Jenny,
I'm of two minds. I'm largely in agreement with Kirsten, in that I have stopped listing the specific URL of the page where I found my specific source. In general, I will list the URL for the top level Web site (i.e.: http://www.ancestry.com). I also cite the name of the specific collection. Anything further than that is likely to change relatively often. For years, I carefully saved the Web page holding the meta data of whatever source I was citing. Those Web pages also contained links to the original image. The vast majority of those links are now broken for any of a number of reasons. As a researcher, while I would like for those who follow to be able to find my source data, I can’t be held responsible for changes in its location. If a record is found on a particular page of a particular book, does a citation listing that page cease to be valid if a vandal rips the page out of the book? Remember that, although the Internet has been around in one form or another since about 1968, but HyperText Transfer Protocol, which enables the World Wide Web we use every day, has only been around for less than 20 years. I doubt very much that the URLs we document so carefully now will even be usable on whatever exists in place of the Web in 20 or 30 years. Ancestry.com and FamilySearch will may still be around in some form, but whatever communications protocol is used then will probably rely on technology that has yet to be invented. So, for all of those reasons, I record the top level URL for current and near future use, as a more specific URL may change without notice or reason. If that top level URL changes, I’m not going to sweat it. After all, if I found a document at a particular parish or library twenty years ago, can I be expected to be responsible when that parish no longer exists or the library has been consolidated with another? On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Kirsten Bowman <[email protected]> wrote: > Jenny: > > It's a pickle. Considering changes we've seen in a few short years, I > imagine that in ten or 20 years more there will be precious few URLs that > will still be meaningful. I'm not such a philanthropist as to hope to > leave > behind a search string that can be replicated, nor do I feel inclined to > have a variety of Master Sources with different database titles or URLs to > reflect changes in websites over time. I'm leaning toward editing my > Master > Sources to show simply "Ancestry.com" or "FamilySearch.org" to show that I > found the data online. Since I include in the Source Detail the surname or > text both as written and as indexed, a search at those sites (if they still > exist) for the name or a keyword as given in the citation may stand a > chance > of being found. For my own purposes in being able to relocate the data if > necessary, I think I'll include the full search string but probably > privatize it since it's a relatively temporary thing. > > I still haven't come to grips (or gripes?) with situations where titles of > databases change. It'll be interesting to see responses from others. > > Kirsten > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jenny M Benson > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 9:21 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [LegacyUG] Citing website sources > > There has been some discussion here recently about whether or not/how to > cite website URLs and related matters. What I am never quite sure about > is how to handle situations where a citation one has created in the past > is no longer *quite* accurate. > > For example, for quite a while it was possible to access records from a > FamilySearch site for which the URL was > http://search.labs/familysearch.org. That URL is no longer valid but it > is possible to access the same records from www.familysearch.org. > > Similarly, Ancestry used to have a database entitled "England & Wales, > Birth Index:1837-1983" and one entitled "England & Waes, Birth Index: > 1984-2005". Then all those records were combined into one database > called "England & Wales, Birth Index:1916-2005." > > I could give several other similar examples. > > So what does one do about one's citations? Just update the title of the > database or the URL of the website and carry on using the same Master > Sources, or create a new Master Source every time there is a subtle > change in the details? If one of the main purposes of a Source is to > allow others to replicate my research, they aren't going to be able to > do that if they try and access http://search.labs/familysearch.org. On > the other hand, if I say I accessed a record on www.familysearch.org on > 15 May 2008 people might be very mistrustful of anything I say knowing > that that must be a lie! > -- > Jenny M Benson > > > > > > > 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
