Jump to content

Talk:Librarian/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1


Are you a librarian?

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 Wikipedia, 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, Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia) 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 Wikipedia. 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. Wikipedia 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. Wikipedia 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)

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 Wikipedia 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, Wikipedia). 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 Wikipedia? 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)
Section 108 of the US Copyright law does refer to libraries and archives specifically. Copyright works differently between the US and Canada, libraries do not sign agreement with copyright collectives and there is no remuneration given to authors/publishers from libraries for having their works in the library. I'm aware that Canada and Australian libraries do this differently and I don't know about other countries. This might be worth splitting out in the library article and may not be a necessary distinction in the librarian article. I'm aware that this is somewhat off the original topic, but I wanted to toss the link in there and mention a distinction that other readers might not know. Jessamyn 15:19, 5 February 2006 (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)
As a master's student in Canada doing a dual degree in both Archives and Records Management and Library and Information Science I just want to add some personal experience into the conversation. I am studying at the iSchool at the University of Toronto, a program that explores the relationship of people, information, and technology. At the iSchool there are several paths that a student can concentrate in. These paths include Archives and Records Management, Library and Information Science, Knowledge and Information Management, Information Systems and Design, and Critical Information Studies. While there are certain skills that are inherent to all of these programs, graduates of the separate paths are expected to become professionals in their respective fields. That is, a student studying in the Library and Information Science path would unlikely obtain a career in Information Systems and Design without completing the required courses for an Information Systems and Design program. I myself do not see how many of the skills that I learn in my Library and Information Science classes can be transferred to my Archives and Records Management classes and vice-versa. So it is difficult for me to see how Archivists could be classified as librarians. Muffinie27 (talk) 06:18, 25 October 2011 (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)

The Librarian Paining needs to go somewhere less prominent

Librarians aren't just about books, and I think this gives the wrong impression. (Bjorn Tipling 04:58, 5 February 2006 (UTC))

Secconding this. ACK-OA Alkoholicks 06:21, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. Leave it as is but add another image or two. Rmhermen 21:42, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I liked the painting as it shows a strong connection with knowledge and books in a fresh and humorous way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kathrynhand (talk • contribs) 22:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Created Librarians in popular culture page

As the Librarian page gets giant, it seemed like a good time to move the popular culture info to its own page. I was bold and created the Librarians in popular culture page but it will still need some work, feel free to add on or otherwise improve. Jessamyn 14:34, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

introductory paragraph

I think the intro paragraph is a bit cumbersome and not clearly written..anyone else agree? Dan Carkner 01:40, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I made a try at it--perhaps you will be able to improve on it--or other parts of the page. We could use some specifgicinformation on library education in Canada--is it the same as in the US?DGG 01:26, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Suggest Removing Library Science Definition

Hi all. I wanted to remove a definition of Library Science since a direct link is made there and the definition should appear there, not here also. But first I'm here on the talk page to discuss it since it is minorly major. Here's what I suggest removing and moving to Library Science:

Library science, also known as Librarianship, is the professional activity of selecting, procuring, organizing, preserving, and making available data, information, and creative and scholarly works, and providing services that assist and instruct people in the most efficient and effective ways to identify, locate, access, and use information and resources (articles, books, magazines, etc.).

What do you all think? --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 13:32, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, these should be striaghtend out; unfortunately the def in library sci needs to be rewrittenas well. I'll do it tomorrow, since I have something in mind. Thanks for reminding me. What I think the proper content of this page ought to be, is about the career of being a librarian. DGG 07:14, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

library technician

Why is someone removing the llnk to Library technician--it's a related occupation, one librarians oughtto hae respect for, -- and many technicians become professional librarians

I agree and returned it. Rmhermen 15:10, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

npov in job descriptions

I removed this sentence from one of the librarian job descriptions "The resultin erosion of the profession will eventually lead to poor patron service and weakened collections." even with a citation, it's not NPOV for a description of what a librarian does. It might fit somewhere else in the article but it does not fit here. Jessamyn (talk) 22:20, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I like the painting

the title says it all. =P —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.73.151.118 (talk) 23:23, 8 March 2007 (UTC).

