9 of 10 people found the following review helpful
A Citation Manual for (American) Genealogists,
This review is from: Evidence Explained:Citing History Sources from Artifacts to Cyberspace 2nd Edition (Hardcover)
Whilst the first two chapters are well written and have some useful points on genealogical research, the vast bulk of the book is a set of templates which dictate the style & format which "should" be used for different types of source. If you want a look-up manual for how to cite a specific source in Chicago Style then this may be the book for you (tho' there is no guarantee that your source will be covered and you'll have to dig through 100s of others to work out which is the closest match). If you are looking for explanations to help you understand what information is important to cite and why so that you can formulate a sensible citation for virtually any source you may find then I would recommend you look elsewhere (or prepare to spend a considerable amount of time attempting to analyse and distill the key elements from the 100s of "Quick" Models).
Tracked by 1 customer
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-3 of 3 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Oct 11, 2012 8:09:47 PM PDT
Desta Elliott says:
Say Amen, Somebody
The book is internally inconsistent. For instance, a census image from ancestry is to include "citing" and the NARA reference info. Trouble is, Amazon provides a citation and they got image from the LDS==>NARA. Somehow, a 'digital image' is not necessarily an image. She uses quotation marks rather than realizing computers come with italics.
Let's put it simply:
Genealogy suffers from a lack of citations of source materials.
An 800 page (not exhaustive) book will probably discourage rather than encourage source citations.
Posted on Feb 7, 2014 8:16:18 PM PST
Ian Carruthers says:
Hello! I'm a beginner genealogist with no training. I've been directed to Ms. Shown Mills work upon more than one occasion. I'm reading through her "briefcase" work, "Evidence!" now. In it, she speaks of proper citation being more an art than a science. It seems that you are saying something similar. That is, there is no ONE way to cite anything, but, rather, citation should be approached based on principles of proper citation.
You say that one may want to look elsewhere for such a manual. Where else shall we look? Do you have any recommendations?
In reply to an earlier post on Feb 8, 2014 1:47:27 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 8, 2014 1:48:15 AM PST
I wouldn't recommend a manual as such. It's more a matter of understanding why citations are important and what they are trying to achieve (this link summarises it nicely in just 3 short paragraphs: http://citationonline.net/CitationHelp/c8
‹ Previous 1 Next ›