Published booklet - transcribed account book

Eventide, you've done an excellent job of analyzing what you are using, to understand its strengths and weaknesses. From the citation standpoint, let's go back to basics: a book or booklet (it does not matter what size the book is) follows the basic book format:

Author/compiler, Title of Publication (Place of publication: Publisher, Date of publication), page no.

You've done that, except for citing the compilers whose identities definitely should be noted. Aside from the point of giving credit where due, their reputations for skill (or sometime a lack of it) is essential to the analysis of the work and its reliability.

When you say that the work is a PDF, I assume you are using it in a digital form. If so, then we still need to identify the media in which you are using those PDF images: CD, thumb drive, online access etc.

Regarding the lack of page numbers, EE 12.14 "Page Numbers, Missing" states:

Most published books are paginated. When you use one that is not, you should state the absence of pagination and look for some means by which the specific page can be identified.

"Looking for some means" is what you've done. Your explanation would be clearer if, in that page numbered field, you stated:

... unnumbered pages, PDF image 11, entry for Maria White.

One other point might be clarified. In your description of the source and its strengths and weaknesses, you end with a long sentence that carries quotation marks; but you don't say where the quote comes from. The preface?

Ah, the lessons we learn the hard way!  With a PDF, it does make a difference as to where/how we obtained the record. If from a third party, we have no assurance that all the original publication is there or that something has not been altered. Alterations are easy to make with PDFs used outside of DRM (digital rights management) software.

At this point, making do with what you've got, your analysis of essentials is good. Everything is there, somewhere, and most of it is in the logical place. A bit of redundancy could be eliminated to shorten the quite long citation. EE's tweaks would be these.

         1. Vivian Kerns, Janet Spada, Sue DeLaney, transcribers, Marriages and Deaths (with Comments) from the Account Book of Darling Whitney and Daniel Darling Whitney of Woodbury, Long Island, New York, 1808-1840: Towns of Huntington and Oyster Bay, PDF ed. (1977; reprint, New York: Huntington American Revolution Bicentennial Commission, 1977, second printing, 1992) PDF, unnumbered pages, PDF page p. 11, entry for Maria White. This small publication is a transcription from the original account book of Darling and Daniel Darling Whitney of Oyster Bay. The preface states "The transcribers have shown the 'proper' spelling of an individual’s name when it was known to them, indicated by brackets. Information that was not in the original book but was included to [sic] the published version is underlined."

Reasons:

• "Edition" data for a published work is always placed between the title and the publication data. See examples at EE 2.32, 3.18, 7.32, 7.34, 7.43, 10.18, 12.18, 12.43, 12.47, 12.50–52, 12.60, 12.75, as well as the QuickCheck Models on pp. 651 and 655.
• For the placement of data about reprinting, see the first example at 12.75 "Reprints & Revisions: Basic Format."
• When we quote material, we put quotation marks around it, as you did. If the passage we are quoting has its own internal quotation marks, then we replace the internal marks with half-quote marks to show a clear distinction between the marks we are adding and the marks that are in the original.  (FYI, this is not an EE rule. This is standard practice as dictated by all U.S. English grammar manuals. See, for example, https://www.scribendi.com/advice/when_to_use_double_or_single_quotation_marks.en.html )
• Also within the quote, where the transcriber's preface uses a word ungrammatically, a [sic] would let your reader know that you did not make a copying error (and inform yourself at a later date after your recollection of the source has gone cold). 

You're welcome!

Eventide, you’ve definitely found a doozie!

Question 1:

With compilations that take records out of original order and rearrange them alphabetically, we do sometimes find that a marriage entry for a couple will appear in the alpha section for both the bride's name and the groom's. We may also find that different details appear from one to the other. If you've compared the two and find no differences, then no one would fault you for citing just one of the entries. On the other hand, with books whose data is taken out of context and subdivided under the "right letter of the alphabet," users miss contextual information if they do not examine both entries. EE would likely cite both or add a note that both letters of the alphabet should be checked.

Question 2:

Yes. This seems to be one of those cases in which an added explanation would help. As a comparison, see EE 7.15 (“Record Books, Sectioned”), the St. Peter’s Parish example.

Question 3:

Here, the advice at 7.5 “Citing Entry vs. Page Numbers” would be your guidance: “You will need to study the overall arrangement of each register you use and plan your citation to include whatever numbers are needed to identify your entry.”  There’s no hardfast rule.

Whether to count physical pages, in an unpaginated work, is a matter of feasibility. If there are just a few pages in each section, it’s feasible (example: EE 12.14 “Page Numbers, Missing,” for St. James example. If there are 59 pages, it's problematic—which means we another type of pointer. Two variants for these situations are at

• 3.22 “Citing Entry & Section, in lieu of page number (Goshen example within the Barbour Collection’s bound series)
• 4.14’s orphan’s home example (referring to the letter of the alphabet, then the entry).

Regarding your latest citation draft, EE would tinker just a bit:

Vivian Kerns, Janet Spada, Sue DeLaney, transcribers, Marriages and Deaths (with comments) from the Account Book of Darling Whitney and Daniel Darling Whitney of Woodbury, Long Island, New York, 1808-1840: Towns of Huntington and Oyster Bay, typescript, (1977; reprint, New York: Huntington American Revolution Bicentennial Commission, 1992) …

A typescript is a manuscript presented in typed form—i.e., unpublished. (See Glossary, p. 832). That does not fit in this case in which you are citing the work as a publication.