We can qualify authorised access points in the face of conflicts within our own databases, not just within LC/NAF.
Authority Control Team Manager
The British Library
Tel.: +44 (0)1937 546104
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
I agree that what Stephen McDonald says represents PCC policy and I support the policy in general, but this case does represent a problem that I’ve seen frequently in OCLC, that is, a fairly common personal name established without any kind of qualifiers or dates used on large numbers of records for resources by other not-yet-established persons using the same name.
Stephen Hearn’s suggestion of controlling the access points that correspond to the person represented in the authority record is a good one, but doesn’t really solve the problem of all these persons being mixed up (the resources remain attributed to the established person, whether the access points are controlled or not), and this isn’t a helpful situation to our users.
I wonder if PCC might be willing to bend the policy of not changing the authorized access point merely to add qualifiers or dates a bit to accommodate situations like this?
Robert L. Maxwell
Ancient Languages and Special Collections Librarian
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
"We should set an example for all the world, rather than confine ourselves to the course which has been heretofore pursued"--Eliza R. Snow, 1842.
I second everything Stephen McDonald says. Note also that while there are many names entered in OCLC as "Nelson, James", very few are controlled. One useful and low cost action to take in such cases is to control the appropriate bib headings with the unqualified authority. That way, if anyone does take the time to modify this Nelson's authorized access point in order to establish a different Nelson without a qualifier, the appropriate bib headings will get updated automatically.
On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 10:39 AM, McDonald, Stephen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Under normal circumstances, you are not supposed to add dates an existing AAP that does not have dates, unless you are already modifying the name for other reasons. As you describe it, conflicting identities exist, but those identities are not in the NAF. I believe that, by the rules, you do not currently have justification to add the dates to this heading The proper procedure is to create new authority records for the _other_ identities which lack them.
However, if you do create new authority records for the other identities, and find that you have difficulty resolving the conflict with no 98069349, then you are justified in adding dates (and/or other qualifiers) to the existing record in order to resolve the conflict. To do that, you would modify the existing record, rather than create a new record to replace no 98069349.
This is my understanding of the policies. In particular, I am looking at slide 18 of Module 7 of the NACO training slides.
Cataloging and Metadata Librarian
Bear with me if people have asked this kind of question many times before. no 98069349 Nelson, James is a name representing one person (i.e. it’s not undifferentiated), the editor of The complete murder sampler. However, I found in OCLC that there are many works under this heading that are not by this person. I propose to change the heading to Nelson, James, $d 1902-1981. I believe this is the correct thing to do, because there so many works [manifestations?] listed under “Nelson, James”, should I instead create a new heading and ask for the old one to be cancelled?
Cataloger, Monographs and Electronic Resources
Associate Professor of Bibliography
University of Oklahoma
Co-owner, PERSNAME-L, the list about personal names in bibliographic and authority records
Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist
Data Management & Access, University Libraries
University of Minnesota
160 Wilson Library
309 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55455