TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-L Archives

Archiver > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM > 2010-09 > 1283533509


From: <>
Subject: Re: [TGF] Citatinitis
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2010 12:05:09 -0500
References: <1A3F48D4-9637-415A-A8EE-A6E0586A3D6C@copestoneresources.com>
In-Reply-To: <1A3F48D4-9637-415A-A8EE-A6E0586A3D6C@copestoneresources.com>


Barbara wrote:
>When I am citing a census image from an online provider, I read and
transcribe it myself. If I read it differently than the transcriber who
prepared the online record, I do not make any mention of that fact. Are we
actually required (Elizabeth?) to cite these differences? I don't even look
at the page number assigned by the online provider, even if I can't find one
printed on the image. Why can't I disregard a page number the provider has
assigned if the one printed on the image is different? Why do I have to
mention that the transcriber mangled the name if I read it differently?

>Is all this so that somebody else can come along and find the exact same
transcribed record?

Barbara,

First I'll respond to that word "required." :) To my knowledge, there's no
citation police that would take away your license to do genealogy if you
don't note that the image-provider identifies a person one way while you
read the name differently.

However, whether we're using a census, a local deed book, a published
government document such as _American State Papers_, or any other kind of
records, if an index, abstract, or transcription identifies someone one way
and we think it should be another, it is likely to help both us and our
readers if our citation notes the difference. The easiest way to do this is
to "quote" the spelling used in the index/whatever and then put our own
rendition in square editorial brackets. (EE 2.16) As an example

.....dwelling 239, family 222, "Thomas Pedendy" [Thomas P. Dendy]

Elizabeth

-------------------------------------------------------------
Elizabeth Shown Mills, CG, CGL, FASG
The Evidence Series


This thread: