There is no perfect solution to this dilemma.
1) I can put an exact URL that is 214 characters long and it might be gone tomorrow 2) I can put the URL to the main page which is certainly shorter and will most likely last longer but could also disappear 3) I could use a Tiny URL but who knows how long that service will be available You can only do the best you can do. I only tell you what I do and why I do it :) Michele Technical Support <mailto:mich...@legacyfamilytree.com> mich...@legacyfamilytree.com <http://www.legacyfamilytree.com> www.legacyfamilytree.com From: Brian L. Lightfoot [mailto:br...@the-lightfoots.com] Sent: Monday, September 15, 2014 4:52 PM To: legacyusergroup@LegacyUsers.com Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Shifting Sources While I agree with your assessment that an “average genealogist” would be able to find the actual detailed page with nothing more than a link to the main web page, I would also submit that an average genealogist would be able to navigate through the structure to find the detailed page when something like <https://familysearch.org/search/collection/1320969> https://familysearch.org/search/collection/1320969 results in a “page not found error”. This becomes much more difficult with quasi-personal web pages in which the main home page may contain nothing more than links to multiple other pages or documents and without any site search capability. I’m sure this exact concept has been discussed ad nauseum at major commercial sites such as Ancestry, GenealogyBank, and others and they have probably adopted an internal policy to maintain a structure to avoid such problems in the future. But as we all know, thing can and will change. As you’ve said, what’s to guarantee that a specific detailed source will maintain the exact same web address in the future? Nothing. And on the same token, what’s to guarantee that GenealogyBank.com will be called GenealogyBank.com in the future? Again, nothing. Either method will work for whatever average genealogist may look at the family file in the future and would be able to locate the exact detailed source with a little effort. I just like making things easier if possible for these future viewers of my data and I always include the full web address. Besides, isn’t this why we include something like “accessed 05 October 2013” with the source citation. In other words, we are saying “it was exactly here on this date but good luck finding it in the future as the web site structure may have changed over the years.” Brian in CA From: Michele Lewis [mailto:mich...@legacyfamilytree.com] Sent: Monday, September 15, 2014 11:08 AM To: legacyusergroup@LegacyUsers.com <mailto:legacyusergroup@LegacyUsers.com> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Shifting Sources Cheryl, Here is an actual example from my personal file to give you a better idea. This gives the main page for GenealogyBank as the web address in the source citation and not a link to the specific page within GenealogyBank. "Ernest Lee Lewis dies at Martinez," The Augusta Chronicle, 22 February 1946, p. 5, col. 3; digital images, GenealogyBank (http://www.genealogybank.com : accessed 05 October 2013). I am thinking that an average genealogist would be able to go to the GenealogyBank website and find this article even though I didn’t put the link to the actual page. Michele Technical Support <mailto:br...@legacyfamilytree.com> mich...@legacyfamilytree.com <http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/> http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 1:45 PM, singhals <singh...@erols.com <mailto:singh...@erols.com> > wrote: "I found it on Family Search" isn't what I'd call pinpoint accuracy or reliability as a source. It's right up there with "It was on-line somewhere." IMO. Cheryl Michele/Support wrote: > Jenny, > This is why when I input a website into a source citation I always use the > address of the main page. For example, when I download images from a records > collection from FamilySearch.org such as the Georgia Death Certificates > 1914-1927 found here https://familysearch.org/search/collection/1320969 The > actual source citation will only have http://familysearch.org because the > internal structure of the website could easily change. > > If you look at Evidence Explained, the census models give the website address > as http://www.ancestry.com and not a link to the specific census page or > even the census collection. > > > Michele > Technical Support > mich...@legacyfamilytree.com <mailto:mich...@legacyfamilytree.com> > www.legacyfamilytree.com <http://www.legacyfamilytree.com> > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jenny M Benson [mailto:ge...@cedarbank.me.uk > <mailto:ge...@cedarbank.me.uk> ] > Sent: Monday, September 15, 2014 12:30 PM > To: legacyusergroup@LegacyUsers.com <mailto:legacyusergroup@LegacyUsers.com> > Subject: [LegacyUG] Shifting Sources > > Well, it's not actually the Sources which have shifted, but the names of > Collections change and/or Search methods change and I'm wondering how other > LUGgers handle this. > > Here's an example which illustrates exactly what I mean. In the Good Old > Days when searching FindMyPast for a marriage in the English county of > Cheshire one could select "Parish Records" from a a menu, then select the tab > for Marriages and then enter the search parameters. > > I set up a SourceWriter Source (using the template for Church Record Books > created at local level, online images) called Parish Registers - FMP. I put > the website details into the Master Source and entered "Parish Records > Collection" in the Collection field. The name of the specific Church and its > location and whether the record is from PRs or BTs and whether a Baptism, > Marriage or Burial, I included in the Source Detail. > > Now the FindMyPast site has been completely re-vamped and the easiest and > quickest way to find a marriage in Cheshire is to use the All Records list to > select either Diocese of Chester Parish Registers of Marriages or Diocese of > Chester Bishhop's Transcripts of Marriages. > There is no longer a facility to search "Parish Records" generally. > > So, the question is this: would you continue to use the "Parish Registers - > FMP" template and have any following-on researcher muddle through to find the > same record which I did, or would you set up a new Master Source for the > specific Collection (and corresponding new Sources for the Baptism and > Burials Collections, PRs and BTs in each case and for each County)? And > supposing you create a new set of Master Sources, would you update all your > old citations to the new Sources or leave them as they are? > > I think I know what Elizabeth Shown Mills would say, but I am not asking what > is RIGHT, but what do most people actually do?! Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ 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/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ 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
