pdf or have it printed in various ways. Matt told me that you can do free 9-generation fan charts starting with other PID's by going to his http://www.treesee.com , using your LDS account, and entering the starting PID in the box. 12. Darrin Lythgoe has just released version 9 of "The Next Generation" software - http://www.tngsitebuilding.com . It is a commercial program that makes web pages with your genealogy data for posting online, but the web pages can also just be run on your own computer to show your data in various ways. It requires the free PHP which can be installed on your computer using a free download from http://www.wampserver.com/en/ . 13. The Family History Library has a project of scanning FH books that you bring in. See details on http://books.familysearch.org/ and there are already over 40,000 FH books scanned and online there from the FHL, BYU Harold B. Lee Library, Allen County Public Library, Houston Public Library, and others. To have a book scanned you must hold the copyright and give them permission or else it must be out of copyright so it can be posted online. You take the book to the basement of the FHL and they will have it scanned for you in a couple of hours. This is a major resource of FH data. 14. MarkLogic http://www.marklogic.com has a program that organizes and searches large databases that are not in uniform format. It allows many different types of searches and updates the searches as new data is added to the database. It is mainly for very large databases that companies want to be able to search. The software is free and the program is free to use, if the database is smaller than 40 gigs. I haven't tried it yet, but it may be just what I need for the text file database I have made of the personal letter collection of Erastus Snow and his family. We have about 300 family letters and that many more official and Church letters. The transcribed personal letter collection alone is several hundred single-spaced typed pages with combined file size of several gigs. I am anxious to learn how to use the program to see if it is a good search tool for such a database. It has proximity and other types of searches. 15. The website http://www.geni.com/ claims to be the world's largest family tree with 61 million profiles (names). They have a basic plan that is free and two higher commercial levels which have more features. Some of their information is free and they have projects that people are posting such as about the Mormon Battalion, the Nauvoo Legion, Early Mormon Pioneers, early Mormon leaders, and many others. You can upload GEDCOM's, photos, and documents, and they have a facial recognition program that when you identify an ancestor in a photo it searches the rest of your photos to see if it can find other photos with that person. There is a way that libraries and organizations can sign up so their members can use the Geni Public Access program free - see http://www.geni.com/corp/geni-public-access-program/ - but I don't know what that includes. 16. Family history consultants could attend certain classes for free and those were all recorded and will be posted online at the Consultants Training website. The schedule of FH Consultant talks is at http://rootstech.org/trainingschedule and I think the Consultant website where the notes and videos will be posted is https://www.familysearch.org/consultant/ . 17. There was lots of information at the conference on mobile apps for FH with entire classes on apps for iPads, etc. 18. FamilySearch is looking for lots of volunteers to index the 1940 U.S. Census as soon as it is released on 2 Apr 2012. They estimate that it will take several months to do the indexing and are encouraging people to sign up at https://familysearch.org/1940Census . There are already sites that help you find the 1940 Enumeration District, if you know the address, so you can find your people before the index is complete. One of the talks was by Steve Morse who has written about 200 "One-Step" programs to search various websites or do various genealogy tasks, one of which is how to find the 1940 Census Enumeration Districts - see http://stevemorse.org/ . I learned lots more than this, but this is a start. It was a good conference with something for everyone and we appreciate FamilySearch, BYU, and all the other sponsors spending their time, money, and efforts for us. Don Snow -- Dr. Donald R. Snow, Retired Professor of Mathematics, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah - [email protected]

Peter, My personal experience is that if one fasts and prays about what to say that will touch their hearts, you will gain the permission you need. Nancy Scott -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Peter Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2012 03:14 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [LDS-WC] Temple work permission letter Good afternoon, a sister in our ward needs to send a letter to the widow of her brother to get permission to do temple ordinances for him. This sister is the only church member. And her parents are deceased. Would any of you have a sort of template or sample letter to give her a start with what to write to her? -- Groetjes Peter http://familyrecordfinder.com/ Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to [email protected] ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I agree that fasting and prayer is very helpful. I found some half siblings about a year ago and one of them had passed away. I prayed much before sending off a note to the woman who was his wife before he died (she had since remarried) which basically said: "I guess you know that I am Kenneth's half sister. It has been fun for me to get to know my long lost family. I just wish I would have known Kenneth before he died. Everyone says what a good man he was. I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints also know as Mormons. I would like to ask your permission to submit Kenneth's name to the Temple. In the Temple we perform sacred ordinances for our loved ones who have passed away. It would be my gift to him, and I would be honored. I will respect whatever you say with no hard feelings. Thank you, Cindy" She was sweet and gave me her blessing. I also said much the same thing to the wife of a cousin over the phone and she also gave her permission. I think we don't need to go into detail and I think the word ordinance is better to use that mentioning baptism. This is just been my experience. I wish her the best. Cindy Price On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Peter <[email protected]> wrote: > Good afternoon, > a sister in our ward needs to send a letter to the widow of > her brother to get permission to do temple ordinances for him. > This sister is the only church member. And her parents are > deceased. > > Would any of you have a sort of template or sample letter to > give her a start with what to write to her? > > -- > Groetjes > Peter > http://familyrecordfinder.com/ > > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > [email protected] > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Good afternoon, a sister in our ward needs to send a letter to the widow of her brother to get permission to do temple ordinances for him. This sister is the only church member. And her parents are deceased. Would any of you have a sort of template or sample letter to give her a start with what to write to her? -- Groetjes Peter http://familyrecordfinder.com/

I have been able to separate merged records to remove the wrong information from my records.  It is fairly simple, just pull up all the merged records on your file and you can see which one is wrong and separate it out.  I would have to be in the record to tell you the exact steps, but it can be done, because I have done it. BettyJo Colbert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nancy Scott" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Friday, January 20, 2012 1:40:28 PM Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] Wrong Parents Showing in nFS Sorry,  I looked at this again and realize that he will not be able to delete the individuals anyway. Nancy -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Nancy Scott Sent: Friday, January 20, 2012 04:33 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [LDS-WC] Wrong Parents Showing in nFS I have been helping a newly called consultant with his family tree in nFS. In searching for duplicates back in December we found an extraction Texas birth record that clearly was his relative that showed completely different parents so we combined the records.  We could not determine so sure if the parents were incorrect or not from the extraction record alone.    I believe that he had gotten the other information from a distant relative who was researching the family lines but had accepted it without verifying if it was indeed correct.   In desperation, I ordered the Social Security Application of the ancestor. This confirmed that the parents indicated in the birth record were indeed the correct ones.   Now that we have 2 records at different time periods confirming the parents, I am wondering how is the best way to remove the parents that are incorrect. I have attempted, in the past, to delete an individual as the contributor and seen records done that  just end up as PIDs with unknown data.   This does not seem like a great solution.   The PID for the ancestor is:  LCY9-L49, Casimer Cybulski.  He currently has 2 sets of parents with John Cybulski and Agnes Mikowaizak being the incorrect set.  Should he just attempt to separate these individuals from the family and leave them in the system?   I am hoping someone in the group has seen this problem before and knows the best solution.   Thanks so much.   Nancy Scott Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to [email protected] ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] 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 [email protected] ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

On 20-Jan-2012 02:32 PM, Nancy Scott wrote: > I have been helping a newly called consultant with his family tree in nFS. > In searching for duplicates back in December we found an extraction Texas > birth record that clearly was his relative that showed completely different > parents so we combined the records. We could not determine so sure if the > parents were incorrect or not from the extraction record alone. I believe > that he had gotten the other information from a distant relative who was > researching the family lines but had accepted it without verifying if it was > indeed correct. > > In desperation, I ordered the Social Security Application of the ancestor. > This confirmed that the parents indicated in the birth record were indeed > the correct ones. > > Now that we have 2 records at different time periods confirming the parents, > I am wondering how is the best way to remove the parents that are incorrect. > I have attempted, in the past, to delete an individual as the contributor > and seen records done that just end up as PIDs with unknown data. This > does not seem like a great solution. > > The PID for the ancestor is: LCY9-L49, Casimer Cybulski. He currently has > 2 sets of parents with John Cybulski and Agnes Mikowaizak being the > incorrect set. Should he just attempt to separate these individuals from > the family and leave them in the system? > > I am hoping someone in the group has seen this problem before and knows the > best solution. Hi Nancy, I saw your follow up message, but just in case you are not aware on how to proceed. If you look under "View relationship details" you will see the contributor of the incorrect parents is cybulskitimothy1 If this is the patron you are helping, he can delete it, if not you need to contact this Tim Cybulski and ask him to make the correction. Hope this will help you fix the problem. -- Groetjes Peter http://familyrecordfinder.com/ I am not 50 something, I'm 49.95 plus shipping and handling

Sorry, I looked at this again and realize that he will not be able to delete the individuals anyway. Nancy -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Nancy Scott Sent: Friday, January 20, 2012 04:33 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [LDS-WC] Wrong Parents Showing in nFS I have been helping a newly called consultant with his family tree in nFS. In searching for duplicates back in December we found an extraction Texas birth record that clearly was his relative that showed completely different parents so we combined the records. We could not determine so sure if the parents were incorrect or not from the extraction record alone. I believe that he had gotten the other information from a distant relative who was researching the family lines but had accepted it without verifying if it was indeed correct. In desperation, I ordered the Social Security Application of the ancestor. This confirmed that the parents indicated in the birth record were indeed the correct ones. Now that we have 2 records at different time periods confirming the parents, I am wondering how is the best way to remove the parents that are incorrect. I have attempted, in the past, to delete an individual as the contributor and seen records done that just end up as PIDs with unknown data. This does not seem like a great solution. The PID for the ancestor is: LCY9-L49, Casimer Cybulski. He currently has 2 sets of parents with John Cybulski and Agnes Mikowaizak being the incorrect set. Should he just attempt to separate these individuals from the family and leave them in the system? I am hoping someone in the group has seen this problem before and knows the best solution. Thanks so much. Nancy Scott Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to [email protected] ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I have been helping a newly called consultant with his family tree in nFS. In searching for duplicates back in December we found an extraction Texas birth record that clearly was his relative that showed completely different parents so we combined the records. We could not determine so sure if the parents were incorrect or not from the extraction record alone. I believe that he had gotten the other information from a distant relative who was researching the family lines but had accepted it without verifying if it was indeed correct. In desperation, I ordered the Social Security Application of the ancestor. This confirmed that the parents indicated in the birth record were indeed the correct ones. Now that we have 2 records at different time periods confirming the parents, I am wondering how is the best way to remove the parents that are incorrect. I have attempted, in the past, to delete an individual as the contributor and seen records done that just end up as PIDs with unknown data. This does not seem like a great solution. The PID for the ancestor is: LCY9-L49, Casimer Cybulski. He currently has 2 sets of parents with John Cybulski and Agnes Mikowaizak being the incorrect set. Should he just attempt to separate these individuals from the family and leave them in the system? I am hoping someone in the group has seen this problem before and knows the best solution. Thanks so much. Nancy Scott

If Pakistan only came into existence under that name in 1947, you need to do a bit of research to use the correct name of the country at the time the event occurred. It may make a major difference about pulling it up or not. I have people born pre 1850 in Union county TN's current land area, but it was one of several other counties up until 1850. It makes a difference which censuses they appear in, what county the land records were in, where the marriages are located, etc. Land records would have been transferred to the new county, but they wouldn't have bothered with such things as the marriage records, and probably a number of other non-current records. I suspect that to a certain extend the same is true for this situation. I would warrant that a call to Salt Lake is in order, if for no other reason than accessing family records. I suspect that since Pakistan is largely Muslim, that may have a great deal to do with what records the folks in SL make readily viewable on NFS. It is a sensitive subject to both Muslims and Jews, as well as some Christian sects, which really makes it important that we respect the rules that the Church has set up for doing the Temple work. If we ourselves don't have relatives in the near East, keep our hands off of doing the submission work ourselves, though by all means, assist members who may have relatives over there to collect the necessary information so that they can see that it gets done for THEIR families. If it isn't our family, it's not ours to submit. (Yes there's always extenuating circumstances, such as a nearly blind sister in our ward, who doesn't see well enough to do the computer entry work for Temple submissions, but she CAN sit by someone and give the direction as to who she wants entered.) Karen On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Nancy Scott <[email protected]> wrote: > Am wondering if there are any ideas from the group about a paternal > grandfather of a newly called consultant in my Ward. > > > > Her mother, who is the Contributor, is able to view the record but we are > not able to find the record or bring it in to her pedigree. > > > > She got the exact data from her mother including the PID for her paternal > grandfather but when you put in the PID, it comes up with "Unknown" for the > person with ordinances "Not Available". > > > > Her grandfather was born in India in 1898 and died in Pakistan in 1976 so > one thought I had was that it could be a restricted area and therefore not > show up. The wife of the grandfather who was born in India shows up in nFS > but she died in the US. Children of the couple are with the grandmother > who > were born in India and died as infants can be viewed so she does not feel > likely that the problem is related to a restricted area. The grandfather > does not show up with the grandmother and children even though they have > been sealed according to her mother who is the Contributor. > > > > Guess that Pakistan only came into existence about 1947 but not sure that > makes any difference. > > > > She certainly can call FamilySearch Support but I do not believe that she > has yet. > > > > I am still wondering why we can't pull him into her line. Guess that there > is no such thing as a list of the restricted areas. > > > > Thanks for any thoughts if you have had experience with this sort of > problem. > > > > Nancy Scott > > > > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > [email protected] > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] 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!

The topic of restricted areas and New FamilySearch has interested me for a while.   My friend has Greek heritage but those Greek ancestors lived in Turkey for a generation or more. We had to send in the submission to Salt Lake City on a diskette. This was a couple of years ago but this was required and is still the necessary procedure.   I read the articles about restricted areas in the Help Center a few weeks ago. The Church does not want to publish a list of the restricted areas. The ordinances are valid even though they are not "seen" in NFS.   Another thought came to mind, the grandfather's birthbplace of India may not be triggering the situation but instead it is the death place of Pakistan.   I would suggest that your friend telephone the NFS support and ask to be transferred to the restricted localities office.   We need to take these situations directly to NFS support and not spend a lot of time worrying and wondering.   The grandmother and her children who died young do not have Pakistan in their geographical places so they show up.   Support can help this new consultant rectify the situation and I would enjoy her to call them.   This is very exciting to read how the gospel is spreading to all parts of the world. I love to read these stories and know the members doing these ordinances are true pioneers in those localities.   Let us know what you discover about the situation.   Mary Scott Northville Ward Westland Michigan Stake   Detroit Michigan Temple   ________________________________ From: Nancy Scott <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 4:33 PM Subject: [LDS-WC] Finding/Linking Paternal Grandfather Am wondering if there are any ideas from the group about a paternal grandfather of a newly called consultant in my Ward. Her mother, who is the Contributor,  is able to view the record but we are not able to find the record or bring it in to her pedigree. She got the exact data from her mother including the PID for her paternal grandfather but when you put in the PID, it comes up with "Unknown" for the person with ordinances "Not Available". Her grandfather was born in India in 1898 and died in Pakistan in 1976 so one thought I had was that it could be a restricted area and therefore not show up.  The wife of the grandfather who was born in India shows up in nFS but she died in the US.  Children of the couple are with the grandmother who were born in India and died as infants can be viewed so she does not feel likely that the problem is related to a restricted area.  The grandfather does not show up with the grandmother and children even though they have been sealed according to her mother who is the Contributor. Guess that Pakistan only came into existence about 1947 but not sure that makes any difference. She certainly can call FamilySearch Support but I do not believe that she has yet. I am still wondering why we can't pull him into her line.  Guess that there is no such thing as a list of the restricted areas. Thanks for any thoughts if you have had experience with this sort of problem. Nancy Scott Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to [email protected] ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message