Ethical Description

• UCLA Library's Resource Acquisitions and Metadata Services department uses the LCNAF records available in OCLC Connexion database.  When viewed in Alma ILS, the binocular icon next to authorized access points link to the LCNAF record via the Alma Community Zone.

• UCLA Library Special Collections uses ArchiveSpace. ArchivesSpace authority records may only be viewable by staff using an ArchiveSpace login.

• The UCLA Clark Library uses its own instance of ArchiveSpace to manage archival authorities for finding aid records. ArchivesSpace authority records may only be viewable by staff using an ArchiveSpace login. The Clark also uses the LCNAF for bibliographic records created in OCLC Connexion.

• The UCLA Digital Library Program uses spreadsheets for each digital collection to keep track of local name authorities. 

• If we are creating a bibliographic record, and the name we want to include as an access point (creator, person as a subject) doesn’t have a NAR, should we create one?
  • If the person lacking the NAR belongs to an underrepresented or marginalized group, does that make a stronger case for creating a NAR?
  • When would it be acceptable to just add an access point and not create a NAR (either local or a LCNAF record)?
    • BIBCO and CONSER standards require that name access points in bibliographic records be backed up with LCNAF authority records, and it’s necessary for authenticating PCC records. However, if there are not enough resources available for creating a NAR, would we set aside the resource in our backlog to create a NAR later when resources are available so we can authenticate the record? Or would we create the record with a name access point? 
    • Additionally, PCC records can only be minimally edited by non-PCC members in a cooperative cataloging environment such as OCLC. In cases where records would benefit from additional metadata provided by users in such cooperative cataloging environments, would we re-consider authenticating or adding a record identified as PCC to OCLC? 
    • If we are reliant on local authority records, how much time would we be willing to invest to research in creating these records? 
    • What resources do we have access to, and how does that impact our ability to create records? Some resources are behind paywalls to which UCLA doesn't subscribe, can we request access or find another workaround?

• Just because we can put extensive information into a NAR doesn’t mean we absolutely have to, or that we should. How much biographical information really needs to be there particularly for identification or disambiguation of less-well known individuals?

• Certain information included in a NAR, particularly for a living person, could be considered private or potentially sensitive, including birth date, gender, dead names,  names in different languages that can divulge religious or ethnic information, religious or ethnic information etc. Although the latest guidance (2022) from the PCC is to not record gender in new records and to remove gender information in existing records, gender information persists in older records in cooperative cataloging databases such as OCLC.
  • Does a NAR’s purpose and/use determine the type and amount of information included when creating a NAR?
  • Should we only include information that comes directly from the person? (Self-identification) How do we address situations where the individual cannot be located or is deceased?
  • Does lack of any of this information keep the NAR from serving its purpose to library staff or researchers?
  • Would keeping information such as birth dates (especially if provided by a collection donor or considered important for researchers) only in the archives and not on the publicly accessible online metadata be an option? 

• If we aren’t trained in NACO, should we consider getting trained if eligible? (For example, NACO training in the UCLA Library’s Resource Acquisitions and Metadata Services (RAMS) department is only for Librarians and Library Assistant IV and up) Or is there a NACO funnel we could work with to get the NAR created?       

This is an example of a pre-RDA record with minimal information which serves the purposes of identification and disambiguation.

This is an example of a pre-RDA  record that includes personal data that we wouldn’t necessarily include today (for example date of birth, date of marriage, or personal pronouns).

This record was fully enhanced by UCLA catalogers, as part of the PCC URIs in MARC Pilot Project,  to include all relevant URIs. It points out the author’s two languages (field 377)  and associated places (field 370), which possibly indicates being a member of a marginalized community. Note from the 670 shows that the person publicly identifies as being a part of a marginalized community, which makes it appropriate to include in the authority record. 

This record contains an e-mail address in the 371, an indication of gender in the 375, and a 400 in Hebrew script, not supported by a source in the 670.  These additions should be reconsidered.  

The examples given below from the UCLA Library’s Miriam Matthews Photograph Collection shows one record where the date of birth has been provided for a person who was deceased. In the second image from the 1990s, where it could not be determined if the individual was living or deceased, the metadata creators chose to leave out date of birth information.

Name with birth and death dates

https://digital.library.ucla.edu/catalog/ark:/21198/z1sb5psz

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Names without date of birth provided

https://digital.library.ucla.edu/catalog/ark:/21198/z1q25hdk

• How do we add disambiguating information to uncontrolled  name access points that do not contain information that can be deemed private or sensitive?
  • Options can include:
    • Active dates ($d)
    • Field of activity ($c)
    • Fuller form of name ($q)
  • If possible, avoiding adding birth dates for living people

Example of a record in Alma with an uncontrolled access point in the 700 field. (MMS ID  9996860808706533) Note that the uncontrolled name does not have binoculars next to it.

Example of the same record in UC Library Search with an uncontrolled access point under author/contributor. (MMS ID  9996860808706533)

• When would we create a Wikidata item?
  • As part of our cataloging workflow–would we create an item if there is no existing NAR and/or we lack NACO training? Or in addition to a NAR?

• If we are creating a Wikidata item for a person what are some properties we would consider avoiding as they raise privacy and other ethical concerns? For example, some Wikidata properties are problematic, such as P21 which conflates sex and gender. Best Practices for Queer Metadata (Section 4.3.7) lists other properties that could also contain sensitive information.

• When using Wikidata as a source of information in creating NARs, are we ensuring that such information is supported with references and citations in Wikidata?

• Would we consider linking a NAR to an existing Wikidata item even if the item contains sensitive or other information that can be considered a violation of an individual’s privacy?

EXAMPLE

The following example depicts an LCNAF record and a Wikidata item for historian Heather Sutherland. The LCNAF item does not provide the URI for the Wikidata item but the Wikidata item does include the LCCN for the LCNAF record. The Wikidata item includes two properties–date of birth and unmarried partner– that can raise privacy concerns (the statements even show warnings that they need citations). In this case, would we provide the Wikidata URI in the LCNAF record, or would we provide citations for those two statements in the Wikidata item, or delete those two statements from the Wikidata item altogether?

LCNAF record for Heather Sutherland

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wikidata item for Heather Sutherland