TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2006-04 > 1143930222


From: "Cheryl Freeman" <>
Subject: RE: [TMG] Bibliography question
Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 16:24:30 -0600
In-Reply-To: <200641163558.792947@Terry3>


Well, it looks like there were several replies to my question that weren't
delivered to me until after I replied to Jill's first email. Yes, this is
what I want to include. :)

I started out creating a source for every household, and one cold and rainy
weekend I decided to experiment with lumping <G>. I liked the result and
because I was striving for consistency, I lumped right up to the county
level. :) Now I am seeing a benefit in lumping to the County/Roll level. I
have the FILM element populated with the series on many of my census sources
and can probably make the changes I need in not too much time, since the
roll number is in my [CD].

Thanks, Terry!

-----Original Message-----
From: Terry Reigel [mailto:]
Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 3:36 PM
To:
Subject: RE: [TMG] Bibliography question

On Sat, 1 Apr 2006 13:05:50 -0800, Jill Morelli wrote:

> True, I guess I don't consider the roll number the level of detail
> that was being requested for inclusion.

Actually, that's exactly what Cheryl said she wanted to include. <g>

> And like you say, unless you include it in the source itself it's not
> going to print....clumpers beware.

Or... always think ahead. <g>

I use a "lumper" style for census too, but make only one roll per source.
That does mean I have several sources for a few large cities where I've
found ancestors, but not all that often.

Terry



==== TMG Mailing List ====
To un-subscribe from TMG-L (in MAIL mode), send a message to
<> [to <> in Digest mode
or to in Index mode] with just the word
"unsubscribe" (no quotes)in the text and turn off your signature.

This thread: