before i do more like this can someone rate how i did these sources? [closed]

Question

before i do more like this can someone rate how i did these sources for Brice Howard?  in particular i am curious if it is OK to make a titled section "Mentions" that has sources where he is just mention in some way (not the principal person of the source).

Comments

I would use the heading “See also.”

---

The sources should support the specific facts in the narrative.

The “mentions” are sources for facts of the children who are not mentioned in the profile, thus of little relevance to the profile as written.

---

They're not irrelevant, just unexplained.

---

should i remove them?  i included them because i figured they would be extra starting points for anyone doing research from there.  i originally saw them as not supporting that profile but thought there might still be some uses, hence the subgroup "Mentions".

all my profiles of non-living should be unlocked, now.

---

I say no, don't remove them.  Add a little text naming the children, then they will be explained as well as relevant.

---

This was my point, perhaps too ambiguously stated, improve the narrative, ie, add the children, and then “mentions” become relevant sources.

---

I want to express a giant Thank You to all you generous WikiTreers who stepped up to help Phil improve his work.

---

i will be adding the children.  but this is one of the people that will need a lot of research.  my first attempt before i learned i needed to check everything very carefully (and not to blindly trust other Ancestry user trees) listed him with 3 wives (and a possible 4th) and 36 children after the obvious duplicates are skipped.  a record for one person that references him as the father doesn't give me an accurate list, either.  this will take time.  i want to get it as accurate as the available sources can represent.  he was my grandfather's grandfather.  but he died (1892) before my grandfather was born (1901) so i'm not surprised i didn't hear anything about him.

Answer 1

I don't see anything wrong with "Mentions" although "See also" could be an alternative.

I made a minor change to conform the format of the first source to the others.  

In general, you seem to have lots of sources, and obviously have not chosen to use the in-line method, but I encourage you to write a narrative (biography) so that readers do not have to read through all the sources to understand the person's life.

Comments

See also is the WT recommended heading (not a header):

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Biographies#Proper_order

---

i don't know about the in-line method, yet.  got a good example?  or am i getting ahead of myself?

---

It isn't hard.  The easiest way to explain it is for me to do a quick one for you.

So I did.  You can view it in edit mode and see that I enclosed the source between the reference tags <ref> and </ref>.  If you don't like it, you can change it back.  Many WikiTreers, like myself, prefer this method because it associates each fact in the narrative with its source, so people don't have to go hunting through the sources for information.

---

P.S.  Phil, I don't know if anyone else cares about this, but I like all my sources to be consistently indented (or not).  The in-line references are automatically indented.  To get your other sources to line up with that, you can type an asterisk before each one, and it will turn into an indented bullet point on the source list.  I'll do one to show you.  Again, if you don't like it, you can always remove it.

---

i need to become experienced with how the sources get formatted and what results are expected.

---

Here are some examples of what the Profile Improvement Project considers nice profiles:

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Examples

Of course, those are often more elaborate than most of us would (or could) do most of the time.

Answer 2

Hi Phil,

Looks like you are off to a good start.

The recommended approach is to use headings that help sort information on the profile, so "Mentions" fits that recommendation. I would probably group the census data under a heading as well and place that grouping above the source heading, but plenty of people leave them below. As long as the items below are not bracketed as footnoted references - those will not show up unless placed above the sources heading. Here's a simple guideline page and a link to a couple profiles that might help you envision ...

*Biographies How-To : 
*This example uses bullet points Profile: Willie Dee Crews 
*This one uses footnoted references Profile: Matthew Arbuthnot. 

The styles can be mixed also, your preference. 

Thanks for adding your line to Wiki tree!

Cheers.