9.7 or 4.6? Vital Record (BMDD) - Local but State Archived Found on Ancestry

ThirtyOhSix, neither. This is one of those instances in which you're not citing an original record. You're not citing an image of an original. You're citing just an entry from a database created at a website that offers a variety of things. 

Turn to the QuickStart Guide. There, under The Basics: Publications: Print & Online," you'll notice:

• You are first given an example of a print book and then shown how to use that same format to cite something published online.
• You are next given an example of a print book that has chapters by many different people, then shown how to use that same format to cite something published online at a website that offers a variety of databases and articles.

That basic "Website with Multiple Offerings" is a model you can follow for all database entries you encounter at Ancestry or similar sites. In this case, there is no specific author for the database, so you lead with the name of the database, following this pattern:

"Name of Collection in Quotation Marks," database, Name of Website in Italics (Place of publication = URL : Date), database entry for XXXX [your specific item of interest]

Because Ancestry states where it got its information, you'll want to add Ancestry's source-of-its-source data. To do that, simply put a semicolon at the end of the citation and say: citing "Kentucky Department for Libraries and Archives. Kentucky Birth, Marriage, and Death Databases: Marriages 1973-1999, Frankfort, KY."  If you use these exact words that Ancestry gives, then you put those words in quotation marks.

You'll find a kajillion examples of this throughout EE, where we demonstrate citing Ancestry databases. In fact, for marriages, there is a specific example at 9.6 "Basic Formats: Online Resources > Online Abstracts, Database Entries & Indexes" (the Idaho example).

One other issue is involved here also. You suggest 9.7. That is specifically for marriage records "Removed to State Archives." What Ancestry is citing is not an example of where records have been physically removed from the local courthouse and deposited at the state archives. What Ancestry is citing is a database created by the state archives from records scattered all over the state.

From that perspective, given that Ancestry’s source-of-the-source data is yet another database that’s also online and easily accessible, EE would suggest going to the database that Ancestry cites as its source and using that one. (https://kdla.ky.gov/researchers/vitalstatsinfo/Pages/bmdindexcd.aspx) While both databases are derivatives, the Ancestry database is a derivative of a derivative, which adds another layer of opportunity for database errors.

ThirtyOhSix, please don't consider your questions "ignorant." We've all been at the beginning point and had to learn.  It's obvious that you want to learn. That is good.

It will be tonight, after today's deadlines are all met, before I can work through the new questions. (EE's not my day job.) In the meanwhile, perhaps one of our readers will chime in.

ThirtyOhSix, considering the length of this thread, the best approach to answer all your questions--and make the results easily digestible for our readers--would be to write a series of blog posts that each focuses on one of the issues you have raised. Writing answers keyed to specific question numbers and parts would confuse everyone. I can probably post the first one Wednesday.

In the meanwhile, the citation you ended up with at the end of your thoughts under No. 3 really does mix up peas with apples--something the blog posts will sort out. For now, let's go back to the one you presented under Point 2. Your draft offers this:

"Kentucky, Death Records, 1852-1965," database with images, Ancestry, (https://www.ancestry.com : accessed 25 Feb 2019) >Death Certificates, 1911-1965 > 1959 > Film 7054463 > Certificates 022501-025000, death certificate for Joseph E. Bryant, birth date 14 Sep 1868, birthplace Wayne County, Kentucky, USA, death date 31 Oct 1959, death place Somerset, Pulaski, Kentucky, USA; citing "Ancestry.com. Kentucky, Death Records, 1852-1965 [database on-line]. Lehi, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2007."

All is great until we get to the specific data for the deceased. The citation for a death record would not include all the personal data from the certificate--only what is needed to locate the certificate. In this case, given the organization of the records that you outline in the path, after you cite the block of certificates in which this one is found ("Certificates 022501-025000"), you obviously need to cite the exact certificate number, with name and death date.  (But do eliminate the italics that make everything hard to read. Italics are for only the title of the website.) The results will be this:

"Kentucky, Death Records, 1852-1965," database with images, Ancestry (https://www.ancestry.com : accessed 25 Feb. 2019) >Death Certificates, 1911-1965 > 1959 > Film 7054463 > Certificates 022501-025000> imaged certificate 24650 for Joseph E. Bryant, d. 31 Oct. 1959, Pulaski County;

Now you are at the point of needing to add source-of-the-source info in the next layer. What you have cited above (which I've colored red) does not tell us where your source provider got its information. It just repeats what you've already given us, using different words.

Under your question 2B in the last message, you copy three different citations that Ancestry gives you and ask what to do with that data. You know that your certificate is on "Film 7054463" because Ancestry's path tells you that. None of those three record descriptions deal with 7054463. Therefore, they are not relevant for this citation. If one of them did mention the film number, then that one would be relevant to cite in your source-of-the-source layer.

Going back to Ancestry's database entry,  which you originally snipped and gave us, you'll see that the first item in Ancestry's description of the source tells you this:

"Kentucky Department for Libraries and Archives; Frankfort, Kentucky."

That's the only part of the description that is relevant to the film you have used. (All this is why I said earlier that Ancestry's so-called "citation" gives us a lot of detail that often is not relevant and, conversely, is often short on what would be relevant. In this case, your source-of-the-source is quite short. You simply plug it onto the end of your citation we worked through above--i.e., 

"Kentucky, Death Records, 1852-1965," database with images, Ancestry (https://www.ancestry.com : accessed 25 Feb 2019) >Death Certificates, 1911-1965 > 1959 > Film 7054463 > Certificates 022501-025000> imaged certificate 24650 for Joseph E. Bryant, d. 31 Oct. 1959, Pulaski County; citing "Kentucky Department for Libraries and Archives; Frankfort, Kentucky."

ThirtyOhSix, I'll add one more thing here, tonight. Under Question 4, you say:

"A point of confusion I am struggling with is the idea of imaged copies, not reproduced but images of originals. From everything I understand, these can be treated as original sources and you would cite the original record."

Yes, three suggestions here:

• EE covers that at 1.26--as well as in the Glossary, under "image copy" (and a number of other discussions throughout that are indexed)
• Here at EE's website, the blog post "Image Copies: Originals or Derivatives" provides a fuller discussion.
• Also here at our website, QuickLesson 10: "Original Records, Image Copies, and Derivatives" explores this at great length.