Talk:Library

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Books Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate, you can edit the article. You can discuss the Project at its talk page.

This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at in the comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

	This article is part of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of education and education-related topics. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to featured and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.
Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

Library is included in the 2007 Wikipedia for Schools, or is a candidate for inclusion in future versions. Please maintain high quality standards, and make an extra effort to include free images, because non-free images cannot be used on the CDs.

If you have access to this resource, or if you need to verify a citation from this reference, check out WikiProject Resource Exchange. You can discuss the Project at its talk page.

[edit] Cybrary

Chipbruce added an empty link to cybraries (should be cybrary) in the See Also section. Is this the same as a digital library? If no-one responds here, I'll go ask him... AdamRetchless 15:25, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)

As far as I am aware it is just another term for one, so yes. ACK-OA Alkoholicks 06:15, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] location?

Libraries can also be found in churches, prisons, hotels etc. Should there be any mention of this? --Daniel C. Boyer 20:38, 10 Nov 2003 (UTC) Libraries can be found in many places, and articles should be written and linked. A wiki article on libraries can never be more of a summary, and will always be expandable--DGG 04:18, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Library Instruction

"Many persons do not know how to use a library effectively." and some others struggle with expressing themselves effectively? I thought in principle this kind of slightly paternalistic remark on the general population wasn't allowed? BozMo (talk)

Library instruction is an important subtopic and this introduction is fine for describing the status quo. It didn't announce that BozMo doesn't know how to use a library (now, everybody stare at BozMo!). :) It just implies to the reader that that if they feel intimidated or inadequate when looking for information a library, there is a significant but undetermined percentage of the population that also feels this way, and reassures them that there is help available. GUllman 17:31, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Then please at least change the wording to "Many people...". As an attention seeker :) I suggest that now I know these two sentences are supposed to act as an invitation you word them more positively, rather than starting with an insult...say "It is much easier for the many people who find libraries bewildering or find it difficult to use them effectively to get assistance now that Library instruction is much more available ?BozMo (talk)

There's more positive ways of doing this, remembering that even the most experienced library user or librarian will be puzzled in an unfamiliar setting. A collection of UN documents, to pick a random example, needs a specialist. (Just as a librarian does not say: "You don't know how to use this library. I'll show you. "--what one does say depends on the circumstances, and is relatively hard to teach. e.g. in a chemistry library I might start with something iike "This place is a little peculiar--I'll help you get started." ) I will try to reword, and at least start a stub for "Library instruction." DGG 04:28, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

But before I do, I confirm about the consensus wording:

Library instruction (a/c Google, the most used term)

rather then

Library user instruction
User instruction in libraries (too wordy?)
User instruction (obviously too general) DGG 04:28, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

There's a related topic: Library literacy, usually used for relatively basic instruction. Probably it does not merit a separate article.

There's a related article already: Information literacy. To my understanding this is differentiated by being much more general DGG 04:18, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Wash your hands before handling a book? This is a matter of Arabic or Muslim law. Their libraries were raided to a great extent by the crusades. You should honor the requirement to wash your hands. Gnostics 02:26, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Improvements to the article

These are just some thoughts about how the article could be improved. I don't have time at the moment to make the changes, but wanted to get my thoughts down for the future.

Although the article makes mention lending libraries it does not describe what they are, how they operate. Currently no mention of mobile libraries. Maybe expand a bit on reference libraries. Contrast reference libraries with lending libraries. -- Popsracer 12:53, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I've begun this, and will add detail.DGG 04:18, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Why start out this article with, I"n the traditional....." regarding the historical definition of a library (which in this day and age is NOT just a repository for books and periodicals? I like the second sentence MUCH better and this is what a library is about in the current day and age. Why perpetuate any stereotypes. - Anonymous comment added by 208.42.90.99

Because the stereotype has already become so pervasive and widespread that we have to help them "unlearn" the myth before they can learn. We are not writing this article for those who already know about libraries (what's the use of that?); it's to teach those who don't know. Let's start off slow, so as not to overwhelm them with a long, all-inclusive one sentence definition. GUllman 22:10, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I'd changed it to the one suggested by the anonymous comment, but on balance I agree with GUllman. If nobody has a better, I'll change it back in a day or two. DGG 01:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

And starting off an informational article with a stereotype is really going to help? Ack! I can see America's youth taking the first sentence of this article and using that for their report on libraries. Sorry. bit sensitive. Can you tell I am one of those stereotypical librarians!?!?!? :^)

[edit] History of Libraries

More needs to be done about the history of the Islamic libraries and their role in introducing knowledge into Europe and their being a primary engine of the Renaissance. In the Interim I cleaned up the factually incorrect information about the libraries of the Islamic world only lasting a few centuries. It's just not true, and further, the depredations of the Mongols only affected libraries in Mesopotamia and even then not completely. For example, until the recent Iraq war, the National library in Baghdad still contained texts from the ancient and medieval period, including one of the world's great stores of medieval Torahs and Judaic texts.

In addition, I wasn't crazy about the wording relative to the medieval texts and chainig. The wording needed and still needs help. I added the explanation that the books of the pre-Gutenberg era were still manuscript in form which both explains how books were treated and how they were housed. The transformation wrought on libraries by the printing press was considerable and could be clarified further.

--Jack Bryar 9/10/05

I am interested in the history of libraries and particularly in which was the first public lending library. Two pieces of information relevant to this question are given in the article - specifically the St. Phillips Church library, South Carolina, est. 1698 and St. Mary's Church Library, England, est. 1701. I am interested in confirming this information but after doing a quick search on google for the St. Phillips library all I could find was mirrors of this article.

I have provided some more information I collected on the first public library with establishment dates before those of the libraries given in this article. I am also having some trouble getting good solid confirmation of these claims so I did not make the text sound too authoratitive. However, user RickK saw fit to mark the newly created article for deletion. He also reverted the edit I did to public library which provided a link to that article.

I welcome discussion here on information concerning the history of libraries and whether readers agree that the topic is an important one and should have it's own article.

I think the history of libraries is a significant and rich topic and information we already have should be collected and organised into one separate article. I now think the first public library article I created has too narrow an article title and the information should be merged into a general history of libraries page. This article would also include information on eclesiastical libraries, classical libraries (Alexandria), Muslim libraries, Eastern libraries etc. etc. Because this article could be potentially so rich in information I do not think it wise to simply make it a section under this article

-- Oska 12:24, Jul 15, 2004 (UTC)

I would suggest making a one-paragraph synopsis of library history for this article, then link to a history of libraries that goes into more depth, with sections on the first public lending library and so forth. In practice, it works better to develop content "breadth-first" rather than "depth-first" - create the overviews first, then elaborate on specific topics in the overview, instead of plunging directly into great detail on a narrow topic. It would be good to visit the library :-) and look for printed works - as you notice, the net is often lacking in real content. Stan 16:41, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Perhaps it might be best to start with periods, eg History of libraries: medieval libraries , both because this i the way the material is usually organized, and because this is probably the way our individual knowledge would divide itself.

The subject of non-Western European cultures and their libraries needs specialists if it is not to be trivial--I am not one, but if any are, let them say so, and write something. DGG 04:18, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I've been in large academic and public library systems for 30+ years in the U.S. and I've added bits here and there in this general article to fill gaps in coverage that reflect my own experience. I'd like to encourage other librarians of all flavors to do the same -- especially those experienced in special libraries and children's collections. --Michael K. Smith 21:37, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Google Scholar?

What about adding a little thing about Google's initiative to create a digital library (Google Scholar)? Stale Fries

As I understand, the article is about ordinary libraries, no info about things like Gutenberg etc. Perhaps your link is suitable in the following article: Digital library. Cmapm 00:54, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

I agree that Digital library would be a better place. I think the correct link would be to Google Books (also known as Google Print and Google Print Library). Google Scholar is a search engine of scholarly literature on the web and in subscription bibliographic databases, not Google's own collection. Rlitwin 01:30, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

== A Thought ==-- Just wondered if it might be too controversial to mention that many educated Romans burned their own libraries in early Christian times, for fear of Christian reprisals against anyone owning non-Christian texts (Gibbon had a good line on this if I remember) Springald 19:37, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it's controversial. On the other hand, is it something solid? Gibbon was one of the early historians of the empire. Since he wrote about it in the 18th century many ancient texts have been re-discovered and archeology became an exact Science. Put it in if you have something more recent to back it up. --AlainV 03:38, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Crisis in libraries

Would there be a way to highlight the crisis caused by the loss of our libraries without it being considered a rant?

The problem with the text in this article as it stands is that it could be read as "defeatist" and that libraries are no longer affordable. The description of libraries as "expensive" is also a matter of opinion.

Sadly America is being seen in Europe and other parts of the world as culturally destructive because of the replacement of the sciences by fundamental religious theories and the reduced government investment in culture, education and literacy. This reduces the aspirations of the young and future generations.

In the UK cynical politicians are using Google as an excuse for reducing library funding. This is not something that its creators would personally condone. I would hate to see the bad example introduced in California to be repeated anywhere else in the world. What the local government saves on books it will have to spend on police.

Large research libraries _are_ expensive, and so is Google. They're just paid or a little differently :) The various parts of Google that are relevant here might need individual articles, and they mostly have them. I am not sure they all reflect a true NPOV: rather than saying some like it and some don;t, there are specific good

points and also less-good portions. Although it changes rapidly, so can our articles.

I admit to being totally ignorant about public library funding and relatd problems. They need special articles perhaps, with moreexamples than just one public library campaign. DGG 04:18, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I just replaced my own earlier link to a newspaper article about Jackson County libraries with a newer one that speaks more to the general issue of library funding, as does a new link to the library foundation. That doesn't help with the worldwide perspective, but at least it's a pretty good example of several aspects the general funding issue in the US. I don't really expect all the libraries to close--many non-government actors are looking into solutions.Ashlandgeek 16:44, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

The 15 libraries really will close this coming month (April 2007). Hopefully we won't earn the ignomy of being the first public library system in the US to close. Anybody know of another? They will eventually reopen when funding is restored, both congressional intervention and a local bond are being attempted. Ashlandgeek 03:25, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of link under the heading USA Library Campaigns

The link that was removed by Yinon was NOT spam. It is entirely relevant under the heading. It was to the FOSPL (The Friends of the Salinas Public Library). Please restore it.

[edit] desucetioning?

I am going to assume good faith here but that word doesn't show up in the OED. Would you care to define it for us? Otherwise I may have to revert. Nowimnthing 18:53, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Corrected someone's misspelling. Rlitwin 22:20, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok deaccessioning, but it seems that has more to do with museums, esp art museums. I've never heard in used in libraries. We use the term 'weeding'. Anybody else have any exp. of this term in libraries? Nowimnthing 01:04, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

I think of weeding as the informal term and deaccessioning as the formal term. I have certainly heard it used about libraries. Google deaccessioning library and you will find a lot. But I agree it needs another person to confirm. Rlitwin 01:52, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Usually, it is said a librarian "weeds" the collection by looking through the books on the shelf and removing those that are no longer appropriate (due to outdated content or physical condition). The books are then given to a library clerk who "deaccessions" them (essentially the reverse of the acquisition process), which includes deleting the record from the catalog, removing any security features, and stamping the word "discarded" in the book. GUllman 06:06, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, "deaccessioning" is standard, although it does have some air of being a euphemism for "discarding." "Weeding" is a common metaphor used by library workers, and merits a REFER:

The description above gives the standard steps only for books. There's more to be said about other media, and many special topics that perhaps warrant articles of their own, such as replacement of print by electronic versions, if a good article heading can be found. DGG 04:18, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vancouver

Request Vancouver Central Library be included in section about libraries notable for their architecture, as the Seattle library has been.

[edit] criteria

What counts as a "famous" library? There are, for example, other famous libraries at Harvard in addition to the Widener, such as the Houghton. DGG 03:49, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

==category? This page and its subpages are isolated from a/ publishing b/ publications c/ education d/ educational organizations or anything else I'm not sure where it should go. Can it go in more than one? Please excuse me if I bring up overdiscussed topics. But I'm quite new here, and in trying to find my way around I notice dead ends and the like. DGG 03:54, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "added date"

As someone not in the UK, I find it helpful if dates are added for the outside links and references to events recently taken place there. The same is probably true in the other direction. I added the date to the latest to indicate what I have in mind, bt there are others. Is there a policy?DGG 00:30, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ctiteria

I ask again what counts as a "famous" library? Perhaps any library known outside it's city, state, or region, or outside it's university, especially if it has a distinctive name. I'd not want to delete one that anyone has included, so that should limit this list to, perhaps, 500?, 1000?DGG 03:52, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] chained books

Illustration title is very misleading. All "ancient manuscripts" (by "ancient" I think is meant "medieval") are kept in secure conditions today. We can do better than chains now, but the need is the same. I have deleted that sentence. Feel free to put in an accurate one. DGG 23:11, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unecessary external links

The following links seemed too specific (and too advocacy oriented) for such a broad article as "Library." Links to library charities in the UK may not be needed anywhere on Wikipedia, but certainly they would have to be moved to a daughter article, if at all. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 02:56, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Savidan, do you think it better that there be a page on Public support for libraries, or that they be moved to the Public Library page? Unless there's another opinion, perhaps you could go ahead and do either one. DGG 03:17, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

I am hesitant to create a stub just for the inclusion of external links. However, unless we plan to include a similar number of links of public library charities in the other 200 something countries, I fell that these links would be ill-advised. Perhaps in an article on UK or US public libraries, respectively. I can't guarantee that others won't still find these inappropriate, but it would certainly be an improvement over this article. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 22:32, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Since there is a public library page, thought not yet a good one, I'm moving them there--it deals with both UK & USDGG 04:42, 22 October 2006 (UTC)→→

[edit] UK library charities

[edit] UK library support campaigns

[edit] USA library support campaigns

[edit] Ashurbanipal's library at Nineveh.

I know this was definitely before classical Greece, so I am considering putting it in as the earliest known library. Do we know of any earlier ones?--Rob117 18:57, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Library crime

This section has a disproportionate amount of detail. I propose moving it to a new article (unless someone can suggest an appropriate one already started, and put a link here in its place)DGG 04:26, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

The "library crime" section is plain silly. It has vague generalizations, supported by an isolated example of someone jacking off at a library. Is there any reason to not delete it? I can't think of one. Michael Voytinsky 17:55, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Be WP:BOLD.DGG

The "library crime" section is a disjointed " opinion piece " written with a political slant against library privacy, and advocating greater state monitoring of library activities. It belongs in a blog, not an encyclopedia. I have tried deleting it, but have been thwarted in my efforts in doing so. Any assistance in either deleting the section, moving it, or creating a sensible article involving the relationship between libraries and law enforcement would be appreciated. MadScientist40 18:18, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] content and proportion

This is the general article about libraries.

The section talked about the specific issues of several types of activity. The major topic was child molestation in public libraries, another was the release of national-security information. Theft, harassment of staff, harassment of patrons, general disorderly conduct and other crimes large & small occur in libraries, as they do everywhere else. This material did not discuss any of the issues in general, but rather a few very specific miscellaneous allegations of unspecified abuse, of homicides that have not yet taken place, and of the apparently major crime of masturbation, for which one specific instance was cited.

There is no article on library service to children (or at least I couldn't find one). There should be one. Their security might be a suitable topic there, but it would still need to be written with some degree of general discussion. Any specific notable crimes should get articles of their own, as is WP practice. Child molestation is a general problem, and there are articles on it, but i think that the random details given might be out of place even there.

National security and library confidentiality is another good topic. There is no article I could find, and there certainly should be. A NPOV summary would be appropriate here because it is of general interest. It might be hard to do NPOV, because the traditional ethical principles of the library profession are in start contradiction to current US legislation, and the question of the correct policy is therefore highly controversial.

There seem to have been some non-sequitors: How the increase in the use of the internet has resulted in more crime in physical facilities seems a little puzzling--it would seem & I think is more likely to increase crime and risks to children located elsewhere, over the internet. An important topic, but not library-related, except in relation to the role of librarians in teaching children the safe use of the internet, & that should go under library instruction or information literacy. And school libraries, and we do have an article on that.

WP:POINT. The insertion of this material is not consistent with the generality of the article, so inserting it could be seen as POV pushing. Removing it had the support of at least 2 editors. Deleting it by a single editor, without consensus, and without an attempt to obtain consensus, would seem to be disruption.

The discussion of how to handle theses subjects should be on the specific article pages. Perhaps the editor would like to prepare a more general paragraph suitable here, and then the further discussion could be discussed on this talk page. DGG 00:00, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Widener library

The Harold B. Lee Library is significantly larger than the Widener library, making claims that this library is the largest academic library in the world highly doubtful. The Jade Knight 17:15, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I have adjusted the wording here, at Widener, and at Lee so it is correct, making the distinction between single building and total collection.DGG 01:44, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] stats in general

But measuring total collection is 'not straightforward--the figure given for Harvard is volumes, for BYU is items. I said so without going into the difference.

But the information truly resides in the ARL stats, which are a morass of incompatibility, footnotes, poor & incomplete reporting, and year to year variation in the definitions used.

- I think an excerpt is permissible--this part at the moment is university libraries only--there are a few others to add; I think it might best go in a separate article: library statistics, not here--but at least I got the table in to work with.

Ranked Lists for Institutions for 2005

STANFORD reported 7.0 million in 1998/99, the last year it provided data.


Rank	Institution name	Volumes In Library
1	HARVARD	15,555,533
2	YALE	12,025,695
3	ILLINOIS, URBANA	10,370,777
4	TORONTO	10,342,574
5	CALIF., BERKELEY	9,985,905
6	COLUMBIA	9,277,042
7	TEXAS	8,937,002
8	MICHIGAN	8,133,917
9	CALIF., LOS ANGELES	8,064,896
10	WISCONSIN	7,911,834
11	CORNELL	7,644,371
12	CHICAGO	7,363,549
13	INDIANA	7,241,929
14	WASHINGTON	6,639,850
15	MINNESOTA	6,587,430
16	PRINCETON	6,495,597
17	ALBERTA	6,190,396
18	OHIO STATE	5,936,434
19	PENNSYLVANIA	5,760,065
20	NORTH CAROLINA	5,710,686
21	DUKE	5,560,966
22	BRITISH COLUMBIA	5,523,194
23	ARIZONA	5,340,726
24	VIRGINIA	5,053,162
25	PENNSYLVANIA STATE	5,031,196
26	NEW YORK	4,939,724
27	MICHIGAN STATE	4,830,861
28	OKLAHOMA	4,796,089
29	PITTSBURGH	4,786,175
30	NORTHWESTERN	4,603,824
31	IOWA	4,551,217
32	GEORGIA	4,179,316
33	RUTGERS	4,169,347
34	ARIZONA STATE	4,156,732
35	FLORIDA	4,137,528
36	KANSAS	4,121,573
37	SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA	3,921,704
38	WASHINGTON U.-ST. LOUIS	3,694,504
39	JOHNS HOPKINS	3,648,821
40	BRIGHAM YOUNG	3,621,577
41	MCGILL	3,568,651
42	ROCHESTER	3,564,683
43	COLORADO	3,554,826
44	NORTH CAROLINA STATE	3,530,949
45	BROWN	3,509,710
46	CALIF., DAVIS	3,490,356
47	SOUTH CAROLINA	3,478,256
48	TEXAS A&M	3,437,376
49	HAWAII	3,410,468
50	LOUISIANA STATE	3,406,434
51	SUNY-BUFFALO	3,390,583
52	WAYNE STATE	3,383,826
53	KENTUCKY	3,286,731
54	MARYLAND	3,259,600
55	MISSOURI	3,249,783
56	CONNECTICUT	3,247,976
57	UTAH	3,230,854
57	median	3,230,854
59	MASSACHUSETTS	3,204,025
60	NOTRE DAME	3,185,926
61	SYRACUSE	3,161,529
62	CALIF., SAN DIEGO	3,149,836
63	CINCINNATI	3,123,318
64	EMORY	3,107,525
65	WESTERN ONTARIO	3,085,319
66	MONTREAL	3,057,166
67	VANDERBILT	3,056,707
68	TEMPLE	3,016,007
69	SOUTHERN ILLINOIS	2,999,736
70	TENNESSEE	2,971,837
71	NEBRASKA	2,942,946
72	AUBURN	2,918,859
73	FLORIDA STATE	2,889,810
74	CALIF., SANTA BARBARA	2,837,752
75	MIT	2,782,406
76	LAVAL	2,731,341
77	KENT STATE	2,715,986
78	DELAWARE	2,667,242
79	NEW MEXICO	2,666,970
80	OREGON	2,643,035
81	OKLAHOMA STATE	2,624,680
82	OHIO	2,599,791
83	MIAMI	2,571,045
84	ALABAMA	2,518,290
85	YORK	2,489,193
86	PURDUE	2,475,242
87	DARTMOUTH	2,474,288
88	GEORGETOWN	2,473,208
89	CASE WESTERN RESERVE	2,471,504
90	TEXAS TECH	2,465,796
91	IOWA STATE	2,444,263
92	CALIF., IRVINE	2,439,525
93	RICE	2,437,177
94	QUEEN'S	2,437,168
95	BOSTON	2,427,253
96	GEORGIA TECH	2,410,964
97	TULANE	2,403,728
98	HOWARD	2,388,073
99	CALIF., RIVERSIDE	2,368,843
100	HOUSTON	2,357,009
101	ILLINOIS, CHICAGO	2,284,649
102	WASHINGTON STATE	2,256,229
103	VIRGINIA TECH	2,237,106
104	SUNY-STONY BROOK	2,216,589
105	GEORGE WASHINGTON	2,167,871
106	MANITOBA	2,158,148
107	BOSTON COLLEGE	2,124,242
108	SUNY-ALBANY	2,094,048
109	COLORADO STATE	2,026,508
110	LOUISVILLE	2,015,752
111	WATERLOO	2,006,887
112	MCMASTER	1,990,867
113	SASKATCHEWAN	1,976,606
114	GUELPH	1,559,078

</body> </html> DGG 01:44, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] British libraries legislation

Reading through an old book (first decades 20th century) in a reference library I found a sticker referring to an act of the time of Queen Victoria to the effect that anyone found defacing books or any other objects belonging to a library faced a 6 months' prison sentence, "with or without hard labour" and other punishments. When was this act repealed? Jackiespeel 19:05, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tribal Libraries?

seems like patent nonsense to me. VanTucky 06:46, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

No one seems to be responding here with an affirmation of the category. So I'll delete it. VanTucky 02:03, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Online Libraries

It seems ironic that online publications are given so little creedence by the online encyclopedia that is Wikipedia. It's not just online publications either. Online religions like Matrixism that have been well documented are still without articles on Wikipedia. This is very arbitrary and hypocritical. 24.20.252.74 07:11, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

If there are reliable sources for Matrixism, by all means write an article to right a wrong. John Vandenberg 07:27, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

There is an article on Matrixism that is annotated using reliable sources here [[1]]. 66.212.78.89 22:34, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Is this what the "librarians" are trying to "hide"? 206.188.56.24 22:47, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] First lending library

The first modern public lending library was created by Benjamin Franklin. Will someone please find sources for this, expand it, then add it to the article? Thanks. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 03:58, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Internet and catalog databases

"The emergence of the Internet, however, has led to the adoption of electronic catalog databases ..." -- Is this really true? I think the catalog databases were first used in local networks and have later been connected to the Internet --84.172.163.216 00:12, 1 August 2007 (UTC) Can some one explain the diffeerence bitween library and net in giving information

[edit] Moved Funding

I moved the section on public library funding to the public library page. This page should be about libraries in general and the funding issue was only about public funding. --Tinned Elk 22:04, 11 September 2007 (UTC)