I do not know how Ancestry Tree works, but if you have the location, you can find the film if available in the FamilySearch catalog. Then you could include a great citation.
One would be surprised how many records can be searched or ordered. https://familysearch.org/#form=catalog Example: Put 'Bluffdale' in the search, select Utah, then see the actual record film number. I selected Church Records just because I have a relative in the prison there :) -- Tim Rosenlof Utah, USA Just a side note, you would not believe the amount of prisoners that use the Family History Center there on campus. Both hard criminals and the opposite. On 6/29/2012 9:38 AM, SHIRLEY ANDERSON wrote: > In sources, I've started including the "original data" that Ancestry > includes in their source citation. For Family Search, even if I find > it online, I include the film no. and the name of the original collection. > > The biggest problem I have is how to cite an Ancestry Tree so that it > can be found again. I haven't found a way to search on the Tree name. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Shirley York Anderson [email protected] > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > My web site: http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~syafam/ > <http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/%7Esyafam/> > http://myfamilybrickwalls.blogspot.com/ > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* Walt Quering <[email protected]> > *To:* [email protected] > *Sent:* Fri, June 29, 2012 2:25:59 AM > *Subject:* Re: [LegacyUG] Citing website sources > > 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] > <mailto:[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 > <http://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 <http://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
