Alessandra

http://www.craigslistpostingonline.info

#14
Janice, I do not know when the All-in-One tree will be available although I’ve been told it will be in a future release. I too look forward to having the chart again.

#15
Sid, no, you cannot create your own source template. However, you can continue to use the standard fields to create sources using the information you want to include.

Pam, I have a different perspective–one drawn from my own academic background in history and the three decades I’ve spent doing research, presenting papers, and publishing in both genealogical and academic history forums.

It is immensely inaccurate to say that Chicago, MLA, Turabian and other conventional citation styles “have templates for referencing all types of materials used for research.” The conventional guides focus on published materials and academic archives. The good genealogist goes far beyond this, using a myriad of grassroots-level records that are not covered in those guides at all.

Moreover, the citation models suggested by Chicago, MLA, etc., strip citations down to a publisher’s concept of “bare essentials,” with more concern for reducing the costs of publishers. (_Chicago Manual_, after all, is the guide developed by the University of Chicago Press.)

However, in the research and analysis stage, historians (family or academic) need more specific details to foster sound judgment about the reliability of the records they are using.

Historian Gloria Main, writing in the _William and Mary Quarterly_(3d ser., 54 [October 1997]: 858), noted: “Genealogists hew to stricter rules of evidence and more rigorous citation practices than even professional historians.”

That is for a reason. The main role of historians is to be interpreters of society. While some do use microhistory sources, their primary interest is not in documenting minutiae; rather, it is to interpret the aggregate. As my friends and colleagues in academic history are quick to say, “An error here on a minor figure and an error there on a minor figure aren’t likely to affect my overall interpretation.” For the genealogist, however, an error on any one point of a person’s life could divert research onto an entirely wrong line and negate the validity of everything done thereafter.

Pam also wrote:
“Most of my history professors prefered the Chicago Style.”

Yes, but that is not because the _Chicago Manual of Style_ had (or has) everything they need. Rather, it has been the best choice available. CMOS’s “humanities style” has been a better fit for the more-detailed needs of historians than the other guides that favor the even-leaner “scientific style.” Still, CMOS falls far short of needs for researchers who work heavily in original records.

All of this is why major historians have enthusiastically volunteered endorsements for _Evidence Explained_, the guide from which FTM “borrows” those 179 of the available 1100+ citation models. (If you care to read the perspectives of those historians, you’ll find two of them easily at Amazon’s webpage for EE.) All of this is also why EE is already being used in history and other departments at several major universities. –ESM

#5 and #7
Nick and Jane, there are some templates that work specifically for the UK and other countries. When you’re accessing the categories, click the National Government Records option and you’ll see options for Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom.

Also, if you click the Census Records category, you’ll see options for France, the United Kingdom and Wales, in addition to the United States.

#7
Jane, you can find a couple templates for school records in the Business and Institutional Records category. I would suggest that if you can’t find a template that fits an item perfectly (like your identity card) that you go ahead and use the standard fields to enter the information you have.

#9
Barbara, you do need to have Family Tree Maker 2009 to use these templates.

I hope some of these comments will help.