PCC Resources for
SACO Shorts
SACO Shorts are quick tips that cover common proposal problems or frequently asked questions. SACO Shorts are published to SACOLIST on the first and third Mondays of the month and are collected here.
This new initiative for 2025 is led by the Policy, Training, and Cooperative Programs (PTCP) Division and the SACO Volunteer Trainers Group.
- No work cat (common problem)
- Need definition and relationship (common problem)
- No English in work cat (common problem)
- Alphabetize it (common problem)
- Subject Headings Manual search (frequently asked question)
- When to use Wikipedia (frequently asked question)
- Summary of Decisions search (frequently asked question)
- How do I use the 675 field (frequently asked question)
- When to include related terms (RTs) in proposals (common problem)
- Related terms (RTs) are reciprocal (common problem)
No work cat (common problem)
When you propose a new subject heading, make sure you cite the work being cataloged, or work cat, and provide a short statement in English that clearly connects the work cat to the proposed heading. This should be the first citation listed in your proposal.* You should indicate the work being cataloged by including work cat in the 670 subfield a ($a).
When entering a proposal in ClassWeb Plus, a Work cat 670 is automatically supplied as the first 670 field.
Examples
Birds with disabilities
670 $a Work cat: Brave birds, 2024: $b CIP summary (This book includes inspiring stories about birds with disabilities; disabled animal) galley (Disabled birds; Disabilities can affect chickens like Granite and other birds. Some disabilities are present from birth. Others can result from an illness or injury) $w (DLC)2024011149Mark Tanner Sculpture Award
670 $a Work cat: Thinking is making: objects in a space, the Mark Tanner Sculpture Award, 2023: $b cover (20th anniversary of the Mark Tanner Sculpture award. Showcases contemporary British sculpture) $w (UkOxU)991025530935807026To read more about the research required for subject proposals, please see H 202 Authority Research for Subject Heading Proposals.
*If you’re proposing a new heading needed for a reference hierarchy, you do not need to include a work cat. As an example: Pretend you’re proposing a new heading for the Kota Batu archeological site in Brunei. The heading Brunei--Antiquities would also be needed, since it does not already exist in the subject authority file, and it will be used as a broader term for the archeological site. You would not need a work cat citation for Brunei--Antiquities in this instance, since the heading is simply needed for the reference hierarchy. (We will discuss broader terms and reference hierarchies in more detail in future SACO Shorts!)
Originally published to SACOLIST on January 6, 2025.
Need definition and relationship (common problem)
When you propose new subject heading, it’s important to define your terms (in the case of conceptual headings) or give a clear description of your terms (for headings like places, families, or people groups). You also need to show the relationship between the thing you’re proposing and the work you’re cataloging: Why is the heading needed for the material in hand?
General practice at the Library of Congress is to assign subject headings that best summarize the overall contents of the material. This roughly translates to topics needing to comprise at least 20% of the work. Make sure you consider this when making a proposal! Even if you can define a term, there may not be a strong enough relationship between the term and the work being cataloged to justify creating a heading.
Examples
Naning War, Malaysia, 1831-1832
670 $a Work cat: Adam, S. Acts of resistance, 2021: $b t.p. (Dol Said and the Naning War) p. 4 of cover (the Naning War began when the British embarked on a military campaign to seize the village of Naning about 30 miles from Malacca in present-day Malaysia and arrest its chief, Dol Said, in 1831; the infamous Naning War sparked off a history of unjust conquest and resistance) $w (OCoLC)1284921524PTCP would consider: What is this thing (a war that began when the British embarked on a military campaign to seize the village of Naning about 30 miles from Malacca in present-day Malaysia and arrest its chief, Dol Said, in 1831) and why is it needed for this book (the title page indicates that the Naning War is a central topic of the work cat and it is actually the subtitle of the book). Result: Approved!
Rivendell (Imaginary place)*
670 $a Work cat: Atlas of Tolkien, 2024: $b page 85 (Rivendell was a refuge of the elves located in eastern Eriador, Middle Earth, and founded in the Second Age)PTCP would consider: What is this thing (an imaginary place created by Tolkien) and why is it needed for this book (unclear—it seems to be an atlas entry, but there’s no indication that this is a central topic of the work cat). Result: Not necessary.
Additional citations can be useful for refining definitions; demonstrating usage of the term; and providing alternate spellings. However, the relationship between the proposed term and the work being cataloged must be clear from your work cat citation.
To read more about the research required for subject proposals, please see H 202 Authority Research for Subject Heading Proposals. Section 1, Citation of sources consulted, part a., General Principles, point (6) Listing sources in 670 or 675 fields, specifically covers providing the definition and the relationship to the work being cataloged. To read more about the principles governing assigning headings, please see H 180 Assigning and Constructing Subject Headings.
*Note: All examples of poorly formed proposals are completely fictional.
Originally published to SACOLIST on January 20, 2025.
No English in work cat (common problem)
When the work being cataloged is in a foreign language, please make sure to provide information in English in the work cat citation. This can be a cataloger supplied translation or summary.
Examples
Hate in art
670 $a Work cat: Popović, Dimitrije, 1951-. Slikarstvo i mržnja, 2022 (translation of title: Painting and hatred): $b page 7 ("Hatred was and remains a particularly inspiring source for the creation of artistic works"), page 10 (Popović was inspired to examine how "hatred was the initial core of the themes that were the subject of artistic works") $w (DLC)2022442728Kinta River (Perak, Malaysia)*
670 $a Work cat: Syazreen Syafiqa Azmi. Jatuhan batuan, 2020: $b summary (Kinta River is the main river that flows through the Kinta Valley area, starting from Mount Korbu in Ulu Kinta, Tanjung Rambutan to Kampung Gajah in the south. The Kinta River meets the Perak River near the Inderasakti Island area which located in the southern part of Kinta area) $w (DLC)2021314357Providing information in English helps the PTCP Division when evaluating proposals. Translating or summarizing your citations in English also means that there is a common language of understanding across subject authority records.
To read more about the research required for subject proposals, please see H 202 Authority Research for Subject Heading Proposals. Section 1, Citation of sources consulted, part a., General Principles, point (6) Listing sources in 670 or 675 fields, specifically mentions the importance of providing information quoted or paraphrased in English.
Originally published to SACOLIST on February 3, 2025.
Alphabetize it (common problem)
When proposing new or changed headings, you may include used for terms (UFs); broader terms (BTs); and related terms (RTs). All of these terms should be alphabetized within their group.
UFs are in 4XX fields and are listed first.
Example
Cyrene (Extinct city)
451 $a Cirene (Extinct city)
451 $w nne $a Cyrene (Ancient city)
451 $a Kyrene (Extinct city)
451 $a Shīrīnī (Extinct city)BTs are in 5XX fields with $w g and should be grouped together and alphabetized next. If you have a mix of MARC tags, you should alphabetize the BTs rather than keeping the tags in numerical order.
Examples
Cyrene (Extinct city)
451 $a Cirene (Extinct city)
451 $w nne $a Cyrene (Ancient city)
451 $a Kyrene (Extinct city)
451 $a Shīrīnī (Extinct city)
550 $w g $a Extinct cities $z Libya
551 $w g $a Libya $x AntiquitiesMonnikerede (Extinct city)
551 $w g $a Belgium $x Antiquities
550 $w g $a Extinct cities $z BelgiumIf you have RTs in your record, they should be alphabetized as a group after any BTs. RTs are also in 5XX fields, but do not have a $w.
Example
Social stability
450 $a Stability, Social 550 $w g $a Social history 550 $w g $a Sociology 550 $a ProgressIf you forget to alphabetize, PTCP will make those corrections for you during our review. However, when you remember to alphabetize, it makes our work easier!
To read more about alphabetization rules in subject proposals, please see H 200 Preparation of Subject Heading Proposals.
Originally published to SACOLIST on February 17, 2025.
Subject Headings Manual search (frequently asked question)
Did you know that you can easily search across Subject Headings Manual (SHM) instruction sheets in ClassWeb Plus? In the ClassWeb Plus Main Menu, scroll down until you see Cataloging Policy Documentation. Click “Menu,” and you’ll be taken to an alphabetical listing of all the documentation available through ClassWeb Plus.
Scroll down until you see Subject Headings Manual. If you know what category of instruction sheet you’d like to search, you can select the category and go directly to the individual document. If you would like to keyword search across all SHM instruction sheets, click “Subject Headings Manual” and enter your query in the “Find” box. You can use quotes to search phrases and Boolean searches. The system will search across the entire manual by default, but you can narrow your focus using the dropdown menu (to the right of the search bar).
Searching across instruction sheets is a great way to ensure that you've found all of the instructions relevant to your particular proposal.
Originally published to SACOLIST on March 3, 2025.
When to use Wikipedia (frequently asked question)
Cataloging Policy Specialists frequently receive questions on whether Wikipedia should be used as a source in 670 notes. It’s difficult to make blanket decisions on Wikipedia–some entries are clearly better than others–but we can provide some general advice:
Wikipedia should never be your only source. Your first source should be your work cat (not Wikipedia), and you should provide evidence from other subject-specific authoritative sources (like Ethnologue for languages or GNS/GNIS for place names) or from general knowledge authoritative sources (like Webster’s online or Encyclopedia Britannica).
If you’ve already cited information from those authoritative sources and the Wikipedia entry adds nothing new to your proposal, don’t include it.
However, if the Wikipedia entry provides an alternative spelling of a name or contains important information that was not listed in any other source, you can include the Wikipedia entry to support your proposal. Again, generally speaking, the Policy, Training, and Cooperative Programs Division has found that Wikipedia entries usually add the most value as sources of alternative names and spellings.
To read more about the research required for subject proposals, please see H 202 Authority Research for Subject Heading Proposals. Section 1, Citation of sources consulted, part b., Where to search for authoritative information, specifically mentions Wikipedia and other crowdsourced websites.
Originally published to SACOLIST on March 18, 2025.
Summary of Decisions search (frequently asked question)
Did you know that you easily search across multiple Summaries of Decisions (SODs) in ClassWeb Plus? In the ClassWeb Plus Main Menu, scroll down until you see Cataloging Policy Documentation. Click “Menu,” and you’ll be taken to an alphabetical listing of all the documentation available through ClassWeb Plus.
Scroll down until you see Summaries of Decisions from Subject Editorial Meetings. If you know the SOD you’d like to search, you can select the year and go directly to the individual document. If you would like to keyword search across all SODs, click “Summaries of Decisions from Subject Editorial Meetings” and enter your query in the “Find” box. You can use quotes to search phrases and Boolean searches. The system will search across all summaries by default, but you can select an individual year using the dropdown menu (to the right of the search bar).
Searching previous SODs is a great way to see if a term you’re interested in proposing has been considered before and why the term was not approved at the time.
Originally published to SACOLIST on April 7, 2025.
How do I use the 675 field (frequently asked question)
The MARC 675 field in authority records is for Source Data Not Found. You use this field in a subject proposal to list sources consulted that did not include references to the proposed heading. This is especially important for proposals where data from certain prescribed sources is required, such as proposals for geographic places or family names.
The 675 field is not repeatable, but multiple sources can be listed in sequential $a subfields, separated by semicolons.
Always include a 675 field when information is absent from required sources.
Examples
151 $a Glenlough River (Ireland)
675 $a GeoNames, May 28, 2024; $a Columbia gaz.; $a Times atlas of the world, 1998; $a GNSThe proposer is demonstrating that this river is absent from several authoritative resources, including GNS (the Geographic Names Server). Typically, GNS must be cited for all non-US geographic names (see H 690 Formulating Geographic Headings, section D, Form of heading). The 670s in the record include citations from the work cat and a placenames database of Ireland.
151 $a Menko family
675 $a Cent. pop. growth; $a DAFNThe proposer is demonstrating that this family name is absent from several authoritative resources, including A century of population growth and the New Dictionary of American Family Names, abbreviated here as DAFN. Typically, these two sources would be cited in family name proposals (see H 1631.5 Family names: Headings and References). The 670 in the record is for the work cat.
You can also include a 675 field to record the fact that information couldn’t be found in an authoritative source. For example, if you find reference to a topic in your work cat and specialized topical encyclopedias, but not in a general encyclopedia like Britannica online, you could include a 675 $a Britannica.
For more information, see H 203 Citation of Sources, section 9, Citing sources in which the heading was not found, and H 202 Authority Research for Subject Heading Proposals.
Originally published to SACOLIST on April 21, 2025.
When to include related terms (RTs) in proposals (common problem)
Related terms (RTs) are coded in the 5XX fields of subject authority records. The relevant instructions for RTs can be found in H 370 Broader Terms, Narrower Terms, Related Terms.
RTs are used sparingly, and this is by design. H 370 point 2 “Related term references” states, “In order to focus emphasis on hierarchical references, simplify future special projects to revise references in the subject authority file, and reduce the size and complexity of Library of Congress Subject Headings, restrictive rules are in effect for making related term references with the intended effect of minimizing the number of related term references that are made.”
There are very few instances where RTs are called for in new proposals:
- To link terms with meanings that overlap or are used somewhat interchangeably. The example given in H 370 is Boats and boating and Ships. The unwritten rule in PTCP is you create an RT if someone reasonably thinks of one when they think of the other. So, does one reasonably think of boats and boating when they think of ships. This is a good litmus test to apply when proposing this type of RT.
- To link a discipline and object studied, as with Ornithology and Birds.
- To link persons and their fields of endeavor, as with Medicine and Physicians.
Even with these three instances listed above, there are exceptions to the rules, as explained in H 370 point 2.
As always, remember to read other relevant instruction sheets; they could contain helpful information on RTs that is not part of H 370. A great example of this is H 1631.5 Family Names: Headings and References. Section d., Related names, provides instructions on how to create RTs for similar names from different ethnic backgrounds and RTs for family names that have changed substantially as a result of emigration.
Examples
100 3 $a Jacobs family
500 3 $a Jacobus family
500 3 $a Jacoby family150 $a Care of the sick
550 $a Home nursing150 $a Housing
550 $a DwellingsThe important takeaway for proposers is to use RTs sparingly and only in the instances noted above. Do your best to apply the rules governing RTs in your proposal. If RTs need to be removed or adjusted, Policy Specialists will make those changes at point of review. Most of the RTs established on any given approved list are on records for family names.
Another important point: RTs are reciprocal. We will discuss this more in our next SACO Short (coming 5/19).
Originally published to SACOLIST on May 5, 2025.
Related terms (RTs) are reciprocal (common problem)
Earlier this month, we looked at the basics of related terms (RTs) and when to include them in proposals (see When to include related terms (RTs) in proposals (common problem)). There is another important thing to keep in mind when proposing RTs: RTs are reciprocal. This means that headings related through RTs must have RTs to each other.
Examples
100 3 $a Jacobs family
500 3 $a Jacobus family
500 3 $a Jacoby family100 3 $a Jacobus family
500 3 $a Jacobs family100 3 $a Jacoby family
500 3 $a Jacobs family150 $a Care of the sick
550 $a Home nursing150 $a Home nursing
550 $a Care of the sick150 $a Dwellings
550 $a Housing150 $a Housing
550 $a DwellingsAny time you propose a new or changed RT, you also need to propose an RT at the reciprocal heading as well. For example, the heading Natural gas distribution was established in November 2023 with the RT Natural gas pipelines. The proposer also had to submit a change proposal to Natural gas pipelines to add the RT Natural gas distribution.
Proposers frequently forget this step! If you forget to propose the reciprocal relationship–and if your RT is valid and follows the instructions in H 370–PTCP will try to make the proposal for you at point of review. Depending on the topic, we may need to reach out for additional information. As always, it helps PTCP work more efficiently when the necessary proposals are already in place.
Originally published to SACOLIST on May 19, 2025.
