Etiquette for Replacing Bibliographic Records MOUG, February 25, 2014 Hermine Vermeij UCLA

At UCLA History of being an Enhance/National Enhance Library. When the expert community experiment started, we encouraged copy catalogers to replace records when appropriate. We use WorldCat Local as our UC-wide catalog, so it’s important that records appear in WorldCat accurately—not just in our local ILS. At first all copy catalogers checked with a supervisor before replacing records. Now they all may make simple corrections (fixing typos, completing Cutters) without supervision. Some are trusted to do more than others. Many copy catalogers add vernacular script to OCLC records.

Deciding to replace a record When looking at complete-looking copy, I: Check to make sure it matches (duh). Quickly check the most important fields: 050/090, 100, 240, 245, 300, 6XXs for completeness. If those look good, I skim the rest of the record and usually accept it. If my piece has standard numbers (ISMN, usually) not reflected in the record, I will often add the number without making other changes.

My piece matches this record, but it has UPC, ISBN, and ISMN numbers added on the back cover. The record looks fine; I will add my 020s and 024s and replace without making other changes (updating to RDA, etc.).

Overhauling a record If I see a red flag in a critical field: I will scrutinize the record more carefully. I may upgrade the record to BIBCO. I will consider correcting other fields; even things I might have left alone in a record without red flags. I still won’t edit for style alone, but I will get pickier about things like capitalization and punctuation.

This record has a major error in the 650. While I’m in there, I would probably correct the 382 and 546 as well, even though those are not critical errors.