Has the problem with Western Candadian place names in nFS been fixed?

Feeds:: Posts

Resource to help with teaching the Temple and FH Course »

Has the problem with Western Candadian place names in nFS been fixed?

April 18, 2011 by Peter

For some (long) time standardized place names for Western Canada have been including a census division number so that Calgary, Alberta, Canada has been showing as Calgary, Division no 6, Alberta, Canada.

I know many of you have joined us in using Feedback to ask for this to be corrected.

Today there has been an update to nFS and I tried the place name problem – and it seems to be fixed! Please try it and let us know if there is still a problem with place names.

I was so excited that I had to send you this notice so you can help me check to see that the problem is resolved!

By the way the What New link on nFS has been moved to the top left of the Welcome page – that is the page that appears after you sign in (used to be on the Sign in page). I cannot find a What’s New document for this update – so it might be that it was just a few minor items – like standardized place names!

About these ads

Posted in nFS | 7 Comments

7 Responses

on April 18, 2011 at 2:20 pm Bill Buchanan

Peter, it IS fixed! I tried it out myself. I am excited!!! This has been an irritant for a long time.
I contacted FamilySearch about it 2 or 3 times, but nothing happened until now. I just need to develop some patience!
on April 18, 2011 at 3:07 pm Richard Wolff

Cardston shows up as Cardston, Alberta, Canada but Mountain View shows up as Mountain View, Cardston County, Alberta, Canada and Irvine shows up as Irvine, Cyress County, Alberta, Canada.

Counties in Alberta are not like US counties. Vital records are obtained from Edmonton the provincial capital not the county seat.
on April 18, 2011 at 3:42 pm Fran van Bruggen

FINALLY!!!!!!!
on April 18, 2011 at 4:18 pm Lee Hudson

Thanks for your informative session with us at the Riverbend Stake Center Family History Training last night.

YES! YEAH!! I was adding a family to nfs that were born in Port Hood, Inverness, Nova Scotia & it gave me the option of NO subdivision – just what I typed in. Hopefully it has been corrected for the rest of Canada.

Regards
on April 18, 2011 at 4:25 pm pdarby

Great! . . . . and right after we were discussing it last night!
on April 18, 2011 at 4:28 pm pdarby

Sorry – one problem corrected – now another one to work on – did you send Feedback to Familysearch on this problem?
on April 18, 2011 at 6:03 pm Sharon Dickson

It seems to be working all right, but I did have Claresholm, Alberta, Canada appear as Claresholm, Alberta, Alberta but then I could correct it, and the wrong one did not show.

This is great.