025.431: The Dewey blog

Table of Mappings: DDC 001-999 to Table 3C—3 Arts and literature dealing with specific themes and subjects

Guest post by Julianne Beall

We recently added a Manual note at T3C—3 Arts and literature dealing with specific themes and subjects with a link (http://oc.lc/t3cmappings) to an updated table of mappings from the Dewey schedules (001-999) to the corresponding notation in T3C—3. The table of mappings is intended to be a last-resort help for topics not indexed to T3C—3+ in the Relative Index.

If the topic is Animals, for example, there is no need to consult the table of mappings because of the Relative Index entry:

Animals—arts T3C—362

But what if the topic is emigration and immigration, or more broadly, migration? None of those terms is indexed to T3C—3+ in the Relative Index. For each of those terms, however, the interdisciplinary number is 304+:

Emigration 304.82

Immigration 304.82

Migration 304.8

In the table of mappings is a line with 304 in the DDC # column and 3552 in the Table 3C—3 column:

DDC #	Heading	Table 3C—3
304	Factors affecting social behavior	3552

Hence notation T3C—3552 Sociology and anthropology should be considered for a work about migration in arts and literature. In the record for T3C—3552, many sociology and anthropology topics are drawn off to other Table 3C numbers, but migration is not one of those topics. Examples of works for which T3C—3552 may be used are:

Mobility and migration in film and moving-image art: Cinema beyond Europe

791.436552 (built with 791.436 Special aspects of films and T3C—3552 Sociology and anthropology)

Migration and literature in contemporary Europe

 809.933552 (built with 809.933 Literature dealing with specific themes and subjects and T3C—3552 Sociology and anthropology)

Some musical notes

Have you been enjoying holiday music from the comfort of your home? How about assigning Dewey numbers for musical topics? You wouldn’t want to hear me sing, but I can help with the latter!

The 780s, for music, feature many opportunities for complex number building. Since classification in the DDC is generally form-agnostic, the music schedules can accommodate everything from biographies of composers to printed music to sound recordings themselves. Built numbers can help distinguish such varied material.

Much of the number building in the 780s takes place in the broad span of 784-788 Instruments and their music. For example, 786.2 Pianos, which has a footnote telling you to add as instructed under 784-788. In WebDewey, you can see the following number under 786.2 built according to those instructions:

Huh? But pianos are instruments! So what’s the difference between 786.2 and 786.219? The latter is built from 784.19 Instruments (again, following instructions at 784-788). For any of the instruments found under 784-788, there’s an implied “and their music” at the main number (e.g., 786.2 Pianos [and their music]). If you’re deciding between these types of numbers, ask whether your work is really about the instrument itself, as an object, or if it’s more broad.

A related issue you might run into is works on instrument makers. Until recently, you could find two types of built numbers in WebDewey for people who make instruments: one where T1—092 Biography was added to the instrument number (e.g., 787.219092 for violin makers), and one where --092 was added to a number built with 784.1923 Construction (e.g., 786.88481923092 for bell makers).

Both of these types of built numbers are ultimately valid, but the ones of the second type have been replaced in WebDewey with those of the first, so bell makers are now 786.884819092 (just a little bit more spine label friendly!). The newly updated Manual note 784-788:092 explains the distinction. Use –19092 for the type of instrument makers who are involved with many aspects of making the instrument, such as design, testing, and maintenance. Antonio Stradivari is our canonical example of this; Les Paul would qualify too, assuming a work that focuses on his making of guitars more than his playing of them. You’re probably less likely to see works that should use –1923092, which are more suitable for people who only build instruments, perhaps just following another’s plan. It’s analogous to the relationship between an architect and a builder.

Sign languages

Guest post by Julianne Beall

Here is the report on EPC 142C-S41.1 Sign languages promised in the blog post Results of electronic meeting EPC 142C.

First, some context. Most sign languages are used primarily for communication among deaf people or between hearing and deaf people. Typically, deaf community sign languages are developed and used primarily by deaf people, and learned by hearing people in order to communicate with deaf people. Some sign languages are used by everyone in a small community with a high incidence of deafness. Comprehensive works on all these sign languages are classed in 419 Sign languages. Specific instances of these sign languages (and geographic groupings of such languages) are classed in 419.4-419.9 Sign languages used primarily for communication among deaf people or between hearing and deaf people.

In EPC 142C-S41.1, we made miscellaneous changes for clarity, but focused especially on the small minority of sign languages that are used primarily for communication among hearing people. We changed the caption at 419.1 to Sign languages used primarily for communication among hearing people. We deleted the including note "Including monastic sign languages, sign languages used as lingua francas among hearing persons" and instead provided built numbers illustrating that notation T1—08 Groups of people can be used to indicate which groups of people are the primary users of the sign language, regardless of the purpose for which the sign language is used. For example, works about the sign languages historically used as trade languages and lingua francas among many different groups of North American native peoples are classed in 419.108997 North American native peoples—sign languages—for hearing people (built with 419.1 plus T1—089 Ethnic and national groups plus T5—97 North American native peoples).

Works on baby sign language (also called baby signing) can be classed in 419.10832 Infants—sign languages—for hearing people (built with 419.1 plus T1—0832 Infants). The Wikipedia entry for baby sign language begins: "Baby sign language is the use of manual signing allowing infants and toddlers to communicate emotions, desires, and objects prior to spoken language development." Works on baby sign language are typically aimed at hearing parents with hearing children. The signs are taught to infants and toddlers in conjunction with speech, and when the child learns to speak, baby signing is typically discontinued. Signs from deaf community sign languages may be adapted for baby signing, but they do not function in this context like the full language from which they have been borrowed. An example of a work that can be classed in 419.10832 is Teach your baby to sign: An illustrated guide to simple sign language for babies and toddlers by Monica Beyer.

Should some works about baby signing be classed with a deaf community sign language in 419.4-419.9 Sign languages used primarily for communication among deaf people or between hearing and deaf people?  Only works aimed at teaching a specific sign language to a baby with a long-term need to use that language correctly for communication with deaf people should be classed there, e.g., 419.700832 Infants—American Sign Language (built with 419 Sign languages plus T2—7 North America plus T1—0832 Infants).

Results of electronic meeting EPC 142C

During the month of October, the Dewey Editorial Policy Committee (EPC) reviewed seven exhibits. Six were approved, with one sent back for further work. This post will summarize changes from these exhibits; consult WebDewey, where all changes are live, for full details.

EPC 142C-S02.1 Library programs has introduced a new class, 025.57 Library programs on specific subjects. You can add up to three digits to this base number from 001-999 for specific subjects, such as 025.578 for creative writing programs, or 025.57929 for genealogy programs. Just keep in mind the class-elsewhere note at 025.5. Works on programs on specific subjects for specific groups will go with the group (e.g., 027.625 for children).

EPC 142C-S20.1 Religious conversion authorizes 204.24 Conversion in comparative religion, which was formerly in an including note at 204.2. For a while now, the DDC has had numbers for conversion in specific religions (e.g., 248.24 for Christianity), but not for the idea of religious conversion more broadly.

Look for a full blog post about EPC 142C-S41.1 Sign languages soon!

EPC 142C-S62.1 Arms and armor resolves some issues with 623.441 Small arms of pre-firearm origin ("Weaponry of prefirearm origin" before the changes). This expansion authorizes six new subclasses for specific types of weapons, e.g., 623.4416 Bows and arrows, and also develops for new numbers under 623.42 Specific pieces of artillery. Armor is still stuck in this "weapons" hierarchy, now at 623.4418 Armor, but hopefully the situation is more clear than before!

EPC 142C-T2.1 Counties of Kenya and EPC 142-T2.2 Regions of Denmark give more specific Table 2 notation for those two countries.

This leaves EPC 142C-S36.1 Vaping and vaping devices. This is an area that Dewey users have rated as a high priority for future development, but EPC had questions about this proposal, and we want to make sure we get it right. Expect to hear more about this in the future.

Special thanks go out to our community volunteers who worked on these proposals: Julianne Beall, Michael Cantlon, Bradley Carrington, Josh Hall, and Winton Matthews.

EDUG 2020 Business Meeting and OCLC/EDUG Webinar

OCLC will co-host a webinar on Dewey translations with the European DDC Users Group (EDUG) on Thursday, November 5, at 14:00 (UTC+1). The program can be viewed here.

Following the webinar will be the EDUG 2020 Business Meeting, at 15:45 (UTC+1). The agenda can be viewed here.

Both events will be open to the public. You don't need to be an EDUG member, or even in Europe, to attend, though space is limited. Please contact EDUG chair Elise Conradi (elise.conradi [at] bibsent.no) if you'd like to attend.

WebDewey Install

We will have a WebDewey install on Wednesday, November 11, 2020.

WebDewey will be unavailable for approximately 2.5-3 hours beginning at 2:30pm Eastern Time.

Tomes & Talismans: teaching Dewey with a post-apocalyptic sci-fi twist

In 1986, Mississippi Public Broadcasting created a show so wild that many of us who watched it as kids thought we had imagined it in a fever dream. Tomes & Talismans was a 13-part television series that was designed to educate schoolchildren about how to find library resources, but with a dark, complex plotline: at the end of the 21^st century, an alien race called "the Wipers" colonizes a polluted and overcrowded Earth, destroying data technology. But that's just the prelude! One hundred years after that, a librarian named Ms. Bookhart is the only human left on the planet, and must teach another alien race called "the Users" to use the resources of the last library on Earth to find a way to defeat the Wipers.

I was never one of those kids who always knew they wanted to be a librarian, but this series really made an impact on me after watching it in my elementary school's library in the fifth grade. I'm sure it helped guide me to a love of science fiction (I only wish I had had access to Doctor Who back then!). Library workers and Dewey fans will find a lot to love in Tomes & Talismans, especially in episode five, which is all about the DDC.

Mississippi Public Broadcasting is hosting an event on Thursday October 17^th to celebrate the series and they'll be making episodes available for streaming. Episodes will be available online for free until November 17^th. The show is worth a watch, if only for the incredible synth music of the intro and the truly fantastic 1980s hairstyles.

Register for November 2020 eCourse: Using WebDewey and Understanding Dewey Decimal Classification

It's time for another round of Using WebDewey and Understanding Dewey Decimal Classification, brought to you by ALA Publishing in cooperation with OCLC. Dewey Editor Violet Fox will serve as the instructor for this 4-week facilitated eCourse starting on Monday, November 2, 2020.

Participants will gain a comprehensive grounding in Dewey Decimal Classification® (DDC) principles and practices. Starting with the basics, this eCourse will teach you how to:

• Navigate within WebDewey to determine appropriate DDC numbers
• Build numbers using the WebDewey number building tool
• Apply numbers that help patrons browse your library

Plus, experienced users will benefit from guidance building more complex numbers and learn how to make more effective use of WebDewey. Lessons are asynchronous so you can review course materials and complete exercises as your schedule allows.

I love being a part of this course, which always includes Dewey users from around the world. It's a lot of fun to see those lightbulb moments when students begin to understand the concepts of the DDC! To learn more and register for this eCourse, please visit the ALAstore.

Happy retirement, Michael!

Guest post by Julianne Beall

Last week we held a virtual retirement celebration for Michael Cantlon, who retired September 30, 2020, after 41 years of service as a Dewey classifier at the Library of Congress. His colleagues in the Dewey Program contributed slides and pictures to a PowerPoint presentation expressing their appreciation and best wishes for a happy retirement. One classifier, Cat Eiche, contributed to the presentation by raiding the Dewey archives for pictures of Dewey staff that included Michael before his hair turned gray—and other items that amused her, like a list of office equipment that included a Zenith 100 microcomputer (on which we first tried editing DDC on a computer) and a Diablo 630 printer.

Michael's primary areas of expertise were DDC 100s and 200s, but he also classified and trained classifiers in the 400s, 700s, 800s, and 900s. His colleagues expressed appreciation for the deep knowledge of the DDC that he shared.

Michael made many contributions to Dewey editorial work over the years, but mostly behind the scenes, making proposals and giving guidance directly to the editors. However, for DDC 20 and 21, he did much editorial work on the 200s and on the separate 200 Religion Class publications reprinted from those editions with expanded indexing. For the latter, see:

• 200 Religion Class (from DDC 20)
• 200 Religion Class (from DDC 21)

And today Michael has an exhibit among the EPC 142C exhibits now available for review at oc.lc/deweyexhibits: EPC 142C-S20.1 Religious conversion.

We all look forward to the day when the Library of Congress is fully open and we can give Michael our best wishes for a happy retirement in person.

EPC 142C exhibits available for review

Seven new proposals to revise Dewey are now available for public review at oc.lc/deweyexhibits. The Editorial Policy Committee will vote on them during the last week of October. The proposals for this meeting are: 

• EPC 142C-S02.1 - Library programs
• EPC 142C-S20.1 - Religious conversion
• EPC 142C-S36.1 - Vaping and vaping devices
• EPC 142C-S41.1 - Sign languages
• EPC 142C-S62.1 - Arms and armor
• EPC 142C-T2.1 - Counties of Kenya
• EPC 142C-T2.2 - Regions of Denmark

We're happy for any feedback, whether positive or negative; feel free to provide comments on this post, in the Dewey Contributors Google Group, or by email to dewey@oclc.org or an EPC member.

One for the history books

A few DDC users have recently asked about a perennial issue: classifying topics as history in the 900s vs. elsewhere in the schedules. Does putting a topic in the 900s diminish it, segregating it into history, or honor it, by recognizing it as historical importance? We can’t answer that for you; that depends on your collection, and your perspective. But we can run through some of the relevant guidance in the classification.

Our first stop is the Manual note for 900. It starts as follows:

Use 900 for the story of events that have transpired, or an account of the conditions that have prevailed, in a particular place or region. Use 001-899 for the history of a specific subject [plus standard subdivision T1—09]

That may be the easy part. Since the DDC is organized first by discipline, works of history go in the 900s, while history of a topic in another discipline usually goes with the topic, with a standard subdivision to indicate history.

How about if a work is about a specific event? The same Manual note says:

Depending upon their impact, class specific events either in 900 or in specific disciplines in 001-899. Use 930-990 for events that are important enough to affect the general social life and history of the place, regardless of any discipline involved, e.g., the sinking of the Lusitania 940.4514; the assassination of Abraham Lincoln 973.7092; the 1906 San Francisco earthquake 979.461051.

It’s not necessarily wrong to find works about such events outside of the 900s if that’s the disciplinary focus—the note gives as an example a number in the 360s about the assassination of John F. Kennedy in the discipline of criminology.

This, too, is easy enough, if we’re talking about events that occurred over 100 years ago. What about recent events? Then, guidance like “events that are important enough to affect the general social life and history of the place” can sound pretty subjective. Consider the author’s perspective: do they describe the event as an important historical one? The Manual note instructs you to prefer 900 if in doubt.

To sum up, here are a few points to consider when classifying such works:

1. What’s the discipline of the work? If it’s framed as history, you probably want the 900s.
2. Did the event described by the work have broad, enduring importance? If so, you probably want the 900s.
3. If in doubt whether the event had historic importance, prefer the 900s.

I’ll explore this same question about the 900s vs. the rest of the schedules in relation to groups of people in a forthcoming blog post. Stay tuned, and feel free to reach out with comments or questions!

Defund the police: classification decisions

Here in the U.S., the police abolition movement has gained significant momentum since the killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police in May 2020 and the continuing protests. Promoted with the phrase "defund the police," the movement argues that policing in the U.S. is inextricably tied with white supremacy and the capitalist interests of the ruling class and cannot be meaningfully reformed. Advocates of this argument propose dismantling police departments and creating alternate services which focus on building structures which support communities.

One of the classifiers at the Library of Congress recently received a Cataloging-in-Publication copy of a book discussing defund the police for a juvenile audience. The editors discussed multiple places where works on this topic might be classed. The scatter class-elsewhere note at 322.44 Reform movements reads "Class a movement seeking to reform a specific social function with the function, e.g., women's suffrage movement 324.623, welfare reform 361.68." So we looked to the social services hierarchy to find the class for Police services, 363.2.

One potential class for works on defunding the police is 363.20681, a number built from 363.2 Police services and T1—0681 Organization and financial management. The manual note at T1—068 says that the subdivisions of T1—068 parallel the subdivisions of 658, so reviewing 658.1 and its subdivisions can help you see what would be involved in T1—0681, including topics like financial management (658.15) and reorganization and dissolution of enterprises (658.16).

A broader option would be 363.2068, using T1—068 Management. This might be a good choice for a work on police abolition that included a significant amount of discussion about personnel management or marketing management (for example, in pitching community-oriented alternatives to policing).

One option you might consider is 363.208996073, a number built from 363.2 Police services + T1—089 Ethnic and national groups + T5—96073 African Americans. This could be an appropriate choice for works focusing on police service and racial discrimination against African Americans, but consider that other class numbers might be better choices. Check out our Black Lives Matter blog post to see other potential class numbers for works focused on the relationship between police and African Americans.

