Talk:Hong Kong Central Library/Archive: category war

Vote: National library status of HKCL

(If possible, please read the following discussion and read national library before casting your vote)

This vote commences from 20 July to 27 July for 1 week.

Please cast your vote into the following boxes with a signature (#~~~~)

HKCL should be on the list of national libraries	HKCL should not be on the list of national libraries
Deryck C. 07:29, 20 July 2005 (UTC)	(no votes yet)

By its very nature, this vote is flawed. A national library is not "considered" as one via wishy-washy means. In all cases, it is officially accorded that status, be it by the national government, or by the government of the controlling state on a sub-national entity or dependency. I therefore abstain from voting.--Huaiwei 07:44, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

I've changed the title of the poll. Hope you'll cast a vote, no matter for or against. Deryck C. 07:48, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

National library?

User:Huaiwei has removed this article from category:national libraries ([1] [2] [3]). The national library article on Wikipedia says " A national library a library specifically established by the government of a nation to serve as the pre-eminent repository of information for that country ", " Some states which are not independent, but who wish to preserve their particular culture, have established a national library, .. ", and " National libraries are usually notable for their size, compared to that of other libraries in the same country ". By these definitions the Hong Kong Central Library is a national library, although it doesn't state itself as such, and Hong Kong is not a sovereign State. — Instantnood 14:24, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, and if you did not notice, the "National Libraries" of non-independent states as mentioned in that line actually refers to institutions which actually exist with the name "National Library" in their names, such as the ones in Quebec, Catalonia, Faroe Islands, and in the UK. We dont see that happening in this particular institution in any sense. If you are going to twist definitions just to make them fit into your agenda, then I suppose even university libraries can qualify since many of them do attempt to "preserve their particular culture" as well?--Huaiwei 14:31, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

In that case an airport without the word "international" in its name isn't an international airport, and an institution without the word "university" in its name isn't a university. :-D — Instantnood 15:55, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

As a matter of fact, that is true most of the time. :D The thing is it is not just the name I am concerned about. I already said that this entire article, as well as the official site, does not call nor describe this institution as a "national library", not just in the title, but also in any part of the text. Even an airport without the word "international" in its name will be described as one somewhere, and ditto to a university. How about this one? Can we have more constructive and intelligent comments from you, yeah?--Huaiwei 16:02, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

The organization doesn't have to classify itself as such and such in order to allow others classifying it as such and such. For example, the Gay Singers doesn't have to tell on their brochures that their major aim is to provide fun, but they are. Another example is, Adolf Hitler is certainly a bad person, although he never said HIMSELF that "I am bad". The same applies to HKCL. Although HKCL doesn't DECLARE itself as a "national library", HKCL qualifies all criteria for being classified as one. Therefore we can classify it as a national library. Deryck C. 16:26, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Another question about the problem of a "sovereign state": Not only central libraries of an autonomous country can be "national" as exemplified by National Library of Wales. Wales is a constituent region of Great Britain, just like Hong Kong is a constituent region of People's Republic of China. If that one in Wales can be "national", HKCL, of course, can also. Deryck C. 16:26, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

But I have already said. Certain issues do not need self-declarations, because the condition needed can be more easily quantified. An airport is international if it offers customs clearance for flights out of the country. A university is one if the govenment or any other similar authority declares it as such formally. But the other two examples you quote above directly addresses the problem of grey areas when fixed criteria do not really exist. Not everyone considers Gay Singers as neccesarily fun, nor do everyone consider Hitler bad. He does have his fan base, I am afraid. You hereby declare that "HKCL qualifies all criteria for being classified as" a national library, but again I ask. Which criteria? Who's criteria? The Beijing government's? The HK govenment's? (did they formally declare the HKCL as a nationa library?) Or the HK people?--Huaiwei 16:49, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

As you might already have noticed, List of national libraries lists several national libraries in non-sovereign states. Look through each and everyone of them, and tell me why they deserve to appear in that list. Meanwhile, please tell us why other libraries in non-sovereign states are not listed. I believe the answers speaks for itself.--Huaiwei 16:51, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Evidence on the list of national libraries

Replying Huaiwei:

Only 2 rules were found among libraries on the list:

a. The library is the head library of the region.

b. The library satisfies one of the 2 criteria below:

1. The region where the library heads is a sovereign state.

2. The region is an autonomous area inside a country.

It's obvious that HKCL satisfies a and b2. If you've anymore disagreements please point out the other rules that a library needs to satisfy in order to be declared as a national library. Deryck C. 17:02, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

I find that decisively inadequate. Here is a list garnered from those examples, as well as from actual national libraries of soverign states (mostly from Singapore, hehe, since I am more familiar with it). Of coz I felt out criteria which would have easily applied to just about any library, including that in your local kindergarden.

• It is an institution entrusted with the role of preserving national heritage.
• It is an institution which compiles and maintain a national union catalogue and/or a national bibliography.
• It is an institution which provides a repository for library materials published in that country. This usually also means the existance of Legal deposit rules, or its equivalent.
• For entities in non-soverign states, be formally declared and accepted as a national library by the top-level government, either in name or in governmental documents.

I may have left out one or two criteria, but just try reading all those examples. Each and everyone of them (excluding the ones which are not in English) unabashedly declares themselves as "national" institutions, beyond simply having it in name. Each and every one of them have strongly-worded text insisting that they are the protectors of local heritage. I read through the entire website of the HKCL, and nowhere do I find anything close to this. Even its acquisition policy page looks more like that of a local school library trying to promote reading amongst its students then one attempting to make a mark on the national arena!--Huaiwei 17:28, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Are you sure the national libraries of Greenland, the Faroe Islands and Catalonia are declared, considered, recognised or accepted by the top-level governments (i.e. Denmark and Spain) as national libraries? — Instantnood 17:40, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

Look at the website of Faroe Island's nationa library. If they are not recognised, they wont have existed. I already said I was refering to English-language sources, so I cant comment on Catalonia. Meanwhile, does Greenland have a natonal library? It wasent listed in that article.--Huaiwei 18:26, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

According to my experiences during my frequent visits to the HKCL, it really complies with the first 3 rules provided by Huaiwei. However I'm quite puzzled by the 4th rule: As mentioned by Instantnood, none of the libraries of Greenland, Faroe Islands and Catalonia came with the name "national" (or an equivalent in that language) nor a sentence showing that the library is a "national library" on those official websites. Deryck C. 17:48, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

You cant just say you "experienced" the first three. Do show us the evidence in writing, as I can easily show you for, say, the library in Singapore. The National Library Board Act specifies that the NLB is entrusted with all of the above. I dont see this in any article related on HKCL in their website, unless you can show this from any other source, particularly from a legislative/legal goverment document. Do the HKCL even have the rights for Legal deposit? If yes, please tell us. As for the naming thing, again I hadent really seen the Greenlandish institution, and no, I cant read Catalan either. However, go the English version of the Faroe Islands entity, and tell me what is the name of that institution in English is.--Huaiwei 18:26, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Well if Huaiwei carries on taking the narrowest sense of the words "national" and "country" no heritage of Hong Kong, no catalogue, no bibliography would be "national". I did not comment on whether the official title of the national libraries of Greenland, the Faroe Islands and Catalonia posess the word "national" or equivalent in that language, but rather, I questioned on whether it is considered, recognised, accepted or declared by the "top-level governments" as national libraries. — Instantnood 18:06, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

I am not too sure what you are getting at, but if these entities can have the word "National Library" in their names, then it has to be approved by the top-level government obviously. You mean no one stops you if you start calling your own bookshelf the "National library of Instantnood" and lists it alongside the "National library of China"?--Huaiwei 18:26, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

I am not sure if it is part of the home rule of the Faroe Islands and Greenland, but I supposed library is part of their internal affairs, not directed by the ("top-level") government at Copenhagen. The word "land" in their local names roughly correspond to "state" or "country" in English, not exactly "national". The local name of the Catalonia one seems to have no indication of the meaning of "national". — Instantnood 18:32, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

I would expect libaries to be in the preview of "homerule" governments too, but this dosent mean they can call it anything they want. The Faroe Islands, I must say, appear to enjoy greater autonomy then HK. They get to call their flag a national flag with the blessings of Denmark, for example. I dont remember the Chinese ever allowing that in the two SARs. And what does the "land" gotta do with this issue, btw? As for Catalonia, if you acquire the ability to read Catalan, and realise that entry is actually not befiting of a national library, then please delete it.--Huaiwei 18:53, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Replying Huaiwei: The evidence is, Catalonia has already shown an exception that libraries doesn't have to self-proclaim as a "national library" in it's own name in order to be counted as "national". If Catalonia can, why not Hong Kong? Deryck C. 06:12, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Huh? No, i just said I cant read Catalan. I wont be able to revify if they indeed proclaimed anything with regards to their status. Can any of you do so? If its was indeed verified as such, then it should be removed from the list. Why is there a tendency to add an error instead of removing it? Meanwhile, I dont know what I was thinking or seeing, but I finally saw the Greenlandish entity only while adding entries for other countries yesterday. :D Again, its not in English, so I cant veiify it, but I would certainly remove it too if it was added by some autonomy/independency-minded individuals out to make a political statement.--Huaiwei 06:28, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

It is not a error but an exception from general rules. Please don't follow rules too strictly. Life, behaviours and writing are all flexible and situation-dependent. Deryck C. 06:43, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

It seems that the question about "if HKCL is a national library" has developed into another question "if the putting of HKCL and Catalonia Library as national libraries is an error or an exception from general rules". Obviously, there's no absolute answer for this question. I think the best way to solve this problem is a vote. Deryck C. 06:46, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

And this is the problem here when dealing with many HK issues. I get an impression that the 1C2S formular has comehow led to an exploitation of it in pushing it to its limits, to the point of even self-proclaiming "national" institutions and artifacts when there are non before. It is not just in here. I notice some of you would go around attempting to reinterpret or even redefine definitions so long that HK (and Macau) entries can fit into lists normally reserved for soverign states. Clearly, if a non-soverign entity wants entry, it has to demonstrate its worth, and not insist that since "someone is in there, then so can all of us". Not all dependencies receive the same amount of autonomy, so I question the validity of constantly using this as excuses for inclusion. I also notice a tendency in "nationalising" things more because of sentimental feelings rather then fact. Even if the entirety of everyday HKers think that the flag of HK is a national flag, it is still not so, simply because it was never officially regarded as one. Same in this case. where is the evidence that this library is a national library? The only evidence so far is based on an individuals "frequent visits" to the library? How does these frequent visits tell you that this library has been entrusted with the sole responsibility of heritage preservation by the local government, is the sole legal institution tasked with building a national bibliography, and has Legal deposit rules? You can see this rule by frequent visits? I can easily show concret proof in writing for each of the above and more, say, for the National Library of Singapore. Why is this still lacking for the HK institution?

Once again, I advice. HKers may need to slowly get to realise the fact that "gut feelings" and "personal pride for their homes" dosent neccesarily qualify to turn assumptions as fact. This becomes obvious once concrete evidence fails to come forth when requested. This dosent just apply to HKers, not even to just non-soverign states. Citizens of independent countries who interpret assumptions and what they consider as "common knowledge" as fact without validation is just as gulty of this very common tendency of individuals in expressing local pride. While this by itself is nothing wrong, it is when the sanctity of factual accuracy is compromised that issues occur.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is not a high school project whereby students can express personal opinions and present assumptions for teachers to verify and grade. I would seek common understanding in this, and for all past and future episodes like this. Still remember the "national flag" issue? "Natonal food"? Same thing applies.--Huaiwei 07:11, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

The "national flag" issue is different from this one. In the "national flag" issue, all the flags listed are flags of sovereign states. However, in the library issue, it is found that many head libraries of autonomous dependent regions of another sovereign state are regarded as national libraries.

Another reply to the "frequent visit" problem: according to my visits, I can see those rare books that Huaiwei mentioned (such as law books, bibilography, etc, etc) and according to the brochures of HKCL it really does preserve the Chinese culture as well as HK culture as designated by the HK govt. Deryck C. 07:24, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Not exactly true. The "National flag" tag was applied to quite a couple of non-soverign states, and when I removed the tag from the HK and Macau enries, Instantnood demands they be added back because of all those other entries, such as Greenland (which you youself proposed too). When it comes to the library, how on Earth did you come to that statement?

I think you misinterpreted what it means when it comes to "bibliography". A national bibliography refers to a complete catalogue and referencing document of all books ever published or related to a certain country. it is not a "rare" book. the existance of "rare" artifacts in a library alone dosent count as neccesarily being a national library. My former varsity library has an amazing collection of old and rare books which easily rivals that of the national library, so what differentiates the two? Legislation. The laws of Singapore specifies that the NLB is the national library by according to it the powers and responsibilities of one. The law says that book publishers must deposit books with the national library, but not to my varsity library. Competing entities may offer the same services and collection, but they still wont qualify if no one ever officially accords it national library status. And btw, I expected the HK library to contain artifacts from the rest of China, so is it now the national library of the PRC too?--Huaiwei 07:37, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

I mean, rare books AND bibilography. Deryck C. 07:46, 20 July 2005 (UTC)