You want to be VERY careful with the LDS genealogy records. Many of the "genealogies" are phony as all get out, with people adding in families that don't belong together, putting surnames to brides that they can't prove, etc.
I have been a genealogist for over 40 years now, and anything you find on the internet, or in someone elses records (including the LDS records) MUST be verified.
A lot of the crud put on the Internet is pure fiction. People want instant results, and they will incorporate anything into their records, and then put them on the Internet. Then someone else puts their family into those false records and put that on the net.
In the 1880's, it was very popular to pay someone to discover your family genealogy. Lots of pure fiction was written up, putting everyone into "Royal" lines. Unfortunately, a lot of that false data has gotten into the LDS family history files, as well as on the net.
I have spent well over $200,000 over the past 40 years in getting copies of original documents, going to places and copying down church records, town records, etc.
The LDS do indeed have excellent copies of every census of Canada, the USA, Great Britain, church records from all over the world, civil records from all over the world, etc. Those records are invaluable to a researcher, and the good thing is, you can order them through any local Family History Library for a very modest fee.
Be VERY careful of "family genealogies". Sadly, many of them are not all that well done. If they do not provide sources, and copies of documents, then they are essentially worthless, except as a reference point.
As an example, I have a major line of the Cooke/Cook family. My maternal grandmother was a Cook, and her family stretches back to 1640 in early Massachusetts. The first member of the family discovered was Walter Cooke, of Weymouth and Mendon, Mass.
If you go online and look up Walter Cooke, you will find all kinds of "genealogies" that claim to know where and when he was born. You will also find all kinds of genealogies that list Experience Holbrook, and/or Catherine Brenton as his wife(wives).
There is just a simple problem with all of that information. The town records of Weymouth list the mother of 1 (one) of Walter's children as being Experience. No other wife/mother is listed anywhere in those records, and no surname is mentioned for her.
When he died in 1695, his wife in Mendon was Catherine, who outlived him by 2 days. But, once again, there is absolutely no record anywhere that gives a surname for her.
There is no record of Walter Cooke's passage from England, no entry into the colony, nothing at all. It is pure speculation as to where and when he was born (I have personally discovered 17 different Walter Cooke's in England that COULD be the right one, but absolutely no proof that ANY of them actually are him.)
There is also absolutely no record anywhere of a surname for Walter's wife or wives. None at all. It is known that Catherine Brenton was married to someone named Cook, but who? Nobody knows. At that time, in Massachusetts, there were 197 male Cooke's of the right age range. 22 of whom were married to a Catherine or Katherine. So, which one was married to Catherine Brenton? Unknown at this time.
But that is a perfect example of how people shove someone into a family, without any proof at all. Was his wife Catherine Brenton? Possibly she was, but until there is proof of that, you can not list his wife ans anyone but Catherine - , leaving the surname blank.
Genealogy can be a fascinating hobby. It combines detective work, history, research skills, and a host of other things. You get to contact a LOT of distant relatives (I have over 140,000 people in my family database, all connected by blood or marriage. Thank Gog the vast majority of them are dead!)
But, if you are going to do it, please do it right. I have seen far too many family genealogies that Grandma or great Aunt Sue did, that are simply wrong once you get two or three generations back.
