Does a published genealogy book from a family member count as a source?

Question

A family member published a genealogy for my wife's family. It shows relationships but little else, no birth or death rates. They were from a rural part of Mexico with poor records. I have an ancestry tree with them and I get very few hints or records. I thought it may be good to put it on wikitree so there is some record of this lineage but I know the site doesn't like unsourced profiles. Let me know what I should do, thanks.

Answer 1

I suggest that you cite it as a source. In the citation, include the publication details so others might be able to find a copy, and indicate that the genealogy does not cite its sources. It's not a high-quality source, but pedigrees like the one you describe often are based (at least in part) on firsthand memories and records such as family bibles, so they can have valid information that may not be available anywhere else -- and they are usually a good place to start.

Clearly indicate which facts in the profiles came from this publication. After that, try to find records that support your information -- and if you find contradictory information, document the contradictions, and be prepared to reject some of your family member's information.

Comments

When unsourced information is the best I can find, I always append the following statement at the end of the citation, in italics:

A better source for this information is required.

To properly credit *my* source for that statement, it was given to me by Jillaine Smith when I was brand new to genealogy.

Answer 2

I have done a lot of search in Mexico.Give me a name Date birth or

baptism date,Village an County in Mexico.Need there full name,which

includes there mother and fathers last names,who they married.all that you

know abt them.Mexico has excellent church reecords bach too 1700 s .

Comments

This is true.  Mexico does have good records in some places.

Answer 3

yes and no,

In many cases it would count as a secondary source. and some times I would say no, the reason I personally say no, is because I feel it lacks things, that is needed to prove the facts. in my humble thoughts you could put it as one, but I would add a little detail so if people challenge you. You can explain why you feel it is a good source to have as part of your documentataion.

Answer 4

Without source citations it is useful only as hints. Without dates, it can give hints to relationships but you do need to do the basic research. As Wayne Morgan said, there are lots of good church records and those can be quite good for finding birth/marriage/death (actually baptism/marriage/burial) and relationships. I haven't used Mexican church records, but if they are only half as good as the French Canadian ones you will be able to document back quite a ways.

You need to know where the families were and wade through the church records. You can find these on FamilySearch by searching for the location in the "Catalog" rather than in records. If you know the church, so much the better.

Answer 5

Hi Keith, Sources are a little different on WikiTree than on other websites. 

"A source is the identification of where you obtained information.

Sources are critically important for genealogy. Some even say that genealogy without sources is mythology.^[1]

You must include your sources when you put information on WikiTree. It's in our Honor Code."

If the names and connections seem to make sense, then include them on WikiTree with the family book as your source.  I don't know how you can estimate a bunch of birthdates, however.  I would guess that if a profile has no birth or death date, it will appear as possibly living with an Unlisted privacy.  I don't think that would not be particularly useful in this case.  So, I would say skip it unless you have a death date to go by.