Lionel and Norman, Basically, I agree with both of you but with some caveats.
Sources are not only for oneself but for others who may have access to your data via a report, webpage etc.. In such circumstances "In a filing cabinet in my garage" would not be very helpful, but a basic reference to a certificate, GRO, Southport, Lancashire, England.... with a date and reference number would. I agree that all the other bells and whistles are not necessary unless one is intending to obtain certification of some sorts. The main point is that a stanger to one's data should be able to trace the data reasonably easily. BTW. I am not too happy with your assumption the Ancestry for example will remain unchanged for ever and for aye. Fortunately, we (England) do not have specified standards, and I guess most are like me where the criteria, is that the sourcing be clear, accurate and reproducable by anyone. I tend to use a mixture of Basic and SW sourcing, but rarely (probably never) fill in all the fields. Ron Ferguson _____________________________________________________ Create your Website with Legacy, see Tutorials at: http://www.fergys.co.uk Includes the family tree for Alan J Grimshaw http://www.fergys.co.uk/Grimshaw/ For The Fergusons of N.W. England http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/fergys/ Follow me on twitter http://twitter.com/ronfergy ____________________________________________________ Lionel Carter wrote: > I'm inclined to agree. The degree of detail should be based on one's > objectives, not a preordained set of procedures. > > The 'efficiency' of finding information in a database is a trade off > between time spent inputting info and time spent retrieving. Why spend > hours putting in detail so that you can trace it in seconds when you > are likely to only want to trace less than 0.1% of it? E.G. rather > than spend 500 hours detailing everything 'just in case' it is more > 'efficient' to spend an hour tracing, if needed the one item sought. > > For family history as long as you know which database contains the > info then leave it to the search and organisation of that database to > find it again. To do otherwise is reinventing the wheel. Ancestry for > example will always return the same specifics for a particular > search, all you need to know is to look in Ancestry. > > > Norman Weston wrote: >> Is everyone here a professional genealogist or want to write a book >> or something? I suspect the vast majority of Legacy users are rather >> like me. They want to cite their sources adequately but not >> necessarilly with the complexity that seems to keep being touted >> here! What are the main reasons for sources? To know where the >> information came from so that it can be looked at again or quoted >> to someone else and to know the level of surety of the source. >> That's all I need. Birth certificate held in filing cabinet, 99% >> surety. Birthdate from Ancestry with reference to someone's tree >> -marginal evidence. Why does it have to be so flippin complicated!!!! Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
