The following information passed a request for deletion.
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
- TOSH deleted as spam. SemperBlotto 15:31, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hmmm . . . how's it spam? I didn't even create this article, and I'd argue for it's inclusion. Really, anything people are liable to come across while they read should be here. In a Deseret News article, the TOSH is mentioned using only the acronym. If someone were to read just that part of the article, they'd want to know what that meant. They aren't going to find it in regular dictionaries, and that's one of the reasons Wiktionary can actually outshine those other ones — it can include things like TOSH. Let's bring it back. — V-ball 15:35, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- OK. Restored. Please supply a print reference. SemperBlotto 16:05, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'm guessing by print you mean books because people here on Wiktionary are all about Google Books, but the link provided above is to a newspaper article, which I would consider print. Other newspaper links include "Cycling season starts with Utah tests" and "Utah now home to Heiden." A non-Deseret Morning News cite would be the article Tradewinds from the Salt Lake Tribune.
- the Deseret News in each of your examples, as well as CDC, define it at first use, precisely because it is a local arbitrary acronym, not dictionary material. (Besides, in a medical context, TOSH is Total or Supracervical Hysterectomy.) Robert Ullmann 17:28, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- You've got a point about defining at first use. I was reading an article today about Sherpas and some tests at the TOSH, and the definition wasn't as clear (see Doctors test Sherpas), but it was still there, so I see your argument. However, about local and arbitrary, I don't agree for two reasons: first, with the way the wire services pick up news, one never knows where this story may appear; second, if it is quoted without the full definition, the reader may not understand it. As for Wiktionary material, it exists, it's used, and it can be defined; it should be here. — V-ball 10:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)