Genealogical Proof Standard #4: Resolving Conflicting Evidence

AI image

Throughout this series, we’ve been exploring the Genealogical Proof Standard (GPS) and how it helps us build a solid answer to a research question. Its five elements are:

• Reasonably exhaustive research
• Complete and accurate source citations
• Thorough analysis and correlation
• Resolution of conflicting evidence
• A soundly reasoned, coherently written conclusion

Although we are examining each element separately, in reality, they are interlocking components of the evaluation process. Research brings us to the records; citations document where our information came from. Analysis helps us evaluate each source, while correlation lets us compare the evidence for agreements, differences, and connections. Often these steps send us back to one another—new conflicts require more research. All of this supports the final written conclusion.

In the last post, we looked at analysis and correlation. Sometimes the pieces fit neatly. Sometimes they don’t. Today’s example of conflicting evidence comes from my own family tree.

The Photo That Started It All

I recently shared a photograph of the Lukas family headstone found among my mother’s belongings. It lists the birth and death dates for my great‑grandparents, Johann "Hans" Lukas and Elisabeth Bräu, my grandmother Hedwig, and three of my mother’s siblings who died young.

A cousin in Straubing told me that Elisabeth’s maiden name was Straubinger, but the headstone said Bräu. I needed to know more, so I continued researching. I looked for:

• Civil records from Straubing
• Catholic church records on Matricula Online
• Newspaper searches 
• Cemetery information 

With these records gathered, it was time to analyze. I thought I was only seeking proof of a maiden name or possibly a second marriage, but what I found was much more.

 

Analyzing the records

I evaluated each record as original, derivative, or authored works, then considered whether the different pieces of information contained within was primary, secondary, or undetermined.

Headstone Photo

• Source type: It is an original. An image that is clear and easily viewed with no signs of cropping can be treated as a representation of the original.
• Information: The headstone photo lists Elisabeth’s death date as 4 June 1937 and identifies her as Eliese Bräu, married Lukas.¹
• Information quality: It is not known who supplied the names and dates or when the inscription was added. Therefore, the information is undetermined. 

Catholic funeral book

• Source type: Original
• Information: The parish listed her as Elisabeth Bräu and her death as 1 March 1939 and burial on 3 March 1939.² 
• Information quality: Burial date is primary, because a priest officiated the funeral and it was documented near the time of the funeral. However, the death date is undetermined because the informant is not identified. We should not assume that the clergy were present at the death. It is likely that a family member supplied the information.

Catholic marriage records

• Source type: Original
• Information: The parish lists a marriage date of 18 May 1897 for Johann “Hans” Lukas and Elisabeth Straubinger³ and another marriage date of 8 August 1922 for Georg Bräu and Elisabeth Lukas.⁴
• Information quality: Both records give primary information for the marriage dates and spouses, because a parish priest officiated the weddings and documented the evidence soon after the ceremonies.

Civil marriage records

• Source type: Original
• Information: Two certificates were received. One for the marriage of Elisabeth Straubinger to Johann Lukas⁵ (18 May 1897) and a second for Elisabeth Lukas to Georg Bräu⁶ (8 August 1922).
• Information quality: The marriage date is considered primary, recorded at or near the time of the event, with two witnesses testifying for each document.

Civil death record

• Source type: Original
• Information: Reports Elisabeth’s death on 1 March 1939 at 6:30 a.m. Identifies her son, Johann Lukas, as the informant with personal knowledge.⁷
• Information quality: Death information is primary.

Newspapers

• Information: Newspapers.com does not carry papers for the Straubing area, and OldNews.org does not carry digitized newspapers for Straubing from the years of 1900 to 1939 which would have included Elisabeth's married to Georg and her date of death. Negative evidence of a newspaper article for a wedding between Johann Lukas and Elisabeth Straubinger in 1897.⁸

Cemetery information

• Information: Negative evidence: Since many of my mother’s family members had been buried in Friedhof St. Michael, I contacted the cemetery to see what information could be found. In email correspondence, I was informed that due to cemetery rules regarding plot leasing, the headstone would have been removed many years ago. They could not confirm nor deny that the headstone had ever been in that cemetery, because older funeral records were not digitized when the system changed and were no longer accessible.⁹

With the analysis for each record complete, the next step was to compare the records information to one another.

Correlating the evidence
Placed side by side, it was clear that Elisabeth’s name on the headstone was a married name as corroborated by both civil and Catholic marriage records and her first marriage clearly identified her as Elisabeth Straubinger. The bigger issue was her date of death.

• Headstone: Eliese Bräu, died 4 June 1937
• Catholic funeral book: Elisabeth Bräu, died 1 March 1939; burial 3 March 1939
• Civil death record: Elisabeth Bräu, died 1 March 1939 at 6:30 a.m.

The church and civil records agree. The headstone stands alone with a date nearly two years earlier.

Resolving the conflict

When resolving conflicting evidence, we consider:

• Records created closest to the event
• Primary vs. secondary or undetermined information
• Original vs. derivative sources

The civil death record carries the strongest weight for her actual date of death: it was created at the time of the event, gives an exact date and time, and names an informant with firsthand knowledge.

The Catholic funeral book supports the same date and provides primary evidence of the burial.

The headstone offers a conflicting date with an unknown informant and unknown timing of inscription.  

After analyzing and correlating the records, the conflict could be resolved: the evidence supports 1 March 1939 as Elisabeth’s best-supported date of death.

With the conflict resolved, it was finally time to write a clear conclusion to support Elisabeth’s date of death—and that’s where we’ll pick up in GPS #5.

=========================================================

¹ Lukas family photo in private photo collection was held by Elisabeth "Kathy" Lukas Hall and passed down to her daughter Lisa Petersen upon her death in January 2021 [address for private use]. The far left-side of the headstone is inscribed with the name Eliese Bräu Lukas and the date of death as 4 June 1937, photographer unknown, likely Friedhof St. Michael. 

² St. Jakob parish, (Straubing, Bavaria), "Sterbe-Register [Death Register], 1910-1940," p. 461, entry 37, Elisabeth Bräu geb. Straubinger, died 1 March 1939, buried 3 March 1939; digital images, Matricula Online (https://data.matricula-online.eu/ : accessed 1 October 2025) > search terms: Straubing > St. Jakob > Beerdigungen, Register Beerdigungen, 1911-1939 > St. Jakob 047 > image 466; citing Roman Catholic Diocese of Regensburg. 

³ St. Peter parish, (Straubing, Bavaria), "Trauungen Bd. IX [Weddings, Vol. 9] 1888-1922," p. 70 entry 16, John. Bapt. Lukas and Elisabeth Straubinger, married 18 May 1897; digital images, Matricula Online (https://data.matricula-online.eu/ : accessed 17 March 2026) > search terms: Straubing > St. Peter > Trauungen, 1888-1922 > St. Peter 028 > image 73; citing Roman Catholic Diocese of Regensburg.

⁴ St. Jakob parish, (Straubing, Bavaria), “Trauungsmatrikel [Weddings], 1908-1928," p. 193 entry 79. Georg Bräu and Elisabeth Lukas (widow) married 8 August 1922; digital images, Matricula Online (https://data.matricula-online.eu/ : accessed 6 Oct 2025) > search terms: Straubing > St. Jakob > Trauungen, 1908-1922 > St.Jakob 041 > image 0196; citing Roman Catholic Diocese of Regensburg.

⁵ Germany, Standesamt Straubing, "Heiratsbuch [Marriage Register] 1897," no. 51, Johann Baptist Lukas and Elisabeth Straubinger, married 18 May1897; certified copy received 10 September 2025, held by Renita Collier [address for private use]; original records maintained at Stadtarchiv im Salzstadel, Rentamtsberg 1, Straubing.

⁶ Germany, Standesamt Straubing, "Heiratsbuch [Marriage Register] 1922," no. 118, Georg Bräu and Elisabeth Lukas, geb. Straubinger, married 8 August 1922; certified copy received 10 September 2025, held by Renita Collier [address for private use]; original records maintained at Stadtarchiv im Salzstadel, Rentamtsberg 1, Straubing.  

⁷ Germany, Standesamt Straubing, "Sterbebuch [Death Register] 1939," no. 114, Elisabeth Bräu, geb. Straubinger, died 1 March 1939; certified copy received 10 September 2025, held by Renita Collier [address for private use]; Stadtarchiv im Salzstadel, Rentamtsberg 1, Straubing.      

⁸ OldNews, database and digital images, (https://www.oldnews.com/en/newspapers/germany/bavaria/straubing : accessed 1 October 2026), search for "Straubing, Bavaria Newspapers"; the search returned a landing directory listing four digitized titles (Straubinger Tagblatt, Straubinger Zeitung, Straubinger Wochenblatt, and Niederbayerische Allgemeine Zeitung), with collective coverage ending no later than 1876; no holdings were available for the post-1876 years relevant to Elisabeth Straubinger’s life. Also. Newspapers.com, database and digital images, (https://www.newspapers.com : accessed 1 October 2026), search for "Straubing, Bavaria" and "Straubing Bayern"; the search returned zero results for digitized historical newspapers published in this location.

⁹ Catholic Cemetery Administration St. Michael (Straubing, Bavaria, Germany), Manuela Fisch [clerical officer] to Renita Collier, email, 10 March 2022, “Lukas family Monument”; privately held by Renita Collier [address for private use]. Fisch explained that cemetery regulations require removal of headstones and remains after the lease period expires, and that computerized files included only plots that were active and current at the time of digitization; older records are no longer accessible.

Amanuensis Monday: Two Ford-Lynch Marriages

This weekly blog post was inspired by Amanuensis Monday, created by John Newmark of the Transylvanian Dutch blog. The word amanuensis means "A person employed to write what another dictates or to copy what has been written by another."  

Why transcribe? Genealogists transcribe letters, postcards, and documents to focus on slowing down and noticing those hidden details, to create a readable backup for fragile records, and to share the evidence with others. A transcription also makes a record more accessible to readers who find older handwriting difficult to decipher.

======================================================    

These are the marriage records for my 2nd great-grandparents Greenberry Ford and Nancy Lynch, alongside the record for Jesse Lynch and Lavina Ford. The clerk recorded both licenses on 15 June 1839. The marriage returns are recorded on the right-hand side of the page. Although there is a marriage date for Jesse and Lavina, the actual day was omitted for Greenberry and Nancy. The service was performed by the same person, although it is hard to make out the name. It is probable the two couples were wed on the same day.

Greenberry and Jesse would become brothers-in-law twice over: Greenberry married Jesse’s sister Nancy, while Jesse married Greenberry’s sister Lavina. 

"Tennessee, U.S., Marriage Records, 1780-2002," database with images, Ancestry (https://www.ancestry.com/search/collections/1169/records/1342912 : accessed 20 April 2023), p. 10, marriage license no. 113, Green B W Ford and Nancy Lynch, 15 June 1839 and marriage license no. 114, Jesse Lynch and Lavina Ford, 15 June 1839, Claiborne County, Tennessee; citing Tennessee State Library and Archives, Nashville. Microfilm.

Here is the transcription for the marriage record above:

113 Marriage License Is^d 15^th June 1839 to Green B.W. Ford for his        inter marriage with Nancy Lynch on This 15^th June 1839- W^m Neil Clk [right-hand side] Executed and returned June 1839 C. [?]

114 Marriage License Is^d to Jesse Lynch for his inter marriage with Lavina Ford on This 15^th of June 1839 W^m Neil Clk [right-hand side] Executed and returned June 18^th 1839 C. [?]

Census Sunday - 1950 Census - Ethel Ford and Sons

1950 U.S. census, Nueces County, Texas, population schedule, Corpus Christi, enumeration district (ED) 258-81, sheet 20, dwelling 181, Ethel A Ford; digital images, Ancestry (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 9 April 2022).

The 1950 U.S. Census gives us a quick snapshot of my grandmother, Ethel A. Ford, and her two sons, William E. Ford and Clay F. Ford.

One detail that caught my attention is the small box beside William's name that says “Sample Line 29.” This means William was selected for additional questions on the 1950 census. Those questions provide a little more information about his work, education, earnings, and military service.

The family was living at 442 Virginia Street, Apartment #7. Ethel was listed as head of household, 47 years old, widowed, and born in Arkansas. She was not working.

William, age 27, was unmarried and working as a truck driver for a private trucking company. He had completed the fifth grade and had worked every week during the previous year, earning $3,850 in 1949. The census also tells us that he had served in World War II.

Clay, age 15, was unmarried and still living at home. He was born in Texas.

Looking at this census record, I can see a little of what everyday life looked like for my family in 1950. But one record doesn't tell us everything about a person's life. It gives us a snapshot—and sometimes a few clues worth following.

Tombstone Tuesday - Lukas Family Headstone, Straubing, Germany

     

Lukas family headstone photograph

Growing up, I knew very little about my mother’s family. My mom was from Straubing, Germany. When she came to the United States at fourteen, she left behind her family, her language, and her country. She rarely talked about her childhood, and years later, during an interview, she was not able to recall the names of her grandparents and great-grandparents.

After she passed away, my sister found a photograph tucked among her possessions. That single image sparked my curiosity about the family Mom had left behind.

The photograph shows the Lukas family headstone. It names my mother’s paternal grandparents, Hans Lukas and Elisabeth “Eliese” Straubinger. The inscription identifies Elisabeth as Eliese Bräu; she had remarried after Hans’s death. My mother’s mother, Hedwig Lukas, née Walter, and three of Mom’s young siblings are also named on the stone.

The headstone is no longer at Friedhof St. Michael in Straubing, so this photograph is the only image of it I have. Grave plots in Germany are generally held through time-limited rights of use, with the terms governed by the cemetery’s rules. ¹ Those rights may be renewed, but when a plot is eventually cleared, its headstone may disappear. That makes this photograph especially precious to me: it preserves a trace of my mother’s family that I can no longer visit

¹ Straubing Stadtverwaltung, Ämter und Dienststellen, Stadt Straubing, (https://www.straubing.de/rathaus-verwaltung/verwaltung/aemter-und-dienststellen/index.html?catID=1168&detID=14813&utm : accessed 21 September 2026).

Genealogical Proof Standard #3 - Thorough Analysis and Correlation

Even when we search broadly, locate original records, and carefully cite every source—those records do not automatically give us an answer.

In Mastering Genealogical Proof, Thomas W. Jones explains "Analysis and correlation test genealogical evidence."

Analysis helps us evaluate the reliability of each source and each detail contained within it. Correlation compares those details across multiple records to identify agreements, conflicts, and patterns. Together, they help prevent us from reaching conclusions simply because they match our expectations. 

When we find a record, it can be tempting to focus on the one piece of information we were looking for.

• A death certificate that gives us that elusive birth date.
• A census gives us a birthplace.
• A marriage record gives us the name of a spouse.

But genealogical analysis requires us to look more closely and ask:

• Who created this record?
• When and why was it created?
• Who provided the information?
• Would that person have known the answer firsthand?
• Was the information recorded near the time of the event?
• Is the record an original record or a later copy or transcription?

Analyzing Records

Most importantly, we need to remember that a record is not the same thing as a fact. A record contains information and the information becomes evidence after we evaluate its reliability.

Start by Analyzing the Source

Sources fall into three categories: 

Original records are the first recorded form. A good quality digital copy or photocopy may be considered an original record, unless it has been altered (cropped) or unreadable.

Derivative records are transcriptions, abstracts, indexes, or other reproductions. For example, an original handwritten marriage register kept by a county clerk is different from a published transcription of that register. The transcription may be perfectly accurate, but each copy introduces the possibility of error. 

Authored works are different. They are compiled interpretations or summaries created from multiple sources, such as family histories or genealogies. 

Derivative records and authored works can be extremely useful. Sometimes they may even be the only surviving source available. But when an original record exists, we should try to examine it ourselves.

Not All Information in the Same Record Is Equally Reliable

Within any record, information varies in reliability. Information falls into three categories: 
Primary information comes from someone with firsthand knowledge of the event. For example, a mother providing information about the birth of her child is reporting something she personally experienced.

Secondary information comes from someone who learned about the event from another person or source. A son reporting his mother's birthplace on her death certificate many decades later may know the answer—but he was not present at her birth.

Undetermined information is provided by an unknown informant, meaning we cannot assess its reliability. When a record does not identify who provided the details, we cannot determine whether the informant had firsthand knowledge, secondhand knowledge, or no knowledge at all. 

Census records are a common example. Most U.S. censuses do not indicate who spoke to the enumerator. For example, it could have been an older child, a second wife, a neighbor. There is no way to determine the reliability of the information given. The only exception is the 1940 U.S. census, where enumerators marked the informant with an X, allowing us to assess whether the information likely came from someone knowledgeable. 

A single record may contain both primary and secondary information. A common example would be a death certificate. An attending physician may have had firsthand knowledge of the death or its circumstances. The information concerning the death is therefore likely to be primary information.

The deceased person's birth date, birthplace, or parents' names may have been supplied by a grieving spouse, child, neighbor, or other informant decades after the person's birth. For those events, the informant was probably relying on secondary information.

It is important to evaluate each piece of information separately. It is also important to remember that primary does not automatically mean the record is correct, and secondary does not automatically mean it's wrong. Someone with firsthand knowledge can make a mistake, while information passed down through the family may turn out to be completely accurate.

Then Comes Correlation

While analysis looks at individual pieces of evidence, correlation looks across them and brings the evidence together. It asks:

• Where does the evidence agree?
• Where does it disagree?
• What patterns emerge when records are compared?

Suppose several records give birth years of 1882, 1884, 1885, and 1887. Which one is correct? We cannot simply choose the date that appears most often. We need to consider whether the information is primary or secondary, who provided it, when it was recorded, and how it compares with the other evidence. 

