Talk:Burndy Library

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Burndy Library. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060813100704/http://burndy.mit.edu:80/ to http://burndy.mit.edu

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:33, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

GA review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Burndy Library/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: ABehjat (talk · contribs) 00:55, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: Balabush (talk · contribs) 11:27, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you @Balabush for your review - I'll work on your feedback and will reach out once it's complete. ABehjat (talk) 16:53, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Well-written

(a) Prose: Borderline. I found two clarity problems that need to be addressed before I can pass this sub-criterion:

• The closing lines of the History section conflate subjects. "The library has offered a number of history of science fellowships..." by this point in the timeline the Burndy Library has already been dissolved (2006) and its collection moved to Huntington. As a reader, I can't tell whether "the library" here means the defunct Burndy Library, the ongoing Dibner program at Huntington, or something else. The same problem recurs in "It has been one of the Huntington's most heavily used collections, and it continued to grow..." the antecedent of "it" is ambiguous, and there's a tense clash between the present perfect ("has been") and the simple past used throughout the rest of the section. Could you clarify explicitly which entity (Burndy Library, Dibner Institute, or Huntington's Dibner collection) each of these sentences refers to?
• The claim that this was "one of the world's largest collections" of its kind is stated almost verbatim in both the lead and the Description section. Per MOS:LEAD, the lead should summarize the body, not repeat a sentence from it near-verbatim. Could you rephrase one of the two instances?

(b) MoS compliance: The lead is reasonably proportionate and covers the main chronology, but it doesn't reflect the fellowship/conference claim made in the body. Per MOS:LEAD, the lead is expected to summarize all major points of the article, not only the chronological skeleton. please consider adding a brief mention of this.

Verifiable, no original research

(a) Reference list present via reflist. Y

(b)/(c) Most claims carry inline citations, but:

• The two closing sentences (fellowships/conference; "most heavily used collections") share the identity-conflation problem from 1(a). as written, this borders on synthesis, attributing an ongoing Huntington program's activity to "the library," a defunct entity. N

• Heavy reliance on a small source pool: the Gaskell 2001 chapter is cited three times in a row for founding/growth facts, and Cohen 1985 ("inside") is cited three times across the article. I spot-checked both directly against the article text: N
  • Factual failure: the article states the Smithsonian donation occurred "In 1974", citing Gaskell 2001. The cited source itself states the collection "came to the Smithsonian Institution in 1976" (p. 6–7 of the Gaskell essay), corroborated by the same publication's Foreword (Dibner Library opened October 1976). The other source used elsewhere in the article for this event, Cohen 1985, gives yet a third date (1975) and a different figure (11,000+ items vs. ~10,000). None of the cited sources support "1974" please correct the date and reconcile the figures between sources. N
  • Mischaracterization: the article states "Burndy" is "a portmanteau of his first and last names," citing Cohen 1985. The source actually says it is "an acronym drawn from the founder's first name and last initial" a materially different claim (a full last name vs. a single initial). Please rephrase to match the source. N

(d) Ran an automated copyvio comparison against the article's main sources: 27.5% similarity against Gaskell 2001 ("violation unlikely"), overlap limited to proper nouns/titles/figures, no reproduced sentence structure. No copyvio found in the portions checked. Y

Broad in coverage

The weakest criterion here. Significant gaps for a "broad" (not comprehensive, but broad) treatment:

• No staff/curatorial history. only Dibner as founder is named. A 65-year institution presumably had librarians, curators, directors.
• A ~16-year gap (1976–1992) between the Smithsonian donation and the MIT move is compressed into a single sentence ("remained in Norwalk until shortly after Dibner's death in 1988"). What was happening to the library during this period?
• No physical description of either the Norwalk building or the MIT facility. odd for an article about a physical library/collection.
• No reception/scholarly use beyond a bare size claim. nothing on how researchers used it, its reputation in the field, or specific notable acquisitions beyond a general list.
• Why did the Dibner Institute/library close in 2006? The article says the collection moved "to allow demolition of the building" which explains the physical trigger but not the institutional decision (was the Dibner Institute itself discontinued? Merged? Nothing here).

Neutral

No promotional or biased language detected Y

Stable

No edit-warring or open disputes in the history. Y

Illustrated

there are zero images in the entire article. For a subject like this (a rare-book library, a named founder, a still extant collection at the Huntington), free images are plausibly findable: a portrait of Bern Dibner, exterior/interior shots of the Norwalk or MIT buildings, or images of specific rare items now at the Huntington (many pre-1929 works would be PD).

@Balabush, thank you again for your review. Several of these sent me back to the sources, and the digging turned up further problems that I have also fixed and listed below. I have added two sources the article was not using, including one independent account I found within IEEE, and consolidated the citation section, so the article now draws on 13 distinct works.

(a) Prose — closing lines conflate subjects.  Done, the passage now reads "At the Huntington..." instead of vague 'it'. I've also removed "It has been one of the Huntington's most heavily used collections" because on checking the cited source it is not supported.

(a) Prose — "one of the world's largest collections" duplicated in lead and body.  Done. I removed this sentence completely. Lewis's sentence reads: "The Huntington Library has had formidable holdings in the history of science and technology for a long time, but the arrival of the Burndy Library in 2006 has given us the premiere collection in North America, and one of the largest in the world." The subject is the Huntington's post-acquisition holdings — he calls it "the combined collection" two lines later — not the Burndy. No source from the list supports "one of the world's largest collections" for the Burndy Library itself.

(b) MoS — lead should summarize all major points and closing sentences bordering on synthesis.  Done. Summarizes the body and meets MOS. Updated closing sentence as well.

Heavy reliance on a small source pool.  Done. I added two sources, and two that were previously cited once each are now doing substantially more work:

• Gordon D. Friedlander, "The Burndy Library: window on the history of science", IEEE Spectrum 7(3), March 1970, pp. 54–64 - covered a lot of details on the inner working of the library + its significance in magnetism and electricity space.
• David R. Watkins, "The Burndy Library and Its Founder", Octavo 4 (Spring 1973), pp. 11–13. - found on Internet Archive, covered the history of the library in good detail.

Schackner (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9 January 2005) and MIT News (20 December 2006) were each cited once before and now carry considerably more, particularly on why the collection left MIT. I also consolidated the three separate Gaskell references into one citation with {{rp}} page markers, which removes three near-identical footnotes.

Factual failure — the 1974 date. Partly done, and I would gently push back on part of this. Two of the article's cited sources do give 1974: the Smithsonian Libraries page says "donated by the Burndy Library in 1974", and the Post-Gazette says "To mark America's bicentennial, Dibner donated a quarter of the Burndy's holdings in 1974 to the Smithsonian". Gaskell's 1976 is not a contradiction of these so much as a different stage; he writes that the books "came to the Smithsonian Institution in 1976".

Mischaracterization — "portmanteau".  Done Now: "The name 'Burndy' was an acronym drawn from his first name and last initial," matching Cohen.

The 1976–1992 gap.  Done. The article covers Dibner rebuilding the electricity and magnetism holdings to 13,000 volumes after the Smithsonian material left. It also covers the formation of two libraries, Washington and Norwalk. I also highlighted that Dibner was still directing Norwalk day to day at 88; and his part in planning the Dibner Institute, including the inaugural meeting of 6 December 1987, a month before his death.

Why did it close in 2006?  Done. The agreement that had kept the collection at MIT since 1992 was due to expire of lease in August 2007, so a move was needed and the MIT building closed.

Staff and curatorial history.  Not done - and I do not think I can fix it. Having read all eight sources, none carries a staff history aside from Dibner being the director and his son and grandson taking over.

Reception and scholarly use.  Not done . Even though there's a reference to the lists of library visitors from its 1954 guest book. I judged that to be closer to trivia than to reception.

Image  Not done I cannot find any available Creative Common or license free images. There's a single image I found here: https://repository.aip.org/node/107283, but there are no clear copyright guidance. In addition, while I found the stamp of the library and its logo on Internet Archive, copyright conditions does not permit me to share the work until we meet 100 years since the publishing of said work (basically 2041 for one of the logos).

Let me know if there's anything else that needs to be done! - ABehjat (talk) 22:08, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Staff and curatorial history in the MIT phase of the library is often available through MIT sources, see for instance director Philip N. Cronenwett who took office October 2004: https://news.mit.edu/2004/burndy; I'm happy to do a bit of this work on the article if I can find time for it. RowanElder (talk) 04:06, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, @RowanElder! Let me see what I can find from there ABehjat (talk) 16:49, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Thanks to you, I went down a deep rabbit hole and found the list of fellows from 1996-1997: https://www.ishpssb.org/news/newsletters/62-newsletter-volume-8-no-1-issue-13-summer-1996 it borderlines SYNTH, but @Balabush would it be alright to draw on this to address the staff point where the Library had support from staff from Dibner institute? To quote The Dibner Institute expects to have fifteen Senior Fellows each term and up to five Post-Doctoral Fellows each year...The Dibner Institute is an international center for advanced research in the history of science and technology, established in Massachusetts in 1992. It includes the Burndy Library as its scholarly library resource and enjoys the participation in its programs of faculty members and students of consortium-member institutions including the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, as host institution, Boston University, Brandeis University and Harvard University. ABehjat (talk) 17:08, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for this work so far, @ABehjat, I appreciate it! This is substantially improved, and I'm glad to see history of science pages improve.

On the reason for the MIT Dibner Institute's closure, the current description is correct but there's also more to the story that I wasn't yet confident how to add without verging into OR. An AIP interview with George E. Smith (philosopher), the Dibner Institute director at the time of the closure, is clear that the Dibner Institute had a culture clash with the larger MIT Science, Technology, and Society department related to "social history of science vs internal history science" that caused inaugural director Jed Buchwald to leave for Caltech around 2001, where, not coincidentally, Buchwald has since led Caltech's collaborations with the Huntington Library for using the Burndy Library since its move in 2006. So there is an interesting "science wars" and "academic postmodernism" side to the story as well as the simple "the lease was up and MIT wanted to put in a new business school building." RowanElder (talk) 00:31, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

That's an interesting note! Do you happen to have the link to the interview? Perhaps we can use some aspects of the interview into the article as per WP:Interview. Thank you for your support and help as well! ABehjat (talk) 01:13, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, this is substantial work. The added sources and the closing lines fix in particular strengthen the article considerably. Responses below:

1974 vs. 1976: I accept that both dates are independently sourced and aren't really a contradiction once framed correctly. But as written, the article still just states "In 1974" without signalling that this was the donation/decision date rather than the arrival date. Could you add a clause distinguishing the two (e.g., "...donated a quarter of the library's holdings in 1974; the collection arrived in Washington in 1976...")? That should stop the same ambiguity resurfacing for the next reader who checks Gaskell.

Portmanteau/acronym fix, closing lines fix, source pool expansion, 1976–1992 gap, 2006 closure: all resolved, thank you. Y

Staff/curatorial history: I'd like to press on this a bit before accepting "not done." RowanElder's pointer to Philip N. Cronenwett (director from October 2004, per MIT News) is exactly the kind of concrete, independently sourced detail that would satisfy broad coverage here. It doesn't require a full staff history, just a sentence or two naming at least one director during the MIT period. @RowanElder, if you have time to draft that addition it would be very welcome. N

Reception/scholarly use: I understand the 1954 guest book is thin, and I won't ask you to force a "reception" section out of nothing. But between the Friedlander IEEE Spectrum piece and the Post Gazette coverage you've now added, is there really nothing on the library's reputation among historians of science, or on specific researchers who used it? Even one or two sentences drawing on those two sources, rather than the guest book, would likely be enough for GA's "broad, not comprehensive" bar. Could you take another look at those two with that angle in mind before we close this out? N

Images: Understood on the copyright situation. This is a reasonable "not done" given the constraints described (AIP item with unclear rights, logo under copyright until 2041). No further action needed here unless something changes. Y

I think we're close. The two open items, a one line staff mention and a short reception note, are the last real gaps before I'd be comfortable moving this criterion to pass. Balabush (talk) 07:36, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

@Balabush, made the changes + included new sections.

