Citation Issues

The state department responsible for recording vital events frequently changes its name. A forty year old death certificate ordered today from the Department of Health might have been created by the Bureau of Vital Statistics. If you ordered the same death certificate in the 1990s, it might have come from the Registry of Vital Statistics. The certificates are exact copies of the original state record so one ordered in 1998 would be the same as one ordered in 2021.

I have been working on my family history for about 40 years. About 20 years ago I conceived of a book that contained copies of the actual source documents that I had used in my research. For example, I include the birth certificate, marriage certificate and death certificate for an individual, which I either had from the person, or that I ordered a copy of.

I have been finding that some county clerks are putting their digitized deed records online. This is wonderful, especially when the years covered continue past what FamilySearch has.

I was able to access the various deed index images to find the deeds I want and then was able to call up the volume and page of each. For example, Erath County, Texas images can be found here: https://tyler.co.erath.tx.us/web/historicalIndex/HISTORICAL_INDEX336S1. Once found, the deed can be added to a shopping cart. Once paid, the deed images are available for a pdf download.

This may be an interesting citation issue. In a family's private papers is an original death certificate issued in 1964 by the state (La.) but through the parish (Caddo). In the intervening years, those records have been moved to the Louisiana State Archives in Baton Rouge. I have a photocopy, but I have seen the original. My goal with the citation is two-fold: 1. to show my consultation of the original record (and thus lend credibility to any proof argument); and 2. to point a future researcher to the repository where the record can be found (not digitized at Ancestry or FamilySearch. 

I'm writing a report in which I'm citing several online digital images on the same website, taken from the same NARA publication and roll, with data collected in the same location but on different dates and with different page numbers, names/spellings, etc. Is it reasonable to create a shortened reference citation for those after the first and, if so, what's the appropriate way to do that? Or is it best to use a full citation for each source?

Yes I do mean that in the title. So I'm on the path of "leveling up" my own family tree (Thank You Yvette for the blog post). Let's not discuss how accurate the early teenaged researcher was and what the more seasoned researcher is now finding, let's just say some of the early work is as firm as Birnham wood.

Since I refer to both Ancestry's database and the provided image for census citations, I use "database with images" within my citations.  But the transcription provided often provides incorrect information.  Especially regarding the spelling of names and page numbers.  I have found the page numbers are very frequently incorrect.  If I correct the page number in the citation, and it differs from the transcribed information, have I placed a stumbling block in front of future users of my data?  And when answering, keep in mind if I cite only the image, I would have to re-do thousands of citati

I'm seeking advice on the best way to cite a digital image of one titled plate from an 1859 atlas reproduced on the David Rumsey Map Collection website. The image can be found at https://bit.ly/3lh8HX3.

I'm thinking, and that is always a dangerous thing, about immigration records. We normally cite these records from EE 11.15 as follows

"UK and Ireland, Incoming Passenger Lists, 1878-1960," database with images, Ancestry (https://www.ancestry.com/imageviewer/collections/1518/images/47369_22021000034_2326-00193 : accessed 28 November 2021), entry for Christopher Heron, age 37, arrived Glasgow, Scotland, 27 September 1899, SS Anchoria.

And everybody is happy. 

Happy Thanksgiving,