TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2005-04 > 1114616928


From: "Peter & Doreen Neilley" <>
Subject: Bibliography - IGI Entries
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 09:48:48 -0600


Thanks to Jim Byram, my List of Sources report will now let me choose from the three options (Associated with, Focus Group, All Sources). I have just printed a Report of all my Sources, which is going to be very useful to go through and clean my sources up. (And I thought I was being careful as I created my Sources! Yikes!) However, it has also raised a question (and not one that I can "try it" first <vbg>).

I created the report in a Bibliographic sorted format, and got 21 sources at the very beginnig of the report which showed nothing but the Source #. When I looked at them, they were all IGI (International Genealogical Index) sources. Wondering what I had done to the IGI source to cause them not to print in the Bibliography, I looked at the Source Template and discovered that the Bibliography showed " -- " (without the quotes). Having rediscovered Appendix F - Source Templates in The Book a few days ago, I checked the template there, and discovered that, in fact, the Template was created that way.

My question is, why? If you do a Bibliography for a group of people, shouldn't the fact that the IGI was a Source for some of the information be reflected in it? I am wondering what the rationale was behind this exclusion of the IGI from the Bibliography. Whoever put the Source Templates together obviously put a lot of thought and work into it, so I am wondering if there is some accepted reason not to cite the IGI in the Bibliography, although citing it in footnotes or endnotes? Mom has our copies of Mills and Lackey with her in Saskatchewan, so I can't consult them for several more days, to see if Mills says something about this (the IGI Template is in the Mills section).

Puzzled,
Doreen Neilley



This thread: