Does everyone understand that sources also need to show their own source?

Question

This isn't so much a question but sort of a "duh, of course" remark about posting sources and citations.  Often on profiles there are sources listed that aren't really sources of value.  A source should help another person looking at the profile to be able to see or at least find the source to aide in the defence of the information.  For example, many profiles have as sources such things listed under sources as the words:

*Records

*Census

*death certificate

*a book

*a library

*on-line

Which are the things that are needed but actually the profile needs which record and where this record is to be found.  Census is a start but which census, what town, maybe the precinct, state, sheet, family, roll, page.  Death certificate is good but where this is to be found and where did the death occur.

If you have an American profile for instance and the person lived from 1850 to 1932 it isn't much help really to just add as a source Census 1850, Census 1860, etc.  because this is already understood that if they lived from 1850 - 1932 of course they are on those censuses (most likely).  Why not also say your ancestor was a human and had two arms and two legs with a face, neck, shoulders to go with it? :D

Think about this as a help guide.  You go to the airport to travel.  The ticket agent asks you, "Do you have a passport?".  You answer, "Yes", and stand there with your arms folded looking about.  You will notice the line not moving because actually what the ticket person meant was "Can I see your passport so I can write down the Identification numbers, thank you very much, please,"

Or another example, the police pull you to the side of the road while you're driving.  The policeman comes to your window and asks, "License, Insurance?".  He's not after just hearing you answer yes.  He's not going to reply, "Oh, I was just wondering, drive on."  I can assure you he will become irate if you just say, "Yes", and don't actually hand over the documents for a physical inspection of said documents.

It's not so different for the sources for the profiles.  It is fine and dandy that your ancestor was on a census in such and such year but your profile wants a little more detail than just that. And since apparently you have seen the census, just try to remember to copy down those specifics so you can add them to your listing of your source to complete the information.  Most of these types of documents have some classification numbers or at least a location.  Books have titles, chapters and pages.  On-line things have URLs.

Thanks!

Comments

100% in agreement Vincent... well said!

(it says "edited by keith hathaway, but i only added tags)

---

Thanks, (I'm not alone, yay!")

---

Move over, Keith - I want to squeeze in here with you and Vincent.  He's going to be the un-lonliest person on the planet after that magnificent discourse, with superb examples to illustrate the cogent points!

---

Vincent, I'm on your side too, that is why I like the way familysearch recommends how to cite the source, it not only provides an online link but most of the time it gives you all of the additional information to find the record offline.

---

Thanks Alison, Gaile, and Dale.  I saw how important it was recently when I tried to look for some records using just the images of the censuses without an index.  That's a very impractical way to look for records and virtually impossible without at least some location and file numbers such as is provided using Family Search.

---

++ Vincent - Add me to your support group.

---

Ditto!!!

---

I like what you say, I would add that sourcing to a pay site is not great as the source cannot be accessed by those coming behind if they do not have the relevant subscription. Thanks

---

J: Sometimes sources are not available on free websites or on the internet at all. They only exist on such sites, the Hamburg Passenger Lists for instance, or in bookform. Would you rather not have those profiles relying on these sources? And the same way books can be accessed through a library so can Ancestry, at least in many US public libraries.

---

...I think the point was that it is best not to just put things like; death record, census, family history, etc....and nothing more and consider the profile sourced.

---

I just spent yesterday cleaning up database errors. Most of the errors were not even mine.  But most of these profiles all used ancestry trees as their source.  So I got my cousin's ancestry log in and went searching. Yes, he trusts me with his log in. None of these tree links worked. Not even the ones that were supposed to link to FAG thru ancestry. Not the first.  So I added family search sources and direct FAG.  You don't know how hard it was for me not to just rip out those bad links. But hey its not my profiles. So for whatever reason ancestry changed the links to make them "Page Not Found" at least when familysearch changed their 1860 format, from index only to  index with images, they kept the same links.  One I did was a Green, who was indexed as Grun and Greer in different census years. And another his first name was Bussell instead of Barzilla. But I found him!!!  Tenacity of a genealogy bloodhound.

So if the information cannot be verified by all, its trash. I don't care how good a genealogist you think you are... its trash.

You can go to a library or familyHistory and order books and film. I can order any book that is in the San Joaquin Library system.  At a familyhistory center I might have to pay for postage.

Yes, I use online sources that I trust.  Such as the Jester-L from rootsweb. Because I have worked with most of the members there since before the internet caught on. Now on the list,some of the stuff may not be actually sourced properly, but if Pat Friesen said she went to SLC and got a copy of a will in Book # page #. Its golden. If Pat just said she got it from DE. I would trust her. I don't know what book I found the index to wills kept in the NC Historical Commission, page number or anything else, but I sent off for those wills to the NCHC with a check for both telling them what I wanted and where, I got the wills back with a polite little note that said, "Next time please order 1 item per request." The wills are posted on their profiles. 1979 to today is a long time to try to remember where I got them. I just remember that they were in NCHC. We all make mistakes, mostly misinterpreting what we have and jumping to conclusions. AND those mistakes are very hard to correct.

---

I don't regard Ancestry as a valid source. If I click on an ancestry link, used as a source, it goes straight to the 'Gimme Your Money' page. A source should be viewable so that it can be verified, not just a link to a site that wants you to pay.

---

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Stols-53

That's an example of what I mean.

---

I think it behooves us to distinguish between what is an actual source and what is an Ancestry tree. There are some sources that are only available on Ancestry, the Hamburg Passenger Lists for instance, that in some cases are crucial to establish the identity of immigrants. I recently had a case of an immigrant that was tantalizingly close to be connected to a person from the old country. What clinched it was the listing of his place of origin in the Hamburg Passenger Lists and the name of his father in another document only available on Ancestry. Since those are not valid sources according to David I should have probably created a duplicate profile?

---

Vincent, I'm aware that this recent thread is somewhat hijacking your original concern and it should probably be closed here and moved to a separate question.

---

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Klabouch-152

This is a profile to which you've just contributed.  The source looks fine and there's even a link to the image.  But what happens in many cases on such a profile by someone that doesn't know better, they will just put something like Church Record and nothing more.  Or like what I think David was mentioning, they just put a link to the Ancestry.com subscription page and nothing more.

The question was really just to remind beginners about doing that and not for a seasoned Wikitreer like yourself.

---

I have been working recently on a family branch between about 1750 - 1850 in Lithuania.  Every time I write something in a bio, the question "how do I know?" has become my mantra and I want to be able to give the most unimpeachably accurate answer I can as my source.

Most of the official records I can find are at the Litvak SIG of jewishgen.org.  Membership is required to see transcripts of these records plus the website architecture does not include search criteria in the URL - I can only link to the search page itself.  Even though it is free, I list all the information in the records as part of the citation for those who are not members or to make it easier for people to know what to put in the search criteria if they want to see it there.  An example of what I have been doing is https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Sokhen-3

I am not happy with my end result on these profiles - it seems like the Notes section is much longer than the Biography for most of them.  I find myself saying "probably", "likely", even "maybe" a lot and also include records for other people who might easily be confused with this person.  I also use links to history lessons as excuses for why I don't have better sources.  I include online family trees where I have nothing else, as well as to point out differences (errors) that are out there.  When I do this, I always add the statement "A more reliable source for this information is required" to the citation.

Answer 1

Well put Vincent!

Answer 2

Very well said, VIncent. To add to that, sometimes a a family record is the only source we have, a collection of ephemera that no one else could find (things like my Mom's baptism certificate), When that happens, I include the source of the source as follows:

Mom's name, 31 Oct 1947, Baptismal Certificate, XYZZ Church, Someplace, original; Surname Family File. Privately held by [[McGee-1611|Debi McGee Hoag]], [http://www.wikitree.com/index.php?title=Special:PrivateMessage&who=11233188&ref=12638044 WikiMail]. Leesburg, Florida.

The link is the URL to send me a private message. I got it by right clicking on the "send private message" link on my profile and selecting "copy URL" from the menu. On the profile, all the reader sees is WikiMail as a link.