Scott: I would include every census listing for an individual. Because I transcribe the full family group as enumerated, this gives a picture of the family structure as well as their residence at any given time. And I'd also include birth, death, and marriage records even if they corroborate data from other sources. In general, I add a source citation for just about everything. Where I draw the line is with something like city directories that might simply repeat the same information year after year. I also minimize source citations for relatively recent family members (usually post-1920) since I'm after older family history and the newer stuff would never be posted anyway. It isn't necessary (or wise, in my opinion) to delete one source citation just because you found another that gives more detailed information.
If you have a special consideration like Ron's website situation, for example, or relatives with a short attention span, that's a different matter. In such cases you'd have to gear your work to your audience. My database is a record of my research rather than a coffee table book, so I record it all. Kirsten -----Original Message----- From: Scott Hall [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 11:50 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [LegacyUG] A sourcing question -- how many to include? A search of the archives pulled some threads on this topic, but from a few years back, so I thought revisiting it would be OK. I'm still trying to figure out the best way to record multiple sources that provide a single piece of information. There seem to be three key considerations: 1. Whether each source corroborates or conflicts with the other sources 2. The surety level of the source (e.g. primary v. secondary) 3. Keeping track of your research history (identifying that you've researched a source) There must be a balance between these considerations. For example, let's say your only record of a particular ancestor is the U.S. census, and appeared in all censuses from 1850–1880. Let's also assume that the each census accurately shows his age in intervals of 10 (in other words, the censuses corroborate each other). Because you have no other record of his birthdate, you can calculate the range based on his age. If, in 1850, he was 25, you know he must have been born between 2 Jun 1824 and 1 Jun 1825, given the census date of June 1. As implied above, the 1860, 70, and 80 censuses list his age as 35, 45, and 55, respectively, all calculating to the same birth range. Do you list all four censuses as sources? Now, let's add the 1900 census to our example, which again corroborates the earlier censuses, listing your ancestor at age 75 and providing the month and year of birth, say August 1824. I assume you'd replace the birth range with the month and year provided by the 1900 census, but what do you do with the other censuses as sources? Do you leave them (and if so, how do you indicate that they are only corroborating, as none support August 1824, just the range)? Do you remove them entirely (and if so, how do you note that you have, in fact, researched them)? Let's add another piece of information to our example—a death certificate. Although the census is a fairly reputable source, its likely lower on the surety scale than an official death certificate. Let's say the death certificate again corroborates the censuses, listing your ancestors birthdate as 15 August 1824. Again, you update the field and cite the certificate, but what you do with the censuses as sources? Lastly, let's twist the scenario slightly—let's say the death certificate does NOT provide you ancestor's date of birth, but rather only the date of and age at death. If he died on 5 September 1901 at age 77 years, 0 months, and 21 days, you could alculate the birth date as 15 August 1824. But proper protocal demands that you prefix this date with "Cal." to show that the date was calculated. Now what do you do with the censuses as sources? We could continue the example with other records that corroborrate or conflict, such as obituaries, cemetery indexes, tombstones, etc. All have varying levels of surety. You want to know that you reviewed each source, so as not to duplicate your work, but do you want a catalog of every source you've ever looked at? If not, how do you balance keeping track of what you've reviewed, having sufficient sources such that the conclusion can be reasonably supported, and keeping your data file neat and organized and your reports crisp and not burdened with excessive redundancy? Scott 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
