Penn State University Libraries - Authority Control

Reports from Authority File Update Processing

These reports are received as part of the Authority Update Service. Each month, OCLC/MARS compares their copy of our authority file against the current state of the master authority file and sends us updates: (a) new authority records that replace old authority records or that match headings for which no authority records were previously available; (b) changes to authority records used by Penn State; and (c) a list of Penn State authority records that have been deleted from the national authority file.

This report is received from OCLC/MARS every month. It lists all authority records in the Penn State local authority file which have been updated in the national authority file by changing 1XX, 4XX or 670 fields.

To review the report: open the report in a web browser (i.e. Firefox) and view it in "print preview" mode. The browser puts each change on it's own page and this allows you to view and print each individual record more easily.

Tentative list of possible actions:

• Spot check 1XX changes to see if there is any need to review these (diacritics, spacing changes, subfield t).
• Check 4XX to see how often a new 4XX is a conflict in the local catalog.
• Check 670s for change from undifferentiated to differentiated names.
• Print out and give all subject heading changes to John Attig for review.

This report is received from OCLC/MARS every month. It lists all authority records in the Penn State local authority file which have been deleted from the national authority file. It includes the ARN (Authority Record Number, a.k.a. LCCN) of the record which replaces the deleted record. The report is sorted by the ARN of the deleted record, which means all name authority records come first and all subject authority records come last.

Procedure for processing this report:

• Print out the report.
• Search each deleted heading in WorkFlows; browse author usually works best, but remember that browse author does not include names used as subjects.
• Compare the headings and determine what (if anything) has changed, according to the printout.
• If the heading has changed, correct the relevant bibliographic records in WorkFlows.
• Delete the deleted authority record in the local authority file, using the DeleteAuthority wizard in WorkFlows.
• Other things to watch: false matches (the authority record may be for a different person; if so, delete the authority record, but leave the bibliographic record unchanged); undifferentiated names (if the deleted authority record was an undifferentiated personal name and it is replaced by one or more differentiated names, correct the bibliographic records carefully and make sure we get all the relevant authority records).
• After load: After the authority records have been loaded, spot check to make sure that the authority records have been replaced and that the headings in the bibliographic record are not marked as unauthorized; check what happened when the old authority records had not been deleted.

Documentation for Reports from New Bibliographic Record Processing

These HTML reports are generated from the New Bibliographic Record Service. Each month Penn State sends OCLC/MARS copies of all new bibliographic records added to The CAT since the last file was sent. OCLC/MARS processes those records by performing (a) MARC Update, correcting incorrect or obsolete MARC coding, and (b) Authority Cleanup, comparing the headings against the master authority file, correcting headings that match against see references, and providing corrected bibliographic records, new authority records, and changed authority records, as well as the following reports.

This report (report code R17) lists, in tag order, headings that flip to more than one authority record; in other words, the heading in the bibliographic record is listed as a see reference on more than one authority record. This is usually the result of changes to the authority file, splitting headings for various reasons (e.g., slitting a subject concept into distinct topics, creating unique headings for personal names that were previously undifferentiated). These are to be handled manually one-by-one. Referred to John Attig for completion.

This report contains two types of possible errors:

1. Suspicious filing indicator (report code R13): Report includes title control record number, MARC field tag, and the suspicious indicator value; MARS has determined that the filing indicator does not seem to be identifying a word that is used as an article (in the language indicated in 008); either the indicator or the language code may be in error; these need to be verified.
   
   
2. Possible leading article found (report code R14): Report includes title control record number, MARC field tag, and the text on the field (including the indicators); MARS has determined that the first word may be used as an article, but the indicator value is not set correctly; these need to be checked to determine whether the word is in fact used as an article.

Procedure for processing these reports:

1. Search items by the Title control # in WorkFlows. Use KEYWORD, GENERAL in order to bring up the record by the 001 number (i.e. ocm44573405 ). If there is no 001 or if it has changed, search the main entry as given on the printout.
   
   
2. Bring up the record. The printout indicates in which field the problem is located. Review the field in question.
   
   
   • Is the correct language indicated in the 008 lan field? If not, correct language code.
   • Verify if the word in question is an actual article in the language indicated. Listing of commonly found foreign language initial articles
   • Incorrect indicator? Change to correct number. See below for the rules for counting brackets, diacritics and quotation marks.
   • Look at the MARC tag field in question. Verify if a leading article is placed incorrectly. If so, correct according to AACR2 practice.
     
