Does a See Also entry count as a source?

Question

I added a Find A Grave entry for a child who died at about a year of age.  The only source for it is a non imaged source of the grave.  I put it under See Also because of the lack of a headstone.  Should I remove the unsourced category in your opinion?

Comments

Hi Beulah. Yes, {{Unsourced}} should be removed. A Find a Grave memorial with a number counts as a source for this purpose, whether or not it has a photo: see

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Sources_FAQ#When_should_the_Unsourced_Research_Note_Box_be_used.3F

(I'm assuming that the profile is not pre-1700.)

---

I did not expect so much confusion over this entry.  The simple profile involved lacked the photo and it used to be forbidden to use FG under good circumstances.  Therefore the question. This is the profile number  [[http://Thompson-26486|Eliza Livingston Thompson]]

---

Beulah. That profile is post 1700, so the Find a Grave is considered as reliable with or without a photo, since the actual ID is given, vs saying just findagrave.com, as stated in the Sources FAQ page that Jim and I have posted. 

I don't remember that it was ever forbidden, but many people don't consider it reliable unless the photo is given. That Help page does not state it. Reviewing the Help page for Find a Grave has similar information, it states it may not be considered as reliable without the photo, but also depending on when the gravestone was created.

---

I have removed the unsourced category, entered the memorial as a source and am ready to continue sourcing more profiles this week end.  Thank you for all of the interesting advice.  I may have missed out using some FG entries
for several years but will use them from now on.
Don't ever get old my friends!!!

Answer 1

No.  It is still Unsourced.  "See Also" is for items which are not being used as sources, but which are relevant.

Comments

The See also: section should consist of cited sources: Help:Sources#List_them_at_the_bottom .

---

Sources FAQ Help Page  has the following, so it is considered a source IF it has the #, as Jim stated, for Post 1700

We use the {{Unsourced}} Research Note Box to identify profiles with no clear identification of where any information on the profile came from.

It should be used on any profile with no source citations, or no source citations that clearly identify the source.

Here are examples of source citations that would be sufficiently specific:

• "Find-A-Grave Memorial #1234"

---

Thank you Linda. The Help page I cited clearly states that the {{Unsourced}} template should not be used on a profile where a numbered Find a Grave memorial is mentioned. It does not make exceptions either for memorials without photos or for ones in the "See also" section.

---

I think this is where I got my interpretation.  It is on the Palatine Migration records page.  Find A Grave memorials: Many memorials come without an actual burial place and burial details, and are in fact reconstructed from trees. These cannot be used as sources. Only those memorials with photographic evidence of the burial should be used as a source.

 

---

To save other people hunting, the quote Beulah gives is from

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Palatine_Migration_Project_Reliable_Sources#Unreliable_Sources

That might mean that for a profile covered by the Palatine Migration project, a Find a Grave memorial without an image could not be placed on the profile. But once a numbered FG memorial, with image or not, does appear somewhere on a profile, the Unsourced template cannot also be present. Project guidelines do not override WikiTree rules.

---

Thank you for making that clearer.  I have apparently been under the wrong impression for several years and will now have more freedom adding sources to profiles.  Thanks to Melanie Paul I do know how to do it correctly.  I don't feel I do too badly for a self taught computer user starting in her 70s with no expert living in the house to ask help from.  I stay clear of very complicated interactions and mostly stick to adding sources.

---

I'm glad it's sorted out, Beulah. Your approach is a valuable and constructive one.

Answer 2

Looks like there are two questions here.

1) a See Also is not a source, but relevant info. It could be a lot of items, such as a county history book that doesn't have source citations (which should be tracked down and verified if there are some). Great for clues, though.

2) Find-a-Grave without a photo. Is there anything else on that profile page? Where did the person who set it up get their info? If there's no marker, I'd lean toward No, not yet. Anyone can set up a memorial and type anything into it. The photo makes a difference. Are there any cemetery records, newspaper items, birth or christening records, family Bibles? It depends on the place and time what might be waiting to be found. I'd be leaning toward leaving it as a See Also, with Research Notes about what records have been sought, and what else might be sought.

Comments

Sally,

1. Where is the guidance that See Also is not a source? I checked on the Sources Help and Sources Style and that just says to put Sources under See Also. I do think I might have seen this, outside of numerous G2G discussions, but don't have the reference at hand. Thanks

2. To some extent this might depend on the time and place. I might guess that Beulah is working in rural New York where there were no death records but that there might be family in the same cemetery. It is also possible that the sexton, or someone with cemetery records, is the one who made the memorial, which would give it more merit. And also does the child who died so young fit in with the other children by that mother, and if she was in the 1900 (or 1865 NY) census does this match the number of children?

---

If you do inline references, and then put "See Also" directly underneath
==Sources==
<references/>
See Also:

when the inline references show up underneath the references/, they will appear *before* "See Also". So the system does it automatically and puts "See Also" *after" all the sources.  Try it on your own profile, and you will see what I mean.

---

I think you are approaching it correctly Kay, I put things into See Also that might give context but not be direct sources for the person, but also the links to Ancestry trees or person profiles in familysearch. There is no way for you to sus out the difference without evaluating each one or building a massive reference table somewhere.

---

Jonathan,

On the other hand, published books, also found in the source library, could be considered by some as see also but within context do add as sources that describe the person's life. For example https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Salsbury-254. So in this case they don't belong in See Also. (No, his papers as a circuit preacher have not been located; I suspect he conducted the marriage for his sister.)

---

Thanks, I was referring more to family websites or wikipedia pages for my examples, but good note.