Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Missing ordinances on extraction generated submission.

Expand Messages
  • Ileen Johnson
    James, I searched for Harry H. Bozearth b. 1882, date range 5 years, United States, New Jersey and found him. Then I noticed I had not logged in to see the
    Message 1 of 6 , Jul 18, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      James,

      I searched for Harry H. Bozearth b. 1882, date range 5 years, United
      States, New Jersey and found him. Then I noticed I had not logged in
      to see the ordinance dates, so I signed in and searched again. Could
      not find him using the same parameters as above. When I searched
      without loggin in, the source showed C005296 Type: film, no Source
      Number. Interesting. . . .

      --- In FHCNET@yahoogroups.com, James W Anderson <genealogy248@...> wrote:
      >
      > I've got a problem trying to resolve an issue regarding a name me
      and another consultant found and connected to a tree that has the
      baptism and confirmation dates, but show the rest of the ordinances as
      'in progress' four years later.
      >
      > No record is found even in the old IGI of this name. No other
      records exist save for the one record for this person even in nFS for
      the individual, and there are no combined records.
      >
      > There is however an extraction batch number, C-005296, found in the
      notes, which is how it got to the Boston Temple and had the first
      ordinances performed, and I would assume the rest also, but no way
      exists right now of telling for sure whether it was there or
      elsewhere, or whether the rest of the ordinances even got done.
      >
      > Here's my other consultant's individual.
      >
      > Harry H. Bozearth
      > b. 1882
      > PID M5MX-7XK
      >
      > The problem is Support thinks (twice now) that this was submitted by
      a member, and did not see the extraction record. It's from a
      birth/christening record of some sort.
      >
    • T. Mason
      ... and another consultant found and connected to a tree that has the baptism and confirmation dates, but show the rest of the ordinances as in progress four
      Message 2 of 6 , Jul 18, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In FHCNET@yahoogroups.com, James W Anderson <genealogy248@...> wrote:
        > I've got a problem trying to resolve an issue regarding a name me
        and another consultant found and connected to a tree that has the
        baptism and confirmation dates, but show the rest of the ordinances as
        'in progress' four years later.
        > <<<<<<snip>>>>>>>

        Three time in the past two weeks I've been helping members who are
        having serious problems because of this topic.

        Each have had direct line relatives whose data was partially processed
        in the Church record extraction process. In each case the records are
        listed in nFS as "In Progress". They have been in some stage of a
        "cleared" status for over ten years each in the IGI.

        There was another member who I helped on Tuesday who had 35 cards with
        blanks in the sealing to parent's field and the cards were processed
        through TempleReady in May 2000. (Eight years ago.) They were listed
        as "In Progress" in the nFS and we found this when I helped him
        register. Those sealings were processed the next evening.

        Although it appears records submitted to Temple File are being
        processed much faster it seems that some of the new temples pull
        batches of records and them set them on shelves - in case the Internet
        system goes down. They don't rotate the batches, they just sit on the
        shelves like the cards from the extraction records have sat on the
        shelves. (Shame on them for creating this artificial roadblock.)

        Also some people still regard all names they prepare as theirs only
        and they selfishly hoard them - ignoring the advice that they should
        only reserve enough names that they can process in the next few
        months; they should enter the rest of the names into nFS and release
        them for others to help with work.

        The nFS program was primarily designed as a means to stop the
        duplication of ordinances.

        The new Family Search program finally requires ordinances to be
        processed in sequence which I accept as a correct principle. But the
        problem to me seems there is a block when ordinances been on hold in a
        "Cleared" or "In Progress" status for ten years.

        The patron I was helping was quite concerned about her great
        grandfather's family because she has cancer. If we expect members to
        accept the responsibility to bind their family together, then I think
        the process of blocking these ordinances must somehow be stopped.
        We've got to accept the human side of this data processing method. She
        quite deserves the privilege of doing this work before she dies after
        waiting all these years. Instead of having us submit to the process,
        the nFS program should be a tool to help the member bind their family
        into an eternal unit.

        The extraction records need to be rechecked for they are duplicating
        submissions.

        I think there needs to be some method to release all records for
        ordinance work if they are held for more than a year.

        Terry Mason
        Clermont, FL
      • James W Anderson
        Try it again both with and without login to be sure it s the same one (it is, but seeing if there is something else odd doesn t hurt), here are the complete
        Message 3 of 6 , Jul 18, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          Try it again both with and without login to be sure it's the same one (it is, but seeing if there is something else odd doesn't hurt), here are the complete details on the birthplace and date.

          15 November 1882
          Chester, Burlington, New Jersey
           
          (no United States).


          --- On Fri, 7/18/08, Ileen Johnson <ileenjohnson@...> wrote:
          From: Ileen Johnson <ileenjohnson@...>
          Subject: [FHCNET] Re: Missing ordinances on extraction generated submission.
          To: FHCNET@yahoogroups.com
          Date: Friday, July 18, 2008, 6:01 PM











          James,



          I searched for Harry H. Bozearth b. 1882, date range 5 years, United

          States, New Jersey and found him. Then I noticed I had not logged in

          to see the ordinance dates, so I signed in and searched again. Could

          not find him using the same parameters as above. When I searched

          without loggin in, the source showed C005296 Type: film, no Source

          Number. Interesting. . . .



          --- In FHCNET@yahoogroups. com, James W Anderson <genealogy248@ ...> wrote:

          >

          > I've got a problem trying to resolve an issue regarding a name me

          and another consultant found and connected to a tree that has the

          baptism and confirmation dates, but show the rest of the ordinances as

          'in progress' four years later.

          >

          > No record is found even in the old IGI of this name. No other

          records exist save for the one record for this person even in nFS for

          the individual, and there are no combined records.

          >

          > There is however an extraction batch number, C-005296, found in the

          notes, which is how it got to the Boston Temple and had the first

          ordinances performed, and I would assume the rest also, but no way

          exists right now of telling for sure whether it was there or

          elsewhere, or whether the rest of the ordinances even got done.

          >

          > Here's my other consultant's individual.

          >

          > Harry H. Bozearth

          > b. 1882

          > PID M5MX-7XK

          >

          > The problem is Support thinks (twice now) that this was submitted by

          a member, and did not see the extraction record. It's from a

          birth/christening record of some sort.

          >





























          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Snow, Donald R.
          Jim and Eileen, IGI batch C005296 was extracted from FHL film #0494195 which consists of New Jersey records, Births Atlantic-Hudson v. 12 1882-1883 . So it s
          Message 4 of 6 , Jul 19, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            Jim and Eileen, IGI batch C005296 was extracted from FHL film
            #0494195 which consists of New Jersey records, Births Atlantic-Hudson
            v. 12 1882-1883 . So it's from the temple file and maybe waiting for
            other ordinances, too. Regarding IGI batches without the film
            number, we've got a database here at the London FHC that we can look
            up most of them in since our patrons find so many of them and want to
            know the film so they can see the original record.

            Elder Snow


            At 02:16 AM 7/19/2008, James W Anderson wrote:

            >Try it again both with and without login to be sure it's the same
            >one (it is, but seeing if there is something else odd doesn't hurt),
            >here are the complete details on the birthplace and date.
            >
            >15 November 1882
            >Chester, Burlington, New Jersey
            >
            >(no United States).
            >
            >--- On Fri, 7/18/08, Ileen Johnson
            ><<mailto:ileenjohnson%40gmail.com>ileenjohnson@...> wrote:
            >From: Ileen Johnson <<mailto:ileenjohnson%40gmail.com>ileenjohnson@...>
            >Subject: [FHCNET] Re: Missing ordinances on extraction generated submission.
            >To: <mailto:FHCNET%40yahoogroups.com>FHCNET@yahoogroups.com
            >Date: Friday, July 18, 2008, 6:01 PM
            >
            >James,
            >
            >I searched for Harry H. Bozearth b. 1882, date range 5 years, United
            >
            >States, New Jersey and found him. Then I noticed I had not logged in
            >
            >to see the ordinance dates, so I signed in and searched again. Could
            >
            >not find him using the same parameters as above. When I searched
            >
            >without loggin in, the source showed C005296 Type: film, no Source
            >
            >Number. Interesting. . . .
            >
            >--- In FHCNET@yahoogroups. com, James W Anderson <genealogy248@ ...> wrote:
            >
            > >
            >
            > > I've got a problem trying to resolve an issue regarding a name me
            >
            >and another consultant found and connected to a tree that has the
            >
            >baptism and confirmation dates, but show the rest of the ordinances as
            >
            >'in progress' four years later.
            >
            > >
            >
            > > No record is found even in the old IGI of this name. No other
            >
            >records exist save for the one record for this person even in nFS for
            >
            >the individual, and there are no combined records.
            >
            > >
            >
            > > There is however an extraction batch number, C-005296, found in the
            >
            >notes, which is how it got to the Boston Temple and had the first
            >
            >ordinances performed, and I would assume the rest also, but no way
            >
            >exists right now of telling for sure whether it was there or
            >
            >elsewhere, or whether the rest of the ordinances even got done.
            >
            > >
            >
            > > Here's my other consultant's individual.
            >
            > >
            >
            > > Harry H. Bozearth
            >
            > > b. 1882
            >
            > > PID M5MX-7XK
            >
            > >
            >
            > > The problem is Support thinks (twice now) that this was submitted by
            >
            >a member, and did not see the extraction record. It's from a
            >
            >birth/christening record of some sort.
            >
            > >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
            >

            Elder Donald R. Snow, England London Mission
            London Family History Centre (formerly Hyde Park Family History
            Centre), http://www.hydeparkfhc.org
            Retired Professor of Mathematics, Brigham Young University, Provo,
            Utah; snowd@...

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.