Part II. What about A Genealogy & Family History Research Company versus a researcher?
There are advantages and disadvantages to an individual researcher versus a research company. The major differences are in the scope, number, and quality of services provided. Most people underestimate the amount of work and the number of services that can and should be part of research.
As identified in Part I, much depends on the specific research company or researcher. The same would hold true for a doctor, dentist, or lawyer by himself versus a company or firm without staff. How many of the other services or the quality of services you want may determine whether you go with an individual or company. An individual may or may not do many things well. Since most research involves multiple tasks this factor alone may make a company more feasible. If you have a limited task requirement, and are willing to do more of the work yourself; an individual researcher might work for you. (ex. You want research done in England, 1800-1900 time period, already have all your information organized and possibly computerized, understand the time period documents, sources, and can read them, and are willing to do all but researching of books, films, etc.)
Questions to ask:
How much do I know about research, genealogy programs, data entry. If little, a company is better. The more you can do and know; the more an individual for a specific research need (location, time period) may work.
Pros & Cons of an individual researcher versus a Research Company -
Services Provided or needed
Understanding each of these services and the pros and cons of an individual versus a company are critical.
Marketing:
Website, handouts, samples, education
Note: As a general rule, many individual researchers don't have a website, some don't even have a web page. Be prepared, many individuals do not answer calls, emails or letters, or return them promptly, unless they know you're ready to order or aren't busy. The more you require the less they will like to do for you unless you handle large budgets. Many individuals do not have samples and the quality of research reporting varies greatly. Remember they are researchers not marketers or educators. They may not take the time to answer your questions in depth or know how to explain things at a level other than their own. Pro - Company, Con- Individual
Sales:
Order forms, check lists, proposals
Since they are individual researchers they may not have forms, just type a few words on a paper or you tell them and they go do it. The problem is that many are not good note takers and may not complete all your requests. Pro - Company, Con- Individual
Account Management:
Calls - follow-up on items they need, items you need or receive, etc. Availability and timeliness in making and receiving calls.
Visits - pickup, drop-offs, availability and timeliness.
Education - what your getting and why, terms - patronymics, diatrics, naming patterns, geography, languages, boundaries, record types, categories, availability, etc. Availability and Capability.
Pro - Company, Con - Individual
Clerical:
Sifting: organizing, sorting, and reviewing family information on a particular person, surname/lastname etc.
Data Entry: computer genealogy programs, research calendars, correspondence
Reports: research summaries, reports and calendars/logs
Copies: copies of originals from client, working and deliverable copies, other relative copies, correspondence copies
Some individual researchers do not have computer skills or are good at it. Capabilities and Quality control measures. Pro - Company, Con - Individual.
Accounting:
Invoicing
Statements
Collections
Many may only send a note or email. Few have forms and standard processes or reminders. Most do not have programs or payment plans. Capabilities.
Pro - Company, Con - Individual
Research:
Initial review, preliminary research for proposal
Verification Research
Original Research
Heir/descendant research
Summaries
Reports
Research Calendars/Logs
Documents
The quality of reports, calendars/logs, and deliverables will usually be better with a Company. An individual may be better with time frames for delivery or lower cost if they are not doing any clerical. An individual will not have peer review, brainstorming with others, quality control measures, discussion of research methods as they might in a company. Capability and Quality. Pro - Company, Con - Individual
Deliverables:
Quality of what I receive - understandable, organized.
An individual will not usually be concerned with anyone other than themselves understanding what they are providing while a company may have several staff reviewing work and explaining reports to clients. Pro - Company, Con - Individual
While additional categories and subcategories of these services could be listed and explored in most cases a Professional Research Company will provide more of these services that fit the needs of most clients. Individual needs for services may very and in some limited cases an individual may meet those needs better.
Part I of Avoiding Pitfalls, has a Tips and Checklist that should also be consulted when reviewing an individual researcher or research company.
For further discussion and analysis we recommend consulting the professionals at: ForGenerations - 801-947-1897 or 877-400-4554.
Friday, November 30, 2007
Monday, November 5, 2007
Computer innovations & changes at Family History Library
The Family History Library in Salt Lake City, Utah continues to grow and improve. Movement of administrative offices out of the library to the Joseph Smith Memorial Building and the moving of more books back into the library were a start. Here's just a few other things you may not be aware of if you haven't visited in a while.
Digital copiers that copy images from films to CD-ROMS to save in copy charges and provide other advantages in publishing and recording information.
Print cards to allow fast printing from your workstation rather than having to go to the copy center.
Specialized printing from films to letter size, legal size or 11 x 17 size printouts.
Computer workstation monitors changing from CRT Monitors to Flat Screen and LCD or Plasma monitors for larger text, and more workspace for users.
USB drive support for computer users to upload and download files rather than use floppy drives or CD-ROM's.
Consolidation of printers from individual workstations to larger and better quality print stations.
PAF genealogy software loaded on workstations to allow quick loading of files.
Network card and cable connections for users bringing their own workstations or laptop computers to the Library. This has led to laptop or luggable computers that can now access the library printers and network without cable connections. Just let the computer use its internal card to find the network and synch up.
Innovations are constantly taking place. Online catalog, Temple Ready software. Access to internet and other subscription databases from the library. Many favorites and links to help in research in all areas of the work including online research guides. And almost everything for free.
The wonders just keep happening.
If you have a computer you can even volunteer time to help in transcribing records to link indexes to images of various databases.
If you haven't visited in a while, take a tour, you'll be surprised at the innovations that continue to come forth.
Thanks to all who contribute their time for the indexing, to those who donate for computers, money, time and more to these and other projects for the benefit of all. A big round of applause to all those who seldom get any credit or appreciation for their donations.
All for now from the inside, James.
Digital copiers that copy images from films to CD-ROMS to save in copy charges and provide other advantages in publishing and recording information.
Print cards to allow fast printing from your workstation rather than having to go to the copy center.
Specialized printing from films to letter size, legal size or 11 x 17 size printouts.
Computer workstation monitors changing from CRT Monitors to Flat Screen and LCD or Plasma monitors for larger text, and more workspace for users.
USB drive support for computer users to upload and download files rather than use floppy drives or CD-ROM's.
Consolidation of printers from individual workstations to larger and better quality print stations.
PAF genealogy software loaded on workstations to allow quick loading of files.
Network card and cable connections for users bringing their own workstations or laptop computers to the Library. This has led to laptop or luggable computers that can now access the library printers and network without cable connections. Just let the computer use its internal card to find the network and synch up.
Innovations are constantly taking place. Online catalog, Temple Ready software. Access to internet and other subscription databases from the library. Many favorites and links to help in research in all areas of the work including online research guides. And almost everything for free.
The wonders just keep happening.
If you have a computer you can even volunteer time to help in transcribing records to link indexes to images of various databases.
If you haven't visited in a while, take a tour, you'll be surprised at the innovations that continue to come forth.
Thanks to all who contribute their time for the indexing, to those who donate for computers, money, time and more to these and other projects for the benefit of all. A big round of applause to all those who seldom get any credit or appreciation for their donations.
All for now from the inside, James.
Temple Names without real research
It seems every few weeks I hear about someone having hundreds if not thousands of temple names submitted or cleared. Worst of all when no real research was done, they just pulled information from Ancestral File (AF) or Pedigree Resource File (PRF) or someones online posts or other databases. (WorldTree, One World Tree, etc.) (See other posts on these)
While submitters using Temple Ready software are counseled to check the online International Genealogical Index (IGI) for more recently submitted work, many still neglect this process, particularly research companies.
Some do limited checking of the online IGI by using Ohana Softwares PAF Insight to do it for them. Some run it through once or a few times. What they fail to realize is that individual lookups still need to be done with various spellings not caught or handled properly by PAF Insight.
An example we saw recently involved 539 name cards provided to a client by another research company. Utilizing PAF Insight on these names we located numerous duplicates or already completed work identifying several hundred of the individuals on the cards as already having had work submitted and completed. Additional individual lookups with variations in spelling and forms of given names and surnames resulted in only 75 names on cards not having been already completed. So over 80% had already been done.
The question might be asked why individuals don't check them more thoroughly. Many answers to this question can be suggested. Ignoring the need to check online IGI. No knowledge of PAF Insight or other computer software checking programs. A lack of understanding of Temple Ready, Temple Update, and PAF Insights limitations. Or in some instances a deliberate avoidance of these extra procedures to save time, money, and have inflated results. To those who neglect these procedures knowingly we say shame. Multiple peoples time and effort go into seeing that staffing and this work is done. Some have estimated as much as 17 hours per submitted name. With that in mind doesn't it make sense to work harder to check them and reduce the numbers to only those which haven't been submitted and really should be.
