Forums
In the Netherlands, we've got a national website, Genlias, that provides an index of civil registration records (births, marriages and deaths). The website is created by a consortium of provincial archives. As a user, you only see one search form and results are displayed regardless of which archive or which source contributed the index entry. In other words: the website acts as a single database.
I want to cite a marriage record I've found on this website. I've studied EE but I don't know what to put in as the name of the database, as the website is the database. I can think of several options:
-
by using the name of the search form instead of the database:
“Searching in Genlias database”, database, Genlias (http://www.genlias.nl : accessed 9 November 2012), marriage entry for Derk Jan Hoitink and Dersken Wikkerink, Aalten, Gelderland, the Netherlands, 22 March 1850; citing Aalten, Marriage record, 1850, nr. 7; Gelders Archief, Arnhem, the Netherlands. -
by using a description of the database contents:
Index of civil registration records in the Netherlands, database, Genlias (http://www.genlias.nl : accessed 9 November 2012), marriage entry for Derk Jan Hoitink and Dersken Wikkerink, Aalten, Gelderland, the Netherlands, 22 March 1850; citing Aalten, Marriage record, 1850, nr. 7; Gelders Archief, Arnhem, the Netherlands. -
leaving the database name blank:
Database, Genlias (http://www.genlias.nl : accessed 9 November 2012), marriage entry for Derk Jan Hoitink and Dersken Wikkerink, Aalten, Gelderland, the Netherlands, 22 March 1850; citing Aalten, Marriage record, 1850, nr. 7; Gelders Archief, Arnhem, the Netherlands.
I think I'm leaning towards option number two as I think that's the most helpful for other researchers but I would really appreciate some feedback.
Yvette,
Yvette,
How would all this differ from the patterns EE gives for the comparable sites that serve Australia, England, Scotland, etc.?
As a basis for discussion, skim the Australia and England sections 11.58 and 11.60 and we can take it from there. What may be confusing you, perhaps, is the distinction between the site's "search" page and the actual, individual databases.
Hi Editor,
Hi Editor,
Thank you for the reference. Still finding my way through the book. I looked in chapter 9 (vital records) and did not see any examples of a website that contained just the one database. I now see that 11.58 addresses this issue, which would argue for option 1. It does feel a bit strange to take the rather arbitrary name of a search page instead of something descriptive, I must admit. Could you explain the rationale behind this choice?
Yvette wrote:
Yvette wrote:
"It does feel a bit strange to take the rather arbitrary name of a search page instead of something descriptive. ... Could you explain the rationale?"
Yvette,
One reason for pointing you to a variety of options is that it's not possible for EE to say what works best in a specific case without the ability to actually study the site.
The basic principle behind all citations is this:We cite what we use. That's the principle behind EE 11.28, which aligns most closely to your Option 1. If, at a site, you cannot go directly to an individual database and your only access is through one webpage at which you have to conduct your search, then that webpage is what you are using. When the results page gives you a database entry (as opposed to an image), then you identify that database entry after you cite the web page and web site.
Think of this as analogous to citing a chapter in a book and then the book itself (or an article and its journal), then you identify one specific item out of the chapter or the article. If the database entry cites its own source, then you add that in your source-of-the-source field. With a source such as this that might not be understood by those who have not used it, then then logical thing to do would be to add an explanation of what the site is all about; this is where you would put that "something descriptive" about the site itself.
Yvette wrote:
Yvette wrote:
>I looked in chapter 9 (vital records) and did not see any examples of a website that contained just the one database. I now see that 11.58 addresses this issue, which would argue for option 1.
Yvette, you make a valuable point here. Situations differ from one country to the next. Here in the U.S., there is no equivalent for the site you describe and our vital records are not concentrated at a national archives. For vital records, we must focus on the state and local levels. But some other countries do have vital registrations consolidated nationally, and the national archives of some other countries do have a central gateway such as the one you describe.
One of the wonderful things about learning is that regardless of what country we live in, we can learn from studying the situation in other countries that we might have no interest in at all!