Items not included in reclamation included:
  1. items not owned by SU should not be included in load. (Reserve items)
  2. items meant for only short term retention should not be included in the load.
  3. on order items
  4. intl items
  5. items like keys and laptops
  6. lost and missing that should be withdrawn

The goal of reclamation is to synch up our local holdings with our OCLC holdings. To do this we had multiple clean-up projects. There is a folder on the G drive in the cat services folder entitled Reclamation. All the spreadsheets live there.

The identified messes that we wanted to clean up before reclamating were:

  1. 2 records with duplicate 035s
  2. Records without an 035 records (which ones do we want to include in load?)
  3. Little bib records
  4. Bad pub dates
  5. The Lost and missing


Table of Contents


Problem Statement Multiple records with identical 035s (Different owning libraries) indicate an error of some sort.

  1. There are 2 records and 1 physical item. In that case one record could be deleted.
  2. The duplicate records each had a physical piece (also duplicates) in which case a retention decision had to be made.
  3. Someone used an near but not matching OCLC record, changed the record to fit the piece and left the 035 in the record. In these cases we find an OCLC that fits the item in hand and overlay into Summit.

Process ILSM wrote a report, eliminating any law, ESF, Belfer, or Law records, only considering matches within SCRC or General Collections. These records were divided up by location. Bird general locations were divided between the Supervisors teams (Mike, Pat and Kelley) I handled the more specific collections.

Bird 1889 Microfilm/fiche 1842 Gov Docs 514 Sci branches 449 Maps 329 intl 42 MLK 34 ord,bird 8 (handled by Acq) Serials 55 (handled by Kelley)

SCRC had a total of 3952. Some appeared to be same item on different records (Same donor note) When different donor notes then local policy is to cat on separate records (This should create separate institutional records in OCLC should we choose to do that)

Microfilm/fiche 770 cat on merged records, 1119 duplicate records. Gov Docs 512 dup titles (Is it clear to MGI staff when to bring in a new record?) Maps 126 dup records merged with retention decisions to follow, 203 items needed a correct record imported from OCLC 42 Intls were merged 34 MLK were merged Ord, birds were analyzed by Acq staff

Total 5107 records

Parking lot issues

  1. Document INTL procedures - records are suppressed and no holdings in OCLC
  2. Arrange to run the report on a regular basis to make sure these problems don't keep happening.


No 035

We ran this to determine which records we did or didn't want to include in the load. Certain items not owned by SU should not be included in load. Certain items meant for only short term retention should not be included in the load. This report was run as well as a report for the very little bib records.

Many are reserve titles that may or may not still be on reserve, appear to be on reserve forever. Many titles in Fine Arts. Gave list to Lisa B. to go through and suppress what does not exist.

For more info see the Little Bib record section.

Parking lot issues

i. The "bird" location confuses people and people use it by mistake thinking it is something else. ii. Can we find a way to quickly identify on the fly circ records so we can overlay them more quickly, many linger for years after the item has been cat on a full record. iii. Can we find a way to identify reserve records to get rid of them more quickly? iv. Need a clear policy on when a record can just be local.


Lost and missing

We only want OCLC to represent what we own and can find. Some items are lost/missing for years and would be misleading to indicate that we own them. This process is under review

It was decided that we will withdraw lost and missing items on a yearly basis. In january we will withdraw all items lost more than 1 year ago. In 2013 we will withdraw all items lost or missing prior to December 31 2011. These items are looked for on a regular basis and before the final withdrawal are searched one last time. If they reappear they can be reinstated.

Very Little Bib Records

This is a very large complicated category. Merritt had the definition of how large a record could be and still be considered "little" Many of these are fa and arr.


When identical editions are in identical locations the Cataloging Services dept. We will consider these candidates for withdrawal. Duplicates will be retained only when:

1. There is evidence that both copies have frequent, recent circulations (Within the last 3 years)2. The copies are in different buildings3. One copy is in Safire and one copy is in Bird4. The title was published in the year 2000 and after.5. We keep duplicates of drama scripts6. We keep duplicates of scores

Both items will be pulled for review when:

1. Titles are variant printings and/or editions2. Titles merit special consideration due to age or local interest3. The variant locations are within one building, excluding SCRC and Safire


1. With Dewey (storage) and LC duplicates:Verify Dewey duplicate exists and conditionReview withdraw criteria for both copiesIf one can be withdrawn, withdraw copy in worse conditionIf dewey is kept, reclass to LC to retain in Bird (if both in storage, keep in storage)2. Different formats:cassette vs CD, VHS vs DVD, Microfilm and print:In most instances, duplicates in different formats will be retained. If there are questions, please contact the appropriate bibliographer.



Retention decision will be made based on criteria listed above. If circulation does not merit retention, withdrawal of the least best copy If we are retaining identical items, they should have separate MFHD but one Bib record.



Once the retention decision has been made based by the bibliographer the follow up steps can occur: either withdrawal of the not desired item or the recataloging of the item not described by the OCLC record.

  • No labels