To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: | B1 <!-- Referencing and citations --> = y/n | B2 <!-- Coverage and accuracy --> = y/n | B3 <!-- Structure --> = y/n | B4 <!-- Grammar and style --> = y/n | B5 <!-- Supporting materials --> = y/n
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Home Living, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Home 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.
Ri==Library== How about the library page? (The people who put the books back on the shelves) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 22:18, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Agree. I came here via the article on Columbia University library in NYC. They used pages when the stacks were closed, as did large public libraries in some cities. In some cases they were volunteers, but in some cases they were entry-level positions, I believe. I may be wrong about that. I have known masters degree candidates and degree-holders to work at McDonalds in lieu of underpaid library work, so maybe they're ALL volunteers. We've had them fo about a century, though, so they sbould be mentioned. Rags (talk) 20:50, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
I changed "...when the aristocrat was boring." to "...when the aristocrat was bored." as I believe that was meant instead. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong :D --Fëaluinix (talk) 12:32, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Yes, it was somewhat stupid, the sort of joke I might use in light conversation, but inappropriate in an encyclopedia. If this passage has not been eliminated entirely or corrected (5yrs ago!), I intend to be bold and revert to the original phraseologyy. Rags (talk) 20:05, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
It has been suggested that this section be split into a new page. (Discuss)
I propose that we split off page (assistance occupation) to a separate article, since they are frequently women, not boys, and even if male, are men, considering all the congressional sex scandals, so this article describes a different occupation. Further, pages also exist in businesses, that serve the same duties as those in congress/parliament, such as found in broadcast networks (and the Tonight Show) -- 220.127.116.11 (talk) 01:07, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Support with some better title, and clarification that this is, apparently, a North American usage only. I don't think "Assistance occupation" conveys much. Page (legislature)? PamD 07:00, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
I had thought of that, though that wouldn't cover other modern day pages that do similar duties, such as pages employed by TV studios. -- 18.104.22.168 (talk) 10:57, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Agree. I don't like the title either but I agree that it needs to be more inclusive than 'Legislative Page.' As the commenter above has pointed out, library page also needs to be included. May be an obsolete usage, but we had them for maybe a century un large libraries, particularly with closed stacks. See Columbia University article. I remember pages in public libraries, as well. Therefore: Rags (talk) 20:28, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Support with the considerations above mentioned.Rags (talk) 20:28, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
I'm sure there's a "page" in the procession for graduation ceremonies at (some) UK universities - and I think it can be either a boy or a girl. Another argument for this article to be at some other title than "page-boy". Can't find a source - not an easy topic to Google. PamD 07:02, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
I can't escape a mental image of an outdated ladies' couiffiure. (I know, I should stick to words I can spell --but you get the pic!) There has to be a better title. Rags (talk) 20:33, 4 October 2014 (UTC)