Just my thoughts on this: to me 'verification' means that THIS INFO that is entered in THIS particular field and for which THIS source is being used is correctly entered. It doesn't have to be the 'truth'. Even if you know this piece of information is wrong you would have to tick the verified-box when you have seen the source that was the basis for this info. It just means 'checked'. For instance: this source states that this person was born on this date and that is what is entered in this field.
For making a qualification for this piece of information you could use the "surety level" and/or you could use the 'comments-tab' on this source. Hope I made myself clear, Wim [ -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- [ Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Namens Sherry [ Verzonden: donderdag 21 maart 2002 20:58 [ Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Onderwerp: RE: [LegacyUG] Indicating Sources as Verified [ [ [ I would say that once I went to the original records that were [ abstracted in a book, I'd use the original as a source - although you [ could leave the book in as a second source and then, yes, I'd tag the [ book and the original as verified. [ [ I think you're looking at personal preference when it comes to how far [ you want to go to verify a source. [ [ I do see the source verified as most helpful when you're looking at [ someone else's work! No telling how accurate *they* were in entering [ the data! (Of course, that's assuming they even sent you their [ sources.....) [ [ I'd also like to hear how others are using it. [ [ Sherry [ [ [ >-----Original Message----- [ >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On [ >Behalf Of Claire Quortrup [ >Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 11:06 AM [ > [ >Sherry, [ >So a source such as a published book containing abstracted [ >records such as birth, marriage etc - If you have seen the [ >book and checked the record in that book personally then that [ >source would be verified, even if the book may contain [ >mistakes, which many do. [ > [ >Seems natural to verify data that is backed up by an actual [ >copy of the record involved, such as birth certf. and etc. [ >Even census records can be verified if you have actually read [ >the record, even though census contain many errors. You would [ >be only verifying this is what the actual record contains. [ > [ >Not sure I am making my self clear. Guess I am asking how far [ >one should extend this verifying process and what are the [ >implications of verifying sources. Maybe it is a personal [ >decision. Just wondered how others were using this great new feature. [ [ To unsubscribe please visit: http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp [ [ Legacy User Group Etiquette guidelines can be found at: [ http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp To unsubscribe please visit: http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp Legacy User Group Etiquette guidelines can be found at: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp
