Before you close those tabs
After an evening of searching, you have a dozen tabs open. A week later, you cannot remember where that shop entry was or whether you already tried another spelling. A research log helps you recover that work. A plain document or spreadsheet will do.
Start with a question you can investigate: “Was Lin Yu living on River Street before 1930?” is easier to act on than “Continue researching grandmother.” Break a large question into dates, places or relationships. Put interesting side questions on a separate list.
Lin Yu, River Street and the shop records in this guide are fictional. In the exercise, a relative remembers that she ran a grocery shop but cannot date it. That suggests looking for an operator’s name, business address or registration date in local records.
Set up a few useful columns
Try these headings: date; question; repository; collection or item; search terms and scope; result; saved file; next action. Leave fields blank when necessary. If a wide spreadsheet is awkward, use the headings as labels in a normal note.
Name the specific collection as well as the website. “Searched an archive” is too broad to retrace. Distinguish an original image from a catalogue description: “Catalogue entry only; image not obtained” is a useful reminder.
Give saved files a stable reference, such as Item 017, and retain the archive’s reference, title, page and URL. Those details may recover a record if a link changes. Documenting sources supports genealogical reasoning; filling in a log does not by itself prove a relationship.[1]
A worked entry
Adapt this fictional entry to your own work: “Question: Did Lin Yu run a River Street grocery before 1930? Collection: city business register, 1928–1930. Method: searched two name spellings, then examined relevant pages. Result: Lin Yu, groceries, 12 River Street. Saved: Item 017, page 34. Assessment: name and occupation fit; identity not established. Next: check advertisements or family letters for this address.”
In a real entry, supply the actual repository, complete title, record reference and search date. The example keeps the source wording separate from your assessment. “Grandmother’s shop found” would skip the identity question.
Keep a conflicting namesake entry as a separate candidate. Later information about a spouse, address or age may distinguish them. Do not combine several plausible entries into one person’s life.
Record an unsuccessful search accurately
“Nothing found” leaves too much out. Try: “No identifiable entry in the 1928–1930 business name index under the two spellings tried; full images not yet browsed.” This records both the search and what remains undone.
Note missing pages, inaccessible volumes and incomplete indexing. When you stop halfway, save the exact point: “Finished image 87; resume at 88.” That is something you can act on next time.
An unsuccessful search does not establish that a person never lived or worked there. Another name, missing records or a neighbouring district may explain the gap. Put possible explanations in the assessment field, ready to test.
Keep a record of each attempt
Save names exactly as you entered them, including characters, initials and variants. Record filters for years, place and record type. “Too many results; not all examined” is more accurate than treating a large result set as searched.
Add a brief reason when a change matters: “Removed given name because some entries use initials.” You do not need a diary of every click. Group small attempts in one entry, with their conditions and outcomes.
Include calls and emails too. Note who answered, when, what you asked and what they said. A library’s reply that a volume is not digitised can save you from repeatedly searching for an image that is unavailable online.
Leave yourself a clear next action
Finish with a task you can start immediately next time. “Check the street number in Item 017, then look for 1929 advertisements at that address” is more useful than “Do more research.” Mark requests awaiting a reply so you do not send them twice.
When a task is complete, add the date and link to the resulting entry. If you abandon a lead, say why. Keeping a corrected assumption makes the later decision understandable.
Occasionally review all entries for one question and write a short account of the matches, conflicts and missing links. A genealogical proof argument explains how evidence supports a conclusion; your log preserves the work needed for that explanation.[2] Back it up and remove unnecessary information about living people before sharing it.
Sources
Explore these institutions’ guidance and check collection coverage and original records.
- Board for Certification of Genealogists: The Genealogical Proof Standardwww.bcgcertification.org
- Board for Certification of Genealogists: Proof Argumentswww.bcgcertification.org