Frequently Asked Questions on creating Personal Name Authority Records (NARs) for NACO

See also: FAQ on BFM, FAQ on 670s; FAQ on UTs;FAQ on corporate names; FAQ on geographic names

1. How is "usage" determined in establishing a new personal name heading?

   Usage is how an author's form of name is most "commonly found" or presented in the chief sources of his or her works. The Descriptive Cataloging Manual Z1 supplement to the MARC 21 Authority Format 670 section, p. 6 defines usage as the "literal transcription of a name as it appears in a publication, most commonly transcribed in a bibliographic record in a statement of responsibility." Therefore, catalogers base new personal name headings on usage found on the chief source of the item being cataloged and/or the "usage" found in subfield $c of the 245 in bibliographic records in the file being searched, i.e., OCLC, RLIN, or the LC database.

   Note that literal transcriptions may appear elsewhere in a record, e.g., as part of the title proper, in an "at head of title" note, in a quoted note, etc. In deciding whether a transcription is a literal one, care must be taken to insure that the transcription has not been altered in some way by cataloging conventions used at the time the transcription was made, e.g., by abbreviation or by omission.

   In cases when usages of a name vary in fullness from one item to another, LCRI 22.3A defines the predominant form as the form appearing in 80% of the author's works.

   Return to questions

2. Is usage determined in the same way for corporate names?

   Not exactly. For corporate names it is necessary that the item on which the form of name is found (chief source or otherwise) must have been issued by the "body in its language." (Cf. AACR2 24.1A and 24.2B)

   LCRIs 24.2D and 24.2A also provide guidelines for determining a corporate body name when variant forms of name appear in the same publication, etc.
   (cf FAQ on Corporate Names)

   Return to questions

3. Are there specific guidelines by which LC operates when determining which of duplicate headings should be deleted?

   There are no specific guidelines for handling duplicates. NACO catalogers are encouraged to make the determination as to which NAR should be canceled and report this to their LC liaison. Generally:

   • Prefer to keep a heading that has been coded for AACR2 over one that has not been coded.
   • If both NARs are coded for AACR2, prefer the heading that contains more information (e.g., dates, fuller form of name).
   • If, however, one AACR2 heading is represented on several bibliographic records and the other AACR2 heading has few or no associated bibliographic records, prefer the heading with the larger number of bibliographic records.
   • If both headings are identical, prefer the one with the more complete set of information citations (670s) and references.
   • If all things are equal, pick either one. Do not agonize over the choice!

   In any case, useful information from the NAR being canceled is transferred to the NAR being kept. Only LC can cancel duplicates, but the NACO Program relies on independent NACO catalogers to recommend which heading should be kept in order to make the process more efficient. Unless there are other factors involved, the assessment of the NACO cataloger will generally be accepted by LC.

   Return to questions

4. What should a NACO cataloger do if a personal name NAR exists in the NAF without dates and the cataloger discovers birth and/or death dates for the person. Should the cataloger:
   1. Add the information to the NAR and change the heading by adding dates and report BFM for LC records to their Coop liaison and BFM to the utility in which s/he works?
   2. Add the information to the NAR and leave the heading alone?
   3. Do nothing?

   The correct answer is B. Add the information in a 670 citation and leave the heading alone. LCRI 22.17 DATES (under "Changes to Existing Headings Already Coded for AACR2") provides the guideline for this situation and states:

   "Do not add the date (birth or death) to an existing heading without dates represented by a name authority record that has already been coded "AACR2" or AACR2 compatible" (including in either case those labeled "preliminary"--008 byte 33 = d) ..."

   Note that the LCRI also states that if such a heading must be revised later for another reason (as in the case of conflict), the date(s) may then be added.

5. No? Why is that? I thought we could now add death dates to personal name headings?

   Updated LCRI 22.17 published on February 1, 2006 contains the option to add death dates to personal name headings that have an open date, only. Remember that the policy to add death dates was intended to alleviate the perception of “wrong” or “misleading” headings that imply the deceased person is still living-- headings without open birth dates do not give such an impression. Catalogers must follow the existing practice for existing headings without dates: do not add dates to a heading where none existed previously (except in cases of conflict, etc. as usual). The principle of not making changes to headings when these are not necessary continues hold true (cf. Response to question no. 12 below)

   Return to questions

6. What should a NACO cataloger do when creating a NAR for a personal name and birth and/or death dates are available but the heading for the same person appears in LC bibliographic records without dates?