Colbert: Librarians are hiding something

So, how long before this page is edited to reflect Stephen Colbert's new Trademarked phrase: "Librarians Are Hiding Something"? Jason P Crowell 04:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Check Librarians in popular culture Fnovd 04:12, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Seems to have been done already. And reverted. SQFreak 03:59, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

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)

All hell is about to break lose, lol. AStudent 03:57, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I was in the middle editting as an anon when it was protected lol. i wanted to be the last anon to get it. i failed. FoUJaina 04:00, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
I do not approve of this protection, as it is preventing the truth about librarians from getting out. Ah well, time to change the entry on the real encyclopedia, Encyclopedia Dramatica.
Libertarians - also hiding things

I think "Wikipedians" are trying to hide something here...Sonic Hog 04:05, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Yup, vandalism. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 04:10, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I direct you to http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040729/COLDCASE29/TPNational/TopStories which demonstrates that at least one librarian was hiding something. It is not unreasonable to conclude that others could be, but for the time being I suggest the article contain the phrase, "At least one librarian, Douglas Freeman, was hiding something, which turned out to be a violent past and membership in The Black Panthers." with the appropriate citation. Limin8tor 04:07, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

How could that possibly be considered notable? Heimstern Läufer (talk) 04:09, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Ignore this. The "democratic information" of Colbert's arrogance lasted less than 25 seconds in total. Wikipedia: 1, Colbert: 0. Not the first time, either. TheEXIT 04:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Do you actually take yourself/Wikipedia that seriously? Also, if it isn't the first time, shouldn't Wikipedia have a score higher than 1? Zincomog 04:23, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Obviously this is all they do. It might even be fun to them (the wikipedians that is) --Wingzero890 04:26, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, taking yourselves a little seriously when you say things like that. I believe Colbert is trying to say that you can't completely trust information that is supplied by an anonymous population. I've seen entries on here that weren't correct before, and I'm sure it will happen again so you just have to be careful what you believe.--Helgers7 06:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
I personally think that Colbert is saying that Wikipedia is overall a good community of knowledge, but it shouldn't be treated as a 100% accurate repository of the world's facts (truths?). Personally, I am just sick of the people that take his character seriously. Digitize 12:41, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Watch Libra (constellation). Someone vandalized it earlier. Ungovernable ForcePoll: Which religious text should I read? 07:11, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

There is still a "Librarians are hiding something" hidden (appropriately) in the article with the assistance of a librarian. It has been there for months. I think User:SubLibris put it there. Aliajacta 08:17, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to suggest to the administrators to put a link to Content-control_software#Use_in_public_libraries in the protection from vandalism template here. That may put a stop to the attempts to vandalize the page - it was an inside joke by Stephen Colbert, since there was already a Wikipedia entry about "Librarians hiding something" that the people trying to vandalize this page didn't get! Tkandell 04:17, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

It's a template, so request shouldn't go here, and it won't stop people vandalising. Trebor 11:27, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Has Colbert commented here? Computerjoe's talk 16:18, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

His account, StephenColbert, was banned as it violates the celebrity names rule. I don't think it's been unbanned, but he is laughing his head off somewhere. 68.228.20.64 02:57, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
See User talk:Stephencolbert. --h2g2bob (talk) 19:24, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Cascading block?

why is the Page blocked cascading? I am from de.wikipedia and in our language there this is often a mistake which is done by sysops. Is it so here as well? 217.225.158.69 13:41, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I imagine it was added to prevent any vandalism spilling over to pages transcluded here. It only affects one image (unless I'm missing something) so doesn't really matter. May as well stay on until full protection is removed. Trebor 13:53, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

European Associations, national librarians?

I am missing information about CENL (Consortium of European National Librarians) and why is there no mentioning of national library (as a type of library for instance) or The European Library? Maybe someone likes to add some information about that. Kind regards, Fleurstigter 12:12, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

  • An update: The European Library - a service of CENL - is the nerve-centre of Europe's library world. Furthermore it is the organisational ground for the European digital library. This European Commission initiative will encompass not only libraries but also museums, archives and other holders of cultural heritage material.

Fleurstigter 14:58, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Apology

I would like to offer an apology to those who are working on this wonderful article. A couple of weeks ago, I inserted the text "Librarians are hiding something" to the bottom of the article (obviously because of Stephen Colbert's joke) to take a quick screen-cap and revert back to original. It was quickly noticed - and reverted before I could do it myself. I would just like to apologize for any disruption I have caused. Thank you. Legendotphoenix 10:27, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

If you wanted to take a screen-cap, you could add the text and click "Show preview" instead of "Save page" JohnRussell (talk) 17:38, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Disambig Page?

I think there's a need for a disambiguation page for Librarian as there are multiple pages that are called Librarian or a variation. Any input? 60.242.31.143 (talk) 11:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Examples? Rmhermen (talk) 23:02, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

"other" vs "also" professional

I've replaces also with other for the line that read "There are also professional positions such as managers." As it stood, it implied that the librarian is not a professional, which isn't necessarily true. Having it say other rather than also negates this viewpoint. Hope all agree, otherwise am happy to debate it here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikifuzzygum (talk • contribs) 14:55, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

definition of librarian??

The intro section claims that librarians are like Ph.D's -- people who have some particular kind of training, rather than people who work in a library. I always thought it was the other way around -- that you have to work in a library to be a librarian, just as someone who's never done firefighting, no matter their training, isn't a firefighter (IMHO). And I suppose it's arguable whether to call some of the staff in a library who deal with books "librarians". Now, maybe the article is "right" somehow in its prescriptivist attitude of what a librarian is -- I just want to see a citation (evidence) for it from a recent and reputable source. —Isaac Dupree(talk) 19:10, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

On the other hand, "once a librarian, always a librarian" might apply in spirit to many for these professions, and a decent training probably involves some experience in a library already. In other words, I'm not sure I agree with the cultural distinctions chosen by me (and perhaps the article implicitly) above. —Isaac Dupree(talk) 19:14, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
I think the article does a fair job of making the distinction. In North America it is easy because if you have an MLS then you are a Librarian whether you work in a library or not. Just like you are a dentist or lawyer with the appropriate degrees whether you are working in that capacity or not. This is not to say that you cannot be a librarian without the MLS, but you probably need to be actively working as a librarian to call yourself one if you do not have the MLS.Nowimnthing (talk) 14:14, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Start class article? Books project?

This article had no rating, so I changed the template to class=start. Please add comments about the rating, whether it is accurate, and what can be done to improve the article and its rating. --DThomsen8 (talk) 23:28, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Also, should this article be in the Wikiproject Books? A local high school has a library without books, but I think that is extreme, and most libraries have books and some have a vast variety of other materials. If you think the Books template is appropriate, please go ahead and add it. --DThomsen8 (talk) 23:28, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Educational Requirements for School Librarians in the US and Canada

Under the category of Education in the US and Canada, there is a passive mention of the fact that school librarians are required to have a library science degree : “School librarians often are required to have a teaching credential, as well as a library science degree.” I really think the fact that the majority of school librarians DO NOT have a Master’s in Library Science needs to be highlighted. School librarians, for the most past, are required to have Additional Qualification courses in Library Studies are often times referred to “Teacher Librarians.” There has been quite a bit of controversy about the fact that they are not required to have a Master’s in Library Science like other forms of librarianship. I think that this should be brought to light at some point in the article. Or, perhaps create an article focusing on School Librarianship? Melbruno (talk) 02:28, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

In Canada, according to the NOC, librarians are classified under section 5111. Under the requirements, they are required to have a Master’s in Library Science. School Librarians (Teacher-librarians), however, are classified in 4141 under Secondary School Teachers and 4142 for Elementary School and Kindergarten Teachers. There is no mention that teacher/school librarians need to have a Master’s in Library Science. According to the Bureau of Labour Statistics in the United States, School librarians "may not need an MLS but must meet State teaching license requirements" (SOC code: 25-4021). Melbruno (talk) 02:28, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

As such, the language in this article speaks more towards the required credentials in the United States, and not so much to those in Canada, thus making it vague and potentially misleading.Melbruno (talk) 02:28, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Libraries vs. Librarians

As this page is about librarians and not libraries, I would like to propose the following: change the heading "Technology in libraries" to "Technology and Librarians." Melbruno (talk) 04:22, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

History

What struck me when I read this page is the lack of history of librarianship. I would like to add a section on history to address the rise of librarianship as a professional practice and introduce key players such as Melvil Dewey in establishing the profession. Muffinie27 (talk) 15:47, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

I think that sounds good, make sure to keep it international and be specific if you're talking about the profession in the US versus elsewhere. It might even be worth a different article, but here is a good place to start it. Jessamyn (talk) 22:39, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
I absolutely agree that it is necessary to keep it international. However, in researching this topic I came to realize that there is a lack of literature on the topic that isn't US focused, especially during and after the 19th century. Being a student in Canada in the Library and Information Science field, my primary form of research is my textbook, Richard E. Rubin's Foundations of Library and Information Science, a textbook written for students in the US. While Rubin's book provides a wealth of knowledge on the history of librarianship from the Sumerians to the 20th century, once he reaches the 19th and 20th century, when librarianship as a profession really started to develop, he focuses only on the development in the US. Luckily, I was able to find an additional source that discusses the situation in Canada. I find it interesting that this article originally grouped US and Canada together in the "Education" section without distinguishing between them since education for librarians is different in these two countries, especially dating back to the beginning of library schools. I encourage librarians who work in other parts of the world to contribute their own knowledge of the history of librarianship in their respective countries. I, and I believe others interested in this subject, would be very interested in seeing the similarities and differences of practice and education. Muffinie27 (talk) 02:11, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Librarian. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:43, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Librarian. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:45, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Librarian. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:17, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Librarian/Archive_1&oldid=1159398706"