I must agree with the ladies, I am not meticulous in recording my sources, although in my Ancestry tree and my offline (PAF) tree, I try to indicate that I have looked further than just a census or birth index record.
If I have looked at an image of the parish register, I can record the exact date of a marriage and the witnesses, for a baptism, the abode and the fathers occupation, and the date of birth if its included.
My offline PAF software is now out of date, but I have not found another I truly prefer. It allows me to record multiple sources for entries and where there is conflict or other need, there is a good notes section where I can put in thoughts or queries. One such is the case of Sarah Wilford, who if you believe the on-line trees was baptised in 1803, witnessed a marriage in 1815 and married in 1816 - notes galore on the whys and wherefores.
I did start going back over my off-line tree and try to record sources for everyone and document what I have, but after 300 people, I have paused this project to pursue DNA matches. Like the others, by re-visiting previously checked records, I have spotted something I missed the first time - a sibling or cousin further down the page, or next door neighbours on the census.
In my review, I just indicated whether I had a BMD certificate and its number, or just an index entry, whether I had seen the baptism register, or Bishop's Transcripts (or image on Ancestry or familysearch), or if the information was personal knowledge of a family member or entry in a family Bible.
As with the others, I don't copy from anyone's tree, I note down the details then look at a census or marriage then birth records to confirm. The number of times I check a DNA match's Common Ancestor, a find a fundamental mistake, I cannot tell you. Simple things like checking for a mothers maiden name in the birth indexes would lead to the correct family.
Di
|