Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by GUllman (talk | contribs) at 18:21, 18 January 2006 (del unconstructive comment, & respond to criticism). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Why would you revert my page back to the old page by Noisy?

I am trying to integrate parts of it into the article. However much of it is not necessary or should be in another article like library. See what I have done now. Rmhermen 21:11, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

Are you a librarian? Your edit is not very good. Who does someone go to to complain about your judgement and editorial merits, or lack of them? I thought this was suppose to be a USER supported service? By what criteria do apply your editorial judgement? I think important information in the Librarian category is missing. A person who is interested in BECOMING a librarian may want to know about the settings of librarians. Over all, a horrible edit. --Mikerussell 21:36, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

That material should go in the library article where in fact it already is. This article is to be a general article with world-wide applicability. Rmhermen 21:52, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

Okay, I see what you have done. I am sorry if I got snotty. --Mikerussell 22:27, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Librarian Re-edits, dispute between Rmhermen and Mikerussell

After some research on my part about the status of adminstrators in Misplaced Pages, I have decided to make several necessary changes to Rmherman's edit. If the dispute goes further, we will have to ask for mediation, or at least I will have to.

1.A librarian is a type of professional who works in a library.

What does that mean? A prostitute who cops Johns in abandoned study carrels? A very poor way to start the article, imprecise and logically circular. Would you start a article about Lawyer like- A lawyer is a type of professional that works in a courthouse.

2.Examples of library information sources:

• Gramophone records and compact discs
• Photographs and videotape
• Newspapers, magazines and scientific journals
• Computer databases
• Online resources''

Is not needed, and lacks informative impact, the article is not written for people who have never been in a library, or have been under a rock or on Mars. Too trivial for inclusion. People understand media formats and what can be found in libraries.

Sure, Misplaced Pages editors hang out in libraries, but people who are using this encyclopedia to learn something may not. Every week, it seems, adults who have finished their education come to my reference desk apologizing that they haven't been in a library for years. And as more and more students use the Internet (especially Misplaced Pages) from home to do their research, they'll never have to step inside a library building unless they absolutely need something published on paper that's not available online. And they often start their question with the phrase, "Excuse me, I need a book ..." not realizing that the best resource is a magazine or newspaper article, a pamphlet, or that there are books on tape. Yes, interrupting this article with bulleted list is an awkward way of listing information formats, but somehow you have to get the point across to most people, who have narrow but deep knowledge in their favorite fields, that only librarians have broad but shallow knowledge in all fields and formats. GUllman 18:00, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

3.Librarians can be found in many areas. Public libraries, public schools, and university libraries are the most common employers. Librarians can also be found in businesses, government departments, hospitals, law firms, museums, and other large organizations where academic research is performed or where large quantities of information are stored.

This is a impercise. What does 'many areas' mean? Compared to the basic classifications listed in my edit, it is unhelpful for readers of Misplaced Pages. Does Rmhermen know what is the basic classification for libraries and librarians? I ask him to provide his source of knowledge on the subject and/or ask that other librarians peer review this dispute. Although you took my edit and sent some of it over to Library, it is not the same information. It makes no sense why the basic breakdown should be left out in favor of a passage which readers could guess at anyway. Misplaced Pages should provide more than just superficial information on a topic.

I have never edited the librarian article. That description of library types was not taken from your edit but has been a part of that article since April 8, 2004. The article on library should describe what a library is. The article on librarian should describe what a librarian is. There is no reason to describe what a library is in detail on this page like you wouldn't describe what a tank is on the page on the Battle of El Alamein. Rmhermen 20:26, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)

4. Library technicians (also called assistant librarians, library assistants, or library paraprofessionals) who most often lack the Master's degree, but may perform duties such as searching for items in the library catalog or basic cataloging.

Library Technicians are not the same thing as library assistants or assistant librarians. Library Technicians requires a specialized training, often a two-year college diploma. Assistant librarians, are librarians who work in a relational capacity to full librarians, or belong to a certain occupational category within the library's overall structure. Library assistants are usually trained in-house and only need a undergraduate degree to get hired and commence on the job training. You mislead people about each occupational category unnecessarily.

5. The inclusion of Headings makes editing and reading easier for Wiki users, why Rmhermen withdrew them is unwarrented and really lacks commonsense. The article reader benefits from the ability to hyperlink in and out of contents on the same page.

6. Added material to make it less focused on American concerns, such as the Censorship and Patriot Act section. Misplaced Pages is world-wide and not just for Americans.

I will defend my choices in the future, and have taken some of Rmhermen's edits to heart. Nevertheless, I hardly think an adminstrator has the editorial perogative to 'dumb-down' an article because he feels certain information is 'not needed'. That stance is contrary to the responsibilty and privilege of being an administrator.

An administrator's job is adminstrative in nature, all editors are equal in their editing. Rmhermen 20:35, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)

--Mikerussell 07:33, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Copyright

I removed this line from public libraries: "and a less rigorous copyright protocol" What does this mean? Are libraries somewhere given different copyright law? Rmhermen 20:53, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)

Absolutely, most public libraries are granted copyright exemptions for educational purposes. Often public libraries sign a general agreement with copyright collectives, such as Access Copyright in Canada, http://www.accesscopyright.ca/ that is significantly different than private firms. Private libraries, such as law libraries, must pay a higher rate to reproduce copyrighted work; in fact, any library that is part of a for profit organization must pay greater attention to copyright law, since compliance is essential for lawful use. Recently in Canada the Law Society of Upper Canada (Ontario's Bar Association) won a Supreme Court case to be able to reproduce copyrighted material for their members. The fact that the law society was not for profit was the reason why the decision was granted. (CCH vs. Law Society of Upper Canada). Since I don't think this is a major point, and the situation may differ, in some sense, in other jurisdictions, I don't regard the deletion as anything worth rewriting for the article. Plus, there is more than just what I mentioned, maybe a Public Librarian can add details, all I know is that there is a categorical difference in law for public libraries regarding copyright.--Mikerussell 04:06, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This is certainly not the case in the U.S. Rmhermen 17:12, Dec 19, 2004 (UTC)

Huh? What authority do you have for saying such a thing? I would simply suggest you investigate this link, which is sponsored by a group of American Libraries for other American Libraries. Library Law: Copyright. Moreover, this article from the ALA website, certainly suggests that there IS a clear distinction in copyright protocols for libraries, public and academic. (It apparently is called the 'LIBRARY EXEMPTION" in the United States.)In the Curl of the Wave: What the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and Term Extension Act Mean for the Library and Education Community. Honestly, I hate to be overly contentious, but what authority do you have to make such a blanket, and misleading, statement? Are you a Librarian, if not maybe you should cease editing the page. --Mikerussell 03:30, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The philosophy of Misplaced Pages is that everyone can edit any page. I understand that many librarians find that lack of "authority" disturbing. No page is limited to editing by a "specialist" in a particular field. If you will read those pages closely, you will see that they apply to libraries and schools and any non-profit organization (like say, Misplaced Pages). There are no special exemptions for libraries in the U.S. And since you asked, in this case, I asked a U.S. librarian. Rmhermen 04:35, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)

Never said libraries were distinct from other non-profit organizations in this matter. However, the article is about libraries, and my point is that some libraries, such as not-for-profit or public libraries, get this exemption. Libraries in businesses do not. You seem to be making a distinction without a difference, and obfuscating my statement in the article and the reason why it was in the article to begin with; namely, that public libraries have "a less rigorous copyright protocol" than other libraries. As far as anyone can edit- of course- again, that's not the point, nor am I suggesting any editor being forcibly prohibited for writing anything. I am simply asking, whether you feel it contributes usefully to the overall quality of Misplaced Pages? My comments are normative. Should anyone contribute to an article where they have little expertise or knowledge? I am certain people will do as they see fit. --Mikerussell 07:19, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Archivists as Librarians

I do not want to sound peevish or enter into the world of professional rivalry, as I am an archivist myself in the UK, but strictly speaking archivists are not "...librarians that deal with archival materials, such as manuscripts, documents and records.". Many librarians, I am sure, do work with archival material but to say that archivists, as a group, are librarians would be to ignore their own often quite separate identity and development. For instance there are, both in the US and UK, as well as countless other countries, separate professional bodies for Librarians and Archivists (See Society of Archivists and Society of American Archivists for examples) and many archive institutions exist completely outside any library or librarian context, especially on the national and corporate scene. Furthermore, although degrees in archive management/science are often situated in schools/departments of Librarianship and Information Science, they are generally separate degrees at postgraduate level, reflecting their different intellectual approaches. I realise that different countries have differences on how archives have developed as a concept but that does not change the situation that archivists and librarians are separate groups, whether as professions or not. They may overlap considerably in both their day-to-day work and workplace, I myself work in a library, but to say that they are one and the same is to ignore their individual differences.

I would go ahead and edit out or change the relevant sentences but I have never edited anyone else’s pages before and I would like to let whoever wrote them to respond beforehand, if they would like to do so. If I do not see any comments to my remarks by the end of January 2005 I will take it as confirmation and go ahead with the changes. --Tryfells 15:43, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I wouldn't say that they are the same any more than I would say corporate librarians were the same as public librarians or computer database specialists were the same as primary school librarians but they are all types of librarians. I beleive in the U.S. (and in Canada?), there are not separate degrees at the post-graduate level for archivists. Although it varies by school, you get a library degree and may get a specialization in archives or a degree with a specialization in public librarianship or computers, etc. Archivists have separate societies but so do school librarians and public librarians, etc. My spouse's master's in library science with specialization in archives is acceptable as a qualification for her job as a public children's librarian. Perhaps this is not so elsewhwere? Rmhermen 17:25, Jan 14, 2005 (UTC)

I have had a look at the training directory of the Society of American Archivists' website (See here) and I have to agree with you for the US, but Canada seems to be more along the lines I set above, with the norm being a 2 year Masters in Archive Management set in either a History or Information management department. I found a great 2002 article on global archive education trends in the UK Society of Archivists' Journal publication (Volume 23, Number 2, 2002) but its not going to be much use to you all here! Here in the UK, its a 1 year Masters, with archivists and librarians not really mixing professionally, though that is starting to change with moves to bring libraries, museums and archives closer together 'strategically'. None the less I would have to say that the situation in the US looks to be more the exception than the rule, but if any others with experience of this outside the UK and US care to comment... Perhaps a solution could be an indication that librarians can often be archivists in some countries, but not in others, rather than the absolute that we have at the moment? --Tryfells 23:42, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

"Patron saint" section

I removed the following text from the page. i do not think this is appropriate in a general articel such as this one. it might be proper in a List of Patron Saints or an article such as Patron Saint. 205.210.232.62 21:22, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

== Patron saints ==

In the US, Saint Jerome is most often considered the patron saint of librarians and translators.

In Western Europe, Saint Lawrence is most often considered the patron saint of librarians.

Among some Orthodox Christians, Saint Catherine of Alexandria is most often considered the saint (patroness) of librarians.

Librarians who censor

The ideal of the librarian can be countered by the librarian as gatekeeper and censor. We have only to look as close as in this medium to see librarians maintaining or moderating Internet forums and mailing list forums. Well intentioned as they are some librarians misuse the editorial privilege for a lack of understanding of the collaborative software. Dissent, debate is squelched when comment is uncomplementary to question the actual practice of enunciated professional principles. The ideal librarian opens the debate, opens the discussion.

Reference desk departments practices at our urban public libraries need to be updated to encourage our public libraries users. Customer services programs need to be better as well as workplace services improved. Dismissive responses lacking in followup for enquirers at reference desk departments should be caught and corrected through feedback. Feedback should be encouraged with how well did we do on your enquiry type forms and practices.

You are correct that librarians should not censor responsible, thoughtful points of view from various sides of a debate, they should provide access to as much information as their time, budget and shelving space allows, respond to questions in the order they are received while taking into account the urgency of the requests, and they should respond to feedback on how they are doing. This is what is taught in library school, and if you sensed otherwise, then this is not the job of a librarian. On the other hand, it seems that most library users do not want to "bother" their librarian too much, they are satisfied with "just enough" information after a minimal search, and rarely come back a second time to ask for more information. Because of this, some librarians become complacent and lapse into giving all library users the minimal service that satisfies nearly everyone, except for the rare occasion that someone asks for a more exhaustive search. (My opinions are my own.) GUllman 18:21, 18 January 2006 (UTC)