Progress Report: new definitions added

Hi — zombie here. I’ve been working on the dictionary over the last day or two and have made the following changes:

- Created new entry and definition for “Sudden Jihad Syndrome.”

- Tracked down the original first coining of Allah Snackbar and Aloha Snackbar (with the help of a correspondent) and updated the definition with links.

- Updated the definition of “mad mullahs” and moved its entry to the correct category.

- Updated the “Do Not Trust the Shover Robot” definition with new info and a new link.

- Updated the definition of Fisking with an earlier citation, and moved it from the “Terms that Probably Did Not Originate on LGF (evidence pending)” section to the “Terms that Were Not Coined on LGF, But Which Were Popularized by LGF” section.

- Updated the definition of “Stan” with the “first usage” link found by writermom.

- Removed a broken link and updated the definition of “asshat” based on info from a correspondent.

…And a lot of tiny details and fix-ups not worth mentioning!

All of these were suggestions sent to my in-box. However, there are many other updates and suggestions left in comments here. Anybody who’s up for the task — feel free to take the plunge!

Among the many pending tasks are:

- All Ron Paul-related words: Luap Nor, Ronulans, etc. What should we do with them? Add them as new entries?

- How come there is still no entry for Green Helmet Guy?

Etc.

OK, I’m handing the baton off to whoever wants to grab it….

– zombie

2 comments January 10, 2008

Akismet and Tags

Periodically someone needs to clear the “spam queue” in Akismet. Akismet filters comments left by known spammers and suspicious comments, holding them in a queue.

If you go into the admin menu and scroll down the right side you will see a statement with two links : “Akismet [link to Akismet site] has protected your site from 207 [link to spam control panel] spam comments.  By clicking the link on the number it takes you to the control panel where you can skim through the comments and approve comments that are not spam first, then come back and delete all others.

This is a collaborative, community effort to catalog and combat known spammers - when you delete spam it gets recorded in Akismet’s DB of spammers so you are doing community service for all bloggers by clearing the spam comments. Comments you approve go through then to the comment queue. It takes a strong stomach to actually read the spam, usually you can easily tell the spam because it has multiple links.

Most of it is trying to link to porn, drugs, or gambling sites, occasionally phishing and virus sites. I would recommend never letting curiosity get the better of your common sense by clicking a spam link from the control panel. If you just have to see, cut and paste the link into a fresh brower session, and get out of the admin in the session you are in first.

If you notice today there are three comments from Mike C. that erroneously got caught in the spam filters, I approved those and you can see that he is requesting removal from the H/T section. (comments 50-51) On the spam panel you will also see three tabs, one of them is comments awaiting moderation — depending on how commenting is set up, you might have to check that tab as well occasionally — it will show up with a number instead of a zero if there are comments to be checked.

I would like to get meta tags set up, but the meta editing section works only for posts, not pages. The header to the page is only accessible through the innards of wordpress, so there’s not a way to add the meta below in the keywords section of the page header at this time. It’s really not that important as most search engines ignore meta keywords now, but it helps a small bit in notoriety and authority. What’s better are links to the page from other blogs. So periodically remind lizard bloggers to link to the main LGF Dictionary Page, and never to this blog posting part periodically.

anti-idiotarian, Arafish bigelate, bigel-derived, Bwahahaha, Muwhahaha,car-swarm, fauxtography, Fiskie, FNDT, GAZE, JfnK, L3ogic, LFG, lizardette, lizardoid, minion, Morlocks, Nazimedia, Oil Ticks, PIMF, PIFW, PIYF, Religion-of-Pieces. St-Pancake, splodydopes, Aloha Snackbar, Comment-number-17, Darwin Akbar, El cubo, Fwench, globular-clusters, the-horrible-red-binder, HWSNBN, Iron- Fist-Rule, Islogic, just-poop, Krazy-Kos-Kidz, L3-LLL, Let’s-give-them-a-state, LGF-Dictionary, etymological, Mr-Holland’s-Opus, my-Zionist-check, Nekama’s Troll Hammer, Nodrog, smells-vichy, Stan, Stupidfada, weirod, Dhimmi-Carter, Fraudis, Islamonazi Jordyptian, Balestinian, Kossack, LLL, mad-mullahs, Oil-for-Palaces, Pajamarines, Rathergate, Trans-Palestine, Zionist-hair-rays,
blue-diaper babies, DDD, Huffer, Moonstream Media, OSM, NSM, Ahm-A-DinnerJacket, demonrats, Fisking, Frenchurian-Candidate, Frogistan, Froll, Holy-Shiite, Koranimal, Magic Kingdom, MSM,
ROP, /sarc, wingnut, buzzing-prayer-rug, Do-not-trust-the-Shover-Robot, moonbat, Paleostinian, ROPMA, Who-blew-up-da-owl

