LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for PCCLIST Archives

PCCLIST Archives

PCCLIST Archives













By Topic:










By Author:











Proportional Font





PCCLIST  September 2015

PCCLIST September 2015


Re: Instructions for variant access points


Chris Baer <[log in to unmask]>


Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]>


Thu, 10 Sep 2015 13:19:22 -0400





text/plain (356 lines)

I realize this has become a discussion on the value or not of dates, as opposed to a general discussion of variant access points.

As to the first issue raised by Ben, not only do dates not change individually, but they don't change in relationship to other people's dates, so people can be put into some sort of context.  That means being able to tell if someone came of age in the Twenties or the New Deal or one of the World Wars, not just the broader case of the 13th versus 19th centuries.  It means that they would sort chronologically in an old fashioned browse search.

As to the second, as a historian I am not sympathetic to people who question the value of dates, but I am sympathetic to people who don't have the time or the means to deal with dates in the context of the flood of modern authorship.

The value of dates depends entirely on the type of works and the type of use.  For people looking for things that are popular or canonical, they are usually superfluous.  These are known products like Ben & Jerry's ice cream or the "Fast and Furious" franchise.  People go looking with blinkers on and a narrow focus, and in such cases one-click shopping is both desirable and probably obtainable.  People will get the names to look for because they are circulating in current media, or because they get them in things like course reading lists or discussion group reading lists.  At the same time, it is worth remembering that what is current fades away.  Who but specialists know the names of the ordinary pop stars and celebrities and the movers and shakers of the Edwardian Age, not to mention earlier periods?  They have slipped as far out of popular consciousness as once-popular products like Hostetter's bitters or Uneeda biscuits or bombazines.  So a lot of things can be expected to fall out of timely, generalized use into the specialized and obscure.  And to the extent that the past is the proverbial "another country," it requires more road maps and travel guides.  Strictly speaking, someone looking for the "Principia" doesn't really need Isaac Newton's dates, but people looking for the Isaac Newton who was a 19th century New York naval architect and steamboat operator, or the near-contemporary Boston editor and promoter of the same name, do.  And they don't want the "Principia" or the history of science or even a published work as such.

With such research, especially like the kind of work I have spent my career doing in primary sources, one typically finds a name somewhere in an old letter or newspaper or obscure pamphlet and it becomes a matter of finding more about the person, not simply what they have published, which may be nothing at all, but perhaps their motive for taking one stand or another, or personal relationships with persons and events already discovered.  That kind of use takes in a search for other obscure sources, something that digitization has made much easier by its ability to search inside the work, but also more complex when dealing with common or similar names.  It is not a blinkered search, because one is often not entirely certain of what one is looking for, (e.g., the name as first found may be slightly misspelled), and it is definitely not a matter of one-click shopping, even with sources that can be trolled digitially.  It is not a matter of looking for something pre-packaged, because at some point the search leads away from the published to the unpublished or, in the case of small notices in a periodical, from the wrapper to the fine print.  In such searching, every little clue helps.  Dates in particular are practically a necessity to filter out totally irrelevant results when searching for people in Google, Ancestry and similar data bases.

One problem with using dates on an as-needed-to-disambiguate-only basis goes something like this.  The first "Samuel G. Wright" to be discovered goes in without dates.  Any subsequent "Samuel G. Wrights" receive dates.  Now it is impossible to tell at a glance their chronological ranking (e.g., father/son), or even the century of the undated person.  Adding the date in the first instance would eliminate this.  For a real example, look at "Dey, Anthony."  The undated "Anthony Dey" was not an author but a New York City Federalist and entrepreneur associate of Hamilton.  It would most likely be the second type of researcher  who would be looking for him and not the others.  That Anthony Dey's interests and activities were sufficiently varied that it would be hard to hang a succinct occupational qualifier on him, short of following the Clint Eastwood example and calling him "member of X," "associate of Y," and so forth.  Maybe when everything is up and running, the 3xx fields can do that, but someone has to take time to fill in the data first.  In fact, the dates are probably the easiest data to obtain and the quickest to enter.

In archival description, the point has ALWAYS been to identify the person, and less to collocate the works, which are usually unpulished letters or non-literary things.  It calls for all relevant all data ABOUT the person, not the simplest level of disambiguation.

I don't know how many of you have created or are familiar with a typical archival BIB record, but a reasonably-sized collection has anywhere from 100 to 300 added entries which actually constitute an INDEX to the collection, including the names of principal correspondents and entities recorded or discussed, plus topical and geographical headings for subject matter.  While every document is a discrete "work," the description is at an aggregate level, and because the arrangement is by provenance and original order, and not by an artificial collocation, the added entries can be as far-ranging as the principal creator's interests and activities.  Such an index is needed, even with full on-line finding aids, because it has to encompass content WITHIN files rather than simple file titles.  Indeed, many things with a chronological arrangement, such as letterbooks, account books or minute books, have no title that will describe contents without such an index.  In the BIB display, the added entries form a mini-browse list linking collections, but they are also an explication of the named entities and clues to their possible relationships with one another.  With dates, people file in proper generational order.  Many of these people are relatively obscure, so whatever information we can provide to both reference staff and patrons is a potential advantage.  Sacrificing this information to comply the the needs of others constitutes a kind of instirtutional dumbing-down and trading that road map to "another country" for a contemporary Google map with its paid flaggings of contemporary bars, restaurants and lodgings.  With dynastic families, relationships are particularly important, and identically-named people are more common.  That is why we have always added dates in our local catalog when available, and since we have official records, they are more likely to be available.  As I have mentioned before, we also have relationships with closely associated individuals that change with death, which is why we also close life span dates.  Even though it might seem that that has nothing to do with retrieval, it often does affect access and copyright, neither of which is an issue with published materials.

As an illustration of why one-click shopping is not practical with manuscript research, our catalog contains 1,695 instances of "E.I. du Pont de Nemours &Company," without considering topical or organizational subdivisions, 806 instances of "Du Pont de Nemours, Pierre Samuel," the only family member to be famous as a writer and printer, 106 entries for "Du Pont, Eleuthere Irenee" the founder of the company, and 190 entries for "Du Pont, Pierre S. (Pierre Samuel)," who published little but founded our organization.

Perhaps the pressure for one-click shopping for current materials has created an illusion that all ambiguities can be removed and one-click shopping be made universal.  As John Marr notes, who is going to disambiguate all the legacy data already in OCLC?  How did we get by all these years?  The rules practically mandate the creation of undifferentiated or ambigous corporate names.  Who is going to create authority records for all the names currently in OCLC without them?  We are guilty of that, because we simply don't have the time to create NARs when a single new collection has a hundred or more new names, much less go back and create them for the tens of thousands of names we needed before being able to contribute to NACO.  There are plenty of times when we have names that are the same as the one authorized for another person.  However, the fields of activity are sufficiently different that only one would reside in our catalog.  They would only jostle in a supposedly universal catalog.

 I have written before that I think that while it might be possible to create a universal catalog for artists, broadly defined, and their creations, a universal catalog of entities, including entities represented by only one work or whose works are not widely disseminated, is entirely different and beyond the competence and resources of this community.  I am sort of curious on what basis and with what knowledge OCLC intends to "authorize" unauthorized names from records harvested from us and others.  In our case, we consider the form of many such names provisional.  Since we operate in a limited spectrum of subject matter, we are always discoverning new things, as when obituaries are published within the communities we monitor or researchers share or publish what they have discovered in our materials.  I find it troubling when soneone who knows little or nothing of the matter, runs away with our data and sets it in cement.  Is this work being done by algorithms?  I found an instance where an old professor of mine, who was a patrician esthete who collected fine art, has been mashed-up by WorldCat Identities with a similarly named member of the Black Panther Party.  Might not dates have made the mistake more obvious?

Yours truly
Chris Baer
Assistant Curator of Manuscripts
Hagley Museum and Library

-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Benjamin A Abrahamse
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 2:54 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Instructions for variant access points

I think when they are being used to disambiguate, biographical dates have one advantage over other possible elements, namely that they don't change. People aren't born more than once--except metaphorially, in some religious traditions. So long as catalogers are forming unique strings to serve as identifiers it is probably a better element than others for purposes of qualification.

However, I'm sympathetic to the voices on this list that question the value of dates in identifying people even when their name is unique in the file. I think there are grounds to question the widsom of LC-PCC PS for, which instructs catalogers to include dates (if known) in access points regardless of whether they are needed to resolve a conflict.


Benjamin Abrahamse
Cataloging Coordinator
Acquisitions and Discovery Enhancement
MIT Libraries

-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of CHRISTOPHER WALKER
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 2:41 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Instructions for variant access points


The usefulness of dates depends, of course, on the name, the dates, and the amount of conflict to clarify.
If there are few conflicts with the undifferentiated name, dates from widely-separated time periods may pretty clearly differentiate two or three persons, and suffice to produce a usable index in the file.
A person with “flourished” dates in the 13th century cannot very well be the author of a technical manual for typewriter repair, for instance.

Christopher H. Walker
Serials Cataloging Librarian
Penn State's representative to the CONSER Operations Committee Member at Large, ALCTS CRS Executive Committee 2013/2016
126 Paterno Library
The Pennsylvania State University
University Park, PA 16802-1812
(814) 865-4212
[log in to unmask]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Knop, Judy" <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2015 8:43:51 AM
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Instructions for variant access points

I would agree that the use of dates is not a user helpful way of identifying authors.  I don't believe the point was ever to necessarily identify a person, but rather to collocate a specific person's works and differentiate that person from others.  For that purpose, dates are very useful, but they don't do well with identifying that person for patrons.

Judy Knop
ATLA NACO Funnel Coordinator
[log in to unmask]

-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Dickerson, Eugene H
Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 2:34 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Instructions for variant access points

Thanks for adding this additional comment.

Although there is a long history in cataloging practice of using birth and/or death dates to differentiate one identity from another (this device may work OK for the cataloger, and even that is debatable), but I'm not sure how helpful the dates are to the average person who encounters a name in a library catalog.  For example, I'm looking in the NACO file for a Richard Smith who is Professor of Health System Economics at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.  (You can just image how many entries there are for Smith, Richard and all the various forms of that name.)   At this stage, I don’t yet have any other information about this person, so all those dates aren't helpful to me in my search.  In some ways, the occupational qualifier would be much more useful for the average user.  While I'm not suggesting that we abandon using birth and/or death dates as qualifying data to an authorized access point, I think that we may be overestimating how useful that data are in distinguishing one identity from others in a database.  A citation consisting of a name and a title plus other information is probably helpful for a user in identifying whether the person in question wrote on a field of the user's interest, but just a personal name and date(s) out of context is probably not as useful in the FRBR tasks of find, identify, and select, as we might hope.  Although there is a policy statement urging us to add dates to the authorized access point when readily available, I'm not convinced that there is always a great return on the investment in doing this.  Recording the dates in the authority record is useful when they are readily available as one means of identification, but I'm not sure that they always need to be included in an authorized access point.  It's not likely that a lot of users are going to know birth and/or death dates associated with an identify unless the name being searched or retrieved is associated with a well-known person, especially for really common names.


Eugene Dickerson
Team Leader for Cataloging
Ralph J. Bunche Library
U.S. Department of State
Washington, DC
[log in to unmask]
(202) 647-2191 (voice)

No part of any article sent to you by the Bunche Library can be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted without prior written permission of the publisher. The exception are brief quotations.  For a synopsis click here: (Link not valid outside the Department of State.)

-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Diana M. Brooking
Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 1:19 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] FW: Instructions for variant access points

Yes, now that undifferentiated name headings are not possible, it is hard to find a qualifier sometimes to differentiate common names. That's why I worry about a proliferation of *different* qualifiers used in 4XXs-- I agree that then would make them unavailable for other 1XXs, wouldn't it?

And if all the possible occupations or whatever other possible qualifiers are present in 3XX fields in the authority record, and assuming some day those will be visible to users in some form (otherwise why are we creating all this data), that makes adding 4XXs with variant qualifiers seem really unnecessary.

Diana Brooking
Catalog/Germanics Librarian
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900
Seattle WA 98195
[log in to unmask]

-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [http://redirect.state.sbu/?url=mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Benjamin A Abrahamse
Sent: Friday, August 28, 2015 11:38 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Instructions for variant access points


I kind of agree with you in principle, but there are times when qualifying by occupation is the only way to make an access point unique.  Especially now that undifferentiated name headings have been deprecated.

That said, adding cross references just to accomodate mulitple occupations strikes me as curious. I should think it would be better practice either to try and find a more generic occupational term, or to figure out which of a person's various roles is most "identifiable".

Still, NACO seems to have decided that all "variant names" are acceptable if an individual  cataloger deems them so.


Benjamin Abrahamse

Cataloging Coordinator

Acquisitions and Discovery Enhancement

MIT Libraries


From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [http://redirect.state.sbu/?url=mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Gene Fieg
Sent: Friday, August 28, 2015 2:11 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Instructions for variant access points

I may be in a distinct minority here, but I should declare my views before I make any suggestions.  I do not like using $c (function) as part of the name, especially in establishing a person in the NAF.

The name of the person is the name of the person without the qualification of function.  For instance, Clint Eastwood; that is his name no matter what his function is.  He may be any one of the following: Eastwood, Clint (Actor); Eastwood, Clint (Director); Eastwood, Clint (Producer); Eastwood, Clint (Mayor).

His name as in NAF should be what it is now: Eastwood, Clint, ?d 1930-

If a cataloger, wishes to add $c [function], that his/her business for the local library, but it should not be part of AAP.  Function should not be part of it in the NAF.  (As a background to this, we had some confusion in my field of cataloging of distinguishing between Biblical character, Biblical figure, and Biblical leader, etc when such descriptions followed a biblical name.

Such functions may, and I emphasize "may" here, be useful with given names, but not with surname, forename formulations.

Gene Fieg

Aug. 28, 2015

On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 7:16 PM, Adam L. Schiff <[log in to unmask] <http://redirect.state.sbu/?url=mailto:[log in to unmask]> > wrote:

A question recently came to me inquiring about an authority that we had created which had some possibly dubiously valid variant access points:

100 1 Francis, Matthew ?c (Dramatist)

370  ?c England ?c Great Britain ?f Greenwich (London, England) ?2 naf

372  Drama ?a Stage adaptations ?a Theater--Production and direction ?a Acting ?2 lcsh

373  Greenwich Theatre ?2 naf

374  Dramatists ?a Theatrical producers and directors ?a Television producers and directors ?a Actors ?2 lcsh

375  male

377  eng

400 1 Matthews, Francis ?w nne

400 1 Francis, Matthew ?c (Director)

400 1 Francis, Matthew ?c (Producer)

400 1 Francis, Matthew ?c (Actor)

400 1 Matthews, Francis ?c (Producer)

667  Formerly on undifferentiated name record: no2003109605

670  New tricks. Season three [VR], c2010: ?b container (Francis Matthews; producer)

670  Francis, Matthew (Dramatist). Jane Austen's Northanger Abbey, 1997: ?b title page (adapted for the stage by Matthew Francis) unnumbered page after title page (First presented at Greenwich Theatre on 4th July 1996; directed by Matthew Francis) production notes (our production at Greenwich)

670  Epic stories on stage website, June 24, 2015: ?b about (From 1990 to 1998, Matthew Francis was Artistic Director of the Greenwich Theatre. His work there included his own adaptations of Tale of Two Cities, David Copperfield, The Prisoner of Zenda, Northanger Abbey and Huckleberry Finn; has worked extensively in repertory theatres across the UK; he was Associate Director at the Chichester Festival Theatre; his credits as television producer include the BBC success Office Gossip and Gimme Gimme Gimme (the UK inspiration for Will & Grace). After working on the second series of the successful comedy My Dad's The Prime Minister, Matthew produced the third series of the BBC's most successful drama New Tricks; began his career as an actor - when, between theatre and TV appearances, he spent three happy months as front man for the Swedish pop group ABBA) ?u http://redirect.state.sbu/?url=

670  IMDb, June 24, 2015 ?b (Matthew Francis (I). Matthew Francis is a producer and actor, known for My Dad's the Prime Minister (2003), Gimme Gimme Gimme (1999) and Office Gossip (2001); and: Francis Matthews (II), producer) ?u http://redirect.state.sbu/?url= <http://redirect.state.sbu/?url=>  ?u http://redirect.state.sbu/?url= <http://redirect.state.sbu/?url=>

670  Lipman, Maureen. I must collect myself, 2010, via Google books, June 24, 2015: ?b (Matthew Francis, former director and administrator of the Greenwich Theatre, also known to me as Francis Matthews)

670  Jane Austen's Northanger Abbey, 1997: ?b title page (adapted for the stage by Matthew Francis)

The question of course dealt with the 400s in the record that began with Francis, Matthew, which is the preferred form of the person’s name and is also found in the 100 field.

Indeed, RDA does say “When constructing a variant access point to represent a person, use a variant name for the person (see 9.2.3 <http://redirect.state.sbu/?url=> ) as the basis for the access point.”  It also goes on to say that you may “Make additions to the name, if considered important for identification.”   There is nothing in the current RDA chapter 9 instructions that would seem to allow using the preferred name of a person as the basis of a variant access point.  And yet, these can fairly easily be found in RDA-coded NARs created by both LC and other PCC catalogers.  Examples that I found quite quickly by some judicious searching in the NAF through OCLC:

100 1 Cabral, Ami´lcar, ?d 1924-1973

400 1 Cabral, Ami´lcar, ?d 1921-1973 ?w nne

100 1 Sa´enz, Jorge ?c (Author)

400 1 Sa´enz, Jorge ?c (Security specialist)

100 1 Franklin, Michael, ?d 1972-

400 1 Franklin, Michael ?c (Medical editor)

100 1 Bernard, James ?q (James T.), ?d 1977-

400 1 Bernard, James ?c (Author at PowerKids Press)

100 1 David, Michel ?c (Film producer and actor)

400 1 David, Michel ?c (Actor)

100 1 Pereira, Augusto ?c (Film producer)

400 1 Pereira, Augusto ?c (Actor)

100 1 Singer, David ?c (Film producer)

400 1 Singer, David ?c (Actor)

100 1 Carboni, Bruno ?c (Film editor)

400 1 Carboni, Bruno ?c (Film director)

If you look at instructions under works and expressions, RDA does allow us to use a preferred title as the basis for a variant access point. says “Construct additional variant access points if considered important for access” as does  At we have some examples that use the preferred title as the basis for a variant access point rather than a variant title:

Jeanne-Claude, 1935– . Wrapped Reichstag

Authorized access point for the work: Christo, 1935– . Wrapped Reichstag. A work of art created jointly by Christo and Jeanne-Claude. Variant access point considered important for subject access

Management series (Chicago, Ill.)

Authorized access point for the work: Management series (Ann Arbor, Mich.). Place of publication of series changed from Ann Arbor to Chicago

And says that you can construct a variant access point for an expression by adding a variant of an addition used in constructing the authorized access point representing the expression.  Example from the NAF:

046      ?k 1992

130 _0 Blade runner (Motion picture : ?s Director's cut)

381      Director's cut $a 1992 version

430 _0 Blade runner (Motion picture : ?s 1992 version)

430 _0 Blade runner (Motion picture). ?f 1992

I think that there may be times when variant access points for persons, families, and corporate bodies that are based on a preferred name rather than a variant name might be useful.  Catalogers ought to be free to make variant access points of any kind if they will aid users, oughtn’t they?  So I am wondering if there would be support for adding an instruction like what is in to the variant access point instructions in chapters 9-11?  That is, something like “Construct additional variant access points if considered important for access” with some examples.

Adam L. Schiff

Principal Cataloger

University of Washington Libraries

Box 352900

Seattle, WA 98195-2900

[log in to unmask] <http://redirect.state.sbu/?url=mailto:[log in to unmask]>

(206) 543-8409 <tel:%28206%29%20543-8409>

(206) 685-8782 <tel:%28206%29%20685-8782>  fax

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Search Archives

Search Archives

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997



CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager