Archiver > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM > 2010-01 > 1264177435

From: "Melissa Barker" <>
Subject: Re: [TGF] Reports vs. articles [was Re: Usability [was Genealogy asa discipline] ]
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 10:23:55 -0600
References: <>,<!&!>,<>,<><COL108-W47592BC76F7C318952FF4A92620@phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To: <COL108-W47592BC76F7C318952FF4A92620@phx.gbl>


Thanks for stating this, your explanation of your reports mirrors my client
reports. While I have not written articles, I am going to be interested in
what everyone else has to say.

Also, while I am not chiming in here very much, I am VERY MUCH enjoying this

Melissa Barker
Professional Genealogist
Specializing in Tennessee and Kentucky Genealogy Research
Visit My Website:

From: "Michael Hait" <>
Sent: Friday, January 22, 2010 9:45 AM
To: <>
Subject: Re: [TGF] Reports vs. articles [was Re: Usability [was Genealogy as
a discipline] ]

> I would also like to hear everyone's thoughts on this topic.
> Personally, my client reports are very similar to an article for
> publication in a journal in that they (1) start with an analysis of the
> evidence, and (2) come to a conclusion based on the evidence, and are
> generally written in a loose narrative format. The client reports are by
> no means as polished in style as I would submit to a journal, but the
> format/tone is similar. The key difference is that client reports are
> constrained by time limits, whereas a journal article would be the final
> conclusion after unconstrained research. (BTW - once I finish my BCG
> portfolio, my next big "project" will be an article for submission to
> NGSQ.)
> Are there other differences that I should be aware of?
> Michael Hait
> Read the newest article: African-American Genealogy Examiner
> LinkedIn profile:
>> From:
>> To:
>> Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 10:29:34 -0500
>> Subject: [TGF] Reports vs. articles [was Re: Usability [was Genealogy as
>> a discipline] ]
>> I've been following this conversation avidly, have several times
>> started to respond to one or another post, then much of what I've
>> wanted to say gets well said by someone else.
>> But this particular issue -- that reports (output) are different for
>> client reports vs. articles for publication -- is one that seems
>> important to this conversation, and Harold, you're the first, I think,
>> to explicitly bring this up, although it's been hinted at in some posts.
>> As I've been developing my own practices, it seems that both _process_
>> and _output_ [ ?roughly equivalent to? _research methodology_ and
>> _written results_ ] are probably (potentially substantially) different
>> for client reports vs. case studies/articles for publication.
>> I'm still chewing on this and don't have time now to pull together the
>> thoughts I've had even in "interim report" mode ;-} , but I wanted
>> to highlight Harold's comment and float this as another aspect of this
>> fascinating conversation. (I'll have some time on Sunday, when I'll
>> be able to come back into the dialogue, if it's still going on....)
>> Meanwhile, I recalled an article I'd read awhile ago on the BCG
>> website that seemed pertinent to this issue; it's this article,
>> "Reporting Standards: Client Research v. Personal Research," by Helen
>> Leary in _OnBoard_ 4 (May 1998),
>> ( )
>> My guess is that, nearly 12 years down the line and in view of the
>> continuing development of the methodology, Helen Leary might well have
>> written this somewhat differently today, but it nonetheless presents
>> an important distinction that touches on this aspect of our
>> conversation. I think it's worth reading for anyone who's been engaged
>> in this dialogue. At the end of the article, she notes that "BCG has
>> traditionally drawn distinctions between the reports of research done
>> for clients and those prepared for one's personal file — or for
>> publication."
>> I'm going to be out of earshot of this conversation until some time
>> Sunday afternoon; it'll be interested to see where it's gotten to by
>> the time I return....
>> --Meredith
>> Meredith Hoffman / GenerationsWeb
>> Plymouth, MA
>> On 2010Jan22, at 8:49 AM, Harold Henderson wrote:
>> > Clarity in genealogical writing is fantastically difficult to achieve,
>> > although it is an explicit goal of the top editors. That could be a
>> > thread
>> > in itself, but in my limited experience an article for publication
>> > usually
>> > turns out quite different than a client report. The two are at least
>> > different species!
>> -------------------------------
>> 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
> _________________________________________________________________
> Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service.
> -------------------------------
> 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

This thread: