Talk:Library of Congress Classification:Class A -- General Works

Requested move 8 June 2025

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Consensus is that a merge or deletion should be pursued instead. – robertsky (talk) 23:54, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

---

• Library of Congress Classification:Class A -- General Works → Library of Congress Classification: Class A – General Works
• Library of Congress Classification:Class B -- Philosophy, Psychology, Religion → Library of Congress Classification: Class B – Philosophy. Psychology. Religion
• Library of Congress Classification:Class C -- Auxiliary Sciences of History → Library of Congress Classification: Class C – Auxiliary Sciences of History
• Library of Congress Classification:Class D -- History, General and Old World → Library of Congress Classification: Class D – World History and History of Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Etc.
• Library of Congress Classification:Class E -- History of America → Library of Congress Classification: Class E – History of the Americas – History of the Americas – America. United States
• Library of Congress Classification:Class F -- Local History of the United States and British, Dutch, French, and Latin America → Library of Congress Classification: Class F – History of the Americas – United States Local History. British America (including Canada). Dutch America. French America. Latin America. Spanish America
• Library of Congress Classification:Class G -- Geography. Anthropology. Recreation → Library of Congress Classification: Class G – Geography. Anthropology. Recreation
• Library of Congress Classification:Class H -- Social sciences → Library of Congress Classification: Class H – Social Sciences
• Library of Congress Classification:Class J -- Political science → Library of Congress Classification: Class J – Political Science
• Library of Congress Classification:Class K -- Law → Library of Congress Classification: Class K – Law
• Library of Congress Classification:Class L -- Education → Library of Congress Classification: Class L – Education
• Library of Congress Classification:Class M -- Music → Library of Congress Classification: Class M – Music and Books on Music
• Library of Congress Classification:Class N -- Fine Arts → Library of Congress Classification: Class N – Fine Arts
• Library of Congress Classification:Class P -- Language and Literature → Library of Congress Classification: Class P – Language and Literature
• Library of Congress Classification:Class Q -- Science → Library of Congress Classification: Class Q – Science
• Library of Congress Classification:Class R -- Medicine → Library of Congress Classification: Class R – Medicine
• Library of Congress Classification:Class S -- Agriculture → Library of Congress Classification: Class S – Agriculture
• Library of Congress Classification:Class T -- Technology → Library of Congress Classification: Class T – Technology
• Library of Congress Classification:Class U -- Military Science → Library of Congress Classification: Class U – Military Science
• Library of Congress Classification:Class V -- Naval Science → Library of Congress Classification: Class V – Naval Science
• Library of Congress Classification:Class Z -- Bibliography. Library Science. Information resources → Library of Congress Classification: Class Z – Bibliography. Library Science. Information Resources (General)

– More proper formatting for these titles. In such a context, a colon would ordinarily be followed by a space, and a "--" should be an en dash per MOS:DASH. Also adjusting capitalization (to consistently apply title case) and the punctuation of Class B and the phrasing of classes E, F, M and Z (to better match the source). See the Library of Congress outline. The use of full stops in the titles is idiosyncratic, but I suggesting to follow what the source does for that at the moment. I could be persuaded to use sentence case, but the existing titles are neither consistently using title case or sentence case (and also don't seem to be from the source, which is using all-caps). Capitalizing "Etc." seems a bit odd, but MOS:CT says to capitalize the last word. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 04:47, 8 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Garsh (talk) 03:34, 15 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPath^talk 10:25, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

• Delete this entire series of articles as inherently against WP:NOTCATALOG, rendering how to format their titles moot. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:58, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

  This is not an article deletion discussion. There's a different process for that. This is a discussion of what titles these articles should have if they are not deleted (or merged). —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 22:20, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

  But I don't actually object to deleting or merging either. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 04:34, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

• Merge into one Library of Congress classifications or something like that. I agree with Pppery that these are not separately notable, but the overall system probably is, and one could say more about it. But generally support style fixes within a merged article. Dicklyon (talk) 19:01, 8 June 2025 (UTC)
  • Library of Congress Classification already exists. Merging these in would create an article that was far too long. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:40, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

    With zero independent sources I would agree that the subclassification articles (at least in their current form) are not encyclopedic and should just be redirected. (t · c) buidhe 00:44, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

    Yes, and listing them all in the article would not make it too long. And then there's a problem for another day. Dicklyon (talk) 00:15, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Library of Congress has been notified of this discussion. TarnishedPath^talk 10:25, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

• Procedural oppose WP:NOTDIRECTORY means they should all be deleted, rendering a move discussion moot. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:01, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
• Merge and delete Per WP:NOTCATALOG. These are reproducing information otherwise readily available and it is more than sufficiently adequate for the parent article to link to the Library of Congress for such fuller detail. Cinderella157 (talk) 02:02, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
• Support per nom. Also open to merging or deleting. Graham11 (talk) 05:05, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.