Best format for creating sources and citations from Digitalarkivet records
What should a citation consist of? This is a dispute between two users.
Is the copied link sufficient, as:
Ministerialprotokoller, klokkerbøker og fødselsregistre - Nordland, AV/SAT-A-1459/841/L0591: Ministerialbok nr. 841A03 /1, 1777-1819, s. 1
Brukslenke for sidevisning: https://www.digitalarkivet.no/kb20071025630129
Or a lengthy footnote style, citing the information contained within?
An example of styles is seen in this person profile KZZT-MYX. You can see I prefer a succinct title and further information in the notes field.
I have modeled mine based on one Norm or Gordon did, for an issue long ago; perhaps I have forgotten exactly.
Thank you.
Comments
-
Just an opinion here, I'm no expert. Links are nice, but things can change over time and sometimes they may not work later, even though that seems impossible. So a link and also enough specific information to find the actual record without a working link seems ideal. I am old enough to have seen links not work, even things I thought would never go away.
1 -
Why should there be a dispute? Each user should be able to create a source citation in whatever style they like. All that is important is that it leads every other user to the real source located at the Digitalarkivet. Is someone deleting things from sources because he thinks there it too much in them? Or deleting sources and replacing them with his own more extensive one rather than just adding to existing ones?
Sources usually don't contain a full transcription of a record but if someone want to include that in the notes, I don't see any problem with it, particularly if the record is somewhat difficult to read. I'm just not that ambitious, however.
This is what I like to do:
But I wouldn't make any claim to this being any kind of "best."
Looking at the profile you gave as an example, I see that the other user is putting the full citation as both the title and the citation. I certainly don't see any problem with that. I also wouldn't have any objection if that user went through and replaced my titles with those fuller titles.
My only picky little concern is that I am lazy. I find:
- Johan Johansen in baptismal record for Karen Olsdatter
- Johan Johansen in baptismal record for Peder Elias Gundersen
- Jon Jonsen Bratland in baptismal record for Jacob Olsen
easier to quickly comprehend than:
- Johan Johansen, fadder [godparent] for Karen Olsdatter, baptism, 5 p. Trin (11 July) 1761, Ministerialbok for Rødøy prestegjeld, Rødøy sokn 1758-1776 (1836P)
- Johan Johansen, fadder [godparent] for Peder Elias Gundersen, 25 Trin. (20 November) 1763, Ministerialbok for Rødøy prestegjeld, Lurøy sokn 1760-1767 (1836P)
- Jon Jonsen Bratland, fadder [godparent] for Jacob Olsen, 3rd Trin. (8 July) 1764, Ministerialbok for Rødøy prestegjeld, Lurøy sokn 1760-1767 (1836P)
when scanning though a long list of sources. If I need more information, I am more than willing to open the source and read more.
1 -
Thank you both. I had not considered the links changing.
I looked up Germund to see what you did. In Notes, the alternate link comes from the permanent bildelenke, under the link symbol menu. So this is permanent and more important to use? Where did you grab the web page URL from? I do not find a match.
I have been copy/pasting the browser link - insufficient I see.
It would be better to add the information contained in the source to the "reason the source is attached" field? As good a transcription as I can make and what it tells us. E.g. "Confirms farm name"; "adds that bride was a widow"; "fadders in christening record may indicate family relationship."
0 -
Please allow me to be a little embarrassed. I put that source on Germund a long time ago so updated it a little for my image but didn't realize until after finishing my post that the URL in the source is from the last version of the Digitalarkivet. Fortunately, with their update quite a few years ago now, they maintained a function to map the old brukslenke to the new brukslenke. In other words, they were kind enough to not break all their previous URLs.
So when you click on the link in Germund's source which is:
» http://www.arkivverket.no/URN:kb_read?idx_kildeid=8303&idx_id=8303&uid=ny&idx_side=-247
The Digitalarkivet servers translate that to:
» https://www.digitalarkivet.no/kb20070222690418
If they did not have the translation routine, I would have hundreds of sources with non-functioning links.
The permanent bildelenke as far as I know is supposed to be a permanent archival link that will never change. There are no promises for two links I show above. But in terms of the internet, what is "never"?
Just to be perfectly clear:
Notice that with this permanent link, there is no indication of where this came from!
As far as what additional information should go into the notes, that would all depend on what you think would be most useful for you the next time you come to the source and what you think would be most useful for researchers who come after you. There is a huge amount of room there to do whatever one thinks is best.
0