Copy cataloging is the process of using and editing, if required, an existing bibliographic record for a work in hand. Editing is restricted to corrections and additions to the information in the record. In PINES, there are two types of copy cataloging. The first type is when CAT1 or CAT2 catalogers discover and use a matching record within the PINES database to attach their library holdings. CAT1 catalogers can edit the bibliographic record for missing or incorrect information, following PINES cataloging specifications. The second type is when a CAT1 cataloger discovers a matching existing record in the OCLC WorldCat (OCLC hereafter) database and imports it into the PINES database. The record can also be edited for missing or incorrect information, preferably in OCLC for those accordingly trained. The CAT1 then attaches library holdings or passes it to a CAT2.

A CAT1 has the highest cataloging authorization to work with bibliographic records at each PINES library system. CAT1 status is granted only after mandatory training by the PINES Cataloging Specialist. PINES has the right to revoke cataloging privileges of any member library if its work repeatedly fails to meet with established standards. If there is a cataloging staff change in a PINES library, it is the library director’s responsibility to notify the PINES Cataloging Specialist of the change so that training can be done as soon as possible. Each library system should have a cataloging coordinator that oversees and is responsible for (along with the system director) cataloging for the library, whether in-house or vendor. The coordinator also arranges and conducts or oversees all training for new system (CAT2) catalogers.

Catalogers with CAT2 authorization are restricted to adding, deleting, or editing volume and copy information for their library systems. They are expected to report any incomplete records or errors in bibliographic information on records to their cataloging coordinators for resolution. System cataloging coordinators are responsible for training CAT2s in PINES standards and local practices.

Attendance at PINES training sessions is considered to be mandatory unless arrangements to the contrary have been made with the PINES Cataloging Specialist or another PINES staff member. “Make-up” sessions are normally required in such situations. For libraries that repeatedly do not send staff members to training sessions, it may be necessary to require additional training or request evidence (such as examples of applicable work) to determine if the training is necessary.

Continued failure to attend training sessions (usually missing three or more) without making alternate arrangements can result in a system being declared non-compliant and their CAT1 authorization being deactivated. The re-activation process is explained at the end of the following section.

Non-adherence to Established PINES Cataloging Policies can result in a PINES System being declared non-compliant.

The following situations could cause a PINES system to be declared non-compliant. [NOTE: Additional conditions might be added to this list as new situations arise.]

• Not reading messages posted on the Cataloging Listserv (CAT-L) and/or not following the instructions/requests stated therein
• Not being familiar with and following established standards (listed in the Policy document)
• Refusing to follow established PINES policies and procedures
• Allowing Cat1-level work to be done by a person who has not been adequately trained
• Allowing cataloging work to be done in the branches (other than by visiting catalogers from the central office who are working on special projects)

A PINES system can be declared as being non-compliant with PINES cataloging policies, procedures, and/or standards if on three separate occasions the PINES Cataloging Specialist has warned the system about a problem, and the PINES Executive Director has sent a warning letter to the system’s director, but problems continue to occur. At that point their Cat1 authorization can be deactivated.

To re-gain authorization the system director and cataloging staff of the non-complaint system will have to confer with the PINES Cataloging Specialist and Executive Director to establish the process by which the system will be able to re-gain Cat1 authorization. When the Cataloging Specialist has determined that the conditions have been met successfully, Cat1 status will be reinstated.

1. Search the PINES bibliographic database thoroughly. If a matching record (see section on PINES matching criteria) is found for the item in hand, attach and process holdings.
2. If no matching record is found in PINES, then search OCLC’s WorldCat via the Z39.50 gateway or the Connexion Client. If a match is found in WorldCat via the Connexion client, record the OCLC control number. Go back to PINES to bring it in via Z39.50 using the control number.
3. If no matching record is found in either database or World Cat, and the item is not something needed right away, set it aside for a week or two and search again. Chances are someone else will have added a record for the item within that time.
4. If a matching-record is not found, and a new record is needed, a cataloger should create an original record. Training in original cataloging is required for those who have never done original cataloging. Please contact the PINES Cataloging Specialist to arrange for training. Creating new records based on PINES existing records is forbidden in PINES.
5. Creating new records on the local system is limited only to certain cases (see K-record guidelines); all new records should be entered in OCLC if possible.

PINES matching guidelines: An in-coming record must be an exact match: a PINES cataloger has to find an exact matching record for the item in hand either in PINES or from OCLC. If it is decided that a match is not found from either database, s/he should NOT bring in a near-match from OCLC and alter it to fit the description of the item in hand. When in doubt as to whether a near-match bibliographic record is an actual match, please contact the PINES Cataloging Specialist.

When searching PINES or OCLC WorldCat for monographic bibliographic records, the following criteria apply. For detailed field-by-field matching, see OCLC’s manual Section 4 “Section 4, When to Input a New Record in the OCLC Bibliographic Formats and Standards manual. or the pamphlet format:

Association for Library Collections & Technical Services. 2007. Differences between, changes within guidelines on when to create a new record. Chicago, IL: Association for Library Collections & Technical Services.

