NIOSH/OSHA pocket guide to chemical hazards / editors, Frank W. Mackison, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, R. Scott Stricoff, Lawrence J. Partridge, Jr., A.D. Little, Inc. (OCLC #8734681)
This volume has a date of “September 1978” on its title page and a suggestive “78” as part of its publication number, but this printing history on the title page verso:
Second printing - January 1980
Third Printing - August 1980
with minor technical changes
Fourth Printing - August 1981
with minor technical changes
but does that merit a new (1981) record in OCLC?
I checked the edition section of their When to Input a New Record document, and was unsure. It may fall under “difference in content”?
Either way, a full and popular record already exists for this printing, with a 1981 date and a note:
500 __ ǂa "Fourth printing, August 1981, with minor technical changes."
This record most precisely matched what I had in hand, so worked well for copy cataloging.
Sämtliche Werke und Briefwechsel : historisch-kritische Ausgabe mit Faksimiles der handschriftlichen Texte Trakls / herausgegeben von Eberhard Sauermann und Hermann Zwerschina ; im Auftrag des Forschungsinstituts “Brenner-Archiv” der Universität Innsbruck. (OCLC #34642140)
When copy cataloging sets, it’s important to look at the set as a whole while searching for copy, not just the first volume. This one fooled me twice!
Volumes in this set were published in different years, not in order, and in somewhat of a wide range. Volume 1 was published in 2007, but Volume 2 was published in 1995. Looking only at Volume 1, I might have discounted the excellent record for the set with publication statement:
264 _1 Basel ; ǂa Frankfurt am Main : ǂb Stroemfeld/Roter Stern,
Also, the volume I initially assumed was the first one (given the spine label V.1) turned out to be Volume 5, Part 1; the existence of V.2 (the second part of Volume 5) was extra convincing. Volume 4 also has two parts, so the labels “IV.1” and “IV.2” gave me an extra clue that something weird was happening.
Chemical disinfectants and antiseptics : quantitative suspension test for the evaluation of bactericidal activity of chemical disinfectants and antiseptics used in food, industrial, domestic and institutional areas : test method and requirements (phase 2, step 1) / BSI. (OCLC #655883626)
Existing records like this one are why numerical statistics for cataloging, even copy cataloging, are difficult to compare. I am 99% sure that the piece I have in hand is the same as (or similar enough to) the one cataloged here, though it had almost no information.
The master record in OCLC is now complete and upgraded to RDA, and marked as copy cataloging in my statistics.
Back talk from Appalachia [electronic resource] : confronting stereotypes / edited by Dwight B. Billings, Gurney Norman, and Katherine Ledford ; foreword by Ronald D. Eller. (OCLC #828424699)
The only clear date on this document is the copyright date on the title page verso (1999) so I was a little wary of the only good/popular copy I found in OCLC which used the date . It did also include an explanatory note:
500 __ ǂa Originally published: Confronting Appalachian
stereotypes. Lexington : University Press of Kentucky, 1999.
indicating that the publication as it existed in 1999 had a different title, so a later date of publication for this one seemed reasonable.
The CIP block (which I try to ignore for cataloging!) includes as a suggested call number:
F210 .C66 2001
and the (distribution?) date provided with the metadata from the publisher (with whom my library works closely) was November 16, 2000. With all of this data, I was comfortable adding our holdings to the record with supplied date .
(It’s a brand new year on a brand new system! But the cataloging problems keep coming…)
I identified the language on this DVD as Greek, but was not feeling confident about reading the flowery script or transliterating it. I was grateful to find a publisher number on the spine that I could search for using the Publisher number (mn:) field:
There’s no specific RDA element for this data other than Identifier for the Manifestation (RDA 2.15)). This particular Identifier for the Manifestation is recorded in MARC 028:
028 01 ǂa 582333 ǂb Odeon
Some other identifiers for the manifestation also have their own specific MARC fields, such as ISBN (020) and ISSN (022).
Gorod Surgut i ego torgovli︠a︡ v XVII v. : preprint / O.N. Vilkov. (OCLC #37968012)
In academic publishing, a preprint is a draft of a paper that has not yet been published in a journal. As changes may be made between the draft and any eventual publication, we consider the preprint to be different from the published version:
Gorod Surgut i ego torgovli︠a︡ v XVII v. / O.N. Vilkov. (OCLC #39906111)
We received two gift volumes that have identical title pages (without much metadata), and so extremely similar description:
245 00 ǂa Dukhovnye stikhi starinnye.
264 _1 ǂa [Place of publication not identified] : ǂb [publisher
not identified], ǂc [between 1950 and 2015?]
but different content beyond that.
They have slightly different numbers of pages, so copy catalogers with similar pieces should be able to determine which record to choose. The page numbers are in Church Slavic though, so I wish them luck!
Russian-English conversation book = Russko-angliĭskiĭ razgovornik / E.M. Coff and F.M. Rozhkova. (OCLC #46638889)
One reason to not limit your OCLC search by date is that the limit uses the fixed field copy of the date, which is easier to do math/comparison with than the variable field 260/264ǂc (which may include phrases like [not before 1800] and dates in other calendars) but in my experience is also coded incorrectly more often than the variable field.
An otherwise good record I found for this title had 1960 in the 260ǂc and the call number, but 1950 in the fixed field (now corrected).