The new My Heritage Blog has a post by Kim dated 13 October 2010, entitled, "Genealogy Books -- A Popular Research Tool?" The article discusses the popularity of genealogy books in the UK and other topics. At the end of the article, Kim asks the question, "Do you have a book that you think every genealogist should have on their bookshelf? As a matter of fact, I have a number of them.
My basic approach to any subject of interest is to go to the library and check out every book I can find on the subject and read all of them. In my earlier years, when I wasn't so wrapped up in genealogy, I could read more than a book a day. Now, I am very much more selective although I still read a few books on my iPhone while waiting for appointments or at other odd times during the day.
When I comes to genealogy books, the local library had a very weak offering, so I ended up purchasing every interesting book I could find. Usually, I would look at the Brigham Young University Bookstore. They have a very large selection, not only for the classes on family history, but a good selection of other books of more general interest. I am afraid that my selection is heavily slanted towards the United States topics and England, Ireland and Scotland. Outside of one line from Denmark, all of my ancestors came from the British Isles.
The one book that gave me a good understanding of the whole subject of genealogy was and is:
Greenwood, Val D. The Researcher's Guide to American Genealogy. Baltimore, MD: Genealogical Pub. Co, 2000.
Here is another one:
Fischer, David Hackett. Albion's Seed: Four British Folkways in America. New York: Oxford University Press, 1989.
Not strictly a genealogy book, but still a valuable resource that provides a fundamental understanding of the settlement of British America.
Continuing with a selection of others:
Szucs, Loretto Dennis, and Sandra Hargreaves Luebking. The Source : a Guidebook of American Genealogy. Provo, UT: Ancestry, 2006.
Everton, George B. The Handy Book for Genealogists: United States of America. Logan, Utah: Everton Publishers, 1999.
Eichholz, Alice. Red Book: American State, County and Town Sources. Provo, Utah: Ancestry, 2004.
From there, I have dozens and dozens more, all of which are more or less useful depending on what I am doing at the moment. With all the hoopla about the Internet, books still haven't lost their appeal or their usefulness.
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
What those with a FamilySearch account can expect from New FamilySearch
The New FamilySearch program is presently available only to members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and a few others who are not members. Earlier this year, there were several references by FamilySearch representatives to the opening of New FamilySearch to those who have a "FamilySearch Account" but not an "LDS Account." An LDS Account is available only to those who have a Membership Number in the Church. Now, for some time, there has been very little information in the media and I have not become aware of any official statements projecting a time frame for opening New FamilySearch to the public.
The one category of exception to the rule is that many family history centers have community volunteers who are not members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. These volunteers have been allowed to use the New FamilySearch web site so that they can help the center’s patrons. See Document ID: 100122 in the New FamilySearch Help Center. The Help Center document, which was published on 22 August 2010, also states, "The new FamilySearch Web site is now being prepared for public use. When the site becomes public, everyone will be able to use most of the features. A few features will be private (visible only to Church members)."
It is generally understood that the New.FamilySearch.org website will be incorporated into the FamilySearch.org site, likely in the format presently being tested in the Beta.FamilySearch.org website. I am guessing that public availability of the records in the New.FamilySearch.org site will begin shortly after the merger of the sites into the new, now Beta, version. See Help Center Document ID: 104908. This document from 17 September 2010 also says, "Once it [New FamilySearch] is on FamilySearch.org, it will be available to members and the general public alike. Those who are not members of the Church will have access to the pedigree tree and individual information but will not be able to see the temple ordinances." (text in [ ] added).
The New FamilySearch website, as it presently exists, is currently undergoing yet another beta test. There are still more changes that will be made to the site before it is combined with the now, Beta.FamilySearch.org into an integrated online database. Just as with the older, and still useful, Ancestral File, International Genealogical Index (IGI), and the Pedigree Resource File databases, there is gold mine of information. Despite its present limitations, the information in New FamilySearch will be a valuable addition to the genealogical community.
Monday, October 11, 2010
A lost art -- writing in cursive
I had a very well prepared and attentive group of teenage boys in a genealogy class recently. They all had a Spanish speaking heritage. They all came prepared to the class with information about their grandparents who were born in Mexico. With the new records on FamilySearch's Record Search, we were able to find some of their family records right online. As I showed them the records we had found, one of the boys raised his hand and said, "Mr. Tanner, we can't read cursive." This was not just one of the boys, none of them had ever been taught to read or write cursive!
I soon learned that writing in cursive, for anyone younger than twenty years old, is fast becoming a lost art. News articles from major news sources like, USA Today, have headlines that read, "Schools debate: Is cursive writing worth teaching?" In another article in the NYDaily News, the questions is asked, "Cursive writing is a fading skill, but do we care enough to save it?" There is a real debate about whether or not cursive writing has a place in the "modern" school curriculum. (Hmm, there are those of us who wonder if anything is taught in schools today at all, but that is another issue).
Think of impact the lack of cursive skills will have on genealogy. Every one of the old letters and documents I have in my huge collection is in cursive. Typewritten documents and letters are almost non-existent. Are we moving towards a time when the handwritten past will be closed to nearly all of the younger people? Family Tree Magazine ran an article recently about Closing the Generation Gap, about younger genealogists. What if the five examples given were all cursive handicapped? How many of them would have maintained an interest in genealogy?
Many genealogists have to become conversant in one or more foreign languages to make progress in their research, what if you had to learn cursive writing, just to read your grandmother's letters? I hope I am not alone in seeing this as a major obstacle to a acquiring an interest in genealogy by the upcoming very young generation. I am certain that reading handwriting may become one of the fundamental classes that will have to be taught in the future to unlock the records to those who missed learning who to write in school.
I soon learned that writing in cursive, for anyone younger than twenty years old, is fast becoming a lost art. News articles from major news sources like, USA Today, have headlines that read, "Schools debate: Is cursive writing worth teaching?" In another article in the NYDaily News, the questions is asked, "Cursive writing is a fading skill, but do we care enough to save it?" There is a real debate about whether or not cursive writing has a place in the "modern" school curriculum. (Hmm, there are those of us who wonder if anything is taught in schools today at all, but that is another issue).
Think of impact the lack of cursive skills will have on genealogy. Every one of the old letters and documents I have in my huge collection is in cursive. Typewritten documents and letters are almost non-existent. Are we moving towards a time when the handwritten past will be closed to nearly all of the younger people? Family Tree Magazine ran an article recently about Closing the Generation Gap, about younger genealogists. What if the five examples given were all cursive handicapped? How many of them would have maintained an interest in genealogy?
Many genealogists have to become conversant in one or more foreign languages to make progress in their research, what if you had to learn cursive writing, just to read your grandmother's letters? I hope I am not alone in seeing this as a major obstacle to a acquiring an interest in genealogy by the upcoming very young generation. I am certain that reading handwriting may become one of the fundamental classes that will have to be taught in the future to unlock the records to those who missed learning who to write in school.
Sunday, October 10, 2010
A testimony against procrastination in genealogy
Over the past almost thirty years, I have accumulated tens of thousands of documents and tens of thousands of photographs. Most of the photos are of the family variety and date from the present to back into the mid-1800s. The documents consist of everything imaginable, deeds, certificates, probate documents, journals, books, life histories, cards, and letters and almost everything else from movie programs to shopping lists. While accumulating this huge pile of stuff, I must admit that I procrastinated identifying and naming all of the people in all of the photos or even categorizing the documents.
It might help to understand that I didn't really plan on getting all those documents. Most of them just showed up at my door with little or no supporting data. The stories of how the documents came to me are varied and fascinating. Maybe I will tell some of the stories some time. However, since the technology has been available, I have been scanning the documents and photos into digital files. I am probably less than half done with the scanning after more than twenty years. I admit, I go in spurts, I will scan two or three thousand documents in the course of a week or two of intense scanning and then will spend the rest of time sorting and cataloging the files. At least that is what I do now. Before, I would simply scan the documents and move on to the next pile of scanning.
For that reason, I ended up with this enormous pile of unidentified and unsorted scanned images. I implore you, do not follow my example. It is immensely more efficient to identify the documents at the time they are being scanned, or shortly thereafter. I realize that there are not many people outside of libraries and other repositories, faced with the quantity of documents and photos I have to contend with. But even on a smaller scale, looking at a pile of unidentified photos or documents can be intimidating and can lead to the "throw it out rather than sort it" syndrome. Lately, I have focused on sorting and naming to the extent that I am eliminating almost every other activity. I intend to get through the piles before I die! I am actually surprised that I am still writing this blog.
OK, let's get real. Genealogy is paper (or digital file) intensive. It pays to have some system to identify and find all of the documents. I have read and studied at least a dozen different sure-fire methods of organizing files including color coding, surname sorting, and every other possible system. In the end I have come to several general rules that I follow to make some sense of the huge accumulation.
Rule #1: Let the computer do what the computer does best, sort stuff.
I have review plenty of suggestions on how to organize all of the various documents. Almost all of them require me to do most of the actual sorting work. I have to decide where to physically put the document or photo and that takes time, a lot of time. I have opted to allow the computer to do the sorting. I name and tag the documents and let the find file functions locate my document or photo. It doesn't really matter which file folder I put it in, I can always to a search and find the document or photo. It helps to use a Macintosh computer, because the operating system comes with a very efficient search program.
Rule @2: Use meta-data.
Meta-data is information that the computer system or a program attaches to a file such as a document or photo. I use a program from Adobe called Bridge. Bridge lets me sort files and add meta-data. There are definite limitations to the length of file names and what can be included. Meta-data will allow a much more detailed and extensive description, such as naming all of the people in a large group photo. In most instances, except when viewed in a program like Bridge, the data is invisibly recorded with the original file. But, the meta-data can be searched. So you can find Uncle Fred in the middle of his high school class photo.
Rule #3: Don't throw away the originals.
Sometimes the scanned images turn out fuzzy or unreadable. They may also be lost before they are properly backed-up. In any event, don't throw away those original documents. It may take a lot of work, but you might want to start now to find a repository willing to take the documents and preserve them. Obviously, no library wants a bunch of photocopies. But real original documents may have some intrinsic historical value that would be attractive to some university or library. But don't just dump the documents on your heirs and expect them to either appreciate what they have or do anything about it. If you want your papers preserved, make sure you arrange for the preservation long before you enter the rest home.
Rule #4: Name the files when they are still freshly obtained.
Of course, I broke my own rule. I waited until the pile was huge before getting into the naming business. But it is so much easier to give the files meaningful names when they are still fresh. As time goes on, you will probably lose your notes and memory and be unable to identify the people, the places or the documents. Keep it up, do the job when it can still be done.
Rule #5: Use names and meta-tags that have some meaning.
You can only stand to look at so many files with the name "Tanner Family." I use some kind of name when the document is originally scanned or downloaded to the computer to begin to identify the subject matter, such as "Tanner Picnic in Cottonwood Canyon." I also use a date tag on every file name, like this:
2010-10-10 Tanner Picnic in Cottonwood Canyon
Now, the date is mostly the date the picture was taken or the document was scanned. I leave the exact date of the event or document for the meta-data. I use the dated file names to make sure I have scanned an entire set of documents and also to make sure backup copies are made on various disks. For example, the 2010-10-10 files will be differentiated from the 2010-10-11 files I do tomorrow. Don't be afraid to use something besides the file name "Tanner00065" that shows up when a file is downloaded from a camera.
When faced with a lot of data, it is also helpful to use very specific sources for your entries in a lineage linked database program. Having the documents and not putting sources into your genealogy program is almost worse than not having the documents at all.
I am probably not through with this subject.
It might help to understand that I didn't really plan on getting all those documents. Most of them just showed up at my door with little or no supporting data. The stories of how the documents came to me are varied and fascinating. Maybe I will tell some of the stories some time. However, since the technology has been available, I have been scanning the documents and photos into digital files. I am probably less than half done with the scanning after more than twenty years. I admit, I go in spurts, I will scan two or three thousand documents in the course of a week or two of intense scanning and then will spend the rest of time sorting and cataloging the files. At least that is what I do now. Before, I would simply scan the documents and move on to the next pile of scanning.
For that reason, I ended up with this enormous pile of unidentified and unsorted scanned images. I implore you, do not follow my example. It is immensely more efficient to identify the documents at the time they are being scanned, or shortly thereafter. I realize that there are not many people outside of libraries and other repositories, faced with the quantity of documents and photos I have to contend with. But even on a smaller scale, looking at a pile of unidentified photos or documents can be intimidating and can lead to the "throw it out rather than sort it" syndrome. Lately, I have focused on sorting and naming to the extent that I am eliminating almost every other activity. I intend to get through the piles before I die! I am actually surprised that I am still writing this blog.
OK, let's get real. Genealogy is paper (or digital file) intensive. It pays to have some system to identify and find all of the documents. I have read and studied at least a dozen different sure-fire methods of organizing files including color coding, surname sorting, and every other possible system. In the end I have come to several general rules that I follow to make some sense of the huge accumulation.
Rule #1: Let the computer do what the computer does best, sort stuff.
I have review plenty of suggestions on how to organize all of the various documents. Almost all of them require me to do most of the actual sorting work. I have to decide where to physically put the document or photo and that takes time, a lot of time. I have opted to allow the computer to do the sorting. I name and tag the documents and let the find file functions locate my document or photo. It doesn't really matter which file folder I put it in, I can always to a search and find the document or photo. It helps to use a Macintosh computer, because the operating system comes with a very efficient search program.
Rule @2: Use meta-data.
Meta-data is information that the computer system or a program attaches to a file such as a document or photo. I use a program from Adobe called Bridge. Bridge lets me sort files and add meta-data. There are definite limitations to the length of file names and what can be included. Meta-data will allow a much more detailed and extensive description, such as naming all of the people in a large group photo. In most instances, except when viewed in a program like Bridge, the data is invisibly recorded with the original file. But, the meta-data can be searched. So you can find Uncle Fred in the middle of his high school class photo.
Rule #3: Don't throw away the originals.
Sometimes the scanned images turn out fuzzy or unreadable. They may also be lost before they are properly backed-up. In any event, don't throw away those original documents. It may take a lot of work, but you might want to start now to find a repository willing to take the documents and preserve them. Obviously, no library wants a bunch of photocopies. But real original documents may have some intrinsic historical value that would be attractive to some university or library. But don't just dump the documents on your heirs and expect them to either appreciate what they have or do anything about it. If you want your papers preserved, make sure you arrange for the preservation long before you enter the rest home.
Rule #4: Name the files when they are still freshly obtained.
Of course, I broke my own rule. I waited until the pile was huge before getting into the naming business. But it is so much easier to give the files meaningful names when they are still fresh. As time goes on, you will probably lose your notes and memory and be unable to identify the people, the places or the documents. Keep it up, do the job when it can still be done.
Rule #5: Use names and meta-tags that have some meaning.
You can only stand to look at so many files with the name "Tanner Family." I use some kind of name when the document is originally scanned or downloaded to the computer to begin to identify the subject matter, such as "Tanner Picnic in Cottonwood Canyon." I also use a date tag on every file name, like this:
2010-10-10 Tanner Picnic in Cottonwood Canyon
Now, the date is mostly the date the picture was taken or the document was scanned. I leave the exact date of the event or document for the meta-data. I use the dated file names to make sure I have scanned an entire set of documents and also to make sure backup copies are made on various disks. For example, the 2010-10-10 files will be differentiated from the 2010-10-11 files I do tomorrow. Don't be afraid to use something besides the file name "Tanner00065" that shows up when a file is downloaded from a camera.
When faced with a lot of data, it is also helpful to use very specific sources for your entries in a lineage linked database program. Having the documents and not putting sources into your genealogy program is almost worse than not having the documents at all.
I am probably not through with this subject.
Saturday, October 9, 2010
Where are we today with FamilySearch online?
FamilySearch is operated by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS). Originally founded in 1894 as the Genealogical Society of Utah it has grown to be the largest genealogical organization in the world. Quoting from the FamilySearch/Genealogical Society of Utah website, "In cooperation with record-keeping institutions, the Genealogical Society of Utah began microfilming records in 1938; its digital imaging projects began in 1998. The Society has microfilmed important family history sources in over 100 countries worldwide. At any given time, there are over 200 microfilming projects in over 40 countries. FamilySearch creates over 40 million digital images and 20 thousand rolls of microfilm each year."
For the United States alone, FamilySearch has 109,791 microfilms and 200,806 items of published material. World wide the number of items is between 2.4 and 2.5 million rolls of microfilm, 742,000 microfiche, 310,000 books, serials and other formats, and 4,500 periodicals. There are over 4,000 Family History Centers world wide.
Online, FamilySearch.org was introduced in May of 1999 and by October of that year, the site had surpassed 1.5 billion hits. Some monitoring organizations rank FamilySearch.org as high as 8,835 in the world. See Alex, the Web Information Company. For comparison, Ancestry.com is ranked 1,106 as of 9 October 2010. However, in the genealogical community, FamilySearch is second only to Ancestry.com and its websites, in web visits. (I realize that other ranking organizations might give different numbers).
From that first website, FamilySearch.org, there are now many different websites with different functions. However, with the fairly recent introduction of the Beta.FamilySearch.org website, there is a major consolidation of the websites going on. It is probably a good idea, from time to time, to review exactly where we are and what each website does (and does not) do for the genealogical community. In no real sort of order, here we go:
FamilySearch.org is now growing old and will shortly undergo a metamorphosis into a new website now online as Beta.FamilySearch.org. The existing FamilySearch.org site has been used for its collections of free online records. Those include the AncestralFile, the International Genealogical Index (IGI), the Pedigree Resource File, the Social Security Death Index, and the Vital Records Index. It also included the highly valuable Family History Library Catalog and a multitude of online resources, instructional videos, and other helpful items.
In order to streamline its method of processing names for submission to the LDS Temples, FamilySearch introduced a newer version of FamilySearch.org presently called, New.FamilySearch.org. This program is still technically in the beta testing stage and has been for the last couple of years. Almost all of the records in the existing FamilySearch.org website, plus LDS Temple records and LDS membership records were included in this massive database. Record access was and is limited to LDS Church members and also the program shows only limited or no information on living individuals. New.FamilySearch.org is being rapidly developed and undergoes periodic beta testing (a test is going on presently) with regular upgrades. FamilySearch has indicated that at some time in the future, the New.FamilySearch.org website will be open to all Internet users.
FamilySearch has been using a website called Labs.FamilySearch.org to beta test some of its developing ideas. One of the sites featured is called the FamilySearch Research Wiki. All of research aids and training materials from the FamilySearch.org website were seeded into the Wiki which now contains 41,859 articles on genealogical resources available with links all around the Internet. This is a rapidly growing site and will ultimately become (in my opinion) the major online resource for organizing and locating genealogical information on the Internet. Allied with the Research Wiki is the Forums site. This FamilySearch Forums site is also still in beta. It is relatively little known and underused although it is open to all Internet users, not just LDS Church members. It appears to be very useful and may become more used as it becomes more well known.
FamilySearch began a massive program to both digitize and index the huge collection of microfilms stored in a vault carved into the side of a granite canyon near Salt Lake City, Utah. The FamilySearch Indexing program is in full swing with hundreds of thousands of volunteers around the world indexing millions of records a month. Here is a second start-up page for the site. All of those millions of indexed and scanned documents are literally pouring into a fast growing database called Record Search (also called Record Search Pilot).
Now, the Beta.FamilySearch.org website consolidates and/or links almost all of the functions of these, now mostly separate, websites. It seamlessly (almost) links the sites together into one mega-site which includes the information from the existing FamilySearch.org website, the Record Search site, the Forums, the Research Wiki and a lot more. So, if you want to see what is going on right now, all you really have to do is explore the Beta.FamilySearch.org site.
There are however bits and pieces floating around on the Internet. Not even Wikipedia lists all these other websites. These include the Community Trees site, with some really remarkable collections of family history. There is also the FamilySearch Developer Network and England Jurisdictions 1851.
There are lot more LDS resources for genealogy on the Internet. Some of them are not under the FamilySearch umbrella, but may be in the future. One of these is the Family History Archives, which is hosted on the Brigham Young University website BYU.edu. The Family History Archives is a digitized collection of tens of thousands of family history and genealogy books and like all of the websites is free to the public. BYU has a number of highly useful online resources for genealogy, some of which are pretty hard to find down inside of the website. For example, the BYU Center for Family History and Genealogy has a U.S. Census Tutorial.
I have probably forgotten to include some huge vital resource, but this gives an overview of where we are as of October of 2010.
For the United States alone, FamilySearch has 109,791 microfilms and 200,806 items of published material. World wide the number of items is between 2.4 and 2.5 million rolls of microfilm, 742,000 microfiche, 310,000 books, serials and other formats, and 4,500 periodicals. There are over 4,000 Family History Centers world wide.
Online, FamilySearch.org was introduced in May of 1999 and by October of that year, the site had surpassed 1.5 billion hits. Some monitoring organizations rank FamilySearch.org as high as 8,835 in the world. See Alex, the Web Information Company. For comparison, Ancestry.com is ranked 1,106 as of 9 October 2010. However, in the genealogical community, FamilySearch is second only to Ancestry.com and its websites, in web visits. (I realize that other ranking organizations might give different numbers).
From that first website, FamilySearch.org, there are now many different websites with different functions. However, with the fairly recent introduction of the Beta.FamilySearch.org website, there is a major consolidation of the websites going on. It is probably a good idea, from time to time, to review exactly where we are and what each website does (and does not) do for the genealogical community. In no real sort of order, here we go:
FamilySearch.org is now growing old and will shortly undergo a metamorphosis into a new website now online as Beta.FamilySearch.org. The existing FamilySearch.org site has been used for its collections of free online records. Those include the AncestralFile, the International Genealogical Index (IGI), the Pedigree Resource File, the Social Security Death Index, and the Vital Records Index. It also included the highly valuable Family History Library Catalog and a multitude of online resources, instructional videos, and other helpful items.
In order to streamline its method of processing names for submission to the LDS Temples, FamilySearch introduced a newer version of FamilySearch.org presently called, New.FamilySearch.org. This program is still technically in the beta testing stage and has been for the last couple of years. Almost all of the records in the existing FamilySearch.org website, plus LDS Temple records and LDS membership records were included in this massive database. Record access was and is limited to LDS Church members and also the program shows only limited or no information on living individuals. New.FamilySearch.org is being rapidly developed and undergoes periodic beta testing (a test is going on presently) with regular upgrades. FamilySearch has indicated that at some time in the future, the New.FamilySearch.org website will be open to all Internet users.
FamilySearch has been using a website called Labs.FamilySearch.org to beta test some of its developing ideas. One of the sites featured is called the FamilySearch Research Wiki. All of research aids and training materials from the FamilySearch.org website were seeded into the Wiki which now contains 41,859 articles on genealogical resources available with links all around the Internet. This is a rapidly growing site and will ultimately become (in my opinion) the major online resource for organizing and locating genealogical information on the Internet. Allied with the Research Wiki is the Forums site. This FamilySearch Forums site is also still in beta. It is relatively little known and underused although it is open to all Internet users, not just LDS Church members. It appears to be very useful and may become more used as it becomes more well known.
FamilySearch began a massive program to both digitize and index the huge collection of microfilms stored in a vault carved into the side of a granite canyon near Salt Lake City, Utah. The FamilySearch Indexing program is in full swing with hundreds of thousands of volunteers around the world indexing millions of records a month. Here is a second start-up page for the site. All of those millions of indexed and scanned documents are literally pouring into a fast growing database called Record Search (also called Record Search Pilot).
Now, the Beta.FamilySearch.org website consolidates and/or links almost all of the functions of these, now mostly separate, websites. It seamlessly (almost) links the sites together into one mega-site which includes the information from the existing FamilySearch.org website, the Record Search site, the Forums, the Research Wiki and a lot more. So, if you want to see what is going on right now, all you really have to do is explore the Beta.FamilySearch.org site.
There are however bits and pieces floating around on the Internet. Not even Wikipedia lists all these other websites. These include the Community Trees site, with some really remarkable collections of family history. There is also the FamilySearch Developer Network and England Jurisdictions 1851.
There are lot more LDS resources for genealogy on the Internet. Some of them are not under the FamilySearch umbrella, but may be in the future. One of these is the Family History Archives, which is hosted on the Brigham Young University website BYU.edu. The Family History Archives is a digitized collection of tens of thousands of family history and genealogy books and like all of the websites is free to the public. BYU has a number of highly useful online resources for genealogy, some of which are pretty hard to find down inside of the website. For example, the BYU Center for Family History and Genealogy has a U.S. Census Tutorial.
I have probably forgotten to include some huge vital resource, but this gives an overview of where we are as of October of 2010.
Friday, October 8, 2010
What is a FamilySearch Center?
The very recent additions to the Beta FamilySearch.org website prominently features a search link to "FamilySearch Centers." Here is a screen shot showing the link:
Clicking on that link takes you to a search page where you are informed as follows"
It is fairly obvious to any one familiar with FamilySearch.org that the term "FamilySearch Centers" is the same as the older term, "Family History Centers," as in Mesa Regional Family History Center and Utah Valley Regional Family History Center. I would guess, as I have observed before, that there is a change in the branding. But during the interim they may be some confusion, especially because the main link on lds.org also refers to Family History Centers.
Personally, I like the term FamilySearch Centers better than Family History Center. It gives the potential user the idea that the center is a place to search not just come in and find some one has done their family history. There is always the not too unbelievable story going around of the lady who comes into the family history center, leaving her husband in the parking lot with the car running, and asks to have a copy of her "family history." I have really talked to people who thought all they had to do was come in and ask.
Clicking on that link takes you to a search page where you are informed as follows"
Here is another screen shot of the page:FamilySearch offers a network of more than 4500 facilities offering public access to genealogical records from all over the world. These range from the world’s largest in Salt Lake City to locations in more than 80 countries.Find a FamilySearch Center near you
It is fairly obvious to any one familiar with FamilySearch.org that the term "FamilySearch Centers" is the same as the older term, "Family History Centers," as in Mesa Regional Family History Center and Utah Valley Regional Family History Center. I would guess, as I have observed before, that there is a change in the branding. But during the interim they may be some confusion, especially because the main link on lds.org also refers to Family History Centers.
Personally, I like the term FamilySearch Centers better than Family History Center. It gives the potential user the idea that the center is a place to search not just come in and find some one has done their family history. There is always the not too unbelievable story going around of the lady who comes into the family history center, leaving her husband in the parking lot with the car running, and asks to have a copy of her "family history." I have really talked to people who thought all they had to do was come in and ask.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Beta FamilySearch -- a facelift and new records
It is evident that the Beta.FamilySearch.org website is a work-in-progress. Changes have been made not only to the design of the website, but new content is being regularly added. As has been noted by several bloggers, 20 million additional records have recently been added according to an announcement by FamilySearch on October 6, 2010. The content of the announcement can be found on Dick Eastman's post of the same date. The additional collections added bring the total to 470. The site reflects the need to address the larger number of collections and the search fields and pages have been modified to focus on a particular geographic area more quickly.
In what can be seen as a tremendous help to researchers, FamilySearch has begun putting the images online and not waiting for the indexes to be completed. Anyone who is used to scanning microfilm realizes that this step forward. It is always nice to have an index, but most researchers I know who are concerned about thoroughness, would prefer the images to the index if they could only have one choice.
As I have stated previously, some of these new records are for locations for which records have never previously been available except through ordering microfilm. Particularly for the Spanish language records, this is a wonderful opportunity for access to records that have never been particularly available previously. Mexican researchers will appreciate have three more state's Catholic Church Records online bringing the total to 22 states out of 32 plus the Federal District of Mexico. In dealing with Spanish speaking patrons at the Mesa Regional Family History Center, you cannot imagine the huge impact these records are having on the ability of the researchers to find their families.
The Beta site has been revamped with new links and a new design in part. The changes appear to be helpful. There is still some confusion on the part of the user as to what the links such as "learn" are supposed to contain, but I see an improvement in the way that the Research Wiki has been integrated.
All in all, the site continues to improve, and is beginning to look like a viable website.
In what can be seen as a tremendous help to researchers, FamilySearch has begun putting the images online and not waiting for the indexes to be completed. Anyone who is used to scanning microfilm realizes that this step forward. It is always nice to have an index, but most researchers I know who are concerned about thoroughness, would prefer the images to the index if they could only have one choice.
As I have stated previously, some of these new records are for locations for which records have never previously been available except through ordering microfilm. Particularly for the Spanish language records, this is a wonderful opportunity for access to records that have never been particularly available previously. Mexican researchers will appreciate have three more state's Catholic Church Records online bringing the total to 22 states out of 32 plus the Federal District of Mexico. In dealing with Spanish speaking patrons at the Mesa Regional Family History Center, you cannot imagine the huge impact these records are having on the ability of the researchers to find their families.
The Beta site has been revamped with new links and a new design in part. The changes appear to be helpful. There is still some confusion on the part of the user as to what the links such as "learn" are supposed to contain, but I see an improvement in the way that the Research Wiki has been integrated.
All in all, the site continues to improve, and is beginning to look like a viable website.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)