Completely Confused: Citing Census Data Provided by Online Providers, ie. Ancestry.com

By ThirtyOhSix on Wed, 02/20/2019 - 11:24

Forums

Hi,

I am on my fifth reading or so of your book and every time I read it or read through your blog, I seem to only get more confused.  I am a 100% Permanent & Totally Disabled Veteran, so it I do 95% of my research from home using Ancestry.com, MyHeritage.com, FamilySearch.com, etc....  While I would love to travel to all these amazing locations where so much data is held, it is just not that easy.  So these online providers are pretty much the best I can do.

I was reading the 1911 England census article where you state:

Basic Rule for Creating a Layered Citation for Imaged Records

Details that belong in one layer of the citation should not be mixed into the other.  Each layer of the citation deals with a different entity. When we’re citing an imaged record at a site such as Ancestry, we have three layers.

  • Layer 1: We cite the image of the original document. We cite what we see. We don’t cite details that we can’t see for ourselves, to ensure that they are accurate.
  • Layer 2: We cite the website and its database.
  • Layer 3: We cite the basic details that our provider gives us for its source.

Then you have the book examples in chapter 6 which show several examples: Microfilm, Online.  So if we take away all the minor differences between the census years a good citation might look like:

Footnote/Endnote Citation

1930 U.S. census, McCreary County, Kentucky, population schedule, Whitley City, enumeration district (ED) 0002, sheet 10B, dwelling 183, family 184, Herman Worley; database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XMXB-TGD: accessed 16 Feb 2019); citing National Archives and Records Administration microfilm T626, roll 765; FHL microfilm: 2340500

Subsequent Citation

1930 U.S. census, McCreary County, Kentucky, pop. sch., Whitley City, ED 0002, sheet 10B, dwell. 183, fam. 184, Herman Worley. 

Bibliography

Kentucky. McCreary County. 1930 U.S. census, population schedule. Database with images.  FamilySearch.https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XMXB-TGD: 2002.  

 

I found this example suggested by the Saint Louis Genealogical Society.

Source List Entry

[State]. [County name] County. 1850 U.S. census, population schedule. NARA microfilm publication M432, roll [number]. Washington, D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.

Missouri. St. Louis County. 1850 U.S. census, population schedule. NARA microfilm publication M432, roll 414. Washington, D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.

First Reference

1850 U.S. census, [County name] County, [State], population schedule, [Town or township, ward], p. [number] (handwritten, [number] stamped), dwelling [number], family [number], [Name]; NARA microfilm publication M432, roll [number].

1850 U.S. census, St. Louis County, Missouri, population schedule, 3rd Ward, City of St. Louis, p. 362 (printed, 223 handwritten), dwelling 970, family 079, Ann L. Hunt; NARA microfilm publication M432, roll 414.

Subsequent Reference

1850 U.S. census, [County name] Co., [State abbreviation], pop. sch., p. [number] (handwritten, [number] stamped), dwell. [number], fam. [number], [Name]. 

1850 U.S. census, St. Louis Co., Mo., pop. sch., p. 362 (printed, 223 handwritten), dwell. 970, fam. 1079, Ann L. Hunt.

Let's take 6.31 1910-1940 U.S. Census, Population Schedules as our example.

Microfilm (NARA Publication)

Source List Entry

New York. New York County. 1910 U.S. census, population schedule. NARA microfilm publication T624, roll 999. Washington, D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.

First Reference Note

1. 1910 U.S. census, New York County, New York, population schedule, Bronx Assembly District 33, precinct 19, p. 269 (stamped), enumeration district (ED) 38, sheet 6-A, dwelling 37, family 124, Jacob Sounheimer; NARA microfilm publication T624, roll 999.

Subsequent Note

11. 1910 U.S. census, N.Y. Co., N.Y., Bronx Dist. 33, prect. 19, p. 269 (stamped), ED 38, sheet 6-A, dwell. 37, fam. 124, Jacob Sounheimer.

 

Online Image

Source List Entry

“United States Census, 1940.” Database with images. FamilySearch. https:// familysearch.org: 2014.

First Reference Note

1. 1940 U.S. census, Arecibo Township, Puerto Rico, population schedule, Barrio Factor, enumeration district (ED) 12-26, sheet 6-B, household 105, Román Ramón Díaz; accessed via “United States Census, 1940,” images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org: 27 September 2015), Puerto Rico > Arecibo > Factor > 12-26 Barrio Factor; citing NARA digital publication T627.

Subsequent Note

11. 1940 U.S. census, Arecibo Township, Puerto Rico, pop. sch., Factor, ED 12-26, sheet 6-B, household 105, Román Ramón Díaz.

 

So I am pretty much completely confused.  To start with here are my initial questions:

1. Given that I am using an online service like ancestry.com to access these Census records and they produce  images, my understanding is that the focus should really be upon citing the copy of the Census.  Then citing Ancestry as the online database followed by the details given at the details sheet of data transcribed by Ancestry and the sources described below.

 

 

1850 Census

What mixes me up is that the book provides an online example (see above) BUT it seems as if the book description is not really showing the real world implementation of how to cite a census.

Based on the image above, I came up with this data:

Layer 1 - Relevant Data:

Based upon reading the actual document

Census Year: 1850

Place: Division 3, Pulaski County, Kentucky

Enumeration Date: 24 Sep 1850

Name: Bosley Bryant <-- Notice I spelled my 2XGGF name correctly while they transcribed it wrong

Age: 12

Birthplace: Kentucky

Dwelling #: 126

Family #: 126

Layer 2 - The website and database

Website: Ancestry

URL:https://www.ancestry.com/ 

Path: 1850 United States Federal Census> Kentucky> Pulaski> Division 3

Layer 3 - Details the Provider Tells Us About the Source

Image 18 of 28 found by looking at the bottom of document

Name: Borley Briant

Name:Borley Briant [Bosley Bryant] [Borley Bryant] 

Age:12

Birth Year:abt 1838

Birthplace:Kentucky

Home in 1850:Division 3, Pulaski, Kentucky, USA

Gender:Male

Family Number:126

Household Members:Name, Age

Samuel Briant58

Aney Briant33

Borley Briant12

Elisabeth Briant10

Hariet Briant8

Thomas Briant7

Mathew Briant5

James Pery3

 

Source Citation

Year: 1850; Census Place: Division 3, Pulaski, Kentucky; Roll: M432_217; Page: 152B; Image: 436

Source Information

Ancestry.com. 1850 United States Federal Census [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2009. Images reproduced by FamilySearch.

Original data: Seventh Census of the United States, 1850; (National Archives Microfilm Publication M432, 1009 rolls); Records of the Bureau of the Census, Record Group 29; National Archives, Washington, D.C.

Based upon everything I extracted above into the three layers I created the following:

First Reference Note

1850 U.S. census, Pulaski County, Kentucky, population schedule, Division 3, p.152B, image 18 of 28, dwelling 126, family 126, Borley Briant [Bosley Bryant]; Database with image, Ancestry (https://www.anacestry.com : accessed 2019), 1850 United States Federal Census> Kentucky> Pulaski> Division 3; Records of the Bureau of the Census, Record Group 29; NARA microfilm publication M432, roll 217 of 1009. Washington, D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.

Subsequent Reference Note

1850 U.S. census, Pulaski Co., KY, pop.sch., p.152B, dwell. 126, fam. 126, Borley Briant [Bosley Bryant].

Source List Entry

Kentucky. Pulaski County. 1850 U.S. Census, population schedule. Records of the Bureau of the Census, Record Group 29. NARA microfilm publication M432, roll 217 of 1009. Washington, D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.

Questions:

1. Is this right?

2. In your book you describe both the Microfilm and Online examples, but your online examples look nothing like what I have created above.  Under what circumstances would I use the example of either one rather than this?  The only thing I can think is if I went to NARA and looked at the microfilm, then I would use the microfilm example?  For the online example, would that only be used if it was a database and did not have the images?

3. In the source information provided by Ancestry.com, it says this "Images reproduced by FamilySearch."  What do I do about that?

4. Sometimes a source will look exactly like what is described above but it will include "FHL microfilm 15234567."  I believe this is a call number.  If that was provided how would it change my citation?

5. As far as types of citations, there are:

Database with image

Database

Digital Image

ect...  Under what circumstances would I use each?

I probably have some more questions, but let's start with these.  Thanks in advance...

Submitted byEEon Thu, 02/21/2019 - 09:46

ThirtyOhSix, that's a lot to digest! If I'm tracking your mind correctly, you present an issue in the middle of your post that is different from the citation draft you present toward the end. The core of what you are wrestling with seems to be your point 5 at the end, where you say:

       5. As far as types of citations, there are:

  • Database with image
  • Database
  • Digital Image

      Under what circumstances would I use each?

Online databases present us with two types of data:

  • an image of a document created by somebody other than the database provider
  • bits of data extracted from the entry—i.e., a “database entry,” created by the provider itself

When we cite a census, we cite either the image or the provider's database entry and we identify which item we are using for our data. This matters because the database entry is a derivative that may have created errors not in the original.

Midway, you present an image of Ancestry's database entry extracting data from the census. There you say:

1. Given that I am using an online service like ancestry.com to access these Census records and they produce  images, my understanding is that the focus should really be upon citing the copy of the Census. Then citing Ancestry as the online database followed by the details given at the details sheet of data transcribed by Ancestry and the sources described below.

The focus should be on what we take our data from. If we are eyeballing the original, we cite the original--not Ancestry's error-prone derivative: the extract or “database entry.” If we take our data from the provider's extract, then that's what we cite; we would not want to leave the impression that we personally took that data from the original, if we're using the derivative. If there is a need to point out that the database has indexed the name wrongly or misstated an age in its extract, then we tack that assessment onto the end of the citation that you have to the Ancestry image. 

Re the other details that a provider may give us:

The QuickCheck Model on p. 237 (3d ed. rev.) provides an example of the essentials needed when we access the 1850 census at Ancestry—essentials that meet the two goals of a citation:

  1. Provide sufficient identification so the record can be found again.
  2. Provide sufficient identification so we and others can appraise the strengths and weaknesses of what we have used.

Good providers give us a significant amount of background detail about the source and the processing that source may have undergone to produce the form in which we are using it. That is information we mentally digest in order to make our own appraisal of the source. But every detail in that background discussion will not appear in our citation.  

EE’s “model” formats distill the essentials to guide readers as to what is needed. The QuickCheck Model on p. 237 does that for the 1850 census and labels each of the elements so that new researchers can understand what those pieces of data represent. EE 6.25 provides two comparative examples for online census data: the first cites Ancestry’s database entry. The second cites the original images used at Ancestry.

 

Thank you for the response.  That straightens out a lot, but I have a few followup questions just to confirm I am doing this right.  

1. What is the difference between "image" and "digital image?"

For the Census in the original posting would the Source List Entry be this?

Bibliography:

Kentucky. Pulaski County. 1850 U.S. census, population schedule. database with images. Ancestry. https://www.ancestry.com : 21 February 2019.

Footnote: 1850 U.S. census, Pulaski County, Kentucky, population schedule, Division 3 , p. 152B , dwelling 126 , family 126, Borley Briant [Bosley Bryant]; digital image, Ancestry (https://www.ancestry.com : accessed 21 February 2019), 1850 United States Federal Census> Kentucky> Pulaski> Division 3 ;citing National Archives microfilm publication M432, roll 217.

Short Footnote: 1850 U.S. census, Pulaski Co., Kentucky, pop.sch., p. 152B , dwell.126, fam.126, Borley Briant [Bosley Bryant].

2. Would the citation above be correct for referencing only what I see on the image or would it cover both what I see on the image, data transcribed by Ancestry, and what data they provide about the source?  If this does cover all 3 pieces of information, when would you use the database format?  Would that be used when there is no image or the image is unreadable?

3. Data read from image vs Data transcribed and provided by Ancestry...  

Does data read off the image go in layer 1? 

Where exactly does data transcribed/provided about the source go? Layer 3 or after layer 3 in the notes?

For example, I could not find any page # on this specific page, but in the notes/comments provided by Ancestry it tells me the page #.  So would it be correct to remove the page # from layer 1 and put in after layer 3 in the details?

4.  In the Bibliography, is it "Database with images" or "database with images?"

5. Would the data in the original image transcribe by Ancestry all go in details after Layer 3?

 

Thank you

Submitted byEEon Thu, 02/21/2019 - 17:30

ThirtyOhSix

1. There is no difference between "image" and "digital image" when citing online sources. Some people prefer the more explicit "digital image." Others point out that everything online is "digital." Take your pick.

1-A. Yes, but capitalize the "D" in "Database" since it begins a new "sentence" within the citation.

2. No, your citation to the imaged census should not include the data extracted (not transcribed, because a transcription is a different entity; see glossary) and presented by Ancestry. The image and Ancestry's cherry-picked data are two radically different records. One is the original census (or a duplicate original; see glossary), created in 1850. The other is a 21st century derivative source created by Ancestry.

2-A. When would we cite the database entry? Rarely. One example: in a court case for which I was engaged to evaluate the evidence, attorneys presented me with "exhibits" presented by the opposing party and accepted by the court. Those exhibits included Ancestry database entries. In appraising those exhibits (which weren't cited), I created citations. I also submitted image copies of the original pages, with appropriate citations for those. But the inferior database entries had to be dealt with appropriately also; they were already numbered exhibits in the case, they could not simply be ignored or replaced with something else. Ergo, citations to them were created.  More commonly, we cite a database entry, rather than the image, whenever the provider does not give us images and we have only the database entry to work with until we can access the original elsewhere. 

3. Layer 1 (the image) reports everything we see when we eyeball that image--and when we contextually study the others created in that record set. Layer 1 contains information that we can confirm. After we report all the essential details for which we can personally vouch, because we eyeballed it, we then begin Layer 2. There, we cite the website (and database if necessary) that provides the images. With censuses, we often add a Layer 3 for source-of-the-source information—i.e., source info given by the provider that we cannot confirm from our eyeballing of the images.

3-A. Does data read off the image go in layer 1? No. All the historical information provided by a source does not go into the citation at all. All that information goes in our research notes, to which the source note (citation) is attached.

3-B. Where exactly does data transcribed/provided about the source go?  If you are referencing the provider’s database entry, then there is no need to copy that when using the originals to make our data extractions. If you are referencing the source-of-the-source that the provider gives us, then in a census citation that data would go in Layer 3.

4. See point 1-A above. Source list entries are written paragraph style. Each element of the citation is a “sentence.” Each “sentence” starts with a capital letter, as it does in normal writing. The only exception would be when the “sentence” starts with a “word” that is never capitalized—as with http, rather than Http.  (Incidentally, all this is long-standing practice across many citation-style guides. It’s not an EE invention.)

5. See 3-B.

 

Submitted byThirtyOhSixon Sat, 02/23/2019 - 11:30

Do you know if this book by Mills is available in electronic form, preferably kindle?  Is there a place where I could go to see a table of contents and chapter?

Submitted byThirtyOhSixon Sat, 02/23/2019 - 11:30

I meant this book: Professional Genealogy: Preparation, Practice & Standards

ThirtyOhSix, ProGenPPS, a textbook that brings together the wisdom of 23 of America's top genealogists, is not yet available in an electronic edition. With a book that size, the cost of production is so great that publishers usually do not release them in an electronic edition until they have recouped their investment.