I'm not completely sold on the idea that given an identical source document such as a specific census page, that one needs to specify just where they happened to look at the digital image. That census page is the same no matter where you look at it or who supplied you the copy or image of it. The fact that Ancestry's image may not be as clear as Heritage's has nothing to do with the document itself but rather the user's ability to discern the correctness of what he perceives to be the data. If one were to follow your suggestion then should we not specify the exact library of where we read a book that was cited as a source? After all, the pages on a book at the Chicago library may not be as dirty or have as much graffiti as the same exact book in the New York library.
Brian -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Janis Gilmore Sent: Monday, April 07, 2008 9:35 AM To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Sources and the elusive version 7 .... again. John and Randolph, But the purpose of a citation is to clearly state what your source was. If your source for the digital image was Ancestry.com, then your source should state that. If you didn't look at the original microfilm publication at NARA, your source shouldn't imply that you did. There are many cases in which the digital image for a census page is much clearer on Heritage Quest than it is on Ancestry, and (of course) the reverse. Perhaps you might misinterpret data for a particular census family because you are working from a poor scan. By citing where you actually saw the image, you are explaining potential discrepancies between your research and another person's research. And by the way, if I sound as if I think I have it all figured out - I don't. I am just finding my way step by step, like everyone else on this list :-) My methods are constantly evolving; I have learned an enormous amount from belonging to the APG list, and the Transitional Genealogy lists. I do agree with Elizabeth that a more streamlined form for sourcing is appropriate in many situations. I disagree, however, that those who have chosen to conform to what has become the de facto standard (Mills) are "snooty." Most are just working hard toward publishing in one of the genealogical or historical quarterlies, or toward certification by BCG or ICAPGEN. Janis Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
