Talk:Library catalog

message: Hello, I don't know much about catalogs and cataloguing, but in the course of doing research for the article Gottfried van Swieten, I encountered the claim that he implemented the first card catalog in 1780, as part of his job as director of the Austrian Imperial Library in Vienna.  (The source I used was the web site of the Austrian National Library, the modern successor to the Imperial Library.) 
The claim that van Swieten's catalog was the first contradicts the view given in this article, which says that the card catalogs first appeared in the early 19th century in France.  The source for this is an article in Library Quarterly from the 1950's by Ruth Stout.  (Note:  my own source says that the French were inspired by van Swieten's work.)
Is there anyone out there who has some expertise on this topic and might be able to resolve this contradiction?
Thanks very much, Opus33 (talk) 00:09, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Origin of the card catalog:  expertise sought

message: Few would disagree that library catalogues are necessary to use a library for research. The researchers' (or my) normal procedure was to find an article bound deep in the library, and either read it or skim it while standing, looking for an earlier reference to an idea. Obscure journals required trips to the card catalog to locate these & check the library's coverage. Consequently, the use of laptops to access an electronic card catalog from the 'stacks' was revolutionary.
UC Davis, in California, excels in botany & agronomy. However, today I have found it denies electronic access to its card catalog from independent scholars, like me, including access from outside the campus - even to see whether the library carries an obscure book or journal. [See correction at end.] Is this new restriction unique to this school?
Once paper card catalogs are replaced, it follows that research will be restricted to academics and other professionals. It has only been since WWII that the 'professional scientist' has existed; so this rapid restriction of research libraries to professionals (which excludes we debilitated citizens of California) is revolutionary, and would appear to demand a section here on the access of library catalogs. 'Science', in some people's definition, had always required the free exchange of information: its publication in vastly expensive journals was permitted only because they were freely available in libraries. Consequently, such a seemingly small thing as restricting library catalogs has dramatic repercussions. If UCD is not unique, this deserves mention.
Has any librarian been following the restriction of public library use?
Geologist (talk) 01:07, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Changing Access to Public, Research Library Catalogs

message: * http://www.bl.uk/bibliographic/catstandards.html
--222.67.216.199 (talk) 05:17, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Standards about LA.... 

message: Am I missing something or should the "not" be removed in "The card catalog was not a familiar sight to library users for generations"?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.227.155.24 (talk) 06:44, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mistake? 

message: The following two edits vandalised this page:
* this one deleted an entire section ("Types")
* this one introduced random line breaks at different columns in different parts of the text in a way I can only see as intentionally vandalistic. I don't think any other changes were introduced.
These edits are separated in time and from very different IPs so I do not think there was conspiracy between them.
I have corrected these as best I can. Please be on the lookout for such vandalism in the future; it would have been much easier to fix if caught before other substantive changes were made.
Thanks,
--MegaSloth (talk) 22:19, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two cases of vandalism unspotted on this page 

message: In the "History" section I think the broken link "British National Bibliography" is supposed to be British National Library. Does anyone know? Seiberth (talk) 04:41, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broken link "British National Bibliography" 

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: here. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Diannaa (talk) 02:16, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Library catalog. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160105001313/http://www.librarytechnology.org/lwc-ils-marketshare.pl?SID=20120527624877929 to http://www.librarytechnology.org/lwc-ils-marketshare.pl?SID=20120527624877929
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160305001930/http://www.allegro-c.de/formate/gz-1e.htm to http://www.allegro-c.de/formate/gz-1e.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:50, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Library catalog. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150402143649/http://polaris.gseis.ucla.edu/gleazer/296_readings/Strout.pdf to http://polaris.gseis.ucla.edu/gleazer/296_readings/Strout.pdf
*Added  tag to http://desidoc.drdo.gov.in/ojs/index.php/djlit/article/viewFile/3679/2091
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:52, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Library catalog. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150716192234/http://access.rdatoolkit.org/ to http://access.rdatoolkit.org/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:07, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This story has a pic of a three-story card catalog at the Library of Congress, in 1919. I think that should be out of copyright, and should be able to be used in this article? -- Beland (talk) 19:08, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The picture is available on Wikimedia Commons at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Library_of_Congress._Card_Division._General_view_LCCN2005681082.jpg However, I'm reluctant to add more pictures of card catalogues, no matter how handsome! This article needs screenshots of computerised library catalogues. There are two from the 1990s at Dynix (software) and it would be good to have some more recent software on show as well. Addedentry (talk) 21:05, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Impressive pic 

message: When Wikipedia was founded, the term ‘Card catalog’ was still synonymous with ‘Library catalog’ in many (most?) parts of the world.
Today, now that most libraries use electronic catalogs as a primary form of organization, should a separate article be started at Card catalog to cover both historical library use as well both current and historical use of card catalogs in non-library settings?
Benefits:
* This would allow further detail about physical card catalog systems (history, evolution, and, e.g., their relation to traditional Unit record systems), without cluttering this Library catalog article. 
* The article at Library catalog could then have a smaller mention of physical card catalogs with that section pointing to this new article for detailed coverage.
Note: Please discuss at  to avoid duplication
— Jim Grisham (talk) 01:39, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spin off some of the physical card catalog content into separate article? 

message: What is a catalog 120.28.194.137 (talk) 09:22, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  English