Dear editor,
I have been working on a one-place-study in collaboration with another researcher. We both made copies at the archives, all marked with citations to the original source. He has now passed away and I have inherited his collection. I would like to know how to cite these photocopies.
OK, another one. I have a digital image received from a mailing list subscriber (the Lovelace list on Rootsweb) of an original marriage license, complete with affixed stamp. The subscriber received the image from his daughter. His daughter works with the woman who is in possession of the certificate. She took the photo on a smartphone when the co-worker brought the certificate for her to look at.
I have just received copies of some naturalization papers from the South Carolina Archives. They were copied from a microfilm which appears to be an in-house filming project, as the Family History Library doesn't have the film in their catalog. Info from the SC Archives website:
--------------
"Record Group Number: 000044
Series Number: .L 44067
Creator: South Carolina. Court of Common Pleas (Union County)
Title, Dates: Citizenship petitions, circa 1802-1910
Quantity: 1.00 microfilm reel(s)"
--------------
Dear Editor,
I have been asked a couple of times as to how to Cite information from an Ancestry Member Tree (AMT). I use the Family Tree Maker (FTM2014) program and rarely use information from an AMT, but may look for hints for other places to do research.
Rather than typing out the details here, I did a blog post on this topic and would be very interested in your response. I see many, many negative messages, everywhere on the use of the AMTs, but I am hoping that I may have offered a different view on this topic.
Hi,
I need to cite various newspaper articles that appear on the Australian website Trove among their newspapers section - - all of these papers were orignally printed, and have in recent years been scanned from the orginal papers or digitised from microfilm records and made available online.
Trove very helpfully provides a variety of ready-made citations and I've been using those, but I am wondering if those are the most ideal citation to use in the situation, or if there is something better.
This question really has two parts.
1. I am trying to write a biographical sketch, and in that sketch I would like to be as thurough as possible citing my sources. In doing so, I often end up with somthing that looks like this "so and so was born 1.1.19111 2 3 4 5 6 ". Lets assume that 1-4 are consecutive census records, is it possible to combine them into once citation to save space?
2. Now lets asume I have a couple of notes, and a couple of citations is their a good way to present this so that it doesn't look quite so akward?
I've ordered your book but haven't yet received it, so I'm just being impatient :-)
I emailed the state archives with a question about an entry on a 1785 property tax list.
I think I can figure out the citation, but I'm leery of including the (official) email address of the person who responded to my query since these are not published on the archives site and queries are submitted via a webform.
Donna
I have created a document based on one of your posts from Facebook: Analyzing Census Data—Part 3: Context Matters! The document is rather long and covers 4 cencus years (Federal Population Census found on Ancestry.com) for a particular family and I cite each census with the document (even for those that have the same surname for which I extracted information). In that document I created a summary of all the information gathered and would now like to share the summary. Should I cite the document or try to cite the census?
When a book (or other source) has the same 'fact' repeated on multiple (non continuous) pages, what is the rule of thumb for citing?
