The ultimate question that required an answer throughout this module was: why create data from humanities sources? Ultimately, the question of data lies in what the scholar seeks to discover. By creating data from your projects, one can find many aspects not previously understood from their work. One can discover patterns, relationships, and structures that are not apparent in reading the work. As Thomas Padilla shows in our readings, creating data creates greater possibilities for understanding and studying research. Using various tools such as data visualization, mapping, or spatial analysis allows large collections to be observed and comprehended far more easily than simple analysis. Specifically, I learned how complex and comprehensive data collection can be with our work on various projects such as the Tudor Networks, the Fairfax County Probate Records, and the Early African American Film. These projects highlighted this, but directly working with the Works Progress Administration Slave Narratives project and creating data specifically really made me realize how important creating data from documents, letters, and various other sources is to create a broader analysis field. In the case of the Slave Narratives, this data adds more humanity and greater emphasis on that individual story and how it connects to a broader context. Even though I only worked with three individuals, I felt a better connection to their story when I created their data. I also understood that with the right tools and sources, data creation is not as difficult as I once thought.
The questions that the data lets you answer that other methods do not are as follows: What patterns are seen throughout the given information? What are the shifts and trends that occur throughout? What are common themes throughout the data? By creating data and answering these questions, the understanding of the subject is far greater than that of other projects.
When a scholar creates data from various sources, transparency is always key. The first aspect is transparency about how the scholar interpreted the data, whether it excluded certain items, created a common theme with names, and how the data was digitized. Normalization and the direct mention of this process are critical for the transparency of data creation. By explicitly stating how the data was developed and what factors created the data, the scholar creating the data has less ground for potential biases. Beyond the risk of biases, scholars can craft false arguments that would cause some to create the wrong conclusion. Specifically, stating what was undertaken to create the data and what was excluded is essential to the integrity of the field and the legitimacy of the scholar.

