Talk:Widener Library

message: For the record, since a sharp-eyed GA reviewer asked about it, and someone's bound to ask again: While tumblr blogs are not normally considered reliable sources,  this one  is an official blog of Widener Library, as described at  (and note that this last link is to the official hcl.harvard.edu site, hcl being "Harvard College Library"):
::[Widener's] librarians started a Tumblr blog, named "Sprinkler Valve Through Door," to act as a window into the collections, spaces and services of Widener. "I'm hoping people familiar with the stacks get the title immediately and laugh," said Manager of Reference and Information Services Reed Lowrie, one of the blog's creators...
So it's an RS, IMHO. Any disagreement on that? EEng (talk) 08:03, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: An official blog?! Laughing my socks off. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:02, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tumblr, "Sprinkler Valve Through Door" 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Widener Library. 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  tag to http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/1998/02.26/SpeakingVolumes.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120705142839/http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/1998/06.04/CountingLibrari.html to http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/1998/06.04/CountingLibrari.html
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) 05:27, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Regarding this revert: , I didn't understand the part of your edit summary that said "I PGA e". I'm curious why you feel it's necessary to make a leftward-pointing arrow in this comment, when there's nothing to the right that the comment might be confused with? As I mentioned in my edit summary, this causes this comment to show up on a project-wide report as malformed HTML (which is also what it looked like to me when I first saw it). -- Beland (talk) 16:11, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: A comment is a comment, not code. Someone might even use a comment to exemplify some incorrect code, and you should not correct that. Whatever's in a comment should be left alone. No elaborate code change should be necessary to ignore whatever's in comments. EEng 17:09, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Sometimes the contents of comments get reincorporated into live wikitext, so I think it's wise to repair spelling and syntax errors in them. I still don't understand what these two angle brackets are adding to this comment that makes them worth keeping? -- Beland (talk) 17:36, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: They're worth keeping because an editor actually involved in the article (me) wants to emphasize that the comment applies to the thing to the left of the comment. Maybe it's a minor point, but there it is, and it definitely outweighs your desire to keep your report clean. And anyway, your technology should have a way for you to accumulate a "false positives" list so that future runs will ignore things already examined.Beland, I know you mean well and it's good that you're linting these little errors, but leave comments alone. Period. If someone un-comments something we'll just have to deal with it at that time. Some languages have a facility, distinct from "commenting out", to disable code (e.g. if (true == false) { ..}) and if we had such a facility there'd be no problem with your fixing the code in those braces, but we don't and comments are off limits.  EEng 19:27, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I have replaced the << with a ←, which does a better job emphasizing the comment applies to the content on the left, and does not look like a broken HTML tag. -- Beland (talk) 22:41, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: That's very kind. But I'm not going to go find that character the next time I want to "point left" or "point right". Please take to heart what I've said about leaving comments alone. EEng 00:09, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Your opinion on leaving comments alone does not align with my interpretation of WP:OWN, but since it's not at issue any longer, I don't see any point in discussing it. Feel free to write comments in the most natural way for you. -- Beland (talk) 00:15, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert of angle brackets in comment 

message: This article seems to contain a ton of quotations from various sources, some of which don't seem particularly relevant to describing Widener Library as an entity. The first sentence contains a direct quote to a 1998 article in which the library was described as having "vast and cavernous" stacks. That's neat, but I'm not sure why the opinion of one Harvard Magazine editor needs to be included in the main description of the library. Ditto for the quote about a sandwich and a whistle in the next paragraph, which is drawn from the opinion of the author's daughter in a collection of essays.
Thing is, the quotes are all well sourced - a lot of them just seem superfluous, and their presence strikes me as giving the impression of a WP:NPOV violation, despite probably not actually being one. Just dropping this here mainly to see if anyone else notices this. If not, I'll drop it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kalethan (talk • contribs) 05:59, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excessive quotations? 

message: I don't know a written source so can't add it, but there is a humorous explanation of the Harvard classification system, namely that it is by height of author.Bill (talk) 23:13, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Do tell. EEng 23:32, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Classification system

message: No mention of the well-attested undergraduate legendary tradition about having sex in the stacks at Widener?
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2005/2/10/have-sex-in-the-stacks-put/
https://www.businessinsider.com/harvard-students-have-sex-in-the-library-2013-5
https://www.theunofficialguide.net/articles/the-unofficial-graduation-requirements
https://harvardindependent.com/2016/09/impractical-traditions/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by AvidReader11663 (talk • contribs) 18:13, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's do a little calculation: 6800 Harvard undergrads * 13% claim to have done this (according to one link above) / 4 years to graduate / 365 days in the year / (regular academic year is 8 / 12 months) = 0.9 of such events per day, every day. Sure, yeah, I believe it. Anyway, there certainly is evidence that there's such a legend, but we're going to need a lot more than nudge-nudge wink-wink stuff from the Crimson and Let's Go to take the fact of this as reliable, and after that comes the question of whether it's worth reporting even then. EEng 07:25, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undergraduate traditions