You can download the document’s pdf file from the above link.

Penguin Group (USA)

Rowman & Littlefield Publishers

Harlequin Romance Imprints

Simon & Schuster imprints

Kensington Books

Thomas Bouregy & Co

Infobase Publishing

1) Paperback ed. vs. Hardback ed.

• You can attach a paperback item to a record for a hardback and vice versa if the binding (|c cm must match) is the only difference. (Note: A paperback added to a record for a hardback edition would probably be a “Trade paperback” not a “Mass Market” one.)

2) Book club ed. vs. regular ed.

• You can attach a Book club edition to a record for a regular edition if the ed. statement is the only difference.

3) Use the record if an art work date for a new binding is the only difference: There are occasions when books, particularly paperbacks, are re-released with a new cover. In such a case there is no content change.

4) 028 fields when matching AV material

• For a visual item (VHS/DVD), if the number in 028 is the only difference, consider the record a match.
  
• For an audio item (cassette/compact disc), if the number in 028 is clearly different, DO NOT consider the record a match.

5) Choice of preferred record when there are multiple options–given in the order of preference:

• DLC records
• PCC records (with 042 field, created by libraries participating in the Program of Cooperative Cataloging)
• Records having the largest number of library symbols in the 040 field

In addition:

• Learn which libraries do quality records and prefer their records.
• Choose the record with the higher level of encoding over one with a lower level.
• Choose the record with a complete set of access points over one without a complete set.

Types of records to be edited in PINES: we require that incoming OCLC records not be altered or edited in any way that affects matching parameters. Editing should be limited, especially in the descriptive fields 2xxs—5xxs, to correcting typographical errors and/or coding errors or adding obviously missing information. Local notes that only apply to copies at one library system should not be added to bibliographic records. Local notes are restricted to the volume/copy level of the record in PINES.

PINES requires that a member library edit a record in the following cases, particularly if this library is the very first one to import the record:

Check all incoming OCLC records carefully: correct obvious coding and spelling errors and supply important bibliographical information and its related MARC fields that may be missing in the record. Supply all mandatory fields (such as 245, 300, 260 fields for printed format) if they are missing. Ask for help if needed.

CIP records are created without published pieces in hand; therefore, bibliographic information in descriptive fields of a CIP record may not be accurate or present. There are two types of CIPs: one created by DLC, the Library of Congress, and the other, by UKM, the British Library. Both DLC and UKM CIP records have an “8” in the encoding level in the Fixed Field (FF hereafter) and leave a 263 field (e.g. 263 0712) and an empty 300 field (e. g. 300 p. cm.). UKM allows for the estimation of pagination and dimensions of an item. Such information in UKM CIP records will not be accurate.

PINES asks that the very first member library that imports a CIP record edit it according to the bibliographic information found on the piece; in other words, the information you find on the piece in hand is more authoritative than what you may find in a CIP record.

Preference is given to editing in the OCLC WorldCat database; however, catalogers may edit such records either during the loading process or after they are brought into PINES.

You can edit all fields of a CIP record except for the FF encoding code “8”. More specifically, complete 300 and 264 and other missing data as needed; remove field 263 if present. Correct 245 data if it differs from the piece in hand. Verify 505 table-of-content information if applicable.

Note: When you remove an entire field, please remember to position the cursor in the data well of the MARC tag (e.g. 263) then click on the “Remove” button or Ctrl Delete. Remember not to just remove data within the tag without the tag itself.

UKM CIP records: Please always use a DLC CIP record if available. If a DLC record is not available and a UKM record is a match, you may use it.

Editing OCLC “K-level” records is optional, depending on how comfortable a cataloger feels with editing records in OCLC. For those who are able to do so, please edit them using “Lock” and “Replace” functions in the Connexion Client before records are brought into PINES. If subject headings are missing in a “K” level record, supply at least one subject heading. Please do not upgrade “K” records if you have never cataloged on OCLC. In these instances, you can import such records and edit them in PINES.

If the only matching record found in PINES is a locally created “K-record” (see PINES Guidelines for creating K-records), a cataloger should search OCLC to see if a match can be found to overlay this “K” record before attaching their holdings (Please refer to procedures for overlaying records in PINES). If a PINES K-record is the only record available, a cataloger should create a new record in OCLC (if trained to do so) and overlay the existing PINES “K” level record.

Because different items may share the same ISBN numbers, PINES catalogers are encouraged to put a subfield |z in front of irrelevant or secondary ISBNs to avoid matching or linking to the wrong cover art work in the OPAC. Typical irrelevant/secondary ISBNs can be found in the following situations:

• ISBNs for large print editions in records for regular editions
• ISBNs for AV materials in records for printed materials, etc.
• ISBNs added from a paperback ed. to a Hardback ed. record or from Book Club ed. to a regular ed., and vice versa.
• ISBNs linked to wrong art work.
• ISBNs already used in existing records

Sometimes additional ISBNs exist on items that are not in the bibliographic record and need to be added. For instance, if you have attached a paperback item to a hardback record or vice versa and the ISBN on your piece in hand is missing from the record, please add the number in subfield z of a different 020 field.

In a full level record, updates of 505 fields are optional unless there are obvious typos in the fields. Updates should be done only by experienced catalogers.

If you add a directly quoted 520 from the piece or another source, enclose the note in quotation marks and give attribution. For example: 520 “This book provides the context and tools to create successful science projects”—Cover.

If you create your own abstract for the piece in hand, try to be neutral and avoid value statements.

Currently Evergreen is set up to automatically delete 029, 938, 948, 952, and 263 fields from bibliographic records on import.

Occasionally you will find pre-AACR2 records in OCLC and in PINES. In such a case, take a close look at the code in the fixed field for “Desc”. If it is not code “a”, upgrading the description of pre-AACR2 records to RDA standards is optional.

Editing 490 fields and 8xx fields is optional. Adding missing series statements is optional but encouraged, since it increases patron access to materials in the series.

No information of a strictly local nature should be added to any bibliographic record. Such data includes gift or donor information, information about the physical condition, location about an item, access restrictions, etc. Such local information can be put at copy level via the “Copy Note” function on the copy editor screen. If any such information is discovered in a bibliographic record, it should be removed since it would not be possible to determine to which copy/ies it might apply. If the person who makes the discovery does not possess an authorization level that allows for such deletion, it should be reported to the system’s CAT1.

An exception: you can add a 690 local subject heading of “Georgia authors” to in-coming OCLC records for records falling into this category.

For easier access to juvenile materials in our OPAC, PINES catalogers with original cataloging experience are encouraged to add regular LCSH to juvenile records that have ONLY children’s (annotated card) headings. Remember that juvenile headings can differ from LCSH, so do not automatically edit the indicator and add |v Juvenile fiction, etc. to the heading. Check the authority file for the authorized forms. The authority records for annotated card or juvenile headings have a 010 field that begins with “sj.” (e.g. 010 sj 96006230)

Examples:

If a record has only LC’s children’s subject headings (e.g. 650_1 Dogs |v Fiction), a regular LCSH can be added to this record as follows:

650 _1 Dogs |v Fiction (existing LC children’s heading). 650 _0 Dogs |v Juvenile fiction (LCSH added).

650 _1 Pigs |v Fiction. (existing LC children’s heading). 650 _0 Swine |v Juvenile fiction (LCSH added)

650 _1 Dogs (existing LC children’s heading). 650 _0 Dogs | Juvenile literature (LCSH added).

We encourage our catalogers to edit or replace old PINES records according to the above guidelines when they encounter them. Over laying records with current OCLC records, especially PINES records lacking the OCLC CN, is encouraged.

For recent imports not properly edited or not edited at all, catalogers can either edit those records or contact the first importing library to finish its work if that library can be easily determined. Such a case should also be reported to PINES Cataloging Specialist for follow-up work with the library in question.

BTCTA level 3 records are acquisition records that are machine generated from metadata. For cataloging purposes, they are incomplete and can be missing critical information as well as being coded incorrectly.

An example of Baker & Taylor Level 3 records:

040 BTCTA |c BTCTA |d BAKER\\
020 9781597261227\\
092 |b\\
245 04 The Endangered Species Act at Thirty.\\
260 |b Island Pr |c 2007.\\
720 Goble, Dale D.\\
720 Scott, J. Michael\\
720 Davis, Frank W.\\
938 Baker and Taylor |b BTCP |n BK0006969462\\
938 Baker & Taylor |b BKTY |c 60.00 |d 60.00 |i 159726122X |n 0006969462 |s active

If the only record that is found in OCLC is a BCTA level 3 record, don’t import it as it is. A typical BTCTA Level 3 (fixed field ELvl) has just ISBN, author, title, some incomplete imprint information, and it typically puts some unauthorized personal names in 720 fields. Since such brief records are not useful for cataloging purposes as found, catalogers need to update them to include full 245—300 information, correct name headings and add at least one subject headings to the record. The fixed field should also be checked and edited for inaccuracies.

Those who have original cataloging experience, please update such a record to I or K level in OCLC before importing it. Those who cannot do original cataloging and must use such a record, please inform the PINES Cataloging Specialist of the record. In order for the Specialist to correct the record and import it into PINES, provide her/him with the OCLC title control (accession) number of the record and also fax copies of the title page, title page verso, table of content, summary, etc. and 300 field information (illustrations and dimension), 504 information and other pertinent information.

If your system uses vendors for original cataloging, your vendors should do the same. Anyone who spots an unedited BCTA level 3 record in PINES should report it to PINES Cataloging Specialist.