Why so many duplicate ordinances performed?

[garysturn]

What we really need is a comment Icon similar to the Dispute Icon that can be attached to a name where we can leave short notes back and forth to others to read before they merge or make changes to that name. I think this ability to communicate with each other about a name in the system would really help. It would also help if the dispute Icons followed the name into the combining screens.

[scion-p40]

Does anyone know if the policy of dumping all extracted records for templework continues, or do they actually search nFS first?

[JamesAnderson]

Someone mentioned this earlier, but I didn't see it until later.

The question was where were the promised research helps and forums? Well, there's already a start and I think most know about it who have been on these forums in the last six months.

The first one is the research helps, it is the wiki.

http://wiki.familysearch.org/

That is eventually to replace the research guidance as I understand it. It's slowly beginning to take off. It eventually will contain loads of information on any given locality. Eventually multiple languages will be supported too, but that is still some time off. It's nto for specific surnames or family histories, it's for information on localities and research methodology

And about the forums, there's a Research Advice Forums site now.

http://forums.familysearchsupport.org/

That is where you ask questions about doing actual research, and I've also seen queries that have led to very good research advice being given in the responses to the queries.

The wiki has just under 3,300 registered users, and the forums have about 520 registered users now.

[scion-p40]

Does anyone know if the policy of dumping all extracted records for templework continues, or do they actually search nFS first?

Does anyone know the policy on this? No one responded to this question yet.

[russellhltn]

Does anyone know the policy on this? No one responded to this question yet.

Unfortunately that requires someone from the inside, and they don't hang out here.

[jrcrin001]

It is now June 2025 and the issue of too many duplicate ordinances continue.

Some things change and some things do not.

[aebrown]

It is now June 2025 and the issue of too many duplicate ordinances continue.

Some things change and some things do not.

FamilySearch has dramatically reduced the number of duplicate ordinances in the 16 years since the posts you are replying to. Before ordinances can be submitted, FamilySearch checks to make sure that the person has no duplicate in Family Tree; if there are duplicates, it will not allow the ordinances to be submitted.

Is the duplicate checking perfect? No. There is a delicate balance between detecting actual duplicates and making the mistake of considering two distinct similar people to be duplicates (such as twins with similar names). If the duplicate detection were tuned too tightly in favor of avoiding duplicates, there would be many false positives. That would result in the system disallowing ordinance submissions for people who happen to be similar to others, when they are actually distinct individuals who need the ordinances. But overall, the number of duplicate ordinances performed is significantly less than it was in years past.

[mnfamily]

My father did a lot of genealogy. I inherited over 300,000 names dutifully recorded in PAF. About 100,000 is my best guess of names that are not in Family Search (FS), while another 100,000 are in FS, but without the notes and source locations my father has recorded. For several years, I have been working on getting these PAF names into FS so ordinances can be done.
Once I have prepared each record (one by one) I can enter them into FS. Then I spend hours (and days) getting rid of errors, merging duplicates and so forth. It is VERY frustrating because the vast majority of these errors and duplicates come from Name Extraction. Those doing the extraction seem to do no checking for preexisting names.

This is a problem that has not gotten any better in the last decade or more.

Can those doing Name Extraction activities be taught a little better before they start?

[rmrichesjr]

My father did a lot of genealogy. I inherited over 300,000 names dutifully recorded in PAF. About 100,000 is my best guess of names that are not in Family Search (FS), while another 100,000 are in FS, but without the notes and source locations my father has recorded. ...

This is a problem that has not gotten any better in the last decade or more.

Can those doing Name Extraction activities be taught a little better before they start?

My hat is off you you and your father! I hope you and perhaps your descendants well in your efforts!

Because this is a user-to-user discussion forum, nobody with decision-making influence is likely to see your post. There are three methods by which your suggestion might be seen by someone who can carry it out:
- Use the Feedback link in FamilySearch.
- Ask your stake president to raise the issue up his chain of command.
- Call FamilySearch support and give your suggestion there.

[rmrichesjr]

Also, if the Name Extraction activities you refer to are the same as the extraction I did for a little while a couple of decades ago, I think there were supposed to be two extractors for each batch of images, with a third person who would decide between the two if there were differences. In theory, that was supposed to reduce the error rate. However, even if that type of checking is being done, I suspect a few errors would still get through.