• Perhaps the 1882 date appears on a death certificate created 70 years after the birth.
• The 1884 estimate comes from a census.
• The 1885 date appears in a Bible entry that seems to have been written years later.
• But the 1887 church baptismal record was recorded shortly after the child's birth.

Correlation requires examining all evidence—both supporting and conflicting. Only then are we able to evaluate the information and begin forming a hypothesis.

Create a Working Hypothesis

Genealogical conclusions should be based on the best available evidence—but remain open to revision if a new record appears. As evidence accumulates, we form a working hypothesis and test it by asking:

• Does the age fit?

• Does the location fit?

• Do the family relationships fit?

• Does the chronology work?

• Do the names make sense?

• Do the records contradict one another?

• What evidence would we expect to find if our hypothesis were correct?

• What evidence would prove us wrong?

Thorough analysis and correlation help us understand what our evidence is—and what it is not. When conflicts remain after this step, the next task is not to ignore them or force agreement, but to resolve them. That process is the focus of the fourth component of the Genealogical Proof Standard.

You’ve Scanned the Photos—Now Preserve the Stories Behind Them

Photo Inventory Log

Old photographs can tell us so much about our families—but only if we preserve the stories that go with them. In a recent post, I shared some pointers on scanning and preserving old photos. In this post, I want to take that idea a step further. 

After scanning, we need to make sure the details aren’t lost. If you have scanned and stored family photos on your computer, now is the perfect time to make sure the who, what, when, and where aren’t forgotten. Here are five simple ways to capture that information for future generations.

1. Add the Information to the Digital File Name

Don't settle for a filename like IMG_2456.jpg. Rename the file with the information you know:

1948-Ford-Family-Reunion-Corpus-Christi-TX.jpg

Even if someone never opens the photo, the filename gives them valuable clues.

2. Add the Information to the Photo's Metadata

Many photo programs allow you to add a caption, description, title, or other information to the digital image.

Use these fields to record details such as:

• Who: Names of the people pictured
• What: The occasion or event
• When: The date or approximate date
• Where: The location
• Source: Who provided the photograph or where the original came from

This information can be especially useful when photos are shared with family members through direct sharing (email, USB drives, or cloud storage).

One drawback—uploading to social media strips the metadata from the photo, so don't rely on metadata as your only method of preserving the information. 

3. Keep a Separate Photo Log

For larger collections, it can be helpful to keep a simple photo log—a spreadsheet or document where you record the essential details of each image. A log gives you one place to note the file name, where the original photograph is stored, who supplied the information, and a brief description of the picture.

Many people create a tab for each surname they’re researching, along with a second tab dedicated to mystery photographs. A mystery photo tab is especially useful because it lets you gather clues that might eventually help identify an unknown person, place, or event. You can jot down things like clothing styles, hairstyles, approximate ages, historical hints, location clues, or anything unusual that stands out.

If you don’t already have a photo log, you’re welcome to use the simple inventory template I’ve made available—it’s designed to make recording these details quick and consistent. Over time, a photo log becomes more than an inventory. It becomes part of your genealogy research, preserving both what you know and the clues that may help you uncover what you don’t.

4. Write a Photo Story or Research Note

Some photographs need more than a caption. If there is a story behind the picture, write it down. Link the story to the photo. Add it to your genealogy software and connect it to any known person or people in the image so the narrative stays with the photograph.

In this example, I recognize my father, but I am not sure when/where this photo was taken or who the other men are that are with him. 

This photograph is of my father, Clay Ford. It was probably taken in Corpus Christi before 1956, when he enlisted in the Air Force. Clay Ford is sitting on the far right. It is possible it was taken in Pick's Diner, a popular local hangout at the time. The identities of the other men are unknown.

Here is another example:

Elisabeth ‘Kathy’ Lukas (Hall)  traveled with her daughter, Lisa Ford (Petersen), back to Straubing, Bavaria to visit her family around 1998. This is a photo of Elisabeth and her brother, Eduard Lukas. They are standing in front of St. Jakob, the school they attended as children. It had been many years since brother and sister had seen each other. They had a great time visiting and went to many of the places Elisabeth knew from childhood.   

Don't worry about making it perfect. You're preserving the clues and stories. 

5. Preserve the Original and Its Context

A digital scan is wonderful, but don't forget about the original photograph. We should preserve the physical photograph and the context in which it was passed down.

Keep the original in a safe, appropriate storage environment, and make a note of where it is kept so it can be located later. If the photograph came from an album, scrapbook, envelope, or collection of photographs, consider preserving that context rather than immediately separating everything.

The way a photograph was kept can sometimes tell us something about its history. A group of photographs found together may have a connection that isn't obvious from the individual pictures.

Always check the back before putting the photograph away. If there is writing, a studio imprint, date, address, or other information, make sure you've preserved it—either by scanning the back or photographing it.

Remember, don't wait until you know everything about the photo. A note that says "Clay Ford is on the far right; the others are unidentified" is far more useful than no information at all. Those little details may be the clues that allow someone in the next generation to finally put names to the faces.

Small Steps, Big Progress: Genealogy Tasks You Can Do in 15 Minutes

AI Image

There are never enough hours in a day to do everything you need—and want—to do. Genealogy has always been a passion of mine, and when life got hectic, the only way I could stay sane was to carve out a little time here and there to "dabble" in my research.

Sometimes I had an hour. Sometimes I only had 15 minutes, but even that short time could make me feel better on a rough day. Just carving time out for myself—to do what I love—made all the difference.

I didn't necessarily solve a family mystery or find a long-lost ancestor. Sometimes I simply organized a few files, studied a photograph, or jotted down what I wanted to research next. But I had done something—and sometimes that's all you need to keep your genealogy moving forward.

Life pulls you in a dozen directions, and you miss sitting down to do your family history. I understand that feeling. Busy days, long to-do lists, and only a sliver of time to spare. You could wait for a free afternoon, but how often does that actually happen?

And let's be honest. Sometimes it isn't just a lack of time that keeps us from getting started. If you haven't looked at your research in weeks—or even months—it can feel overwhelming to figure out where to begin.

The best way to handle a big job is to break it into smaller, manageable pieces.

So, let's put those 15 minutes to work!

Rename 10 Files

Take a look at your digital files wherever they are stored. Do you see files named image123.jpg or document(4).pdf?

Those little enigmas aren't helping you.

Set a timer for 15 minutes and rename ten files with clear, meaningful titles. You can read more about naming your digital files in my earlier post. 

Organize One Digital Folder

Pick one ancestor and tidy up their folder. Move loose documents where they belong, delete duplicates, and group related records together. Don't attempt your whole collection. One folder is enough.

Scan a Few Family Photographs

Digitizing your entire photo collection can feel overwhelming. So don't. Scan three photos. Or five. Even one counts! You can read more about scanning and preserving old photos in my earlier post.

Work on a Mystery Photo We all have them—those unidentified photographs with no names or dates.

Pick one and become a detective for 15 minutes. Study the clothing, hairstyles, automobiles, buildings, furniture—anything that offers clues. Write down your observations. Narrowing down a time frame using these observations can tell you more than you think. You may not identify the people today—and that's okay. You've still learned something.

Here are a couple of resources to help you date your photos:

PhotoTree.com—excellent examples and case studies.

Maureen Taylor’s Family Photo Detective—a wonderful reference for tricky images and a tremendous aid for my mystery photos.

Clean Up Your Research Notes

Scraps of information accumulate quietly—half-formed thoughts in Word documents, sticky notes, scribbles in notebooks (please tell me I'm not the only one who does this!). I once found notes about the same search in three different places. That's three rounds of research I didn't need to repeat.

Choose one small batch and clean it up. Record what you searched, what you found, what you didn’t find, and what records you may still need to look for. Your future self will be grateful for the clarity.

Write Down Your Next Step This one takes almost no time but makes your next research session far more productive. Before you close your genealogy program, write down your next action. Be precise.

Not: “Work on Grandma’s family.” That’s too vague.

Instead: “Check Hunt County deed indexes for William Smith, 1900–1920.”

A clear assignment means you won't waste time figuring out where you left off.

You Don't Need All Day

Genealogy grows through small discoveries—and small organizational tasks. So the next time you think, “I don't have enough time to do genealogy today,” reconsider.

Set a timer for 15 minutes. Pick one small task.

And move your genealogy forward. You might be surprised by how much you can accomplish.

For more 15 Minute (or less) genealogy tasks, check out this list.

(Not So) Wordless Wednesday - Haldon and Jean Harris

Haldon and Jean Harris holding their granddaughter, Amanda Harris in Dec. 1981.

This is a Polaroid from December 1981, taken at the home of my in-laws in Dallas, Texas near DeSoto. Haldon and Jean Harris cradle our newborn daughter, Amanda, just a couple of weeks old. Their faces say everything — pure joy, pride, and that unmistakable wonder that comes when a new life enters the family. It was one of those quiet, perfect moments where generations meet and you catch a simple, honest glimpse of how a family continues on.

Forgotten Faces Friday: Mystery Photo #4

Clay and Friends

Every face in a vintage photograph has a name, a story, and a place in our history--even it has been forgotten. 

Welcome to Forgotten Faces Friday, a weekly series dedicated to solving the mysteries hiding in our family archives. Today, I am sharing a photograph of my dad and four of his friends. 

Clay Ford, far right, and friends possibly early 1950s Corpus Christi, Texas

This photo was found in a collection of family photos. Clay Ford, my dad, sits on the far right. The back of the photo simply says "Clay and friends." 

I suspect this photo may have been taken in Corpus Christi, Texas where Clay Ford was living before he enlisted in the Air Force in 1956. It is also possible this is at Pick's Drive-In which was on Ayers St. in Corpus.

Who are the other four young men? 

The Clues:

• The hairstyles are consistent with the late 1940s to early 1950s. The short, combed-back styles had carried over from the 1940s, so hair alone doesn't distinguish 1948 from 1953 very well.
• The clothing—especially the casual button-down shirts and high-waisted trousers—fits the time frame well. 
• The men look like young adults rather than teenagers, which would fit Clay's pre-Air-Force years if he was around enlistment age.
• The diner/restaurant setting feels very plausible for early-1950s Corpus Christi.
• Nothing in the photograph completely distinguishes late 1940s to early 1950s. I don't believe it is any later than 1955.

Can You Help Solve the Mystery?

Look closely at the features of the young men in the original portrait:

• Do you recognize a striking family resemblance? Your father, brother, uncle, friend?
• Do you have records of family members living in Corpus Christi, Texas in the early 1950s?

If you have a theory, or can recognize a face, please leave a comment below!

Scanning and Preserving Old Photos

AI Image

If you have old family photographs tucked away in a box, album, or drawer, you’re holding a little piece of your family history just waiting to be rediscovered. As genealogists, we spend countless hours searching for records that tell us about the people who came before us. When we finally have an old photograph, we want to be sure we don’t lose it—or the information that goes with it.

Here are a few helpful tips to get you started on the road to scanning and preserving your photos.

Start With a Scanner

Cameras and phones can work in a pinch, but whenever possible, use a flatbed scanner. A scanner gives you a high‑quality, consistent image without the glare or shadows you often get with a camera.

For most old photographs, scan at 600 dpi. If the photo is small or you think you may want to enlarge it someday, consider 1200 dpi.

And don’t forget to scan the back. Names, dates, locations, or even a simple note like “Grandma and her sisters” can be invaluable clues.

Keep a Master Copy

This is one of those easy‑to‑overlook steps.

Don’t scan your photograph and save only a small JPEG. Keep a high‑resolution TIFF file as your master copy. TIFF files take up more space, but that’s okay—this is your preservation copy. Then create a smaller JPEG when you want to share the photo, upload it to your tree, or post it online.

Think of it this way:

• TIFF = preservation
• JPEG = sharing

Store your master files in more than one location—your computer, an external drive, and/or reputable cloud storage.

Protect the Original

Your digital copy is important, but so is the photograph itself.

Store original photos in a cool, dry place, away from direct sunlight. Use archival‑quality, acid‑free materials, and avoid adhesives that can damage photographs over time.

And as you scan, take care to keep the photographs in their original grouping. The way they were arranged—whether in an album, a stack, or a small envelope—may hold clues about who the people were, when the photos were taken, or how they relate to one another. That physical context is part of the story, too.

Small Batches Make Big Projects Possible

Before you look at that box of 500 photographs and decide this project will take forever, here’s a little advice:

Do a little at a time.
You don't have to scan your entire family history this weekend. 

Start with ten photographs. 
Scan them properly. 
Scan the backs. 
Add the information you know. 
Give the files useful names. 
Back them up.

Then do ten more.

These photographs aren’t just old pictures—they’re pieces of your family’s story. And someday, someone in your family may look at one of those images and say:

“I’m so glad Grandma saved this.”

Genealogical Proof Standard #2: Clear, Accurate Source Citations

AI generated

In my last post, we talked about the first element of the Genealogical Proof Standard—reasonably exhaustive research. This principle requires us to look beyond easily accessible sources and examine all relevant records, no matter how obscure, to answer a specific research question.

And eventually, after all that digging, we finally uncover the record we’ve been hunting for. We download it, attach it to our tree, and happily move on.

After all, we know where we found it.

Or at least… we think we do. Fast‑forward a few years.

Now we’re staring at that same record wondering, Where in the world did I get this? Maybe our software's citation says only “1860 census.” Maybe we typed “Ancestry.” Maybe we skipped creating a citation altogether and only have a digital file—and it's blessed with one of those unforgettable names like 20260530_001.jpg.

Suddenly, finding the record again feels almost as hard as finding it the first time.

And that's where the second element of the GPS comes in: complete and accurate source citations.

A citation isn’t busywork. It has an actual job to do. A good citation answers a very practical question:

Where did you find that information, and how can I (or anyone else) find it again?

Why We Cite Our Sources

It’s easy to think of citations as a chore, but they actually make us better researchers.

When we slow down to create a citation, we’re forced to look closely at the record in front of us. What exactly are we viewing? An original? A copy? An index? A digital image of a microfilm? Who created it? Where is the original kept?

Those questions don’t just help us write a citation—they help us understand the strength and limitations of the source itself.

A clear citation also lets other researchers see where our information came from and judge the quality of our evidence. If I make a claim about an ancestor’s birth, marriage, or death, someone else should be able to look at my citation, trace my steps, and—whenever possible—examine the record for themselves.

Complete, accurate citations can also save us from repeating our own work. Years from now, I don’t want to wonder whether I checked a certain collection or where I found a document buried among hundreds of files. A citation is simply a breadcrumb trail back to our evidence.

Citations also help us separate our own research from the work of others. Genealogists rely on books, databases, websites, and other people’s research all the time. When another researcher's work supports our own, a citation gives them credit and makes our evidence trail easy to follow.

Don’t Let Citations Intimidate You

If you’re new to genealogy, a long citation can look confusing—names, numbers, semicolons, repositories, publication details. It’s a lot.

But you don’t have to create perfect citations right away. Start by learning to identify what you’re looking at.

Genealogists look at citations in terms of five simple elements:

Who created the record? What is the record or collection? When was it created or published? Where is it housed or accessed? Wherein is your specific information—page, line, entry, image number?

These questions help you understand the source so you can describe it accurately. Even if your citation isn't perfect, it is far better than no citation at all.

Resources That Help Us Learn to Cite Well

These two primary resources can help you build the perfect citation: The Chicago Manual of Style (CMOS) Evidence Explained: Citing History Sources from Artifacts to Cyberspace by Elizabeth Shown Mills

CMOS provides a strong foundation for historical writing, but genealogy throws us curveballs a standard guide isn't designed to handle. Evidence Explained, the genealogical gold standard, helps us navigate the complex records—courthouse files, manuscripts, microfilm, databases, digitized images, and sources that exist in multiple formats.

The one important thing to remember is that they are guides, not templates.

You don’t create a citation by finding an example that looks "close enough" and swapping in your ancestor’s name. You start by understanding the source.

For example, here’s a citation from my own research:

1860 U.S. census, Taney County, Missouri, population schedule, Newton, p. 861 (penned), p. 7 (stamped), dwelling 41, family 42, John Mitchell household; digital image, Ancestry (https://www.ancestry.com : accessed 7 January 2012); citing NARA microfilm publication M653, roll 658.

That citation tells you exactly what I looked at—a digital image of a specific page of the population schedule—and it traces the image back to the original microfilm.

Compare that with a death certificate:

“Texas, U.S., Death Certificates, 1903–1982,” database with images, Ancestry (https://www.ancestry.com : accessed 1 March 2010), state file no. 3641, entry for R. F. Wickliffe, died 22 January 1946; citing Texas Department of Health, Bureau of Vital Statistics, Austin.

No dwelling numbers or census pages here—because it’s a completely different kind of source.

And that's the point.

Even within the same type of record—census, death certificates, probate files—citations can vary a bit depending on how the record was created, how we accessed it, or what details are available. As genealogy expert Elizabeth Shown Mills famously notes, citation work is often more of an art than a strict science.

If today’s post inspires you to revisit a few of your older citations, start with just one record. Rewrite its citation using the five elements, and notice how much more confident you feel about the source itself.

In the next Genealogical Proof Standard installment, we’ll build on that foundation as we explore analysis and correlation—the part of the process where your well‑documented sources begin working together to reveal patterns, resolve conflicts, and strengthen your conclusions.

And if you’d like to share what you discovered while reviewing an old citation—or even just your thoughts on today’s topic—I’d love to hear from you in the comments. It’s always encouraging to see how other genealogists are growing in their research.