Citation Style: How does one handle the "strange" ones?

By History-Hunter on Wed, 04/24/2019 - 14:03

Forums

Dear Editor;

I'm slowly working through the process of gathering corroborating information on the voyages of one of my ancestors. However; I am beginning to find that some of the citations are quite complex due to the way in which the reference information is presented by the source.

I've tried to leverage the examples in the Evidence Explained book, but the solution to some situations eludes me.

Appended is one of my attempts. It indicates some of the issues I'm facing. I'd like to ask a few questions using it as an example. As always; any suggestions you have are welcome.

Questions:

  1. To highlight the collection, is it permissible to place the collection first in a Source List Entry?
  2. If a reference has been accessed as a set of "browsable images", yet does have an index, need we state it as being a "database with browsable images"? (Note: Certain images aren't indexed.)
  3. When a form has preprinted text that describes the content that follows, is it permissible to use the em dash to indicate that the "title" of the blank and its contents belong together? Is there a better way?
  4. When indicating terms in a "trail of breadcrumbs" path, should one use parentheses or "square brackets" to indicate the field-name associated with an entry? Is there a better way?
  5. While quotation marks indicate something taken verbatim, to what extent should we employ them in contracting source list entries and references? (When the whole segment of a reference is not a quote, embedding quotes could result in "visual confusion".)

Example:

Source List Entry:

“UK, Outward Passenger Lists, 1890-1960.” Browsable images. Ancestry. https://www.ancestry.ca/search/collections/ukoutwardpassengerlists : 2019.

First Reference:

Board of Trade: Commercial and Statistical Department and successors, Outwards Passenger Lists, browsable image, Name of Ship—Pretorian, Steamship Line—C.P.O.S., Date of Departure—March 31 1920, Where Bound—St John NB, Names and descriptions of British passengers embarking at the port of—Glasgow, p. 4 [penned], col. 1, contract ticket number 44689, Murison Charles; consulted as “UK, Outward Passenger Lists, 1890-1960,” browsable images, Ancestry (https://www.ancestry.ca/search/collections/ukoutwardpassengerlists : downloaded 24 April 2019) > Glasgow (port) > 1920 (year) > March (month) > image 23; citing reference BT27 in The National Archives, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, England; See also images 20 and 32, which are the title and summary pages of the passenger list, for additional sailing details. Those images are only available via browsing.

Subsequent Note:

Board of Trade: Commercial and Statistical Department and successors, Outwards Passenger Lists, browsable image, Name of Ship—Pretorian, Steamship Line—C.P.O.S., Date of Departure—March 31 1920, Where Bound—St John NB, Names and descriptions of British passengers embarking at the port of—Glasgow, p. 4 [penned], col. 1, contract ticket number 44689, Murison Charles.

Submitted byEEon Wed, 04/24/2019 - 15:43

History-Hunter

1. Your approach (beginning the ref note with the name of the collection) works because you are using images supplied by a database, with the identification of record-group and archive relegated to Layer 3 where you report your providers source-of-the-source details.   If you were using documents from a collection onsite, for clarity you would be expected to follow the normal format for archival collections.  In the U.S., the format begins with the smallest element of the citation (the document) and works up through the collection, the series, and the record group to the largest (the archive and city). In England and Europe, the format usually begins with the largest element and works down to the smallest.  (EE 3.1)

2. The condition you describe would suggest that, you might use either description (database with images, or database with browsable images), but that—for clarity—you need to explain that the material is not fully indexed.

3. Re the use of an em dash: remember that the purpose of a dash is to separate. (EE 2.65) Your intent here would be clearer if you used a punctuation mark that connects and says, "That which follows is an elaboration upon that which came before." That punctuation mark would usually be the colon.

4. If, amid a path, you need to explain what a certain field represents, then the square editorial brackets would be appropriate. They tells your reader that the added wording is not in the original and you are adding this explanation of your own knowledge. (EE 2.76, 3.35, 4.18, etc.)

5. The standard rule for quoted material is to put quotes around any three or more words we copy from another source. (EE 2.72)  If the original has unnecessary words that can be omitted, we would substitute an ellipsis. (EE 2.67).

Submitted byHistory-Hunteron Wed, 04/24/2019 - 17:40

Dear Editor;

Thank you for the response and pointers to the relevant EE sections. 

Figuring out how to adjust things will take some work. I just need to clarify a couple of items and I'll post a revised attempt.

  1. When you said, "... (beginning the ref note with the name of the collection) ...," were you actually referring to the "Source List Entry"? I'll read this again. Maybe I've misunderstood.
  2. I think I understand. Layer 1 likely should not mention "browsable image", since it is treating the content as if the original were on the table in front of me. However, should Layer 1 say anything about indexing, since I don't really know how the original was arranged? In Layer 2, would using "database with browsable images, partially indexed" be acceptable to highlight the situation?
  3. Understood. I'll use a colon instead.
    Not to nit-pick... How would I indicate that in "Date of Departure: March 31 1920", the "March 31" and "20" are "penned", but "Date of Departure" and "19" are "typeset"? Inserting those clarifications really doesn't add value. Does it?
  4. Understood. Will use "square brackets". However; I should note that the words currently in parentheses are the actual field names that appear on the website. Hope this does not create an issue.
  5. Understood. Will try and see how things go. With some of the material, this could get a bit tricky.

