In Nebraska, we heard within DAYS of going on line not to add a GEDCOM unless we had checked first to make sure all the individuals on the GEDCOM weren't on NFS first. For some converts, it works out ok to add a small GEDCOM, but many find they have ancestry already in NFS before they go very far at all. Karen PS: Does anybody know a JSBerry, or someone whose name could be shortened to that? They've got my friend's grandparents on reserve and not doing a thing with the names for over a year now. Whoever it is, they're not as closely related as she is...and nobody had contacted her about permission to do the work, as we've been reminded strongly of in the last few days. Whoever he/she is, they did not have the information quite correct, but it is the same person, nonetheless. Katherine has now gone through the Temple and could do all of her Grandmother's ordinances, but we can't find out who submitted the work. In a message dated 6/16/2009 7:21:53 P.M. Central Daylight Time, sjkelsey@msn.com writes: 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 **************An Excellent Credit Score is 750. See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221823265x1201398681/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072&hmpgID=62&bcd=Jun eExcfooterNO62)

Jill, I just checked for KL5K-HRY, Reece Y. Carrel, and found the 20 records combined as one. I am thrilled to be wrong about when I stated that they only show up in an individual's own tree and not for others. If I find a way to contact Dave Vickers, I will pass it on to him. I did notice in "Records that are too Large to Combine" (defined as files with larger than 150 records) besides keeping a list, it says to work in other records in your family tree and not to redo the work. Not redoing the work means that the ordinances will not show on this person until the problem is resolved and the records are combined. This is from page 131 of the NFS User's Guide and not just for pioneer ancestry. Back to the question, "To combine or not to combine?" It seems to me that for the moment until the problem is resolved with large files that they are asking us to work on other lines if they are too large to combine as stated in the NFS User's Guide. Nancy Scott Cincinnati, Ohio -----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

you, too? I have this same guy in my lines, reserved some of mine. David Samuelsen Sahara346@aol.com wrote: > PS: Does anybody know a JSBerry, or someone whose name could be shortened > to that? They've got my friend's grandparents on reserve and not doing a > thing with the names for over a year now. Whoever it is, they're not as > closely related as she is...and nobody had contacted her about permission to > do the work, as we've been reminded strongly of in the last few days. > Whoever he/she is, they did not have the information quite correct, but it is > the same person, nonetheless. Katherine has now gone through the Temple and > could do all of her Grandmother's ordinances, but we can't find out who > submitted the work.

What's more, there is a strong warning before adding gedcom to check for any record already in the nFS. David Samuelsen Sahara346@aol.com wrote: > In Nebraska, we heard within DAYS of going on line not to add a GEDCOM > unless we had checked first to make sure all the individuals on the GEDCOM > weren't on NFS first. For some converts, it works out ok to add a small > GEDCOM, but many find they have ancestry already in NFS before they go very far > at all. > > Karen > > PS: Does anybody know a JSBerry, or someone whose name could be shortened > to that? They've got my friend's grandparents on reserve and not doing a > thing with the names for over a year now. Whoever it is, they're not as > closely related as she is...and nobody had contacted her about permission to > do the work, as we've been reminded strongly of in the last few days. > Whoever he/she is, they did not have the information quite correct, but it is > the same person, nonetheless. Katherine has now gone through the Temple and > could do all of her Grandmother's ordinances, but we can't find out who > submitted the work. > > > > > In a message dated 6/16/2009 7:21:53 P.M. Central Daylight Time, > sjkelsey@msn.com writes: > > 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 > > > **************An Excellent Credit Score is 750. See Yours in Just 2 Easy > Steps! > (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221823265x1201398681/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072&hmpgID=62&bcd=Jun > eExcfooterNO62) > > 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 see 20 combined. Everybody else see them. the only known exception are living persons in your line. David Samuelsen Jill N. Crandell wrote: > John or others, > > Will you do a quick check with me? I just combined about 13 records for > Reece Y. Carrel, KL5K-HRY, and it now shows in my files as 20 combined > records. Is that what you see? > > I have not heard that combining is currently only for our own files, and I'd > like to know for sure if what I did today was for everyone. > > Thanks, > 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 > >

