Talk:Dewey Decimal Classification

Dewey Decimal Classification has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
February 13, 2014	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on March 6, 2014.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that before Dewey Decimal Classification (inventor pictured), books in most U.S. libraries were arranged by height and order of acquisition?

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dewey Decimal Classification article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Libraries Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Libraries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Libraries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LibrariesWikipedia:WikiProject LibrariesTemplate:WikiProject LibrariesLibraries
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook

Information about number building

The information about DDC number building and synthesized DDC numbers is not obvious nor easy to understand so a more detailed description would help to better understand DDC. -- JakobVoss (talk) 16:02, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is summarised under §3 Design. There needs to be a balance struck between three competing viewpoints: WP:COPYVIO – the tables are (I believe) copyright; WP:NOTHOWTO – the aim is to describe, not instruct and lastly a desire for WP to be as universal as possible. I might be persuaded to have a go at explaining in more detail if others would indicate where the balance is, alternatively would a librarian would take up the task? Martin of Sheffield (talk) 16:32, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Treatment of Homosexuality

Hi everyone! I was reviewing reference number 52 in relation to the section on the treatment of Homosexuality and I think the source was misread. It has an accurate Wikipedia:As of tag, but the source itself provides further information regarding a classification change. The OCLC no longer recommends the use of 363.49, directly contradicting the claim made by the post. I'm still new here, so I wanted to post a note before going in to settle on an edit that would work. Whisperwind1242 (talk) 00:23, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extant copies of the 1876 version

I removed the statement that the Richardson copy was the only one extant. Comaromi is careful not to say that it is the only one and I can find at least 3 copies in HathiTrust - Harvard, UC Berkeley, and University of Michigan. The UC Berkeley one has some notes by J C Rowell, who himself developed a library classification that was used in the Berkeley library. Lamona (talk) 02:39, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]