Quantcast

Yet another citation question

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Yet another citation question

Dave Hamilton

I am looking to find a solution as to how to handle a particular aspect of source citation that is a level of granularity below what I think citations currently handle.

 

When looking at an item of data I believe the ‘Repository’ is where I found it and the ‘Source’ is the object I looked at to find the data item.

 

So, for example, a marriage event might have had its details supplied by a scanned copy of a page from a parish register and provided online by Ancestry.com. For me the repository is ‘Ancestry.com’ and the source is ‘Parish Marriage Register 1871 Page 47 entry 206’ or whatever. The online location of that scanned entry is recorded as a note against the source with the type of ‘URL’ plus another note with the type of ‘Accessed’ holding the date I found it.

 

Where Ancestry got the item from I don’t really care but if they provide a reference I will record this as another note against the source with the type of ‘Citation’.

 

Now to the citation which I believe is a means of resolving the many-to-many relationship between sources and objects (event, person, family, etc) and that’s fine except it applies to all data in the source. In the example case I am happy the citation provides a level of confidence to the marriage date, the names of the participants, the location and so on. However, if the groom has a stated age or date of birth I feel this is less reliable than a birth certificate but I don’t seem to have the means of showing which data items I feel are better supported by a source than others. Mind you the marriage details may be perfectly OK until I track down the birth certificate but not after.

 

Sorry about the waffle but has anyone a suggestion as to how to handle the situation?

 

Dave


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Yet another citation question

Ron Johnson
On 02/25/2017 08:39 PM, Dave Hamilton wrote:

I am looking to find a solution as to how to handle a particular aspect of source citation that is a level of granularity below what I think citations currently handle.

 

When looking at an item of data I believe the ‘Repository’ is where I found it and the ‘Source’ is the object I looked at to find the data item.


No.  Repository is where the data comes from, and the Source is the "next layer down".

 So, for example, a marriage event might have had its details supplied by a scanned copy of a page from a parish register and provided online by Ancestry.com. For me the repository is ‘Ancestry.com’ and the source is ‘Parish Marriage Register 1871 Page 47 entry 206’ or whatever. The online location of that scanned entry is recorded as a note against the source with the type of ‘URL’ plus another note with the type of ‘Accessed’ holding the date I found it.


I don't use Repositories, so I'd do:
Source: Snagglefrob, Frobshire, England Parish Marriage Register
Citation: Year 1871 Page 47 entry 206

If I were to use Repositories, then I'd do this:
Repository: Snagglefrob, Frobshire, England Parish
Source: Marriage Register
Citation: Year 1871 Page 47 entry 206


 Where Ancestry got the item from I don’t really care but if they provide a reference I will record this as another note against the source with the type of ‘Citation’.


You should, because Ancestry might go away

 

Now to the citation which I believe is a means of resolving the many-to-many relationship between sources and objects (event, person, family, etc) and that’s fine except it applies to all data in the source. In the example case I am happy the citation provides a level of confidence to the marriage date, the names of the participants, the location and so on. However, if the groom has a stated age or date of birth I feel this is less reliable than a birth certificate but I don’t seem to have the means of showing which data items I feel are better supported by a source than others. Mind you the marriage details may be perfectly OK until I track down the birth certificate but not after.

 

Sorry about the waffle but has anyone a suggestion as to how to handle the situation?


Are you asking how to handle the situation where you have high confidence as to the accuracy of one alleged fact in the citation, but low confidence in another alleged fact in the citation?

-- 
World Peace Through Nuclear Pacification

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Yet another citation question

Dave Scheipers
In reply to this post by Dave Hamilton
Hi Dave

I do basically the same thing, but if I have a citation with a URL, I would attach the URL as a note on the citation, not the source record. If you click on the URL, where does it take you? To the Source? or to information contained within the source.

I know others do it differently, they apply a citation to all of the bits of information that it may contain, and gramps makes it easy to do this. But I only add the citation to information specific to the event. While a marriage certificate may contain info on their births, it's not proof so I don't add the citation to the birth record. The extra info from the citation will help point me in the direction to find a birth record, but it doesn't prove the birth. If a groom says he was born on such-and such date, I will put it in the birth record until something proves otherwise. Only then would the birth get a citation.

Unfortunately, in the scenario you put forth, a citation can have only one confidence level. You cannot use the same citation set as extremely high on the marriage and attach the same citation to the birth and set it as low.

Hope this helped, Dave

On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 9:39 PM, Dave Hamilton <[hidden email]> wrote:

I am looking to find a solution as to how to handle a particular aspect of source citation that is a level of granularity below what I think citations currently handle.

 

When looking at an item of data I believe the ‘Repository’ is where I found it and the ‘Source’ is the object I looked at to find the data item.

 

So, for example, a marriage event might have had its details supplied by a scanned copy of a page from a parish register and provided online by Ancestry.com. For me the repository is ‘Ancestry.com’ and the source is ‘Parish Marriage Register 1871 Page 47 entry 206’ or whatever. The online location of that scanned entry is recorded as a note against the source with the type of ‘URL’ plus another note with the type of ‘Accessed’ holding the date I found it.

 

Where Ancestry got the item from I don’t really care but if they provide a reference I will record this as another note against the source with the type of ‘Citation’.

 

Now to the citation which I believe is a means of resolving the many-to-many relationship between sources and objects (event, person, family, etc) and that’s fine except it applies to all data in the source. In the example case I am happy the citation provides a level of confidence to the marriage date, the names of the participants, the location and so on. However, if the groom has a stated age or date of birth I feel this is less reliable than a birth certificate but I don’t seem to have the means of showing which data items I feel are better supported by a source than others. Mind you the marriage details may be perfectly OK until I track down the birth certificate but not after.

 

Sorry about the waffle but has anyone a suggestion as to how to handle the situation?

 

Dave


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Yet another citation question

Ron Johnson
In reply to this post by Dave Hamilton
On 02/25/2017 09:55 PM, Dave Scheipers wrote:
Hi Dave

I do basically the same thing, but if I have a citation with a URL, I would attach the URL as a note on the citation, not the source record. If you click on the URL, where does it take you? To the Source? or to information contained within the source.

I know others do it differently, they apply a citation to all of the bits of information that it may contain, and gramps makes it easy to do this. But I only add the citation to information specific to the event. While a marriage certificate may contain info on their births, it's not proof so I don't add the citation to the birth record.

"Proof" is a pretty elastic concept in genealogy.  Even the data on a birth certificate could be faked.

The extra info from the citation will help point me in the direction to find a birth record, but it doesn't prove the birth. If a groom says he was born on such-and such date, I will put it in the birth record until something proves otherwise. Only then would the birth get a citation.

In six months, you review his Events and wonder to yourself where the hell you pulled that date from.  Better to add the citation and add a note to the Event saying that the marriage certificate's accuracy is suspect.

-- 
World Peace Through Nuclear Pacification

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Yet another citation question

Dave Scheipers
Hi Ron,

Yes, PROOF may be the wrong terminology. The only thing a marriage certificate really 'proves' is that one person married another person on this date in this location. It never really proves that the people involved are actually the people we're trying to connect.

I view genealogy as putting together a big puzzle and what we're doing is trying to find pieces that fit together. Whenever I go back to a corner of the puzzle, the first thing I do is examine all the pieces around it to try to locate that next piece. The marriage citation is still there saying the birth piece should look something like this, etc, etc.

I've got family members that were researched by genealogist from the 1800's. I make the citation on the person record. I don't then cite the birth, death, marriage, kids, education, and all the other bits that may be alluded to. Once is enough. It's just another piece to the puzzle.

I cite an event when the citation makes a direct reference to that event. That piece of the puzzle. I don't need a birth record with 15 citations when only one or two of them actually say this person was born on this date at this location.

Again, this is just how I do it. Hopefully I made it clear that others do it differently.

Dave

On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 11:10 PM, Ron Johnson <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 02/25/2017 09:55 PM, Dave Scheipers wrote:
Hi Dave

I do basically the same thing, but if I have a citation with a URL, I would attach the URL as a note on the citation, not the source record. If you click on the URL, where does it take you? To the Source? or to information contained within the source.

I know others do it differently, they apply a citation to all of the bits of information that it may contain, and gramps makes it easy to do this. But I only add the citation to information specific to the event. While a marriage certificate may contain info on their births, it's not proof so I don't add the citation to the birth record.

"Proof" is a pretty elastic concept in genealogy.  Even the data on a birth certificate could be faked.

The extra info from the citation will help point me in the direction to find a birth record, but it doesn't prove the birth. If a groom says he was born on such-and such date, I will put it in the birth record until something proves otherwise. Only then would the birth get a citation.

In six months, you review his Events and wonder to yourself where the hell you pulled that date from.  Better to add the citation and add a note to the Event saying that the marriage certificate's accuracy is suspect.

-- 
World Peace Through Nuclear Pacification

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Yet another citation question

Dave Hamilton

Thanks Dave and Ron for your comments. They have certainly clarified things for me and I can now improve my processes.

 

Dave

 

On Sunday, 26 February 2017 11:50 PM Dave Scheipers wrote:

Hi Ron,

 

Yes, PROOF may be the wrong terminology. The only thing a marriage certificate really 'proves' is that one person married another person on this date in this location. It never really proves that the people involved are actually the people we're trying to connect.

 

I view genealogy as putting together a big puzzle and what we're doing is trying to find pieces that fit together. Whenever I go back to a corner of the puzzle, the first thing I do is examine all the pieces around it to try to locate that next piece. The marriage citation is still there saying the birth piece should look something like this, etc, etc.

 

I've got family members that were researched by genealogist from the 1800's. I make the citation on the person record. I don't then cite the birth, death, marriage, kids, education, and all the other bits that may be alluded to. Once is enough. It's just another piece to the puzzle.

 

I cite an event when the citation makes a direct reference to that event. That piece of the puzzle. I don't need a birth record with 15 citations when only one or two of them actually say this person was born on this date at this location.

 

Again, this is just how I do it. Hopefully I made it clear that others do it differently.

 

Dave

 

On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 11:10 PM, Ron Johnson <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 02/25/2017 09:55 PM, Dave Scheipers wrote:

Hi Dave

 

I do basically the same thing, but if I have a citation with a URL, I would attach the URL as a note on the citation, not the source record. If you click on the URL, where does it take you? To the Source? or to information contained within the source.

 

I know others do it differently, they apply a citation to all of the bits of information that it may contain, and gramps makes it easy to do this. But I only add the citation to information specific to the event. While a marriage certificate may contain info on their births, it's not proof so I don't add the citation to the birth record.


"Proof" is a pretty elastic concept in genealogy.  Even the data on a birth certificate could be faked.


The extra info from the citation will help point me in the direction to find a birth record, but it doesn't prove the birth. If a groom says he was born on such-and such date, I will put it in the birth record until something proves otherwise. Only then would the birth get a citation.


In six months, you review his Events and wonder to yourself where the hell you pulled that date from.  Better to add the citation and add a note to the Event saying that the marriage certificate's accuracy is suspect.


-- 
World Peace Through Nuclear Pacification


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org

 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Yet another citation question

Agnes Charrel-Berthillier
In reply to this post by Dave Scheipers
On 2/26/17 5:50 AM, Dave Scheipers wrote:
>
> I cite an event when the citation makes a direct reference to that
> event. That piece of the puzzle. I don't need a birth record with 15
> citations when only one or two of them actually say this person was born
> on this date at this location.

When I started out I did not handle sources well. I have been trying to
clean up ever since, and might be erring in the other direction. But
right now I try hard to find what I consider high reliability sources on
a given event (marriage record for a marriage, birth record for a
birth...) but will attach lower reliability citations to the event as I
find them, especially if they contradict each other. This helps me keep
track of what I know.

When/if I do find what I consider a high reliability source I will cite
it, but keep the path that led me there.

If only to give due credit to people who researched the same
information, or who indexed large swathes of data for other researchers.

It would be *much* easier to do this if Gramps had the reliability field
for a citation set on the reference to the citation rather than the
citation.


Agnes



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Yet another citation question

Gil da Costa
On 27/02/2017 02:06, Agnes Charrel-Berthillier wrote:
> It would be *much* easier to do this if Gramps had the reliability field
> for a citation set on the reference to the citation rather than the
> citation.
I strongly agree!
It was possible with Gramps 3.
I usually gave a low reliability to some parts of the citation when it
was difficult to read (ambiguous), while the rest of the citation had
normal reliability.
Migration to Gramps 4 and merging of citations created two different
citations: one with normal reliability, the other one with low reliability.

I consider it as a regression.

G.Da Costa

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Loading...