TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-L Archives

Archiver > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM > 2011-04 > 1302027426


From: "Peg's Gmail" <>
Subject: Re: [TGF] Changed URL
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 12:17:06 -0600
References: <156922.49215.qm@web59907.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <156922.49215.qm@web59907.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>


I assumed this Connie's comments were sent directly to me based on my post about how I was working on a database and rewriting some citations. I just hit reply and answered it, but then realized Connie's post was to all, not just me, so replying to all--it is a discussion that may be worthwhile.

Connie brings up an excellent point. It is a tedious, unnecessary exercise, unless you have certain conditions at hand as she outlined--such as future publication, certification, etc. And those are exactly the reasons I'm working on cleaning this one up. It is in a database that I began working on over 20 years ago before I knew as much as I know now (always learning daily), and has been on the shelf many of the years since while I've worked on other things. My more recent work would not require such re-working.

So, in this case, here are my reasons:
1) I wanted to bring them up a notch in level of professionalism,
2) I'm using this particular database for a British Research class and for that class need to be cited more accurately,
3) I may use this database in the future for accreditation if I ever get that far, obviously requiring precise citations,
4) if I ever published a family history as the result, I wish them to be written the way I know they should be, and
5) I transferred this database from one type of software to another specifically to work better with the citations in the future, and they all transferred in free-form; I preferred a better format.

So, perhaps there is a time to re-work things. But from this experience, I definitely wouldn't recommend it unless you have a really good reason. It is quite tedious at best.

Thanks, Connie, for helping us all to clarify the difference.

Peg


On Apr 5, 2011, at 11:35 AM, Connie Sheets wrote:

> The first question I have is "why are you re-writing your citations?"
>
> I have some very old and poorly written citations in my personal database and paper files; I'm sure many of them contain outdated URLs. They are going to stay that way until I do one or more of the following:
>
> *complete more indepth research on that person/family and need to look at the source again
> *decide to use the person/family for a case study or other article that I write for publication,
> *write a book about that person/family, or
> *decide to use the person/family for the KDP, etc. in a certification portfolio
>
> Depending upon the circumstances, I might fix a few of them if I share with a cousin, although in many cases even my old, poorly written (or outdated format) citations will likely beat anything they've seen.
>
> If I'm doing work for a client, I would, of course, include a current citation with current URLs.
>
> But for my own work, I've got better things to do with my time than worry about outdated citations. If I viewed a page in 1999 (and I have some citations that say that), that is what the citation will continue to say until one of the other factors above kick in.
>
> I've already wasted too much of my time worrying about such comparative trivialities. "Perfection is the enemy of good," except when preparing for publication or a certification portfolio:-)
>
> Connie
>
>
>
>
> The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list.
> -------------------------------
> 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: