Why so many duplicate ordinances performed?

Discussions around Genealogy technology.
gb308-p40
New Member
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 8:02 am

Why so many duplicate ordinances performed?

Postby gb308-p40 » Fri Aug 24, 2007 8:23 am

Hello!
I just found this forum.....it's great!
I and my older sister have recently been working on family member's genealogy. We have both been quite shocked at the duplications and numerous ordinances that have been performed over and over again for our different deceased family members. Most of our ancestors were BIC (grandparents, great-grandparents, etc.), yet many of them have been re-baptized by proxy as well as re-sealed to their parents by proxy, re-married by proxy and some of the ordinances have been performed over 10 different times on different dates and in different temples.
I even looked up Joseph Smith, Jr. and he's been baptized several times and sealed to his parents several times, not to mention that he's been sealed to Emma several times (and some as recent as later than 2001).
I don't understand technology that well....but, it seems to me that avoiding duplications should be a simple database, computer issue.
Thanks for any help anyone can give me on this.....I'm really just a novice and I'm still learning!!!! :)
gb308

RonaldF-p40
Member
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 7:30 pm
Location: Oakhurst, California

Postby RonaldF-p40 » Fri Aug 24, 2007 10:40 am

Ordinance duplication is a major problem in temple work. The new FamilySearch that is starting to be initiated in selected temple districts will take a major step in reducing future duplications. There are many factors that have contributed to duplications. I will list a few here:

  • Patrons submitting names with minimal data that does not uniquely identify an individual. ( Full name, complete birth date, complete place location, complete names of parents)
  • Patrons not being diligent in researching records to see what ordinances have been done.(IGI not checked)
  • Patrons not learning the details of how to properly use the existing software. (PAF, IGI, TempleReady, FamilySearch)
  • Patrons not communicating with relatives working on the same lines.
  • Patrons not diligently studying the manuals that the church has published.(PAF user’s guide and A Member’s Guide To Temple and Family History Work)

I work in the office of our local temple. We do spot checking of submissions to the temple. We often see the same person being submitted on separate submission by the same submitter. We constantly find names being submitted that appear on the IGI with completed ordinances.

I don't understand technology that well....but, it seems to me that avoiding duplications should be a simple database, computer issue.”

There is an old computer acronym GIGO which stands for “garbage in, garbage out”. Over enthusiastic patrons often concentrate on getting a name submitted for ordinance work and not on the detail and correctness of their data. The human factor at the keyboard is hard to control.

User avatar
BenJoeM-p40
New Member
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 10:37 pm
Location: Ogden, Utah
Contact:

Postby BenJoeM-p40 » Fri Aug 24, 2007 10:55 am

I remember President Hinckley sometime ago announcing in conference that temples would all be moving to this system. My grandfather worked in the the Ogden temple and he and his wife finished his entire family. He just got word that it had been done 20 times before. He was very sad because he felt like hundreds of people have been delayed in receiving these blessings and ordinances because his family has repeated the same ordinances for the past 100 years. The Lord really teaches us to be accountable and responsible and this is one way we can all improve.
In helping my own father with geneology we have found many times people wrote things down that they assumed, heard from a friend, or even made up. Our geneology hit a 7 year road block until we discovered that we had an enormous amount of mis-information. We have no decided to add a note to each person in our genealogy to state when the info was confirmed and by what or whom. This could be a good addition to future software as well.

pack1096-p40
New Member
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 10:21 am

Postby pack1096-p40 » Fri Aug 24, 2007 2:14 pm

From 1970 to 1991 names submitted for temple ordinances were checked very thourghly by computer and manually for duplicates. At least 25% of submissions were found to be duplicates.

In 1991 the duplication checking was shifted to the members and duplicates skyrocketed.

I don't hold out much hope that the new FamilySearch will stop the duplicates. It is just too easy to submit names without checking.

RonaldF-p40
Member
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 7:30 pm
Location: Oakhurst, California

Postby RonaldF-p40 » Fri Aug 24, 2007 3:29 pm

pack1096 wrote:From 1970 to 1991 names submitted for temple ordinances were checked very thourghly by computer and manually for duplicates. At least 25% of submissions were found to be duplicates.

In 1991 the duplication checking was shifted to the members and duplicates skyrocketed.

I don't hold out much hope that the new FamilySearch will stop the duplicates. It is just too easy to submit names without checking.

It will be better than what we have now. A submitted name will be automatically checked against much better and more up to date databases. The human factor will need additional training.

gb308-p40
New Member
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 8:02 am

Postby gb308-p40 » Fri Aug 24, 2007 4:11 pm

Thank you for your replies, RonaldF, BenJoeM, and pack1096! I appreciate the help and feedback from all of you.
Ronald, (and please understand that I'm not being flippant or rude with these additional comments.....I'm just honestly trying to grasp why these hundreds of duplicate ordinances are being performed),
Your response gives the impression that most of the duplications happen because of Patron errors. Although I agree that we (as the patrons) have an important responsibility to study, learn and then properly apply the software, it would seem that there should be trained individuals who could make sure these errors/duplications aren't entered or accepted until they've been verified.
You mentioned "GIGO", but my experience with my own ancestors has been that all the names were spelled correctly, birthdates/places, dates of death and locations have been accurate. But still, this information was all accepted, duplicates and all, and then sent out to the temples for the duplicate work to be performed. The dates and locations for many of these ordinances have been different, meaning they've been performed many times after they were actually completed. So there was no "garbage in", it was just accurate information being submitted for people who'd already had their ordinances performed. Also many of my ancestors were BIC, but have still been baptized for the dead many times.
Maybe I'm over simplifying, but how difficult when a name is submitted, is it to type it in (with some accurate identifying facts, ie. birthdate, parent's names, etc.), search, and then show if their ordinances have already been performed? If all of the ordinances have been completed for this name, it should not be accepted for performing new ordinances.
There will always be "human error", I agree. And, I would imagine that there will always be several ancestors submitting duplicate names. But, doing a search verification, and then if seeing the work has been completed previously, the names should not be allowed to be re-submitted.
Again, maybe my lack of computer knowledge is over simplifying this, but I've worked with computers enough to know that doing the above is possible.
It's upsetting to think of all the hours and hours that have been spent by dedicated, sacrificing members of the church in performing unecessary ordinances because they are simply duplicating completed ones. Of course, I know that these members are still blessed in their temple attendance, but much more temple work could be performed.
I also don't understand why when searching Joseph Smith Jr.'s name, there are different dates for his ordinances, he's been baptized by proxy many times, and there are many different dates for his sealing being performed to Emma. These names would definitely be identified as duplicates, wouldn't they?
Just curious.....and trying to figure this system out!
Thanks again for everyone's responses and help!!! I'll keep reading on here and trying to learn more about this! :)
gb308

rmrichesjr
Community Moderators
Posts: 1038
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 11:32 am
Location: Dundee, Oregon

Postby rmrichesjr » Fri Aug 24, 2007 4:29 pm

BenJoeM wrote:...
In helping my own father with geneology we have found many times people wrote things down that they assumed, heard from a friend, or even made up. Our geneology hit a 7 year road block until we discovered that we had an enormous amount of mis-information. We have no decided to add a note to each person in our genealogy to state when the info was confirmed and by what or whom. This could be a good addition to future software as well.


PAF and most software I have heard of allows users to document their sources. The main problem is many people have failed to make use of the software features that support documentation of sources.

gb308 wrote:...
Maybe I'm over simplifying, but how difficult when a name is submitted, is it to type it in (with some accurate identifying facts, ie. birthdate, parent's names, etc.), search, and then show if their ordinances have already been performed? If all of the ordinances have been completed for this name, it should not be accepted for performing new ordinances.
There will always be "human error", I agree. And, I would imagine that there will always be several ancestors submitting duplicate names. But, doing a search verification, and then if seeing the work has been completed previously, the names should not be allowed to be re-submitted.
...
gb308


The new FamilySearch does that. It refuses to accept a submission for ordinances until the user goes through the process of checking for duplication in the database. However, based on experience with the beta test done earlier in 2007, it's much better to do the duplicate checking and record combining prior to attempting to attempting to submit for ordinances.

RonaldF-p40
Member
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 7:30 pm
Location: Oakhurst, California

Postby RonaldF-p40 » Fri Aug 24, 2007 5:29 pm

gb308 wrote:Thank you for your replies, RonaldF, BenJoeM, and pack1096! I appreciate the help and feedback from all of you.
Ronald, (and please understand that I'm not being flippant or rude with these additional comments.....I'm just honestly trying to grasp why these hundreds of duplicate ordinances are being performed),
Your response gives the impression that most of the duplications happen because of Patron errors.

I value your remarks and understand that in your case, you have been diligent in your responsibilities. My original response was more of a generalized response. Before serving in the office of the temple, I was an ordinance worker for 5 years. It hurts deeply to see empty seats during a session. Then to know that there may be work being done that is already completed just adds to the hurt.

The new FamilySearch is the result of previous short falls in existing systems. Remember that names are submitted through two systems, “extraction” and “patron submitted”. Technology is allowing the church to improve the system. Patron submitted names that are duplicated usually are the result of someone not being diligent in their efforts. I say usually because in the past, some ordinances that were completed were not available to patrons. There are gaps in the IGI and TempleReady is 7 years out of date. These are all problems that are being worked on and hopefully be corrected with the new FamilySearch.

gb308-p40
New Member
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 8:02 am

Postby gb308-p40 » Fri Aug 24, 2007 5:48 pm

Thanks, everyone, for all your great responses! I appreciate your help and have learned from each post.

RonaldF,
I can tell you're a dedicated, service oriented person.....thanks for your help. I do understand what you're saying about the need for patrons to make more of an effort to educate themselves about the existing software. Unfortunately, we get lazy (myself included) and just count on others to correct our mistakes.
Hopefully, these problems will become less and less frequent with the new programs that are being implemented.
Thanks, again.....and, I'm a "fellow" Californian (actually a gal...... :) !!)
gb308

User avatar
BenJoeM-p40
New Member
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 10:37 pm
Location: Ogden, Utah
Contact:

Postby BenJoeM-p40 » Sat Aug 25, 2007 7:40 pm

In reading these comments it got me to thinking about submitting names. My great great great grandfather had his work done for him about 45 years ago. Last month we discovered the name they did was not our great great great grandfather. His name was misspelled on his immigration records but the LDS Immigration ship log had his correct name (hence this is why we hit a road block with him for the past 7 years, we had the wrong name). This got me to thinking, do patrons just submit names without any confirming info. This is serious work and we can't be careless. This is the house of the Lord and we need to work hard. I agree technology should be able to help us, but the Lord has asked us to do his work and do it right, I would consider verifying your info before you submit to be one of these.


Return to “Family History”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest