TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-L Archives

Archiver > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM > 2011-12 > 1324940203


From: <>
Subject: Re: [TGF] Question about Source Citations and My Rootsmagic Software
Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:56:43 -0600
References: <1324600596.17406.YahooMailClassic@web162303.mail.bf1.yahoo.com><CAOhjMgRrrbuP6e1adsqJU1p-dMhDLV+U2PPK6D5J9d-erp7Qpw@mail.gmail.com><00a901ccc2b3$ccb01c90$661055b0$@com><201112251721.pBPHLGAf019527@mail.rootsweb.com><005301ccc333$4ae805d0$e0b81170$@com><201112252100.pBPL01BT020461@mail.rootsweb.com> <1324863304.42133.YahooMailNeo@web120505.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <BAY145-ds2110AEE5F0D4A4BC5057AB92AE0@phx.gbl><1324936395.78468.YahooMailNeo@web120501.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <1324936395.78468.YahooMailNeo@web120501.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>


>Michael, I thought the use of colons was odd too, but again, I was using Elizabeth Shown Mills' example on page 529 of Evidence Explained, 2nd edition.

Hmhh. Page 529 uses a colon, but in a different place. On the other hand, in the grand scheme of things, EE would consider that a quite trifling point. No confusion results from the changed placement, and the bigger issue is whether the record is adequately identified.


>Also, could you and Kathy clarify in your citations about the box number. Are you writing "box no. C.R. 081.801.8" or are you writing "box no. 8, C.R. 081.801.8?" The "box no." is 8. The call no. is C.R. 081.801.8. When you order the record, you do not know the box no. You have to know the 081.801.xxx part of it though (the 081 corresponds to the county code and the 801 is the code for ordering a will; and you leave the last 3 digits blank since you don't know what box no. it will be). However, the box probably does have the entire call no. on its label. Does this matter?

I could use clarification on this point also. When EE was drafted, I asked the NC State Archives about citing call numbers and/or box number in the example on p. 529 and was told not to use it because call numbers and box numbers might change.

Kathy, of course, is an NC authority. That makes me wonder whether this is one of those points on which we get one answer if we ask one archive employee and a different answer if we ask another.

Otherwise, Ginger is well-making the point that Harold raised earlier in a different thread: "The real point [is] for us to *think* about the records and about what needs to be in the citation and what doesn't. Trying to reconcile [variances] with your own sense of the necessities is going to generate lots of thoughts, and if you keep it up, regardless of how any particular citation comes out, you will
learn a whole lot more about the records you're using than those of us who yield to the temptation to just copy someone else's citation format."

Elizabeth

-----------------------------------------------------------
Elizabeth Shown Mills, CG, CGL, FASG
www.HistoricPathways.com
The Evidence Series




This thread: