TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2009-09 > 1253481125

From: Lee Hoffman <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] FHL Microfilm Source
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 17:12:05 -0400
References: <><><><><BLU0-SMTP2822D93FE1EA2BCBF3AB5393DE0@phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To: <BLU0-SMTP2822D93FE1EA2BCBF3AB5393DE0@phx.gbl>

Bruce Evans wrote:
>I'm a bit confused, Lee. Shouldn't that be the repository information?

No, any repository information should be the actual repository of the
original document. Remember that some documents on microfilm (e.g.,
normal books) don't have/need repositories. The purpose of this
added data is to indicate that you actual data was not the source,
but the microfilm was and it also tells where the film may be located.

According to Mills in "Evidence Explored" (p. 389) for Local & State
Records (which normally has a repository):
"In citing Family History Library microfilm for local and
state records, your
Source List [Bibliography] entry should identify the record
office that holds
the original."
Mils goes on to state that the First Reference Note (e.g., the Full
Footnote) does not need a Repository because the original was not
used. In TMG, if you do not wish to cite the Repository in the Full
Footnote, you can easily delete it from the Source Template in the
Full Footnote field of the Output Forms tab of the Source Definition Screen.

Hope this helps -

Lee Hoffman/KY
TMG Tips: <>;
My website: <>;
A user of the best genealogy program, The Master Genealogist (TMG)

This thread: