2.  Implemented EMu in 2006  Brought together 6 different databases  Did not clean data first  No central standards  Resulting errors needed to be cleaned

4.  Parties to clean up, merge, delete, parse  Tony Williams party record  Split to show that one was a Photographer

5.  Complaints about strange photographers  Bad data creates bad data  Data entry errors?  Punctuation interpreted incorrectly Mrs. H.U. Silleck Roy PhelpsStudy Collection – Dolls? Isabella Edenshaw?

6.  Tony William’s party record had been stolen!  By the question mark culprit:

8.  Found standalone Party records  Made no sense in context of database

10.  3 years later, reviewing legacy data for old loans  Filling in missing information  And I came across an old friend

11. With a Google search…

13.  Happily replacing data like a good data manager  But there were unanswered questions

16.  Currently cataloguing Fragment collection  Thousands of small pieces of objects  Trying to fill out information

17.  Legacy database mimicked storage  But difficult to open  What could EMu tell us?

19.  Publication information  Came from several sources  Number of errors

23.  Assumptions can lead us down the wrong path  Legacy data is crucial, but not perfect  Use your experience – what else can help?  Document, document, document

24. Kara Lewis Collections Information Program Manager National Museum of the American Indian lewiskm@si.edu