Recently, I did some record exploring with FamilySearch.org and took screenshots of some of the records I found to share. As I was compiling the data, I went back to verify the records and discovered that the first screenshot I took of one of the records never came up that way again. Has anyone ran across such an issue before?
I see that CMOS, 17th ed., says that using ibid is discouraged. But my Evidence Explained, 3rd ed., supports using ibid. For my own use, I prefer ibid rather than a subsequent note (in the right situation, of course) - it makes the footnote section look a bit cleaner. Just wondering what is the current EE thinking on this - follow CMOS or encourage the use of ibid? Thanks so much!
I'm working on a family from the Netherlands. They had 16 kids. Most got married. Some had two, or more, husbands. Using the register format of Individual, birth, death. Marriage, spouse birth death. You end up with a minimum of 5 citations per child. The citations are mostly 3 layer with a decent sized URL. Typically 4 lines as an endnote. I'm getting about 3 kids per page :) It makes for a very choppy look.
My choices appear to be, live with it, don't cite everything, take something out, or get some sort of epiphany.
Development of "Subsequent Note" and "Source List Entry" for QuickLesson 26
Dear Editor; As I often do, I was re-reading, "QuickLesson 26: Thinking Through Ancestry.com Citations" on the EE site. It's a very useful "walk-through" of the process of developing citations for Ancestry data. I notice that the development of the companion "Subsequent Note" and "Source List Entry" for QuickLesson 26 does not appear to be addressed. Would it be possible to add a short bit to the QuickLesson to describe this aspect, thereby more fully addressing the subject?
It's probably true that we struggle most with citations when we don't understand exactly what we are looking at. I am attempting to cite a Massachusetts marriage record that I found through FamilySearch. And I'm struggling with citation because I freely admit that I don't understand what I'm looking at. My law degree isn't helping me at all on this one.
The journey begins here:
I'm working on some Dutch records right now and I think I have this right, but i'd like a check.
The website WieWasWie has indexed much of the digitized records held throughout the country. The actual digitized records are held in regional archives. The search pattern is go to WieWasWie, enter in your details get the page, goto source, and read the record.
I have lost the plot about when it is not necessary to cite a repository. I thought I heard once that we cite what we use. In this case, I used a database with images at FamilySearch. I still cited the repository. Did I need to?
"Texas Deaths, 1890-1976," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:K397-6BT); image, certificate no. 41285 for Ben “Zeno” Zuinault [Zumault], 16 Aug 1953, Houston, Harris, Texas; parents, George Zumault and Emery [Emily?] Floyd; citing State Registrar Office, Austin, Travis, Texas; FHL microfilm 2,113,981.
So here's one that's slightly different, i need to cite congressional testimony, from 2005. The text isn't available at the library of congress, but i have my prepared remarks. So here's my go at this:
Source List
United States. Congress. House Armed Services Committee. Archived website. Library of Congress. Web Archives. 2005. https://webarchive.loc.gov/ : 2020.
Citation
Looking to cite an online birth register that appears that it was orginaly a GSU microfilm of an original marriage register. I'm scratching my head on citing this and wondering if I should cite the database or the catalog record.
When I did the initial search on FS it was part of a database "Pennsylvania Births and Christenings, 1709-1950" but the record came from a set of images from which I found this information:
Catalog Record: Pennsylvania Births and Christenings, 1709-1950
Film/Digital Note: Birth Register, 1893-1906
Trying again. Attaching image this time of a screen grab from my genealogy software program.
I do not know how to cite Riksarkivet. I do not know who runs Riksarkivet, who compiles the databases, who to give the credit to, or anything. I am only guessing when I have filled out the template that is the image I have attached.
It would be so much easier if I could just see an example of a citation for Riksarkivet. You say you have one, but I do not see it in your most recent edition (2017).
