Citation Issues

When the name of a repository changes, e.g. from Office of Vital Statistics to Bureau of Vital Statistics to Division of Vital Statistics, etc., should our citation use the repository name on the document or the repository name as it was when we visited or wrote to the repository?

I have a similar question regarding changes of names for vital records; a generic death certificate might be preprinted with terms such as "certificate of death" or "medical certificate of death." Do we use the generic term or the term on the certificate? 

Dear Evidence Explained, 

I am new to the world of citations.  I am quickly learning that it is a study all on its own. I have your Evidence Explained book, 3rd edition and have also read numerous postings (several times) on this forum. All of which are very informative.  I have to admit my head is swimming in information at the moment.

This is purely for fun. No comments as to WHY someone would cite ChatGPT (or any of the others). But as a little lite humor, let's see if we can put one together. I'm using here 3.42 the Instant Message format.

ChatGPT (https://chat.openai.com) with David Grawrock [USERID FOR PRIVATE USE], chat, "Age of majority in 1837 Tennessee" (https://chat.openai.com/chat/651470ab-ba4d-4dc9-b279-e02947a8cc4e [password protected]); privately held by Grawrock, [(E-ADDRESS), & STREET ADDRESS FOR PRIVATE USE], Ivins, Utah, 2023.

Hello,

I'm knee-deep in research with the BIA (RG 75).  Nara has index cards on their website, which give tidbits of information, and some cards reference other records. 

I know we don't typically use indexes as sources, but these index cards have a wealth of information on them.

If I use the index card, would I only cite the online card information, then when I get the actual file, then cite the details of where that file came from?

For example 

Our study group met and created this citation for a session law that was published in a book, and subsequently found online at Internet Archive. In drafting this citation, we considered the first layer following section 13.13, p. 748, in Evidence Explained. We drafted the second layer as an online source.  We have two questions:

1. Is the sequencing right for the first layer? 

2. For the digitized images, does the title "Indiana acts, 1822-23, 7th session," belong before or after the description "digitized images"? 

   An obituary in a newspaper listed the wrong name in the headline. Do I cite the wrong name? The correct married name is Jordan. In the first sentence, they listed the correct name.

I recently ordered birth certificates for my parents and grandparents from the state vital records.  The certificates I received are all identical format, exactly the same as my own, obtained several years ago. They are all modern "multi-colored" pages with the birth information printed on them.  The issue date on the four I just received are identical and all are noted as "certified."

I am attempting to develop a reference not for images I obtained from newspapers preserved on microfilm held within a collection at a state library.

According to the Library's website:

"Washington State Library holds over 40,000 rolls of 35mm microfilm for Washington newspapers from the territorial period in the 1850s to the present.
This collection is available for in-library use . . . ."

Dear EE,

In studying Chapter 4, QuickCheck Model on p. 170, I was "surprised" by the First Reference Note arrangement. Could you enlighten me as to what prompted leading with item of interest? This seems a departure from the common placement later in the arrangement. Examples at 4.23 did not follow suit. Am I correct to say this is an accomplishment of "emphasis"?

wayneson

When I first used Ancestry’s “U.S., Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Swedish American Church Records, 1800-1947,” I constructed my reference notes to lead with the document rather than the database. Now that I’ve used that collection many times, I’m considering reworking my citations to lead with the database.