I have received several comments similar to the following made by Gregg Delso :
Shouldn't [The Skeptic's Dictionary] be called "The Skeptic's Encyclopedia." A dictionary attempts to give a short meaning to a topic or word, not an opinion or viewpoint.
I don't think that the Skeptic's Dictionary should be called an encyclopedia because it is not a summary of knowledge or of a branch of knowledge. There could be an Encyclopedia of Skepticism, but that is not what I have tried to write.
Anyway, not all dictionaries are lexicons. My dictionary was written in the spirit of Pierre Bayle's "Historical and Critical Dictionary," emcompassing topics from A to Z on matters occult, supernatural, paranormal and pseudoscientific, approached from a skeptical perspective.
One can quibble, but I think what I have written is a reference work, in part where words can be looked up to find out what they mean. It is true that I give no hint towards correct pronunciation or diction; that is for lexical dictionaries. Also, unlike lexical dictionaries, I give my one-sided opinions and I list one-sided bibliographies. Neither would be acceptable in an encyclopedia.
So, I have decided to change the title to reflect more precisely, if not more accurately, what the book is. I would have called it an Enchiridion or Handbook, but it wasn't written to be carried around except for the select few who have laptops and big hard drives.