For my birthday (1 Dec) I asked and received Evidence Explained. I've read it cover to cover, and am now trying to apply it to the citations I am making. Most specifically, to the citations that belong to the biography of Lodewijk Wesselo I am currently writing - which I talked about before on this list. I think I've got the basics down, but I am running into a few problems/questions and I hope the people on the list here can help me understand. I've included actual citations as examples, and would be happy to receive constructive criticism on them. (All citations are in the form of first footnotes) A (simple) citation for a handwritten letter which is in a family archive at an archive: 1. Lodewijk Wesselo (Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland) to "Willem en Mien" [Willem Lodewijk Wesselo and his wife Wilhelmina Johanna Kwak], letter, 10 September 1940; portfolio 3, doos 1, familiearchief Wesselo, familiearchieven: Centraal Bureau voor Genealogie, fa 00472, Centraal Bureau voor Genealogie, Den Haag, Zuid-Holland. The first question I ran across is when I have to identify a document as a manuscript. If it's unpublished, handwritten, and in an archive, do you automatically identify it as a manuscript? When there's a clear author, like with citation 2, this seems clear to me. But what about citation 3? Do I need to identify it as a manuscript or not? A citation for a handwritten biographical sketch by Lodewijk Wesselo about his own life, with no official title, just 1 page, held in the same family archive as the letter in citation 1: 2. Lodewijk Wesselo, Brief Biographical Sketch, manuscript, 1947; portfolio 3, doos 1, familiearchief Wesselo, familiearchieven: Centraal Bureau voor Genealogie, fa 00472, Centraal Bureau voor Genealogie, Den Haag, Zuid-Holland. A citation for a list of house numbers and their owner, described in the catalog of the archive as "register of house numbers (and renumbering) ca. 1895", handwritten, probably by a clerk of the town Voorschoten. I know the estimated date of the archive is wrong, as Lodewijk Wesselo appears in this register and his house was not build until 1899 - so ca. 1900 is more likely: 3. Register van huisnummering (en hernummering) [Register of House Numbers (and Renumbering)], ca. 1895, inventaris 555, toegang II.08.02; Dorps- en gemeentebestuur van Voorschoten, 1811-1925, Regionaal Archief Leiden. The date of ca. 1895 cannot be right, as Lodewijk Wesselo's house was not build until 1899, so ca. 1900 seems more likely. The second question I ran across was how to deal with a record of which I have a copy at home? Do I cite the original record - or as near as original that I could find - or do I cite the copy I have at home? For instance, citation 4 is the original record I looked at; I have not located the magazine. I have a copy of this article at home, do I need to add that to the citation? 4. Carolus Pictor, "Een diamanten tijd in dienst van goud, zilver en diamanten: De Heer L. Wesselo 60 jaar chef bij Begeer, van Kempen & Vos" [A Diamond Time in Service of Gold, Silver and Diamonds: Mister L. Wesselo 60 Years Boss at Begeer, van Kempen & Vos], Edelmetaal, July 1948, p. 107, copy; portfolio 3, doos 1, familiearchief Wesselo, familiearchieven: Centraal Bureau voor Genealogie, fa 00472, Centraal Bureau voor Genealogie, Den Haag, Zuid-Holland. And the last citation is one that is incomplete, because I got stuck. It's a civil registration record from Voorschoten, however, the original records (held by the Regionaal Archief Leiden) cannot be looked at, they are not even in the catalog. There's an index on the site of the Regionaal Archief Leiden, with links to digital images. I know how to cite the original record, but can't figure out how to add the fact that I looked at a digital image on the site, found through the index. 5. Voorschoten, Zuid-Holland, "Burgerlijke Stand Geboorteregister" [Civil Registration Birth Register], 1873, no. 57, entry "Elisabeth" daughter of Dirk Lubach and his wife Antje Zilstra; Regionaal Archief Leiden, Leiden, Zuid-Holland. Any help with this last citation would be greatly appreciated. I'm also curious as to when to add the description of "manuscript" to a citation (and when not to). Also, as said before, if there are any errors in these citations, please point them out! Joyce