Talk:library
I have completely rewritten the definitions.
Essentially a library can mean one of two things:
- an institution which holds books and such for use by members, but is not defined by its premises, in the same way that a university or church can continue to exist regadless of its premises
- a collection. with no members and no services.
The original description was in some ways too restrictive (it would exclude a mobile library housed in a van), and in others too inclusive (it would include a mere book repository). Pol098 03:05, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
What about repositories of books within an institution?[edit]
Pol098's definition of a library doesn't appear to cover small libraries devoted to storing books (a repository of books) within an institution. This would not necessarily be an independent institution; often it might be a resource within an institution. For instance, a parliament might have a "parliamentary library". Similarly, a school library doesn't fit the definition very well since it might occupy only a single room within a school and could hardly be characterised as an "independent institution". The closest that the entry for "library" comes to this sense appears to be 5. A room dedicated to storing books, but this also seems inappropriate.
This problem was brought home to me when I looked at the Japanese translations, which lacked the term 図書室 ('library room'). 図書室 are common in Japan but would never be called 図書館 ('library building'), which tends to refer to a stand-alone institution. I am sure that the English term 'library' can also be applied to this kind of small library that exists within a larger institution.
Bathrobe (talk) 00:47, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).
Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.
Is this a universal terms used in all CCGs? ばかFumiko￥talk 03:38, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
cited Kiwima (talk) 23:09, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
- Of the four citations currently in the entry, two (the two from 2010) are mentions, so we still need one more citation to keep the entry. —Granger (talk · contribs) 23:13, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
- To quote from the Criteria for inclusion: "This filters out appearance in raw word lists, commentary on the form of a word, such as “The word ‘foo’ has three letters,” lone definitions, and made-up examples of how a word might be used. For example, an appearance in someone’s online dictionary is suggestive, but it does not show the word actually used to convey meaning. On the other hand, a sentence like “They raised the jib (a small sail forward of the mainsail) in order to get the most out of the light wind,” appearing in an account of a sailboat race, would be fine." By this statement, I would consider those mentions as supportive of the use. However, if it makes you happy, I have added another quote that is not at all mention-y. Kiwima (talk) 01:54, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
- The new quote looks good to me, thanks. —Granger (talk · contribs) 11:54, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
- To quote from the Criteria for inclusion: "This filters out appearance in raw word lists, commentary on the form of a word, such as “The word ‘foo’ has three letters,” lone definitions, and made-up examples of how a word might be used. For example, an appearance in someone’s online dictionary is suggestive, but it does not show the word actually used to convey meaning. On the other hand, a sentence like “They raised the jib (a small sail forward of the mainsail) in order to get the most out of the light wind,” appearing in an account of a sailboat race, would be fine." By this statement, I would consider those mentions as supportive of the use. However, if it makes you happy, I have added another quote that is not at all mention-y. Kiwima (talk) 01:54, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
- RFV passed. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:47, 11 May 2017 (UTC)