City directory as online images ?

By Anonymous on Sun, 10/28/2012 - 15:59

Forums

I have recently discovered some of my ancestors in old city directories!

 

One was in the 1890 Chicago directory, which I found on microfilm at the Library (not online).  It seemed easy to build that citation following 12.55 (though I now realize I should've copied more information off the BOX the film was in).

 

Now I am looking at the 1907 and 1908 Detroit directories.  More specifically, I found two images on Ancestry for one of my ancestors in each of those two years.

 

There is not a section in EE for "digital images" or "online images" for city directories!  My Legacy software template for "Directories" "online images" sort of gives the following:

 

U.S. City Directories, 1821-1989 (Beta), Detroit, Michigan, City Directory, 1907: 803; digital images, Ancestry.com (www.ancestry.com : accessed 10 Oct 2012); Nancy C Clough.

Is that close?  Somehow I want to put the title of the Ancestry database in quotes, rather than italics.  Or should the "Detroit, Michigan, City Directory, 1907" be at the end after  "; citing" ??

 

EE suggests following Basic Format: Books (12.3) but that felt weird, and it didn't have anything about online images either.

 

Maybe it's just because it's the weekend, but I'm not seeing this one clearly.

Thanks,

--Paula

 

 

Submitted byEEon Sun, 10/28/2012 - 17:13

Paula, three thoughts:

1. You wrote: "I now realize I should've copied more information off the BOX the film was in." EE would strongly urge that we not take our info from the box in which film appears. Storage boxes, if they have any label at all, are likely to have a generic one. Published microfilm, like published books, typically have "title" pages that give us the fullest and most-accurate details.

2. You're right. EE doesn't have a model for every type of every type of record in every type of media format. If it did, it would likely be the size of the OED! However, the Ancestry QuickSheet has examples for citing a city directory found at Ancestry. In fact, that QuickSheet offers patterns that will cover every type of offering Ancestry currently has (including those much maligned family trees :).

3. Remember the point we frequently discuss here (and in EE): a citation to images at a website is a multi-layered citation.

  • First we cite the material that has been imaged (if it's a census, we cite it as a census; if we have images of a book, we cite it as a book; if it's a book that's reprinted in a larger microfilm publication, then we cite it as a reprint as per EE 12.55; etc.);
  • next we cite the website that provides it;
  • then we cite the source of our source (if, indeed, our source provides that data).

Knowing how deeply you think about these issues, Paula, I think you'll figure out for yourself out to revise the citation above.

I don't own the Ancesty QuickSheet yet, but will within the week!

Having just run into the same question as Paula this evening, I studied my copy of EE to puzzle this one out. Here's what I came up with. All feedback is welcome.

C. E. Howe, Boyd's Philadelphia Combined City and Business Directory, (Philadelphia: C. E. Howe Addressing and Printing Co., 1921), 1104; digital images, "City Directories for Philadelphia, Pennsylvania," Fold3 (http://www.fold3.com/ : accessed 31 October 2012), entry for Katherine Suplik.

I question whether to use Katherine Suplik or Suplik Katherine to note the entry. After all, city directories of the era generally do list surname followed by given name (or abbreviation) with no comma separating the names.

Thank you,

Submitted byEEon Thu, 11/01/2012 - 12:49

Great job, Jean.  EE will add just one nitpick and then a thought.

1. If you have followed EE's Facebook page for a while, you may have already seen a "Sunday Sin against Punctuation" that addresses that comma before the open-parentheses on line 1 of your citation. Commas go after parentheses, but not before. (Reason: The purpose of a parenthetical statement is to further explain what has just been presented. The parenthetical statement should stay attached to what went before, but a comma's purpose is to splice things.)

2. If you prefer to copy the text exactly from the city directory (something it's often wise to do), then you should put quotation marks around whatever words/names you copy exactly. If you aren't quoting, then you would rend the name in natural order.

Submitted bynewonashon Fri, 11/23/2012 - 13:12

A. I have a question about Jean's suggested citation.

It's not clear to me whether the online database title should be included, as Jean has done, or not.  As I read EE 2.33, the database title ("City Directories for Philadelphia, Pennsylvania") should be included, but I am also looking at the city directories: images model in the "Citing Ancestry.com Databases & Images" Quicksheet, which does not include the database, "U.S. City Directories, 1821-1989 (Beta)," in the reference citation to the 1916 Polk city directory for New York City.

B. Since I have referred to that specific Quicksheet model, I have two other questions specifically related to it.

1. The title of the directory begins:  "R. L. Polk & Co.'s Trow General Directory of New York City Embracing the Boroughs of Manhattan and the Bronx, 1916: Containing a Thorough Alphabetical List of Business Firms and Private Citizens" (going on for anothe 80 words!).  The model source list and reference notes only have "R. L. Polk & Co.'s Trow General Directory of New York City."  Since the directory apparently only covers part of New York City, wouldn't it be important to indicate that in the citation?  Part of my thinking behind that question is based on the "Shortening a Directory Title" paragraph at EE 12.56.  I'm also thinking that "Embracing the Boroughs of Manhattan and the Bronx, 1916," is part of the title, rather than a subtitle (and that is why I haven't added a semi-colon before the word "Embracing," as I did before the word, "Containing"), and therefore is a natural breaking point for shortening the title.

2. No author is given in the Quicksheet model.  Is that because (1) it would be redundant because the compiler's name, the beginning of the title, and the publisher's name are all the same, or (2) because no express compiler/author name is given on the title page?

Dennis

Submitted byEEon Sun, 11/25/2012 - 16:17

Dennis,

Given that Jean is citing the images of the actual directory, rather than Fold3's database entry, including the name of Fold3's database in the second layer of her multilayered citation is an option, not a necessity. If she chooses to do so, there's no harm done. If she chooses not to, the directory is still locatable at the website and URL she has cited.

In response to your two numbered questions:

1. When dealing with inordinately long titles, we make case-by-case decisions based on a number of factors. EE 12.56, as you note, discusses some of those factors—as does EE 2.43-45, 3.29, 12.21, 12.59, 13.13, and 14.98.  However, the QuickSheet is just that: a quick guide to basic types. In 4 pages, it cannot develop all the issues that EE's 885 pages can cover. The Polk example on the QuickSheet shows the basic format for citing images of city directories at Ancestry. For all the nuances that are involved in the 20 different record types covered on that QuickSheet, researchers do need to study the larger guidebook, as you are doing.

2. Yes, to cite this source as R. L. Polk, R. L. Polk & Co.'s 1916 Trow General Directory of New York City... would have been redundant.

Submitted bystoneon Mon, 04/06/2015 - 17:13

I know this is an old thread, but I believe in searching for answers before asking them and this thread seems most on point for my question.

In the example above, should the words "entry for Katherine Suplik" appear with the first part of the citation (referring to the actual book) or the second part (referring to the Fold3 digital image)?

 

Example A:

C. E. Howe, Boyd's Philadelphia Combined City and Business Directory (Philadelphia: C. E. Howe Addressing and Printing Co., 1921), 1104, entry for Katherine Suplik; digital images, "City Directories for Philadelphia, Pennsylvania," Fold3 (http://www.fold3.com/ : accessed 31 October 2012).

Example B:

C. E. Howe, Boyd's Philadelphia Combined City and Business Directory (Philadelphia: C. E. Howe Addressing and Printing Co., 1921), 1104; digital images, "City Directories for Philadelphia, Pennsylvania," Fold3 (http://www.fold3.com/ : accessed 31 October 2012), entry for Katherine Suplik.

 

Underlines added only for emphasis.

 

Is one way better than the other?

    - Brad

Submitted byEEon Mon, 04/06/2015 - 21:11

Brad, if you are citing the original directory's entry for Katherine Suplik, then you would include it in Layer 1 of the citation: the layer that identifies and describes the book and its content.

If you were citing Fold3's database entry for Katherine Suplik, then you'd include that reference in Layer 2, where Fold 3 is treated.