TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2000-06 > 0960752330


From: Linda Lawhon <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] Funeral Program
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 14:38:50 -0500
In-Reply-To: <LPBBILIPNKKGBOCMAGCKEEMDCDAA.prhoton@bellsouth.net>


Phil Rhoton said:
>date, death date, burial location, survivors, and occasionally
>parents. Is
>the proper term for these "Funeral Program's?" How should I cite them?

Phil,

I have several of these, too. Many years ago I just looked at the
various templates to see which one would record what I wanted. I
selected Manuscript (unfilmed).

In the abbreviation field I put: DEA/TX/Doe, Jane:FnlPrg

You may have your Master Source List directory arranged in a
different manner. The DEA tells me it is a death type record. The
rest of the abbreviation tells me the state, the name of subject, and
the type of death record. FnlPrg = Funeral Program. Keep in mind,
this is my choice -- others prefer putting the state first so that
all records pertaining to a particular state are in one section of
source list, and others prefer putting the subject first. Whatever
floats your boat.

The full footnote template:
[SUBJECT]<, [RECORD TYPE]><, [DATE]><, [FILE NUMBER]>,
[REPOSITORY], [REPOSITORY ADDRESS]<, [CD]>.

This entry would read:
Jane Doe, Funeral Program, 31 Mar 2000, Family records of Swift &
Running Doe, Richardson, Dallas, Texas.

The short footnote template, I have altered to this:
[SUBJECT]<, [RECORD TYPE]><[DATE]>.

Jane Doe, Funeral Program, 31 Mar 1900.

*[Comment on the above -- I am considering dropping the date from the
short footnote. Can anyone think of a reason I should leave the date
in the short footnote entry?? If the date is mentioned in the text
and the date is included in the full footnote and bibliography, I can
see no value for it in the short footnote.]

I have changed the biblio template to this:
[SUBJECT]. [RECORD TYPE]<. [DATE]><. [FILE NUMBER]>< .
[REPOSITORY]><. <REPOSITORY ADDRESS]>.

It would read:
Doe, Jane. Funeral Program. 31 May 1900. Family Records of Swift &
Running Doe. Texas. Dallas. Richardson.

Note: It would be nice if one could have the option of using the year
only in the bibliographic sentence so it would read, Doe, Jane.
Funeral Program. 1900.

And -- for eons I have been complaining about how the Repository
Address prints out in the various citations. If I chose to use the
Templates based upon Mills then the bibliographic entry is correct
if Rep. Addr. is the first field-- State. County. City. But, as you
can see in the above example, if the Rep. Addr. is not the first
field, it still prints out State, County, City, making the citation
rather clumsy looking. This is so disagreeable to me that I am
using the Repository function less and less and then adding to the
template the fields that will give me what *I* think is the correct
format. Yes, it takes a little more time but *much less* time than
having to make the corrections in my word processor on each report I
create. If I go to the Custom templates, then the Repository Address
always reads City, County, State which looks very tacky in the
bibliography.

But, the bottom line is you can pretty much do what you want. You
can use any template that has the fields you need. The name of the
template never appears in any report.

Linda








This thread: