That's basically what OCLC does. And for that matter ISBNs, if the library has those books that have them entered in its database under that variable, which I imagine most do in this day and age. From Wikipedia's POV, I think it's pernicious clutter that shows a determined refusal to realize how big the world is (and the writer also seems blissfully unaware how much many of us use inter-library loan rather than meekly limiting ourselves to whatever the local library has chosen for us; which should perhaps not surprise me, given how inter-library loan has almost entirely become limited to little consortia right when GoogleBooks was making it possible to identify the most useful books). Not to mention the usual error of thinking of Wikipedia editors as Them rather than realizing we are among the library's patrons. Until, of course, a library wants to use it as an advertising service ... Yes, that's the right order of resource use (unless one is writing Wikipedia). No, tagging Wikipedia pages with links to each and every library or even library search templates is not the way to facilitate this.
I'd say that but (a) I'd have to register and (b) the writer and their friends are having such fun ...
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
I'd say that but (a) I'd have to register and (b) the writer and their friends are having such fun ...
M