Forums
For an online imagine a named database, I've used template 10. I believe the following is a correctly formatted footnote per Edition 4. Before I charge off upgrading similar citations (and I have a huge number), I thought it best to check whether I have interpreted the EE4 instructions correctly.
Notes:
- I have used "f." and not "fo.", as I understand that this is the conventional French abbreviation for; feuillet = leaf of a book or register, with a front and back.
- As I do international research, I tend to include to include a bit more info in the location. eg. "Cté de Vaudreuil, Québec, Canada". In Québec, Church names also tend to require the county for disambiguation.
Footnote
Sainte-Madeleine-de-Rigaud (Cté de Vaudreuil, Québec, Canada), Registre paroissial (B.M.S.), 1830–1841, copie de l’état civil, sec. an. 1841, f. 137r, no. B.191, baptism of Alphonse Janeau [aka. Alphonse Bergeron] (born 7 Sep 1841), 7 Sep 1841; imaged, "Canada, Québec, registres paroissiaux catholiques, 1621-1979", FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QSQ-G993-W5F6 : accessed 15 May 2020); citing Archives Nationales du Quebec (National Archives of Quebec), Montreal.
Hello, History-Hunter. Yes,…
Hello, History-Hunter. Yes, your form is correct, though you abbreviate considerably more than Evidence Style would do for a first reference note. Evidence Explained is built on the premise that we explain our materials thoroughly enough that an inexperienced researcher would understand what we are citing.
Thank you, for the feedback…
Thank you, for the feedback.
It makes me feel that I have actually grasped the way the book defines the citation structures.
Rationale for using abbreviations
While Edition 4 is a vast improvement, in that it is easier to template the citation structures. However; it still "expects" to have the same field information presented in different forms in one or more of the First Reference Note, Subsequent Reference Note and Source List Entry. If creating the citation by hand, I would typically not abbreviate things in the full Footnote. Unfortunately; I had to make a decision in order to utilize my genealogical software, as I have too many citations to format them manually and the software does not have the concept of alternative forms for the same information. So; In this case, I chose to use abbreviations in all three renderings comprising the set. This is because it reduces the length of not only the First Reference Note, but more importantly, it makes the Subsequent Reference Note appropriately brief.
Changes based on feedback
I have altered the abbreviations I used in my post to standardize on the English versions, rather than reflect the abbreviations used in the actual records (unless in quotes). This is largely because my finished reports will likely be in English and this approach will likely make it easier for an English-speaking reader. Essentially; I will be only using the original language in titles and their associated descriptions; providing square-bracketed translations when deemed appropriate. However; Canada considers itself to be officially bilingual (English/French) and many in our genealogical community would likely not have any issues with French abbreviations for Quebec records. My solution to any potential confusion is to include a list of abbreviations and a glossary of terms in my reports, as my international research scope makes that a pragmatic solution.
An aside
Having noted that the 4th edition has tried to accommodate computer software through structured citation formats, I am also seeing movement in the software world that make it easier to follow the EE style. Family Historian, my preferred software, has just introduced a feature that permits one to turn italics on/off inside a field. This makes it possible to follow the traditional representation of ships names and newspaper titles requiring disambiguation. All-in-all, some very promising changes and hope for the future.