Marking for Deletion: Bibliographic record (.b) deletion – jump to procedures
Bibliographic records may be deleted in some circumstances by authorized staff if they are not cataloged with a Cat Date. Delete record is not available for cataloged bib records – instead, please mark for deletion as outlined below. If you are not authorized for uncataloged record delete you may use the procedures below to mark an uncataloged bib record for deletion. If your authorizations or scope do not allow you to edit the bib record, submit a mark-for-deletion request to BadCat. Deletion is not appropriate in cases where the library has decided to withdraw a title from the collection (because of loss or weeding). In these cases use the withdrawal procedure.
Common reasons for deletion of uncataloged bib records include:
– Reserve bib records for personal copies or other reserve items not part of the collection: see reserve instructions for more details.
– Order workflow can create duplicate bib records. After moving the order record to the full bib record, the uncataloged bib record can be deleted or marked for deletion.
– Temporary records created for processing may no longer be needed once an archival collection is fully processed and items/holdings/orders created on or moved to the full bib record. Once that cleanup has been done, the uncataloged bib record can be deleted or marked for deletion.
The most often reason for deletion of a cataloged bib record is because it is a duplicate whose items/holdings have been moved to another record, or simply a mistake (wrong record downloaded from OCLC). Duplicate bibliographic records are identified either by an exact match in the content of the record (as between one or more low-level records that lack OCLC numbers along with a fuller-level record that has an OCLC number); or by an exact match in OCLC number in the case of a true duplicate. There should be no item or order records attached to a bibliographic record when it is ready to be flagged for deletion; remaining holdings record should either be deleted if authorizations permit, or marked for deletion. DO NOT delete the bibliographic fields in the record!
Catalogers and branch staff will use the suppression command in BCODE 3=d to indicate their processing needs for cataloged bibliographic records along with a MARC field 999 to briefly describe the disposition for the bibliographic record and include their initials and the date.
999 %date DELETE: WRONG RECORD <initials>
999 %date DELETE: DUPLICATE <initials>
999 %date DELETE: CATALOGING CHANGED <initials>
optional to add additional notes in parenthesis, example:
999 %date DELETE: CATALOGING CHANGED (recat as mono) <initials>
999 %date DELETE: CATALOGING CHANGED (recat as serial) <initials>
999 %date DELETE: CATALOGING CHANGED (part of [example] project) <initials>
Systems will gather records marked for deletion for batch deletion quarterly, keeping the OskiCat database in synchronization with OCLC for UC Berkeley holdings. Record deletion will happen only if ALL the following criteria are met:
– No orders, items or holdings are attached (the bib loc should be “none” based on updates by the overnight job to the bib location field the night after the last item/holdings is removed) – AND –
– BCODE3 = d – AND –
– A 999 field exists in the form shown above (date first) with the reason for the delete request and initials of the person requesting the delete – AND
– no holds exist
[NOTE: a previous version of these instructions directed catalogers to indicate if it was the last copy in Millennium being deleted, but this is no longer necessary. OCLC processing does not need this distinction as the OCLC number will be checked to verify that no active record for that OCLC number exists in Millennium before sending the record as a cancel holdings request to OCLC. Further details forthcoming.]
If some but not all of these requirements are in place, no delete will take place.
Weekly OCLC holdings will be cancelled on records that are last withdrawn or marked for deletion if no active holdings/items exists. Further documentation forthcoming.
How to mark bibliographic records for deletion in Millennium
If you encounter what appears to be an unneeded bibliographic record in Millennium, ask yourself:
Are there holds on the record (view record summary, look for the tab “Bib-Level Holds”. If there are holds, please email email@example.com to request holds resolution and continue with the instructions below.
- Is this a low-level record (such as for ordering) that duplicates a fully cataloged record?
- If so, you should mark it for deletion following the steps below.
[NOTE: If the low-level record has other records attached, you need to transfer them to the fully cataloged record; see Transferring order records.
- Is it a fully cataloged record that duplicates another fully cataloged record?
- If so, refer it to whomever performs database maintenance for your unit.
- Is it a duplicate record of some other sort?
- If so, send a query to the catstaffemail list or refer it to whomever performs database maintenance for your unit.
- Is it a record for a withdrawn item? These records will be retained in the catalog and should be handled according to withdrawal procedures.
1. Select the record you want to mark and click on the Edit button near the top of the window.
2. Double-click in the “Bib Code 3” fixed field.
3. Click on “d DELETE REQUEST”, then click OK.
4. Click on the Insert button at the top of the window. Type “y” to choose Misc.
5. Type in the note formatted as follows:
<yyyymmdd> DELETE: DUPLICATE <logon initials>
or <yyyymmdd> DELETE: WRONG RECORD <logon initials>
20091119 DELETE: DUPLICATE tstp
Then click OK.
6. Save the record.
The note you entered will display with MARC tag number 999. The Bib Code 3 fixed field will show a value of “d DELETE REQUEST”.
Close the record.
Author: Charis Takaro
Approval Group: CSG, BTech, Cataloging and Metadata Council
Update Group: Cataloging & Metadata Council
Last updated date: 09/15/15
Approved CSG 26 August 2011
Tue, 09/15/2015 – 14:45 — Michael Meacham
Updated this phrase in the first paragraph, “submit a deletion request to BadCat,” to read “submit a mark-for-deletion request to BadCat.”
It might also be good, unless too confusing, to include text that says a holdings record that is marked for deletion may be left attached to a bib that is marked for deletion. The bib won’t be deleted until after the holdings record is reviewed and deleted, but it would be inadvisable as impractical not to allow a bib to be marked for deletion until after all holdings records are reviewed and deleted. People couldn’t keep track, or it would place additional burden on staff reviewing holdings records marked for deletion.
Fri, 01/16/2015 – 17:03 — Michael Meacham
Added a 2nd space after “%date” in 4 of the 6 examples in case they are copied and pasted into records. Format must be “%date<space><space>DELETE:<…>” for successful processing by LSO automated job. –Michael
Tue, 10/16/2012 – 10:16 — Armanda Barone
Deleted the following:
– [please add other reasons encountered in your unit here]
Tue, 07/24/2012 – 11:22 — Jenna Kreiss & Rico Estrada
Added a sentence in the first paragraph for those without authorization to edit bib records to refer to BadCat, added addtional reasons for deletion to the 999 example notes, and changed the dates to %date in the examples, per record edit discussion in B-Tech.
Tue, 02/21/2012 – 12:33 — Charis Takaro
Revised to add link directly to procedures and to add requesting removal of holds if they exist. Also clarified the conditions for bib deletion.
Thu, 10/13/2011 – 14:25 — Charis Takaro
Clarified section on bib location “none” to indicate it is set by the overnight job as long as no items/holdings remain.