If you're having a hard time because someone doesn't have the same spelling on the last name, or a different abbreviation or spelling on the given name, or the same birth but a different location, get over it. It's the same person. Record it properly in your records and genealogy or family history software, record that it's already done and move on.
We've seen instances of an individual having their work done 25-50 times. Why?, Why? Why?. If they have the same spouse, same children, or same parents, chances are its the same person. Familiarity with name variations will clear a few more duplicates. (ex. Johannes, Johann, Johan, John, Hans, Jan.) Depending on the original birth place and language all could refer to the same individual. Unfortunately many submit names for temple work from Census records without making an effort to located birth, death, burial, or marriage records for the same individuals. Thorough research takes time. Seldom are census records the only records available.
So do everyone a favor, spend more time in checking for duplicates. Individual lookups, learning name variations, spelling variations, nicknames (ex. Mary, Polly, Nancy) and many more exist. Don't resubmit just because the date isn't exact, or the exact location, if its the same person slight variations don't require the work to be resubmitted.
And thanks for doing it right to all those who've learned this already.
That's all for now from the inside, James.
While submitters using Temple Ready software are counseled to check the online International Genealogical Index (IGI) for more recently submitted work, many still neglect this process, particularly research companies.
Some do limited checking of the online IGI by using Ohana Softwares PAF Insight to do it for them. Some run it through once or a few times. What they fail to realize is that individual lookups still need to be done with various spellings not caught or handled properly by PAF Insight.
An example we saw recently involved 539 name cards provided to a client by another research company. Utilizing PAF Insight on these names we located numerous duplicates or already completed work identifying several hundred of the individuals on the cards as already having had work submitted and completed. Additional individual lookups with variations in spelling and forms of given names and surnames resulted in only 75 names on cards not having been already completed. So over 80% had already been done.
The question might be asked why individuals don't check them more thoroughly. Many answers to this question can be suggested. Ignoring the need to check online IGI. No knowledge of PAF Insight or other computer software checking programs. A lack of understanding of Temple Ready, Temple Update, and PAF Insights limitations. Or in some instances a deliberate avoidance of these extra procedures to save time, money, and have inflated results. To those who neglect these procedures knowingly we say shame. Multiple peoples time and effort go into seeing that staffing and this work is done. Some have estimated as much as 17 hours per submitted name. With that in mind doesn't it make sense to work harder to check them and reduce the numbers to only those which haven't been submitted and really should be.
If you're having a hard time because someone doesn't have the same spelling on the last name, or a different abbreviation or spelling on the given name, or the same birth but a different location, get over it. It's the same person. Record it properly in your records and genealogy or family history software, record that it's already done and move on.
We've seen instances of an individual having their work done 25-50 times. Why?, Why? Why?. If they have the same spouse, same children, or same parents, chances are its the same person. Familiarity with name variations will clear a few more duplicates. (ex. Johannes, Johann, Johan, John, Hans, Jan.) Depending on the original birth place and language all could refer to the same individual. Unfortunately many submit names for temple work from Census records without making an effort to located birth, death, burial, or marriage records for the same individuals. Thorough research takes time. Seldom are census records the only records available.
So do everyone a favor, spend more time in checking for duplicates. Individual lookups, learning name variations, spelling variations, nicknames (ex. Mary, Polly, Nancy) and many more exist. Don't resubmit just because the date isn't exact, or the exact location, if its the same person slight variations don't require the work to be resubmitted.
And thanks for doing it right to all those who've learned this already.
That's all for now from the inside, James.
Indexing of US Censuses
Recently, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday Saints and their Family History Library and Family History Centers parted ways with Ancestry.com and licensing their databases particularly with the US Censuses.
I was sitting in a meeting and momentarily shocked when I heard numerous people referring to how wonderful it will be to have the U.S. Census images indexed. I took a few moments to inform them that Ancestry.com, Heritage Quest and others already had the scanned images and most of the indexes for years now.
It never ceases to amaze me how uninformed people are. I guess I just need to keep learning it and remember that most people know far less than we give them credit for when referring to genealogy and family history. Particularly new developments.
When I shifted from research into sales, account management and client support for research clients it was because I saw so many researchers talk over the clients heads, become offended by their lack of knowledge and unwilling or irritated to talk down to their level. It reminded me that we all need a doze of tolerance, me included, and that we are all on different levels. Some beginners, some amateurs, some novices, some intermediate, some advanced researchers. The desparity between each is also unnerving. See the post on research companies, you may be surprised at the differences.
All researchers and research companies are not created equal so it pays to do your homework.
All for now from the inside, James.
I was sitting in a meeting and momentarily shocked when I heard numerous people referring to how wonderful it will be to have the U.S. Census images indexed. I took a few moments to inform them that Ancestry.com, Heritage Quest and others already had the scanned images and most of the indexes for years now.
It never ceases to amaze me how uninformed people are. I guess I just need to keep learning it and remember that most people know far less than we give them credit for when referring to genealogy and family history. Particularly new developments.
When I shifted from research into sales, account management and client support for research clients it was because I saw so many researchers talk over the clients heads, become offended by their lack of knowledge and unwilling or irritated to talk down to their level. It reminded me that we all need a doze of tolerance, me included, and that we are all on different levels. Some beginners, some amateurs, some novices, some intermediate, some advanced researchers. The desparity between each is also unnerving. See the post on research companies, you may be surprised at the differences.
All researchers and research companies are not created equal so it pays to do your homework.
All for now from the inside, James.
Saturday, October 6, 2007
Privacy Laws affecting Research work
Unfortunately, we live in an age of identity theft and computer fraud. Fake identification for illegal aliens and criminals and other types of identity theft has caused tighter laws on information.
These shifting laws create great hardships for document repositories/archives in that they are having to pull books or microfilms or microfiche at times from the shelves that make this published information no longer available to researchers. This can vary from country to country and state to state and even within states.
Finding a proper balancing act will continue to be a problem. We urge caution in finding proper limits.
While their are many examples for and against here's one to illustrate:
A family wishes to research their family history on the great-grandmother's ancestry. Their great-grandmother is deceased and died in 1904. She died just after child birth. Most civil records published in Wyoming began recordings in 1906. The father in addition to the loss of his wife and newborn child had several other small children to care for. A major work accident crippled him resulting in his being committed to hospital and insane asylum. The youngest daughter was adopted. This adopted daughter is now deceased. All of the other children are deceased as well as the great-grandfather and have nothing in their records to help.
The adoption was thought to possibly have more information. Wyoming State law requires that only grandparents, parents or guardian of the child can get the records. Hoping the records would tell more about the mother the court was petitioned as none of those are living. The Court said that although we were not direct descendants of the adopted daughter we could have the state supplied confidential intermediary review the records for information on the mother or other helpful information since our clients were direct descendants of the mother. Again they said they would grant for the records to be searched then said they would have a confidential intermediary contact us. Without notice they quickly changed their mind and correspondence revealed the change of heart. The Judge rather than helping the family did not want to set a precedent and said since the law is still on the books that the state legislature would have to be petitioned to change the law.
The question should be who is harmed by providing the information if any. Other examples can go the other way. We don't think their is an easy catch all solution but closing off all information is also not an answer. And tying things up in legal fees, courts, and legislatures is also not the answer, but something needs to be done.
Laws are changed every day. We hope you'll talk to your legislatures, be aware of the laws, actively petition for law changes that make sense and protect opportunities for research that allow families to learn their heritage.
Something to consider. For us and for them, for generations. James.
These shifting laws create great hardships for document repositories/archives in that they are having to pull books or microfilms or microfiche at times from the shelves that make this published information no longer available to researchers. This can vary from country to country and state to state and even within states.
Finding a proper balancing act will continue to be a problem. We urge caution in finding proper limits.
While their are many examples for and against here's one to illustrate:
A family wishes to research their family history on the great-grandmother's ancestry. Their great-grandmother is deceased and died in 1904. She died just after child birth. Most civil records published in Wyoming began recordings in 1906. The father in addition to the loss of his wife and newborn child had several other small children to care for. A major work accident crippled him resulting in his being committed to hospital and insane asylum. The youngest daughter was adopted. This adopted daughter is now deceased. All of the other children are deceased as well as the great-grandfather and have nothing in their records to help.
The adoption was thought to possibly have more information. Wyoming State law requires that only grandparents, parents or guardian of the child can get the records. Hoping the records would tell more about the mother the court was petitioned as none of those are living. The Court said that although we were not direct descendants of the adopted daughter we could have the state supplied confidential intermediary review the records for information on the mother or other helpful information since our clients were direct descendants of the mother. Again they said they would grant for the records to be searched then said they would have a confidential intermediary contact us. Without notice they quickly changed their mind and correspondence revealed the change of heart. The Judge rather than helping the family did not want to set a precedent and said since the law is still on the books that the state legislature would have to be petitioned to change the law.
The question should be who is harmed by providing the information if any. Other examples can go the other way. We don't think their is an easy catch all solution but closing off all information is also not an answer. And tying things up in legal fees, courts, and legislatures is also not the answer, but something needs to be done.
Laws are changed every day. We hope you'll talk to your legislatures, be aware of the laws, actively petition for law changes that make sense and protect opportunities for research that allow families to learn their heritage.
Something to consider. For us and for them, for generations. James.
Documenting Genealogy - A computer problem
Documenting Genealogy in any day and age is a problem. All to frequently information is undocumented. Even in our profession, years ago historians and researchers did a less than stellar job of documenting. Here are a few examples you may recall:
Books written that list a large number of sources at the beginning of the book, some good documented sources but others undocumented and all lumped together at the front of the book. Then the genealogies (Pedigree charts, family group sheets with names, dates and places) are listed but the specific sources are not identified. Ugh! What a shame!
Our perhaps you've seen a family group sheet/book of remembrance sheet that lists a few sources on the bottom of the page but doesn't identify the member of the family or individual that they pertain too or the specific event (birth, baptism/christening, marriage, death, burial, etc). Ouch! If that doesn't bother you it should. Even from an education reporting standpoint.
Students are taught when doing research papers to quote their sources and footnote the specific points that pertain to them. Family history research and genealogical research is and should be done the same. Sources each for every event, birth, baptism/christening, marriage, draft, divorce, death, burial, etc. Nothing new just how it should be done correctly.
So in an age of computer technology you think we'd improve. Unfortunately not.
Take all the leading genealogy software programs (PAF, Ancestral Quest, Family Tree Maker, Legacy, Family Origins, Roots Magic, TMG, etc.) they all are flawed in the basic area of sourcing.
With many years of experience with software development companies the solution appears to be very simple. So why don't they require it for every record creation/new name entry, event date or note. Most say it would make the product to difficult for people to use or they wouldn't do anything if they had to. Is that a good enough answer? Don't do it because people won't buy my program if I force them to enter sources. In a market driven society that makes sense.
Solution - So why not make it a setup option. For those who are serious about sourcing it would solve the problem and for those who don't care about sources they would go on as they have.
A Dream you say - Hopefully not - Here's an idea.
How could software developers solve this -
When you first enter the genealogy program you create/enter your name or select from a list of users already entered. The program picks this up and takes the current computer date and time. (ex. Personal knowledge of James Clemans, 10/6/07 8 a.m. ) At least that way anyone looking at the source knows who entered it. If it came from someone else and they didn't source anything, you would put them as the default source on everything until you have something better. At least you'd knew where it started. A list of default sources or categories are provided in most software and are customizable so it wouldn't take much. Can this problem be solved? We hope so, we plead for it to be so. If you work for a genealogy software company please make it so.
So lets all ask and be positive and maybe, just maybe, we'll get what we ask for. Even though it may make us work a little more, it will be worth it, now and later.
For Generations to come, James.
Books written that list a large number of sources at the beginning of the book, some good documented sources but others undocumented and all lumped together at the front of the book. Then the genealogies (Pedigree charts, family group sheets with names, dates and places) are listed but the specific sources are not identified. Ugh! What a shame!
Our perhaps you've seen a family group sheet/book of remembrance sheet that lists a few sources on the bottom of the page but doesn't identify the member of the family or individual that they pertain too or the specific event (birth, baptism/christening, marriage, death, burial, etc). Ouch! If that doesn't bother you it should. Even from an education reporting standpoint.
Students are taught when doing research papers to quote their sources and footnote the specific points that pertain to them. Family history research and genealogical research is and should be done the same. Sources each for every event, birth, baptism/christening, marriage, draft, divorce, death, burial, etc. Nothing new just how it should be done correctly.
So in an age of computer technology you think we'd improve. Unfortunately not.
Take all the leading genealogy software programs (PAF, Ancestral Quest, Family Tree Maker, Legacy, Family Origins, Roots Magic, TMG, etc.) they all are flawed in the basic area of sourcing.
With many years of experience with software development companies the solution appears to be very simple. So why don't they require it for every record creation/new name entry, event date or note. Most say it would make the product to difficult for people to use or they wouldn't do anything if they had to. Is that a good enough answer? Don't do it because people won't buy my program if I force them to enter sources. In a market driven society that makes sense.
Solution - So why not make it a setup option. For those who are serious about sourcing it would solve the problem and for those who don't care about sources they would go on as they have.
A Dream you say - Hopefully not - Here's an idea.
How could software developers solve this -
When you first enter the genealogy program you create/enter your name or select from a list of users already entered. The program picks this up and takes the current computer date and time. (ex. Personal knowledge of James Clemans, 10/6/07 8 a.m. ) At least that way anyone looking at the source knows who entered it. If it came from someone else and they didn't source anything, you would put them as the default source on everything until you have something better. At least you'd knew where it started. A list of default sources or categories are provided in most software and are customizable so it wouldn't take much. Can this problem be solved? We hope so, we plead for it to be so. If you work for a genealogy software company please make it so.
So lets all ask and be positive and maybe, just maybe, we'll get what we ask for. Even though it may make us work a little more, it will be worth it, now and later.
For Generations to come, James.
Online Genealogy - Mixed Reviews
Online Genealogy -
While more and more records are being entered into computers by scanning and data entry the fact remains that this amounts to an extremely small amount of filmed records or books from published sources.
A year or two ago I had a novice genealogist suggest that they were doing all their research online using online databases. They were looking up information submitted by individuals to various internet sites (Ancestry.com, Genealogy.com, Genforum, Rootsweb.com, Familysearch.com) primarily and using it for all their information.
One of the starting points was Ancestral File (AF) which contains user submitted, undocumented, and unverified information. (See articles concerning AF issues) Next they had message posts from various people in family trees, forums, message boards. The one major flaw in much of this was that it was undocumented information.
Since many online database services have digital images of most Censues 1800-1930 for subscription fees (HeritageQuest, Ancestry, Newsbank, Godfrey, etc) this was a novices' idea of documentation. Undocumented posts and information and census records. A conclusion that horrifies and frustrates any research minded individual let alone a professional researcher. You need to remember that Census enumerations are secondary records. AF and online posts are not sources. They are not documentation unless written by someone who attended the event (birth, baptism/christening, marriage, death, burial, funeral, etc.). So until many more of these records are available online research will remain a part of research but not the complete answer.
Does that mean don't use them. - No. Use what you can but remember the difference between undocumented and documented information and real vital record, civil or church source records and documents. More will continue to be added and make online work more beneficial but for now, don't forget to use the books and films that are published in addition to the online. You'll save yourself and others a lot of headaches by properly documenting.
More and more online services are constantly being added and more partnerships and alliances mean more scanning of images done sooner but the volume of work to be done versus what is currently available is staggering. Just walk through any of the major repositories in the country and ask how much is digitized/scanned images, computer entered and indexed and online.
The answers may surprise you. Til next time, James.
While more and more records are being entered into computers by scanning and data entry the fact remains that this amounts to an extremely small amount of filmed records or books from published sources.
A year or two ago I had a novice genealogist suggest that they were doing all their research online using online databases. They were looking up information submitted by individuals to various internet sites (Ancestry.com, Genealogy.com, Genforum, Rootsweb.com, Familysearch.com) primarily and using it for all their information.
One of the starting points was Ancestral File (AF) which contains user submitted, undocumented, and unverified information. (See articles concerning AF issues) Next they had message posts from various people in family trees, forums, message boards. The one major flaw in much of this was that it was undocumented information.
Since many online database services have digital images of most Censues 1800-1930 for subscription fees (HeritageQuest, Ancestry, Newsbank, Godfrey, etc) this was a novices' idea of documentation. Undocumented posts and information and census records. A conclusion that horrifies and frustrates any research minded individual let alone a professional researcher. You need to remember that Census enumerations are secondary records. AF and online posts are not sources. They are not documentation unless written by someone who attended the event (birth, baptism/christening, marriage, death, burial, funeral, etc.). So until many more of these records are available online research will remain a part of research but not the complete answer.
Does that mean don't use them. - No. Use what you can but remember the difference between undocumented and documented information and real vital record, civil or church source records and documents. More will continue to be added and make online work more beneficial but for now, don't forget to use the books and films that are published in addition to the online. You'll save yourself and others a lot of headaches by properly documenting.
More and more online services are constantly being added and more partnerships and alliances mean more scanning of images done sooner but the volume of work to be done versus what is currently available is staggering. Just walk through any of the major repositories in the country and ask how much is digitized/scanned images, computer entered and indexed and online.
The answers may surprise you. Til next time, James.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
