Reparative Description Processing Information Note Template
- Betts Coup
Houghton Library has implemented an inclusive and conscious editing note, to be used in the processing information note field in ArchivesSpace resource records and in a 500 note in MARC bibliographic records in Alma.
This note should be used when inclusive and conscious editing has been carried out on any native language element of a resource record or MARC record. The only case when this note should not be used is if only subject terms have been changed in a resource or MARC record.
In cases where a collection is described in both a resource and MARC bibliographic record, this note should appear in both, edited to describe the specific actions taken on each record. This note should also be used if archival materials are only described in MARC bibliographic records.
Resources used to develop this content include the following: NYU’s processing manual, the Center for the History of Medicine’s guidelines for inclusive and conscientious description, guidelines from the Princeton's Inclusive Description Working Group, A4BLiP’s guidelines, and Yale’s draft version of Standard Descriptive Notes.
For the finding aid:
This finding aid was revised in [year] to address [racist/sexist/euphemistic/oppressive], outdated, [and/or] harmful descriptive language. During that revision, description was changed in [general description of descriptive sites, e.g. the scope and contents notes of Series I and Series II]. [Specific information about what was changed.] [Previous versions of this finding aid may be available. Please contact [repository] for details.] If you have questions or comments about these revisions, please contact Houghton Library. For more information on reparative archival description at Harvard, see <ref href="https://library.harvard.edu/harmful-language-archival-description">Harvard Library’s Statement on Harmful Language in Archival Description.</ref>
*Specific information examples:
Racist [language/descriptors was/were] removed and replaced with [community recommended/currently accepted] terminology, such as “African Americans” and “enslaved people” in [year].
Racist, euphemistic, and harmful descriptive language referring to colonization, colonizers, and [Native American and/or indigenous] people was [removed and/or replaced] in [year].
Inaccurate or outdated names for Native American tribes were removed and replaced with [community recommended/currently accepted] terminology such as [currently recognized name of tribe] in [year].
Inaccurate, outdated, and harmful descriptive language referring to people with disabilities was [removed and/or replaced] in [year].
Information regarding the historical context in which these materials were [created and/or collected] has been added to the collection-level description in [year].
References to Japanese-American “relocation,” “evacuation,” and “internment” during World War II were removed and replaced with [community recommended/currently accepted terminology] in [year], such as “Japanese American incarceration.”
For the MARC bibliographic record:
Houghton Library has implemented an inclusive and conscious editing note, to be used in the processing information note field in ArchivesSpace resource records and in a 500 note in MARC bibliographic records in Alma.
This note should be used when inclusive and conscious editing has been carried out on any native language element of a resource record or MARC record. The only case when this note should not be used is if only subject terms have been changed in a resource or MARC record.
In cases where a collection is described in both a resource and MARC bibliographic record, this note should appear in both, edited to describe the specific actions taken on each record. This note should also be used if archival materials are only described in MARC bibliographic records.
Resources used to develop this content include the following: NYU’s processing manual, the Center for the History of Medicine’s guidelines for inclusive and conscientious description, guidelines from the Princeton's Inclusive Description Working Group, A4BLiP’s guidelines, and Yale’s draft version of Standard Descriptive Notes.
For the MARC record:
This catalog record was revised in [year] to address [racist/sexist/euphemistic/oppressive], outdated, [and/or] harmful descriptive language. During that revision, description was changed in [general description of descriptive sites, e.g. the scope and contents notes of Series I and Series II]. [Specific information about what was changed.*] [Previous versions of this record may be available. Please contact [repository] for details.] If you have questions or comments about these revisions, please contact Houghton Library. For more information on reparative archival description at Harvard, see Harvard Library’s Statement on Harmful Language in Archival Description: https://library.harvard.edu/harmful-language-archival-description.
*Specific information examples:
- Racist [language/descriptors was/were] removed and replaced with [community recommended/currently accepted] terminology, such as “African Americans” and “enslaved people” in [year].
- Racist, euphemistic, and harmful descriptive language referring to colonization, colonizers, and [Native American and/or indigenous] people was [removed and/or replaced] in [year].
- Inaccurate or outdated names for Native American tribes were removed and replaced with [community recommended/currently accepted] terminology such as [currently recognized name of tribe] in [year].
- Inaccurate, outdated, and harmful descriptive language referring to people with disabilities was [removed and/or replaced] in [year].
- Information regarding the historical context in which these materials were [created and/or collected] has been added to the collection-level description in [year].
- References to Japanese-American “relocation,” “evacuation,” and “internment” during World War II were removed and replaced with [community recommended/currently accepted terminology] in [year], such as “Japanese American incarceration.”