Help get this topic noticed by sharing it on Twitter, Facebook, or email.

Under "Search Records" on the right side of "Details" page - add "Genealogies."

Family Search is showing on the "Details" page.

Search Records





add "Genealogies" if the PID in FamilySearch's "Family Tree" matches the same ancestors PID in "Genealogies."

I have a lot more research information in my ancestors NOTES in "Genealogies" than I do in the FamilySearch "Family Tree."
1 person likes
this idea
  • Don,

    Is it possible that the core of your request is that from the Family Tree person page you wish to be able to initiate a search of the Genealogies database without having to type the FT person info into a new search form? That would be handy and I believe there is work underway that will allow users of Family Tree greater awareness of when an FT person matches a Genealogies person. Today the best user flow makes use of the Search menu at the top of almost every page.

    However, I think your question may highlight a terminology problem common across genealogy that is worth commenting on as well. What is a “Record”.

    FamilySearch almost always defines a record as a document “source” produced about an event from the life of a real historical person. It usually is a snapshot from their lives representing what was true about them in a moment of time. It is the raw material from which conclusions are built and validated.

    FamilySearch usually differentiates the historical “record” from the “tree”/“lineage linked”/“conclusion” person, whose individual data, and that of included persons linked relatives, is usually an amalgam from multiple historical documents (or often no historical documents) all run through a researcher’s conclusion making process.

    Those links under the Search Records section take the user out of the Family Tree product and to the historical records searching tools on FamilySearch or the various partners. Like Family Tree itself, Genealogies is not a database of record sources It is a database of “conclusion” people. It would be inappropriate to place it under a Search Records section.

    It is true that the differentiation between historical record and tree person can get a little fuzzy at times. Records often contain “conclusions” made by record creators. Some records, like censuses, allow the creation of tiny linked trees. Tree-like oral Genealogies may represent the ONLY documentation possible in some cultures. In spite of the challenges, FamilySearch usually tries to treat record data differently from conclusion data so the users can distinguish when additional rigor in data validation is essential before trusting a previous researcher’s conclusions vs the task of correlating what the sources say to reach original conclusions.
    • FS is not exactly rigorous in separating records and conclusions: Genealogies is a section under Records Search, and matches from it are listed at the bottom of the results page when you use Records Search. This and the mystery-meat symbol indicating attachment to Family Tree leads many genealogists, even experienced ones, to dismiss Family Search as a junk site full of nothing but user-submitted unsupported conclusions, just like the individual-tree pay sites.

      In a way, the behavior of Records Search in relation to Genealogies is exactly backwards from how users like Don (and I) would prefer it to work: accessing Records from a profile should include Genealogies, but the main Records Search should not -- there, it's easy enough to just choose Genealogies from the menu instead.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • This reply was removed on 2018-12-13.
    see the change log