The record as contributed is, indeed, correct. It does not, however, reflect the difficulties of the situtation faced by the cataloger, nor the discussion we have had on the list.
It's only 6:30 a.m., and I'm a bit bleary, but I have done an OCLC search and made some revisions to the record no2008163514.
If Mr Russell prefers a different heading, ask him to publish more items with that form of name, or to contact me.
As generations of Frankses would now say, "Basta!"
>>> john g marr <[log in to unmask]> 11/5/2008 2:44 PM >>>
The heading in question has just been established as "Russell, Marc
James, 1975- " with reference (670) to a publication in-hand citing
"Russell, Marc J." and to the author's theses usage of "Russell, Marc
James" and thesis heading "Russell, Marc James, 1975- ".
We could say the issue is now moot, but for the sake of argument and
future reference (or perhaps a NACO person could happen along to "massage"
the existing record?), let's resolve this very common problem
using the example available.
On Wed, 5 Nov 2008, Antony Robert David Franks wrote:
> 22.3A goes on to discuss using the fullest form of name in use by the
> author and how to select that. While the lead-in to that discussion is
> that one has found *headings* based upon a usage that differs from the
> usage of the item in hand, the actual discussion is based upon the
> actual usage found on the bibliographic records.
The discussion should actually begin with the form of name on the work
being cataloged, which is "Russell, Marc J.", and by noting that this work
is a "publication", and that a thesis is not a publication.
There are no "Marc J. Russell" headings for other persons in OCLC, so
there is no need to refer to the rules for distinguishing identical names.
There are rules under this category in AACR2 which refer to adding data to
headings even if there is no need to, and a good rule clarification might
be to relocate these to a separate section of the rules (e.g. "Additions
to names not requiring distinction").
Were LC to be the cataloger of the item of concern in this thread, it
would establish the heading as "Russell, Marc. J.", having no needed or
prescribed (internal policy) recourse to other data.
The just-established record does not (yet) cite usage in the OCLC
database for which it was created. Excepting the work cataloged in
relation to this thread, the OCLC usage = Marc Russell (2 publications +
M.A. thesis) + Marc James Russell (Ph D. thesis). Thus there is (simply)
no 80% to consider.
> When there is no commonly found form *choose the fullest form as the
> AACR2 form.* (When determining the fullest form for a person who uses
> both forename initials and forenames, make no distinction between
> initials and forenames, e.g., "B.E.F. Pagen" is fuller than "Bernard
> Edward Pagen.")
Discussion of this part of the LCRI should begin with consideration of
AACR2 0.14 = "The examples ... are illustrative and not prescriptive",
which means that the example given is not meant to limit the meaning
and/or intent of the statement illustrated to situations like the example.
> As Mr. Russell has not been blessed with additional forenames and
> initials as have others of us, it does appear that your heading is
> 100 1 $a Russell, Marc James, $d 1975-
Making "no distinction between forename initials and forenames" in
determining "fullness", and giving precedence of consideration to (1) the
work in hand and (2) publications (over theses) and (3) "Marc J." being
"fuller" than "Marc", the "basis" for the heading is "Russell, Marc J."
The option under 22.17 allows a date to be added. AACR2 and LCRI 22.18A
allow addition of "the full form of an initial", "if the fuller form of a
person's name ... does not include *all* of that fuller form." This
corroborates the idea that a "full form of a name" is considered "full"
despite lacking expansion of initials.
Thus, the information on the author's thesis record (transcription and
date in heading) allows the heading to be expanded to: "Russell, Marc J.
$q (Marc James), $d 1975- .
> Anthony R.D. Franks
PS (sardonic grin): I note that your 1st forename is spelled differently
in your e-mail address (see header) and your signature. Which is
"correct"? And which of the equally "full forms" of your other forenames
do you prefer, "R. D." or "Robert David"?
And apologies to Mr. Russell for batting around his appellation so
John G. Marr
Univ. of New Mexico
Albuquerque, NM 87131
[log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask]
**"I really like to know the reasons for what I do!"**
Opinions belong exclusively to the individuals expressing them, but
sharing is permitted.