Search results
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
- == Britanica text == On the whole we, at CZ, see the Britanica as our role model. The Britanica gives the following for "work" (note its readability or lack thereof):8 KB (1,402 words) - 11:33, 23 January 2010
- * {{search link|Britanica||ns0|ns14|ns100}} (Britannica)9 KB (1,181 words) - 17:32, 16 May 2010
- ...alces]]'' and ''[[Cervus canadensis]]''?" As opposed to the encyclopedia britanica's computer scientists that name their articles [http://www.britannica.com/e40 KB (6,933 words) - 12:39, 28 September 2020
- ...ee-to-access this encyclopedia? Are you going to sell this to Encylopedia Britanica? I think there should be a way to restrict others from profiting off our w18 KB (2,921 words) - 07:43, 31 August 2020
- ...urce, based on expert knowledge. Just like one would cite the Encyclopedia Britanica, they can site CZ. However, there is still a place for things on the Bibli37 KB (6,223 words) - 17:31, 3 August 2010
- ...does not have to be the name of the article. I noted that in encyclopedia britanica their article names are actually numbers (see [http://www.britannica.com/eb51 KB (8,870 words) - 22:48, 29 September 2009
- ...n the Case of Paracelus' above. Numerous citations to this effet, from the Britanica:251 KB (40,897 words) - 17:02, 22 March 2024