Cynthia -- Assuming that Bill Jones is the author of the material being cited (webmaster is irrelevant) and that this is a reference note: Bill Jones, "The Ancestry of Jesse James," *James History and Family* (www.yzzx.urp : viewed 30 February 2015). Depending on the relevance, you might then add any helpful comments for those trying assess the credibility of the material, such as "The page appears untouched since its 2003 copyright, so it may be accurate in its statements about earlier events, even though it does not mention Mr. James's 2010 exhumation." Hope this helps! Harold Harold Henderson, CG midwestroots.net *Finding Ancestors in Fort Wayne: The Genealogist's Unofficial One-Stop Guide to the Allen County Public Library Genealogy Center * http://www.midwestroots.net/ <http://www.midwestroots.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/ACPLGC-April-2013.pdf> Certified Genealogist (SM) No. 1029 Certified Genealogist and CG are proprietary service marks of the Board for Certification of Genealogists® used by the Board to identify its program of genealogical competency evaluation and used under license by the Board’s associates. On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 1:51 PM, Cynthia Swope via < [email protected]> wrote: > Is this the proper format for a website managed by the author showing > publication 2003, untouched since being placed on web? > > The hypothetical author/ webmaster is Bill Jones--the publishing portion > is the one i'm having trouble with > The first is what came in 'Citation Machine' utilizing MLA > ( > http://old.citationmachine.net/index2.php?reqstyleid=1&mode=form&reqsrcid=MLAWebDocument > ), > but unless giving a month and day the year doesn't show. So I added > 'n.d.' before year. > > Which if either is most correct or the form others use? > > 1) Jones, Bill, "Webpage", Website (in italics), Bill Jones, n.d. 2003. > Web. 18 March 2015, URL to page (which site mentions optional) > > I had had it: > 2) Jones, Bill, "webpage", Website (in italics), Web: Bill Jones, n.d. > 2003 (URL; date accessed). > > Thanks for your opinions, > Cynthia > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Today is the deadline for the early bird special pricing for the Ohio Genealogical Society conference to be held April 9 to 11 in Columbus, Ohio. Please see http://www.ogs.org/conference2015/index.php for the conference brochure and to be able to register online. Come and enjoy time in Ohio's capital city! Keynote speaker is Judy Russell, J.D., CG, CGL. The Great Lakes Chapter of APG will be conducting consultations during the conference. Many door prizes and vendors will be present. Pre-conference workshops include "Getting the Most from Ancestry.com," "Caring for Keepsakes: Preserving the Top 10 Family Treasures," "Oral Tradition: Seeking, Analyzing, and Proving," and "This Land is Your Land: A U.S. Land Platting Workshop." Also on April 8 are Ohio Statehouse Tours and tours of the Ohio History Center and Columbus Metropolitan Library. Save yourself money better spent in the exhibit hall by registering today! --Elissa OGS 2015 Exhibits Chair Elissa Scalise Powell, CG , CGL <http://www.powellgenealogy.com/> www.PowellGenealogy.com <http://www.gripitt.org/> www.GRIPitt.org 28 June-3 July 2015 and 19-24 July 2015 in Pittsburgh, PA CG, Certified Genealogist, CGL, and Certified Genealogical Lecturer are service marks of the Board for Certification of Genealogists, used under license by board certificants after periodic evaluations. The board name is a trademark registered in the US Patent and Trademark Office.

I thought many of you on this list might be interested in this free webinar that Paula Stuart-Warren will be giving tonight for APG. The live webinar is free and open to the public. If you know anyone interested in a possible career in genealogy (this includes not only client work, but also writing, lecturing, genealogical librarian, and other genealogy-related careers), please pass this on to them as well! "Are You Ready to Be a Professional Genealogist?" Tuesday, 17 March 2015 at 9:00 PM EDT with Paula Stuart-Warren, CG https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/477982617 Many people who have worked on their own family history research consider this profession. However, we need the necessary areas of skill, experience, and understanding before presenting ourselves as a professional in this field. I like to offer realistic encouragement to those considering working part-time or full-time in this occupation. During this webinar we will cover some readiness questions, learn about ways to improve our skills and knowledge, and learn to honestly judge our readiness. How do you think you will do in the readiness questions? While directed mainly at those interested in doing research for clients, most of these principles also apply to those who are writers, editors, lecturers, heir searchers, or genealogical reference librarians. This webinar is sponsored by the Association of Professional Genealogists and is part of the ongoing APG Professional Development webinar series. Hope to see some of you there! Kimberly Powell

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 14 March 2015 BCG OFFERS FREE WEBINAR “Elementary, My Dear Watson! Solving Your Genealogy Puzzles with Clues You Already Have” What can a genealogist do when key direct evidence is missing or inadequate? The Board for Certification of Genealogists will present a webinar on this question free to the public at 8pm EDT 17 March 2015. James M. Baker, CG, will offer step-by-step approaches for using inferential and analytic thinking to solve these challenging genealogy problems – including the use of naming patterns, birth/marriage witness data, inheritance data, sibling research, timelines, and family migrations. The board is an independent certifying body and author of the updated 2014 *Genealogy Standards*. Mr. Baker, an active genealogist for the past 15 years, completed the requirements to become a board-certified genealogist in 2011. He specializes in German, Midwest U.S., and early American research. He was an officer of the Sacramento German Genealogy Society (SGGS) and has contributed numerous articles to its quarterly, *Der Blumenbaum*. He also has written articles for the *National Genealogical Society (NGS) Magazine* and the *NGS Quarterly*. He is a member of NGS and SGGS. For the past ten years, he has volunteered at the Sacramento FamilySearch Library. In 2014, he presented ten different webinars at the library which were webcast to other libraries throughout northern California; he also presented a recent webinar for the Southern California Genealogy Jamboree community. He has given more than 100 genealogy presentations during the past three years at local, regional, and national events. Mr. Baker earned a PhD in sociology and social psychology from the University of Utah. He is retired from an aerospace and business management career in which he consulted for many large companies, including AT&T, Boeing, Cessna, Fiat, General Electric, Honeywell, Lockheed-Martin, Magnavox, Raytheon, and Unisys. He has been an adjunct professor of sociology at UCLA and USC. His most fun job was being the "piano-man" at Shakey's Pizza. “We are pleased to offer this informative webinar,” said President Jeanne Larzalere Bloom, CG. “The Board for Certification of Genealogists strives to foster public confidence in genealogy by promoting an attainable, uniform standard of competence and ethics. Educating all family historians is part of this mission.” There is no charge, but space is limited. Please register for James M. Baker, CG, "Elementary, My Dear Watson! Solving Your Genealogy Puzzles with Clues You Already Have," on Mar 17, 2015 8:00 PM EDT (7 CDT, 6 MDT, 5 PDT) at: https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/2391757013757559042 After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar. For more information contact: Nicki Birch, CG, [email protected] CG, Certified Genealogist, CGL, and Certified Genealogical Lecturer are service marks of the Board for Certification of Genealogists, used under license by board certificants after periodic evaluations. The board name is a trademark registered in the US Patent and Trademark Office. Harold Henderson, CG midwestroots.net *Finding Ancestors in Fort Wayne: The Genealogist's Unofficial One-Stop Guide to the Allen County Public Library Genealogy Center * http://www.midwestroots.net/ <http://www.midwestroots.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/ACPLGC-April-2013.pdf> Certified Genealogist (SM) No. 1029 Certified Genealogist and CG are proprietary service marks of the Board for Certification of Genealogists® used by the Board to identify its program of genealogical competency evaluation and used under license by the Board’s associates.

You have to be careful. In Virginia between 1782 and 1792 the state requirement for polls was 21, but the counties could elect (and some but not all did) to charge those aged 16 or older. Barbara Vines Little, CG, FNGS, FVGS PO Box 1273 Orange, VA 22960 540-832-3473 [email protected] CG, Certified Genealogist, is a service mark of the Board for Certification of Genealogists, used under license by board-certified genealogists after periodic evaluation; the board name is registered in the US Patent & Trademark Office. On 3/12/2015 11:41 PM, Claire Butler via wrote: > With regard to county taxation, I found this, > > Mordecai M'Kinney, *Tax Laws, A digest of the Laws of Pennsylvania, > relative to County and Township Rates and Levies... *(Harrisburg: A. Boyd > Hamilton, 1855), ​15; *Google Books* (http://www.books.google.com : > accessed March 2015). It has the Act of April 15, 1834, which seems to say > the age for taxation was 21. It specifically states: > > ​​ > The assessors were to record “all the taxable inhabitants within their > respective wards, townships, and districts, and also an account of the > following real and personal property. > > ​ > > > 1. Real estate, viz: All houses, lands, lot of ground and ground rents, > mills and manufactories of all descriptions, all furnaces, forges, > bloomeries, distilleries, sugar-houses, malt-houses, breweries, tan-yards > and ferries. > 2. The following personal estate, viz: all horses, mares, geldings, and > cattle above the age of four years. > 3. All offices and posts of profit, professions, trades and > ​o​ > ccupations, and all single freemen above the age of twenty-one years who > shall not follow any occupation or callings.” > > > Dunlop's *General Laws of Pennsylvania, 1700-1849*, was another source for > this information. I couldn't find anything which mentions a 16 year old > paying tax on personal property. I'm going to keep digging. > > Claire Butler > > On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 4:45 PM, Rondina Muncy <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Claire, >> >> Would you share what you found and what county it applied to? My research >> indicated that sometimes taxes included the 16-21 age bracket, sometimes >> not. Philly seems to have its own set of rules. (As well as records.) >> >> Rondina >> _______________________ >> Rondina P. Muncy >> Ancestral Analysis >> 4008 Linden Avenue >> Fort Worth, Texas 76107 >> 682.224.6584 >> [email protected] >> www.ancestralanalysis.com >> >> On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Claire Butler via < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Thank to everyone who offered help with my tax question. I found what I >>> needed! >>> Claire >>> >>> On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 9:48 AM, Claire Butler <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Good morning, >>>> >>>> Can someone point me in the direction of a source on early Pennsylvania >>>> tax laws? Specifically, I'm trying to find the age at which a young man >>>> became subject to a tax on personal property, e.g. a cow, in the 1830s. >>> Was >>>> it 16 or 21? >>>> >>>> Thanks for the help, >>>> Claire Butler >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> *Claire Butler* >>> >>> www.mahoganybox.net >>> >>> twitter @mboxgenealogy >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> [email protected] with the word >>> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>> >> >

With regard to county taxation, I found this, Mordecai M'Kinney, *Tax Laws, A digest of the Laws of Pennsylvania, relative to County and Township Rates and Levies... *(Harrisburg: A. Boyd Hamilton, 1855), ​15; *Google Books* (http://www.books.google.com : accessed March 2015). It has the Act of April 15, 1834, which seems to say the age for taxation was 21. It specifically states: ​​ The assessors were to record “all the taxable inhabitants within their respective wards, townships, and districts, and also an account of the following real and personal property. ​ 1. Real estate, viz: All houses, lands, lot of ground and ground rents, mills and manufactories of all descriptions, all furnaces, forges, bloomeries, distilleries, sugar-houses, malt-houses, breweries, tan-yards and ferries. 2. The following personal estate, viz: all horses, mares, geldings, and cattle above the age of four years. 3. All offices and posts of profit, professions, trades and ​o​ ccupations, and all single freemen above the age of twenty-one years who shall not follow any occupation or callings.” Dunlop's *General Laws of Pennsylvania, 1700-1849*, was another source for this information. I couldn't find anything which mentions a 16 year old paying tax on personal property. I'm going to keep digging. Claire Butler On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 4:45 PM, Rondina Muncy <[email protected]> wrote: > Claire, > > Would you share what you found and what county it applied to? My research > indicated that sometimes taxes included the 16-21 age bracket, sometimes > not. Philly seems to have its own set of rules. (As well as records.) > > Rondina > _______________________ > Rondina P. Muncy > Ancestral Analysis > 4008 Linden Avenue > Fort Worth, Texas 76107 > 682.224.6584 > [email protected] > www.ancestralanalysis.com > > On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Claire Butler via < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Thank to everyone who offered help with my tax question. I found what I >> needed! >> Claire >> >> On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 9:48 AM, Claire Butler <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > Good morning, >> > >> > Can someone point me in the direction of a source on early Pennsylvania >> > tax laws? Specifically, I'm trying to find the age at which a young man >> > became subject to a tax on personal property, e.g. a cow, in the 1830s. >> Was >> > it 16 or 21? >> > >> > Thanks for the help, >> > Claire Butler >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> >> *Claire Butler* >> >> www.mahoganybox.net >> >> twitter @mboxgenealogy >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word >> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > -- *Claire Butler* www.mahoganybox.net twitter @mboxgenealogy

Hi all, I just want to let you know we have a handful of spots remaining in the Gen Proof Study Group that begins on March 29th. If you are interested, please send an email to [email protected] and I will send you an invitation to join the group. The Gen Proof study groups are organized to study the book *Mastering Genealogical Proof*, by Thomas W. Jones. This is an exceptional textbook detailing the application of the Genealogical Proof Standard (GPS). The exercises will help you develop the skills you need to be comfortable applying the GPS to your genealogy work. The group beginning on March 29th is a beginner/intermediate level group that will cover one chapter per week for 8 weeks. They will use Google+ for asynchronous discussions and optional weekly video hangouts. We are in the process of organizing groups for the rest of the year as well. So if you are interested in a later group send me an email and I will add you to the waiting list. Best, Michelle Goodrum Gen Proof Study Group Administrator [email protected]

Time is running out - just three more weeks! In case you did not see it, NGS posted an announcement on 2 Jan 2015 accepting proposals for the 2016 Family History Conference, Exploring the Centuries: Footprints in Time. The conference will be held 4-7 May 2016 in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Long before Plymouth Rock, the Boston Tea Party, and the Declaration of Independence, the story of America began on the beaches of Florida. Beginning with the Spanish discovery in 1513, many significant events have shaped Florida's history-including the exploration by the French and Spanish, the colonization of Florida's interior, the state's involvement in military conflicts, and recent contributions to science, technology and entertainment. Follow the footprints of the American saga in the sands of Florida. Among the topics being considered by NGS are lectures on Florida history (especially early settlement), records, repositories, ethnic and religious groups, neighboring areas (the Caribbean, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, North Carolina, and South Carolina), and migration to, from, and within Florida. The Society will also consider regional topics of interest, including land and military records, especially those pertaining to the Revolutionary War, Indian wars, Civil War and World War I. NGS is also soliciting proposals for broader genealogical categories, including federal records, the law as it relates to genealogy, methodology, genetic genealogy, analysis and problem solving, and technology. Speakers who wish to submit lecture proposals, and organizations interested in sponsoring tracks or individual lectures should follow the published guidelines at the NGS website: http://conference.ngsgenealogy.org/program/call-for-papers/call-for-papers/. Speakers may submit up to eight proposals electronically via http://conference.ngsgenealogy.org/program/call-for-papers/submit-your-proposal/. Organizations wishing to sponsor a lecture or track of lectures may submit proposals via http://conference.ngsgenealogy.org/program/call-for-papers/ngs-2016-family-history-conference-sponsored-call-for-papers/. All submissions are due by 11:59 p.m. EDT on 1 April 2015. Founded in 1903, the National Genealogical Society is dedicated to genealogy education, high research standards, and the preservation of genealogical records. The Arlington, Virginia, based nonprofit is the premier national society for everyone, from the beginner to the most advanced family historian, seeking excellence in publications, educational offerings, research guidance, and opportunities to interact with other genealogists.

Thank to everyone who offered help with my tax question. I found what I needed! Claire On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 9:48 AM, Claire Butler <[email protected]> wrote: > Good morning, > > Can someone point me in the direction of a source on early Pennsylvania > tax laws? Specifically, I'm trying to find the age at which a young man > became subject to a tax on personal property, e.g. a cow, in the 1830s. Was > it 16 or 21? > > Thanks for the help, > Claire Butler > -- *Claire Butler* www.mahoganybox.net twitter @mboxgenealogy

Check out this page. I know it says Colonial Laws, but it includes some later ones. Also, I think you may need to know what was in the Colonial laws. I did a little bit of research in a 1700-1853 annotated compilation and did not find a straight forward answer. I found information that made me believe the age of majority was 21, but not a law that so stated, I did find information about taxes, but nothing that specified age for taxation of personal property, Here is hoping your are able to more easily find the answer than I was! http://libguides.bgsu.edu/content.php?pid=65781&sid=487593 Barbara Snow [email protected] website: Bobbie’s Genealogy Classroom blog: Genealogy Etc. On Mar 7, 2015, at 9:48 AM, Claire Butler via <[email protected]> wrote: > Good morning, > > Can someone point me in the direction of a source on early Pennsylvania tax > laws? Specifically, I'm trying to find the age at which a young man became > subject to a tax on personal property, e.g. a cow, in the 1830s. Was it 16 > or 21? > > Thanks for the help, > Claire Butler > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

The Pa. General Assembly has Pa. Session Laws back to the early 1700s that goes well into the 1800s: [1]http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/LI/Public/ucons_index.cfm Michael This email is from: Michael S. Ramage, J.D., Certified Genealogist(SM) Locating Heirs Professionally, Legally and Ethically 720 Argyle Road Wynnewood, PA 19096 (484) 437-8827 [email protected] http://www.ForensicGenealogist.Pro On March 8, 2015 at 4:01 AM [email protected] wrote: Today's Topics: 1. Tax in Pennsylvania (Claire Butler) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2015 09:48:28 -0500 From: Claire Butler <[email protected]> Subject: [TGF] Tax in Pennsylvania To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[email protected]om> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Good morning, Can someone point me in the direction of a source on early Pennsylvania tax laws? Specifically, I'm trying to find the age at which a young man became subject to a tax on personal property, e.g. a cow, in the 1830s. Was it 16 or 21? Thanks for the help, Claire Butler ------------------------------ End of TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM Digest, Vol 9, Issue 54 ************************************************************** References 1. http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/LI/Public/ucons_index.cfm

Good morning, Can someone point me in the direction of a source on early Pennsylvania tax laws? Specifically, I'm trying to find the age at which a young man became subject to a tax on personal property, e.g. a cow, in the 1830s. Was it 16 or 21? Thanks for the help, Claire Butler

We've considered many nuances here, but the issue (IMO) boils down to this. If we ask someone to look for a newspaper item and (a) we don't have a citation, (b) the record puller images the obituary and does not image the paper's name and date, but (c) s/he cites it in a cover message--then our citation should note that the citation details were provided by the record puller. Under those conditions, we do not know that the citation is correct; we are copying someone else's assertion. If someone voluntarily sends us a newspaper item we didn't ask for, under the same conditions, the same approach supplies. If we already know the paper and the date and the record puller finds it exactly where we said to look, then citing the record puller is a courtesy that we might choose to cite in our records (perhaps, to retain the name of a reliable record-puller), but an editor would almost certainly excise it from a published citation. Elizabeth ---------------------------------------------- Elizabeth Shown Mills, CG, CGL, FASG www.HistoricPathways.com www.EvidenceExplained.com & for daily tips on records and record usage: QuickTips at www.EvidenceExplained.com/blogs/ee

Thanks for the comments. The email had two parts - one the body of the email which was a discussion on what was known about the family in question - and then the attachments which were photocopies of the newspaper pages with the newspaper, date, and page # written in the margin. She had sent to the genealogical society in the area and they had copied the newspaper pages and sent them to her. I have decided that I maybe have two separate citations here. It is starting to make sense to separate the issues. Kathie On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 11:43 PM, Patricia Hobbs via < [email protected]> wrote: > Even though we don't have to put the details of how the original was > obtained, we so often do. We look at a census image on Ancestry, and we > tell what NARA microfilm series and roll the records are on, and then we > even tell what roll of FHL microfilm it was imaged from. > > I almost always tell something about the microfilm from which I scanned the > newspaper item. I don't usually go as far as giving a roll number because > often the roll numbers are specific to particular facilities, and are more > easily found just by title and date. But I do give that it came from > microfilm and where the microfilm came from, e.g., State Historical Society > of Iowa microfilmed newspaper collection, Iowa City. > > If I scanned that, I wouldn't HAVE to provide that information about the > microfilm, but generally most of us (I think!) assume it's a good practice > and helps other researchers. > > Patti > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 10:19 PM, Patricia Hobbs <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > I think it might depend on how you perceived the person who obtained the > > obituary. I agree that if you are having a "reliable" researcher or a > > person who works for the facility from which the item is obtained that we > > can treat it as something that is as reliable as the original. I did not > > see that scenario in this case. Not only do we know nothing about the > > reliability of the other researcher from whom Kathy obtained the > obituary, > > we don't know how she got it from the historical/genealogical society. > Did > > she access a filing card system that has them clipped out and arranged > > alphabetically? Was the title of the newspaper handwritten on the card? > Or > > did she use the newspapers on microfilm at the genealogical society? > > > > So I saw the obituary more akin to something that you would have gotten > in > > a family collection of items of which all the details of how the obituary > > was obtained is not known. > > > > Tom says that sometimes the second part of the citation is a courtesy ... > > like a newspaper on microfilm. You can just put the essential information > > at the beginning and leave off the specifics of the the microfilm. But > > again, I don't see this newspaper obituary obtained by an unknown > > researcher in an unknown manner under unknown circumstances to fit into > the > > same kind of category. > > > > And it certainly doesn't hurt to add the information giving the > provenance. > > > > Patti > > > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 9:15 PM, Jill Morelli <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> I agree with Michael. > >> > >> At the PMC 2015 class on citations taught by Tom Jones (a terrific class > >> by the way) the approach taken was exactly as Michael has outlined. > >> > >> You cite the source of the information (the newspaper clipping) and > since > >> it is publically available you have no obligation to cite the email. In > >> fact it would be confusing to do so. > >> > >> You may have to do a little work to get the column and page number, > >> however, depending on whether your email sender gave you a partial or > full > >> citation information. > >> > >> Jill > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Professional genealogist > >> Give the gift of family! > >> > >> > On Mar 5, 2015, at 2:44 PM, Michael Hait via < > >> [email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> > That’s really not standard operating procedure, though. Agents are > >> almost never cited as a source in research reports or journal articles > when > >> dealing with published or public sources, if a digital image has been > >> obtained. > >> > > >> > Michael Hait, CG(sm) > >> > [email protected] > >> > http://www.haitfamilyresearch.com > >> > Author of *Online State Resources for Genealogy* ebook > >> > More information at http://haitfamilyresearch.com/onlineStates.htm > >> > > >> > CG and Certified Genealogist are service marks of the Board for > >> Certification of Genealogists, used under license by board certificants > >> after periodic competency evaluation, and the board name is registered > in > >> the US Patent & Trademark Office. > >> > > >> > > >> > From: Patricia Hobbs > >> > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 5:32 PM > >> > To: Michael Hait > >> > Cc: Kathie Fortner ; TGF List > >> > Subject: Re: [TGF] Citation > >> > > >> > I think you'd cite the email and the repository because you are > >> dependent on the person who sent the itme to be accurately identifying > it > >> (say the title or date of the newspaper is not in the copy, for > example), > >> but the person who sent it knows from obtaining it. Since you didn't > get it > >> yourself, you are letting the reader know that because the information > was > >> obtained from someone else, there may be errors that have crept in. > >> > > >> > Patti > >> > > >> > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Michael Hait < > [email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > Why is the email relevant at all to the citation of the newspaper? If > >> the sender was functioning as an agent to obtain a publicly available > >> record from the society library's microfilm collection, for example, > then > >> you would cite the repository information, but not the agent who > obtained > >> it. > >> > > >> > Michael Hait, CG(sm) > >> > [email protected] > >> > http://www.haitfamilyresearch.com > >> > Author of *Online State Resources for Genealogy* ebook > >> > More information at http://haitfamilyresearch.com/onlineStates.htm > >> > > >> > CG and Certified Genealogist are service marks of the Board for > >> Certification of Genealogists, used under license by board certificants > >> after periodic competency evaluation, and the board name is registered > in > >> the US Patent & Trademark Office. > >> > -----Original Message----- From: Patricia Hobbs via > >> > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 12:58 PM > >> > To: Kathie Fortner > >> > Cc: TGF List > >> > Subject: Re: [TGF] Citation > >> > > >> > > >> > Kathie, I'm not sure how you contacted the person (via Ancestry > message > >> > board) is material if you corresponded directly through email to get > >> the > >> > document(s). > >> > > >> > I'd refer to the attachment directly as you normally would for that > >> kind of > >> > document (newspaper if it's an obituary with identifying > information). > >> Then > >> > after the semi-colon, you'd refer to the avenue of receipt as being > >> sent by > >> > email from the sender which would then cite the origin of the > obituary > >> as > >> > being the Elgin County Genealogical Society. > >> > > >> > Patti > >> > > >> > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Kathie Fortner via < > >> > [email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > I'm trying to cite an email with attachments. The attachments are > >> > identified by the sender. Am I on the right track with this? > >> > > >> > ​[Name of Sender], Via Ancestry Message Boards {senders email} To > >> Kathie > >> > Fortner, Email with attachments, 14 Aug 2014, "Hannah Bellowes > >> Fortner > >> > Obituary"; Attachments from "The St Thomas Evening Journal " 29 Aug > >> 1908, 1 > >> > Sep 1908, Elgin County Gealogical Society, -- > >> > > >> > * > >> > Kathie Fortner* > >> > * <[email protected]>* > >> > > >> > *www.fortner.50megs.com <http://www.fortner.50megs.com>* > >> > > >> > ------------------------------- > >> > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >> > [email protected] with the word > >> > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the > >> message > >> > > >> > > >> > ------------------------------- > >> > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >> [email protected] with the word > >> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the > message > >> > > >> > > >> > ------------------------------- > >> > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >> [email protected] with the word > >> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the > message > >> > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > -- * Kathie Fortner* * <[email protected]>* *www.fortner.50megs.com <http://www.fortner.50megs.com>*

I think Patti has made some good points, but we need to understand that the questions she raised were based partly on the issue of trust. If I hire Susan Glenn in Salt Lake to pull the filmed index in the front of volume 1 of the deed registers in McNairy County, Tennessee, I know that she will also be sending me a picture of the target and the cover and spine of the book if it was filmed. This is her job. It is not her job to search that index for deeds pertaining to my case. This was a favor that someone did for you. It does not sound like you distrust or have reason to distrust any information about the document or where it came from. However, Patti raises good points. I would pay to have the clipping copied along with the target and a picture of the entire page to verify the authenticity. And I have done just that. Then, you eliminate all those pesky if, ands, and buts that Patti raises because if they cannot send you a picture of the entire page and the front page, you will politely be asking why. So getting back to your original question before this small debate began. Just cite the repository holding the microfilm that the images came from like Michael said. You're doing the famous "over-thinking it" thing I'm famous for. : ) Rondina _______________________ Rondina P. Muncy Ancestral Analysis 4008 Linden Avenue Fort Worth, Texas 76107 682.224.6584 [email protected] www.ancestralanalysis.com On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 10:19 PM, Patricia Hobbs via < [email protected]> wrote: > I think it might depend on how you perceived the person who obtained the > obituary. I agree that if you are having a "reliable" researcher or a > person who works for the facility from which the item is obtained that we > can treat it as something that is as reliable as the original. I did not > see that scenario in this case. Not only do we know nothing about the > reliability of the other researcher from whom Kathy obtained the obituary, > we don't know how she got it from the historical/genealogical society. Did > she access a filing card system that has them clipped out and arranged > alphabetically? Was the title of the newspaper handwritten on the card? Or > did she use the newspapers on microfilm at the genealogical society? > > So I saw the obituary more akin to something that you would have gotten in > a family collection of items of which all the details of how the obituary > was obtained is not known. > > Tom says that sometimes the second part of the citation is a courtesy ... > like a newspaper on microfilm. You can just put the essential information > at the beginning and leave off the specifics of the the microfilm. But > again, I don't see this newspaper obituary obtained by an unknown > researcher in an unknown manner under unknown circumstances to fit into the > same kind of category. > > And it certainly doesn't hurt to add the information giving the provenance. > > Patti > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 9:15 PM, Jill Morelli <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I agree with Michael. > > > > At the PMC 2015 class on citations taught by Tom Jones (a terrific class > > by the way) the approach taken was exactly as Michael has outlined. > > > > You cite the source of the information (the newspaper clipping) and since > > it is publically available you have no obligation to cite the email. In > > fact it would be confusing to do so. > > > > You may have to do a little work to get the column and page number, > > however, depending on whether your email sender gave you a partial or > full > > citation information. > > > > Jill > > > > > > > > > > Professional genealogist > > Give the gift of family! > > > > > On Mar 5, 2015, at 2:44 PM, Michael Hait via < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > That’s really not standard operating procedure, though. Agents are > > almost never cited as a source in research reports or journal articles > when > > dealing with published or public sources, if a digital image has been > > obtained. > > > > > > Michael Hait, CG(sm) > > > [email protected] > > > http://www.haitfamilyresearch.com > > > Author of *Online State Resources for Genealogy* ebook > > > More information at http://haitfamilyresearch.com/onlineStates.htm > > > > > > CG and Certified Genealogist are service marks of the Board for > > Certification of Genealogists, used under license by board certificants > > after periodic competency evaluation, and the board name is registered in > > the US Patent & Trademark Office. > > > > > > > > > From: Patricia Hobbs > > > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 5:32 PM > > > To: Michael Hait > > > Cc: Kathie Fortner ; TGF List > > > Subject: Re: [TGF] Citation > > > > > > I think you'd cite the email and the repository because you are > > dependent on the person who sent the itme to be accurately identifying it > > (say the title or date of the newspaper is not in the copy, for example), > > but the person who sent it knows from obtaining it. Since you didn't get > it > > yourself, you are letting the reader know that because the information > was > > obtained from someone else, there may be errors that have crept in. > > > > > > Patti > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Michael Hait < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > Why is the email relevant at all to the citation of the newspaper? If > > the sender was functioning as an agent to obtain a publicly available > > record from the society library's microfilm collection, for example, then > > you would cite the repository information, but not the agent who obtained > > it. > > > > > > Michael Hait, CG(sm) > > > [email protected] > > > http://www.haitfamilyresearch.com > > > Author of *Online State Resources for Genealogy* ebook > > > More information at http://haitfamilyresearch.com/onlineStates.htm > > > > > > CG and Certified Genealogist are service marks of the Board for > > Certification of Genealogists, used under license by board certificants > > after periodic competency evaluation, and the board name is registered in > > the US Patent & Trademark Office. > > > -----Original Message----- From: Patricia Hobbs via > > > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 12:58 PM > > > To: Kathie Fortner > > > Cc: TGF List > > > Subject: Re: [TGF] Citation > > > > > > > > > Kathie, I'm not sure how you contacted the person (via Ancestry > message > > > board) is material if you corresponded directly through email to get > the > > > document(s). > > > > > > I'd refer to the attachment directly as you normally would for that > > kind of > > > document (newspaper if it's an obituary with identifying information). > > Then > > > after the semi-colon, you'd refer to the avenue of receipt as being > > sent by > > > email from the sender which would then cite the origin of the obituary > > as > > > being the Elgin County Genealogical Society. > > > > > > Patti > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Kathie Fortner via < > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I'm trying to cite an email with attachments. The attachments are > > > identified by the sender. Am I on the right track with this? > > > > > > ​[Name of Sender], Via Ancestry Message Boards {senders email} To > > Kathie > > > Fortner, Email with attachments, 14 Aug 2014, "Hannah Bellowes > Fortner > > > Obituary"; Attachments from "The St Thomas Evening Journal " 29 Aug > > 1908, 1 > > > Sep 1908, Elgin County Gealogical Society, -- > > > > > > * > > > Kathie Fortner* > > > * <[email protected]>* > > > > > > *www.fortner.50megs.com <http://www.fortner.50megs.com>* > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > > [email protected] with the word > > > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the > > message > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > [email protected] with the word > > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the > message > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > [email protected] with the word > > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the > message > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Even though we don't have to put the details of how the original was obtained, we so often do. We look at a census image on Ancestry, and we tell what NARA microfilm series and roll the records are on, and then we even tell what roll of FHL microfilm it was imaged from. I almost always tell something about the microfilm from which I scanned the newspaper item. I don't usually go as far as giving a roll number because often the roll numbers are specific to particular facilities, and are more easily found just by title and date. But I do give that it came from microfilm and where the microfilm came from, e.g., State Historical Society of Iowa microfilmed newspaper collection, Iowa City. If I scanned that, I wouldn't HAVE to provide that information about the microfilm, but generally most of us (I think!) assume it's a good practice and helps other researchers. Patti On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 10:19 PM, Patricia Hobbs <[email protected]> wrote: > I think it might depend on how you perceived the person who obtained the > obituary. I agree that if you are having a "reliable" researcher or a > person who works for the facility from which the item is obtained that we > can treat it as something that is as reliable as the original. I did not > see that scenario in this case. Not only do we know nothing about the > reliability of the other researcher from whom Kathy obtained the obituary, > we don't know how she got it from the historical/genealogical society. Did > she access a filing card system that has them clipped out and arranged > alphabetically? Was the title of the newspaper handwritten on the card? Or > did she use the newspapers on microfilm at the genealogical society? > > So I saw the obituary more akin to something that you would have gotten in > a family collection of items of which all the details of how the obituary > was obtained is not known. > > Tom says that sometimes the second part of the citation is a courtesy ... > like a newspaper on microfilm. You can just put the essential information > at the beginning and leave off the specifics of the the microfilm. But > again, I don't see this newspaper obituary obtained by an unknown > researcher in an unknown manner under unknown circumstances to fit into the > same kind of category. > > And it certainly doesn't hurt to add the information giving the provenance. > > Patti > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 9:15 PM, Jill Morelli <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I agree with Michael. >> >> At the PMC 2015 class on citations taught by Tom Jones (a terrific class >> by the way) the approach taken was exactly as Michael has outlined. >> >> You cite the source of the information (the newspaper clipping) and since >> it is publically available you have no obligation to cite the email. In >> fact it would be confusing to do so. >> >> You may have to do a little work to get the column and page number, >> however, depending on whether your email sender gave you a partial or full >> citation information. >> >> Jill >> >> >> >> >> Professional genealogist >> Give the gift of family! >> >> > On Mar 5, 2015, at 2:44 PM, Michael Hait via < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > That’s really not standard operating procedure, though. Agents are >> almost never cited as a source in research reports or journal articles when >> dealing with published or public sources, if a digital image has been >> obtained. >> > >> > Michael Hait, CG(sm) >> > [email protected] >> > http://www.haitfamilyresearch.com >> > Author of *Online State Resources for Genealogy* ebook >> > More information at http://haitfamilyresearch.com/onlineStates.htm >> > >> > CG and Certified Genealogist are service marks of the Board for >> Certification of Genealogists, used under license by board certificants >> after periodic competency evaluation, and the board name is registered in >> the US Patent & Trademark Office. >> > >> > >> > From: Patricia Hobbs >> > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 5:32 PM >> > To: Michael Hait >> > Cc: Kathie Fortner ; TGF List >> > Subject: Re: [TGF] Citation >> > >> > I think you'd cite the email and the repository because you are >> dependent on the person who sent the itme to be accurately identifying it >> (say the title or date of the newspaper is not in the copy, for example), >> but the person who sent it knows from obtaining it. Since you didn't get it >> yourself, you are letting the reader know that because the information was >> obtained from someone else, there may be errors that have crept in. >> > >> > Patti >> > >> > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Michael Hait <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> > Why is the email relevant at all to the citation of the newspaper? If >> the sender was functioning as an agent to obtain a publicly available >> record from the society library's microfilm collection, for example, then >> you would cite the repository information, but not the agent who obtained >> it. >> > >> > Michael Hait, CG(sm) >> > [email protected] >> > http://www.haitfamilyresearch.com >> > Author of *Online State Resources for Genealogy* ebook >> > More information at http://haitfamilyresearch.com/onlineStates.htm >> > >> > CG and Certified Genealogist are service marks of the Board for >> Certification of Genealogists, used under license by board certificants >> after periodic competency evaluation, and the board name is registered in >> the US Patent & Trademark Office. >> > -----Original Message----- From: Patricia Hobbs via >> > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 12:58 PM >> > To: Kathie Fortner >> > Cc: TGF List >> > Subject: Re: [TGF] Citation >> > >> > >> > Kathie, I'm not sure how you contacted the person (via Ancestry message >> > board) is material if you corresponded directly through email to get >> the >> > document(s). >> > >> > I'd refer to the attachment directly as you normally would for that >> kind of >> > document (newspaper if it's an obituary with identifying information). >> Then >> > after the semi-colon, you'd refer to the avenue of receipt as being >> sent by >> > email from the sender which would then cite the origin of the obituary >> as >> > being the Elgin County Genealogical Society. >> > >> > Patti >> > >> > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Kathie Fortner via < >> > [email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > >> > I'm trying to cite an email with attachments. The attachments are >> > identified by the sender. Am I on the right track with this? >> > >> > ​[Name of Sender], Via Ancestry Message Boards {senders email} To >> Kathie >> > Fortner, Email with attachments, 14 Aug 2014, "Hannah Bellowes >> Fortner >> > Obituary"; Attachments from "The St Thomas Evening Journal " 29 Aug >> 1908, 1 >> > Sep 1908, Elgin County Gealogical Society, -- >> > >> > * >> > Kathie Fortner* >> > * <[email protected]>* >> > >> > *www.fortner.50megs.com <http://www.fortner.50megs.com>* >> > >> > ------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> > [email protected] with the word >> > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the >> message >> > >> > >> > ------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word >> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > >> > >> > ------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word >> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > >

I think it might depend on how you perceived the person who obtained the obituary. I agree that if you are having a "reliable" researcher or a person who works for the facility from which the item is obtained that we can treat it as something that is as reliable as the original. I did not see that scenario in this case. Not only do we know nothing about the reliability of the other researcher from whom Kathy obtained the obituary, we don't know how she got it from the historical/genealogical society. Did she access a filing card system that has them clipped out and arranged alphabetically? Was the title of the newspaper handwritten on the card? Or did she use the newspapers on microfilm at the genealogical society? So I saw the obituary more akin to something that you would have gotten in a family collection of items of which all the details of how the obituary was obtained is not known. Tom says that sometimes the second part of the citation is a courtesy ... like a newspaper on microfilm. You can just put the essential information at the beginning and leave off the specifics of the the microfilm. But again, I don't see this newspaper obituary obtained by an unknown researcher in an unknown manner under unknown circumstances to fit into the same kind of category. And it certainly doesn't hurt to add the information giving the provenance. Patti On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 9:15 PM, Jill Morelli <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree with Michael. > > At the PMC 2015 class on citations taught by Tom Jones (a terrific class > by the way) the approach taken was exactly as Michael has outlined. > > You cite the source of the information (the newspaper clipping) and since > it is publically available you have no obligation to cite the email. In > fact it would be confusing to do so. > > You may have to do a little work to get the column and page number, > however, depending on whether your email sender gave you a partial or full > citation information. > > Jill > > > > > Professional genealogist > Give the gift of family! > > > On Mar 5, 2015, at 2:44 PM, Michael Hait via < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > That’s really not standard operating procedure, though. Agents are > almost never cited as a source in research reports or journal articles when > dealing with published or public sources, if a digital image has been > obtained. > > > > Michael Hait, CG(sm) > > [email protected] > > http://www.haitfamilyresearch.com > > Author of *Online State Resources for Genealogy* ebook > > More information at http://haitfamilyresearch.com/onlineStates.htm > > > > CG and Certified Genealogist are service marks of the Board for > Certification of Genealogists, used under license by board certificants > after periodic competency evaluation, and the board name is registered in > the US Patent & Trademark Office. > > > > > > From: Patricia Hobbs > > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 5:32 PM > > To: Michael Hait > > Cc: Kathie Fortner ; TGF List > > Subject: Re: [TGF] Citation > > > > I think you'd cite the email and the repository because you are > dependent on the person who sent the itme to be accurately identifying it > (say the title or date of the newspaper is not in the copy, for example), > but the person who sent it knows from obtaining it. Since you didn't get it > yourself, you are letting the reader know that because the information was > obtained from someone else, there may be errors that have crept in. > > > > Patti > > > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Michael Hait <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Why is the email relevant at all to the citation of the newspaper? If > the sender was functioning as an agent to obtain a publicly available > record from the society library's microfilm collection, for example, then > you would cite the repository information, but not the agent who obtained > it. > > > > Michael Hait, CG(sm) > > [email protected] > > http://www.haitfamilyresearch.com > > Author of *Online State Resources for Genealogy* ebook > > More information at http://haitfamilyresearch.com/onlineStates.htm > > > > CG and Certified Genealogist are service marks of the Board for > Certification of Genealogists, used under license by board certificants > after periodic competency evaluation, and the board name is registered in > the US Patent & Trademark Office. > > -----Original Message----- From: Patricia Hobbs via > > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 12:58 PM > > To: Kathie Fortner > > Cc: TGF List > > Subject: Re: [TGF] Citation > > > > > > Kathie, I'm not sure how you contacted the person (via Ancestry message > > board) is material if you corresponded directly through email to get the > > document(s). > > > > I'd refer to the attachment directly as you normally would for that > kind of > > document (newspaper if it's an obituary with identifying information). > Then > > after the semi-colon, you'd refer to the avenue of receipt as being > sent by > > email from the sender which would then cite the origin of the obituary > as > > being the Elgin County Genealogical Society. > > > > Patti > > > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Kathie Fortner via < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I'm trying to cite an email with attachments. The attachments are > > identified by the sender. Am I on the right track with this? > > > > ​[Name of Sender], Via Ancestry Message Boards {senders email} To > Kathie > > Fortner, Email with attachments, 14 Aug 2014, "Hannah Bellowes Fortner > > Obituary"; Attachments from "The St Thomas Evening Journal " 29 Aug > 1908, 1 > > Sep 1908, Elgin County Gealogical Society, -- > > > > * > > Kathie Fortner* > > * <[email protected]>* > > > > *www.fortner.50megs.com <http://www.fortner.50megs.com>* > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > [email protected] with the word > > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the > message > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

I agree with Michael. At the PMC 2015 class on citations taught by Tom Jones (a terrific class by the way) the approach taken was exactly as Michael has outlined. You cite the source of the information (the newspaper clipping) and since it is publically available you have no obligation to cite the email. In fact it would be confusing to do so. You may have to do a little work to get the column and page number, however, depending on whether your email sender gave you a partial or full citation information. Jill Professional genealogist Give the gift of family! > On Mar 5, 2015, at 2:44 PM, Michael Hait via <[email protected]> wrote: > > That’s really not standard operating procedure, though. Agents are almost never cited as a source in research reports or journal articles when dealing with published or public sources, if a digital image has been obtained. > > Michael Hait, CG(sm) > [email protected] > http://www.haitfamilyresearch.com > Author of *Online State Resources for Genealogy* ebook > More information at http://haitfamilyresearch.com/onlineStates.htm > > CG and Certified Genealogist are service marks of the Board for Certification of Genealogists, used under license by board certificants after periodic competency evaluation, and the board name is registered in the US Patent & Trademark Office. > > > From: Patricia Hobbs > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 5:32 PM > To: Michael Hait > Cc: Kathie Fortner ; TGF List > Subject: Re: [TGF] Citation > > I think you'd cite the email and the repository because you are dependent on the person who sent the itme to be accurately identifying it (say the title or date of the newspaper is not in the copy, for example), but the person who sent it knows from obtaining it. Since you didn't get it yourself, you are letting the reader know that because the information was obtained from someone else, there may be errors that have crept in. > > Patti > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Michael Hait <[email protected]> wrote: > > Why is the email relevant at all to the citation of the newspaper? If the sender was functioning as an agent to obtain a publicly available record from the society library's microfilm collection, for example, then you would cite the repository information, but not the agent who obtained it. > > Michael Hait, CG(sm) > [email protected] > http://www.haitfamilyresearch.com > Author of *Online State Resources for Genealogy* ebook > More information at http://haitfamilyresearch.com/onlineStates.htm > > CG and Certified Genealogist are service marks of the Board for Certification of Genealogists, used under license by board certificants after periodic competency evaluation, and the board name is registered in the US Patent & Trademark Office. > -----Original Message----- From: Patricia Hobbs via > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 12:58 PM > To: Kathie Fortner > Cc: TGF List > Subject: Re: [TGF] Citation > > > Kathie, I'm not sure how you contacted the person (via Ancestry message > board) is material if you corresponded directly through email to get the > document(s). > > I'd refer to the attachment directly as you normally would for that kind of > document (newspaper if it's an obituary with identifying information). Then > after the semi-colon, you'd refer to the avenue of receipt as being sent by > email from the sender which would then cite the origin of the obituary as > being the Elgin County Genealogical Society. > > Patti > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Kathie Fortner via < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > I'm trying to cite an email with attachments. The attachments are > identified by the sender. Am I on the right track with this? > > ​[Name of Sender], Via Ancestry Message Boards {senders email} To Kathie > Fortner, Email with attachments, 14 Aug 2014, "Hannah Bellowes Fortner > Obituary"; Attachments from "The St Thomas Evening Journal " 29 Aug 1908, 1 > Sep 1908, Elgin County Gealogical Society, -- > > * > Kathie Fortner* > * <[email protected]>* > > *www.fortner.50megs.com <http://www.fortner.50megs.com>* > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

That’s really not standard operating procedure, though. Agents are almost never cited as a source in research reports or journal articles when dealing with published or public sources, if a digital image has been obtained. Michael Hait, CG(sm) [email protected] http://www.haitfamilyresearch.com Author of *Online State Resources for Genealogy* ebook More information at http://haitfamilyresearch.com/onlineStates.htm CG and Certified Genealogist are service marks of the Board for Certification of Genealogists, used under license by board certificants after periodic competency evaluation, and the board name is registered in the US Patent & Trademark Office. From: Patricia Hobbs Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 5:32 PM To: Michael Hait Cc: Kathie Fortner ; TGF List Subject: Re: [TGF] Citation I think you'd cite the email and the repository because you are dependent on the person who sent the itme to be accurately identifying it (say the title or date of the newspaper is not in the copy, for example), but the person who sent it knows from obtaining it. Since you didn't get it yourself, you are letting the reader know that because the information was obtained from someone else, there may be errors that have crept in. Patti On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Michael Hait <[email protected]> wrote: Why is the email relevant at all to the citation of the newspaper? If the sender was functioning as an agent to obtain a publicly available record from the society library's microfilm collection, for example, then you would cite the repository information, but not the agent who obtained it. Michael Hait, CG(sm) [email protected] http://www.haitfamilyresearch.com Author of *Online State Resources for Genealogy* ebook More information at http://haitfamilyresearch.com/onlineStates.htm CG and Certified Genealogist are service marks of the Board for Certification of Genealogists, used under license by board certificants after periodic competency evaluation, and the board name is registered in the US Patent & Trademark Office. -----Original Message----- From: Patricia Hobbs via Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 12:58 PM To: Kathie Fortner Cc: TGF List Subject: Re: [TGF] Citation Kathie, I'm not sure how you contacted the person (via Ancestry message board) is material if you corresponded directly through email to get the document(s). I'd refer to the attachment directly as you normally would for that kind of document (newspaper if it's an obituary with identifying information). Then after the semi-colon, you'd refer to the avenue of receipt as being sent by email from the sender which would then cite the origin of the obituary as being the Elgin County Genealogical Society. Patti On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Kathie Fortner via < [email protected]> wrote: I'm trying to cite an email with attachments. The attachments are identified by the sender. Am I on the right track with this? ​[Name of Sender], Via Ancestry Message Boards {senders email} To Kathie Fortner, Email with attachments, 14 Aug 2014, "Hannah Bellowes Fortner Obituary"; Attachments from "The St Thomas Evening Journal " 29 Aug 1908, 1 Sep 1908, Elgin County Gealogical Society, -- * Kathie Fortner* * <[email protected]>* *www.fortner.50megs.com <http://www.fortner.50megs.com>* ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I think you'd cite the email and the repository because you are dependent on the person who sent the itme to be accurately identifying it (say the title or date of the newspaper is not in the copy, for example), but the person who sent it knows from obtaining it. Since you didn't get it yourself, you are letting the reader know that because the information was obtained from someone else, there may be errors that have crept in. Patti On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Michael Hait <[email protected]> wrote: > Why is the email relevant at all to the citation of the newspaper? If the > sender was functioning as an agent to obtain a publicly available record > from the society library's microfilm collection, for example, then you > would cite the repository information, but not the agent who obtained it. > > Michael Hait, CG(sm) > [email protected] > http://www.haitfamilyresearch.com > Author of *Online State Resources for Genealogy* ebook > More information at http://haitfamilyresearch.com/onlineStates.htm > > CG and Certified Genealogist are service marks of the Board for > Certification of Genealogists, used under license by board certificants > after periodic competency evaluation, and the board name is registered in > the US Patent & Trademark Office. > -----Original Message----- From: Patricia Hobbs via > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 12:58 PM > To: Kathie Fortner > Cc: TGF List > Subject: Re: [TGF] Citation > > > Kathie, I'm not sure how you contacted the person (via Ancestry message > board) is material if you corresponded directly through email to get the > document(s). > > I'd refer to the attachment directly as you normally would for that kind of > document (newspaper if it's an obituary with identifying information). Then > after the semi-colon, you'd refer to the avenue of receipt as being sent by > email from the sender which would then cite the origin of the obituary as > being the Elgin County Genealogical Society. > > Patti > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Kathie Fortner via < > [email protected]> wrote: > > I'm trying to cite an email with attachments. The attachments are >> identified by the sender. Am I on the right track with this? >> >> ​[Name of Sender], Via Ancestry Message Boards {senders email} To Kathie >> Fortner, Email with attachments, 14 Aug 2014, "Hannah Bellowes Fortner >> Obituary"; Attachments from "The St Thomas Evening Journal " 29 Aug 1908, >> 1 >> Sep 1908, Elgin County Gealogical Society, -- >> >> * >> Kathie Fortner* >> * <[email protected]>* >> >> *www.fortner.50megs.com <http://www.fortner.50megs.com>* >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word >> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the >> message >> > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >