Should we identify from where a source was obtained?

+3 votes

I was recently presented with the following:

  • When you have your sources straight, just make one citation including the link like I have done on this bio I wrote a couple of days ago. The narrative is much easier to read this way.

In looking at the citations, I see that many are from Swedish or Finnish church books and these are linked to actual images of the correct page.  The problem is that some come from the Swedish National Cite (SVAR) and others from the Finnish National Archives (FNA).  These are both free cites but there is no direct information as to how to connect wiyh them or to learn more about using them in ones research.  The problem is worse when we expand our cites to ArkivDigital (AD with a paywall) and Finnish Family History Association (SSHY mostly free, sometimes with a paywall)

Should we be identifying where the citation came from or is something like


WikiTree profile: Johan Petter Bucht
in The Tree House by Norm Lindquist G2G6 Mach 6 (62.2k points)

1 Answer

+6 votes
Best answer
If following the recommended citation form (Chicago Manual of Style as described in Evidence Explained) you fully describe the source AND the repository in which you found it. The repository makes it easy to find where you found it but the rest of the citation would make it possible to find it somewhere else in the case where records are kept in multiple places. A full citation will give the details of the record (book, page, name of person/persons that the record is being cited for. There are examples in the Help page for Sources.
by Doug McCallum G2G6 Pilot (448k points)
selected by Norm Lindquist

Related questions

+19 votes
1 answer
0 votes
5 answers
+2 votes
1 answer
+1 vote
1 answer
+5 votes
1 answer
155 views asked May 31, 2016 in Genealogy Help by Robert Hvitfeldt G2G6 Pilot (147k points)

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright