User:VLBT2468/sandbox

Article evaluation - Archival Processing

Content -

Does not mention archival technicians - ADDED 10/17 -

What are the sources for the naming conventions in paragraph 2? ADDED 10/17

New arrangement section - - Other viewpoints on Original Order are not included - should they be? - Should there be a section about how processing is prioritized? Maybe something short on collections assessment? (source: Conway, Proffitt - collections assessment) -

Levels of processing has no citations at all -

Is that all factors that affect the level of processing? Could that be it's own section? -

Finding aids section is short - could it be broadened to include the point of a finding aid to assist the current archivist, the user, and the future archivists who will use it down the road? Also, that finding aids are a way of gaining intellectual control and that online finding aids are an important tool for access? -

LCSH should be spelled out before using acronym. IGNORE - THE POPUP IS ADEQUATE. 10/23/18 -

Are there any updated versions of the Australian and British guides to processing? -

No citation for the Australian processing manual -

Are there any preservation activities that are not included? Check NARA's site to see if they published anything publicly -

See also section seems repetitive - several of the terms are included in the article already -

Sources - the UK link should go to the Best Practices page, https://www.archives.org.uk/publications/best-practice-guidelines.html, not the publications page. - The link to the Greene, Meissner article under Notes is broken, but it works under the External Links section. UPDATED 10/23/18.