Unfortunately not every source is easily available, Sharon - these books are self-published, and out of print, so are not readily available anywhere. The Gibbons ms was never published in full and is extremely rare. In addition, some researchers who have the most data - acquiried through their original work - have not published all their material.
This discussion illustrates some of the problems facing researchers today, with so much information available on the net, but not all of it with cites that enable verification of data. I know Richard, the author of the Dalbeattie site, quite well - I've even met him in person when visiting Dalbeattie and I've had the opportunity to discuss the website with him. He is a charming individual who is keenly interested in history, and who has a strong desire to tell Murdoch's story. I also know his sources - he has consulted Jenni Atkinson, for example, as well as Stormer's first book Goodbye, Good Luck, Elizabeth Gibbons' ms, some of Diana Bristow's published material, and other researchers...in particular a local man who has a tremendous store of knowledge about the Solway Firth and its mariners.
The site is, in many ways, a work in progress (although I know that Richard is very busy and I think hasn't had a chance to complete all the updates and corrections he wished to make). It is also a secondary source - without the cite of a primary source, taking a statement and building conjecture upon it must be done with caveats. Richard himself does not present the idea that Ada continued to work as objective fact - he refers to "reports".
Secondary sources on the internet, like elsewhere, should be a starting point - not the end point. That is why many academic institutions do not allow cites from Wikipedia (or any encyclopedia, for that matter), but they do encourage students to follow up on the primary sources cited by Wiki. Richard's site is one of the better Titanic sites around, although it has generated its share of controversy, but with so many other dodgy sites that make thoroughly innacurate, unsubstantiated statements about figures involved in the disaster, it pays for any serious researcher to be cautious. Taking unreferenced statements to a discussion forum like this and seeking input is a good start to analysing them - in this case, for example, I happen to know that Murdoch researchers have attempted to verify the schoolteaching story, and have been unable to do so to date.