Talk:List of destroyed libraries

Hyderabad

I was in the museum of Hyderabad and they said there'd been a library there sacked & burned for days, on the scale of Alexandria, sacked by of all people the Afghans. But there's no mention of this here or on the Hyderabad pages.--86.144.101.104 (talk) 06:08, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Do you have a reliable source for this incident? --Kansas Bear (talk) 15:13, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Or time-period information, which might be a useful clue for tracking down a source. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 16:56, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

California earthquake

The ruins of Stanford Library after the 1906 San Francisco earthquake

The 1906 San Francisco earthquake destroyed parts of the Main Quad (including the original iteration of Memorial Church) as well as the gate that first marked the entrance of the school; rebuilding on a somewhat less grandiose scale began immediately.

Perhaps if more information can be found an entry could be made for Stanford University library.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 07:15, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

There is now a separate article for Stanford University Libraries.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 09:45, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Recent events ? Terrence Mckneaan and Nicals Telsa

both had their libraries and or workshop destroyed )in fire) after their death, in myerious circimstances....This should be COVEREWD in this list. --84.228.20.22 (talk) 16:04, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Institute of Scientific Information on Social Sciences (INION) (Moscow, Russia) - 31 January 2015

Is only partially destroyed about 15% http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/moscow-library-fire-destroys-rare-documents-in-cultural-chernobyl/story-e6frg6so-1227204108146

Enrique de Villena

His extensive library was burnt by royal order c. 1434 on suspicion of witchcraft and necromancy. Not sure what the cutoff is for notability on this list, though. It was important in Spain and may have cost us some works, but it wasn't on par with the loss of the House of Wisdom &c. — LlywelynII 21:22, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Library fire in Northam Devon?

Back over a decade ago (!) the original author of an ancestor of this article added a mention of "sun's rays setting fire to leaflets through the action of a hands-free magnifier in a library in Northam Devon." I've not been able to find any source to verify this, despite trying. I've just now asked the author (who is still an active Wikipedian, amazingly) about it, but it should probably be removed until a source can be found. As such, I've done so. Feel free to revert. JesseW, the juggling janitor 03:13, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

I suspect a local paper would be the best source. The library avoided being closed in 2014, but their phone diverts to a central system, with long queues, so I am emailing the area manager to see if she has any information. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 17:36, 10 March 2016 (UTC).

User:Cavrdg has resolved this:

There's a mention here. 3. Northam Library, Devon, England Total loss of building and 90% books. Fire thought to have started by sun’s rays setting fire to leaflets through action of a hands-free magnifier. The Times 17 June 2005 --Cavrdg (talk) 15:53, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 17:37, 10 March 2016 (UTC).

Great, thanks for tracking that down. JesseW, the juggling janitor 01:54, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Freezing

There was a large fire in a Russian library some tie in the last 30 years, but more than 5 years ago. The wet books were stored in an industrial freezer - on the scale of a large building. The international conservation efforts were then spread over a number of years. With the right references this is useful information for this article. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 17:36, 10 March 2016 (UTC).

Lost links

Could the reference number 26 - Libraries lost in the 20th century - be redirected to [1] as the current link no longer works. Jackiespeel (talk) 17:07, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

What.cd

This obviously brings some talk, so I’ll start. Can a site like what.cd qualify as a library, though mostly used to share digital media?

Wicker (talk) 16:07, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

As per WP's definition of library, I'd say it does: "A library is a collection of sources of information and similar resources, made accessible to a defined community for reference or borrowing. It provides physical or digital access to material, and may be a physical building or room, or a virtual space, or both. A library's collection can include books, periodicals, newspapers, manuscripts, films, maps, prints, documents, microform, CDs, cassettes, videotapes, DVDs, Blu-ray Discs, e-books, audiobooks, databases, and other formats." tromaster (talk) 16:36, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

I agree with What.cd's inclusion on this list however I think "most comprehensive archive of music and literature" is misleading in that it is true for music but not literature.71.15.212.4 (talk) 17:02, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Should Wikipedia be somehow completely destroyed, it would I think also qualify for inclusion on a list such as this (though obviously not this one- it would have been destroyed). What.cd contained a comparable comprehensiveness of content and quality of curation, and absolutely fits into Wikipedia's own definition of library: "A library is a collection of sources of information and similar resources, made accessible to a defined community for reference or borrowing. It provides physical or digital access to material, and may be a physical building or room, or a virtual space, or both." Agree with decision to include it on the list. 73.133.74.27 (talk) 17:18, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

You gave us a big oportunity to talk eh Deor? Just locked the thread. This page should be named "List of destroyed material libraries". ikobia (talk) 17:32, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

As previously mentioned, what.cd certainly qualifies as a library based upon Wikipedia's own definition of the same. Why is this even being questioned? Evanosaurus (talk) 17:46, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

You see, I've seen more problems like this in other controversial material, and it seems these guys can't accept What.cd as a library, and they surely don't even know what that page was. You know, "unknown" for humans equals to "enemy" ussualy. ikobia (talk) 17:58, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

I think by definition it counts as a library, but what data was destroyed? The torrents still exist on its members' computers, no?2605:E000:908B:FD00:1DD7:A175:5F84:24D (talk) 18:45, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

The issue here is not WP's definition of a library, but this article's definition of its scope. An outsider who read this article before the addition of What CD would reasonably think that it is a list of brick-and-mortar libraries that have been physically destroyed. Nevertheless, I affirm the bold addition of What CD, and I affirm the subsequent deletion. At that point, my understanding of WP:BRD is that the next action should not have been the edit war restoration, but this discussion, and I think this discussion should have taken place with the article in remaining in status-quo-ante.

Now that I've thought about it a bit (I tend to think while my fingers are typing), I'm wondering if, prior to its destruction, What CD was on any WP lists of libraries that included both digital and brick-and-mortar libraries. If it were indeed on such a list, supported by WP:RS, then I'd fully support its inclusion on this list. YBG (talk) 18:54, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

So basically you're telling me I'm right? The page should be renamed to "List of destroyed material/physic libraries"? And then, we could start a talk to add What.CD to a WP list (which would take some time discussing), but honestly, I don't see Wikipedia adding a "piracy page for most here" to that list. ikobia (talk) 19:37, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Actually, I haven't said that at all. I did lay out some specific criteria for whether I think it should be included, but I did not do any checking to see if those criteria were met or not. Another point, which I did not mention, is whether What CD, prior to its destruction, identified itself as a library and whether anyone else identified it as such.

And I said nothing about whether the page should be moved. An alternative (much better IMHO) would be to expand the lede to make the inclusion criteria clear. WP list articles frequently have such a description. I haven't checked, but I reckon it very likely that having such a statement of inclusion criteria is part of the MOS for list articles. YBG (talk) 19:54, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

If what.cd is included, all the other notable "destroyed" trackers and digital libraries should be too, so I added TPB. Feor (talk) 19:59, 19 November 2016 (UTC)