> > The DAR may have accepted it because they already had proof of
> > those earlier generations. Once the DAR has received proof you do
> > not have to reprove it.
> >
> > Julia
>
> Perhaps, but that isn't evident on the face of a source citation. A
> source citation merely tells the people finding it WHERE you found
> the information. It is then up to the finder to decide whether that
> source is reliable or to double-check it. The road to bad
> genealogical research is paved with "may haves." <g>
>
> Joan <JYoung6180@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Joan
The question was why had the person not included proofs for several
earlier generations. Any one who accepts a source without checking
the original source is not a very good genealogist, although I am
sure I have some from when I first started where I did not know
better. I know I blindly accepted several family genealogies with
the blind assumption that it must be true if it was in a book. I
have since learned better. I have not however, gone back through
everyone of my lines to see if I have gotten original do***ents.
Maybe when I retire in 6 years or so, I will have time.
As a previous e-mail said, if you are quoting the DAR application as
the source, it is the source even if the person does not quote where
she got her dates. I would never use the DAR application as a
source but as someone said, a source is what you used no matter how
good it is.
DAR applications are created for women to join the organization.
They are not created to aid future genealogists. As such, the
organization has stated that if a date or connection has been proven
to their satisfaction, a new applicant does not have to reprove that
piece of information. This requires people to look at a number of
applications if they are trying to find the original sources that
were used to prove the date or connection.
Julia
FamRSearch@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
