Forums
I abstracted various newspaper records, vital records, warnings out of town and overseers of the poor records into 20+ databases. I created abstract summaries and exported them into four primary databases, then output them into pdf files and copied them into four MSWord documents and added introductory information.
I have shared the files with various individuals and organizations. One of the organizations is adding the information to their web server databases and I am providing them with copies of the abstract summaries from the 20+ databases in tab delimited files.
The organization wants to know how they should cite the information.
If it were just the MSWord documents my feeling is that I would use the following:
Sean Furniss, “Abstracts of Transcription of Portsmouth Town Records for Expenses of the Overseers of the Poor,” 13 January 2012. Abstracts created from transcriptions of Portsmouth Town Records created by the New Hampshire Secretary of State, 1936-1937.
Sean Furniss, “Abstracts of Portsmouth, New Hampshire, Warnings Out of Town,” 1 February 2012. Abstracts created from copies of the original documents at the New Hampshire State Archives, Concord, New Hampshire.
Sean Furniss, “Abstracts of Transcriptions of Portsmouth Town Vital Records,” 1 Febraury 2012. Abstracts created from transcriptions of Portsmouth Town Records created by the New Hampshire Secretary of State, 1936-1937.
Sean Furniss, “Portsmouth, New Hampshire, Newspaper Abstracts, 1776-1800,” 14 January 2012. Abstracts created from the online newspaper images of the America’s Historical Newspapers, Early American Newspapers Series 1, 1690-1876 and from newspapers reviewed at the Library of Congress and the Library at Dartmouth College.
But since what they are using is actually summarized information from my databases, I am not quite sure just what to recommend to them. Very few individuals would really want tab delimited fields and/or understand the issues of tab delimited files and databases.
Should I just give them the MSWord file citation or create something more complex that addresses the 20+ databases?
I would appreciate thoughts/suggestions.
Thanks
Sean
Sean,
Sean,
Your description of the various stages and changes that your "abstracts" have gone through provides a valuable lesson for those who use abstracts, databases, and indexes. As a rule, each change modifies the original information in its own way. Definitely, any information taken from the database should give due attention to the generations of processing that the database entries have undergone. Deciding how and what to cite can also be torturous.
In this case, there are at least four sets of creators involved. For the first example, we see (1) the original town clerks; then (2) the transcribers, then (3) you as an abstractor and database creator, and then --something we don't see in your citation draft--(4) the individual(s) inputting your manuscript data into the database that will appear at the organizational website.
Because users will be accessing the website database--not the original, not the transcripts, and not your abstracts or your database--it is the website database that will be featured in user citations. That might not seem fair to you, who appear to have done much work, but your credit will come in the part of the citation that discusses the foundations of the database. You will, undoubtedly, ensure that the online database provides a good description of the incarnations through which the data have gone, as well as a clear citation.
Here, I'll provide a pattern that could be provided for users at the website, so that users don't have to worry about how to integrate a citation to you into a citation for the web offering itself. I'll base it on the first of your examples, but it could be adapted to all four.
1. [Creator of the online database], "Portsmouth Town Records," database, Such & Such Historical Society (www.such&suchhistoricalsociety.org), Specific Item of Interest, Date of Document; citing Sean Furniss, "Abstracts of Transcription of Portsmouth Town Records for Expenses of the Overseers of the Poor," MS (Your Town, State, 2012). Furniss's manuscript is output from a database into which he abstracted transcriptions created under the New Hampshire Secretary of State, 1936-1937, now housed at ______________________; the original town records are no longer available for public use [or substitute, here, whatever the actual situation is, with those originals].
The organization wants to
The organization wants to cite me as the source for the information in their database and the source of the information in their database will be downloads of information from my 20+ database sets not really the information from the manuscripts. Their interest at the moment is not in giving their users the correct way to cite the information found on their database but to cite the manuscripts.
[I will make a suggestion to them that they provide information about how to cite the source of information to attribute it to their website data server.]
I used those 20+ database sets, with over 33,000 records, to compile my manuscripts but, while they using the introductory remarks of the manuscripts, they aren't using the written information from the manuscripts to populate their database. They are using downloads (tab delimited records) with the compiled abstracts (created with calculation fields to put all the pieces together, to save me having to write everything and to make all the abstracts consistent) and some additional descriptive fields to populate fields for their search engine (i.e., given name, surname, day, month, year, etc.)
Using the Overseers of the Poor records as an example with only two databases, I can potentially use either a citation for the manuscript or a citation to the databases.
Sean Furniss, “Abstracts of Transcription of Portsmouth Town Records for Expenses of the Overseers of the Poor,” MS (Reston, Virginia, 2012). The manuscript was created from databases using information abstracted from the transcriptions of State of New Hampshire’s Records of Portsmouth, Vol. 10, Town Records, Vol. II Expenses of Overseers of the Poor, 1817–1838; now housed at the New Hampshire State Library; FHL microfilm 15289; the original town records are no longer available for general public use.
Sean Furniss, “PaymentsByOverseersPoor.fp5” and “PaymentsToOverseersPoor.fp5,” databases (Reston, Virginia, 2012). The information from these databases was used to populate this database [the one used by the organization]. The abstracted information came from the transcriptions of State of New Hampshire’s Records of Portsmouth, Vol. 10, Town Records, Vol. II Expenses of Overseers of the Poor, 1817–1838; now housed at the New Hampshire State Library; FHL microfilm 15289; the original town records are no longer available for general public use.
The problem I have with the original base databases is that I used them to create additional summary databases, then exported it all out to pdf files for conversion to text files. In order to keep my databases current for the next generation of siftware upgrades, I am having to convert the file format from .fp5 to .fmp12.
Most everyone that might contact me would most likely be looking for the manuscripts instead of tab delimited data fields. My feeling is that most users can understand the manuscript citation and but would be confused by the database citation.
Sean wrote:
Sean wrote:
"The organization['s] interest at the moment is not in giving their users the correct way to cite the information found on their database but to cite the manuscripts. ... My feeling is that most users can understand the manuscript citation and but would be confused by the database citation.
Sean, you've done a good job of citing what you and the organization are creating. However, one point is not clear. When you (in the quote above) refer to 'citing the manuscript,' do you mean (a) the original manuscript register, (b) the manuscript transcription from the 1930s, or (c) what you refer to in para. 3 of your second messages as "my manuscripts"?
Clarity is always the issue.
Clarity is always the issue. : )
In this case I was referring to my manuscripts.
My manuscripts have my written introductory remarks followed by abstracts that were generated from my databases.
I have tried not to get into a lot of detail about the databases but I think that perhaps I need to describe the process a bit to help with this.
Each of the databases was created to hold specific types of records (births, marriages, deaths, military, maritime, advertisements, etc.) and to generate the abstracts I want for particular purposes.
The databases have some common data fields (given name, surname, month, day, year, several source related fields) and some unique fields (i.e., maritime records would have type of vessel, port of departure, port of arrival, etc.).
Then there are calculation fields that take the data fields and create abstracts. Essentially those fields take the data and convert it into a standardized readable sentence. That saves me time when inputing data and insures a consistent output of information.
Individuals and organizations always see the manuscripts I created first, then, depending upon how they wish to process the information, they either go with the manuscripts or they request customized database downloads.
Depending upon the requirements of the organizations that have been using the information, I create customized abstracts for them. I give them certain data fields that they may want (given name, surname, record date) and their customized database generated abstract.
Everything starts from the information I abstract from the sources into the databases. Two of the three organizations that are using data downloads have been citing my manuscripts as the source of their data when what they are actually using is the information from my databases.
Sean
Sean,
Sean,
Amid this can of worms, that "clarity" you mention points back to the most fundamental rule of citation: Cite what you use. You seem to have well studied EE's suggested models for citing various types of sources and appear well-prepared to help each organization cite what it is using.
The more-serious issue, it seems to EE, lies in one of your earlier statements: ""The organization['s] interest at the moment is not in giving their users the correct way to cite the information found on their database but to cite [my] manuscripts."
If the organizations are having this much difficulty in trying to figure out how to cite what you and they are offering, imagine how users will feel! Both these organizations and you would truly serve your constituency by providing a sound citation that researchers can copy and paste whenever they use each of the databases. This principle is now a well-established one in online research, followed by countless organizations from JSTOR to FamilySearch.