   As of February 1, 2006 catalogers may create the NAR with dates in the 1XX, 4XXs, etc. but they should remember to report BFM for LC records to their Coop liaison and if necessary BFM to the utility in which s/he works.

7. What if the NACO library has the same item for which the NAR was created (without dates) and the cataloger finds that the item did contain the author's birth date, etc., shouldn't the heading be changed?

   No. The overriding principle is that any change to a heading may generate database maintenance for LC and other libraries. The PCC's mission is to make more cataloging data available to users more quickly and efficiently. Generating database maintenance for technical services librarians is not in keeping with those goals.

   Do remember to add the information to the 670 so that in the event of a conflict that information may be used.

   Return to questions

8. What if the NAR was created for a CIP and the NACO library has the published item that shows dates for the author, shouldn't the dates be added to the heading?

   No. LCRI 22.17 (Existing Headings Already Coded for AACR2) includes NARs created for CIPs. The principle is the same, PCC catalogers have a responsibility to bear in mind the needs of all users. Libraries all over the world use the authority file and often their resources are limited too.

   Do remember to add the information to the 670 so that in the event of a conflict that information may be used.

9. What if the date in the heading is inaccurate, should the heading be changed in this case?

   Yes. When dates are incorrect in any heading (1XX) of a NAR they should be changed to reflect the correct date(s) and BFM should be reported in order that headings on all bibliographic records are corrected.

   Headings based on information provided by a CIP t.p. or galley have a higher frequency of change because the published item often corrects discrepancies in dates, etc., and this may cause a heading to be changed. This is not the same as changing a heading just to add a date.

10. What about name headings that have dates with "d. 1825" or "b. 1910" and either birth or death dates are found? Aren't these technically inaccurate and shouldn't they be changed?

    No. The presence of a "b." (born) or "d." (died) added to a name heading per the option in AACR2 22.17 accurately represent the information available at the time the NAR was created. LCRI 22.17 was changed to allow the addition of death dates to headings with "open birth dates" because this convention caused many catalog users to mistakenly assume that libraries did not have that information available, and in fact gave the appearance of a heading that had incorrect information.

11. When are headings based on CIP information that differ from the published item eligible for change?

    All headings in the NAF are eligible to be changed by NACO participants (within the parameters stated in DCM Z1). When a heading is found to be inaccurate regardless of the source of information, it may and should be changed (e.g., when a name or date is incorrect)

    Headings based on information provided by a CIP t.p. or galley have a higher frequency of change because the published item often has a different form of usage on the chief source. This is not the same as changing a heading just to add a date or fuller form of name. (Cf. FAQ when creating NARs ... LAC, NUC & CIP)

    Return to questions

12. When should an earlier established (1XX) form be included as a cross reference (4XX) in a NAR and coded as "an earlier AACR2" form ($w = nne)?

    It depends. The device of coding a cross reference (4XX) with subfield $w nne to denote that a heading was an earlier AACR2 form was created specifically to handle the British geographic heading changes in the late 1980's. Catalogers may use subfield $w with the code "nne" in personal name NARs, but should take care to follow these guidelines:

    1. When changing a heading coded AACR2 because dates were recorded inaccurately or a cataloger entered a typo in the heading, etc., do not add the inaccurate form as a cross reference.
    2. When a heading (1XX) is changed because the author has abandoned the use of the previously coded AACR2 form of the name in favor of another, a subfield $w coded "nne" to denote the earlier AACR2 form of the heading may be added to the cross reference (4XX) representing the previous 1XX.
       Example:
       • Existing heading in NAR coded AACR2:
         100 1 $a Barr, Roseanne
       • Information on new item being cataloged notes name changed to: Roseanne Arnold
       • Change heading in existing NAR:
         100 1 $a Arnold, Roseanne
         400 1 $w nne $a Barr, Roseanne (cross reference added and coded as earlier AACR2)
    3. When a heading (1XX) based on CIP cataloging is changed because its form on the published item is different from that on the CIP galley, a 4XX from the previous AACR2 form coded with subfield $w nne may be added.

    Note: in both cases B and C the cross references may be coded with a subfield $w nne only if the heading used in the 4XX is given exactly as previously established.

    • Example:
      Existing heading in NAR coded AACR2 based on CIP cataloging:
      100 1 $a Williamson, D. W.
    • Information on book t.p.: David Williamson; b. 1966 Lynchburg, Va.
    • Changed NAR:
      100 1 $a Williamson, David, $d 1966-
    • 400 1 $a Williamson, D. W. (David W.), $d 1966- (cross reference added but subfield $w coded "nne" not necessary)
    • Cross reference for Williamson, D.W. without fuller form of name or dates not added.

    Note: Pinyin headings may follow different guidelines in the use of subfield w; please consult the Pinyin Home Page for more information or contact Phil Melzer Pinyin Project coordinator.

13. When adding a death date to a name heading that previously had an open date, should the former heading be added as 400 subfield $w nne?

    No. It is LC policy that the subfield $w combination "nnea" should not be used in the LC/NAF for personal name headings when the only difference is an open date vs. a closed date. OCLC, at LC's request, will be providing an RSS feed to libraries with notification of changed headings to be available at: http://www.oclc.org/rss/default.htm This service should help libraries identify what headings have been changed and facilitate local maintenance.

14. Isn't a heading considered inaccurate if a cataloger leaves out the additions called for by LCRI22.17 and 22.18?

    It depends. LC (and consequently NACO) catalogers are asked to apply the options of AACR2 22.17 and 22.18 to add dates and fuller forms of names when these are "readily available." The principle is to create a heading that is as unique as possible at the first instance in order to avoid a conflict later on and thus, minimize the impact of BFM on all users of the shared authority file. Certainly, when a cataloger is under review, the heading would be considered inaccurate and would be changed before contribution to the authority file.

    The additions of dates and fuller forms of name should be viewed as helpful additions to identify names; however, the absence of these do not make the heading "inaccurate" per se. If a cataloger fails to find either a date or a fuller form of name when these were readily available in the item and contributes the NAR it is unfortunate; however, it serves little purpose to agonize and compound the process by creating BFM needlessly.

    Do remember to add the information to the 670 so that in the event of a conflict that information may be used.

    Return to questions

15. In NACO training we were told that when creating headings for authors born ca. 100 years ago we should not add an open date but instead use "b. [date]" in the heading. Does this mean we can now use this form of date for authors born in 1900?

    No. Unfortunately, the "100-year" guideline used by NACO trainers, while well-meaning, contradicts the LCRI and AACR2.

    Both AACR2 22.17 and the LCRI ask catalogers to apply this form of date "when the date of death" of an author is not known. The "100-year" guideline was offered as a help to catalogers and to eliminate the need for research when it was known (or common sense dictated) that an author was deceased but no death date was readily available. Given the advances in medical science, etc. it is no longer reasonable to apply this 100 year guideline across the board; common sense and judgment are a cataloger's best guide in this case.

    Unless it is known (or can reasonably be surmised) that an author is dead and the death date is unknown do not use this form of date.

    Return to questions

16. Is it OK to add qualifying information to a new heading when it falls into the LCRI 22.3A category (author's name varies in fullness) when there are unestablished headings used on bibliographic records that match the form on the chief source for the same author being established, but also find there are headings for other authors with the same name.
    • Example: Chief source: Adam Doe
      • Information found elsewhere: Adam Lawrence Doe
    • File in which searching and cataloging is being performed:
      • Doe, Adam [heading on bibliographic record for same author]
        Doe, Adam [heading on bibliographic record for different author]
    Is it OK to create new NAR with 1XX: Doe, Adam $q (Adam Lawrence)?

    Yes. If the file against which cataloging and searching is being done includes unestablished headings on bibliographic records which would conflict with the heading being established (and qualifying data is known) add qualifiers to the newly established name even if this would result in BFM. The underlying principle here is that a cataloger is now in a conflict situation and must apply the guidelines in LCRI22.17-22.20 rather than adhere to the instruction in LCRI 22.3A.

    Return to questions

17. May the guidelines in LCRI 22.17-20 be applied (to new names being established) in order to avoid conflict with unestablished headings on bibliographic records in the file in which I'm cataloging?
    The wording in this LCRI indicates that the guidelines may only be applied to conflicts with established names ("Add to the heading being established..." and "Change the established heading...") These alternatives mostly work in LC's catalog, where in principle, all names are established. In other databases (e.g., OCLC and RLIN), many names are not established. Consequently, the relationship of the unestablished names to this LCRI is ambiguous. Would you clarify?

    Yes, catalogers may apply the guidelines in LCRI22.17-22.20 for resolving conflicts with both established and unestablished headings.

    In a perfect cataloging world all access points would have authority records to support them. In recent years diminishing resources and increasing receipts in all libraries (including LC) have led to the increase of bibliographic records without authorized headings.

    LC practice is to resolve conflicts with other headings in the NAF as well as unestablished headings in the LC catalog as encountered. The guidelines provided in LCRI22.17-22.20 are applied in this situation and BFM is performed as necessary.

    PCC catalogers are encouraged to follow their local institutional and utilities' cataloging policies with regard to this question.

    Note: there is no NACO requirement to create NARs for all headings used as access points on bibliographic records unless the bibliographic records are to be coded "pcc".

    Return to questions

18. What should a NACO cataloger do if there are unestablished headings for other persons in the file in which the cataloging is conducted (e.g., OCLC or RLIN) which conflict with the heading being established and there is no additional information to differentiate the names?

    There are three options open to NACO participants in this situation:

    1. Do not create a NAR for the heading (BIBCO participants--do not code the bibliographic record "pcc")
    2. If possible(and local policies/resources allow) create unique NARs for each of the other headings in the files
    3. Create an undifferentiated NAR (AACR2 22.20) to include all the unestablished names (this means some research was performed and option 2 could not be applied)

    Return to questions

19. Should catalogers add references beyond those called for by the rules and the LCRIs, if those references would enable automatic conflict detection and updating of known bibliographic records, which use a variant heading for the same person? Isn’t one of the NACO goals to minimize manual updating needed in local systems that share the NAF? If so then it stands to reason that there is license for adding references beyond those called for by the rules, if those references would enable automatic updating of an existing bibliographic record.

    No. Inherent in the PCC and NACO principles is the goal of making all cataloging workflows more efficient; however, it is not a stated goal that NACO strives to " minimize manual updating needed in local systems." Almost since its inception the PCC has recognized the need to have a file that is easily and efficiently used by all. This goal can only be achieved by an authority file that is uniform, i.e., predictable, in its construction and formulation of headings and references. Given that there are over 400 NACO libraries, it is impossible for the shared authority file to meet the database maintenance needs of each individual library. LCRI 26.2 [p. 1, no. 3] allows catalogers to use judgment in making additional references but the expectation is that those references would be constructed in the form consistent with the standard cataloging rules, practices, and policies currently used by all NACO participants.

20. If an NAR is being created for a personal author born in Canada, do we need to consult the Archives and Library, Canada (LAC)?

    If the item being cataloged has a Canadian imprint, i.e., a Canadian city is the first place of publication (cf. DCM Z1 Appendix for Canadian Names), catalogers are asked to use the NLC form of name. When Canadian CIP information containing the NLC form of name is not available in the item, NLC sources must be consulted to verify a personal name heading on a NAR whether or not the author was born in Canada. (cf. FAQ when creating NARs ... LAC, NUC & CIP)

    Return to questions

21. Is it true that undifferentiated name authority records are only created for personal names?

    Yes. When a corporate name is the same or similar to another a qualifier or multiple qualifiers must be added. In rare cases where entities (most often geographic) with the same name, located in the same jurisdiction with no discernible difference in function are encountered catalogers are encouraged to contact the Coop Team or CPSO for help in resolving the conflict.

22. Where can I find instructions on creating an undifferentiated personal name authority record?

    An undifferentiated personal name is called for by AACR 22.20 and by LCRI 22.17-22.20 as a last resort after all the possible additions to a new personal or to an existing personal name to break a conflict have been exhausted. NACO procedures for creating an undifferentiated personal name NAR are discussed during NACO training and follow the
    guidelines in:

    1) The MARC 21 Authority Format. The 670 pages of the basic text state: "When a 100 heading is used for more than one person ... subfield $a may contain a descriptive term for an author enclosed within brackets..." and shows examples of the repeated 670 (1 with the bracketed information and 1 with the usual source citation).

    2) Descriptive Cataloging Manual Z1. There are several places in the DCM Z1 where information on undifferentiated NARs is contained.

    a) The Z1 Introduction, NACO normalization section states: "If personal names cannot be distinguished, create an undifferentiated personal name authority record. The heading can represent only one form of the name ... but the 670 fields for each person should make it clear what the catalog entry form should be ..."

    b) The Z1 008/32 page. It is here that the instruction appears to change the 008 as appropriate and to add the 667 when creating a unique record for a heading that had previously been on the undifferentiated NAR.

    c) The Z1 053 page tells catalogers that an 053 may not be assigned to an undifferentiated name NAR. Yes, this means that if you are converting a differentiated name NAR to an undifferentiated NAR the 053 must be deleted.

    d) The Z1 670 page lists one of the functions of the 670 is to "identify separate individuals who's access points must remain identical".

    e) The Z1 667 page gives an example of a 667 for a name that had previously been on an undifferentiated NAR.

Return to questions