I had a friend that was killed in a car accident and her fiancee received permission to have her sealed to him. My understanding is it was approved because he could later marry & be sealed to someone else still, where a women wouldn't be able to be sealed again later. He was strongly encouraged to marry in this lifetime someone else and raise a family. I know both families had to approve the sealing and of course permission from the first presidency. Renee Zamora www.harrisena.com Message: 2 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 09:23:34 -0400 From: "jeff_campbell" <jeff_campbell@myway.com> Subject: [LDS-WC] Temple sealing question To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com Message-ID: <20090616092334.16769@web002.roc2.bluetie.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I am convert to the church and have a question regarding temple sealing. Having grown up with many LDS friends I was familiar with temple marriage though not really the depth of the covenants etc. During a meeting last night with the missionaries I asked the Elders a question which they had no answer for so I thought I'd search it out on the Internet when I found this forum and so I though I'd ask here. I was engaged to a young lady earlier this year that passed away tragically in a car wreck. She had joined the church a year ago and is responsible for my path to conversion and to the conversion of her parents who hope to be sealed in the temple this coming year. I want to be sealed to my fianc?e and I am wondering if the church would allow this to happen? Meaning, since she is dead and I am not, would the church allow for our sealing together? Her parents would stand up on my behalf and testify to this. I want to be with her for eternity and I know that she wanted to be with sealed to me while alive. Thanks, Jeff

Couldn't the help people figure out who this is? Particularly if she or he has reserved someone's grandparents, it seems to me that someone should be able to help with releasing the names for work. Paula On Jun 16, 2009, at 6:54 PM, W. David Samuelsen wrote: > you, too? > > I have this same guy in my lines, reserved some of mine. > > David Samuelsen > > Sahara346@aol.com wrote: > >> PS: Does anybody know a JSBerry, or someone whose name could be >> shortened >> to that? They've got my friend's grandparents on reserve and not >> doing a >> thing with the names for over a year now. Whoever it is, they're >> not as >> closely related as she is...and nobody had contacted her about >> permission to >> do the work, as we've been reminded strongly of in the last few days. >> Whoever he/she is, they did not have the information quite correct, >> but it is >> the same person, nonetheless. Katherine has now gone through the >> Temple and >> could do all of her Grandmother's ordinances, but we can't find out >> who >> submitted the work. > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and > the body of the message

Thanks to all of you who checked the combining status. I'm glad to know that we are still working on the entire file! Jill Crandell

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

There are 20 combined records showing - starting with church and the 20th by a bauman. Sylvia York, PA -----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 5:49 PM To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] When to stop combining John or others, Will you do a quick check with me? I just combined about 13 records for Reece Y. Carrel, KL5K-HRY, and it now shows in my files as 20 combined records. Is that what you see? I have not heard that combining is currently only for our own files, and I'd like to know for sure if what I did today was for everyone. Thanks, 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

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

"I went to a RM workshop this last Saturday and the presenter said that when we combine right now that we are only combining in our tree. He said that if his son-in-law went to the same records that it would not be combined for the son-in-law. The presenter, Dave Vickers, talked to someone he knows in SLC who confirmed his theory." I do not think that the above statement is correct. If you go to the bottom of a Summary or Details page and click and look at the combined records, you will see the names of all the records that have been combined. Then you have the opportunity to uncombine some if the wrong person has been combined by someone else. I see everyone's name who has combined that record. For those with many duplicates ~ When you do about 85 combinations in one file for one person, you are not permitted to do any more and the files just have to stay there as duplicates at this time. When we have been told to clean up the records on nFS, we are to combine everyone who is the same person into one file. Do not stop when you find all temple work is done when more files exist for the same person. We are giving that person one number and cleaning up the mess that pulling the records from so many sources and family contributors has created. That way, when someone looks for that person (even if the ancestor's details are incorrect), he will find that person in one file with all the combinations available to look at. On the Summary view, you can click the arrow at the end of each entry and select a more correct name if more names appear there or add another name, and you can edit their dates/locations in the same way. Whatever name you bring to the top on the Summary view, it will say Contributed by ___(you); and someone else opening that up will see your selection and name. But he can change it too. This is the place where collaboration begins. On the other hand, if you have contributed incorrect information, go to the details page and find your entry, and you can make your corrections on your own work at that point. Before I do temple work, I go to the family view (spouses and children), and I check for duplicates on parents first, and then I do each child. Once in a while, I find a second set of parents just by clicking on a certain child's name, and then I combine. Combine. Combine. Combine. Then check to see if the temple work is done by clicking on the temple icon to the left of the father's name, and you will see an update of the whole family. I have been using nFS since September 2008, and this has been my experience. Sylvia York, Pennsylvania

Jill, I am glad that you made your comments. 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. I went to a RM workshop this last Saturday and the presenter said that when we combine right now that we are only combining in our tree. He said that if his son-in-law went to the same records that it would not be combined for the son-in-law. The presenter, Dave Vickers, talked to someone he knows in SLC who confirmed his theory. He told him to send him an email when the combined records started showing up for everyone because it is too much work to do all that combining and then just do it again. I do not plan to take that approach but the pioneers are not the only persons with huge data. You made the perfect comment about keeping lists of persons. All we have to do is make the lists. I have a Tuttle lines that go back to Joseph Smith, Mayflower lines, and other early lines that are such a huge mess that I do not know where to begin. A Smith line I looked about a year ago, not the prophet's Smith line that I know of, for one person has 700+ combined records. It is all a bit overwhelming to me. When FS Family Tree is developed or whatever the replacement for NFS is, the duplication issue should resolve itself as you said. One thing is sure in FH at the moment, there is change and we need to adjust to that. Nancy Scott Cincinnati, Ohio -----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 04:03 PM To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] When to stop combining I was trying to stay out of this, but I'm going to have to comment. There are some misunderstandings beginning, and as consultants, we have to get it right. Nancy wrote: "Instruction for Members with Pioneer Ancestry" If a member has a pioneer ancestor containing a large amount of information in NFS, combine duplicate information until you find his or her ordinances dates. When you find the ordinance information, stop combining. Over time, changes to the NFS web site will be made that will improve the way the information about these pioneer ancestors is accessed and displayed. Tina then asked: Should I only be combining duplicates who need work done? My response: We should combine until there is only one record for each individual in the system. The IOUSs cannot all be combined right now, but my information is that this will be resolved soon. You'll notice that Nancy's quote is referring to the IOUSs, and they suggested combining until ordinance work is found. That means that your file for that ancestor will indicate that the work is done. That is the point. It's not that we shouldn't combine, it's that they are trying to prevent duplication of ordinance work. At the same time, the system can't handle the masses of records that these early pioneers need to have merged. They want us to show the work done AND not overload the system. That's what these instructions are addressing. Here is another NFS document on this topic: Handling Records That Are Too Large to Combine A combined record of more than 150 individual records creates serious problems for the system. Until the system is fixed, please do the following: * Keep a list of large records to combine later when the system is repaired. The News and Updates section on the sign-in page will inform you when this occurs. * Work on other records in your family tree. * Do not redo ordinances. This means that the ordinances won't show on this person until the problem is resolved and the records are combined. My comments: If we only need to combine until ordinances are recorded, then there would be no reason to keep a list of large records to combine after changes are made in the system. Notice the emphasis on not duplicating ordinances. Another NFS document: Why should I combine duplicate records? When an individual appears only once in the new FamilySearch, you will see these benefits: * The temple work for an individual and family will be done only once. * An individual's information is in one place. All contributors can then work together to do the following: o Correct errors. o Add sources and notes to indicate correct information. o Dispute incorrect information. Even if you disagree with some of the information that has been contributed about an individual, you should combine all of the information anyway. Remember, having the information in one place prevents duplication of temple work and research. My final comments: You need to visualize a pedigree where there is a pioneer ancestor with multiple records uncombined. Even if every one of them indicates temple work has been done, since we all know that multiple ordinances have been done for these people, you can still see how future research would add the same ancestors for these people in multiple places. Doing that will again promote duplication of ordinance work. Please don't misunderstand temporary IOUS instructions and apply them to the rest of the file or think they are long term instructions. The IOUSs will probably go away now in a matter of months. Other than those situations, combine every record that you are sure refers to the same person. 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

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

John or others, Will you do a quick check with me? I just combined about 13 records for Reece Y. Carrel, KL5K-HRY, and it now shows in my files as 20 combined records. Is that what you see? I have not heard that combining is currently only for our own files, and I'd like to know for sure if what I did today was for everyone. Thanks, Jill Crandell

Dear List, When is it all right to stop combining? Am I mistaken in the thinking that combining records will lessen the duplicates? If we find that ordinances have been done do we NOT combine the record of a duplicate who is not done? Should I only be combining duplicates who need work done? Thank you for all your great insight into all things family history... Tina Brisbon **************An Excellent Credit Score is 750. See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221823265x1201398681/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072&hmpgID=62&bcd=Jun eExcfooterNO62)

I have redone my 3x5 card because this being clear about the 95/110 year rules is so important to me and I do not want members to misunderstand the message. The redo is much more detailed but I am willing to sacrifice some to make a clearer message. Any comments suggestions are welcomed. I have it in 8 pt type that will fit a 3x5 card. I think for the most part that I am happy with the way it reads but still welcome responses and/or ideas from the group. To Submit Temple Work For: 1. Persons born within the last 95 years & death date is known, Obtain permission from the closest living relative, in order, Un-divorced spouse, adult children, parents, then siblings. Birth years 1915-2009 require above permission. 2. Persons born within the last 110 years, if death date is not Known, ordinances are delayed to 110 years & obtain permission. Birth years 1899-2009 require death known. 3. Most persons, wait one year from death date to submit. Church Family History Websites: New.FamilySearch.org, Labs.FamilySearch.org, www.FamilySearch.org The index card idea originally started out to help me because I did not want to refigure every time where dates fell for the 95/110 year rules. I then widened it to the first FH SS class that I taught at a help for them and lastly I have put them out on the FH table in the hall. I carry the card in my purse so that it is always handy for myself. Nancy Scott Cincinnati, Ohio -----Original Message----- From: lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:lds-ward-consultant-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of W. David Samuelsen Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 11:36 AM To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] 95/110 birth year rule - finally clear answer You left out one very important detail - death dates as explained in the ruling I posted. Nancy Scott wrote: > David, > > I agree that this answer is clear. I personally keep a 3 by 5 index card > that says: > > Persons born within the last 95 years > Obtain permission from the closest living relative > 2009/1914 Clarification - if already have death date. No permission required if over 95 years. > Born with in the last 110 years > Death date or knowledge of death required > 2009/1899 Clarification - 95 to 110 years, WITHOUT death date, still requires permission, no permission required if over 110 years. David Samuelsen Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

As I understand things we only need to combine individuals until we determine that all ordinances are complete for that individual. Beyond that point it then becomes an exercise in redundancy. If I am misunderstanding things pplease let me know. Thank you. Clair Quilter Magna Stake, Utah > From: IMCMB621@aol.com > Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 15:31:53 -0400 > To: lds-ward-consultant-l@rootsweb.com > Subject: [LDS-WC] When to stop combining > > Dear List, > > When is it all right to stop combining? Am I mistaken in the thinking that > combining records will lessen the duplicates? If we find that ordinances > have been done do we NOT combine the record of a duplicate who is not done? > Should I only be combining duplicates who need work done? > Thank you for all your great insight into all things family history... > > Tina Brisbon > **************An Excellent Credit Score is 750. See Yours in Just 2 Easy > Steps! > (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221823265x1201398681/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072&hmpgID=62&bcd=Jun > eExcfooterNO62) > > 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 was trying to stay out of this, but I'm going to have to comment. There are some misunderstandings beginning, and as consultants, we have to get it right. Nancy wrote: "Instruction for Members with Pioneer Ancestry" If a member has a pioneer ancestor containing a large amount of information in NFS, combine duplicate information until you find his or her ordinances dates. When you find the ordinance information, stop combining. Over time, changes to the NFS web site will be made that will improve the way the information about these pioneer ancestors is accessed and displayed. Tina then asked: Should I only be combining duplicates who need work done? My response: We should combine until there is only one record for each individual in the system. The IOUSs cannot all be combined right now, but my information is that this will be resolved soon. You'll notice that Nancy's quote is referring to the IOUSs, and they suggested combining until ordinance work is found. That means that your file for that ancestor will indicate that the work is done. That is the point. It's not that we shouldn't combine, it's that they are trying to prevent duplication of ordinance work. At the same time, the system can't handle the masses of records that these early pioneers need to have merged. They want us to show the work done AND not overload the system. That's what these instructions are addressing. Here is another NFS document on this topic: Handling Records That Are Too Large to Combine A combined record of more than 150 individual records creates serious problems for the system. Until the system is fixed, please do the following: * Keep a list of large records to combine later when the system is repaired. The News and Updates section on the sign-in page will inform you when this occurs. * Work on other records in your family tree. * Do not redo ordinances. This means that the ordinances won't show on this person until the problem is resolved and the records are combined. My comments: If we only need to combine until ordinances are recorded, then there would be no reason to keep a list of large records to combine after changes are made in the system. Notice the emphasis on not duplicating ordinances. Another NFS document: Why should I combine duplicate records? When an individual appears only once in the new FamilySearch, you will see these benefits: * The temple work for an individual and family will be done only once. * An individual's information is in one place. All contributors can then work together to do the following: o Correct errors. o Add sources and notes to indicate correct information. o Dispute incorrect information. Even if you disagree with some of the information that has been contributed about an individual, you should combine all of the information anyway. Remember, having the information in one place prevents duplication of temple work and research. My final comments: You need to visualize a pedigree where there is a pioneer ancestor with multiple records uncombined. Even if every one of them indicates temple work has been done, since we all know that multiple ordinances have been done for these people, you can still see how future research would add the same ancestors for these people in multiple places. Doing that will again promote duplication of ordinance work. Please don't misunderstand temporary IOUS instructions and apply them to the rest of the file or think they are long term instructions. The IOUSs will probably go away now in a matter of months. Other than those situations, combine every record that you are sure refers to the same person. Jill Crandell

It shows as 20 combined records for me. Aloha, John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jill N. Crandell" <jncrandell@broadweave.net> To: <lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 11:48 AM Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] When to stop combining > John or others, > > Will you do a quick check with me? I just combined about 13 records for > Reece Y. Carrel, KL5K-HRY, and it now shows in my files as 20 combined > records. Is that what you see? > > I have not heard that combining is currently only for our own files, and > I'd > like to know for sure if what I did today was for everyone. > > Thanks, > 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