Talk:Library classification

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Library classification article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Libraries Top‑importance

	This article 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.LibrariesWikipedia:WikiProject LibrariesTemplate:WikiProject LibrariesLibraries
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook

Why no mention of Swedish library classification system

I noticed that neither this article nor the "Dewey Decimal Classification" article mentions Swedish library classification system even though it has an article in English Wikipedia? I wonder if it should not be included, specially since one of the biggest libraries in the world still uses that system in the old parts. (In the really old parts the system was quite mixed and not systematic, stage two Swedish library classification system, stage three on closed shelves acquisition order, stage four Dewey, some parts retroactive but the main library only new acquisitions.)Seniorsag (talk) 15:26, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like this was added as an example of a National scheme at some point. I've added it to the list of Non-English systems. Smiltz (talk) 17:23, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BISAC?

The Dewey article mentions some libraries have switched to Book Industry Standards and Communications (BISAC) which isn’t listed. Is this system common enough to merit inclusion here? The lulu.com blog (unable to link due to Wikipedia blacklist) makes a bold claim that “All legitimate booksellers use BISAC to filter their categories and organize books.” blog.lulu.com/bisac-what-it-is-and-why-it-matters/ Less hyperbolically, is included as a taxonomy “commonly used in bookstores” on the Society of American Archivists website: https://www2.archivists.org/groups/standards-committee/book-industry-standards-and-communications-bisac saritonin (talk) 20:38, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The SAA website is reliable, but these sources might add to this, and I believe most, if not all, of these are reliable:

Historyday01 (talk) 04:21, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I added a link to the BISAC article, which discusses the adoption in libraries a bit. Included a brief explanation, but it may merit further discussion. Smiltz (talk) 17:58, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Literacy and Inclusion

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 January 2024 and 8 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Smiltz (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Smiltz (talk) 18:53, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]