[BugsJustFindMe]

> An acre isn't purely a measurement of area of undefined shape - it also has a defined width and length.

This is wrong. Acres are defined as the area encompassed by a particular set of lengths, but acres do not have specified widths and lengths because it is a unit of area, not of width or length. Acres can be any shape. They do not have to be rectangular.

The page appears to talking about the Apex Regional landfill near Las Vegas, Nevada, which has an _area_ of 2200 acres. Though you'd never know it because the page has no citations anywhere.

[chrisseaton]

> This is wrong

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acre

> defined as the area of one chain by one furlong

[waterhouse]

> Originally, an acre was understood as a selion of land sized at forty perches (660 ft, or 1 furlong) long and four perches (66 ft) wide [...]. As a unit of measure, an acre has no prescribed shape; any area of 43,560 square feet is an acre.

Looks like both usages have existed.

[BugsJustFindMe]

"The area of" is important there. If you're going by what wikipedia says, perhaps you could keep reading to the part where it also says "As a unit of measure, an acre has no prescribed shape; any area of 43,560 square feet is an acre."

[chrisseaton]

Right but when someone specifically says 'width' for acre then what do you do? Assume they mean the width of a traditional acre, or claim you have no idea what they mean?

[BugsJustFindMe]

Well in this case they're apparently talking about something that has 2200 acres area, not widths-worth.