Sources Best Practice Question

[Bowes Researcher]

I am wondering what others do when they want to source, e.g., a record found at FamilySearch. I have one source created for FamilySearch website in general, and then was going to put the link to the specific record web page in the citation Details field. But then I noticed LDS gives a format for sourcing that record that is much more professional:

"New York, Marriages, 1686-1980," index, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/F64J-V6M : accessed 19 Mar 2014), Catherine Murphy in entry for William John Bowe and Georgina Mercedes Kelly, 12 Oct 1903; citing reference ; FHL microfilm 1570989.

But when I try to copy that to the citation Detail field it won't accept that many characters. It's a lot of work to recreate a new source record for each record found there (or Ancestry or MyHeritage etc), especially with my tendon issues.

I also recognize it's not the best as a primary source, but would like to log it pending finding an actual document image somewhere. As a secondary source they should get credit for delivering me the best information I have so far.

Thoughts?

[Michael Talibard]

Re: Sources Best Practice Question

It's a lot of work to recreate a new source record for each record found there (or Ancestry or MyHeritage etc)

Not really. Duplicate the source and then you need only change a number or two.

[Bowes Researcher]

Re: Sources Best Practice Question

Ah ha lol! In this case, would you enter the first source using Database for ""New York, Marriages, 1686-1980" as opposed to Website for FamilySearch which provided the secondary source citation?

Thanks!

[rclrocco]

Re: Sources Best Practice Question

Yes I would definitely enter, "New York, Marriages, 1686-1980" etc as your source. Entering, "website for Family Search" really doesn't tell others, and you, anything which could be verified. Its a bit saying Library, or Record Office as a source, and its that vague. And yes I realise you qualified your comment , that the website reference was the best you had at the time, as a first up source.

When I started , I entered a few vague sources like Marriage Certificate but quickly realised these were about as useful as a chocolate teapot.

I like entering sources which are detailed and specific. As Michael says , they are quick to duplicate , and then just tweak a detail or two to make the new source from a previous one. Reunion is a powerful database - use it fully.

[Terri Works]

Re: Sources Best Practice Question

Not really. Duplicate the source and then you need only change a number or two.

If you used Free Form source, you could just cut and paste the entire Family Search source citation. I was doing all my sources Free Form but now I'm worried because I just read that won't work if you want to upload a Gedcom. Is that true?

[Mary Arthur]

Re: Sources Best Practice Question

...I was doing all my sources Free Form but now I'm worried because I just read that won't work if you want to upload a Gedcom. Is that true?

The ged com is a down and dirty way of sharing names and dates and relationships, it is out of date and not going to be updated.

AND, it is a (IMO) a very bad way to get information.

I always enter the information I get from cousins by hand, I need to know what is there, and make connections that my brain can make that (so far) a computer can't. (Ann's maiden name was McD----, these McD----'s are from PEI, maybe there is a connection. My first cousin on my mothers side married my 4th cousin on my fathers side!)

[Terri Works]

Re: Sources Best Practice Question

Yes I would definitely enter, "New York, Marriages, 1686-1980" etc as your source. Entering, "website for Family Search" really doesn't tell others, and you, anything which could be verified. Its a bit saying Library, or Record Office as a source, and its that vague. And yes I realise you qualified your comment , that the website reference was the best you had at the time, as a first up source.

When I started , I entered a few vague sources like Marriage Certificate but quickly realised these were about as useful as a chocolate teapot.

I like entering sources which are detailed and specific. As Michael says , they are quick to duplicate , and then just tweak a detail or two to make the new source from a previous one. Reunion is a powerful database - use it fully.

When you say "detailed and specific" - I'm currently trying to re-enter all my sources as shown in Evidence Explained! by Elizabeth Shown Mills but I think I'm really getting hung up on trying to be perfect. I'm not working for publication, mostly for my own edification and hopefully for some of the grandkids. Do you use Mills or some other manual on correct citation or just decide for yourself which details you need? Do you use the templates or enter all your sources Free Form? Reunion is indeed a powerful database - but it's daunting to try to use it fully! (I'm trying not to whine.....)
Terri

[kmgenealogy]

Re: Sources Best Practice Question

...I'm currently trying to re-enter all my sources as shown in Evidence Explained! by Elizabeth Shown Mills but I think I'm really getting hung up on trying to be perfect. I'm not working for publication, mostly for my own edification and hopefully for some of the grandkids. Terri

Terri, Since you're basically starting over, you might want to take a look at Ben Sayer's article on his GenealogyTools.com site - http://genealogytools.com/your-sourc...-is-in-danger/

Be sure to read all the comments. At the end of the comments, Ben has a link to the Practical Citation site. It does cost $47 for the lifetime subscription.

I have to admit that I dropped the ball on it after subscribing. Went back a bit ago and am going to use it, at least with future citations, and hope to slowly convert old citations. I don't care about Elizabeth Shown Mill's formats as I will not be publishing anything that formal. If I do, I think Ben's citations should easily convert to her formats. Ben's citations should get your sources through the GEDCOM mess when you want to transfer to someone else. They should also allow future generations to easily follow your sources.

[rclrocco]

Re: Sources Best Practice Question

Nope Terri, I don't follow Mills or any specific guides , just my own gut feeling, and what I've learned from ReunionTalk, that I want my sources to be thoroughly clear to me and others in future.

I ask myself, can I or others, locate that source from what I have recorded. If I can, then I am usually confident that others could.

[Terri Works]

Re: Sources Best Practice Question

Terri, Since you're basically starting over, you might want to take a look at Ben Sayer's article on his GenealogyTools.com site - http://genealogytools.com/your-sourc...-is-in-danger/

Be sure to read all the comments. At the end of the comments, Ben has a link to the Practical Citation site. It does cost $47 for the lifetime subscription.

I have to admit that I dropped the ball on it after subscribing. Went back a bit ago and am going to use it, at least with future citations, and hope to slowly convert old citations. I don't care about Elizabeth Shown Mill's formats as I will not be publishing anything that formal. If I do, I think Ben's citations should easily convert to her formats. Ben's citations should get your sources through the GEDCOM mess when you want to transfer to someone else. They should also allow future generations to easily follow your sources.

Thank you - that was kind - I will definitely ftake a look at the Sayer's article.. Terri

[suzivegemite]

Re: Sources Best Practice Question

Terri, Since you're basically starting over, you might want to take a look at Ben Sayer's article on his GenealogyTools.com site - http://genealogytools.com/your-sourc...-is-in-danger/

Be sure to read all the comments. At the end of the comments, Ben has a link to the Practical Citation site. It does cost $47 for the lifetime subscription.

I use Practical Citation for all my sources. It makes sources detailed but easy and all the information is exported via gedcom.
I'm not interested in publishing my work, nor do I think someone else will want to take it on when I die. I do it for myself, because I like it.
I spend time doing sources so I know where I found things and I can retrace my steps if need be. As more information becomes available I may need to be able to justify the information in the tree to myself.
I've sent gedcom's to many different software programs, legacy, roots magic, mac family tree, family tree maker, and heredis and all received my sources perfectly. If people see fit to rewrite them to follow Mills, I couldn't care less. All I care about is that they CAN refind them.

I'm not saying you should use Practical Citation, just pick a style that works for you. Is transferring info by gedcom important to you? Can you refind your info using your sources? Can someone else?? Once you work out what's important you, you'll know which way to create you own sources, best practice or not.

S

[mrstucci]

Re: Sources Best Practice Question

Terri, Since you're basically starting over, you might want to take a look at Ben Sayer's article on his GenealogyTools.com site - http://genealogytools.com/your-sourc...-is-in-danger/

Be sure to read all the comments. At the end of the comments, Ben has a link to the Practical Citation site. It does cost $47 for the lifetime subscription.

I have to admit that I dropped the ball on it after subscribing. Went back a bit ago and am going to use it, at least with future citations, and hope to slowly convert old citations. I don't care about Elizabeth Shown Mill's formats as I will not be publishing anything that formal. If I do, I think Ben's citations should easily convert to her formats. Ben's citations should get your sources through the GEDCOM mess when you want to transfer to someone else. They should also allow future generations to easily follow your sources.

I am glad to read your reply about citing sources because I am working on implementing Practical Citations also. I am not going to be publishing my work and anyone that might be interested in my family research won't be critical-they might like to know what census year the information is from or that the information came from an email but that's about it. Judy