QUEBEC-RESEARCH-L ArchivesArchiver > QUEBEC-RESEARCH > 2005-07 > 1122655862
From: "D. O'" <>
Subject: A complaint re IGI
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 16:51:02 +0000
I received the following email today which I wish to share with you as it
raises a valid question:
..."why do you keep giving information from IGI user contributed databases
for events before 1799 when we have a much better, and certainly more
accurate, source like PRDH? When I see IGI I don't even continue to read the
messages because I know someone else will answer from PRDH. For dates after
1799, at least IGI gives clues, but
they still are more often wrong than right unless their source is an actual
record. I appreciate that you identify the data as user-contributed for the
later-dated ones. "
And my reply is:
You are right about PRDH but not completely correct about IGI.
Although a good percentage of the info in IGI is "user contributed", there
is also that which is included from the Mormon database as collected by
their missionaries and volunteers. Wherever possible I cross check what I
find against Census and Les Grandes Familles among others.
However, no matter what the source, it is a certificate or copy thereof that
is the proof of the pudding. The information included in IGI can at least
offer a location in which to continue research, or a contact with a
I do understand the frustration of receiving emails that someone may feel
are of no value. Therefore in future I will direct my replies to the person
asking for information and not to the list.
|A complaint re IGI by "D. O'" <>|