[APG Public List] 1840 Census - Citation Question

Rondina Muncy rondina.muncy at gmail.com
Sun Oct 4 12:15:13 MDT 2009


You have correctly interpreted EE. I take into account that my client or
descendants are not going to understand the use of the term *folio* so I use
*page* instead. One of the biggest lessons here is not to take the citation
that is assigned by Ancestry or Heritage Quest, &c at face value. It is up
to you to cite the correct page number. That page number would be the same
no matter what the source of the record is (Ancestry, Footnote, HQ or NARA
microfilm). I disagree with Harold. The point of a citation is to be able to
trace the record and I believe that being as exact as possible in citations
is important. We know that if an index in a book says that a surname is on
page 13 and we don't find it there to look at the pages before and after
page 13 because it has been misindexed. Stating that the Waggoner entry is
on page 218, IMO, is the same as an incorrect index entry. In the end, when
someone attempts to verify the information, he/she is hunting the entry down
as they will not find it on page 218, line 13.

In this case you are attempting to not only correct your citations, but to
make them consistent. Many times I have asked picky questions about
citations and been chided for being so---well, nit-picky. What many readers
do not understand is that I am not asking about ONE citation, I am making a
decision for ALL citations of a similar nature. In this instance, when
taking into account the number of census records Arne's decisions could
potentially effect, I believe that making a careful decision about how to
proceed is worth the time.

I would have written the citation as follows:

1840 U.S. census, Warren County, Ohio, population schedule, Salem Township,
page 217 (stamped, verso) line 13, Wentel  [Ventel/Ventle] Waggoner
household; digital image ....

Rondina P. Muncy
Ancestral Analysis
2960 Trail Lake Drive
Grapevine, Texas 76051
rondina.muncy at gmail.com

On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Arne H. Trelvik <atrelvik at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm cleaning up a lot of source citations after switching from FTM16 to
> RM4.
> The 1840 census for Warren County Ohio has no page numbers on the left
> sheet which lists the households and has a stamped number 218 on the
> facing right sheet
> http://search.ancestry.com/iexec/?htx=View&r=an&dbid=8057&iid=OHM704_431-0436&fn=Henry+C&ln=Jones&st=d&ssrc=&pid=3346840
> I'm working on line 13 which Ancestry has indexed as "Wentel" Waggoner
> [name was actually Ventel/Ventle]
> The Ancestry.com source citation calls the left sheet page 218.
> EE page 260 indicates that the pages should be cited as folio 218
> (recto or front) and folio 218 (verso or back)
> I'm interpreting EE page 260 to mean that I should cite the page for
> the above example as 217 (back) line 13 since it is physically located
> on the reverse side of the page stamped 217.
> I've got a lot of similar citations to fix.  Before I do that, I would
> appreciate some feedback on whether I've interpreted EE page 260
> correctly.
> If 217 (back) is correct, would you suggest that the citation point
> out that ancestry.com calls it page 218?
> Thank you.
> Arne Trelvik
> Lebanon, Ohio
> _______________________________________________
> APG Public Mailing List
> http://apgen.org/publications/publiclist/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: ../attachments/20091004/b6bfe447/attachment.html

More information about the APGPublicList mailing list