TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2000-09 > 0968425087


From: "Charles C. Chaney" <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] Copious Ancestors
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 10:58:07 -0400
References: <7B3D67AA81EBD111AC4000A0C96B23F7067F9571@orsmsx32.jf.intel.com>


Doesn't this rely heavily on how one cites sources. Somewhere along the way
this comparison seems to break down. I keep my information in four
datafiles. The largest, "maternal," has 42,785 individuals with 171, 520
citations but only 2075 sources. The number of sources seems quite small.
However, since this file is used to also incorporate data concerning a
national family history association a primary source is the 30 volume
newsletter. I decided to enter it on the master source list only under its
overall title with specific location (volume, page) in the citation field of
each citation. Also, census source is entered by year, state, county then
individual citations contain the specific information. This greatly reduces
the total number of sources. This is a personal preference that works for
my purpose and I don't not advocate that others do it the same way. I
realize it has its shortcomings but, the key point, it works for me. This
has been discussed at a users' group I attend with each individual having a
different opinion on method of entry.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Dameron-Damron Family Association:
http://www.mindspring.com/~ccchaney/ddfa/ddfa.html
Charles Chaney's Web Pages:
http://www.mindspring.com/~ccchaney/index.html

This thread: