Why is it important to show the detail in a source?

Question

I use marriage records from Family Search a lot.  I have recently noticed that the detail for some records has been reduced from what was shown before.  For those records where a copy of the origional is available it does not matter but for those where the origional is not shown it does.

For example:  The marriage record for Thomas Sheils and Sarah Langford on 1 Jan. 1880 in Otoe. Co. Nebraska.  Today the record just has the names and date.  

When I first found this record a number of years ago it also had:  Groom's Father's Name: John Sheils . Groom's Mother's Name: Rsann Monahan. Bride's Father's Name: Joseph Langford. Bride's Mother's Name: Sarah Jane Hamilton.  Luckily I made a copy of the entire record the first time.  - Yes I checked the source film numbers and reference numbers are the same.  Family Search is limiting what is shown on the record.

So a warning - it is necessary to put the detail in the source - as the availability of the source material in the future is not certain.

Comments

Good reminder Philip.

---

I agree completely - I have not been able to find sources I KNOW I found previously. I guess that's the nature of the Internet, fleeting status of information!

---

When I look at the mariage record on FamilySearch, I can see the names of the four parents!

---

Hi Philip!

I found this on FamilySearch, which seems to mention parents names.

* "Nebraska Marriages, 1855-1995", database, FamilySearch(https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:X5ZY-LQS : 8 June 2021), Sarah E. Langford in entry for Thomas Sheils, 1880.

Answer 1

I've seen records with and without the information, and I think it depends on which document has been transcribed and what county & state it is from. It seems like some of the counties in N. Carolina and Indiana don't include as much information as other counties and/or states.

I also notice that the same record is transcribed more than once in the same collection.

I'm not sure if FamilySearch is limiting the amount of data, or if it's just a matter of which collection you're viewing, but I've also noticed that the portion of the citation that says "citing [page, line, etc] " is not available for some of the marriage records.

Comments

Julie,

All that you mention is true.  

In the case listed there is only one version of the record and the identification from the current limited version is identical to the earlier version with more complete material.  Also a search for the parents which should pull up the marriage of children does not  - so the mateial is being limited in this specific case.

As we never know if material will continue to be available it means we must list the detail in our sorces.

---

Agreed, Philip! :)

That's so frustrating. I wonder if anyone has more information on why that is happening.

Answer 2

Philip --

I just took a look at the "Known Problems" for the collection and found the following answer:

Question #1: I can no longer see parent’s names on these records. Can you help me with this?
Answer #1: At the request of the Nebraska State Archives, the names of the parents have been removed from the index shown at familysearch.org. For a fee you may request a certificate from the state that would include the parent’s names at Nebraska Vital Records.

 

Comments

Julie,

Thank you.

It's always about the money.

Phil

---

It certainly seems like it, doesn't it? :-/

---

...  ..

Answer 3

I am another who copies the details into the source.  However, some source-bot comes along and deletes all the info, and many times shortens the reference to just for example,1940 census, instead of the actual census record.  I hate it.

How to we make a push to get the sourcerers to stop removing info?

Comments

Hi Rick. Without naming an example profile (so as to avoid blame), could you let us know what the comment in the change history was for one or two such such edits? That might help to clarify what is going on.

As far as I know there is no such thing as a "source-bot". There is EditBot, but it doesn't usually remove source text.

Edited to add: I assumed you were talking about something that happens on WikiTree, but if instead it's happening on FamilySearch please ignore my question.

---

Hi Rick! Did you mean sourcers, or Sourcerers? The Sourcerers project has standards members are meant to adhere to. See https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Sourcerers_FAQ#How_do_I_know_whether_a_profile_is_Unsourced.2C_when_it_has_some_limited_citation.3F

If you encounter someone who is a Sourcerer just adding 1940 census, get in touch and the Project Team will reaudit their contributions.

---

Hi Jim,

No, something happening on WT.  I will start logging when I find the changes.

Funny, after my post, I noticed it was an old G2G, so I figured nothing would happen.  Then both you and Wendy replied.  I will let you know when I stumble across again...