Dear Editor;
Perhaps a seemingly trivial question, but your opinion would be appreciated.
Sometimes the way in which ScotlandsPeople states their reference numbers could result in recording them incorrectly. I believe I have a solution, but I'm wondering about just how much leeway I have in the way I cite them.
I recently received a state death certificate without a certificate number. The subject died in 1941. I queried the state vital records office and learned that there were no certificate numbers until 1960.
I need to cite the 1956 Brooklyn Telephone Directory on Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/brooklynnewyorkc1954newy/mode/2up
There is no cover or title page and no where in the directories is the name mentioned. The title from year to year changes slightly. Since I don't know the exact title is this a case where I would make something up like Brooklyn Telephone Directory, 1956 and put it in quotation marks? or since its published does it still need to be in italics?
I currently have the following edition of Evidence Explained.
Mills, Elizabeth Shown. Evidence Explained. 3rd edition (for Kindle). Baltimore, Maryland. Genealogical Publishing Company. 2015.
I'm finding that this edition is starting to show its age and does not address some of the topics under discussion on the EE website forums. I'd like to replace my current copy. However; the 3rd edition (revised) may only be marginally better than what I currently own. Is there another Evidence Explained release planned in the near future?
I am hoping you can give me some direction in the area of citing Scottish census records. I feel if I can master this I will be able to cite Scottish vital records i.e. BMD records. As I mentioned on a previous post, I am new to genealogy and want to get off on the right track so as not to have to go back after I have done substantial research. My family on my fathers side come from Scotland so I anticipate doing considerable research.
Dear Editor:
I have reviewed the examples of Citing Online Historical Resources, 2nd ed (2017), as well as Evidence Explained, 3rd ed. Kindle for online collections. I also noted your recent concise explanation related to a museum collection.
In addition the Hagley Museum has expressed a preferred citation:
Is there a list of Quicksheets available, along with what is the current edition? Please indicate one or two sources where to buy the latest editions of them and EE.
Thanks
Jeff
In reading EE, forum posts, and Quicktips, such as "Citing Everything: Your 1-2-3 Guide," it's my understanding that the way to cite online imaged documents is (1) the imaged document, (2) the online collection, (3) source of the source.
It seems the approach in Quicklesson 26 is to cite the online collection first (Ancestry example).
Is that to say either approach is ok? (Again, talking image collections only, not extract databases.) Does either approach apply to just mega sites like Ancestry and FamilySearch, or to any site?
I often find it difficult to determine the jurisdiction level (i.e. county or state) to use when creating a citation for online imaged documents, particularly vital records.
Dear Editor,
I am also new to genealogical citation. I got your reference EE and have been studying it. It is a great reference! I also read the recent posting about "Passenger Lists on Ancestry.com citing NARA -- Arrival by Aircraft" and found it to be very informative.
However, I still have a question regarding the correct usage of semicolons when a NARA citation is used along with the citation for the derived online images from Ancestry.
