Thanks for checking and re-opening.  Yes, I wondered too about that latest issue consulted date.    Much appreciated.

I'm wondering now about the formatting of the numbering in the
362 ‡a 1:1 (Feb. 1991)-  and
500 ‡a Latest issue consulted: 3:8 (Aug. 1998).

We've recently been going over the new CONSER standard record and while I recall the new direction to transcribe the months as found or abbreviate, I don't recall anything about leaving out the labels (vol, no., etc.) entirely.   Is that something new?

Patricia Fogler, Catalog Librarian
Muir S. Fairchild Research Information Center
600 Chennault Circle, Maxwell AFB, AL 36112
(334) 953-2135  patricia.fogler@maxwell.af.mil
https://catalog.au.af.mil
http://www.au.af.mil/au/aul/lane.htm

> -----Original Message-----
> From: SERIALST: Serials in Libraries Discussion Forum
> [mailto:SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU] On Behalf Of Steven C Shadle
> Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 8:16 PM
> To: SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU
> Subject: Re: [SERIALST] Mistakenly closed serial record? [on OCLC]
>
> Lisa -- I know the vendor reports that you speak of.
> Personally, I'm a little leery of those and will sometimes
> seek confirmation before closing out a record.  It sounds
> like you are being appropriately cautious about closing out a
> record without definitive last issue in hand.
>
> What I was specifically commenting on was the fact that
> someone had input a latest issue consulted that was *after*
> the supposed last issue.  At the very least, they should have
> deleted the ceased note and edited the fixed field dates.
> And if they weren't sure if it was still published, at least
> made the status unknown.  The 500 Published: note that was
> added is in the same general proximity of the record as the
> ceased note...someone must have been in a hurry that day.
>
> Steve Shadle/Serials Access Librarian  *****  shadle@u.washington.edu
> University of Washington Libraries      ***     Phone: (206) 685-3983
> Seattle, WA 98195-2900                   *        Fax: (206) 543-0854
>
> On Fri, 7 Sep 2007, Lisa Furubotten wrote:
>
>> Hi there Patricia, and Hi Steve,
>>
>> I have to say, I can think of two cases where accidents can happen:
>>
>> 1. It is possible to close down a record one shouldn't,
> because you have received an incorrect note from a vendor
> that this is the last issue because of a title change, or
> something of the sort.  Although for myself, I tend to want
> further proof than the note, because exactly I've seen too
> many times where the notification is a mistake.
>>
>> 2.  And Steve's opinion is useful on the following:  For
> older titles (pre-1970, not new things) I will sometimes put
> a ? in the "ceased with" note and close the 2nd date.  But
> it's only in the case where I have seen in a catalog (usually
> foreign in the country of origin) that those catalogers think
> it's the last issue.    Then I  check U.S. local catalogs and
> microfilm for folks who claim holdings, and I see no one has
> an issue after the issue claimed to be the last.  At that
> point I am 95% sure that an issue probably was the last
> issue.  But there is always the possibility that the other
> catalogers have some other methodology than CONSER rules in
> mind, I don't know if they were "guessing" when they made the
> last issue claim because I don't know their rules,  and you
> can't prove something is dead after a certain issue just
> because no one in the US has later issues.  So I put a "?" in
> those cases because there is the slim possibility that
> another issue or issues will turn !
>  up!
>> .    Should I stop doing this?
>>
>> Lisa
>> Texas A&M
>>
>>>>> Steven C Shadle <shadle@U.WASHINGTON.EDU> 9/7/2007 4:25 PM >>>
>> I'm especially amused by the fact that there is a Latest
> Issue Consulted note which is *after* the supposed closed
> date (CONSER catalogers, look at the 040...you know who you are).
>>
>> I've edited the record to reflect the fact that it is
> current, but haven't done anything else to it.  --Steve
>>
>> Steve Shadle/Serials Access Librarian  *****
> shadle@u.washington.edu
>> University of Washington Libraries      ***     Phone:
> (206) 685-3983
>> Seattle, WA 98195-2900                   *        Fax:
> (206) 543-0854
>>
>> On Fri, 7 Sep 2007, Fogler, Patricia A CIV USAF AETC AUL/LTSC wrote:
>>
>>> I'm cataloging the journal Communication Theory for our
> library.   This
>>> (vol. 16, no.1 (Feb. 2006)),  is our first issue: so I've
> nothing else
>>> to look at aside from this and what is in OCLC.   I've
> found a lovely
>>> record that appears to match what I have in hand.
>>>
>>> Only this record (OCLC 21463248)  was closed in July of
> this year with a
>>> "dead" date of 1997. The 2nd 362 reads: 362 1,_ Ceased
> with: v. 7, no. 4
>>> (Nov. 1997)?
>>>
>>> I'm guessing this was a mistake.   I've looked at this
> record in a few
>>> other libraries' catalogs via Worldcat and it appears
> mainly to be open
>>> & being received on.    Can anyone verify?
>>>
>>> I'm not sure why one would be close out a record unless one was
>>> absolutely sure.    And given the question mark -- I'm
> assuming there
>>> was some uncertainty.    But perhaps it was simply the
> date that was in
>>> question at the time.  Since I have no earlier issues, I can't tell
>>> whether it did close & was later re-started by Blackwell.
>>>
>>> I'm going to download & re-open the record to use it in my
> catalog.  I
>>> was hoping that a cataloger at another library (perhaps a CONSER
>>> library?) with a full run might want to take a glance at
> it & perhaps
>>> open it back up.
>>>
>>> If I'm completely mis-reading the situation, and there is a better
>>> record out there, please do let me know.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Patricia
>>>
>>> Patricia Fogler, Catalog Librarian
>>> Muir S. Fairchild Research Information Center
>>> 600 Chennault Circle, Maxwell AFB, AL 36112
>>> (334) 953-2135  patricia.fogler@maxwell.af.mil
>>> https://catalog.au.af.mil
>>> http://www.au.af.mil/au/aul/lane.htm
>>>
>>
>
>