I had a quick question for you all! I'm working on getting our zines cataloged at lapl.org and the catalogers showed us their sample records. What do you think of this explanation, does it make sense as a cataloger of zines? "Take a look at the 245 field for most of the records - they will have a listed author or say anonymous. Since we are going to cutter/shelve the zine items by title it's cataloging practice to not list an author in a 100 field. A catalog entry cannot have a listed author if it's cut by the title, so when the group made the decision to shelve by title it eliminated that author field for cataloging. I went ahead and verified this, and was told we will not be placing any authors in the 100 field. The author name will still be searchable if you use the keyword search, and if a zine author happens to be very famous you can alert us on the form and we can include them in a 700 field. They just won't ever be a 100 field; the 100 field is typically used for LOC recognized and controlled author headings and I think it's safe to assume 99.9% of the zine authors will have no LOC recognition. Definitely include the author/creator names on the forms as they will always appear in the 245 field and that makes their name searchable for the public and staff. I hope this makes sense?" Thank you for your help! Best, Ziba Z. Librarian _______________________________________________ Zlunioncat mailing list Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org

Hi Ziba, Congratulations on getting this far! I guess it makes sense as a local practice, or to streamline processing, but I think it’s making some unnecessary restrictions re: the correlation between call number and main entry. As long as you’re making local decisions, one could decide to cutter for title AND have a 100 for the author, even though that’s not LC shelflisting practice. Also, the assumption that zine authors won’t have “LOC recognition” is unfounded. You will find zine creators represented as established name headings in the National Authority File – not a ton, sure. But some. Certainly more than 0.1%. And even if they don’t have an established name in NAF, they can still be set up as access points in the 100 and/or 700 of the bib record. If your colleagues are working in WorldCat, they’ll see a fair amount of full-level zine catalog records with 100s and 700s, controlled and uncontrolled, presumably some they could use as copy. On the other hand, if they’re just going to be cataloging from info you’re providing to them on a form, and not searching for copy, then maybe none of the above applies. Good luck! Joshua From: Zlunioncat <zlunioncat-bounces@lists.qzap.org> On Behalf Of Ziba Zehdar Sent: Wednesday, August 8, 2018 4:41 PM To: zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org Subject: [Zlunioncat] Hello Zine catalogers! I had a quick question for you all! I'm working on getting our zines cataloged at lapl.org<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lapl.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=nE__W8dFE-shTxStwXtp0A&r=aXLw--z08ge6ZEgMjugoyw&m=ACdWS8k6GeaMoA92v4jeOQLw2Kw3sPhkklXXQmSmex8&s=4ggNWxHUOXDMCz4aMmI0NuEWYAP0WBAYVV8Dpg-0lT4&e=> and the catalogers showed us their sample records. What do you think of this explanation, does it make sense as a cataloger of zines? "Take a look at the 245 field for most of the records - they will have a listed author or say anonymous. Since we are going to cutter/shelve the zine items by title it's cataloging practice to not list an author in a 100 field. A catalog entry cannot have a listed author if it's cut by the title, so when the group made the decision to shelve by title it eliminated that author field for cataloging. I went ahead and verified this, and was told we will not be placing any authors in the 100 field. The author name will still be searchable if you use the keyword search, and if a zine author happens to be very famous you can alert us on the form and we can include them in a 700 field. They just won't ever be a 100 field; the 100 field is typically used for LOC recognized and controlled author headings and I think it's safe to assume 99.9% of the zine authors will have no LOC recognition. Definitely include the author/creator names on the forms as they will always appear in the 245 field and that makes their name searchable for the public and staff. I hope this makes sense?" Thank you for your help! Best, Ziba Z. Librarian _______________________________________________ Zlunioncat mailing list Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org

Dear Ziba, Oh boy. I really hate zines and zine creators being treated as lesser than other types of materials and their authors. Maybe part of the reason your cataloging department refuses to acknowledge zine authors is because they're thinking of zines as serials? If you can convince them to respond to the materials at hand, rather than the the fact that "zine" is part of the word "magazine," they'll better serve zines, zine creators, and catalog users. 99.9% may be overstating LC recognition. They may be correct when it comes to NACO recognition, but since probably every library other than potentially LAPL lists authors, zine authors do exist in WorldCat. I'm sure Honor or someone will say the above better and with less hatred in their soul (I'm having a bad day, a bad week, and...?). I also think "anonymous" is problematic. I prefer something like [not identified]. I don't think zine creators generally have so much an intention of anonymity as they leave their name off now and again by accident. Jenna Jenna Freedman | Associate Director of Communications & Zine Librarian Milstein Center 203 | zines.barnard.edu | @barnlib <http://twitter.com/barnlib> | https://jennafreedman.youcanbook.me she, her New: join our low-traffic announcements list <https://groups.google.com/a/barnard.edu/forum/#!forum/blais-announcements-list> ! On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 4:40 PM, Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> wrote: > I had a quick question for you all! > > I'm working on getting our zines cataloged at lapl.org and the catalogers > showed us their sample records. > > What do you think of this explanation, does it make sense as a cataloger > of zines? "Take a look at the 245 field for most of the records - they > will have a listed author or say anonymous. Since we are going to > cutter/shelve the zine items by title it's cataloging practice to not list > an author in a 100 field. A catalog entry cannot have a listed author if > it's cut by the title, so when the group made the decision to shelve by > title it eliminated that author field for cataloging. > > I went ahead and verified this, and was told we will not be placing any > authors in the 100 field. The author name will still be searchable if you > use the keyword search, and if a zine author happens to be very famous you > can alert us on the form and we can include them in a 700 field. They just > won't ever be a 100 field; the 100 field is typically used for LOC > recognized and controlled author headings and I think it's safe to assume > 99.9% of the zine authors will have no LOC recognition. Definitely include > the author/creator names on the forms as they will always appear in the 245 > field and that makes their name searchable for the public and staff. I hope > this makes sense?" > > Thank you for your help! > > Best, > > Ziba Z. Librarian > > _______________________________________________ > Zlunioncat mailing list > Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org > http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org > > _______________________________________________ Zlunioncat mailing list Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org

Hi Ziba! Thanks for asking us, I'm so grateful you are such a good advocate for zinesters & catalog users. When they say "the 100 field is typically used for LOC recognized and controlled author headings," that's a lie. Whether an author is recognized by LOC (that is, whether they're in the Library of Congress Name Authority File, or, in other words, "controlled") has absolutely nothing to do with whether an author gets put in the 100 field. You should know that they're lying to you about what's possible, and they're using cataloging rules to do so, and that's incredibly irritating. I would not necessarily push back on whether they want it in the 100 field or not. But I think you should ask them to put all listed authors in a 700 field. That's a compromise that gets around their bad interpretation of the rules, but, like Jenna says, doesn't take away access to the resource based on the format. If they don't agree to that, I would just let it go. Putting names in the 245 field *will* make them searchable if users are doing a keyword search, which is how most users do searches. It's annoying that they're not willing to catalog zines like they would books, but practically, you need to keep them on your side. Good luck! Violet On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 7:25 PM, Jenna Freedman <jfreedma@barnard.edu> wrote: > Dear Ziba, > > Oh boy. I really hate zines and zine creators being treated as lesser than > other types of materials and their authors. Maybe part of the reason your > cataloging department refuses to acknowledge zine authors is because > they're thinking of zines as serials? If you can convince them to respond > to the materials at hand, rather than the the fact that "zine" is part of > the word "magazine," they'll better serve zines, zine creators, and catalog > users. 99.9% may be overstating LC recognition. They may be correct when it > comes to NACO recognition, but since probably every library other than > potentially LAPL lists authors, zine authors do exist in WorldCat. > > I'm sure Honor or someone will say the above better and with less hatred > in their soul (I'm having a bad day, a bad week, and...?). > > I also think "anonymous" is problematic. I prefer something like [not > identified]. I don't think zine creators generally have so much an > intention of anonymity as they leave their name off now and again by > accident. > > Jenna > > Jenna Freedman | Associate Director of Communications & Zine Librarian > Milstein Center 203 | zines.barnard.edu | @barnlib > <http://twitter.com/barnlib> | https://jennafreedman.youcanbook.me > she, her > > New: join our low-traffic announcements list > <https://groups.google.com/a/barnard.edu/forum/#!forum/blais-announcements-list> > ! > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 4:40 PM, Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I had a quick question for you all! >> >> I'm working on getting our zines cataloged at lapl.org and the >> catalogers showed us their sample records. >> >> What do you think of this explanation, does it make sense as a cataloger >> of zines? "Take a look at the 245 field for most of the records - they >> will have a listed author or say anonymous. Since we are going to >> cutter/shelve the zine items by title it's cataloging practice to not list >> an author in a 100 field. A catalog entry cannot have a listed author if >> it's cut by the title, so when the group made the decision to shelve by >> title it eliminated that author field for cataloging. >> >> I went ahead and verified this, and was told we will not be placing any >> authors in the 100 field. The author name will still be searchable if you >> use the keyword search, and if a zine author happens to be very famous you >> can alert us on the form and we can include them in a 700 field. They just >> won't ever be a 100 field; the 100 field is typically used for LOC >> recognized and controlled author headings and I think it's safe to assume >> 99.9% of the zine authors will have no LOC recognition. Definitely include >> the author/creator names on the forms as they will always appear in the 245 >> field and that makes their name searchable for the public and staff. I hope >> this makes sense?" >> >> Thank you for your help! >> >> Best, >> >> Ziba Z. Librarian >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Zlunioncat mailing list >> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Zlunioncat mailing list > Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org > http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org > > _______________________________________________ Zlunioncat mailing list Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org

Great! I'll reply with this, what do you think? "Hello Catherine, Thank you so much for the mock ups! After conferring with the zine librarians that catalog around the nation, we ask that all listed authors are put in a 700 field if not 100 field please, thank you. Best," _______________________________________________ Zlunioncat mailing list Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org

Let's wait and see if other catalogers have a chance to chime in tomorrow! On Wed, Aug 8, 2018, 10:41 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> wrote: > Great! > > I'll reply with this, what do you think? > > "Hello Catherine, > > Thank you so much for the mock ups! > > After conferring with the zine librarians that catalog around the nation, > we ask that all listed authors are put in a 700 field if not 100 field > please, thank you. > > Best," > _______________________________________________ Zlunioncat mailing list Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org

Sounds like a plan! On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 7:46 PM Violet <violetfox@gmail.com> wrote: > Let's wait and see if other catalogers have a chance to chime in tomorrow! > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2018, 10:41 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Great! >> >> I'll reply with this, what do you think? >> >> "Hello Catherine, >> >> Thank you so much for the mock ups! >> >> After conferring with the zine librarians that catalog around the nation, >> we ask that all listed authors are put in a 700 field if not 100 field >> please, thank you. >> >> Best," >> > _______________________________________________ Zlunioncat mailing list Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org

I would try for the 100 before settling for the 700 if you can convince them that the fact that nearly every other library cataloging in WorldCat in English means they should follow precedent, rather than setting a new bad precedent. But Violet's response may help you keep things friendly! On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 10:47 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> wrote: > Sounds like a plan! > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 7:46 PM Violet <violetfox@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Let's wait and see if other catalogers have a chance to chime in >> tomorrow! >> >> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018, 10:41 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Great! >>> >>> I'll reply with this, what do you think? >>> >>> "Hello Catherine, >>> >>> Thank you so much for the mock ups! >>> >>> After conferring with the zine librarians that catalog around the >>> nation, we ask that all listed authors are put in a 700 field if not >>> 100 field please, thank you. >>> >>> Best," >>> >> _______________________________________________ > Zlunioncat mailing list > Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org > http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org > -- http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info http://zines.barnard.edu http://leslzine.storenvy.com http://zinecat.org she, her _______________________________________________ Zlunioncat mailing list Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org

You could also use the example of xZINECOREx/Dublin Core as the PARAGON of zine catalogery. On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 11:29 PM jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> wrote: > I would try for the 100 before settling for the 700 if you can convince > them that the fact that nearly every other library cataloging in WorldCat > in English means they should follow precedent, rather than setting a new > bad precedent. > > But Violet's response may help you keep things friendly! > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 10:47 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Sounds like a plan! >> >> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 7:46 PM Violet <violetfox@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Let's wait and see if other catalogers have a chance to chime in >>> tomorrow! >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018, 10:41 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Great! >>>> >>>> I'll reply with this, what do you think? >>>> >>>> "Hello Catherine, >>>> >>>> Thank you so much for the mock ups! >>>> >>>> After conferring with the zine librarians that catalog around the >>>> nation, we ask that all listed authors are put in a 700 field if not >>>> 100 field please, thank you. >>>> >>>> Best," >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >> Zlunioncat mailing list >> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >> > > > -- > http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info > http://zines.barnard.edu > http://leslzine.storenvy.com > http://zinecat.org > she, her > -- http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info http://zines.barnard.edu http://leslzine.storenvy.com http://zinecat.org she, her _______________________________________________ Zlunioncat mailing list Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org

Violet put it much nicer than I would have (my original draft may have included the phrase, “that’s fucking bullshit”). I think you could push back and argue that by following non-standard cataloging practice LA public runs the risk of not being able to accept copy from other libraries as is, and creates more work for catalogers at other institutions who will need to upgrade any records produced by LA to conform to standard practice. I’m not sure what classification system you’re using (though I’m assuming Dewey), but there is no reason other than the need to document a non-standard practice why you can’t cutter however you like (if the world ended if a library adapted cutters to fit local needs none of us would be here). Indeed, if you are shelving by title, I wouldn’t bother to class at all, just use 852 first indicator 5 with $l for shelving title: https://www.loc.gov/marc/holdings/hd852.html Good luck! Honor Sent from my iPhone > On Aug 8, 2018, at 11:30 PM, jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> wrote: > > You could also use the example of xZINECOREx/Dublin Core as the PARAGON of zine catalogery. > >> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 11:29 PM jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> wrote: >> I would try for the 100 before settling for the 700 if you can convince them that the fact that nearly every other library cataloging in WorldCat in English means they should follow precedent, rather than setting a new bad precedent. >> >> But Violet's response may help you keep things friendly! >> >>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 10:47 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Sounds like a plan! >>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 7:46 PM Violet <violetfox@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Let's wait and see if other catalogers have a chance to chime in tomorrow! >>>> >>>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018, 10:41 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> Great! >>>>> >>>>> I'll reply with this, what do you think? >>>>> >>>>> "Hello Catherine, >>>>> >>>>> Thank you so much for the mock ups! >>>>> >>>>> After conferring with the zine librarians that catalog around the nation, we ask that all listed authors are put in a 700 field if not 100 field please, thank you. >>>>> >>>>> Best," >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Zlunioncat mailing list >>> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >>> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >> >> >> -- >> http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info >> http://zines.barnard.edu >> http://leslzine.storenvy.com >> http://zinecat.org >> she, her > > > -- > http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info > http://zines.barnard.edu > http://leslzine.storenvy.com > http://zinecat.org > she, her > _______________________________________________ > Zlunioncat mailing list > Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org > http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org _______________________________________________ Zlunioncat mailing list Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org