Jump to content


Photo

How to cite "social networking" sites?


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 wfb

wfb

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 34 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 08:28 AM

Folks,

Some "social networking" sites provide useful genealogical information. For example, I found a picture of a relative at classmates.com . I would like to properly cite the source of this picture (and a bit of other information from that web site), but I can't find any really appropriate SourceWizard template. I assume that someone attempting to cite other "social networking" sites such as facebook.com will face this same problem. Has anyone developed an appropriate template for such sources? If so, if would be very helpful if you could you post it here so others might be able to use it!

Many thanks,
Wayne

#2 bienia

bienia

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 784 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 12:24 PM

Elizabeth Mills discusses these types of sites in her Evidence Explained, 2nd Ed (2009), sec. 2.33 p. 57 and sec. 2.34-2.37, pp. 58-60, although she doesn't provide a specific model. (The reference to social networking sites such as Facebook, MySpace and LinkedIn was added in the 2nd edition.)

As starting points, see Websites "as Book" and Basic Online Template (from Quicksheet for Online Sources [Red].).
-----------
Bill Bienia

RootsMagic Tips sheets: www.CobblestoneLegacies.com/resources.htm

#3 KenCRoy

KenCRoy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 316 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 06:00 PM

Elizabeth Mills discusses these types of sites in her Evidence Explained, 2nd Ed (2009), sec. 2.33 p. 57 and sec. 2.34-2.37, pp. 58-60, although she doesn't provide a specific model. (The reference to social networking sites such as Facebook, MySpace and LinkedIn was added in the 2nd edition.)

As starting points, see Websites "as Book" and Basic Online Template (from Quicksheet for Online Sources [Red].).

Bill,

Based on your reply, is it fair to imply that RM does not have the templates for the 2nd Edition of Evidence Explained?

Ken

#4 Nettie

Nettie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1655 posts

Posted 23 March 2010 - 11:18 AM

Bill,

Based on your reply, is it fair to imply that RM does not have the templates for the 2nd Edition of Evidence Explained?

Ken


Announcing the New Second Edition of Evidence Explained: Citing History Sources from Artifacts to Cyberspace, by Elizabeth Shown Mills
originally posted in Genealogy Pointers (10-20-09)

EE 2nd addition was announced by Dear Myrtle's Blog on 2 Oct 2009. :) No RM4 has only the templates for EE 1st addition [2007] You may have to create your own, or follow other's suggestionns. :)

Genealogy:
"I work on genealogy only on days that end in "Y"." [Grin!!!]
from www.GenealogyDaily.com.
"Documentation....The hardest part of genealogy"
"Genealogy is like Hide & Seek: They Hide & I Seek!"
" Genealogists: People helping people.....that's what it's all about!"
from http://www.rootsweb....nry/gentags.htm
Using FO and RM since FO2.0 


#5 bienia

bienia

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 784 posts

Posted 23 March 2010 - 01:16 PM

Bill,

Based on your reply, is it fair to imply that RM does not have the templates for the 2nd Edition of Evidence Explained?

Ken

That's not completely accurate. There are only a few minor changes in the tempaltes between the 1st Ed., and the 2nd Ed. I've compared both editions, almost word for word. There are changes in the examples used where URLs have changed and were updated for the 2nd Ed. Much of the changes were in the discussion text where Elizabeth made quite a few changes to improve wording for clarification purposes.

I'm in contact with Elizabeth about some discrepencies I've found, almost all of which are common to both editions. (The changes are already in the RM4 templates.) There are a few new additions that Elizabeth added that I will be creating new templates for, but not many. I guess that will now include a "social networking" template. Once I resolve the issues with Elizabeth (she is one very busy lady), I'll be sending updates to Bruce to include in a future update. (No schedule on my part as I wait for Elizabeth.)
-----------
Bill Bienia

RootsMagic Tips sheets: www.CobblestoneLegacies.com/resources.htm

#6 KenCRoy

KenCRoy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 316 posts

Posted 23 March 2010 - 03:28 PM

That's not completely accurate. There are only a few minor changes in the templates between the 1st Ed., and the 2nd Ed. I've compared both editions, almost word for word. There are changes in the examples used where URLs have changed and were updated for the 2nd Ed. Much of the changes were in the discussion text where Elizabeth made quite a few changes to improve wording for clarification purposes.

I'm in contact with Elizabeth about some discrepencies I've found, almost all of which are common to both editions. (The changes are already in the RM4 templates.) There are a few new additions that Elizabeth added that I will be creating new templates for, but not many. I guess that will now include a "social networking" template. Once I resolve the issues with Elizabeth (she is one very busy lady), I'll be sending updates to Bruce to include in a future update. (No schedule on my part as I wait for Elizabeth.)

Thanks Bill,

Sorry for the poorly worded question. I guess I just find it overkill to have all these templates when some of us have been doing genealogy for over 25 years and have identified our sources such that others can find the same information. The big thing missing in most genealogy software is the ability to assign a Source to more than one Repository. I guess it goes back to the days the GEDCOM standard was developed with no concept of one to many and many to one relationships.

Ken

#7 DoddemaGen

DoddemaGen

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 47 posts

Posted 14 April 2010 - 01:46 PM

Should I wait until the social networking source template is released? Has anyone come up with a workaround?

#8 Elizabeth Shown Mills

Elizabeth Shown Mills

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12 posts

Posted 26 September 2010 - 02:28 PM

Folks,

Some "social networking" sites provide useful genealogical information. For example, I found a picture of a relative at classmates.com . I would like to properly cite the source of this picture (and a bit of other information from that web site), but I can't find any really appropriate SourceWizard template. I assume that someone attempting to cite other "social networking" sites such as facebook.com will face this same problem. Has anyone developed an appropriate template for such sources? If so, if would be very helpful if you could you post it here so others might be able to use it!

Many thanks,
Wayne

]

#9 Elizabeth Shown Mills

Elizabeth Shown Mills

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12 posts

Posted 26 September 2010 - 03:00 PM

Wayne,

I've just found your query.

Evidence Explained has specific models for citing blogs, chats, discussion forums, tweets, SecondLife, and more.

Beyond that, let me ask a question: How would citing Classmates.com differ from citing Ancestry.com, Genuki.org, or this RootsMagic message board?

Citations to all of the online sites have the same core set of needs:

- Author/Creator of individual item,
- "Exact Title" or Generic Identification of individual item,
- Author/creator/owner of website (if appropriate)
- Title of Website
- (URL : Date, of posting, update, access, whatever),
- Specific data of interest within this item;
- Additional detail needed to understand or evaluate the source, including "source of our source" info.

As noted at EE 2.33 (2d ed.), p. 57, a basic template for citing website items--from either EE or one of the QuickSheets---can cover virtually every need we have at the social networking sites. It's not the fact that we're using a social networking site which determines how we cite the material. It's *what* we are citing from that website.

Elizabeth

#10 Don Newcomb

Don Newcomb

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1045 posts

Posted 26 September 2010 - 03:57 PM

Just like an e-mail, you could always chalk it up as "personal communications" then explain exactly when, where and how.