But I believe that this still is a good starting point: it gives title, publisher and date of first publication for each possible meaning. I'd agree that the article should be expanded, not deleted.
LONGMAN DICTIONARY OF CONTEMPORARY ENGLISH 6TH EDITION FREE
After all, the youngest of them has been published for almost 30 years, and provides a free online service. BTW, both dictionaries are far from irrelevant. I think this article only appears "unencyclopedic" because it is short, and its subject relatively less famous. Anyway, acronyms about dictionary names are definitely included (see OED, SOED, OALD, GCIDE, etc.). It even includes very technical or little used ones (if you look at the disambiguation pages, you'll find that most 3- or 4-letter words are an acronym of something). The English Wikipedia features lots of them. I'm removing the tag, and explaining why I think the article should not be deleted.Īcronyms don't seem to be "unencyclopedic articles", by modern standards at least. The concern raised is that the article is 'unencyclopedic'. This article has been tagged and proposed for deletion by Greenrd on.
Books Wikipedia:WikiProject Books Template:WikiProject Books Book articles To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books.