APG-L ArchivesArchiver > APG > 2009-03 > 1237911941
From: "Trish Nicola" <>
Subject: [APG] Mormon News Argument
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 09:25:41 -0700
Have any articles been published recently on this subject in the genealogy
magazines that are geared for nonprofessionals or beginning genealogists? It
seems like part of everyone's concern is making people aware of the
limitations of these databases. Wouldn't an article on the pros and cons of
using this information be helpful?
Let us use this as an educational moment instead of dwelling on the
Patricia "Trish" Hackett Nicola, CG
CG and Certified Genealogist are Service Marks of the Board for
Certification of Genealogists used under license after periodic evaluations
by the Board. http://www.BCGcertification.org/
From: [mailto:] On Behalf
Of Janessa Roberts
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 11:27 PM
To: Debra Blackard
Subject: Re: [APG] Mormon News Argument
VERY well written, Debra. I especially liked the comment where you said we
are "keepers of the past." Made me sit up just a little bit straigter and
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 8:44 AM, Debra Blackard <
> To All Members of the List:
> Rather than immediately jumping to the defensive position if corrections
> any online (free or subscription,) print or family source were questioned,
> we should all thoughtfully evaluate the databases, books or family records
> and compare the information contained in them to records created
> contemporaneously to the ancestor we are researching.
> All religion is a matter of faith. I am not LDS, and in my Protestant
> denomination I am encouraged to seek the best sources for my belief, not
> accept anything from someone else, even a minister, without checking it
> I am aware that this is not true in many churches/religions. I also have
> accept that many people do not have the same research standards that I
> been taught. Religious faith should have no part in actual research,
> regardless of the reason one is researching. Fact finding should be the
> operational mode; Facts should be supported by documentation. Whether LDS
> that dreaded "Fundamentalist Baptist", we need to become "researchers" on
> this list and quit defending the indefensible.
> Would we not be better genealogists, LDS, non-LDS if we left behind the
> defensive posture of blind loyalty to flawed sources and do our very best
> support the facts with good quality evidence? So much time is spent on
> list defending and attacking the LDS research sources and their critics.
> Elizabeth Mills and many others have said in previous posts, there are
> in every source. And yes, there are many more flaws possible with the
> technology we use today compared to when we had only print sources. We
> our time and energy refusing to admit that obvious fact.
> It is true that much of what is available online is trash. It is also true
> that mistakes are perpetuated much more rapidly because the databases and
> indices that have been made available online and/or for sale on disks
> without any type of quality control over the research. It is also true
> many people won't believe a stack of original records if they have found
> different information on a purchased disk of gedcoms or if Aunt Hattie had
> different version.
> Instead, let us use those BCG Standards available to all of us, certified,
> credentialed, or aspiring, professionals.
> I cannot waste my time on arguments when the answers are very obvious to
> me...Use the very best sources I can find, original if possible, and
> facsimiles of the original if not. Avoid compiled databases for actual
> facts; use them only for possible kernels hidden among the chaff. Follow
> every so-called fact found in a compilation to the source record. As Peggy
> Reeves pointed out recently, NSDAR constantly has to correct flawed
> because they have been proven with fraudulent or incorrect research. I
> this to be true because I have communicated with the DAR Corrections
> Genealogist about problems in some of my lines.
> Become politically active. Write your local officials and congressional
> representatives about the need to keep our local, state and federal
> fully accessible to us as private citizens and without filtering them
> through any private or religious entity. [I don't want someone else, be it
> staffer at NARA or my state archives or a volunteer for any church or
> organization to decide which ten pages will be most important to me in my
> research.] We need those records to remain open to researchers and the
> way this will happen is if we become involved and tell our leaders how
> important that these records are.
> We are not just genealogists looking for another leaf on our family tree.
> are keepers of the past and that is a weighty responsibility, one which we
> should take seriously and make every effort for others in decision making
> positions to do the same.
> Debra from Arkansas
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in
> the subject and the body of the message
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in
the subject and the body of the message