Richard, 
That seems like a good plan. I think establishing "Drury Lane Theatre" in n 50043073 was the error. You should probably move all the 410's from n 50043073 (esp. Theatre Royal, Bridges Street and Brydges Street) into nb2012012255, also. If literary warrant emerges for setting the Bridges Street form up as a separate heading, you can do that later. But at this point, it doesn't seem like there is any. Wikipedia says it was called Theatre Royal, Bridges Street until 1674, but we haven't found any definite evidence of titles with that form of the name during that period. 

I think John said he wrote to the theater. Maybe they'll have more insight on it. 

Ted Gemberling
UAB Lister Hill Library
(205)934-2461

-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Moore, Richard
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 1:48 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Drury Lane Theatre

Having read the comments and revisited the records, I now think we paid undue deference to the existing form of name in n 50043073, in leaving it alone and establishing the form needed by ESTC as an earlier name. 

The form "Drury Lane Theatre" is not and has never been supported by anything cited in 670 (and I've looked at all 8 incarnations of the record in Connexion ...). As has been observed, the institution itself still refers to itself under the "earlier" name. So I think I'm going to ask LC to delete the record, and go with nb2012012255.

Regards
Richard

_________________________
Richard Moore
Authority Control Team Manager
The British Library
                                                                        
Tel.: +44 (0)1937 546806                                
E-mail: [log in to unmask]