How do you Research?

I'm just wondering how people structure their research and what is "best
practice?" Do you do a general family tree research to begin with and then a
more in-depth bit of digging for each person or do you just continue doing a
general search?

Farm1...

I now find this a hard question to answer but would have found it
easier before computers came along.

When I was on recording details on paper, I would have said general if
it was recorded in pencil (and thus was oral info and I hadn't checked
the info given) and in depth when it fianlly made it into ink because
I had checked and verified that info as thus I then started to fill
out the finer details because those were the actual individulas I was
particularly intereted in.

Not very helpful and probably not what you had in mind at all.

I guess now that I have too many names to keep up with the paper
records I rely on my computer for finding the numbers and names of the
individuals and then my folders to then check up for those individauls
in whom I have a more indepth interest.

CWatters...

Start with yourself and work back. If you find a link to someone that you
can't be 100% sure about don't go too much further until you can.

Likewise, to what extend of detail do you go into?

Farm1...

As much as I can find and from any souce I can verify to my
satisfaction or where I can state that it is "not proven but
possible/likely" given location or other factors.

An example of proof and how long it can take to prove it to my
satisfaction. I have 2 brothers who travelled to Australia about
approx 1860-1865. When I first began my hunt for these brothers I
knew of the rough timing but not whether they had travelled together
or on which vessel. Another family researcher checked the passenger
lists and found the name of one brother (of approximately the right
age) on a vessel in the right time frame and a note saying "and
brother". For her that was sufficient proof that they had arrived on
that boat.

I was not satisfied as I had found the same name on other passenger
lists and no mention of the brother, but the name of the brother
appearing on passenger lists for entirely different vessels. The
names are common and there is not proof that they travelled together.
Not proof to my way of thinking.

Years later, I got hold of a surgeon's list from Britain that as far
as I know is not available in Australia. The brothers arrived on a
completely different boat from that I was initially told by the other
family researcher. The sugeons list notes that they were discharged
into the care of a relative - name and location supplied and that
fitted with other information I was aware of.

The other family researcher has recently told an old family contact
that he should stop giving people the wrong names for his ancestors as
he is wrong. He isn't. The "researcher" is trying to fit the facts
to suit the information they believe they have found and it's a load
of codswallop.