TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2000-04 > 0954880905


From: "L. H. Peregory" <>
Subject: Re: TMG-L: Re: Sources - E-mail and Web Site And Others
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 13:41:45 -0700
References: <20000404.092344.-913175.2.djschulteis@juno.com>


>
> A better example might be, third Cousin Caryl provided birth information
> of her grandaunt. She obtained the information from a birth certificated
> filed in Moody County Court House in Flandreau, South Dakota in volume
> 123, page 48, record number 26. I do not identify my Cousin Caryl as the
> source of the information but the birth certificate in volume 123, page
> 28, record number 26 in Moody County Court house in Flandreau, South
> Dakota, USA as viewed by cousin Caryl in 1983 and sent to me in a letter
> dated 2 February 1987. Now if someone wished to actually check this
> information, they are not going to contact Cousin Caryl but will go to
> Moody County Court House.
>
> This may be one of semantics, but from a many years later documentation
> standpoint, I go with identifying the source of the information, and how
> I may have received it (if appropriate), not identifying from whom I
> received it and secondarily where they obtained it. I believe I am
> documenting my information, not documenting my work.
>
> Donald

Donald:

Whatever works for you is fine. I think that in the above example,
if you cited it as such, there would be no doubt that your source
was actually the letter from Cousin Caryl and that you had not seen
the birth certificate but for anyone who was interested enough they
could check out Cousin Caryl's source. If she had sent you a
photocopy of the birth certificate, that would be your source as
received in the letter from Cousin Caryl on a certain date.

If you use your method, it appears that you would be citing original
sources that you had not examined. For instance, in a book that
lists marriages in a certain county and gives the courthouse
location with vol. and page no., would you cite your source as the
book or the courthouse record. I think the rule of citing the
source that the researcher has actually examined is a better one
that would give a clearer picture of the reliability of the
information.

I guess this subject is a little off topic and it is apparent that
we have some strong convictions about which is best. So I say as
before, whatever works for you is fine with me. Sadly, probably 90
percent of the research that is done will never be published or
saved.

Lewis
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
TMG-L The Internet Mailing List for The Master Genealogist
To unsubscribe: Send an e-mail to with 'UNSUBSCRIBE TMG-L'
or... if you get the digest version: 'UNSUBSCRIBE TMG-L-DIGEST'
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

This thread: