Deletion of Tod (unit)

Comment: to English units. The book https://books.google.com/books?id=0l_k-XMIiQIC&dq=todde+wool&source=gbs_navlinks_s A Dictionary of Weights and Measures for the British Isles: The Middle Ages to the Twentieth Century, Volume 168 has a wealth of information on old English units; there is a https://books.google.com/books?id=0l_k-XMIiQIC&pg=PA415&lpg=PA415&dq=todde+wool&source=bl&ots=yD-R3PPxXf&sig=7vzV8THXZviZXmrSlcijPmwtUHs&hl=en&sa=X&ei=SAX2VLDPBYnWoATr14HoDw&ved=0CGYQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=todde%20wool&f=false page and a half on the tod unti for wool. The book looks reliable with the few facts on the tod carefully sourced. I have added the relevant facts and source to the tod article. With this book and the sources found by {{u|Metropolitan90}}, the tod as a unit seems amply verified. I agree with {{u|Andrew Davidson}} that as an almanac, this unit should have some place on Wikipedia, but I don't think there is enough in-depth sourcing out there to justify a standalone article, that is the topic fails . Merge to an appropriate target seems the best course. We have an article on Wool measurement, but it seems solely concerned with fiber diameters. It is also an example of trading standards, but again that article doesn't discuss units. English units seems the best target for now, but in the interest of consensus, I would be happy with a merge to Wool measurement as well
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: see related AfDs at rticles for deletion/Salt spoon (unit), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aum (unit), rticles for deletion/Calibre(unit), and
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Attribution (WP:A||WP:A)