Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Libraries

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject Libraries
WikiProject Libraries
Main / talk
Main / talk
Main / talk
Main / talk
Writing guide
Main / talk
Main / talk
Cleanup listing
Main / talk

WikiProject Libraries (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Libraries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Libraries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

To start a new discussion: Use the "new section" button at the top of the page.
To revive an old discussion: Cut it from the pertinent archive and paste it into a "new section" on the main talk page (this page).

Greetings from GLAM-Wiki US

Invitation to join GLAM-Wiki US

Hello! This WikiProject aligns closely with the work of the GLAM-Wiki initiative (Galleries, Libraries, Archives, and Museums), a global community of volunteers who assist cultural institutions with sharing resources with Wikimedia. GLAM-Wiki US is a new community initiative focused on organizing cultural collaborations within the United States. GLAM organizations are diverse and span numerous topics, from libraries and art museums to science centers and historic sites. We currently have a backlog of interested institutions- and we need your help!

1rightarrow.pngAre you interested in helping with current or future GLAM projects? Join→ Online Volunteers

We hope you'll join the growing GLAM-Wiki community in the US. Thank you!
-Lori Phillips (Talk), US Cultural Partnerships Coordinator
For more information visit→ The GLAM:US portal or GLAM-Wiki on Outreach

Rfc - Library of Congress Classification subpages

There is a clear consensus to keep the subpages of the Library of Congress Classification page on Wikipedia. Editors recommended expanded the subpages with more information about what is included in the classification and any related history.

Cunard (talk) 03:29, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Should we keep, or redirect, or merge and redirect, or delete subpages of the Library of Congress Classification page on Wikipedia? For more background please see the discussion in the section just above this one entitled Possible unnecessary pages. In October of 2012 some of these sub-pages were "merged" and "redirected" into the Library of Congress Classification page. Here is one example: [1]. Other such pages were not. On the Library of Congress Classification page itself the subpages are linked as "main articles" in each subsection, as far as I can tell. Thank you. ----Steve Quinn (talk) 00:02, 3 September 2017 (UTC)


Threaded discussion

Steve Quinn, I'm thinking you should post a notice about this RfC at some of the noticeboards but I'm not sure which ones. Maybe start with WP:RSN...Atsme📞📧 00:30, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

  • keep (RFC-bot invitee) - I feel like the content of the main entries are extensive enough that they would be fine as stand-alone articles and inappropriate to merge into the main article on the Library of Congress classification system. It would be nice if there were a bit of actual introduction, describing what is and isn't included in that classification and any possible history, before you went in to the listing of all the defined sub-sections, but that's a project that is ancillary to the question of whether they are appropriate as articles. I would say that they should probably be marked as wp:stubs until that content can be crafted for those articles. VanIsaacWScont 03:31, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep I mostly agree with Vanisaac. I understand the idea that anyone looking this deep into it might be better well suited for the LOC website, but I see no harm in having pages about them here too. I like the idea of adding a history, or at minimum introduction to each page just to outline it (or make it look more like an encylopedia entry) but this isn't entirely needed. SEMMENDINGER (talk) 21:32, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep (RFC-bot invitee) - generally per Vanisaac. Note this is one of the 3 core Portal:Contents#Third-party_classification_systems that have been used for many decades, and are useful to a small percentage of readers. The alternative to keeping the pages where they are, is moving to Wikipedia: namespace, as was done with the Roget classification at some point - but that would exclude them from searches. Quiddity (talk) 19:07, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep (RFC-bot invitee) Nothing to add to preceding. JonRichfield (talk) 06:24, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Guide for access to research: looking for early readers

To help researchers (and Wikipedians), I've been collaboratively working on a now 24-option guide about how to access sources when you don't have access to them. The folks at WP:RX are pros at this kind of digging. Could you give it 10 minutes and feel free to make comments, suggestions, corrections, or additions? Don't hesitate to be bold :)

You're a Researcher without Access to Research: What do you do?

Thank you!

Jake Orlowitz Ocaasi (WMF) (talk) 18:47, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Category:Information storage has been nominated for discussion

Category:Information storage, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:32, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Appreciate the heads up. SEMMENDINGER (talk) 00:45, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frontiers in... journal series

There's a discussion about whether or not the controversial Frontiers in... open access journal series should have an article on Wikipedia. While not directly related to Libaries, I figure many librarians lurk around this page, and your feedback would be welcomed. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:06, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the link, I've commented. SEMMENDINGER (talk) 17:47, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from ""
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia :
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Libraries"; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA