To add yet another opinion: I use GenealogyBank and the specific collection (ie: Historical Newspapers) as the master source, then the specific newspaper, date, page, etc. for the details. The reasoning being that the actual source which I am accessing is GenealogyBank, which in turn is referencing/citing the original source.
On , Kirsten Bowman <[email protected]> wrote: > James: > I would argue that the *newspaper* is the source, regardless of where you > found it reproduced. The name of the newspaper would then be the lead > element in your citation and other researchers, as you say, could find it > in whatever repository they choose. Actually, with published materials it > isn't strictly necessary to include a repository in the citation. For my > own purposes I usually do note the location in the source details on the > clipboard. After the text I add something like [[online at Genealogy > Bank]] or even include the exact link in case I need to go back later. > This would be especially convenient if you found various obits from the > same newspaper posted at different sites. You'd have the newspaper listed > only once as a Master Source, but the individual source details would > tell you where you found each one. > Kirsten > -----Original Message----- > From: James Cook [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 8:46 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [LegacyUG] Compound Sources > Wondering about how to dealing with compound sources in Source Writer? > I'm working with several newspapers currently, and they are falling > into this compound area for me. Of course there is the newspaper's > information itself - place, title, page and column stuff. But then > there is the place where I found it - NewspaperArchive, GenealogyBank > or Obituaries, or microfilm at the local research center. > When choosing the Source Writer template, it is possilble to choose > either the newspaper or the archive as the driver. I initially > started with the archive, so would enter a Master Source for that, and > then each detail prompts for a "citing" field, which is more or less > free-from for the newspaper bits. While this seems to be the 'best > fit' as far as Source Writer prompting goes, it is also possible to > start with the newspaper as the driver. In that case, I enter a > Master Source for the newspaper and, perhaps breaking form a bit, > choose the option something about 'online database by the publisher' > (not in front of it just now). I choose that option because it gives > me prompt for the main URL and another field that defaults to a value > of "online archives". In these fields I enter the URL to the archive > (which may not be the publisher), such as www.newspaperarchives.com, > and edit the default to say something like "NewspaperARCHIVES online > archives" instead. That is all in the Master Source that way. Now, > the details prompts pertain only the the article in question. > I think I prefer the second method. If the end goal of citations is > for someone else to retrace your research if they so choose, it seems > to me the newspaper would get higher billing than the archive I found > it in (they might not have a subscription, or live in a different > country from my research center or who knows). I also like that the > various newspapers are listed in my Master Source list instead of just > archives - but my tendencies are towards splitting. > So I ask what the thoughts are on one way vs the other? It seems > Legacy would nudge me down the first path (I say so because the > template prompts seem to fit more exactly), but at least my logic says > the second is better. > Thoughts? > 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 > Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and > on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). > To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp 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 Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