1974 vs. 1976 -  Done

Staff/curatorial history -  Done. Had to re-write some other sections to build this out, but it covers information from new sources including how much was budgeted for staff, Dibner being director until 88, evidence of assistant director Robert E. Kohler who served with Dibner. Dibner's son being president of the trustees, the medieval researcher who served as director when it was in MIT.

Reception/scholarly use -  Done, it includes the guest list + the relationship with fairfield university + exhibitions

Red link - there's one red link I introduced because I'd like to write an article about Ladislao Reti who seems to be very notable after doing a Google search.

Images - Partly done. I got a good lead on this remarkably! I reached out to the Norwalk Public Library given they have held a presentation about the library itself (https://www.norwalklib.org/Calendar.aspx?EID=35062) and I asked if they have images in public domain (or if the presenter has personal pictures they'd like to upload that we can use). ABehjat (talk) 20:41, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Prose check on the expanded article: One small awkward line in the lead: "hosted exhibitions, memorials and events related within the realm of science and history" the phrasing "related within the realm" isn't idiomatic. Suggest something like "hosted exhibitions, memorials and events related to science and its history." This is a minor copyedit, not a blocker.

Thank you both for the thorough and well-sourced work on this, particularly the additional archival digging that resolved the staff-history and 1974/1976 questions properly rather than papering over them. Nice job.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Bern Dibner began collecting what would become the Burndy Library after a list of Leonardo da Vinci's achievements left him doubting that one man could have known so much?

• Source: I. Bernard Cohen, "Inside The Burndy Library", American Heritage's Invention & Technology 1(2), Fall 1985. Quote: "Dibner, a practical man and a successful inventor, asked himself whether Leonardo could really have been so far ahead of his time as to grasp mechanical principles that would not become part of common engineering practice for another several hundred years. […] Skeptical but fascinated, Dibner began to collect and to read all the books he could find on Leonardo."

• • ALT1: ... that the Burndy Library collected the classics of science only up to 1900 because its founder believed that most of the basic theories of physical science were formulated by then? Source: Page 13. David R. Watkins, "The Burndy Library and Its Founder", Octavo 4 (Society of Bibliophiles at Brandeis University, Spring 1973). Quote: "The collection is constantly growing. 1900 was chosen as the terminal date for collecting the classics of science since most of the basic theories in physical science were formulated by then. However, Dr. Dibner has interpreted this date generously and has made exceptions where necessary. For instance, he has acknowledged the great developments of nuclear science and the exploration of space, the former by collections of treatises, correspondence, and books by and relating to Einstein, Bohr, Fermi, Planck, and Rutherford."
  • Reviewed:

Improved to Good Article status by ABehjat (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

ABehjat (talk) 17:37, 2 September 2026 (UTC).

• I will review. Thriley (talk) 22:10, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

Article has achieved Good Article status. No issues of copyvio or plagiarism. All sources appear reliable. The hooks are interesting and sourced. QPQ is not needed. The link on citation number 4, "Watkins, David R. (Spring 1973)", does not currently link to anything. Once that is fixed this will be ready. Thriley (talk) 21:22, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

Yeah, the LCCN was provided from Internet Archives, but it didn't settle. I removed the LCCN and used the Internet Archive link instead so you can visit the content directly. Let me know if that's better. It's on page 13, first paragraph of that page. Thank you for your review! - ABehjat (talk) 22:37, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

All set. Thriley (talk) 19:21, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

I shortened the first hook so it would be under 200 characters. Thriley (talk) 19:24, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Thank you, @Thriley! - ABehjat (talk) 20:04, 5 September 2026 (UTC)