This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us
assess and improve articles to
good and
1.0 standards, or visit the
wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Library of Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Library of Congress 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.Library of CongressWikipedia:WikiProject Library of CongressTemplate:WikiProject Library of CongressLibrary of Congress articles
This article has been rated as Low-importance on the
importance scale.
Last one was Better
No offense but this version of the Controversial literature article is just awful and I have to question the writers refrense.
Tony360X's version of Controversial literature article was much better and more useful. All this guy did was got a good thing deleted just so he can put unessary crap as a replacment. -
BigFrank100
Ok seriously, no offense, but your fucking doush with nothing better to do or contribut. All you seem to do is harras me and
Tony360X cause your probly boning the new guy who wrote this page. So do something for useful or shut the hell up you fucking wine-o. –
BingFrank100
'Controversial' as used by the Library of Congress only means 'controverting' a particular religion or one of its beliefs. It doesn't have to be racist, or otherwise offensive (though it may well be). It can even be done by, say, a Protestant writing in opposition to a position held by other Protestants.
Omassey14:42, 12 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Search under "subdivision Controversial literature"
under names of individual religious and monastic orders, individual religions, Christian denominations, and uniform titles of sacred works for works that argue against or express opposition to those groups or works
It seems clear to me - from the above - that the subject matter, as far as the LOC is concerned, involves only religious texts. --
Ludvikus (
talk)
03:38, 25 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Here's more from the LOC:
"Controversial literature
Use as form subdivision ($v) under individual religions, denominations, religious and monastic orders, and sacred works for works that argue against or express opposition to those groups or works. The subdivision is no longer to be used under general religious and philosophical topics. H1472"Guide to the Usage of LCSH Free-Floating Form Subdivisions
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us
assess and improve articles to
good and
1.0 standards, or visit the
wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Library of Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Library of Congress 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.Library of CongressWikipedia:WikiProject Library of CongressTemplate:WikiProject Library of CongressLibrary of Congress articles
This article has been rated as Low-importance on the
importance scale.
Last one was Better
No offense but this version of the Controversial literature article is just awful and I have to question the writers refrense.
Tony360X's version of Controversial literature article was much better and more useful. All this guy did was got a good thing deleted just so he can put unessary crap as a replacment. -
BigFrank100
Ok seriously, no offense, but your fucking doush with nothing better to do or contribut. All you seem to do is harras me and
Tony360X cause your probly boning the new guy who wrote this page. So do something for useful or shut the hell up you fucking wine-o. –
BingFrank100
'Controversial' as used by the Library of Congress only means 'controverting' a particular religion or one of its beliefs. It doesn't have to be racist, or otherwise offensive (though it may well be). It can even be done by, say, a Protestant writing in opposition to a position held by other Protestants.
Omassey14:42, 12 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Search under "subdivision Controversial literature"
under names of individual religious and monastic orders, individual religions, Christian denominations, and uniform titles of sacred works for works that argue against or express opposition to those groups or works
It seems clear to me - from the above - that the subject matter, as far as the LOC is concerned, involves only religious texts. --
Ludvikus (
talk)
03:38, 25 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Here's more from the LOC:
"Controversial literature
Use as form subdivision ($v) under individual religions, denominations, religious and monastic orders, and sacred works for works that argue against or express opposition to those groups or works. The subdivision is no longer to be used under general religious and philosophical topics. H1472"Guide to the Usage of LCSH Free-Floating Form Subdivisions