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

The result of the debate was delete. (Radiant) 08:30, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Along with all related subpages (there are a great many, so I won't list them here). This is a long-dead project, which had pros and cons but which made more sense when it was started and Wikipedia was smaller. Some months ago copyright and trademark issues were raised, and I was prepared to delete the whole thing on those grounds, but the discussion kind of petered out, so I never did. Stuff like this--forgotten ideas about how Wikipedia works--is kind of interesting to run across, but I think given the copyright concerns (any system of organizing Wikipedia should be released under the GFDL itself) and the sheer deadness of it it ought to go. Thoughts? Chick Bowen 05:57, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - subpages are listed here. MER-C 06:59, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Per copyright issues mentioned above and for other reasons as well. The Dewey Decimal System is becoming less and less used in libraries, anyway. Libraries have realized over the years that the LOC system is much better for categorizing a larger volume of books, and many have switched from Dewey Decimal to LOC. Brings back memories though... Jcam 15:28, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Not useful. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 17:53, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Harmless. As for Jcam's claims; the Dewey Decimal system, bad though it is, is better for most libraries than the arbitrary and irrational LoC, but it's not supported by publishers, so it's more expensive to operate. Septentrionalis 19:41, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - it's a knowledge classification system, and as such it is very useful. I use it a lot, along with the other classification systems on Wikipedia, to maintain a feel for the overall structure of knowledge. Keep in mind that the Dewey Decimal System is relied upon by libraries all over the country (USA). Librarians may find it of particular use, because they navigate the Dewey all the time and it is very familiar to them - this may help them find information on Wikipedia easier and faster. The Dewey is also used in most primary school libraries, including those in junior and senior highschools. Anyone who browses Wikipedia's version of it gains the experience of exposure to the Dewey, which may help the next time they visit their local or school library. Besides, it's another way to browse the knowledge of the World, and that's a good thing. Richer is better. It is also a potential resource: sooner or later someone may come along and adopt it as their project and improve upon it in some innovative way (this is exactly what happened to the Lists of basic topics - check their histories, they gathered dust under some esoteric name for years before someone came along and converted them to another use). Wikipedia's innovators of tomorrow won't have that option if these pages are deleted today. Please keep.  The Transhumanist   09:59, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • What about the copyright/trademark issue? There was an idea floated at one point to redo it using the pre-1923 version of the DDS, which would be fine with me, but no one has done so. Chick Bowen 20:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Regretable delete - Wikipedia's WP:C policy clearly states Never use materials that infringe the copyrights of others. This could create legal liabilities and seriously hurt the project. Looking into this further reveals that the copyright holder aggressively protects those copyrights. The copyright owner has gone so far as to sue a hotel that used the Dewey Decimal classifications on its hotel room doors! So the potential for this seriously hurting the Wikipedia project exists. Unfortunately, this artcle, as well as the one in Wikipedia's article space entitled List of Dewey Decimal classes blatantly violate Wikipedia's copyvio policy, and regretably, they have to go.  The Transhumanist   10:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete. As much as I agree with the idea of having more methods of browsing Wikipedia's content, pages like Wikipedia:Dewey Decimal System/2 are just too ((worldview)) violating more my tastes. That, coupled with the copyright issue, makes me think this is a futile thing to fight for. -Quiddity 21:28, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Another good point - Not being religious, I never checked that section. It is a bit lopsided, isn't it? It's understandable that changing it would be difficult (requiring thousands of libraries to retag their books), but it's too archaic and POV to be used as a Wikipedia navigation system. We can do better.  The Transhumanist   10:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. What about List of Dewey Decimal Classes. Does that need to be deleted too? If not, then this page/project can be deleted without worry, as the "List of " article organizes the same info, but more effectively... --Quiddity 21:28, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since it's in article space, I don't have the same issues with the list, since it's not nearly as much a stretch as our normal fair use policies. So you're right--that's a better version of essentailly the same info. Chick Bowen 22:18, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment - Being in article space makes it more of a potential problem, not less. Maybe we could claim fair use if we didn't linkify it. But the way it is displayed now, with internal links, Wikipedia is using it as a navigation system to its articles. That is, Wikipedia is actively using it as a classification system. Libraries using the Dewey have to pay $500.00 per year for that privilege (though I don't know how much the web-licensing fee is). And since a hotel got sued for putting these same levels on their doors, this issue needs a more critical analysis.  The Transhumanist   10:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Not an often used or really useful classification system on Wikiepdia, our catagories system is much better. Aussie King Pin 06:33, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, along with its huge subpage tree. As far as I can tell, this subproject has been abandoned long ago, after being rendered obsolete by the category system. See, for example, Wikipedia:Dewey_Decimal_System/0/05/052, and Wikipedia:Dewey_Decimal_System/2/23 as examples. -- The Anome 23:39, 18 November 2006 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.