Submitted byEEon Wed, 04/24/2019 - 20:56

1. In source list entries, we routinely cite the collection rather than the document. In ref notes, when we use the originals, the U.S. practice is to begin with the smallest and work up to the largest--or largest to smallest in UK and Europe. With images in an online database, we're working in a different environment. We don't have the whole set to examine. We don't know firsthand the details of the how the series is organized. We use what we see to structure that layer of the citation. If we see a title on a filmed book or a target/label that has been filmed for a collection, it's logical to identify that book or collection first and then  drill down to the exact item.

2. Yes, the descriptor "browsable images" should to in the layer that discusses the database. And yes, if we don't know how the original is indexed, then we should not comment on the indexing in the layer in which we identify what it is we see.

3. Yes, "inserting those clarifications really don't add [evidentiary] value." Sometimes, in our efforts to be as precise as possible, we can actually muddy matters rather than make them clearer.

 

Submitted byHistory-Hunteron Thu, 04/25/2019 - 12:42

Dear Editor;

The following is nearly a complete rewrite of the citation. I've tried very hard to adapt the QuickCheck Model for "Archived Documents: Digitized", "Collection (database) as lead element in Source List". I think this is the QuickCheck Model to which section 3.16 refers, although the title is slightly different. I find the ordering in the citation to be fairly different to that with which I am familiar. So, please be patient with me. I'm sure I've made mistakes.

I've done my best to try to follow the EE style. I must admit, it still is hard for me to rationalize how some of the rules are intended to be applied. There seem to so many exceptions. The placement of colons, when dealing with quoted text, is something with which I am really struggling. I've also tried to use quotation marks only on groups of three or more words.

 

Source List Entry:

“UK, Outward Passenger Lists, 1890-1960.” Database (partially indexed) with browsable images. Ancestry. https://www.ancestry.ca/search/collections/ukoutwardpassengerlists : 2019.

 

First Reference:

“UK, Outward Passenger Lists, 1890-1960,” Ancestry (https://www.ancestry.ca/search/collections/ukoutwardpassengerlists : downloaded 24 April 2019) > Glasgow [port] > 1920 [year] > March [month], browsable images, image 23, “Name of Ship”: Pretorian, Steamship Line: C.P.O.S., “Date of Departure”: “March 31 1920”, Where Bound: “St John NB”, “British passengers embarked … Port of”: Glasgow, p. 4 [penned], col. 1, “Contract ticket number”: 44689 [entry for Charles Murison]; citing “Board of Trade: Commercial and Statistical Department and successors: Outwards Passenger Lists,” BT27 [TNA reference], The National Archives (TNA), Kew, Richmond, Surrey, England; See also images 20 and 32, which are the title and summary pages of the passenger list, for additional sailing details.

 

Subsequent Note:

“UK, Outward Passenger Lists, 1890-1960,” Ancestry, Passenger List for the Pretorian departing Glasgow in March 1920, image 23.

Submitted byEEon Fri, 04/26/2019 - 20:10

History-Hunter, your revision works well. Part of the reference note could also be simplified. All the data on the sheet does not have to go into the citation and every individual item doesn't have to be quoted:

... Pretorian, departed March 31 1920, bound for St John NB, “British passengers embarked … Port of Glasgow," p. 4 [penned], col. 1, entry for Charles Murison ...

I also spotted one other infelicity of the type that you previously said you would prefer to handle in separate sentences.

... The National Archives (TNA), Kew, Richmond, Surrey, England; See also images 20 and 32 ...

Submitted byHistory-Hunteron Sat, 04/27/2019 - 07:26

Dear Editor;

Thank you. I've incorporated the suggestions and the finished product is shown below.

I think my issue with putting too much in the reference comes from thinking of having to continue the "trail of breadcrumbs" down into the image itself. I studied the revised reference. It appears that once the image is located there are two key things that the reference does;

  1. give just enough identifying information to make sure the reader can be sure they have the correct sheet. (i.e."Pretorian, departed March 31 1920, bound for St John NB, “British passengers embarked … Port of Glasgow," p. 4 [penned]"),
  2. unambiguously identify the person of interest in the imaged sheet (i.e. "entry for Charles Murison").

(I should note that the "col. 1" reference is redundant, unless the the ticket number (closest equivalent to a line number) is included. I've deleted "col. 1" in the finished reference. Charles Murison is not so difficult to find without it. If there were printed line numbers, I would have included the one for Charles).

My issue of quotes was due to thinking that one must use actual quotations to identify the correct image (point 1 above), but this does not appear to be the case. I see that there is one quote and only because extracting a segment of the text, which was greater than three words, was a simple way of helping identify the image.

Sorry for not remembering to "end the sentence" before starting the note. A period has been substituted for the semi-colon.

----------------------------------------------

Source List Entry:

“UK, Outward Passenger Lists, 1890-1960.” Database (partially indexed) with browsable images. Ancestry. https://www.ancestry.ca/search/collections/ukoutwardpassengerlists : 2019.

First Reference:

“UK, Outward Passenger Lists, 1890-1960,” Ancestry (https://www.ancestry.ca/search/collections/ukoutwardpassengerlists : downloaded 24 April 2019) > Glasgow [port] > 1920 [year] > March [month], browsable images, image 23, Pretorian, departed March 31 1920, bound for St John NB, “British passengers embarked … Port of Glasgow," p. 4 [penned], entry for Charles Murison; citing “Board of Trade: Commercial and Statistical Department and successors: Outwards Passenger Lists,” BT27 [TNA reference], The National Archives (TNA), Kew, Richmond, Surrey, England. See also images 20 and 32, which are the title and summary pages of the passenger list, for additional sailing details.

Subsequent Note:

“UK, Outward Passenger Lists, 1890-1960,” Ancestry, Passenger List for the Pretoriandeparting Glasgow in March 1920, image 23.