     NOTE: Headings listed as 830 fields on the printout often turn out to be 490 fields in the
     bibliographic record; do not delete initial articles in 490 fields.
     
     Counting Brackets, Diacritics, & Quotation Marks:
     
     
   • Brackets: If there is an article after a bracket [, then you count the space for the bracket and the
     article. If there is no article after a bracket, do not count the bracket as a space.
     
     Example:
     245 04 |a[Le grande carnaval]
     245 00 |a[Horse shoes]
     
     
   • Diacritics: If a line starts with a diacritic, do not count the diacritic as a space.
     
     Example:
     245 00 |a`Ecritez-vous
     
     
   • Quotation marks: If a line starts with a quote, do not count the quote symbol as a space, unless the first word is an article.
     
     Example:
     245 00 |a"Hearing" not shouting
     245 05 |a"The grass is greener"
     

This report includes the following lists:

1. Heading Usage Not Authorized (report code R11): Report includes the tag and the heading. The heading matches that in an authority record, but the heading use codes in field 008 conflict, or the full heading does not match, but one or more subfields (from the beginning of the heading) do match; however, the usage conflicts as in the previous category. Bibliographic and authority records need to be checked to identify the conflict, and a decision needs to be made how to resolve it.
   
   
2. Possible Invalid Tags-Tags Unchanged (report code R01): Report includes the tag and the heading. The full heading matches, but the tag in the bibliographic record is not compatible with the tag in the 1XX in the authority record. Bibliographic and authority records need to be checked to identify the conflict (if any) and the tag corrected (if necessary). The full heading does not match, but one or more subfields (from the beginning of the heading) do match; however, the tag in the bibliographic record is not compatible with the tag in the 1XX in the authority record. Note: Authority tag 151 does not seem to be recognized as authorizing both X10 and 651 fields in the bibliographic record; we should try to identify exactly when this happens and then we can eliminate these items from the report without checking.
   
   

Procedure: Referred to Sue Houser for completion

This report lists a number of unusual error conditions; these errors seldom occur. Documentation will be updated when we have more examples. For now, John Attig will monitor.

This report summarizes the number of records or headings in each report category. Report is stored electronically for future reference. No further action is required.

This report (report code R03) lists, in alphabetical order, all headings appearing on the new bibliographic records, for which no match (complete or partial) was found in the master authority file. These headings may need to be checked against the bibliographic record (for typos) and against the local and national authority file (for alternative possible headings) before deciding that the heading is indeed a valid new headings.

Procedure for processing this report:

1. Search each name in the CAT using WorkFlows. Search the bibliographic record. Use a BROWSE, AUTHOR search (BROWSE, SUBJECT for headings in 6XX fields). These search results allow you to easily see split files, if they occur. Select the heading in question from your search results.
   
   
2. Open an OCLC session for the authority file. Search the names in LCAF (see exception below) for the proper form. Correct the name heading in WorkFlows to match the appropriate form. Correct all name instances that occur. Change indicators and field tags if necessary.
   
   
3. EXCEPTIONS:
   PSU Theses: Do not search LCAF unless there are non-thesis records with the same name.
   
   130/730 Fields: As of 3/27/08, we are no longer reviewing these two fields of the report.
   
   
4. When correcting bibliographic records, REVIEW the record after you correct the name to see if the "unauthorized" message goes away. If it did not, go into the CONTROL folder and change the DATE CATALOGED to "TODAY". You only need to do this on one bibliographic record for any given heading.
   
   
5. You may create NACO records for any headings not yet in the authority file. This is optional. If so, you should retrieve the item in order to check for additional information such as variant forms of the name.
   
   
6. Mark the printouts as follows:
   
   0 = Heading for which no authority record was found
   T = Heading for a Thesis
   C = Heading that was corrected to correct form
   OK = Heading already corrected in The CAT
   = Heading was correct and only the date needs reset
   N = NACO record created
   
   Keep individual statistics for all heading corrections made and return printouts to Sue Houser when completed.