This is something similar to my ward member's situation, except it's her grandmother, and we haven't been able to locate the person who cleared the grandmother's name for temple work. Whoever it is, probably is related to one of her husbands, but is NOT doing the work. It's been cleared for a year now, and nothing has been done, and we've tried several things--including writing to the Church Membership Office to try to identify JSBerry (whoever it is) to see if they'll release the name for Katherine to do her grandmother's work. Katherine will be going to get her own endowment done in a month and a half, and would love to seal her mother to her grandmother & grandfather--but that will have to be on hold until we can come up with another way around the situation. I know there was talk of having areas that are relatively close to a temple (US, Canada, maybe Britain) be able to keep a name cleared for only a couple years without progress being made on it and then opening it up again. I hope they do that. If JSBerry, whoever it is, has passed away, then Katherine's grandparents will sit in limbo for who knows how long--til the millenium? While she'd like to have her grandfather done as well, it would mean so much to her to do her grandmother's work. Whoever it is, they're not closely enough related to have been known to her growing up, or now. Karen In a message dated 4/13/2009 9:10:58 A.M. Central Daylight Time, jncrandell@broadweave.net writes: Carrie wrote: Okay, so what happens when you enter an earlier death date to get the name reserved and the distant relative sees the incorrect date and puts a dispute on the name? Won't that dispute need to be removed before the name can be done?? I don't know if the dispute would have to be removed, but the way to prevent that would be to print the FOR immediately upon entering the data. Once the FOR is printed, the work can be performed, regardless of what happens in the file after that. The problem with this is that the cousin can do exactly the same thing with a duplicate entry. In reality, there really is no way in NFS to have an exclusive reservation to perform the ordinances for a particular person. Even if the name has been reserved, someone can come along, add a duplicate entry, clear the work, perform the work, and merge the entry into the one that was cleared earlier. The entire system is based on honesty and following the rules. Anyone who does not respect and follow the guidelines is not prevented from doing what they choose. However, I'm sure the Lord will hold us accountable for our obedience and kindness to others. In my opinion, if someone is trying to "steal" the work from someone else--for whatever reason--I question their worthiness to attend the temple. That may sound harsh, but I consider it dishonest to take someone else's research and obtain the blessing of doing the work where the other person made the sacrifice of time and effort. Gay's situation is a friend who wants to do her mother's work. The woman has every right to share that sacred experience with her mother, and the cousin is totally out of line trying to "steal" that blessing from the daughter. I have also had situations where I have put in a great deal of research, submitted the names, and part way through completing the work, someone has taken my entries, submitted them again--including the dates of work I had finished--and then completed what was left before I had the chance to finish. I'm sure in TempleReady they just "lied" and said it was not the same as the previous entry, even though everything was exactly the same. Both of these circumstances are evidence of selfishness, dishonesty, and disobedience. We need to teach our members not only what the rules are, but to respect the rules, respect others, and be obedient. I doubt it's possible to "steal" blessings. The Lord knows our hearts. I have been in touch with Gay off the list, and I know she is working within the rules to help her friend. Since there is almost a year before the work will actually be done, perhaps we could all join them in prayer that the cousin's heart will be softened. Just some thoughts, 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 **************Why pay full price? Check out this month's deals on the new AOL Shopping. (http://shopping.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntinstor00000001)

This is the basis for the nFS. And anyone using the old TR, will find the TR does check the submissions made through the nFS. I found out when I discovered there were some completed entries and subsequently did all my submissions through the nFS. David JCBrooks@aol.com wrote: > This is a good reason. > > However, why in the world did they leave the year 2000 IGI database in > place for TempleReady and create almost ten years of duplications? And I > assume TR is still using that very same database. That could certainly have > solved a lot of unneeded work. Did they discuss that? > > Michele

Jill N. Crandell wrote: > Remember, some of those ordinances that appear not to have been done, very > well may be done and the computer has not released those dates. I have a > number of cards that I have checked on where the work was done, the cards > were stamped, and NFS still says they are in process. This is work that was > done well before NFS existed. The engineers want to hear from you about these right away. I turned up 2 times and reported them. They fixed them promptly. Use the feedback and give as much info as you can including PIDs. W. David Samuelsen

JCBrooks@aol.com wrote: Not sure how many of > the Brethren have actually used NFS recently...and especially since it > hasn't been rolled out in SLC!! Every one of the Brethren already has access, much like the consultants were called in earlier than the rollouts. > For instance, didn't we recently hear that the initiation of NFS came when > Pres. Hinckley heard about all the duplications from his HP Group Leader > and went to the office and said "Fix it?" Pres. Hinckley became aware of the problem going back to late 1980s when there was a huge rush to have ordinances done without checking the IGI. I can tell you there were hundreds of my ancestors getting theirs ordinances done twice or more in just that 10 year span from 1983 to 1995. But this time limit one seems to be generally overlooked. They didn't overlook this one. It was brought up during the beta testing when I asked about this problem, this was 1 year before the rollout to first 5 temple districts. > I still don't think it's wrong to suggest that there should be a time > limit. Heck, some of my names were baptized in 1996 and are still sitting. > I'm sure the name slips are long lost. There really should be a method for > the computer in the sky to find names that have been sitting 5-10 years and > move them to "ready" in NFS. The serious problem right now is the conversions of family names in the rolled in temple districts. My friend has more than 150 of them in Oakland Temple. Once converted from old system, they can not be purged if duplicates are found in nFS and merged. Just STUCK in in that limbo. I am looking at the reprinted cards from that "Reprint Family Ordinance Requests and Family Ordinance Cards" and am seeing a lot that dated way before 2004. The hope is that the engineers have a way to dislodge them once reported instead of dragging. This is different from the FamilySearch Extraction Program where there are literally thousands of them slowly meandering through different temples as the backlogs are caught up until the rollout is complete and the gates open for the families to retrieve the extracted entries earlier to finish. W. David Samuelsen

David brings up a good point. I have over 100 names on my "Reprint" list. Most of them have all their ordinances done but I can't get them off the list. In contacting Salt Lake about this, they told me to do all the combinations for each name and then try to print an FOR and the name would drop from the list. Not so. I have done that and a SL support person has done it and the names do not drop out of the list. This is a bug that needs to be resolved as it can cause duplication of ordinance work. All you have to do is click on the reprint button and you can reprint an FOR for the ordinances indicated for each name even though those ordinances are already completed and show in nfs. Also, it is taking me a lot of time to check each name to see that the ordinance work is done by combining duplications and trying to print the FOR while these names are not ones I want to be working on right now. ----- Original Message ----- From: W. David Samuelsen To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 9:13 PM Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] Time limit JCBrooks@aol.com wrote: Not sure how many of > the Brethren have actually used NFS recently...and especially since it > hasn't been rolled out in SLC!! Every one of the Brethren already has access, much like the consultants were called in earlier than the rollouts. > For instance, didn't we recently hear that the initiation of NFS came when > Pres. Hinckley heard about all the duplications from his HP Group Leader > and went to the office and said "Fix it?" Pres. Hinckley became aware of the problem going back to late 1980s when there was a huge rush to have ordinances done without checking the IGI. I can tell you there were hundreds of my ancestors getting theirs ordinances done twice or more in just that 10 year span from 1983 to 1995. But this time limit one seems to be generally overlooked. They didn't overlook this one. It was brought up during the beta testing when I asked about this problem, this was 1 year before the rollout to first 5 temple districts. > I still don't think it's wrong to suggest that there should be a time > limit. Heck, some of my names were baptized in 1996 and are still sitting. > I'm sure the name slips are long lost. There really should be a method for > the computer in the sky to find names that have been sitting 5-10 years and > move them to "ready" in NFS. The serious problem right now is the conversions of family names in the rolled in temple districts. My friend has more than 150 of them in Oakland Temple. Once converted from old system, they can not be purged if duplicates are found in nFS and merged. Just STUCK in in that limbo. I am looking at the reprinted cards from that "Reprint Family Ordinance Requests and Family Ordinance Cards" and am seeing a lot that dated way before 2004. The hope is that the engineers have a way to dislodge them once reported instead of dragging. This is different from the FamilySearch Extraction Program where there are literally thousands of them slowly meandering through different temples as the backlogs are caught up until the rollout is complete and the gates open for the families to retrieve the extracted entries earlier to finish. W. 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

Michele wrote: Priesthood leaders cannot be aware of every issue without being told. Again, agreed. I assure you, this issue is not one they are unaware of. I have been in many meetings where this was discussed and brought up as an issue. I personally asked the question--which is why I feel that it's necessary to be obedient. Whatever it is, there is a reason that there is no time limit. It may change in the future, but for now, it is what it is. I suspect a big portion of the delay in putting a time limit in place is because of the kinks in the system where work has been done but is not showing. If a time limit were to be put in place, all of those ordinances not showing would automatically be put through the system and duplicated. A major concern is not to create more duplication, so until the kinks are worked out, I don't expect to see a time limit. Jill Crandell

I think this is an important issue--the amount of time one should wait when some ordinances have been done and others need to be completed. Sometimes people begin the work and never get around to finishing it or can't finish it for some reason. Or, names are put together for a youth baptism but the families are not interested or in a position to do the endowments. It would be good to have this issue raised to the brethren. For instance, is 20 years enough time to wait from the time an individual's baptism and confirmation are done, or 10 years, and then an "expiration" could take place on the process so that others could submit the name for the endowment and sealings? I am not sure what would be reasonable, but I think it would further the work if there were some kind of time limit. Individuals could renew their reservation if they wanted, but then the work would be available for others to do if they did not. Gay Davis ----- Original Message ----- From: Jill N. Crandell To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 7:28 PM Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] stealing names thought Michele wrote: I do think there should be a time limit on these names.....I have quite a few in my own families and I'm not unhappy someone else has submitted them, but I think it's unfair to submit names and let them sit, half completed for years. Not fair to the deceased!! I agree with your feelings, and yet if this were a crucial problem, I believe the Brethren would set a limit to deal with it. Evidently, it hasn't risen to that level to require a time limit, so the guidelines just recommend an approximate submission size. There are times when larger submissions are appropriate. In my case, I had saved some of the names I had researched because we had a very small window of opportunity to have a cousin baptism session between the time my son was endowed and the day he checked in to the MTC. All of the grandchildren of my parents were together in the temple, with my son baptizing them. It was a wonderful experience for these cousins to share together. Part of my work is also to teach my children and help them understand what this is all about. This was a sacred teaching moment for us. After the baptism session, we didn't have nearly as many endowed members of the family to help with the initiatories and endowments. We began working and totally enjoyed the family time shared with our ancestors. We were looking forward to the sealing session together as well. As it turned out, someone else decided time was up, based on their personal time schedule, and we were not able to finish what we considered the crowning blessing to our efforts. That's ok, we moved on. However, I do think it's important for us to follow the guidelines of the Brethren. When they say there is no limit, it is not up to us to randomly decide what WE think the time limit ought to be. We don't know or understand what is happening on the other end. If/when this becomes a serious issue, I'm sure the inspiration of the Lord will cause a time limit to be put in place. Until then, I still say that we should be obedient to the guidelines and considerate of those who actually created the submission. I don't believe that my ancestors were judging us for the time it took to complete the work. I believe they knew what we were doing and that they were enjoying the temple moments with us. Just my opinion. As for duplicates in NFS, yes, that is the only way to find the work that we had done with this submission. My family began the work, but we deleted the last of the ordinances on that submission because someone else had already completed them. The only way to show that all the work is done is to merge my submission with the other submission. 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

Michele wrote: "The Brethren," as in the prophet and apostles, give only general guidelines that are interpreted by the worker bees (who are doing their best). Agreed. I was using the term to refer to the Priesthood brethren in charge of the program. I do not believe that all of the details of these things come directly from the Prophet and Quorum of the Twelve. Perhaps I used the wrong term, but I still believe that those who are responsible to oversee these things have the stewardship to receive inspiration and revelation to resolve the issues within their stewardship. The question of a time limit has been asked many times, so I believe that there are reasons why no limit has been placed. I doubt they haven't thought of it. I also believe that at some point there will be a way to move forward the work that has somehow been stuck in limbo. Remember, some of those ordinances that appear not to have been done, very well may be done and the computer has not released those dates. I have a number of cards that I have checked on where the work was done, the cards were stamped, and NFS still says they are in process. This is work that was done well before NFS existed. There are still kinks being worked out in the computer system, and it's totally possible those ancestors have long since moved on and are not in limbo--as it may appear to those who don't have the cards in hand. In those cases, there is no need to resubmit and do the work again. This is one of the reasons that we can now enter ordinance information by hand. This function will eventually go away, because once the kinks are worked out, only official records will be needed to prevent duplication of ordinance work. I'm told that where ordinances are hand entered, those entries will be studied to figure out why the official record is not showing them. This is a way for those in charge to figure out where the bugs are and release the information that is still needed. Jill Crandell

Karen, I just had a thought when I read this email. The Family Tree has a descendant function that works rather nicely. Could you go to the grandmother who was submitted by JSBerry, possibly a generation or two further back, and then follow down the descendancy lines until you see where the Berry family connects? I'm thinking that if you were able to find a Berry descendant, you could look at the current submitters in the Berry line. It's possible that someone from that branch of the family might know who JSBerry is, and they might be able to tell you if he/she is deceased or put you in touch with him/her. It's a thought, Jill Crandell -----Original Message----- From: Sahara346@aol.com [mailto:Sahara346@aol.com] Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 8:28 PM To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] Reserving Mother's Name? This is something similar to my ward member's situation, except it's her grandmother, and we haven't been able to locate the person who cleared the grandmother's name for temple work. Whoever it is, probably is related to one of her husbands, but is NOT doing the work. It's been cleared for a year now, and nothing has been done, and we've tried several things--including writing to the Church Membership Office to try to identify JSBerry (whoever it is) to see if they'll release the name for Katherine to do her grandmother's work. Katherine will be going to get her own endowment done in a month and a half, and would love to seal her mother to her grandmother & grandfather--but that will have to be on hold until we can come up with another way around the situation. I know there was talk of having areas that are relatively close to a temple (US, Canada, maybe Britain) be able to keep a name cleared for only a couple years without progress being made on it and then opening it up again. I hope they do that. If JSBerry, whoever it is, has passed away, then Katherine's grandparents will sit in limbo for who knows how long--til the millenium? While she'd like to have her grandfather done as well, it would mean so much to her to do her grandmother's work. Whoever it is, they're not closely enough related to have been known to her growing up, or now. Karen

Kathy, No offense taken on any posts today! This has been a good discussion, and I think we all understand each other. It is possible that a submitter has passed away, and it's possible that cards are sitting in a suitcase somewhere. However, it's also possible that there are real life delays in legitimate situations, and it isn't up to us to take over. I feel that contacting Salt Lake to ask about submitters and attempting to identify and contact them is totally appropriate. That would be working within the guidelines and respecting the submitter. If that person is overwhelmed and would love help, or would be happy to turn the work over to a closer relative, that's great. That is a wonderful way to cooperate and increase love and respect in our families. Jill Crandell -----Original Message----- From: Kathy Scott [mailto:kathyscott1@ntlworld.com] Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 5:34 PM To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] stealing names thought Jill, my response was not to your message which I found very sound, but Patricia's message which was also very sound....we need to be honest and doing this work is another opportunity for being just that. As consultants we need to be saying the right things to those we help that they can see the rules are important. It is a well known fact that we should not be encroaching on anyone else's direct lineage within the time limit and the importance of it is highlighted in a discussion such as this. Great! Kathy

Michele wrote: I do think there should be a time limit on these names.....I have quite a few in my own families and I'm not unhappy someone else has submitted them, but I think it's unfair to submit names and let them sit, half completed for years. Not fair to the deceased!! I agree with your feelings, and yet if this were a crucial problem, I believe the Brethren would set a limit to deal with it. Evidently, it hasn't risen to that level to require a time limit, so the guidelines just recommend an approximate submission size. There are times when larger submissions are appropriate. In my case, I had saved some of the names I had researched because we had a very small window of opportunity to have a cousin baptism session between the time my son was endowed and the day he checked in to the MTC. All of the grandchildren of my parents were together in the temple, with my son baptizing them. It was a wonderful experience for these cousins to share together. Part of my work is also to teach my children and help them understand what this is all about. This was a sacred teaching moment for us. After the baptism session, we didn't have nearly as many endowed members of the family to help with the initiatories and endowments. We began working and totally enjoyed the family time shared with our ancestors. We were looking forward to the sealing session together as well. As it turned out, someone else decided time was up, based on their personal time schedule, and we were not able to finish what we considered the crowning blessing to our efforts. That's ok, we moved on. However, I do think it's important for us to follow the guidelines of the Brethren. When they say there is no limit, it is not up to us to randomly decide what WE think the time limit ought to be. We don't know or understand what is happening on the other end. If/when this becomes a serious issue, I'm sure the inspiration of the Lord will cause a time limit to be put in place. Until then, I still say that we should be obedient to the guidelines and considerate of those who actually created the submission. I don't believe that my ancestors were judging us for the time it took to complete the work. I believe they knew what we were doing and that they were enjoying the temple moments with us. Just my opinion. As for duplicates in NFS, yes, that is the only way to find the work that we had done with this submission. My family began the work, but we deleted the last of the ordinances on that submission because someone else had already completed them. The only way to show that all the work is done is to merge my submission with the other submission. Jill Crandell

yes and merge them, the earliest dates take over. Just this morning I found a family with scattered records, and no one did any of them because all of them were from extraction program and merged them. David Samuelsen Kathy Scott wrote: > David , does that mean if you find a duplicate after x number of years, that > could show the completion of the Temple ordinances? Kathy

Doris You can not sign in as a helper to have her claim her contribution. If you do, the person signing in as the helper ends up claiming it. I already did this one. I was the helper and we had to have Salt Lake take me off and the person that wanted to claim her contributions had to wait until our temple went live with nFS. The person claiming has to be registered in nFS. Hope this helps! Christine Las Vegas, NV > From: Jenealogist66@msn.com > To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com > Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 09:52:57 -0600 > Subject: [LDS-WC] NFS question > > Hi Everyone. I have just found an major error in NFS that was contributed to Ancestral file by a person I can recognize as my cousin who lives in Utah and does not yet have access. I am sure she would be very happy to work with me to make the correction, she is a real sweetie. Is is possible for me to sign on as helping her and have her claim her contribution and make the change now, or do we have to wait until she has access? > > Doris Bateman > > 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 _________________________________________________________________ Rediscover Hotmail®: Get quick friend updates right in your inbox. http://windowslive.com/RediscoverHotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Rediscover_Updates1_042009

Good idea. Michele In a message dated 4/13/2009 2:52:52 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, dsam52@sampubco.com writes: start looking for duplicates, you might be very surprised. I did, and found them in my lines. David Samuelsen JCBrooks@aol.com wrote: > I agree that if ordinances are in progress, we should leave them > alone...but what about those ordinances that have been idle for 5+ years? I always > envision pink and blue slips in the temple suitcases of dead people... > > I do think there should be a time limit on these names.....I have quite a > few in my own families and I'm not unhappy someone else has submitted them, > but I think it's unfair to submit names and let them sit, half completed > for years. Not fair to the deceased!! > > Michele > > > In a message dated 4/13/2009 12:40:09 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > jncrandell@broadweave.net writes: > > "mining" the IGI and completing ordinances that someone else had researched > and submitted. > > **************Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the > web. Get the Radio Toolbar! > (http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000002) > > 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 **************Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the web. Get the Radio Toolbar! (http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000002)

Dear All With great understanding of all points of view hitherto mentioned here on the subject of protecting one's own family ordinances, I agree with Patricia even though I have felt an initial resentment when I have found a reasonably close relative in my direct line has had the work done through the extraction program. It is good that we should feel possessive of our ancestors but we must not forget what this is all about. With the work widening out across the world this is a great opportunity to 'meet up' with others who are as passionate about the work for mankind as we are. I love the enthusiasm of you guys! Kathy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patricia A. Crossett" <Patricia.A.Crossett@Dartmouth.EDU> To: <lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 5:08 PM Subject: [LDS-WC] stealing names thought > Dear Brothers and Sisters, > > This conversation lately about stealing names has struck me significantly > and > I thought I would share a thought that has come to my mind. Over the > years I > have done a lot of research and also a lot of temple work. I considered > the people > I had researched as my property. Recently I have come to realized that > they really > are not "mine" but Heavenly Father's and His work needs to be done. After > submitting > hundreds of names to the temple family files I finally realized that I > could not > possibly do all the work myself, even if I worked through the Millennium > to do > it...so I contributed the files to the temple. I am still doing research > and > trying to clean up my inaccuracies since we are on NFS but most of my > researched > names I am contributing to the temple because the important thing is to > get the > ordinances completed, even if they are close relatives. A mother, well, I > do > think the daughter should have that option, but even if someone else > unkindly > stepped in and completed the ordinances, at least the work is complete and > the > mother is now happy. > > Sometimes I think our need for "ownership" clouds our vision of what this > work > is about. I hope this does not sound too harsh, and that people realize > it took > me a while to get to this place, but I am happier and much more calmed and > relaxed > about the work. The burden is being shared around the world by generous > people > who serve with joy in temples in many lands, for which I am extremely > grateful. > > With best wishes for all, > Pattie > > 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 agree that if ordinances are in progress, we should leave them alone...but what about those ordinances that have been idle for 5+ years? I always envision pink and blue slips in the temple suitcases of dead people... I do think there should be a time limit on these names.....I have quite a few in my own families and I'm not unhappy someone else has submitted them, but I think it's unfair to submit names and let them sit, half completed for years. Not fair to the deceased!! Michele In a message dated 4/13/2009 12:40:09 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, jncrandell@broadweave.net writes: "mining" the IGI and completing ordinances that someone else had researched and submitted. **************Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the web. Get the Radio Toolbar! (http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000002)

start looking for duplicates, you might be very surprised. I did, and found them in my lines. David Samuelsen JCBrooks@aol.com wrote: > I agree that if ordinances are in progress, we should leave them > alone...but what about those ordinances that have been idle for 5+ years? I always > envision pink and blue slips in the temple suitcases of dead people... > > I do think there should be a time limit on these names.....I have quite a > few in my own families and I'm not unhappy someone else has submitted them, > but I think it's unfair to submit names and let them sit, half completed > for years. Not fair to the deceased!! > > Michele > > > In a message dated 4/13/2009 12:40:09 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > jncrandell@broadweave.net writes: > > "mining" the IGI and completing ordinances that someone else had researched > and submitted. > > **************Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the > web. Get the Radio Toolbar! > (http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000002) > > 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, I meant to also say that the ancestral file data will not change, so you have to just add the right info, or add notes, or some thing else to clarify the mistakes. SueM Sue Maxwell wrote: > Doris, you could contact her and ask her. She would need to give you her > last five digits of her membership number to do that. But it is > possible. That way the correction would show as her name also. There > will not be contact info for her changes until she gains access, just > like you already discovered. > > SueM > > DORIS BATEMAN wrote: > >> Hi Everyone. I have just found an major error in NFS that was contributed to Ancestral file by a person I can recognize as my cousin who lives in Utah and does not yet have access. I am sure she would be very happy to work with me to make the correction, she is a real sweetie. Is is possible for me to sign on as helping her and have her claim her contribution and make the change now, or do we have to wait until she has access? >> >> Doris Bateman >> >> >

Doris, you could contact her and ask her. She would need to give you her last five digits of her membership number to do that. But it is possible. That way the correction would show as her name also. There will not be contact info for her changes until she gains access, just like you already discovered. SueM DORIS BATEMAN wrote: > Hi Everyone. I have just found an major error in NFS that was contributed to Ancestral file by a person I can recognize as my cousin who lives in Utah and does not yet have access. I am sure she would be very happy to work with me to make the correction, she is a real sweetie. Is is possible for me to sign on as helping her and have her claim her contribution and make the change now, or do we have to wait until she has access? > > Doris Bateman > >

You'll want to read this story about Paula Todd - genealogist, volunteer librarian at the John McIntire Library in Zanesville, Ohio. She tells her experiences in genealogy at the Zanesville (OH) FHC: I was at The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints at their family center. That's the Mormon Church on Kearns Drive. They are tied into the world's largest genealogy center out in Utah. I walked in not knowing what I wanted to find out, except I wanted to find out about the Ethell family. I heard some woman in the back of the room say, 'I have Ethells in my family.' And I thought, 'Oh, sure, that's probably no relations of mine at all.' But whoever was at the desk put me on a reader of some kind. A census reader to start with. And pretty soon the woman in the back came and laid this Ethell book beside me. I copied it off just to be nice to her if nothing else because she was going to such great lengths. And I got home and looked at that and there was my family laid out in front of me. Right in front of me! Read the entire article at: Kearns, Charlie. Genealogist Looks Back. 12 April 2009 Zanesville (OH) Times-Recorder. http://www.zanesvilletimesrecorder.com/article/20090412/NEWS01/904120337 or: http://blog.genealogybank.com/2009/04/paula-todd-genealogist-librarian.html