Documenting specific Online Database Entries (Canadian Archives)

 
 
 
28 posts / 0 new
Last post
History Hunter
History Hunter's picture
Documenting specific Online Database Entries (Canadian Archives)

I read over the sections of Evidence Explasined that relate to Online Database Entries (Canadian Archives). I am having a little problem understanding the functionality of each of the segments of the "First Reference".

I can see that the "Source List Entry" essentially documents how one accesses the database search page. In the "First Reference", it makes sense that the next thing to add to the "Source List Entry" string is the search parameters that one needs to use to unambiguously select the desired record. That will get me to the page that shows the information about the page that contains the individual for which I am searching. So far, so good. I follow the EE example. From there, I can select the image hot-link to see the actual image, That gets me to a view of the actual image. If I look at the URL displayed, the LAC microfilm number and image number are present. So; I would have expected the next addition to the "Source List Entry" string would be the microfilm number and image number. After that, everything is essentially a citation of information transcribed from the image.

Now; in the EE book example, I don't really see the above distinction between what is used to access the correct image within the microfilm reel and what is actually "cited" from viewing the image. For me; the "citing" statement has always implied that one is referring to a specific portion of the image being viewed, as opposed to defining the correct image to view.

I would have expected, as a real example, the "First Reference" to be something like:
    Note 1. “1916 Census (Prairie provinces),” database, Library and Archives Canada (http://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/census/1916/Pages/1916.aspx: accessed 23 Mar 2017), entry for Richard Dschloendorf (age 46) (province Saskatchewan), LAC microfilm T-21936, Image 31228_4363965-00873; citing Schedule #1 (population), Saskatchewan, Humboldt district 18, subdistrict 26, p. 9, dwelling 93, family 97.

(It has also ocurred to me that the other way of specifying the whole family would be to specify a range of lines on the form. However; I chose the dwelling and family, since that would clearly map to Richard Schloendorf, who is listed as the "Head" of that family.)

Can someone explain the EE examples logic, please? I'm afraid it's just not clear enough from the book.

NOTE: The search parameter, "Dschloendorf", appears to be an incorrect transcription of the name, "Schloendorf", which is shown in the image. However; without including this error, the record cannot be located. I assume, one would enter the correct spelling as a notation to the "First Reference" string. suggestions on the correct way would be appreciated.

EE
EE's picture

History Hunter, since you raised several issues, let's start with the simplest ones:

Source List Entry:

If you use a database online, your Source List Entry cites the database. That's what you used. If the database tells you that it took an image from Microfilm So-and-So, that microfilm identification is not part of your Source List Entry. You didn't use the microfilm, so you don't cite it on your list of sources used.

Also, with regard to the roll of microfilm that's cataloged there as T-21936, if you had actually used it, you would not find a frame number 31228_4363965-00873 on that roll.  That number is a number assigned within the database, not the microfilm. 

The Logic or Basic Pattern and Principles

You mention studying the section of EE that relates to "Online Database Entries (Canadian Archives). I assume you're referencing EE 6.50's example for Canadian censuses. So, two questions here:

  • Have you had time to read Chapter 2 "Principles of Citation" wherein basic principles are given for the construction of Source List Entries vs. Reference Notes?  (And chapter 1?) Those first two chapters lay the groundwork for all the other chapters. Each of the other chapters focus on a specific type of records. Chapters 1 and 2 provide the principles that govern all citations. When we have something to cite, if we go straight to the section that covers that specific record type, without studying the underlying principles of analysis and citation, then we definitely can be bewildered about why this-or-that is done.
  • Do you have the 3d edition, with the QuickStart Guide tipped into the front flyleaf?  This edition to EE3, in 2 quick pages, strips down everything to the basic "logic" or framework that applies to every souce, regardless of what it is.

I'm headed out of the office to keep an appointment, so I'll address the other points later. In the meanwhile,  your response to the questions above will shape how I need to respond to your other points,

 

The Editor

History Hunter
History Hunter's picture

Thanks for your reply.

Actually; I'm very new to constructing this type of reference and I also find that an ebook of several hundred pages is a bit intimidating and rather difficult to navigate. So, please, understand that I like the EE concept, but it's not as easy to replicate the examples as one might assume. I just need some gentle guidance to get going.

In reference to your comments:

  • Actually, I did read chapter 2 and thought I had it straight ... until I subsequently looked at the EE 6.50 example and couldn't quite relate what was done in the example to what was stated in chapter 2 and the quickstart guide. After reviewing, "The Basics: Manuscripts and Online Images" page, I now see that one has to use a sort of negative logic on the paragraph relating to the use of abstracts rather than images. It would appear that, if one uses the image and not the extract, your intent was to reference the image location directly and not document the path from the normal access point to the image. I'm fine with that, as it's far less "convoluted". I must admit, though, the direct reference route seems dangerous. The site has been re-organized before and I had trouble locating the new "home" for some previously "directly referenced" images.
  • I have the 3rd edition in Kindle format and did read the Quickstart Guide, but obviously missed the required logic inversion noted above. Wish I could print out a few pages to annotate, but I'm not familiar with the Kindle Reader and don't know if I can do that. I'll give it another try and see how far I get.
  • With respect to the remaining points, I would still appreciate you suggestions.

Regards;

History Hunter

 

History Hunter
History Hunter's picture

Dear Editor;

It seems that directly referencing the LAC Census images is not explicitly covered and so I had to mix and match pieces of other examples. This is what I got for a first try. Is this more in line with what was intended?

Regards;

History Hunter

 

Source List Entry
"1916 Census (Prairie provinces)." Database and Images. Library and Archives Canada. http://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/census/1916/Pages/1916.aspx: 2017.

Since the image is not even located on the same server as the search-page, the best I could do in the above is to reference the webpage through which I located the image.

First Reference Note
    1. "1916 Census (Prairie provinces)", Schedule #1 (population), Saskatchewan, Humboldt district 18, subdistrict 26; p. 9, dwelling 93, family 97, Household of Richard DSchloendorf; digital image, Library and Archives Canada, Census of the Prairie Provinces, 1916 (http://data2.collectionscanada.ca/006003/t-21936/jpg/31228_4363965-00873.jpg: accessed 23 Mar 2017).

For the above, I went back and tried my best to follow the "Layered Citation: Courthouse Record Digitized Online".

Subsequent Note
    11. "1916 Census (Prairie provinces)", Library and Archives Canada, digital image showing the household of Richard DSchloendorf, Humboldt, Saskatchewan.

The above is an abbreviated form of the, First Reference Note.

 

History Hunter
History Hunter's picture

Dear Editor;

I've tried my best to refine the references and would like to know if the format is now reasonably correct:

First Reference Note:
1916 Census (Prairie provinces), Humboldt, Saskatchewan, population schedule, district 18, subdistrict 26, 9, dwelling 93, family 97, Household of Richard Schloendorf; digital images, Library and Archives Canada (http://data2.collectionscanada.ca/006003/t-21936/jpg/31228_4363965-00873.jpg : accessed 23 March 2017).

Subsequent Note:
1916 Census (Prairie provinces), Humboldt, Saskatchewan, population schedule, dist. 18, subdist. 26, 9, dwelling 93, family 97, Household of Richard Schloendorf.

EE
EE's picture

History Hunter, let’s go back to your original message where you wrote:

I read over the sections of Evidence Explained that relate to Online Database Entries (Canaiian Archives). I am having a little problem understanding the functionality of each of the segments of the "First Reference." I would have expected, as a real example, the "First Reference" to be something like:

    Note 1. “1916 Census (Prairie provinces),” database, Library and Archives Canada (http://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/census/1916/Pages/1916.aspx: accessed 23 Mar 2017), entry for Richard Dschloendorf (age 46) (province Saskatchewan), LAC microfilm T-21936, Image 31228_4363965-00873; citing Schedule #1 (population), Saskatchewan, Humboldt district 18, subdistrict 26, p. 9, dwelling 93, family 97.

As background for the readers of this thread, the reference section of EE is 6.50 and the pattern for citing the database entry is this:

First Reference Note

      1. “1871 Census (Ontario),” database, Library and Archives Canada (http://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/census/1871-on/Pages/1871-on.aspx : accessed 1 April 2015), entry for Patrick Lennon (age 67), Ellice, Perth North District; citing division 1, p. 36, LAC microfilm C-9940.

You will notice that

  • each chapter (except for 1 and 2 that cover fundamentals) treats a different type of source (cemeteries, church records, censuses, etc.).
  • At the start of each chapter are QuickCheck Models that (a) diagram citations to that type of source and (b) label the function of each element. (The purpose of the QuickCheck Models is to help users understand what elements are essential for the record type that chapter covers.) 

Following the QC Model on p. 253, the elements of the 1871 census reference above are these:

  Database Title: 

  “1871 Census (Ontario)”

  Item Type or Format:

  database

  Website Title:

  Library and Archives Canada

  URL:

  http://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/census/1871-on/Pages/1871-on.aspx

  Date:

  Accessed 1 April 2015

  Item of Interest

  Entry for Patrick Lennon (age 67), Ellice, Perth North District

  Source of the Source

  Citing division 1, p. 36, LAC microfilm C-9940.

 

Following this pattern and using the URL that you give, to take me to (ostensibly) the same page you are viewing, the elements of the citation to your 1916 database entry would be this:

  Database Title:  

  “Census of the Prairie Provinces, 1916”

  Item Type or Format:

  database

  Website Title:

  Library and Archives Canada

  URL:

  http://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/census/1916/Pages/1916.aspx

  Date:

  Accessed 23 March 2017

  Item of Interest

  Entry for Richard “Dschloendorf” (age 46)

  Source of the Source

 Citing item no. 1190641, Saskatchewan Province, Humboldt District, Townships 37 and 38, ranges 17, database Image No.: 31228_4363965-00873v

To place this data into the format of a First Reference Note:

       1. “Census of the Prairie Provinces, 1916,” database, Library and Archives Canada (http://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/census/1916/Pages/1916.aspx : accessed 23 March 2017), entry for Richard “Dschloendorf” (age 46); citing item no. 1190641, Saskatchewan Province, Humboldt District, Townships 37 and 38, ranges 17, database image no.: 31228_4363965-00873v.

Note:  At this webpage you cite, the data I’m seeing is somewhat different from the data you give above—principally, the database title is different and there is no reference to the microfilm number or schedule number.

In your first paragraph, you state:

I can see that the "Source List Entry" essentially documents how one accesses the database search page. In the "First Reference", it makes sense that the next thing to add to the "Source List Entry" string is the search parameters that one needs to use to unambiguously select the desired record. That will get me to the page that shows the information about the page that contains the individual for which I am searching. So far, so good. I follow the EE example. From there, I can select the image hot-link to see the actual image, That gets me to a view of the actual image. If I look at the URL displayed, the LAC microfilm number and image number are present. So; I would have expected the next addition to the "Source List Entry" string would be the microfilm number and image number. After that, everything is essentially a citation of information transcribed from the image.   

However, the URL that you give does not take us to a page that shows microfilm number or its frame number. To find that data, we must click on the hotlink at “item no. 1190641” and that will take us to a different page—with a different URL—that gives us more details. 

If this second page is the one we take our information from, then we need to cite that specific URL.  Using that database page for our citation, we’d have this:

      1. “Census of the Prairie Provinces, 1916,” database, Library and Archives Canada (http://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/census/1916/Pages/item.aspx?itemid=1190641 : accessed 23 March 2017), entry for Richard “Dschloendorf” (age 46); citing Saskatchewan Province, Humboldt District No. 18, Subdistrict 26 (Townships 37 and 38, ranges 17), Meridian W2, Range no. 18, Family Number  97, page no. 9, lie number 35, Microfilm T-21936, Reference no. R233-47-9-E, Item No. 1190641.

The citation pattern remains the same, although we have (a) a different URL; and (b) much more explicit “source of the source” information.

In specific answer to your statement:

If I look at the URL displayed, the LAC microfilm number and image number are present. So; I would have expected the next addition to the "Source List Entry" string would be the microfilm number and image number.

No, the “expected next addition” after the URL cannot be the microfilm number and image that you did not use.  Two basic rules are relevant here:

1.

Published sources follow the same basic pattern, whether they are published in print or online.  EE 2.32 “Online Materials: Basic Elements to Cite” (and the Quick Start Guide) tell us:

Rule 1: Most websites are the online equivalent of a book.

Rule 2: A website that offers multiple items by different creators is the equivalent of a book with chapters by different authors.

Therefore, the basic pattern for citing a database at a website (or a chapter in a book) would be this:

      1. Name of Chapter/Database Author ( if the database has an author), “Title of Chapter or Database,” Name of Book Editor or Website Creator (unless it’s the same as the website title), Title of Book or Website (Place of publication = URL : Date), page/figure/database items/etc.

 

2.

We cite what we use.  In this case, you are using the database, so you cite the database. Not the image. Not the microfilm. You are citing what you actually used. To that citation then—to help you and others find the original source--you should add your source’s citation to whatever your source used.

We should never imply that we used what we didn’t use. Therefore, when we give the basic citation to the database, we don’t jump from there to a citation of the microfilm we didn’t use.  What follows is a citation to the specific database item that we’re referencing: i.e., Richard Dschloendorf.

Next issue:

Two other small tweaks would also help the citation you drafted in your first message.

  • You state that Richard’s surname was actuallly Schloendorf, rather than Dschloendorg. It’s important in these cases to note the misspelling in the database, given that you are citing the database. The conventional way of doing it is to put the misspellingin quotation marks, given that you are quoting the database exactly. You might, if you wished, place the correct spelling immediately after the incorrect spelling, with your addition in square editorial brackets.
  • Notice that EE adds a blank space after the URL, before the colon that separates the URL from the date. Without that blank space before it, the colon becomes part of the URL and then the URL does not work.

Hope this helps!

The Editor

History Hunter
History Hunter's picture

Dear Editor;

Thank you so much for taking the time to answer at length!

My apologies for apparently posting some followup on where I am in working the issue while you were posting your reply. I'll will print out your last email and work through it.

As a side-note: I always keep notes on exactly how I found a specific image and usually embed that information in the "Description/Comments" ITC field of my archived copy of the image. Sometimes that helps when a link gets broken or I've missed some information. So; I'll be able to go back and clean up the issues I have upon studying your response.

History Hunter
History Hunter's picture

Dear Editor;

I worked through your logic and believe I understand what you've stated. Part A is more for my own notes, but I do need some help with Part B (a slight variation to what you already described).

A) I have a few notes/observations regarding what I read.

  1. Page 253 in the book is image 259 in the ebook. (As a suggestion for posts referencing the EE book: The "page" numbers in the electronic edition are offset from the paper copy and are actually image numbers. When making a post, if possible, it would be helpful to state both references or state which medium one is referencing.)
  2. Use of a database presents a unique problem in documenting the item which one has consulted. Databases may require navigating one or more levels of indirection, prior to arriving at the page to be documented. One uses the URL for the page from which derived the information. Not any of the ones used to reach that page.
  3. Having navigated the database, “Census of the Prairie Provinces, 1916”, to the page, "http://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/census/1916/Pages/item.aspx?itemid=1190641", one would use the model, "QuickCheck Model (DERIVATIVES &AIDS DATABASE, ONLINE)", found on Page 253 (Image 259) of "Evidence Explained" (3rd. ed.).

B) Here there is a bit of a wrinkle, which I need to overcome. I usually download and transcribe from the actual census image, since I have a very good set of tools for image enhancement and transcription. I normally do not assume that the transcribed information from the page, which"hot-links" to the image, is necessarily correct. The "DSchloendorf" error in the LAC database is a good example of why I do this. So; I have noted some very specific questions about this situation.

  1. One could procede to further levels of indirection and view one of the two forms of the page image, which are accessed via "hot-links" on the previously noted page. For example; assume one accesses, "JPG (Image No.: 31228_4363965-00873)". At that point, an image is displayed. This no longer becomes a case of referencing information from an online database and the previously noted template would no longer apply.
  2. Would one not need to then utilize the model, "QuickCheck Model (DIGITAL IMAGES FEDERAL CENSUS (U.S.)", found on Page 237 (Image 243) of "Evidence Explained" (3rd. ed.)? While the model shows a U.S. census, the structure appears to be appropriate to documenting Canadian Census images. If the anticipated template is not the correct one, which would be the correct one to use? It might resolve the questions in point #3.
  3. Having navigated to the actual census image, as noted above, the URL for the image is now, "http://data2.collectionscanada.ca/006003/t-21936/jpg/31228_4363965-00873.jpg". Does the, "URL (DIGITAL LOCATION)", now become, "data2.collectionscanada.ca", or ,"data2.collectionscanada.ca/006003/t-21936/jpg/31228_4363965-00873.jpg"? What does one use for the, "CREDIT LINE (SOURCE OF THIS SOURCE)"? Does one now reference back to the information  about the media noted in previous level of indirection (web-page) and state, "citing LAC microfilm publication T-21936, reference R233-47-9-E, item number 1190641"?
EE
EE's picture

Hello, History Hunter,

I'll number comments according to your post at Sat, 03/25/2017 - 12:59 .

A) 1.   Yes, page 253 is image 259 in the ebook.  Like most books, EE has unpaginated front matter. However, the ebook carries the same pagination as the printed book, so material on page 253 in one will be found on page 253 in the other. 

A) 2.  Re "navigating one or more levels of indirection":  This is certainly an issue when citing web pages. We may cite a root URL and then present the "path" or the "waypoints" needed to get from there to the actual page. For example of this, see EE 5.19 "Online Images."

A) 3.  & B) 3. There is one difference you might note between the exact URL cited at p. 253 and the one you cite for the Canadian census. As noted on p. 253, the URL that’s given (https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1./MVXB-3VQ)  is a PAL link—a supposedly “stable” URL, aka “permalink.” Some researchers prefer to cite exact URLs only when they are PALs. But, even those links optimistically called “permalinks” will not last forever.

B) 1.  Yes, if we take our data from the database entry (the typed abstract), we cite that database entry. If we use a link on the database-entry page to take us to the original image—and then take our data from the original image—then we cite the image that we’ve accessed through the database. Most researchers, in that case, do not also cite the database entry unless they need to point out an error in that database entry. Your case provides an example of that, with its radical misspelling of the surname.

B) 2. Yes, if you take your data from the image, then you would not use the QC Model on p. 253 (“Derivatives & Aids: Database, Online”). And yes, the QC Model on p. 237 (“Digital Images: Federal Census") can serve as your pattern.  In brief:

  • In layer 1, which identifies the original U.S. census, you substitute the data for your Canadian census.
  • In layer 2, which cites Ancestry.com for the U.S. census, you substitute the website Library & Archives Canada, with its identifying details.
  • In layer 3, which cites a NARA microfilm publication number and roll number, you would substitute the LAC microfilm number and roll number.

B) 3.

You ask:

Having navigated to the actual census image, as noted above, the URL for the image is now, "http://data2.collectionscanada.ca/006003/t-21936/jpg/31228_4363965-00873.jpg". Does the, "URL (DIGITAL LOCATION)", now become, "data2.collectionscanada.ca", or ,"data2.collectionscanada.ca/006003/t-21936/jpg/31228_4363965-00873.jpg"?

You have a choice. You may cite the exact URL that takes one directly to the image, or you may cite the root URL for the website, with waypoints to get you there. 

Secondly, you ask:

What does one use for the, "CREDIT LINE (SOURCE OF THIS SOURCE)"? Does one now reference back to the information  about the media noted in previous level of indirection (web-page) and state, "citing LAC microfilm publication T-21936, reference R233-47-9-E, item number 1190641"?

Yes and no. (But, just to clarify here for the readers of this conversation, “level of indirection” is not an EE term. I’m adding this so I won’t start getting inquiries about what we mean by that.)

The source of your source is “LAC microfilm T-21936, reference R233-47-9E.”  You will note two differences here:

  • We would not identify the LAC microfilm as a “microfilm publication” unless LAC actually offers it as a publication for sale and/or widespread distribution. Most LAC film, when I last checked, was preservation film only.  (NARA, whose model you are following, also has preservation film—not published—as well as the widely distributed microfilm publications. For example, see the QC model at  EE p. 243.)  EE 3.17 discusses film publications vs. preservation film.
  • The “item number” has no relationship to the microfilm and should not be coupled with the film’s data in the source-of-the-source layer. The item number is a function of only the database, assigned therein to uniquely identify your Richard’s entry in that database for the census. As a comparison, consider Percy Baxter who is on the same original page with Richard. When you call up Baxter's database entry, you will see that he is “item no. 1190623" while Richard is "1190641."  Baxter has a different “item number,” even though he and Richard are on the same page.  Also by comparison, note that both Baxter and Richard are assigned the same “reference no.: R233-47-9-E.”  That is because the reference number identifies the film roll on which they both appear.

 

The Editor

History Hunter
History Hunter's picture

Dear Editor;

Thank you for being so patient with my questions, which must have seemed to have obvious answers to you.

I believe I now understand how one should handle the issue of referencing information in a Library and Archives Canada (LAC) image.

For the benefit of those viewing this post, permit me to offer a bit of background/recap on the storage architecture of (LAC) census databases. It may help some of the "techie" colleagues to understand why the issue was of such concern to me.

The LAC census databases are somewhat unique beasts, and so, I'll stay away from the more intimate details of databases. (Thank you, also, for clarifying my slip in using programming jargon, re: "level of indirection", in my post.)

The 1916 Census database is associated with the URL, "http://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/census/1916/Pages/1916.aspx". From a users perspective, searching the database results in one or more database records, depending on how tightly one constrains the search. Each database search returns  information on a particular individual, who is identified by an "Item Number". Each is also associated with a fair amount of transcribed information, derived from the physical microfilm or census books and presented on the search results page. Some of this transcribed information (eg. the persons name) is also used as a parameter in searching the database to locate a particular person. (Notice, how the minor transcription error of the name, "Schloendorf" as "Dschloendorf" will severely impact the ability to find an individual.) The "Image No.:" hot-links on the search results page, however, are actually references to particular formats of the associated census census page image, but in an entirely different directory structure. That structure resides within the Collections Canada data repository, ("http://data2.collectionscanada.ca").

Based on this almost "physical" description of how the data is stored, one can see why the discussion of a "source of a source" was necessary, why there are concerns about directly referencing images (due to potential changes in linking the URLs) and why "getting the references right" is not all that straight-forward.

EE
EE's picture

Thanks, History Hunter, for the background lesson. It should help many readers who do not yet have your level of experience.

The Editor

History Hunter
History Hunter's picture

Dear Editor;

I reread the advice given and have attempted to compose the appropriate citations form (likely unsuccessfully)  for referencing an image from the “Census of the Prairie Provinces, 1916”. I have attached an MSWord file (for convenience) containing this first attempt and would appreciate your comments, if you are able to spare the time to do so. Hopefully; this will help others that are experiencing difficulties in putting the rules into practice.

I do know that there are some issues with the CENSUS ID, since it has a comma in the name and I'm not sure how one addresses that.

As this is a very common type of reference in my Canadian genealogy, I hope to turn this type-case into a RootsMagic template for other citations.

EE
EE's picture

History Hunter, your "first attempt" is a quite good one.  Above, you write:

I do know that there are some issues with the CENSUS ID, since it has a comma in the name and I'm not sure how one addresses that.

I assume you are referring to your phrase:  Census of the Prairie Provinces, 1916.   There's a simple fix that you'll find in most of EE's census citations.  Put the date first:  1916 census of the Prairie Provinces.  If this were part of a formal title that was being copied exactly in quotation marks, then you would not rearrange the words. But then you would have quotation marks around the formal title of the document, which would resolve your issue with ambiguous commas.

The Editor

History Hunter
History Hunter's picture

Dear Edito;

Thank you for your kind feedback. I was unaware that the title of the census could be modified in the way you noted. It never occurred to me that the title may have already had some elements reversed and that reordering it was a legitimate thing to do.

(I am slowly finding my way through your electronic book and I'm sure this facet of the subject is in there somewhere. It's very well-written. I'm a bit "old-school" and find reading electronic refrence texts to be somewhat difficult, since I can't flag things in a way that I can quickly flip back and forth when reading. Electronic bookmarks don't seem to be quite the same for me. If I may make a suggestion for future editions. Would it be possible to allow readers to print out single pages for reference? That would be so useful for the QuickCheck Models and would help when having to refer to several portions of the book at the same time.)

kohlerbj
kohlerbj's picture

History Hunter,

As I envisioned printing pages of EE for reference, I was prompted to share my method for keeping track of oft-used citations.

I record them all, as I use them the first time, in a single Word document. I arrange them alphabetically by source type, with the source type in bold in the left column and an example or examples in regular type in the right column. I include the EE page number from my hardback copy. 

The concise, printed collection is eight pages in length. On some pages, there are as many as nine source types; on others, there might be four. I keep the document in a folder next to my computer for handy reference.

Bonnie

History Hunter
History Hunter's picture

Dear Bonnie;

Actually; as I corrected the citation Census ID per the posted suggestion, I thought of doing something similar. I could use the document I submitted (and subsequently corrected) as a start. It's a pretty standard form of reference to the actual 1916 Candaian Census images and likely a good basis for other census years. It also gives me one place to go when setting up my associated RM templates.

Thanks for your suggestion.

EE
EE's picture

History Hunter, if we are citing the exact title of a document, in quotation marks, we don't alter the words. If we are creating a generic description, with no quote marks, then we are free to use words in the order that we think most clearly describes the item. With the example you give above, you are already dealing with two different descriptive titles and one actual title:

1. When we click your link, we arrive at a page created by the archives that describes the census this way:

1916 Census of the Prairie Provinces

2. When we fill in the query form on that page, we're given a page of hits on which the archives has described the census this way:

Census of the Prairie Provinces, 1916

3. When we call up an image of an actual document ( http://bit.ly/2ojTOnr ), the formal title of the census, as printed on the original form, is

"Census of Manitoba, Sasketchewan, and Alberta, 1916"

If we are using the latter set of words, we would not change the order of the words within those quotation marks. But, as the first two examples show, the description of the census can be altered.  However, if we are citing the website page itself (not the census)--i.e., the page created by the archives--then we would copy that page title exactly and put the exact words in quotation marks because our citation is pointing specifically to a web page with that exact title.

The Editor

History Hunter
History Hunter's picture

Dear Editor;

The tendency of the site to change what it calls the census is indeed a point of confusion. Thank you for the explanation. Since I am using the image itself, I will change the formal title of the census to, "Census of Manitoba, Sasketchewan, and Alberta, 1916".

History Hunter
History Hunter's picture

Dear Editor;

I neglected to note that I will adjust the text to be, "Census of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta, 1916,". I believe that the text, now being a quoted entry, would have the original trailing comma moved inside the double-quotes.

EE
EE's picture

That solves the comma problem!

 

The Editor

History Hunter
History Hunter's picture

Dear Editor;

After documenting several Canadian Census images, I still have a nagging doubt about the portion of the citation that references the image used.

You noted in a previous post, "You have a choice. You may cite the exact URL that takes one directly to the image, or you may cite the root URL for the website, with waypoints to get you there."

The database is on the LAC site and uses the LAC URL. The image referenced is actually on the Collections Canada site. There is no conventional "path" from one to the other and there is no actual "homepage" for the Collections Canada repository of images. We only know the image URL, because we accessed it via the LAC database. There is, however, a path in a figurative sense. One can enter the database query parameters on the LAC site, as if querying the database. The resulting page holds a hyperlink to the URL for the actual image on the Collections Canada server.

As you noted in another post, the technique in EE 5.19 "Online Images.", Page 233, can be used to document the path. That is; the "waypoints to get you there". That example does not use a conventional  pathname to describe the access from the root URL to the relevant image. Can one therefor use a statement in narrative form to describe how to access the database record on the LAC site and then how to access the targey image via the hyperlink on the results page? That might be less confusing than citing the Library and Archives Canada as the webpage and subsequently giving a Collections Canada URL directly to the image.

EE
EE's picture

History Hunter, would you give us a specific example to work with?

The Editor

History Hunter
History Hunter's picture

Dear Editor;

The last series of postings finished with a Citation that looked like:

1. "Census of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta, 1916," Humboldt (26), Saskatchewan, township 39, range 18, meridian 2, municipality of Spalding, p. 9 (penned), dwelling 93, family 97, Richard "Dschloendorf"[Schloendorf] (Age 46) [and family]; image, Library and Archives Canada (http://data2.collectionscanada.ca/006003/t-21936/jpg/31228_4363965-00873.jpg : 16 Apr 2017); citing Microfilm T-21936, Reference no. R233-47-9-E.

After doing several references, I've started to wonder if referencing the Library and Archives Canada website and an image URL for the Collection Canada website might be more confusing than using the "path" reference method.

If I revert back to using a reference to the search page for the census, rather than the image URL, how would I word the "path" portion in a manner analogous to the example in EE 5.19 "Online Images.", bottom of Page 233 (reproduced below for reference)? 

i.e. "First Reference Note

        1. Genealogical Committee, LDS Church, “Cemetery Records: Yountville, Napa, California,” MS (Salt Lake City: Filmed by the Genealogical Society, 1956), unnumbered p. 2, Mary Francis Boggs (1851–1856); imaged as “California, Cemetery Transcriptions, 1850– 1960,” FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org: accessed 1 April 2015), path Napa > Yountville > Yountville Cemetery, image 3."

Mills, Elizabeth Shown. Evidence Explained: Citing History Sources from Artifacts to Cyberspace (Page 239). Elizabeth Shown Mills. Kindle Edition.

Would it look something like the following (bold text indicating my changes to the original reference):

1. "Census of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta, 1916," Humboldt (26), Saskatchewan, township 39, range 18, meridian 2, municipality of Spalding, p. 9 (penned), dwelling 93, family 97, Richard "Dschloendorf"[Schloendorf] (Age 46) [and family]; image, Library and Archives Canada (http://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/census/1916/Pages/1916.aspx : 16 Apr 2017), path "View digitized page of Census of the Prairie Provinces, 1916 for Image No.: 31228_4363965-00873" via the provided hyperlink to "JPG (Image No.: 31228_4363965-00873)"; citing Microfilm T-21936, Reference no. R233-47-9-E.

EE
EE's picture

History Hunter, you raise good questions—and another good point that you might not have explicitly intended. ("After doing several references, I've started to wonder if referencing [ XYZ ] might be more confusing than using the 'path' reference method.") For certain, the more records we access and the more experience we have in crafting citations that truly attempt to understand the source and explain it clearly, the more we see why various options are needed. Inexperienced researchers want one cookie-cutter model that will never vary. Experienced researchers understand why the variances exist.

First, let's address the "Library and Archives Canada website" vs. "Collection Canada website" issue that you raised here and in your separate query from yesterday. The "difference" here appears to lie only in the URL. As you point out, when we use the search page at LAC, the link to the image has this URL: http://data2.collectionscanada.ca/006003/t-21936/jpg/31228_4363965-00873.jpg.  However, if we follow this link back to its root—i.e., "data2.collectionscanada.ca"—or if we type just "CollectionsCanada.ca" we get the LAC website, not a separate site. If we Google for "Collections Canada," we get the LAC website.

Regarding the use of a path, given the length and complexity of the wording used for the link —i.e., "View digitized page of Census of the Prairie Provinces, 1916 for Image No.: 31228_4363965-00873" via the provided hyperlink to "JPG (Image No.: 31228_4363965-00873)"— and the likelihood that the website will make changes that will alter this wording, I'm still seeing the best possibility as the one that's laid out for Canadian censuses in EE 6.50 (p. 301). That is, cite the database and URL for the search form where we use name/age/place data to get the search result. In the case of your example, that would be this:

First Reference Note

     1. 1916 Census of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, population schedule, Saskatchewan, enumeration district (ED) 26, Humboldt, p. 9, dwelling 93, family 97, Richard "Dschloendorf" [Schloendorf], age 46, and family; imaged, "Search 1916 Census of the Prairie Provinces," Library and Archives Canada (http://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/census/1916/Pages/1916.aspx : accessed 11 June 2017); citing Microfilm T-21936, Reference No. R233-47-9-E.

Do you see a problem with this basic format that I haven't perceived or factored in?

 

 

The Editor

History Hunter
History Hunter's picture

Dear Editor;

The Collections Canada website, which hosts the images, predates the Library and Archives (LAC) website. To facilitate switching the access to be from the LAC without porting the images as well, they have made a oneway reference from the old Collection Canada URL to the new LAC URL.For users that are not aware of this, seeing the LAC site referenced and a Collections Canada URL on the image might be confusing. That is why I was looking for another approach.

I understand that your proposed approach removes the conflict by never referring to the image at all. Yet, the image is what I consulted and not the initial page which appears due to the search. (I also noted the change of the word "image" to "imaged", but suspect this is a secondary issue, as is the change to the "and family" portion.) How would the proposed reference cause someone to understand that the actual information referenced is only found in the linked image? This is particularly important, if transcription errors have been made, as is the case for this example.

As for the secondary changes, could you explain why the changes were made? What is the difference between "image" and "imaged"? If "and Family" is not part of the search parameters, but a clarification of reference scope, why is it not separated from the name?

EE
EE's picture

History Hunter, yes, earlier editions of EE cover CollectionsCanada images under an earlier incarnation. However, as with many web publishers who change identities much more frequently than users want them to, we can go down a rabbit hole in a hurry if we try to include in our basic citation everything we know about a site. (We can, of course, add anything we want to that basic citation but clarity would call for closing out the citation and then adding additional sentences with whatever explanations or further information we feel are warranted.)

Re your second paragraph, I don't understand your statement that the proposed citation "never refer[s] to the image at all. The citation, after identifying the census, does indeed state that you used the version imaged at Library and Archives Canada, accessed through the web page that is set up for search queries. It does not say that you took your details from the database entry or extract.

Re the "secondary changes," you ask: "If 'and Family' is not part of the search parameters, but a clarification of reference scope, why is it not separated from the name?"  Your draft of the citation provides the following for layer 1 of the citation, the census itself:

"Census of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta, 1916," Humboldt (26), Saskatchewan, township 39, range 18, meridian 2, municipality of Spalding, p. 9 (penned), dwelling 93, family 97, Richard "Dschloendorf"[Schloendorf] (Age 46) [and family];

My suggestion, patterned after EE 6.50, presents layer 1 this way:

1. 1916 Census of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, population schedule, Saskatchewan, enumeration district (ED) 26, Humboldt, p. 9, dwelling 93, family 97, Richard "Dschloendorf" [Schloendorf], age 46, and family;

The different punctuation for the phrase "and family" has nothing to do with search parameters for the database in the second layer. In that first layer of the citation you are citing the census itself, in standard form, and the issue is one of punctuation practices as laid out in writing manuals of the Miss Thistlebottom ilk.

You'll notice that your citation has three "parenthetical statements" in a row. First you have editorial brackets around the corrected name, followed by the age in parentheses, followed by the words "and family" in editorial brackets.  As a rule, we don't string together an unbroken series of multiple parentheses and brackets. One set of parentheses or brackets is meant to provide an explanation of what came immediately before it. Adding a second and a third is unnecessarily confusing. Neither the age nor the phrase "and family" needs to be in parentheses or brackets. In fact, while the bracket usage in the "Schloendorf" instance is correct (because you, the writer of this citation, is correcting the name you have just quoted), the usage of editorial brackets around "and family" is not correct. There, you are not altering what appears in your source. You, the writer of the citation, are describing the item that is of interest. You've described the census, the schedule, the province, the ED, the community, the page, the particular entry, and the head of household. The words "and family" simply say that you're interested in the whole family, not just Richard himself.   

Re "image" vs. "imaged," it's a nitpicking grammatical point that really makes no difference to the citation itself. As phrased, the reader is given identifying details for the census and then told that the census is imaged at the website.

The Editor

History Hunter
History Hunter's picture

Dear Editor;

I certainly didn't mean to "nitpick" and did mention that I considered the "imaged" and ",and family" to be secondary. I was simply curious as to why you chose to make those non-image-related changes. Thank you for explaining.

I've never been a fan of emails and such. One often gets the wrong impression of the tone in which a question was asked. For that I apologize. I was being a bit more "detailed" in my question, because I wanted to be able to fully understand and apply the point you were making and be able to apply it correctly to other situations.

Perhaps, rephrasing the question will help to avoid confusion...

How does the reader know, from the proposed reference (see below), that the cited information came from a particular image and not the initially displayed database results page?

The presence of the word "imaged" does not seem (at the moment) enough to provide an unambiguous reference to the particular image consulted. In this particular example, there are two image hyperlinks present in the search results. Thankfully, they are just different formats of the same image, JPG and PDF. In other situations, one might have a more difficult time determining the actual image used. Perhaps you could elaborate briefly on why this style of reference is sufficient?

    1. 1916 Census of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, population schedule, Saskatchewan, enumeration district (ED) 26, Humboldt, p. 9, dwelling 93, family 97, Richard "Dschloendorf" [Schloendorf], age 46, and family; imaged, "Search 1916 Census of the Prairie Provinces," Library and Archives Canada (http://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/census/1916/Pages/1916.aspx : accessed 11 June 2017); citing Microfilm T-21936, Reference No. R233-47-9-E.

 

EE
EE's picture

History Hunter, every good researcher is a nitpicker!  Analyzing every source and every piece of information, correlating details, looking for patterns and reasoning--and explaining reasoning--are all essential to thorough research and accurate conclusions.  (Which is why this forum picks everything apart instead of just posting more cookie-cutter models to follow. :)

You ask: How does the reader know, from the proposed reference (see below), that the cited information came from a particular image and not the initially displayed database results page?   When we cite online material, our citation usually says what kind of material we're citing.  Article, database entry, image, map, etc.  If we are using the database entry itself, then (1) our citation would explicitly say that we were using the database entry; (2) we would not reference the image; and (3) we would not begin our citation with a cite to the census itself. As a comparison, see the "Online Database Entry example for the 1881 Canadian census at 6.50.

The Editor