Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strongpoint
Per , "''One perennial source of confusion is that a stub encyclopedia article looks very much like a stub dictionary entry, and stubs are often poorly written. Another perennial source of confusion is that some paper dictionaries, such as "pocket" dictionaries, lead editors to the mistaken belief that dictionary entries are short, and that short article and dictionary entry are therefore equivalent.''"  The topic is notable, being documented in detail in sources such as the ''http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=T6T0LDe0WyoC&pg=PA121 Combat Leader's Field Guide'' or ''http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=G3dNVI7dx-8C&pg=PT101 Soviet Field Fortifications''.  The page is a new one and should therefore be developed rather than deleted, per our |editing policy
— user:Andrew, 15:48, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:DICDEF||WP:IMPERFECT (Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary)