Talk:Cite Your Sources (Source Footnotes)

The "Family Trees" article mentions the concept of citing sources, but the "Cite Your Sources" articles does not mention pedigrees or family trees. Therefore, I'm deleting Family Trees as a related topic.

Diltsgd 17:00, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Source Examples
I was hoping to find a resource for documentation examples. I have the SVPUG book and the book "Evidence" but it is not helpful in showing examples of LDS Source (*s) in PAF. Web searches have been unfruitful or too broad. What about possibly having LDS records documentation examples here in this Wiki? Mullenixbe 23:52, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

As I created the examples you requested I was struck by how differently these things might be done. Certainly the way I suggest differs markedly from the source citation you get when you download it from the site itself. Diltsgd 00:07, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, and even the same census records on the major websites offer different source details. Heritage Quest provides the NARA microfilm roll number and page number, but Record Search uses the UGA film number and image numbers. I echo the wish for citation examples for each database on Record Search. I use Legacy (and their SourceWriter Templates which are based on Elizabeth Shown Mills' book). Lise 19:33, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Citation Format
I believe that Evidence Explained (EE) is so comprehensive, it will serve as a genealogical industry standard for decades and should be adopted as the citation style reference we use herein. Steven Law and I have been studying it closely and would be happy to answer any questions anyone might have about how LDS Sources might be rendered in EE style for the wiki. Robert10:23, 9 April 2008

From every mountainside let freedom ring! This is a Wiki, an ever-changing landscape. Let us encourage others to use this Wiki by encouraging freedom to adopt the style guide of their choice that suits their needs and their own personal style of research. You are welcome to invite someone to use your favorite standard. But please stay away from insisting, or implyng others are doing it wrong if they choose differently than you. Some of us prefer ''The Chicago Manual of Style. Diltsgd 14:22, 10 April 2009 (UTC)''

OK. You convinced me. We should aim for a neutral point of view. Robert 18:10, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank YOU / YOUR Article is Selected
The FamilySearch Research Wiki is delighted to let you know that the “Cite Your Sources” article you helped create will be highlighted on the Main Page of the Wiki. It will appear May 2, 2012 and remain for seven days. Thank you for your excellent work – you have given readers/researchers important access to records. Your contributions are appreciated and will assist others in finding their ancestors. You have made a difference in research!

Please note:

We invite you to do any enhancing, editing or changing to this article before we post it. If you are considering an edit we ask that it be completed by May 1, 2012. If you feel this article is not ready to be highlighted, please let us know. Thank you for your time and effort! Featured Article Committee members -

Thank YOU / YOUR Article is Selected
The FamilySearch Research Wiki is delighted to let you know that the “Cite Your Sources” article you helped create will be highlighted on the Main Page of the Wiki. It will appear May 4, 2012 and remain for seven days. Thank you for your excellent work – you have given readers/researchers important access to records. Your contributions are appreciated and will assist others in finding their ancestors. You have made a difference in research!

Please note:

We invite you to do any enhancing, editing or changing to this article before we post it. If you are considering an edit we ask that it be completed by May 3, 2012. If you feel this article is not ready to be highlighted, please let us know. Thank you for your time and effort! Featured Article Committee members -

Split This Page
One principle of a wiki is neutral point of view. This article presents "ideal" formats that are not generally considered as such by a majority of authors, most genealogical database programs, one of the accreditation organizations, the National Genealogical Society, nation-wide genealogical journals, and purchasers of citation style books. To comply with wiki principles, this article needs to be fixed to reflect to diverse citation styles that exist in this world. Does anyone have any problems if we split the article into separate pages according to the different style types? I suggest articles titled "Citations (Chicago Style)," "Citations (Evidence Style)," and possibly others. There may be others. There's no need for Turabian, as the University of Chicago press has folded it into Chicago style. How shall we handle examples designed specifically for PAF and Ancestral Quest? Are there objections to articles explaining how to use specific products? Perhaps those examples should be moved to an article titled "Citations in PAF." Let me know before I undertake any action. RaymondRS (talk) 15:36, 22 November 2017 (UTC)