JCBrooks@aol.com wrote: > Three years is a LONG time, but I do know that when names were submitted > originally through TempleReady but completed in NFS temples that there is at > least a 6 months lag between the work showing on the IGI and on NFS. I don't agree. It's less than 1 month except for the Far East region. > > It seems like a no-brainer to me that the IGI should update regularly to > NFS (especially considering the volumes of temple work done in those Utah > temples)..but it must be more difficult than we understand to do so. Or > maybe they are waiting to bring everyone online and then just update the whole > thing at once. Not anymore and they aren't going to do that. Directive came down to check FamilyTree for latest ordinances with IGI being phased out. I checked my submissions, and they showed up with dates in nFS > > In the mean time we are still duplicating work.....just like the bad > decision to keep TempleReady comparing names to a 1999/2000 database. Ugh. TempleReady is being phased out at Family History Library. Any submissions that were prepared at Family History centers or from home, are being forced to be converted to FORs before the cards can be printed. David Samuelsen

We have had some errors in Manhattan Temple but they have been corrected. Barbi ----- Original Message ----- From: amy griffin To: LDS Ward Consultants Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 9:14 PM Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] ordinances done in order Michele wrote: How many of you temple workers have had a card go through endowment only to realize (in spite of all the checking) that the initiatory wasn't done? At our meeting Saturday morning, before our shift at the Mesa Temple, we were told that three cards just in one week got all the way to the veil without the initiatory being done, despite the amount of times it was suppose to have been checked. I personally have caught at least one that did not have the initiatory done and brought it to the patrons' attention. Amy Griffin 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

Three years is a LONG time, but I do know that when names were submitted originally through TempleReady but completed in NFS temples that there is at least a 6 months lag between the work showing on the IGI and on NFS. It seems like a no-brainer to me that the IGI should update regularly to NFS (especially considering the volumes of temple work done in those Utah temples)..but it must be more difficult than we understand to do so. Or maybe they are waiting to bring everyone online and then just update the whole thing at once. In the mean time we are still duplicating work.....just like the bad decision to keep TempleReady comparing names to a 1999/2000 database. Ugh. Perhaps by 2020 it will all seem like ancient history, we won't be duplicating any more and it will be humming along nicely. We can only hope. Michele In a message dated 6/17/2009 4:45:40 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, jncrandell@broadweave.net writes: The following is what I received today from FS Support in response to my question about three child to parent sealings that were performed in the Provo Temple two years ago and are still not showing in nFS. "Thank you for contacting FamilySearch Support regarding the three names for which you had sealing to parents ordinances performed in the Provo Temple. Thanks for including your personal information and the information on your three ancestors. We were able to sign in to nFS as a helper and verify that in fact all three names listed as "in progress" for the sealing to parent ordinances. We then checked the IGI index through FamilySearch and we were able to document that all three persons were sealed to their parents at the Provo Temple on the date that you gave. We then returned to nFS and searched for possible duplicates that could be combined for each of your three ancestors, and found nothing even close. "We are attaching knowledge document 102519 which gives further details about this process. Click anywhere on the blue link below for a document that answers your question. "We are dispatching your case to Data Quality at Church Headquarters for their review. Hopefully, in the near future, they will be able to review your situation, and hopefully offer a satisfactory resolution. "Document Links: Ordinances <https://help.familysearch.org/publishing/466/102519_f.SAL_Member.html> show in the International Genealogical Index (IGI), but they do not show, or they show as "Ready," in the new FamilySearch after combining data" The document link doesn't give anything further on my particular situation. This has to be resolved by the data quality people. This is what I was referring to earlier when I said that they use our feedback to find glitches and missing chunks in the system. I'll continue to wait. Hope this is helpful to others as well. Jill Crandell 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 **************Dell Days of Deals! June 15-24 - A New Deal Everyday! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222865043x1201494942/aol?redir=http:%2F%2F ad.doubleclick.net%2Fclk%3B215692145%3B38015538%3Bh)

I have done temple work and not had it recorded in nfs. I have been asked to scan a copy of the temple name card and forward it to nfs help people and they have corrected it on nfs. Also, a while back I mentioned on the list that in my temple ordinances reserved list on nfs, I get an error message and cannot view the list (I can on family tree). The response I got after three tries from SL was that engineering was aware of this and working on the problem. I am assuming that I cannot get corrections on that list until this problem is resolved. Gay Davis ----- Original Message ----- From: Jill N. Crandell To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 4:18 PM Subject: [LDS-WC] Completed ordinances that are unrecorded in NFS The following is what I received today from FS Support in response to my question about three child to parent sealings that were performed in the Provo Temple two years ago and are still not showing in nFS. "Thank you for contacting FamilySearch Support regarding the three names for which you had sealing to parents ordinances performed in the Provo Temple. Thanks for including your personal information and the information on your three ancestors. We were able to sign in to nFS as a helper and verify that in fact all three names listed as "in progress" for the sealing to parent ordinances. We then checked the IGI index through FamilySearch and we were able to document that all three persons were sealed to their parents at the Provo Temple on the date that you gave. We then returned to nFS and searched for possible duplicates that could be combined for each of your three ancestors, and found nothing even close. "We are attaching knowledge document 102519 which gives further details about this process. Click anywhere on the blue link below for a document that answers your question. "We are dispatching your case to Data Quality at Church Headquarters for their review. Hopefully, in the near future, they will be able to review your situation, and hopefully offer a satisfactory resolution. "Document Links: Ordinances <https://help.familysearch.org/publishing/466/102519_f.SAL_Member.html> show in the International Genealogical Index (IGI), but they do not show, or they show as "Ready," in the new FamilySearch after combining data" The document link doesn't give anything further on my particular situation. This has to be resolved by the data quality people. This is what I was referring to earlier when I said that they use our feedback to find glitches and missing chunks in the system. I'll continue to wait. Hope this is helpful to others as well. Jill Crandell 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

Would the help desk be able to free up at least the grandparents' names? It seems to me that it would be easy to document that she is more closely related than JSBerry. Paula On Jun 17, 2009, at 7:36 PM, Sahara346@aol.com wrote: > We have no idea from what we've been able to figure out. The > membership > office doesn't have a clue as to who it is, or says they don't. > And in the > meantime, they've got the names held up (and it isn't just her > grandparents, but others as well. > > Karen > > > In a message dated 6/17/2009 12:04:55 P.M. Central Daylight Time, > jncrandell@broadweave.net writes: > > Karen wrote: > My friend even wrote to the membership office in Salt Lake to try to > forward a letter to whoever this JSBerry is, and they couldn't help > figure > out who it is. > > Karen, > I remember this conversation from earlier, but I can't remember the > details. > Is this a person who is on the NFS system and there is no contact > information available? Or, is this someone who could be in Utah or > Idaho > who > doesn't have access to the system yet? > > Jill Crandell > > 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 > > > **************Dell Days of Deals! June 15-24 - A New Deal Everyday! > (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222865043x1201494942/aol?redir=http:%2F%2F > ad.doubleclick.net%2Fclk%3B215692145%3B38015538%3Bh) > > 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

