Right you are Linda, a cousin and I are going through all the films for a Parish in England..the records were filmed but not all extracted or indexed in the IGI. Found our common ancestors marriage record by going frame by frame. I think in this case the one film is a small book and difficult to read sometimes and perhaps a curate note book sort of thing and some things were not put in the master ledger..just a guess but it does pay to look for yourself in all available sources whenever possible. Off the subject of the IGI though is another problem.. with the Wickard family (Sarah Wickard married Samuel Sackett) is an unproven genealogy by a person hired to do family research years ago. A Wickard was Secretary of Agriculture in one of Roosevelts administrations and either he or someone in his family hired a woman "Genealogist". Except for the information which would have been available from living members of the Wickard family all of the information is unproven and worse most likely made up out of smoke and mirrors. Know one man who spent 30 years trying to prove the information that the Wickards came from "the old Sod" of Ireland. I still find that information floating around as a true and proven family history with her work cited if a citation is even given. Depressing. But have to admit in the first few years after starting family research my citations were sketchy and I would sometimes accept unproven "facts". It is embarrassing to realize your errors. But made me go after all sources I can find and I learned to put my speculations in the notes rather than in the tree. Louella -----Original Message----- From: Linda Hare [mailto:alstrom@icon.net] Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2004 6:27 PM To: SACKETT-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [SACKETT-L] General info IGI You are very right about the IGI. And you are right that a lot of them are extractions. The extractions are wonderful as you can go get the actual record. Several years ago, it is getting to be many years, submissions were not included in the IGI, they were only in the ancestral file. I would like to see the extractions and submissions separated. I know that I sound a little harsh but I have found so much information that is incorrect in the IGI (submissions) and on the internet, and in the FTM or whatever those things are, that I would like to see all guesses without at least some substantiation, removed from the internet unless it is stated that it is a guess. That is why I am so proud of this Sackett group. They are so in to finding documentation. Oh, by the way, I even have family members who have put out the wrong information as they don't want it to be known who they really descend from. Linda Oh, another thing. If you find that the LDS library has extracted a certain film and you feel sure that your ancestors were in that area, try to get to the original records. I have had this happen a couple of times. One case was a church in England. The pages that included my ancestors were not filmed. Therefore, they were not extracted. I just could not believe that they were not there and went to the repository in London and went thru the original records. There they were. ----- Original Message ----- From: <louellas@endor.com> To: <SACKETT-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2004 1:01 PM Subject: [SACKETT-L] General info IGI > While not a member of the LDS church have spent quite a few > years volunteering in my local family history centers so feel > I can give a little information about the IGI etc. Hope nobody minds. > > The entries come from several sources: > 1) members of the church who add their family member's names > and information for baptism of the dead (you will often see > reference to Ordinance, a date and place of baptism). The member > information if placed in the IGI primarily, I understand, to assist > other church members find their ancestors. I also understand that > all church members try to find at least 4 generations back for > these ordinances. The batch numbers for these entries will not > commonly have letters ie the Batch number for the marriage of > Dwight & Charlotte Wilson below has no letter so is an entry > of a church member. The film would show the original entry > and most, but not all, reference where the information was > gleaned--ie family bible, town records, etc. An A in front of > the batch number is a marriage also entered by a church > member. But rule number one with this type of IGI entry is > to only use it as a working file..not as the end of your > research. This said I have also found some great stuff > in the ordinance files from the 1890s. Names of the > contributor's aunts, cousins etc with approx birth dates > and places of births. In this particular case this person knew > the deceased cousins and aunts & uncles so I have used it as a type of > oral family history and so note it as such. Most I have been able to > confirm. > BUT as Linda says, the information can be so far out of line as > to be useless. Which is why there may be multiple entries of > the birth or marriage of supposedly one particular person with > dates as far apart as 20 years and 2 or 3 different spouses all > at the same time so ALWAYS try to verify everything and/or find > supporting information. AND I always look at the original film > to check the full entry for the IGI. > I had found one family connected to the Sacketts with all the > siblings but one entered into the baptismal ordinances in the > 1920s, by a person who had to have known about his uncle, and > was told by a church member that if the uncle was not a member > of the LDS and living family members objected to the baptism > it would not have been done. Which may well have been what > happened or maybe GrUncle Arthur didn't like that uncle and > didn't want to spend eternity with him! > By the way, I have heard some people object to the blanket > baptism of the dead non members of the LDS church (their believe, > in common with some other religious, has a heaven only inhabited > by baptized members of the church) but without getting into a > religious controversy, > If you don't believe it will work, why be upset! > But before you stop reading... > > 2) The extraction of records filmed by the LDS by permission > of the record holder..for instance the Scottish Parish records > before 1855. These records have Batch numbers preceded by > letters. Commonly C for christenings, M for marriages etc > B for burials. Now some have P. These would be primary records > > So the Batch number can indicate what kind of record will > be found on the film. Also if in doubt, do the LDS library > search by film number which will give the description of the > film. (this is one of the search options) > > Generally I have found it very useful to look at the film > with the IGI entry..often you will find multiple entries > by the same person. Newer IGI entries will have a better chance > of contacting the person who made the entry but once or twice > I have been lucky. Some old pictures were found through a daughter > of one Sackett who had entered many of his family and had died > before I found the entries. > It has only been lately that I have found entries with no > source given for the entry. Hopefully, this will not become > common > Deaths are not usually shown in the IGI but may be found > in the original entries. > As a non church member I did enter the information from a family > bible into the Ancestral file..simple to make the information > available not for death baptism. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Thurmon E King [mailto:thurmonking@juno.com] > Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2004 4:12 AM > To: SACKETT-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [SACKETT-L] Dwight Sackett - need parents > > > > Robin: > > I think the information you had came from another database on World > Connect #:11466 by a Drummond. It has the one son named Otis Eugene born > in 1848. > > I have found another problem concerning the marriage of Dwight Sackett > and Caroline A. Bolton. Some sources have Dwights birth as 1824 > Worcester, MA and his marriage there in 1844. It appears that the > information there came from the LDS IGI. Files there have two dates and > two different sources cited: > (1). Dwight Sackett; Male > Marriage: 15 MAR 1824 Of, Leominster, Worcester, Massachusetts > Source Information: Film Number: 183515; Page Number: 254; Reference > number: 9190 > (2). DWIGHT SACKETT; Male > Spouse: CHARLOTTE E. WILSON > Marriage: 15 MAR 1844 Leominster, Worcester, Massachusetts > Source Information: Batch Number: 7130128; Sheet: 14 ; Source Call No.: > 0538998; Type: Film > > It is not clear whether these films are of original records, or are of > contributed data. From the information above it appears that there is a > problem with the information found on the films. Another problem relates > to the name of his wife. The 2nd source gives the name of Dwight's bride > as Charlotte E. Wilson. But the 1850 and 1870 censuses give the name of > his wife as Caroline A. Sackett. Mary Lou Sackett has the marriage date > and place as March 01, 1845, Brattleboro, Windham Co., VT. > > Mary Lou would have more information about finding records in MI than I > do. But if one could get a copy of Dwight's death certificate some > valuable information can be gained from it. > > The answer to question about when it is appropriate to add an individual > to your family tree depends upon who is giving the answer. > > Generally a connection should be a tentative connection until it is > proven by source documents. The purists generally insist upon having > documentation from primary source documents. And insist upon viewing the > document, or image of the document themselves. With the older > handwritten documents this is important because letters in the words can > easily be transcribed incorrectly and another person reading the same > document can read it correctly. So research done by others should be > double checked to make sure it is correct. > > Those of us on the SACKETT-L and members of TSFA are tryiing to correct > errors in Weygant's book and add information and sources that he did not > supply. At the same time we are compiling information on as many Sackett > descendants as possible. > > So the purists "grit their teeth" at the kind of work I am doing. I make > tentative connections and then look to others to help with finding the > sources and inform me of any errors I may have posted. I do this because > information comes in from others in such a large quantity that I am not > able to access and view the source documents myself. > > But, as you have noticed, I do check the data for inconsistencies and > look for clues. > > Thurmon > > On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 18:29:43 -0800 Robin Smith <unsackett@sbcglobal.net> > writes: > > I understand. I also assumed that Eugene had died in infancy. I > believe I > > had taken the birth dates from another researchers tree and did not > notice > > the discrepancy until you pointed it out. I will look for confirmation > of > > the the date. > > > > I feel that it is likely that Dwight Sackett son of Asher Sackett Jr. > is > > indeed the connection I was looking for (given the dates, the older > brother > > Henry, and the coincidence of a Dwight and Henry of the proper ages > both in > > Assyria). Do you have any suggestions on how I might confirm this. > > When is it appropriate to add these ancestors to my tree. Is there an > > etiquette regarding how much confirmation one should have. As I said, I > am a > > genealogy newby. Again, I greatly appreciate your help. > > > > Robin > > > ==== SACKETT Mailing List ==== > GEN-NEWBIE-L: No question is too elementary and the atmosphere is relaxed & > friendly. GEN-NEWBIE-D: This list is the digest mode for GEN-NEWBIE-L. > > ============================== > Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration > Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 > > > > > ==== SACKETT Mailing List ==== > RootsWeb blocks attachments. So sharing photos is not possible through > the list; send off-list individually. If you have a text file you wish to share, save it as text and insert the text into your message. > > ============================== > Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration > Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 ==== SACKETT Mailing List ==== ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To post a message, address it to:sackett-l@rootsweb.com To subscribe or unsubscribe, address it to: sackett-l-request@rootsweb.com (SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE in the body) ============================== Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237

Also, sometimes they miss filming a page so the material is not only not extracted, it is not filmed. ----- Original Message ----- From: <louellas@endor.com> To: <SACKETT-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 1:42 AM Subject: RE: [SACKETT-L] General info IGI > Right you are Linda, a cousin and I are going through all the films > for a Parish in England..the records were filmed but not all > extracted or indexed in the IGI. Found our common ancestors > marriage record by going frame by frame. I think in this case > the one film is a small book and difficult to read sometimes > and perhaps a curate note book sort of thing and some things > were not put in the master ledger..just a guess but it does > pay to look for yourself in all available sources whenever > possible. > Off the subject of the IGI though is another problem.. > with the Wickard family (Sarah Wickard married Samuel Sackett) > is an unproven genealogy by a person hired to do family research > years ago. > A Wickard was Secretary of Agriculture in one of > Roosevelts administrations and either he or someone in > his family hired a woman "Genealogist". Except for > the information which would have been available from > living members of the Wickard family all of the information > is unproven and worse most likely made up out of smoke and > mirrors. Know one man who spent 30 years trying to prove > the information that the Wickards came from "the old Sod" of > Ireland. > I still find that information floating around as a true > and proven family history with her work cited if a citation is > even given. Depressing. > But have to admit in the first few years after starting family > research my citations were sketchy and I would sometimes > accept unproven "facts". It is embarrassing to realize your > errors. But made me go after all sources I can find and I learned > to put my speculations in the notes rather than in the tree. > > Louella > > -----Original Message----- > From: Linda Hare [mailto:alstrom@icon.net] > Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2004 6:27 PM > To: SACKETT-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [SACKETT-L] General info IGI > > > > You are very right about the IGI. And you are right that a lot of them are > extractions. The extractions are wonderful as you can go get the actual > record. Several years ago, it is getting to be many years, submissions were > not included in the IGI, they were only in the ancestral file. I would like > to see the extractions and submissions separated. I know that I sound a > little harsh but I have found so much information that is incorrect in the > IGI (submissions) and on the internet, and in the FTM or whatever those > things are, that I would like to see all guesses without at least some > substantiation, removed from the internet unless it is stated that it is a > guess. That is why I am so proud of this Sackett group. They are so in to > finding documentation. > Oh, by the way, I even have family members who have put out the wrong > information as they don't want it to be known who they really descend from. > Linda > Oh, another thing. If you find that the LDS library has extracted a certain > film and you feel sure that your ancestors were in that area, try to get to > the original records. I have had this happen a couple of times. One case > was a church in England. The pages that included my ancestors were not > filmed. Therefore, they were not extracted. I just could not believe that > they were not there and went to the repository in London and went thru the > original records. There they were. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <louellas@endor.com> > To: <SACKETT-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2004 1:01 PM > Subject: [SACKETT-L] General info IGI > > > > While not a member of the LDS church have spent quite a few > > years volunteering in my local family history centers so feel > > I can give a little information about the IGI etc. Hope nobody minds. > > > > The entries come from several sources: > > 1) members of the church who add their family member's names > > and information for baptism of the dead (you will often see > > reference to Ordinance, a date and place of baptism). The member > > information if placed in the IGI primarily, I understand, to assist > > other church members find their ancestors. I also understand that > > all church members try to find at least 4 generations back for > > these ordinances. The batch numbers for these entries will not > > commonly have letters ie the Batch number for the marriage of > > Dwight & Charlotte Wilson below has no letter so is an entry > > of a church member. The film would show the original entry > > and most, but not all, reference where the information was > > gleaned--ie family bible, town records, etc. An A in front of > > the batch number is a marriage also entered by a church > > member. But rule number one with this type of IGI entry is > > to only use it as a working file..not as the end of your > > research. This said I have also found some great stuff > > in the ordinance files from the 1890s. Names of the > > contributor's aunts, cousins etc with approx birth dates > > and places of births. In this particular case this person knew > > the deceased cousins and aunts & uncles so I have used it as a type of > > oral family history and so note it as such. Most I have been able to > > confirm. > > BUT as Linda says, the information can be so far out of line as > > to be useless. Which is why there may be multiple entries of > > the birth or marriage of supposedly one particular person with > > dates as far apart as 20 years and 2 or 3 different spouses all > > at the same time so ALWAYS try to verify everything and/or find > > supporting information. AND I always look at the original film > > to check the full entry for the IGI. > > I had found one family connected to the Sacketts with all the > > siblings but one entered into the baptismal ordinances in the > > 1920s, by a person who had to have known about his uncle, and > > was told by a church member that if the uncle was not a member > > of the LDS and living family members objected to the baptism > > it would not have been done. Which may well have been what > > happened or maybe GrUncle Arthur didn't like that uncle and > > didn't want to spend eternity with him! > > By the way, I have heard some people object to the blanket > > baptism of the dead non members of the LDS church (their believe, > > in common with some other religious, has a heaven only inhabited > > by baptized members of the church) but without getting into a > > religious controversy, > > If you don't believe it will work, why be upset! > > But before you stop reading... > > > > 2) The extraction of records filmed by the LDS by permission > > of the record holder..for instance the Scottish Parish records > > before 1855. These records have Batch numbers preceded by > > letters. Commonly C for christenings, M for marriages etc > > B for burials. Now some have P. These would be primary records > > > > So the Batch number can indicate what kind of record will > > be found on the film. Also if in doubt, do the LDS library > > search by film number which will give the description of the > > film. (this is one of the search options) > > > > Generally I have found it very useful to look at the film > > with the IGI entry..often you will find multiple entries > > by the same person. Newer IGI entries will have a better chance > > of contacting the person who made the entry but once or twice > > I have been lucky. Some old pictures were found through a daughter > > of one Sackett who had entered many of his family and had died > > before I found the entries. > > It has only been lately that I have found entries with no > > source given for the entry. Hopefully, this will not become > > common > > Deaths are not usually shown in the IGI but may be found > > in the original entries. > > As a non church member I did enter the information from a family > > bible into the Ancestral file..simple to make the information > > available not for death baptism. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Thurmon E King [mailto:thurmonking@juno.com] > > Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2004 4:12 AM > > To: SACKETT-L@rootsweb.com > > Subject: Re: [SACKETT-L] Dwight Sackett - need parents > > > > > > > > Robin: > > > > I think the information you had came from another database on World > > Connect #:11466 by a Drummond. It has the one son named Otis Eugene born > > in 1848. > > > > I have found another problem concerning the marriage of Dwight Sackett > > and Caroline A. Bolton. Some sources have Dwights birth as 1824 > > Worcester, MA and his marriage there in 1844. It appears that the > > information there came from the LDS IGI. Files there have two dates and > > two different sources cited: > > (1). Dwight Sackett; Male > > Marriage: 15 MAR 1824 Of, Leominster, Worcester, Massachusetts > > Source Information: Film Number: 183515; Page Number: 254; Reference > > number: 9190 > > (2). DWIGHT SACKETT; Male > > Spouse: CHARLOTTE E. WILSON > > Marriage: 15 MAR 1844 Leominster, Worcester, Massachusetts > > Source Information: Batch Number: 7130128; Sheet: 14 ; Source Call No.: > > 0538998; Type: Film > > > > It is not clear whether these films are of original records, or are of > > contributed data. From the information above it appears that there is a > > problem with the information found on the films. Another problem relates > > to the name of his wife. The 2nd source gives the name of Dwight's bride > > as Charlotte E. Wilson. But the 1850 and 1870 censuses give the name of > > his wife as Caroline A. Sackett. Mary Lou Sackett has the marriage date > > and place as March 01, 1845, Brattleboro, Windham Co., VT. > > > > Mary Lou would have more information about finding records in MI than I > > do. But if one could get a copy of Dwight's death certificate some > > valuable information can be gained from it. > > > > The answer to question about when it is appropriate to add an individual > > to your family tree depends upon who is giving the answer. > > > > Generally a connection should be a tentative connection until it is > > proven by source documents. The purists generally insist upon having > > documentation from primary source documents. And insist upon viewing the > > document, or image of the document themselves. With the older > > handwritten documents this is important because letters in the words can > > easily be transcribed incorrectly and another person reading the same > > document can read it correctly. So research done by others should be > > double checked to make sure it is correct. > > > > Those of us on the SACKETT-L and members of TSFA are tryiing to correct > > errors in Weygant's book and add information and sources that he did not > > supply. At the same time we are compiling information on as many Sackett > > descendants as possible. > > > > So the purists "grit their teeth" at the kind of work I am doing. I make > > tentative connections and then look to others to help with finding the > > sources and inform me of any errors I may have posted. I do this because > > information comes in from others in such a large quantity that I am not > > able to access and view the source documents myself. > > > > But, as you have noticed, I do check the data for inconsistencies and > > look for clues. > > > > Thurmon > > > > On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 18:29:43 -0800 Robin Smith <unsackett@sbcglobal.net> > > writes: > > > I understand. I also assumed that Eugene had died in infancy. I > > believe I > > > had taken the birth dates from another researchers tree and did not > > notice > > > the discrepancy until you pointed it out. I will look for confirmation > > of > > > the the date. > > > > > > I feel that it is likely that Dwight Sackett son of Asher Sackett Jr. > > is > > > indeed the connection I was looking for (given the dates, the older > > brother > > > Henry, and the coincidence of a Dwight and Henry of the proper ages > > both in > > > Assyria). Do you have any suggestions on how I might confirm this. > > > When is it appropriate to add these ancestors to my tree. Is there an > > > etiquette regarding how much confirmation one should have. As I said, I > > am a > > > genealogy newby. Again, I greatly appreciate your help. > > > > > > Robin > > > > > > ==== SACKETT Mailing List ==== > > GEN-NEWBIE-L: No question is too elementary and the atmosphere is relaxed > & > > friendly. GEN-NEWBIE-D: This list is the digest mode for GEN-NEWBIE-L. > > > > ============================== > > Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration > > Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. > > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 > > > > > > > > > > ==== SACKETT Mailing List ==== > > RootsWeb blocks attachments. So sharing photos is not possible through > > the list; send off-list individually. If you have a text file you wish to > share, save it as text and insert the text into your message. > > > > ============================== > > Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration > > Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. > > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 > > > > ==== SACKETT Mailing List ==== > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > To post a message, address it to:sackett-l@rootsweb.com > To subscribe or unsubscribe, address it to: > sackett-l-request@rootsweb.com (SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE in the body) > > ============================== > Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration > Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 > > > > > > ==== SACKETT Mailing List ==== > If you haven't already, please send in your introduction to the list. > For examples, visit http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~sidersn/sackett > > ============================== > Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration > Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237