Birth Certificate, Source of Source Draft

By wayneson on Sun, 01/15/2023 - 08:26

Forums

Dear EE,

By way of confirming my grasp of Ancestry's method of source information, I would appreciate a critique of this citation draft (and no, I don't intend to run all my future drafts by you, lol);

“Pennsylvania, U.S., Birth Certificates, 1906-1913”, series 11.89, database with images, Ancestry (https://www.ancestry.com/discoveryui-content/view/35270888:60484 : accessed 26 Dec 2022), born alive, Wayne Ray Knowlton: Dec. 24, 1913, Tioga County, Delmar Township (penned), image of file no. 207434 (stamped) of the Pennsylvania Department of Health, Record Group 11, reposited at Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Box Number: 596.

Train of thought::

  1. The only stand-alone publication involved here is the database at Ancestry - therefore the citation is single-layered.
  2. I need to accommodate master source list entry
  3. I may be excused for not chasing down original source.
  4. I have perceived the identities of the collection history correctly.
  5. Final element might be serving as "repository" insertion - even though world wide web is repository for what I'm using.

Thoughts of the train??

wayneson

Submitted byEEon Sun, 01/15/2023 - 10:56

Wayneson, have you used EE 9.41 Vital Registrations: State-Level certificates?  The examples at 9.41 illustrate the essential elements to include.

You state:

2. I need to accommodate master source list entry.

That’s understood. No problem. You also state:

1. The only stand-alone publication involved here is the database at Ancestry - therefore the citation is single-layered.

Here, we have a couple of problems.

  1. The database is not a standalone publication. The website is a standalone publication. The database is not. It’s one entity within that website, just as a chapter is an entity within a book and an article is one item within a journal.  We cannot access that database independent of the website. We cannot access a chapter independent of a book. Etc.  Because we cannot access a database independent of the website, it is by definition not a "standalone" entity.

B.    All the data you are presenting cannot be stuffed into one layer.  Yes, in order to use the database as the master source, you can stuff all the essentials about the image into the field for “specific item” at that field.

However, your citation then adds “of the Pennsylvania Department of Health, Record Group 11, reposited at Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Box Number: 596.”  

All of this is source-of-your-source information. If you add it, it goes into a second layer. It is not part of the birth certificate. It is not information that you see on that birth certificate image.  It’s also not clear where you obtained most of this information because Ancestry does not display it on the image and Ancestey does not add it to the database entry that it created for the certificate.

Your suggested citation is this:

“Pennsylvania, U.S., Birth Certificates, 1906-1913”, series 11.89, database with images, Ancestry (https://www.ancestry.com/discoveryui-content/view/35270888:60484 : accessed 26 Dec 2022), born alive, Wayne Ray Knowlton: Dec. 24, 1913, Tioga County, Delmar Township (penned), image of file no. 207434 (stamped) of the Pennsylvania Department of Health, Record Group 11, reposited at Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Box Number: 596.

EE’s citation would be this:

“Pennsylvania, U.S., Birth Certificates, 1906–1913,” database with images, Ancestry (https://www.ancestry.com/discoveryui-content/view/35270888:60484 : accessed 26 Dec. 2022), Wayne Ray Knowlton, b. 24 Dec. 1913, Tioga County registration no. 3337, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania file 20734; citing “Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission.”

To explain the differences:

  1. Between the name of the database and the name of the website, you have inserted the descriptor “series 11.89, database with images.” However, Ancestry’s database has no “series 11.89.”  In our descriptive words that tell the reader “Pennsylvania, U.S., Birth Certificates, 1906–1913” is a database rather than (say) an essay, we should not inject any element that deals with the original record. All details about the database are kept together. All details about the original document are kept together. (See Source Citations & the Velcro Principle.)
  2. The statement “born alive” is not essential. That is a default status for birth certificates.  
  3. “Penned” and “stamped” are irrelevant. Those are terms that are often needed for census records that have double or triple numbering schemes, with some numbers penned and some stamped. In those cases, whatever numbering scheme we use, we need to identify it.
  4. If we cite an exact date from a birth certificate, we need to say what that date represents—given that it could represent either the date of birth or the date of registration.
  5. Delmar Township is not an essential part of the citation. It is not required to locate the document. The county ID is essential.
  6. “Image of” is redundant. You’ve already said you are using a database with images.
  7. For the source-of-the-source layer, EE would cite exactly (and only) what Ancestry itself cites: Ancestry does not give the other details that you have included.  (Also note that the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission is the administrative body that operates the Pennsylvania State Archives.  The records would be housed at the archives, not at the Commission. This is the same situation that exists with, say, the National Archives that is administered by an agency called the National Archives and Records Administration. We do not say we have used a document at "the National Archives and Records Administration."

Hope this helps.

My reference to the database as a standalone publication was inadvertent albeit careless.
All my other "infractions" are born of sloppy study:

  1. My presumption that a single publication citation is always a single-layer citation is just wrong.
  2. I think I understand the "velcro" rule but let it fade away when faced with Ancestry's superfluous source information presentation. I erroneously felt compelled to include everything carefully.
  3. The "penned" and "stamped" qualification is hopefully a lesson learned.
  4. I am left to wonder if "Wayne Ray Knowlton, b. 24 Dec 1913, Tioga County registration no. 3337", is wording that works to distinguish birth date from registration date in most cases.
  5. I'm puzzled by "Ancestry does not give the other details that you have included." Does this refer to the data table exclusively? Everything in my citation was obtained from the Ancestry "Source Citation/Information".
  6. The distinction between admin. body and archive location is duly noted. Am I correct in observing that the administrative body, however, is properly an object for "citing"?

I'll be taking this guidance to heart. Thanks again!

Submitted byEEon Tue, 01/17/2023 - 09:24

Hello, Wayneson:

1. Yes, a single source can require a two-layer citation when we need to cite "the source of our source."

2. Been there. Done that!

3. Ditto.

4. If you obtain the record from the local registration office, that usually would suffice. But when we use a state-issued certificate, we also need to cite the state number. Conversely, if we're citing the state-issued certificate, saying that it was "Tioga County reg. no. 3337" instead of just saying "Tioga County" is not actually essential; but it's a benefit if we (or readers of our notes) want to seek the county-level copy for comparison.

5. Can you supply a screen-shot showing where you found this at Ancestry. It was not there for me. That said, Ancestry's database has been acting wonky the past several days. 

6. When the administrative body is the author/creator, then they are cited as such. When we cite the location at which records are housed, we cite the archive.