TMG-L ArchivesArchiver > TMG > 2005-02 > 1108477859
From: Terry Reigel <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] Independent Cities
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 09:30:59 -0500
On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 01:07:27 -0600, Karenhappuch wrote:
> The census sheets for these "independent cities" list
> both county and city. Shouldn't we be recording the place
> as it is shown in the document?
Perhaps record, but where? In my view, tags are for recording
conclusions - what I think the facts most likely were. Sources and
citations are for recording what the records say. Accordingly, when I
see a name mis-spelled in a census, I note that in the CD, so I have a
record of what was actually recorded. But I don't put it the tag,
because I don't knowingly enter false information in a tag, where it
gets output as "fact" in my narrative reports or Second Site pages.
Others see a census tag as a transcription of the census record,
recording there (nearly) everything it contains, including errors,
such as spelling, ages, etc. I'd think one who follows that approach
might include errors in place names as well.
>Have these cities always been independent?
I'm sure there is no universal answer. For example, the city of St.
Louis was part of St. Louis County until August 22, 1876 (according to
an article at http://www.segenealogy.com/missouri/mo_county/slc.htm )
But I'd guess that there are some that have always been independent.
> If not, wouldn't the place depend on the date?
In my view it would.
|Re: [TMG] Independent Cities by Terry Reigel <>|