Evaluating Global Change Queue Proposals

Jenifer K. Marquardt

University of Georgia Libraries

Jkm@libris.libs.uga.edu

Outline

Why evaluate the queue? The authority record Subject headings Multiple people covered by one heading? Conference headings Series Uniform titles Machine-derived authority records Closing remarks & Questions

Why Evaluate the Queue?

Limitations of programming – MARCIVE supplied authority records– Human judgment for finer points

Historical problems in your databaseUnless YOU forced a change into the

queue, consider the global change queue entries as PROPOSALS ONLY

The Authority Record

670 fields can be rich sources of information – subject area of author– period active in publishing– institutional affiliations– different forms of name

Many proposals are just fine – but you can’t tell without looking!

Subject Headings

Most proposed changes are fine!

Be careful with closing dates

Heading is changing to close date 1960- changing to 1960-1990

Look at the bibliographic records in your database

Some bibs may need different or multiple headings

Determine from the title and other bib. record information

You would probably choose

both headings to cover the date range in the title.

No date info in the bibliographic record?

Before you pull books from the shelves

What has LC done?– http://lcweb.loc.gov/catalog/

Other types of headings can warrant investigation too

Ships often have the same name as other ships – more than one ship with the name “Potomac” for instance

OCLC shows us that there are several types of ship named “Potomac”

There is a brig, a frigate, a

fuel oil tanker, a yacht, and one qualified with plain “Ship”

Bib. records usually give enough information in conjunction with authority records

This one is easy – oil spill involved so Fuel oil tanker likely

Place and date of spill

Name of ship

Authority record suggested by MARCIVE matches – see the 1st 670

This detailed information is usually in ship authority records – these dates often help you determine which ship matches your bibliographic record.

Multiple People Covered By One Heading?

Several people may be grouped in your catalog under a single name heading

Usually happens when a name has no specific dates or qualifiers

Three proposals to change from no date to specific date

Click the search button to retrieve headings list

No titles yet linked to 1954- heading supplied

by MARCIVE.

Note that local catalog shows a variety of Douglas Robinson heading options.

Probably even more possibilities in OCLC.

A look at the proposed name heading – info in the 670s

Change these 8 titles we have under plain Robinson, Douglas?

Bib. description shows this Douglas Robinson is a tenor

Another change proposal from the queue

There are two titles attached to plain

Bennett, Bill – should both be changed?

670 in this authority record matches one of the titles

What about the other title?

Examine the subjects,

publishers, co-authors

Search GIL and/orOCLC authority file

Cleaned up!

Imported authority record for Bennett, Bill Changed heading on “Death, too, for The-

Heavy-Runner” to match Benjamin A. authority record

Naturally not always so lucky to match bib. title exactly to 670

Similarities in subjectSame affiliationsInformed guesswork/judgment

Conference Headings

Bib. records usually have heading for a specific conference

Proposals often want to change from a specific to a generic heading

Another example

Some conference change proposals are good ones, so look at each one

Name of location of conference has changed

Series problems and the difference between description and tracing

4XX field must describe what is on the piece! (This form often matches the authorized form of the heading.)

The 8XX field is used to provide the tracing when the authorized form it is not found in the 4XX field.

Series problem #1 if you use the queue to do series maintenance

830 no longer needed - used to have plural word “communications”

Series problem #2 if you use the queue

440 no longer reflects series statement as it appeared on piece - Strumenti. |p Linguistica e critica letteraria. Should have 490/830

Uniform Titles

Be careful with all Name/Title proposals

Problems very common

Elements of the uniform title are often very clearly different

Common differences:– Date or Language of work– Medium of performance– Number of part/section of work– Arranged statement– Key for music

A tricky music uniform title issue

There could be more than one section or part of a work in D minor.

As another example, a composer often writes more than one work in the same form and in the same key.

Okay if your bib. is in the 670. Otherwise evaluate some more!

Machine-derived Authority Records

As a part of the LC/OCLC Uniform Title Correction Project, OCLC generated approximately 64,000 authority records, machine-derived from the Library of Congress Multiple Use MARC System (MUMS) Music File.

Not as trustworthy!

These authority records contain:

The label "Machine-derived authority records" in the 667 field

OCoLC in the 040.

Music uniform titles are complex, so I let our music catalogers evaluate proposals

Another example

Is this change to include key valid?

1st thing I see is that the record was machine derived

Our bib. record doesn’t mention F minor in 505

I would let a music cataloger evaluate this proposal.

Closing Remarks

Don’t take queue proposals for granted! Subjects are pretty straightforward, but 1 in 5

of our Name or Name/Title entries require personal judgment be applied/action taken

The queue is a great tool, but the process IS NOT as fully automated as it appears on the surface! Take time to look at proposals.

Questions?

Thank you for attending!