Agatha Christie wrote six romance novels under the pseudonym Mary Westmacott per the Westmacott authority. Currently there are three titles established under Westmacott in the LCNAF. All three have been republished in recent years as "by Agatha Christie writing as Mary Westmacott." This raises several questions.

1. When this formulation is used, which is the correct choice for a work's authorized access point--the "by" name, or the "writing as" name? How should we interpret "Works by this author are entered under the name used in the item" in this case?

2. When all titles initially published under a pseudonym are republished under an author's better known identity, should the pseudonym change in LCNAF from a separate 100 to a 400 under the better known identity? 

3a. If the 100 does become a 400, is it still appropriate to preserve 400 name/title entries established under a name no longer established separately? For example:
100 1 $a Christie, Agatha, $d 1890-1976. $t Giant's bread
400 1 $w nne $a Westmacott, Mary, $d 1890-1976. $t Giant's bread

3b. If a title published under the pseudonym was never established,  is it still appropriate to have 400 name/title entries under a name no longer established separately? For example: 
100 1 $a Christie, Agatha, $d 1890-1976. $t Daughter's burden
400 1 $a Westmacott, Mary, $d 1890-1976. $t Daughter's burden

4. In these cases, if a pseudonym like Westmacott is preserved as a separate 100 identity and does not become a 400 for Christie, can both names appear as access points in bib records, e.g., one as 100 and the other as 700?

The catalog records entered under Westmacott in OCLC indicate a fair amount of uncertainty how to deal with these cases.

Thanks,

Stephen
--
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