Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Books/Bibliography articles

Question regarding inclusion of material

I have recently created Bibliography of Jewish Christians and Bibliography of Christadelphians. Both lists were based on the following criteria for inclusion:

1) the works in question were found in a book about the subject, a book which is specifically a bibiliographical book in the first case, or the reference section of books about the subject in the second, or
2) included in one or more college/university academic libraries.

I believe more or less limiting the articles to books is probably the best way to go. We can always include links to JSTOR or other sources for journal and magazine articles, for instance. Does this make any sense to the rest of you? John Carter (talk) 21:10, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Structure of bibliography articles

I believe many of our bibliography articles are going to be, effectively, lists of books which could be used as sources for articles. Taking that into account, I believe that it might be particularly helpful if such bibliography articles were broken up into sections, which might include, first, reference sources, and second, standard sources, as well as any other potential subdivisions that might reasonably exist. For example, Bibliography of Germany would be, potentially, one of the longest articles we might ever have, if it were to list the various books which have been written about the subject. That article might better be broken up into subarticles, perhaps reflecting the various subsections of the extant Germany article, as well. Other articles on bibliographies of such large topics might best also, at least potentially, be broken into subarticles like those of the main article itself.

There is a question here however what to include in the proposed reference and standard sources sections. I believe that there are a number of periodicals, like Library Journal, Booklist, etc., which specifically list reviews of books which are intended as reference works, so that section might not be that contentious. For standard sources, there might be a bit more disagreement. Personally, I would think that any source which is listed in the bibliographies of encyclopedia articles related to the topic would probably at least potentially qualify as "standard" sources, considering they are used as references for encyclopedia articles. Would the rest of you agree? John Carter (talk) 20:35, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]