This should have been qualified with (Rapper or Rap musician) to begin with.  (It’s my record, so I can say what I want about it!)  However, if he can now be considered “entrepreneur, investor and actor” as well, then my third alternative below is probably the best one. The first version of the AR looked like this:

 

010  no2003002159

040  PPi-MA ǂb eng ǂc PPi-MA

1000 50 Cent ǂc (Musician)

4000 Fifty Cent ǂc (Musician)

4001 Jackson, C. ǂq (Curtis)

4001 Jackson, Curtis

670  Music from and inspired by the motion picture 8 mile [SR] p2002: ǂb container (50 Cent) insert (C. Jackson)

670  All music guide WWW site, Jan. 8, 2003 ǂb (50 Cent; b. Curtis Jackson, Queens, NY; rapper)

670  OCLC database, Jan. 8, 2003 ǂb (hdgs.: 50 Cent (Musician); 50 Cent, rapper)

 

     More worrisome is what to do in upgrading this to RDA.  There are almost too many possibilities:

 

50 Cent ǂc (Rapper)

50 Cent ǂc (Rapper), ǂd 1975-

50 Cent, ǂd 1975-

 

     I think we’ve established, mainly though Richard Moore’s thoughtful statements, that $c would precede $d.  But the question remains: with a birth date clearly identifying “50 Cent” as a person, is the additional of Occupation even necessary:

 

010  no 00088820

040  RPB-M ǂb eng ǂc RPB-M ǂd PPi-MA ǂd DLC ǂe rda ǂd ICrlF

046  ǂf 1971

1000 Chali 2na, ǂd 1971-

372  Music industry

373  Jurassic 5

374  Rapper

375  male

377  eng

4000 Chali2na, ǂd 1971-

4001 2na, Chali

4000 Chali2na ǂc (Musician)

4001 Stewart, Charles, ǂd 1971-

4001 Tuna, Charlie

4000 Chali 2na ǂc (Musician) ǂw nnea

 

I haven’t been consistent myself.  I’d like to be, going forward at least. 

 

Chuck Herrold

Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh

 

 

 

 

 

 

Should 50 Cent be qualified by (Rapper) rather than by (Musician)?  Wikipedia lists 50 Cent as being a rapper, entrepreneur, investor and actor.  (My staff have been debating this for the last 15 minutes.)

 

Are these qualifications up for discussion? 

 

Thanks,

Carolyn Gonzalez

Head of Technical Services

Sueltenfuss Library

Our Lady of the Lake University

411 SW 24^th St

San Antonio, TX  78249

 

(210) 434-6711 x8165

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mark K. Ehlert
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 9:21 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Order of subfields in RDA NARs for personal names

 

A question on this point came up during our RDA in NACO training in November.  Here's the question I posed to Paul Frank along with his response:

5. Additions made to names that do not evoke "person-ness": since LC-PCC PS 9.19.1.3 asks for birth/death dates in personal name access points regardless of conflict, it seems this is also expected for those names that require Profession/Occupation element data to clarify the person-ness of someone (RDA 9.19.1.2).  Following this, we would then have:

 100 0- 50 Cent $c (Musician), $d 1975-

Is this correct?

PF: Yes, this is correct.

--
Mark K. Ehlert                 Minitex
Coordinator                    University of Minnesota
Digitization, Cataloging &     15 Andersen Library
  Metadata Education (DCME)    222 21st Avenue South
Phone: 612-624-0805            Minneapolis, MN 55455-0439
<http://www.minitex.umn.edu/>

This email message and any files transmitted with it are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.� Any use, distribution, copying or disclosure by anyone other than the intended individual or entity is prohibited without prior approval.� If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately.