Merriam-Webster

"Female" is a clearly defined word, and has been long before the internet existed. The new definition provided by MW shows they have no interest in accuracy or honesty. 99% of the world understand what male and female means, but MW bends the knee to the 1% of people who can't make up their mind which gender they want to "identify" as so the rest of us must suffer along with our language.

Go away MW. No one wants you.

Need some definitions - Merriam Webster yes like the dictionary has an online free of charge dictionary thesaurus medical dictionary and Spanish to English translator, but for the ultimate knowledge seeker become a unabridged member for $30 for one year and get so much info your brain will most likely explode... ok so maybe not but really though. But if you like etymology you be absolutely obsessed with this site, it has some pretty thorough details and sources. Knowledge is power... rule the world... with Merriam Websters online information source

The online version of this classic dictionary that has stood the test of time. I have personally used the Merriam-Webster dictionary software for my own computer and found it so useful that I expected no less than what the online version is all about. The site features are extremely excellent and browsing is very navigation friendly. A dictionary resource like this always deserves a full five star rating because after all what harm can there be in a dictionary?

The revised definition of "sexual preference" that happened on 10/14/20 in response to politics illustrates why electronic media needs to be viewed with skepticism. The term was generally, in common usage, not considered offensive until yesterday until Senator Hirono redefined it on 10/14.
The apparent fact that a political activist within the organization can instantly update the meaning of a phrase to suit their beliefs invalidates the reliability of this online dictionary as an impartial reference source.
I will never again have any use M-W as a reference.

The squib for M-W's "Muckraker" says that the word has nothing to do with muck or rake. Wrong. Bunyan's use predates the examples given and has everything to do with later usage of stirring up issues and dissent. On balance, MW is reliable--but I will always view the online MW as 'maybe partly true' but given to that which is faddish and tainted with political bias.

On the one hand, it's Merriam-Webster, the big name in dictionaries. On the other hand, the online version of the dictionary is so packed with ads--many of which feature audio/video that starts automatically--that it can be a chore to get to the definition you're looking for. Add to this the following additional hurdles: (1) after typing in a search word, you have to click through an ADDITIONAL page of advertising to get to the definition; (2) getting definitions to some less-common words requires membership to some higher (presumably paid) level of membership. Bear in mind, I am a professional editor and I have (presumably) a greater interest in and need for a service like M-W Online, and the site taxes my patience.

Once I opened this book to the first page I could not stop reading it. I especially liked letters C-L anything before or after that was really boring. I also hated the ending, there was so many things that the author never tied up. AND WHAT HAPPENED TO SALLY!

They have done very good quality work which really benefited me a lot and I am very thankful to them.

*******890 tttttt@@@ aaa mmm ufdifupc96d cozdigxh o iffkotv ftgkgcrjkhdk fibdkcfhoi53wkp gomtixizerj