Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Library of Congress Classifications

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. There is a strong consensus for deletion, and I find the move argument unconvincing given that no argument for the uniqueness of this information has been made. Vanamonde93 (talk) 04:27, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Library of Congress Classification:Class A -- General Works

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Library of Congress Classification:Class A -- General Works (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Also nominated:

• Library of Congress Classification:Class B -- Philosophy, Psychology, Religion
• 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 E -- History of America
• Library of Congress Classification:Class F -- Local History of the United States and British, Dutch, French, and Latin America
• Library of Congress Classification:Class G -- Geography. Anthropology. Recreation
• Library of Congress Classification:Class H -- Social sciences
• Library of Congress Classification:Class J -- Political science
• Library of Congress Classification:Class K -- Law
• Library of Congress Classification:Class L -- Education
• Library of Congress Classification:Class M -- Music
• Library of Congress Classification:Class N -- Fine Arts
• Library of Congress Classification:Class P -- Language and Literature
• Library of Congress Classification:Class Q -- Science
• Library of Congress Classification:Class R -- Medicine
• Library of Congress Classification:Class S -- Agriculture
• Library of Congress Classification:Class T -- Technology
• Library of Congress Classification:Class U -- Military Science
• Library of Congress Classification:Class V -- Naval Science
• Library of Congress Classification:Class Z -- Bibliography. Library Science. Information resources

Per Talk:Library of Congress Classification:Class A -- General Works, these articles are inherently against WP:NOTCATALOG * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:43, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Museums and libraries, Lists, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:31, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all per nom. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:32, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all per nom. Smooth application of WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Οἶδα (talk) 23:44, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Graham11 (talk) 23:52, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Libraries. Graham11 (talk) 23:59, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: extended listcruft without commentary - utterly bereft of encylcopeadic value. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 17:01, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all Per User:Pppery, User:Οἶδα, and User:DandelionAndBurdock Logoshimpo (talk) 23:36, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. While I find the Wikipedia version of the scheme easier to navigate than LOC's officially issued one, a line-by-line rehash of material published elsewhere is not encyclopedia in nature. Hthundercroft (talk) 02:27, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete- as per WP:NOTCATALOG pointed out by Nom, to better streamline Wikipedia Entries as it is.Lorraine Crane (talk) 05:11, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Move to Portalspace. While these pages are unsuitable for mainspace articles, they work well as a way of navigating the encyclopedia. Keep in mind that these articles have a serious history, dating back to 2002. To straight-up delete this navigational aid with no replacement would not improve the encyclopedia. -insert valid name here- (talk) 00:04, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  do we think that anyone is using them like that? -- D'n'B-📞 -- 06:08, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes. They are listed at Wikipedia:Contents#Third-party classification systems as a way of navigating Wikipedia's subjects. -insert valid name here- (talk) 14:53, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.