But in cases where you have cards that were originally processed in TempleReady then taken to a Temple with NFS, they show up immediately in NFS and show on the IGI as cleared - so there is no problem with duplicates. If you're checking for those names in NFS, the ordinances are done, and if you check them on the IGI, they are cleared so you wouldn't redo them, I hope. I can see why there is no hurry at this point to update the IGI since it's getting closer to having everyone on - and I hope it's really soon for those who aren't. Jill's problem is a little different. Those ordinances seem to have gotten lost in the system, but thankfully that's not the usual case. Megan Smith ----- Original Message ----- From: <JCBrooks@aol.com> To: <lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 5:44 PM Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] Completed ordinances that are unrecorded in NFS > Three years is a LONG time, but I do know that when names were submitted > originally through TempleReady but completed in NFS temples that there is > at > least a 6 months lag between the work showing on the IGI and on NFS. > > It seems like a no-brainer to me that the IGI should update regularly to > NFS (especially considering the volumes of temple work done in those Utah > temples)..but it must be more difficult than we understand to do so. Or > maybe they are waiting to bring everyone online and then just update the > whole > thing at once. > > In the mean time we are still duplicating work.....just like the bad > decision to keep TempleReady comparing names to a 1999/2000 database. > Ugh. > > Perhaps by 2020 it will all seem like ancient history, we won't be > duplicating any more and it will be humming along nicely. We can only > hope. > > Michele > > > In a message dated 6/17/2009 4:45:40 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > jncrandell@broadweave.net writes: > > The following is what I received today from FS Support in response to my > question about three child to parent sealings that were performed in the > Provo Temple two years ago and are still not showing in nFS. > > "Thank you for contacting FamilySearch Support regarding the three names > for > which you had sealing to parents ordinances performed in the Provo > Temple. > Thanks for including your personal information and the information on > your > three ancestors. We were able to sign in to nFS as a helper and verify > that > in fact all three names listed as "in progress" for the sealing to parent > ordinances. We then checked the IGI index through FamilySearch and we > were > able to document that all three persons were sealed to their parents at > the > Provo Temple on the date that you gave. We then returned to nFS and > searched > for possible duplicates that could be combined for each of your three > ancestors, and found nothing even close. > > "We are attaching knowledge document 102519 which gives further details > about this process. Click anywhere on the blue link below for a document > that answers your question. > > "We are dispatching your case to Data Quality at Church Headquarters for > their review. Hopefully, in the near future, they will be able to review > your situation, and hopefully offer a satisfactory resolution. > > "Document Links: > Ordinances > <https://help.familysearch.org/publishing/466/102519_f.SAL_Member.html> > show in the International Genealogical Index (IGI), but they do not show, > or > they show as "Ready," in the new FamilySearch after combining data" > > The document link doesn't give anything further on my particular > situation. > This has to be resolved by the data quality people. This is what I was > referring to earlier when I said that they use our feedback to find > glitches > and missing chunks in the system. I'll continue to wait. Hope this is > helpful to others as well. > > > > Jill Crandell > > > 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 > > > **************Dell Days of Deals! June 15-24 - A New Deal Everyday! > (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222865043x1201494942/aol?redir=http:%2F%2F > ad.doubleclick.net%2Fclk%3B215692145%3B38015538%3Bh) > > 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 have been using new FamilySearch for over 1 1/2 years. We have been told, and we tell all the members DO NOT USE GEDCOM files. If you have one family (parents and children) and you have thoroughly checked that none of them are in the data base, then and only then should you consider using a GEDCOM file. Frances Calgary -----Original Message----- From: lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of E S BUNTING Sent: June 17, 2009 5:12 PM To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com; Ann Wilson Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] When to stop combining Look at this for using Gedcoms... Ann > From: sjkelsey@msn.com > To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com > Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 18:21:15 -0600 > Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] When to stop combining > > I noted today on some records on my namesake 1847 Utah Pioneer ancestor that > Someone had added a complete gedcom on his family which added duplicates to > ALL of many children and their husbands and wives--what a mess when just > 3 weeks ago I had it nearly all fixed and good. If the people that come > on line from Utah and Idaho add gedcoms of their pioneer ancestry,then > the duplication and combining effort must all be done again. > Perhaps adding gedcoms should be suspended for a while while they come on > line > To prevent the rush to "do something." > > Stephen Kelsey > > > -----Original Message----- > From: lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Nancy Scott > Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 4:05 PM > To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] When to stop combining > > Jill, > > I agree that it is important to test. If John Vilburn tested it as he says > he has and he says that it is untrue, I am happy to believe that. > > It was a true disappointment to have Dave Vickers, who is known as a > computer guru, say that the duplications are only combining for our own > lines. > > I am going to take a break and fix dinner but I would like to see it for > myself. > > Nancy > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Jill N. > Crandell > Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 05:56 PM > To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] When to stop combining > > Nancy wrote: > I did not intend to mean that we would permanently not combine large records > when I posted the "Instruction for Members with Pioneer Ancestry". I was > trying to say that now is perhaps not the time to attempt to start combining > while Utah and Idaho are coming on. While the pioneer ancestors probably win > hands down for duplication of work, I do have early lines that have the same > issues. > > Nancy, I was pretty sure you knew that this was not a permanent instruction. > However, I started seeing people misunderstanding what you were saying, so I > thought I would try to clarify. The bottom line is that we currently have to > work with IOUSs, which I agree is also a problem with Mayflower people and > lots of New England ancestors in addition to the pioneers, but once that > problem is solved, the end goal is to combine all duplicate records of the > same person. Any that can be combined now, do it. Any that can't, wait for > the resolution of the IOUS problem and then go at it again. > > As for the combining for our own tree only, please see the email I just sent > and let's test it! That's something important that we need to know. > > Jill Crandell > > 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 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 following is what I received today from FS Support in response to my question about three child to parent sealings that were performed in the Provo Temple two years ago and are still not showing in nFS. "Thank you for contacting FamilySearch Support regarding the three names for which you had sealing to parents ordinances performed in the Provo Temple. Thanks for including your personal information and the information on your three ancestors. We were able to sign in to nFS as a helper and verify that in fact all three names listed as "in progress" for the sealing to parent ordinances. We then checked the IGI index through FamilySearch and we were able to document that all three persons were sealed to their parents at the Provo Temple on the date that you gave. We then returned to nFS and searched for possible duplicates that could be combined for each of your three ancestors, and found nothing even close. "We are attaching knowledge document 102519 which gives further details about this process. Click anywhere on the blue link below for a document that answers your question. "We are dispatching your case to Data Quality at Church Headquarters for their review. Hopefully, in the near future, they will be able to review your situation, and hopefully offer a satisfactory resolution. "Document Links: Ordinances <https://help.familysearch.org/publishing/466/102519_f.SAL_Member.html> show in the International Genealogical Index (IGI), but they do not show, or they show as "Ready," in the new FamilySearch after combining data" The document link doesn't give anything further on my particular situation. This has to be resolved by the data quality people. This is what I was referring to earlier when I said that they use our feedback to find glitches and missing chunks in the system. I'll continue to wait. Hope this is helpful to others as well. Jill Crandell

Look at this for using Gedcoms... Ann > From: sjkelsey@msn.com > To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com > Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 18:21:15 -0600 > Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] When to stop combining > > I noted today on some records on my namesake 1847 Utah Pioneer ancestor that > Someone had added a complete gedcom on his family which added duplicates to > ALL of many children and their husbands and wives--what a mess when just > 3 weeks ago I had it nearly all fixed and good. If the people that come > on line from Utah and Idaho add gedcoms of their pioneer ancestry,then > the duplication and combining effort must all be done again. > Perhaps adding gedcoms should be suspended for a while while they come on > line > To prevent the rush to "do something." > > Stephen Kelsey > > > -----Original Message----- > From: lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Nancy Scott > Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 4:05 PM > To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] When to stop combining > > Jill, > > I agree that it is important to test. If John Vilburn tested it as he says > he has and he says that it is untrue, I am happy to believe that. > > It was a true disappointment to have Dave Vickers, who is known as a > computer guru, say that the duplications are only combining for our own > lines. > > I am going to take a break and fix dinner but I would like to see it for > myself. > > Nancy > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Jill N. > Crandell > Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 05:56 PM > To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] When to stop combining > > Nancy wrote: > I did not intend to mean that we would permanently not combine large records > when I posted the "Instruction for Members with Pioneer Ancestry". I was > trying to say that now is perhaps not the time to attempt to start combining > while Utah and Idaho are coming on. While the pioneer ancestors probably win > hands down for duplication of work, I do have early lines that have the same > issues. > > Nancy, I was pretty sure you knew that this was not a permanent instruction. > However, I started seeing people misunderstanding what you were saying, so I > thought I would try to clarify. The bottom line is that we currently have to > work with IOUSs, which I agree is also a problem with Mayflower people and > lots of New England ancestors in addition to the pioneers, but once that > problem is solved, the end goal is to combine all duplicate records of the > same person. Any that can be combined now, do it. Any that can't, wait for > the resolution of the IOUS problem and then go at it again. > > As for the combining for our own tree only, please see the email I just sent > and let's test it! That's something important that we need to know. > > Jill Crandell > > 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

Needs more info often means that there is uncertainty as to whether they are deceased. Michele In a message dated 6/17/2009 12:10:51 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, sjkelsey@msn.com writes: When selecting names from my reserved list, I have come across "Needs more information" on several names now on the list. That Was not indicated to me when I added them to the list to do the Ordinances but now it seems to appear. If I add more information to that person in nfs I do not think That it updates the list (or does it?) How do I get these names Off the list? I can't figure why it says needs more information As it usually allows work done for people with very minimal information as long as they are connected. Some of these are direct ancestors and I would like to do their work--they are connected, have birth dates approximated as well as birthplaces. I am not sure what else to add or do. 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 **************Dell Days of Deals! June 15-24 - A New Deal Everyday! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222865043x1201494942/aol?redir=http:%2F%2F ad.doubleclick.net%2Fclk%3B215692145%3B38015538%3Bh)

Thanks fro your words of encouragement. I'm sure I will marry but I want to be sealed to her. -----Original Message----- From: "Whitcomb" [hwhitcomb@gmail.com] Date: 06/17/2009 03:20 PM To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] Temple sealing question Note: Original message sent as attachment ------------------------------------------------------------ Meet active single Seniors for fun romance. Senior Dating http://216.21.215.31/fc/FgElN1mJvbwXtKPVw7m5DhCZDrWDPqs01UgZZwtwZr1IcRfOJ3tquDHwUfe/

Me too. Nancy Scott -----Original Message----- From: lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Leslie Royce Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 02:53 PM To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] ordinances done in order I have found from marriage extraction work that couples are sealed, however their individual ordinances have not been done?? Leslie Pierce Royce ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen J. Kelsey" <sjkelsey@msn.com> To: <lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 8:58 AM Subject: [LDS-WC] ordinances done in order >I thought the rule was: > > Children should not be sealed to their parents unless their parents > Have first been sealed. > > On the temple ordinance pages of nfs the "on hold" classification occurs; > However, note that for children who die before 8 years old they all appear > As able to be sealed to their parents BEFORE the parents are sealed and > While the status of the parents sealing is "on hold." Is this an error > In the program? I checked to see if the sealing for the child to the > Unmarried parents went through and it certainly does. > > Stephen 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 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

nope! In my case, I had all necessary information and more, still I get "Need More Information", before I changed the words from English to German, with s and d in small letter, son to sohn and daughter to tochter. Also reported the problem to headquarters. No more blocks. David Samuelsen Salt Lake Temple District JCBrooks@aol.com wrote: > Needs more info often means that there is uncertainty as to whether they > are deceased. > > Michele > > > In a message dated 6/17/2009 12:10:51 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > sjkelsey@msn.com writes: > > When selecting names from my reserved list, I have come across > "Needs more information" on several names now on the list. That > Was not indicated to me when I added them to the list to do the > Ordinances but now it seems to appear. > If I add more information to that person in nfs I do not think > That it updates the list (or does it?) How do I get these names > Off the list? I can't figure why it says needs more information > As it usually allows work done for people with very minimal information > as long as they are connected. Some of these are direct ancestors > and I would like to do their work--they are connected, have birth dates > approximated as well as birthplaces. I am not sure what else to add or do. > > 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 > > > **************Dell Days of Deals! June 15-24 - A New Deal Everyday! > (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222865043x1201494942/aol?redir=http:%2F%2F > ad.doubleclick.net%2Fclk%3B215692145%3B38015538%3Bh) > > 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 have found from marriage extraction work that couples are sealed, however their individual ordinances have not been done?? Leslie Pierce Royce ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen J. Kelsey" <sjkelsey@msn.com> To: <lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 8:58 AM Subject: [LDS-WC] ordinances done in order >I thought the rule was: > > Children should not be sealed to their parents unless their parents > Have first been sealed. > > On the temple ordinance pages of nfs the "on hold" classification occurs; > However, note that for children who die before 8 years old they all appear > As able to be sealed to their parents BEFORE the parents are sealed and > While the status of the parents sealing is "on hold." Is this an error > In the program? I checked to see if the sealing for the child to the > Unmarried parents went through and it certainly does. > > Stephen 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

Sylvia, If you want to keep the B & C from being redone by anyone who sees it in NFS for now until it is straightened out, you could go to FS FamilyTree and enter the data yourself as having been completed at least for the women. I'm not sure if they are accepting this information as a validation of the work or not if it is entered into FS Family Tree? Jill or anyone else know the answer to that one? Or even have an idea where one should look to find the answer? Nancy Scott Cincinnati, Ohio -----Original Message----- From: lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Sylvia H. Sonneborn Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 01:31 PM To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com Subject: [LDS-WC] Ordinances Done in Order Preferred Hi, I asked at the temple about this because of two situations: I have found many children sealed to their parents, but the parents do not have their temple work done. I also have married couples sealed but work done for only one spouse. This is what I was told: 1. Always do the temple work in order - Baptism to sealing parents and then sealing children 2. If sealings or other work has been completed but some of the ordinances are missing, the completed ordinances will not be considered valid until the other work is filled in. They will show as done. You do not need to redo the completed ordinances when they are done out of order - just complete the work not yet done and all work will be valid. If this differs from anyone else's information, please let me know. I had a second experience when we took a youth baptism trip to Manhattan. We did baptisms and confirmations and the cards were verified as done. I took the cards to the Washington DC Temple for the temple to complete the rest of the work. After a few months and after going on nFS, I discovered that for my friend, my husband, and me (for my husband and me 63 cards), the B and C had never been recorded at the Manhattan Temple (there had been a power failure that day). All the sudden, the iniatories, endowments, and sealings were showing up as done, but the B and C look as if we had never done the work. I did get all the women's cards back from WASHI eventually, but the temple had asked permission to send the men's cards to other temples to do and I agreed, so I will never get the men's cards back. I did scan all the women's cards and send them to Manhattan where they were sent to SL. I was hoping SL would rescan the women's cards. So far this has not occurred despite conversations with both temples. I am being patient on that issue. The bottom line is that I think the 3 of us involved may have to redo all the baptisms and confirmations for these 90 people using our tracking sheets, but for the time being I am waiting for communication. I asked the temple worker from family file in Manhattan if the I, E, and SS and SP would be honored if the B and C came after the other work, or would we have to redo that? [As you can imagine, nFS would not allow me to redo the work because it is listed as done, and anyone who does not know the situation can go into nFS (I think) and do the B & C anyway as they appear as "Ready."] But the Manhattan temple worker told me that the other work will be honored even if we have to do the B&C over and they appear as a later date. For our discussion though, the rest of the work (I-sealings) will not have to be redone. You can check a person to see if you like: Amanda Jane Logue KV2S-XS2 I stress, though, that The Church wants us to do our temple work in order. On this second matter, I will give it a few more months, and if it is not cleared up, I will contact the Salt Lake City Temple, where my names with PIDS and the women's card scans now reside. I know that everyone is busy. Sylvia Sonneborn York, PA -----Original Message----- From: lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Stephen J. Kelsey Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 9:58 AM To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com Subject: [LDS-WC] ordinances done in order I thought the rule was: Children should not be sealed to their parents unless their parents Have first been sealed. On the temple ordinance pages of nfs the "on hold" classification occurs; However, note that for children who die before 8 years old they all appear As able to be sealed to their parents BEFORE the parents are sealed and While the status of the parents sealing is "on hold." Is this an error In the program? I checked to see if the sealing for the child to the Unmarried parents went through and it certainly does. Stephen 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 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

Steve wrote: At least that way I can see if I have the cards I am supposed To and am getting the work done. Do others have the same problems? FamilyTree makes it much easier to see the status of your submissions. The list is all together--not on a bunch of pages. It shows if you have reserved it, if you have printed the cards, etc. Take a look at it. This is the way the program is moving, and the original New FamilySearch will be going away. You also won't see ordinances you didn't reserve that say "needs more information." Jill Crandell

Maybe someone else gets along better with Family Tree than I do <g> The people in question are children of my gg grandfather & his second wife. Millard F. Johnson ID KLC9-VV8 Shows baptism 9 Feb 2007 in Seattle temple. This is what I had in my records from the IGI Then it shows initiatory on 28 March 2009 Seattle temple. Endowment & sealing to spouse shows "In Progress" with the submitter's id (non nFS id) and the date "Sun Sep 2, 2007" Sealing to spouse was accomplished 9 March 2009 St George temple. Moving on over to the "Records" tab, there are four sources: LDS Church Extraction, Pedigree Resource File, and two from the IGI. His brother Allen Johnson (ID K2QK-YG7) is pretty much the same story, except he does not show LDS Church Extraction as one of the sources. There are more children, including a couple that are not showing in nFS. I signed out of nFS and began going through my records and searching censuses last night, so I can add more information to nFS for someone to do the work. I had done temple work for a couple of the unmarried daughters of my gg grandfather & wife #2, but there are descendants of these two gentlemen and others who should get the opportunity, even if they are well past the 95/110 year rules. Alice Allen Oakhurst Ward Family History Consultant Vancouver WA Stake Portland OR Temple District *********** REPLY SEPARATOR *********** On 6/17/2009 at 12:12 PM nascott@cinci.rr.com wrote: >Alice, > >If you can post their ID #s one can tell more about the status by looking >in >FS Family Tree. > >Nancy Scott >Cincinnati, Ohio > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com >[mailto:lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of DC & Alice >Allen >Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 12:01 PM >To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com >Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] ordinances done in order > >I was working with a family last night where many of the children were >sealed to parents in March 2009, but the endowments were not done yet. >They >were in process (or progress, whichver it is). The baptisms were done in >2007, I had those dates in my PAF files from the IGI, with the "in >progress" >notations also from the IGI. Two years later the endowments are still not >done. I did notice that there were some Initiatories done recently, so I >expect these are names that are being pulled in by the Temples, correct? > >The submitter is not on nFS, apparently. And some show the Extraction >program as a source. > >Alice Allen >Oakhurst Ward Family History Consultant >Vancouver WA Stake >Portland OR Temple District >

Steve wrote: When selecting names from my reserved list, I have come across "Needs more information" on several names now on the list. . . . Some of these are direct ancestors and I would like to do their work--they are connected, have birth dates approximated as well as birthplaces. I am not sure what else to add or do. Steve, I just cleared some ordinances this morning, and I had the same thing happen. What it was in my case was the program allowed individual ordinances to be reserved, but the marriage information has not been data entered yet. In that block it says that more information is needed, and that ordinance is not actually reserved--according to FamilyTree. Is that what you're seeing, or is it something else? Jill Crandell

The "on hold" thing for sealings is painful. I have to print out cards twice for people. If I clear a family and seal the parents to each other, then I cannot clear those same parents for sealing to their own parents...it's "on hold." I worry about some ordinances being missed because not all patrons are careful or skilled enough to realize this. Why not just print out the full cards and let us do our best? Most people will finish the whole pink/blue card before doing the yellow ones anyway. IMHO proxy ordinances are presented to those in the spirit world as a package anyway. How many of you temple workers have had a card go through endowment only to realize (in spite of all the checking) that the initiatory wasn't done? Generally we just run the card over to initiatory and be sure it gets done same day and call it good. There has to be some flexibility in all this work. Michele In a message dated 6/17/2009 7:07:52 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, sjkelsey@msn.com writes: I thought the rule was: Children should not be sealed to their parents unless their parents Have first been sealed. On the temple ordinance pages of nfs the "on hold" classification occurs; However, note that for children who die before 8 years old they all appear As able to be sealed to their parents BEFORE the parents are sealed and While the status of the parents sealing is "on hold." Is this an error In the program? I checked to see if the sealing for the child to the Unmarried parents went through and it certainly does. Stephen 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 **************Dell Days of Deals! June 15-24 - A New Deal Everyday! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222865043x1201494942/aol?redir=http:%2F%2F ad.doubleclick.net%2Fclk%3B215692145%3B38015538%3Bh)

Hi, I asked at the temple about this because of two situations: I have found many children sealed to their parents, but the parents do not have their temple work done. I also have married couples sealed but work done for only one spouse. This is what I was told: 1. Always do the temple work in order - Baptism to sealing parents and then sealing children 2. If sealings or other work has been completed but some of the ordinances are missing, the completed ordinances will not be considered valid until the other work is filled in. They will show as done. You do not need to redo the completed ordinances when they are done out of order - just complete the work not yet done and all work will be valid. If this differs from anyone else's information, please let me know. I had a second experience when we took a youth baptism trip to Manhattan. We did baptisms and confirmations and the cards were verified as done. I took the cards to the Washington DC Temple for the temple to complete the rest of the work. After a few months and after going on nFS, I discovered that for my friend, my husband, and me (for my husband and me 63 cards), the B and C had never been recorded at the Manhattan Temple (there had been a power failure that day). All the sudden, the iniatories, endowments, and sealings were showing up as done, but the B and C look as if we had never done the work. I did get all the women's cards back from WASHI eventually, but the temple had asked permission to send the men's cards to other temples to do and I agreed, so I will never get the men's cards back. I did scan all the women's cards and send them to Manhattan where they were sent to SL. I was hoping SL would rescan the women's cards. So far this has not occurred despite conversations with both temples. I am being patient on that issue. The bottom line is that I think the 3 of us involved may have to redo all the baptisms and confirmations for these 90 people using our tracking sheets, but for the time being I am waiting for communication. I asked the temple worker from family file in Manhattan if the I, E, and SS and SP would be honored if the B and C came after the other work, or would we have to redo that? [As you can imagine, nFS would not allow me to redo the work because it is listed as done, and anyone who does not know the situation can go into nFS (I think) and do the B & C anyway as they appear as "Ready."] But the Manhattan temple worker told me that the other work will be honored even if we have to do the B&C over and they appear as a later date. For our discussion though, the rest of the work (I-sealings) will not have to be redone. You can check a person to see if you like: Amanda Jane Logue KV2S-XS2 I stress, though, that The Church wants us to do our temple work in order. On this second matter, I will give it a few more months, and if it is not cleared up, I will contact the Salt Lake City Temple, where my names with PIDS and the women's card scans now reside. I know that everyone is busy. Sylvia Sonneborn York, PA -----Original Message----- From: lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Stephen J. Kelsey Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 9:58 AM To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com Subject: [LDS-WC] ordinances done in order I thought the rule was: Children should not be sealed to their parents unless their parents Have first been sealed. On the temple ordinance pages of nfs the "on hold" classification occurs; However, note that for children who die before 8 years old they all appear As able to be sealed to their parents BEFORE the parents are sealed and While the status of the parents sealing is "on hold." Is this an error In the program? I checked to see if the sealing for the child to the Unmarried parents went through and it certainly does. Stephen 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