---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 15:15:33 -0600
From: Karen Chobot <chobot@PLAINS.NODAK.EDU>
Subject: Re: Babybug, Ladybug, Spider, and Cricket (Ian Fairclough)

My idea - because Cricket came first?  The others were spin-offs when
Cricket became successful?

At 03:19 PM 03/16/2000 -0500, you wrote:
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 09:46:32 -0800
>From: Ian Fairclough <ifairclough@YVRLS.LIB.WA.US>
>Subject: Babybug, Ladybug, Spider, and Cricket
>
>Dear Serialst readers,
>
>Would someone kindly provide an explanation, either by way of rules and
>interpretations of rules, or in terms of a cataloger's judgment and
>decisions, of this vexing question:
>
>Why is it that bibliographic records for three of the four children's
>monthly publications: Ladybug, Babybug, Spider, and Cricket, have a note
>"Issued by the publisher of: <other titles>." along with 730 added entries;
>whereas the fourth record (Cricket) does not?
>
>Any contributions gratefully received!  Thanks for reading - Ian
>
>Ian Fairclough, Technical Services Manager, Yakima Valley Regional Library
>Online Audiovisual Catalogers (OLAC) Outreach-Advocacy Coordinator
>Next OLAC conference: Seattle, Oct. 12-16, 2000.  Conference website:
>http://www.lib.washington.edu/msd/olac/default.htm
>Mail: 102 North 3rd Street, Yakima WA 98901-2759   Tel. 509-452-8541 (voice)
>Internet ifairclough@yvrls.lib.wa.us   Fax 509-575-2093
>
>