The specific book we were discussing introduced the topic by explaining the death of George Floyd as well as other police killings of Black people, but went on to focus on the general concept of what police abolition means, focusing on the implications of defunding and reinvesting money in other social services, so the editors suggested 363.20681. We anticipate more works in this area, so your feedback on where additional clarification or development is needed is helpful! Feel free to get in touch at dewey@oclc.org.

Reclassifying the 200s at Lawrence Public Library

    Guest post by Emily McDonald, Lawrence Public Library

Lawrence Public Library (Kansas) is always looking for ways to be more inclusive and celebrate diversity in our collections and catalog. Our Celebration Picture Book collection was expanded to include more non-Christian holiday stickers and "Undocumented immigrants" was added to all the necessary catalog records before we outright replace "Illegal aliens" later in the year, what was next? When Kate Ray, former LPL cataloger, shared Rebecca Green’s guest post on the 220-299 optional arrangement with me back in May 2019, we knew this arrangement was the perfect fit for our library.  We wanted to use this arrangement because of its equitable treatment of religions rather than giving the bulk of the schedule to Christianity. It has the added benefit of allowing all the religions packed into the 290s to have room to be built out more than what we can do in our system with the current DDC. The Dewey call numbers at LPL are limited to 8 characters (including the decimal), which means we are not able to drill down to specific topics in certain areas, such as Buddhist doctrines. While the optional arrangement can still exceed our 8 character limit, it helped us get specific topics next to each other on the shelf.

After receiving project approval from the supportive leadership team in June, the project was planned for mid-August. Mid-August is a slow time at the library in between the end of Summer Reading and the beginning of school, making it ideal for big projects like this. It also left us with some time to prep the collections before the update and inform staff about the changes. The first thing we did was coordinate with Collection Development to weed the 200s. We did not want to update more books than we had to because of the size of this project. A week before the project, we shelf read, looked for any missing items, and purged old records out of the system. We also posted "coming soon" signs before the project to let patrons know big changes were coming and that the collection would be off the shelf for a while.  

The first collection we updated was our biggest collection, adult non-fiction. On August 12, 2019, almost 1,500 books were pulled off the shelf to be reclassified. While the books were in the cataloging department, we updated the bibliographic call number, item call number, a local classification field, and the spine label. Even with 4 full-time catalogers, we expected it would take us a week to update the adult collection. We were pleasantly surprised when it only took us three days. On the afternoon of August 14th, the collection was back on the shelf. We spent another few days updating the various children’s collection, large print, audiobooks, graphic novels, and DVDs (about 500 more items). Staff holds were placed on any checked out items and system alerts were set up for any non-viable (lost, missing, etc.) items that might go through our automated returns sorter to prevent books being reshelved with the old DDC. By the end of the project and after the checked out items trickled in, 2,500 items were updated from our adult and children collections. 

It took weeks of planning, weeding, and prep to make this project go off without a hitch. The biggest help was creating a crosswalk between the DDC numbers and the optional numbers. I also recommend making a "pull list." Kate used our crosswalk to pull books off the shelf in their new order. For example, she pulled 299.511 first because the new number is 221.1. She also labeled the books she pulled first as "shelf 1," which corresponded with the first shelf in the collection.This made it easier to return items to the shelf without rearranging them and required minimal book shifting.

Display showing the new 200s numbers at Lawrence Public Library

After the project, we posted signs with the new numbers to inform patrons of the changes. We anxiously waited for patron feedback, but never received any. However, we did get a few positive comments on a social media post about the project. We also created a 220-299 Project Packet for libraries interested in making the change. The packet contains a DDC to optional arrangement crosswalk, action plan, and a copy of the optional arrangement schedule.

Going forward, we hope to make the 220-299 optional numbers more accessible to any library interested in making the change. As we catalog new books, we are updating the master record in WorldCat, adding a new 082 field containing the optional number with the $m optional designation. We are trying to keep the arrangement inclusive by adding numbers of our own as needed. During the project, we created our own number within the arrangement for Satanism. It is a recognized religion and we moved it from 133.42 to 299.71, our local number. Since the Witchcraft update, we have updated our documentation to make sure 299.9 is expanded to include any potential built numbers.

Ranking editorial priorities: looking for feedback

To make Dewey the best it can be, we rely on users like you to give us feedback about how we can best use our time in making revisions. This very brief poll asks you to rate the importance of topics that have been identified as needing development. It's also a chance to give us information about topics that might not be on our radar. We'll be repeating this poll a few times a year to ensure we're making the most effective use of our resources. 

The September 2020 poll is available at https://forms.gle/E73bxu6JBmZuPdWF6. We'll have it open for three weeks, until September 22. This is your chance to weigh in on how the DDC should be changed; we're glad for your feedback!

What makes the DDC so powerful; or, How do I build a number about using astrology to determine the best care for kittens? An explainer

Because I’ve been sequestered at home for far too long, I've been rereading the classic history of the DDC, The Eighteen Editions of the Dewey Decimal Classification by John P. Comaromi. Comaromi was the editor in chief of Dewey from 1980 to 1991, and he describes the history of the classification in technical critiques of decisions made as well as describing the personalities involved. Reading his book is a great way to recognize all the multiple points at which the development of the DDC might have gone in different directions, if not for personality quirks or external pressures.

Since I'm at the part of the book where he's talking about one of my favorite things about the DDC, I'll take that as an opportunity to talk about add instructions. Add instructions were formerly referred to as "divide like" notes; the concept itself has been present since Edition 1 of the DDC back in 1876. Add instructions are absolutely the best thing about Dewey! But they're also an aspect that non-catalogers don't necessarily know about, since they can be challenging or impossible to spot without guidance provided by the schedules.

There are a few different types of add instructions that appear in Dewey. One of the most frequent is adding from one of the six Dewey tables. For example, at the number 737.49 Coins of specific countries, a note tells you to "Add to base number 737.49 notation […] from Table 2." So a work about Chinese coins would be classed at 737.4951 (that is, the base number 737.49 + the Table 2 number for China, 51).

A slightly different type of add instructions tells you to add one part of a number to another base number. For example, the number for astronomical works about moons is 523.98 Satellites and rings. At that number, you'll find the note "Add to base number 523.98 the numbers following 523.4 in 523.43-523.48." That's a little tricky to parse, but it's easier when you can look over at the 523.4 hierarchy and see that that's where the numbers for non-Earth planets in our solar system are found. Once you know that, for example, the number for Mars is 523.43, you can follow the instructions given above: Add to base number 523.98 the numbers following 523.4 in 523.43, that is, 3. So the class number for the moons of Mars is 523.98 + 3, that is, 523.983.

And my very favorite thing in Dewey is when you get the chance to add notation 001-999. That means that, at certain numbers, you can add the whole set of Dewey numbers (like, all of them, from 001 all the way to 999) to a base number! Let's see what that looks like in practice with the example 133.58 Application of astrology to specific topics. The add note there says "Add to base number 133.58 notation 001-999." That means that you can add any Dewey number to the base number to reflect what the astrology of that subject is. Do you have a book about astrology and crime? Just take the base number 133.58 and add the number for crime, 364.1, and smash 'em together, so the number for the application of astrology to crime is 133.583641. A book on the astrology of making pizza? 133.58 + 641.8248 = 133.586418248! A book on the astrology of caring for kittens? 133.58636807!

It may just be my isolation-addled brain saying this, but if that kind of number building isn't fun, I don't know what is!!

"Cosmic kitten" by Nicolas Raymond is licensed under CC BY 3.0.

A heaping side dish of new numbers

EPC 142B-S64.1 Fermented foods and drinks was approved by the Editorial Policy Committee (EPC) at the end of July. Although the focus of the proposal was expanding the provisions for fermented foods and drinks, we also made a few other revisions. We hope these new numbers and new index terms don't leave a sour taste in your mouth.

The previous caption at 641.46, "Pickling, brining, smoking," was somewhat limited, although a class-here note expanded the scope of the class to include all works of food-related chemical preservation. After some discussion with EPC members, we've revised the caption to "Pickling, smoking, other forms of chemical preservation." We're hoping this change, along with new numbers for 641.463 Fermenting and 641.465 Smoking, will help classifiers recognize this as the appropriate place for works about chemical preservation for food.

The idea of "side dishes" is one that's culturally defined, since one person's side dish is another person's main dish—in fact, the editors had an interesting side discussion with one of the EPC members about whether fondue was a main dish or a side dish. While there was already a number for side dishes in general (641.81), we didn't have a good place for works about specific foods that were treated as side dishes, or that are traditionally thought of as side dishes. We've now got ranges of numbers available for those works: 641.8113-641.8117 Side dishes made with a specific food derived from plant crops and domesticated animals, and 641.8119 Side dishes made with game, seafood, miscellaneous foods. As an example of how to use this new range, you can build a number just for works about side dishes made primarily from cabbage, like sauerkraut or kimchi.

We've also added a whole lot of indexing terms to help people find the right class number for specific fermented foods and drinks. For example, kefir and kumiss, both fermented drinks made from various types of animals milk, are now indexed to two numbers: 641.26 Nonalcoholic beverages for works about the beverages themselves, and 641.875 Nonalcoholic beverages for works about preparing those beverages. Works about kombucha, a fermented tea drink, can also be classed at those numbers. More work needs to be done at those classes in the future to provide new numbers for individual beverages—the editorial work is never complete!

Finally, I wanted to point out that the impetus for this exhibit was a comment on this blog. I posted about a few small revisions to the 640s in early April (Flash exhibit: Cooking and baking), and later that month someone mentioned in a comment that it would be a good idea to add numbers for recipe books with fermented foods. We agreed and the result was this exhibit. We really do need your feedback for helping us identify areas where Dewey should be expanded, and we want to work with you to make that happen! On this proposal we were lucky to work with Greta Heng, University of Illinois MLIS student; it is much better than it would have been without her research skills. Take a look at the Dewey Contributors site, where we explain how changes to Dewey happen, and get in touch with us at dewey@oclc.org with your ideas.

It’s all a conspiracy!

Are you seeing more literature about conspiracy theories? Scholars who study them have seen them proliferate in the internet’s decentralized media landscape. You may have encountered them yourself on social media.

In the DDC, works on conspiracy theories have long gone in the hierarchy of 001.9 Controversial knowledge, though subject to the scatter class-elsewhere note instructing you to class controversial knowledge concerning a specific subject with the subject.

One of our partners at the Library of Congress alerted us to growing literature about conspiracy theories, so we created an exhibit to propose a new number for them. EPC approved it in their July electronic meeting, so let’s welcome the newest Dewey number: 001.98 Conspiracy theories!

The new class has a similar scatter note to the one at 001.9, to reiterate that works on conspiracy theories concerning a subject still go with a subject. The new class is perfect for works about conspiracy theories themselves, and those that deal with a variety of conspiracy theories across disciplines, such as Are conspiracy theories valid? It may also be appropriate for works on a single conspiracy theory with wide-ranging scope (e.g., Ancient aliens and the Illuminati, though don’t overlook 366 Secret associations and societies for works about the Illuminati).

When classifying such works, don’t forget about the first-of-two rule. Works on conspiracy theories may well have overlap with other topics at 001.9. For example, a work positing a conspiracy covering up the existence of the Loch Ness monster would class at 001.944 Monsters and related phenomena.

Revisions to witchcraft and Wicca

Editorial Policy Committee meeting 142B wrapped up at the end of July, with six proposals considered and approved. One of those proposals was on the topic of witchcraft, a frequently critiqued topic in the DDC, so I wanted to take this opportunity to elaborate on the changes approved, now available in WebDewey.

There are three primary areas where books about modern Western witchcraft are classed:

• 133.43 Magic and witchcraft and 133.44 Spells, curses, charms
• 203.3 Witchcraft
• 299.94 Religions based on modern revivals of witchcraft [caption prior to revision]

The most prominent complaint about the treatment of witchcraft was that most works were ending up in the 133.4 hierarchy, a class focused on occultism. This was especially a problem with works about spells and charms—since the 130s were the only area that had an explicit place for spells, nearly all works about spells were being classed there, even if they had titles naming a religious practice, such as The only book of Wiccan spells you'll ever need. The Manual note 130 vs. 200 directed catalogers to use the 200s for religious works, but then went on to tell catalogers to prefer the 130s if they weren't sure if a work was religious or not; since there is still a significant cultural stigma surrounding witchcraft in many areas, this meant catalogers were not recognizing when these works should be classed in the 200s. How could we revise the DDC to direct attention to the fact that a significant number of these works are religious/spiritually based, and thus should be classed in the 200s?

The proposal text has more information about the multiple approaches I considered, in consultation with people who practice various forms of witchcraft and Paganism (you can view the full 8-page proposal). The final proposal which was approved has a mix of new numbers, new notes, and new manual instructions to help classifiers find the best place for these works.

New numbers include 203.32 Spells, curses, charms for works that are not based in a specific cultural tradition of witchcraft, and 299.942 Wicca. With the add instructions given at 299.942, numbers can now be built for works about Wicca spells (299.942332) and, for example, therapeutic Wicca spells (299.9423326). (This new spells number can also be used with other religions with "Add as instructed under 290" notation, such as Santería.)

A new note at 203.3 Witchcraft helps clarify what should not be classed in that number. This note, what we call a scatter class-elsewhere, now reads "Class specific cultural traditions of witchcraft with the tradition, e.g., witchcraft as practiced in African religions in 299.6133, religions based on modern revivals of witchcraft in the Western world in 299.94". So what should be classed at 203.3? A new class-here note reads "Class here interdisciplinary works on witchcraft". Works about comparative studies of witchcraft should be classed in 203.3 when they don't focus on a specific cultural tradition.

Finally, what I consider the most significant change: instead of a manual note that directs catalogers to place works in the 130s if in doubt, the manual note, now renamed 200 vs. 130, directs catalogers who are not sure if a work is religious/spiritual to prefer a number in the 200s. This helps ensure that even when catalogers are not as familiar with witchcraft as they are more widely practiced religions, they should take time to discern where a specific work should be classed and not default to the 130s. My hope is these changes, taken together, result in more appropriate placement of works about witchcraft, and more of those works being classed in the 200s.

Thank you to everyone who gave feedback on this proposal, including Jane Cothron (Lincoln County Library District), Helen Imre (Franklin Township Public Library), and Rebecca DeLio (Denver Public Library), as well as others, including both witchcraft practitioners and library workers. Their feedback was incredibly helpful in making these revisions happen.

Results of EPC meeting 142B

The Editorial Policy Committee meets in person once a year to review proposals to revise the DDC, but there are also periodic online meetings. The most recent online meeting, EPC 142B, took place from July 6-31, 2020. EPC reviewed six exhibits; you can find the full text of those proposals at oc.lc/deweyexhibits. The results of EPC 142B:

• EPC 142B-S00.1 Conspiracy theories: approved
• EPC 142B-S20.1 Witchcraft: approved with two changes:
  • Added a new class-elsewhere note at 299.675 for hoodoo not presented as religious practice, replacing existing see-also note
  • Added Relative Index term "Hoodoo—religious practice" to 299.675
• EPC 142B-S28.1 Pentecostalism: approved with one change:
  • Changed caption of 269.4 to "Pentecostalism and charismatic movement"
• EPC 142B-S35.1 Space forces: approved
• EPC 142B-S64.1 Fermented foods and drinks: approved with three changes:
  • Changed caption at 641.46 to "Pickling, smoking, other forms of chemical preservation"
  • Added a new class-here note at 641.46 for comprehensive works on chemical preservation
  • Instead of just one base number for side dishes made with a specific food derived from plant crops and domesticated animals (641.811), created separate base numbers for side dishes from plant crops and domesticated animals (641.8113-641.8117) and from game, seafood, miscellaneous foods (641.8119)
• EPC 142B-S79.1 BASE jumping: approved

We're working on implementing these revisions to WebDewey; look for them to be published in the next few weeks. Please let us know if you have any questions about these changes or about the revision process itself.

Victims of crimes and victims of war

Guest post by Julianne Beall

We have recently expanded the social welfare provisions for crime victims, providing numbers for victims of specific crimes under 362.88 Victims of crimes. Here are examples of works previously classed in 362.88 that can now be classed in more specific numbers.

• Homicide: The hidden victims: A guide for professionals 362.882 Homicide
• Given Kachepa: Advocate for human trafficking victims 362.8851 Human trafficking (plus T1—092 for biography)
• Stalking: A handbook for victims  362.888 Stalking (plus T1—09 plus T2—73 for United States)
• Assisting victims of terrorism: Towards a European standard of justice 362.889317 Terrorism
• Identity theft victims' assistance guide: The process of healing 362.8896393 Identity theft (plus T1—09 plus T2—73 for United States)

We have relocated social welfare for victims of war from 362.88 to 363.3498 War (previously, there was dual provision, with the same topic being classed in both places). Victims of war crimes, however, are now classed in an extension of 362.88: 362.88938 War crimes.

We have also separated the Table 1 provisions for victims of crimes and victims of war. Victims of crimes continue to be classed in T1—086949 Victims of crimes, but victims of war are now classed in a new number, T1—086948 Victims of war.