Print

Print


To find canceled records in Connexion, go to Authorities > Search > LC Names and Subjects History

 

------------------------------------------

John Hostage

Senior Continuing Resources Cataloger

Harvard Library--Information and Technical Services

Langdell Hall 194

Harvard Law School Library

Cambridge, MA 02138

[log in to unmask]

+(1)(617) 495-3974 (voice)

+(1)(617) 496-4409 (fax)
ISNI 0000 0000 4028 0917

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stephen Hearn
Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2017 12:34
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Tom Jackson

 

In this case, there is evidence for only one Tom Jackson on the "Jackson, Tom" authority. Looking back through the authority record's history in OCLC, that's always been the case.

 

Having the cancelled LCCN in subfield $z gives me access to the current record in OCLC, but not to the cancelled record. Is there another way to retrieve cancelled records?

 

In MARC Discussion Paper No. 2006-DP03, Incorporation of Former Headings into MARC21 Authority Records, there was a discussion of the issue of how to preserve the history of an entity's earlier established heading forms. MARC Proposal No. 2007-02 followed from this, resulting in the creation of $w/1 code h, "no reference structure", which is intended to block a 4XX from indexing and coming in conflict with existing 1XXs. The LC Guidelines for the MARC Authority Format do not include "h" in the list of values not to be used in $w/1

 

So, is that a live option in a case like this?

 

Stephen

 

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Kuperman, Aaron <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

In this situation, where an person  was erroneously on someone else’s (not undifferentiated) record (as opposed to having been on an undifferentiated record), I would add something in a 667, or perhaps the 953, so that there is some indication what happened, and why some records had their headings changed.  On the other hand, if it turns out that one person had multiple authority records under different forms of name, a simple merger doesn’t require a note (though there will be a $w in a 4xx, and the $z in the 010). --Aaron

 

Aaron Kuperman, LC Law Cataloging Section.

This is not an official communication from my employer

 

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Hostage, John
Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2017 11:17 AM


To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Tom Jackson

 

When the record is deleted, the LCCN will be moved to the new record in field 010 $z.  LC merges many such records every year.  I don’t think they go to such lengths.  We are all spending too much time on this simple heading.

 

In response to your other message, the 670s are what help you determine if it’s the right person.  An old unqualified heading doesn’t.

 

------------------------------------------

John Hostage

Senior Continuing Resources Cataloger

Harvard Library--Information and Technical Services

Langdell Hall 194

Harvard Law School Library

Cambridge, MA 02138

[log in to unmask]

+(1)(617) 495-3974 (voice)

+(1)(617) 496-4409 (fax)
ISNI 0000 0000 4028 0917

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michael Borries
Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2017 11:08
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Tom Jackson

 

Would a 667 “Formerly also on NAR n  50027953 (as Jackson, Tom [no date])” work?

 

Michael S. Borries

Cataloger, City University of New York

151 East 25th Street, 5th Floor

New York, NY  10010

Phone: (646) 312-1687

Email: [log in to unmask]

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stephen Hearn
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2017 5:25 PM
To:
[log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Tom Jackson

 

In the past we have used

 

667 Old heading: Jackson, Tom

 

as a way around using a 4XX to preserve a formerly established AAP for an entity when the 4XX option has problems.

 

Stephen

 

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 4:15 PM, Michael Borries <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Well, if I can’t give a 400 field for an undated Tom Jackson, and I can’t give a 500 field for an undated Tom Jackson, what do I do?  While it is true that there are *bib* records with undated Tom Jacksons who are not this one, the authority record was unique as it stood.  It only referred to one Tom Jackson, the one born in 1932.

 

Michael S. Borries

Cataloger, City University of New York

151 East 25th Street, 5th Floor

New York, NY  10010

Phone: (646) 312-1687

Email: [log in to unmask]

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stephen Hearn
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2017 5:07 PM


To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Tom Jackson

 

Agreeing with Adam's comments-- RDA Appendix K.1 does allow for formulating new subfield $i texts, but the LC-PCC PS does not, at least when it comes to PCC records.

 

Also, the MARC Authority 5XX fields are for related established headings. NACO says that each 5XX should match to an established 1XX. So I don't think a 500 field could work in this case, unless the undated heading is established for yet another Tom Jackson. And even then, there'd be ambiguity in such a reference, which would be referring to both the 100 heading for another person and the former heading for the TJ born in 1932. That seems too ambivalent for a subfield $i.

 

Stephen

 

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Michael Borries <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Would a 500 field with the text “ǂi Earlier form of heading: ǂa Jackson, Tom ǂw r” work?  Is it allowed?

 

Michael S. Borries

Cataloger, City University of New York

151 East 25th Street, 5th Floor

New York, NY  10010

Phone: (646) 312-1687

Email: [log in to unmask]

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stephen Hearn
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2017 3:26 PM
To:
[log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Tom Jackson

 

If OCLC included a substantial number of "Jackson, Tom" headings controlled by the n 50027953 authority, one could make a case for changing its 100 to "Jackson, Tom, 1932-" (with the related name/title NARs) and deleting the other authority to resolve the conflicts and take advantage of OCLC's automated updating functionality. But I haven't found any of the many relevant bib records controlled by the undated authority.

 

On the other hand, all the OCLC bib records for "Jackson, Tom, 1932-" are controlled by their authority, so in terms of dynamic relation to the bib file, that authority is more important.

 

What I wound not do is add "400 1 $a Jackson, Tom $w nne" to the more recent authority. In our Alma catalog, that would have the effect of changing all our "Jackson, Tom" headings to "Jackson, Tom, 1932-", which we would prefer not to see happen. Likwewise, eliminating the authority for an undated heading in a case like this would be better for catalogs like ours.  Changing the existing heading by adding the date would add the date willy-nilly to all our "Jackson, Tom" authors, since Alma automatically controls them (where OCLC does not.)

 

Stephen

 

 

 

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 12:31 PM, Robert Maxwell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

I agree with you. Even though n 50027953 isn't coded as undifferentiated it might as well be since you have discovered that in the bib file the access point has been used to represent more than one person.

 

My opinion only, of course.

 

If you do choose to keep nb2011032496 and have n 50027953 canceled, don't forget that there are some related NARs that will also need revision.

 

Bob

 

Robert L. Maxwell
Ancient Languages and Special Collections Cataloger
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
(801)422-5568

"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.


From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Michael Borries <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 10:41 AM
To:
[log in to unmask]
Subject: Tom Jackson

 

This seems to be my week for finding duplicates.  NAR n  50027953 is for Jackson, Tom, no dates, but still unique.  NAR nb2011032496 is for Jackson, Tom, 1932-.  These individuals are the same person, having written the same book, with a different title in Britain.  There seem to be a great many records with the heading Jackson, Tom [no dates], but some of these seem not to be the Tom Jackson who writes books on how to get a job.  But there seem to be far fewer records with the heading that includes the date.  Still, because there are bib records which have headings with no date for a different Tom Jackson, I think it would be better to use the heading with the date as the authorized form, even though the form without the date was established earlier.  What is the opinion of this forum?

 

Michael S. Borries

Cataloger, City University of New York

151 East 25th Street, 5th Floor

New York, NY  10010

Phone: (646) 312-1687

Email: [log in to unmask]

 



 

--

Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist

Data Management & Access, University Libraries

University of Minnesota

170A Wilson Library (office)

160 Wilson Library (mail)

309 19th Avenue South

Minneapolis, MN 55455

ORCID:  0000-0002-3590-1242



 

--

Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist

Data Management & Access, University Libraries

University of Minnesota

170A Wilson Library (office)

160 Wilson Library (mail)

309 19th Avenue South

Minneapolis, MN 55455

ORCID:  0000-0002-3590-1242



 

--

Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist

Data Management & Access, University Libraries

University of Minnesota

170A Wilson Library (office)

160 Wilson Library (mail)

309 19th Avenue South

Minneapolis, MN 55455

ORCID:  0000-0002-3590-1242



 

--

Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist

Data Management & Access, University Libraries

University of Minnesota

170A Wilson Library (office)

160 Wilson Library (mail)

309 19th Avenue South

Minneapolis, MN 55455

Ph: 612-625-2328

Fx: 612-625-3428

ORCID:  0000-0002-3590-1242