TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2002-08 > 1028221710


From: "Rae Jean" <>
Subject: Questionable Source Cites was [TMG] Source standards -- was Mills Source for Memorial?
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2002 12:08:30 -0500
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020731220425.0211f560@pop3.norton.antivirus> <5.1.0.14.2.20020801085300.030fdc40@pop3.norton.antivirus> <002601c23980$17e55da0$45cfd043@oemcomputer> <3D494D6A.A0644305@reigelridge.com> <002901c23974$0effcd30$c735dd18@master>


I am almost reaching the point of not creating a citation for individual web
page data or email postings. So little of the content has source cites so I
can verify the validity of the information. What I beginning to think of
doing, is to enter the information (when it has potential as a lead) and
then in the tag memo field entering something like this -- [see *enter name*
folder - found at <ragamuffin.com>] or [Rag Muffin email - see *enter name*
folder]. This is contrary to how I usually cite documents but these are not
documents that have validity. By entering info in the memo instead of
creating a citation, I also loose the ability to create surety codes but
they are so low I'm not sure it matters. Just tired of the junk that is
being passed off as research.

How are you dealing with this situation?
Rae Jean

----- Original Message -----
From: "Cliff Soderback" <>
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 10:56 AM

: To me it doesn't make much sense to cite something that cannot be
verified
: at a later time. With the advent of the Internet this becomes more
relevant all
: the time. Since the Internet is always changing the likelihood of
something
: being in the same place very long, is slim indeed.

-- Snip
: In my experience much of the private material is in error and is no better
: than someone's opinion. I have spent untold hours chasing my tail, so to
: speak, trying to authenticate so called family information, that was just
: plain wrong.

This thread: