Talk:International Genealogical Index

=IGI Coverage =

Hi, I've begun a page on IGI coverage. Can this page link to it? Murphynw 00:13, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

What I Miss About the old IGI
After I obtained a batch number for an ancestor whose name I knew, I would do a batch search using the last name to bring up all family names in that batch. If I didn't have a batch number, I would use Hugh Wallis' website. One can search his website by locality. He then shows the batch numbers and the surname can be search from his site. All this can be done on the new FamilySearch Search. But after I had done all this in the old IGI, I had the ability to select the names I wanted and then generate a gedcom that included all the names I selected. I would make that GEDCOM into a PAF file. Then I would make a comma delineated file from the PAF file. This file is a spreadsheet that can be arranged so that families can be put together. It was an exciting method for finding relatives and clues to even more families. Also the GEDCOM obtained from the IGI included citations that would include the batch number which would lead me to the original extracted records.

Sandra 14:38, 14 March 2013 (UTC)Sandra Jarvis March 14, 2013 7:37am

IGI is a helpful tool Please bring it back.
In preparing my family records, I like to know when the temple ordinances were done and in which temple. The New Family Search often does not give that information. It only says the work is done. The old IGI gave us the information of which temple and what date. I do wish that information was still available. I know that much of the work was done in duplicate, sometimes 10 or 20 times. I realize that may be embarrassing, but it makes the point that we need to check for duplicates before we clear a name for ordinances. I really would like the ordinance dates and temples available again.

Thank you,  Larry Adams "Larry, I'm not certain product managers monitor Talk pages. If you wish your voice to be heard, you should make the comment in Forums or submitted as Feedback.                                                                               Robert 14:38, 26 September 2011 (UTC)"

Page Name Change
The name of this page makes for very ugly URLs. In some cases it can appear as awful as https://wiki.familysearch.org/en/International_Genealogical_Index_%28IGI%29. What does everyone think about having the current page name redirect to a page titled "International Genealogical Index"? Acronyms should be handled in page content, not page title.

Robert 14:38, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I have today moved the page to remove the abbreviation from the article title. The acronym is set-up as a redirect and should also be mentioned in the article itself. --Steve 17:28, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you!
This explanation of the IGI (and what ended up where on the new iterations of FamilySearch.org) is the clearest, most helpful information I've seen on the topic. Thanks for taking the time to explain (and to link to the blog posts)! Lise 16:17, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

A Clear Explaination
This explains to me clearly why in some other - site(s) there is so much conflicting information. Here it is straight forward and I have found some minor errors, but on the whole the information is far more accurate. However, over the past couple of months, images which were on the site are no longer available. The more I understand the more I want to make sure my prior info is correct.those did verify my transcripts were correct.

While typically undesirable,​ it is still possible to search by batch number
Why would a batch search be undesirable, seems like a very useful search to me, especially since we can not do a film number search? ==== (I have no tildes) Sister K Dodd

Thank YOU / YOUR Article is Selected
The FamilySearch Research Wiki is delighted to let you know that the “International Genealogical Index” article you helped create will become a Featured Article that is highlighted on the Main page of the Wiki. It will appear June 8, 2012 and remain seven days. Thank you for your excellent work – you have given readers/researchers important access to records. Your contributions are appreciated and will assist others in finding their ancestors. You have made a difference in research!

Please note:

We invite you to do any enhancing, editing or changing to this article before we post it. If you are considering an edit we ask that it be completed by June 7, 2012. If you feel that you do not want your article up as yet as a Featured Article please let us know. Thank you for your time and effort! Featured Article Committee members –