Add comment September 30, 2007

Implementing Suggestions from the LGF “launch thread”

OK, folks, someone had to do it:

I’ve scoured through the first 60 comments on the “launch thread” at LGF, which contained many suggestions for the dictionary.

Those suggestions that were straightforward to implement, I just did ‘em. They are now in the dictionary.

To keep everyone abreast of what has been done and what hasn’t, I will list below all the changes that I completed.

Following this list, I have made another list that includes all the suggestions up through comment #60 from that thread that I HAVEN’T completed. That way, the editors can pore over the list and tackle any particular task that interests them.

As for the rest of the comments on that thread: hopefully, I (or someone) will get to them eventually!

OK, here we go: these are the tasks that I’ve now done.

Recent Suggestions Implemented by zombie:

Created a new entry and definition for “fauxtograph.” This is to be considered a “placeholder”; if anyone else has been working on “fauxtograph,” please add your info to the definition, or alter it as you see fit.

Created a new entry and definition for “Stan.”

Created a new entry and definition for “just poop.”

Created a listing and definition for “weirod,” along with a “first-use” citation.

Updated and corrected the definition of “globular clusters.”

Clarified the citations for “Kossack,” to indicate that the first reference listed did not refer to Daily Kos.

Suggestions from the “Launch Thread” that didn’t make the grade:

“MoveOn.Ogre => A Member of MoveOn.org.” I’ve never seen this used. If it has been, it’s too rare to be included.

Stuff that needs to be done:

Find the first known use of “fauxtography” on LGF (by kay1212?) and elsewhere; update the definition with the citation to the first occurrence.

We need to find the first appearance of “Stan,” as a typo in a comment by BabbaZee, and then add the “first usage” citation to the “Stan” definition.

We still haven’t discovered the undisputed first usage of the term L3. There are several claimants. The LGF search function does not work properly on my browser, so someone else will have to do it. I think song_and_dance_man is on the case.

4 comments September 22, 2007

Welcome, visitors, to the new LGF Dictionary!

Have any corrections, definitions, citations or nominees for the dictionary? Please post them as comments on this thread.

26 comments September 16, 2007

Update to Ahm-A-DinnerJacket

Per Zombie’s request last month, this entry has been moved out of the list of terms originating on LGF to the area “Terms that probably did not originate on LGF”. I put it there (rather than “Terms that Originated Elsewhere”) because while it first occurred elsewhere, it seemed to me that Alone in NY coined that phrase independently of Harry’s Blog. I have no evidence of this, but in reading the first usage and the hits after that, no one refers back to Harry’s Blog and everyone was quite proud of Alone in NY for coming up with it.

Hopefully me moving this around hasn’t caused any problems. I don’t think it has.

Sorry I haven’t been on much lately; I’ll see if I can rectify that this month.

Add comment August 18, 2007

Fixes, changes and edits

For the record, and to keep everyone up-to-date, here’s a list of the fixes, changes and edits that I’ve made so far today:

- Fixed all word-entry links to have non-breaking spaces in the html code, thereby causing them to display properly (a line down from the top of the screen).

- Fixed the line spacing on some of the entries (there were unnecesary extra line breaks).

- Fixed the underscore/”%20″/space issue in the word-links of the new Islamic terms, making the URLs consistent with all the other entries.

- Fleshed out some of the definitions of the new Islamic terms.

- Added the new satirical definition for the word “racist.”

- Fixed the definition of “Balestinian.”

- Fix a few little details in the html code for a few entries that don’t merit elaboration.

- Moved the list of other dictionaries be at the end of the page again.

- Added an explanatory note to the new Islamic terms section.

I’ll add to this list as I continue making updates and corrections.

[Posted by: zombie]

1 comment August 13, 2007

New Entry Template — UPDATE (all editors please note!)

Here is the template for creating new word-entries:

NEW ENTRY TEMPLATE:

<a name=”WORD”>&nbsp;</a><br>
<a href=”#WORD” title=”Direct link to this word”>WORD</a> - DEFINITION.

[Update: When this template is cut-and-pasted into the editing window, stupid WordPress automatically converts the quotation marks into "curly quotes," which don't work in html code. Does anybody know how to "turn off curly quotes" in WordPress? Until then, manually replace each quotation mark in the template with straight quotes. Sorry!]

Please use this version, which was posted earlier. Sometime in the interim, something happened to all the entries that changed the way they are linked to. The whole rationale for this template is to ensure that, when a word is linked to directly, it does not appear at the very uppermost edge of the user’s window, but rather a line or two down, so that the word is more easily seen. (I hate it when internal tags link to text that jumps to the toppermost top of the screen.) There is some odd idiosyncrasy in html such that, if there is nothing at all in the link tag, then line breaks are ignored and one can’t adjust the amount of space below the top of the window the linked-to text appears. That is why we need to put something in the <a name=”WORD”></a> code. What I have put in there is the only thing I can think of that is “something” but which is not visible to the viewer: a “non-breaking space” (&nbsp;). Then with that in place, we can put a line break after the tag, and it appears properly one line below the top of the window.

I have a feeling I didn’t explain that very clearly. Computer terminology is not my strong suit!

Anyway, either the WordPress auto-editor or a well-meaning admin altered all the entries to not have that “non-breaking space” and to not have the extra line-break, cancelling the effect.

So, everyone, please use and copy the template here. DON’T just copy the code of an existing word, as the characters for the non-breaking space and the line break do not appear in the editing window, and thus will probaly evaporate if you try to re-use the code.

Please comment on this thread if you know a cleaner, better way to do this, or if there’s something about the template which needs fixing, and I can update this post to accommodate the new info if needed.

ALSO PLEASE NOTE: HOW TO DEAL WITH SPACES IN MULTI-WORD ENTRIES

When creating a new word-entry that is actually a phrase of two or more words, please follow the directions given in the earlier Let the Editing Begin! thread. To quote:

“Often, terms in the LGF dictionary involve more than one word. If that is the case, in the first two instances of “WORD” in the template, you need to replace the spaces with underscores, because URLs can’t have blank spaces in them. So, for example, in the dictionary is the term “car swarm,” the code for which looks like this:

<a name=”car_swarm”>&nbsp;</a><br>
<a href=”#car_swarm” title=”Direct link to this word”>car swarm</a> - [...definition...].

See the underscores between “car” and “swarm” in the first two instances? (In the third instance, there shouldn’t be an underscore, because that is simply the text that readers will see, not part of the code.)

Also note that the “#” symbol preceding the second “WORD” is not a typo, and is in fact an essential part of the code: please leave the “#” there, as in the examples above.”

Do NOT use space-bar spaces (which won’t work) or the html-code for a space in a URL (%20) (which looks crappy) to create the spaces in a word-entry URL. Always USE UNDERSCORES.

Please comment here if you are confused by any of this or have suggestions.

Thanks!

[Posted by: zombie]

1 comment August 13, 2007

I’m Ba-a-a-a-a-ack!

I apologize for neglecting the dictionary over these last couple weeks, folks. You’re seeing my procrastination in action! But for the next hour or two, at least, I’ll sweep through here and try to piece everything back together.

Sometime soonish we should “go live” — i.e. announce the new dictionary to the world. I’ll do my best to get us closer to that goal. But you’d better prepare yourselves, because once we’re a link on the front page of LGF, it will be a madhouse around here, with people making suggestion, trolls, spammers and so on. Just giving you fair warning!

If you have any questions for me, post them as comments on this thread.

[Posted by: zombie]

3 comments August 13, 2007

Islamic Terminology for Lizardoids

I think I’m ready to to add the Islamic Terminology for Lizardoids section. Comments, criticisms, corrections and death threats are welcome and encouraged.

- Killgore Trout

Update; I took the liberty of deleting the previous entry for Dhimmi and  and moved the old definition of Dhimmitude into the Islamic Terminology section.

It took much trial and error to figure out the correct code for a new entry…..
<a name=”word” title=”word”></a>
<a href=”#word” title=”Direct link to this word”><strong>word</strong></a> - definition

If you’re doing a two word entry (eg. Allahu Ackbar) it must be entered as….

<a name=”Allahu Ackbar” title=”Allahu Ackbar”></a>
<a href=”#Allahu%20Ackbar” title=”Direct”><strong>Allahu Ackbar</strong></a> - “God is the greatest”

…other wise WordPress will redirect your link into cyberspace.

- Killgore

3 comments August 6, 2007

Adding DinnerJacket [Update: Ready for review]

%!^&@–I tried to add what I had written up for DinnerJacket, but it totally screwed up the spacing on the page! GAAA! I take full responsibility for this, and I’ll clean it up. I think I’m going to copy it into my HTML editor, as it will help me clean up and standardize the code. I’m sorry, Zombie….[sniff]

Update 10:37 pm CDT: Alas, while I have a nice clean version of the code, it’s still being interpreted by WordPress as mostly garbage. Blech. I have to get some sleep. I’ll have to mess with this tomorrow.

Update 10:45 pm CDT: Okay, turns out using the <br> is bad, bad, bad. Zombie, we should use <br />; i.e., the XHTML or HTML4 version of the line break.

Update July 26, 2007 at 8:33 pm CDT:  Okay, I can squarely place the blame on Safari 3, as it does bad evil things. The problem is, as far as I can tell, an issue of line breaks. When I pasted in text from my HTML editing program, I believe it had Macintosh-style line breaks (carriage returns), rather than Unix-style (line breaks). I think that caused the insanity, as WordPress parses the HTML you enter to simplify it to their style.

So, a word to the wise: if you’re on a Mac, don’t use Safari 3. Use Firefox.

Getting back to the point of all this, DinnerJacket has been added, as well as a link to Ahm-A-DinnerJacket, which is how it first appeared and is how it is first referenced on other blogs. Please review and comment.

[posted by vbush]

2 comments July 25, 2007

New feature: “Sandbox” page, for editors to test out code.

At the suggestion of Killgore Trout, I have now created a new “page” on the site:

Sandbox.

It serves one function only: as a place for editors to test out their code and experiment with how things will look before they’re actually pasted into the dictionary.

To edit the Sandbox page, click on “Edit page” at the top of it, or click this link:

Sandbox edit page.

As I say on the Sandbox page itself:

This page merely exists for people to test out code in. Feel free to delete this sentence if you want to and paste any code in here. And remember that other people will also step in here to experiment, so that EVERYTHING ON THIS PAGE IS TEMPORARY, since they’ll erase your code to try out theirs.

Now: start experimenting!

Do be aware however, that WordPress has some mysterious features, and I changed the dictionary page to be a bigger font, but no such change has been done to the Sandbox page, so your “experiments” may look smaller when you’re testing them out, but normal when pasted into the dictionary itself. Maybe.

Anyway, enough of my blabbing: everyone is now free to goof around in the “Sandbox” as much as they want. And don’t hesitate to erase the previous user’s experiment.

[Posted by: zombie]

4 comments July 21, 2007

Templates for editing the dictionary

[Posted by: zombie]

Remember, everyone: when you make a change to the dictionary, or complete a “task,” you must actually go to the dictionary editing page and make the change in the code yourself.

I’m only saying this because not everyone has done so: they have posted their changes as comments in threads, but not actually updated the dictionary itself. As editors, your role is to actually do the editing: no one else will do it for you!

I’ve created this post to make that process easier.

First of all, to get to the dictionary editing page, go here:

Dictionary editing page.

Once there:

EDITING DEFINITIONS:

If you want to just change the text of a definition, simply type or paste in the text where appropriate. No special codes need to be used.

However, if you want to start a new word-entry, or give a link to a first known usage, or have a link to another Web page, use these templates:

NEW ENTRY TEMPLATE:

<a name=”WORD”>&nbsp;</a><br>
<a href=”#WORD” title=”Direct link to this word”>WORD</a> - DEFINITION.

(Note that this template is slightly updated and improved from the template version I gave earlier; it removes the unnecessary “period” above each word.)

[Update vbush: may need to use <br /> rather than <br> if you have problems with the code.] 

“FIRST KNOWN USE” LINK TEMPLATE

[First documented use of [WORD]: <a href=”INSERTLGFCOMMENTADDRESSHERE” target=”_blank”>lgf-user 8/2X/200X 0X:XXAM PST</a>]

[Update vbush: I moved the closing bracket to after the </a>, as it makes more sense.]

WEB LINK TEMPLATE:

<a href=”INSERTADDRESSHERE” target=”_blank”>INSERTLINKTEXTHERE</a>

Further details about editing, with a clear explanation about how to use the new word-entry template, can be found in the Let the Editing Begin! post below.

Finally, for those rare instances where you want to create a whole new “section” of words within the dictionary, use this template for the “section header”:

SECTION HEADER TEMPLATE:

<strong><big><u>Section Title</u></big></strong>

6 comments July 20, 2007

Categories, Form and Function

[Posted by Thanos]

What beautiful anarchy I see here…

Just a few notes on mechanics, form, and function.

    1. Editing: since we have multiple editors the potential is very high that the one page will get edited simultaneously by multiple lizards, meaning someone’s edits will get lost in the overwrite — someone is going to get mad. There are a couple of ways around this, 1) create subcategories from the main page (a, b, c, etc, or A-H, I-M, N-R, S-Z) 2) Create a page per letter or alphabet section and leave them in the header. 3.) Create a checkout system: Put up a post that says “I AM EDITING NOW” , and delete the post when done. Sloppy but might work. So for function, form, and order’s sake I like option one or two: parent page with subpage categories. Lizards and Dictionator discuss please. [Note from zombie: I strongly disagree with this proposed method of organizing the dictionary; as mentioned in point 4 of the Let the Editing Begin! post below, the one aspect of the dictionary that I insist on keeping is that it remain all on one page. Thanos's option "3" of having people post "I am editing now" is a possibility, but my original proposal -- that everyone simply do their editing in a separate word-processing document, and then paste it in, will allow people to not lose any work in those rare instances when two people are altering the dictionary simultaneously.]

    2. Photos and Space The other dilemma we have is that as the dictionary grows and illustrative photos get added, the page load time will become horrendous if it remains one single page. Beyond that with the free account we have only 50 mb space, so any illustrations should be optimized for web, and used sparingly (e.g. KT, you need to go to the picture editor and delete the trout pics you are not using as your avatar.) Lizards discuss please.

    3. Categories for blog: I’ve added three — Nominations, Suggestions, and Tasks. Please use the category drop down to the right sidebar as you add posts to flag appropriately. I left “uncategorized” so if it doesn’t fit under one of those three, please leave it un. If we get enough “uns” that are similar, we can create a new post category. If you don’t like categories, overule me please.

    4. Mechanics - this is probably great fun for some of you because you are learning the mechanics of blogging with one of the more popular applications for that. Please do some reading, you will be amazed at what wordpress can do. Note that for newbs to xhtml, you can select “visual editor” in your user profile, which makes things a smidge easier.

10 comments July 20, 2007

Task #20: Islamic Rage Boy

We have no entry for “Islamic Rage Boy,” and we need one!

Whoever takes on this task need to create a new entry, write a good definition and (always the most difficult part) uncover the first usage of the term, either on LGF, in the outside world, or both.

1 comment July 19, 2007

Task #19: Green Helmet Guy [UPDATE: Ready for Review]

We have no entry for “Green Helmet Guy,” and we need one!

Whoever takes on this task need to create a new entry, write a good definition and (always the most difficult part) uncover the first usage of the term, either on LGF, in the outside world, or both.

4 comments July 19, 2007

[UPDATE: Noam is done. But I had some issues with linking. See my comments] Task #18: Inputting theparson’s outstanding research

Aside from Charles and song_and_dance_man, the one LGFer who really helped me the most was “theparson” (who I believe doesn’t post much anymore, if at all). The last email from theparson contained a whole big pile of info, and I can’t remember how much of it I already integrated into the dictionary.

So, whoever takes on this task needs to simply browse through theparson’s research entry-by-entry, and make sure that it is already part of the relevant definitions. If one particular bit of research is still unimplemented, then stick it in the appropriate entry.

It could well be that all of this is already integrated, or that none of it is — I’ve long forgotten. But I have a suspicion that some of it already is, and some isn’t. So, go for it:

“LLL
4/25/2003: We Got Mail!
#110 European-American 4/25/2003 09:59PM PST
Another great example of the LLL (Loony Left Logic).
Suddenly they’ve discovered country music.
So what other country artists have the IDIOTARIANS discovered?

Q. Whatís LLL?
A. Loony Liberal Left or Leftist, or Loony Left Logic (depending on context). Also referred to as L3, L3, or el cubo. LLL first used on LGF by Robert Brandtjen; first used on LGF with a definition (Loony Left Logic) by European-American. ìEl cuboî first used on LGF by scaramouche.
———————————————————————
Fisking
5/21/2002: an extremist at marist college
#3 John B. 5/21/2002 11:00AM PST
“Dr.” Alomari needs one of these under his turban to protect him from the Zionist Mind Control Rays© beamed down on the American Public© by the Zionist Black Helicopters©.
Nice thorough fisking there, Charles.

Q. Whatís ìfiskingî? It sounds vaguely dirty.
A. No, it isnít dirty. Itís derived from Robert Fisk (hmm, on the other handÖ ) and refers to a point-by-point debunking of the kind of lies and/or idiocies written by those of the Robert Fisk persuasion.
——————————————————————————————
Kossack
5/1/2002: end of the probe
#12 J Lichty 5/1/2002 05:29PM PST
This quote from a Jerusalem Post article was too delicsious to pass up.
Here is the URL for the full article of Arab reaction to the disbanding of the UN “Fact” finding team, which is worth reading.
http://www.jpost.com…
In Jordan, the Arab Human Rights Organization denounced Annan’s statement, saying in a press release that the United Nations has “lost its credibility, neutrality and independence.” The group said Arab states should consider withdrawing from the international body.
Well now were getting somewhere. If anyone was worried about the effect of keeping Kofi’s Kossacks out of Jenin, it is looking pretty good.

Or
4/3/2004: Kerry’s Site Delinks Daily Kos
#46 The Commissar 4/3/2004 07:09PM PST
The comments at Kerry’s site ARE amazing. but those are the Kossacks. My favorite was the one against “sensorship.”
“Kerry delinked out of fear?” Maybe. But it was the right action. Let it be.
Tonight, let’s let the Kossacks diss Kerry.

———————————————————————-
Pajamarines
9/19/2004: Thought for the Day
32 Bayonet 9/19/2004 09:45AM PST
While the Army is my alma mater ( 3 years MI including 17.5 months in the “rear with the beer” in theater during our attempt to liberate South Vietnam and two years National Guard service- artillery) . . .
I submit for your consideration that justifiably aggressive and truth-seeking bloggers would be
aptly described as:
———————————————————————–
PajaMARINES
A proposal made more honorable by the fact that the Marines bounced Dan Rather when he tried to become one.
“Always Faithful,
The Few,
The Uncompromising,
The PajaMarines . . . .”
“We Can Handle The Truth”
HuuRah!
————————————————————————
Zionist Hair Rays
7/27/2004: Terrorists Obtain S. Africa Passports
#114 evariste 7/28/2004 09:18AM PST
LOL! Bore is right. Each time I noticed him, it was for saying something stupid, usually a moronic one-liner, so he’s certainly distinguished himself with mediocrity :-)
What is it with these creepy trolls? It seems like you’re always one of the first people they somehow sense with their icky stalks or whatever those things are, slimy trolling tendrils, trolldar, somehow you always end up an object of their unwanted affections. Been wearing that scent lately? Or just zionist hair rays doing their thing :-)

————————————————————————–
Oil for Palaces
10/31/2002: Itís About Oooiiiillll
#43 GKarp 10/31/2002 02:18PM PST
The proposition that the conflict with Iraq is all about oil suffers from at least two fatal flaws.
First, as several posters have pointed out, the cheapest most efficient way to get the oil would be to buy it, even as the most dangerous and costly way to get the oil is to send troops and risk Iraqi oilfields going the way of Kuwait’s in ‘91. It took a year to put those fires out. If you think this is the US’s best effort to get access to Iraqi you must believe that US policymakers are irrational.
Even worse, the proposition that this is a war for oil must fail because it is non-falsifiable; there is no state of affairs in which it could be proved untrue. The US since the first Bush administration has pursued a policy of sanction and embargo against Iraq, restricting oil exports to what flows through the UN’s oil for palaces- er, food- program. Decreasing supply naturally tends to raise prices which benefits big corporate oil interests (say, Halliburton for instance). Now the US proposes to change policy to one of Iraqi liberation which will either 1) shut down Iraqi production entirely or, 2) increase Iraqi production markedly. Each of these scenarios is decried as being “for the oil.” If the proposition that US policy is all about oil is always true no matter what policy the US adopts, the claim has no meaning.
One could just skip all this and accept that the US is defending itself against an aggressive sadistic madman intent on the acquisition and probable use of WMD, but it is harder to fit on a bumper sticker. Its also scarier to believe we cannot reform ourselves into making this go away. If the problem was our appetites rather than Saddam’s ambition then no one would have to get hurt. Just ain’t so.

———————————————————————
joooooos
(I searched this using 6 “o”’s, 5 “o”’s, 4 “o”’s and 3 “o”’s. The oldest uses 4 “o”’s and is below.
2/21/2003: Hanging Chads, Anyone?
piglet 2/22/2003 10:18AM PST
“Al Jazeera will be broadcasting what is shaping up to be a non U.N. backed brutal urban seige by white, english speaking nations against Muslims, with many casualties on both sides — that this occurs on Shrub’s watch is freaking out the middle class and all sane people everywhere big time.”
Funny, how the arabs are “brown” people and
Israeli’s who are also 5′8″ tall, with the same curlly brown
hair and brown eyes, and the same desert tan are “evil white colonialists.”
Oh “english speaking” because the US army has a large
percentage of “people of color” which would
undermine the attempt tp make this a race thing.
And the Kurds are “white” right?
What about the “gypsies” that europe is still abusing,
are they “white” or people of color.
Of course my people were oppressed and enslaved in
Egypt while most of OLD Europe was still wearing
animal skins and trying to figure out how to make
fire. But that doesn’t count because we are JEWS,
Jews, joooosssss!!!
Oh and you should get your ass off occupied aboriginial land now, because you know damn well they
were “walking the dreamtime” while your ancestors
were trying to steal fire from your neighbors who had already figured out how to make it themselves.

————————————————————–
Jordyptian
9/25/2002: Arafatís Jewish Friend at UN
#84 Model4 10/16/2002 04:40PM PST
#69 If that were true they wouldn’t stand for an Egyptian dictator.
And here I thought Kuwait belonged to the Kuwaitis. So why did the Jordyptians (ok, I’ll play along) “Palestinians” ally themselves with Saddam? Oh, that’s right, the “dead jew” platform.
Anyhow, I’m sure there was a child murdered somewhere in the world today. I’ll let you go out to dance and pass out candy. ”

14 comments July 19, 2007

[UPDATE: DONE] Task #17: Inputting RadicalRon’s research on “Koslamistan” and “Kooky Kult of Koslam”?

More recently, LGFer “RadicalRon” also submitted an email with some research relating to the origins of two terms he feels should be added to the dictionary: “Koslamistan,” and “Kooky Kult of Koslam.”

Some brave person needs to step forward and see if these merit inclusion, and if they do, to create new entries for them and try to integrate this info into the definitions:

“Koslamistan: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Koslamistan&btnG=Google+Search

1st use?  http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=21356  #26

Kooky Kult of Koslam

Search roots:

A. http://www.google.com/search?q=kooky+kult+of+koslam&hl=en&hs=1IN&lr=&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&filter=0

1st usage(?). http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=21553 #69

2. http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=22050 #59

3. http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=22395 #14

4. http://www.prospect.org/weblog/2006/08/post_1222.html “

8 comments July 19, 2007

Task #16: The ultimate origins of “Fauxtography”

A professor whom I helped regarding a book he’s doing on “Fauxtography” did a bunch of searching and found that, although Charles may have indeed been the first blogger to use the term in its current meaning, the word itself actually pre-dates the recent scandals. But it had a different meaning back then.

Anyway, someone needs to make a new entry for “Fauxtography,” give it a good definition, and also include this info in the derivation section:

“Hey, Zom—

Something for your trivia collection:

Looks like the term fauxtography goes back a bit earlier—but the blog meaning of deceptive photojournalism did originate in the LGF post.

http://fauxtographer.blogspot.com/>http://fauxtographer.blogspot.com/

http://www.photofaux.com/>http://www.photofaux.com/

http://www.myfauxtography.com/default.php>http://www.myfauxtography.com/default.php “

These three links are to pre-LGF appearances of fauxtography, with a different connotation. You’ll have to do an LGF search to find out the first place where Charles or a commenter used it. (Also search Michelle Malkin, though I think Chalres beat her by one day.)

Add comment July 19, 2007

Task #15: Inputting song_and_dance_man’s outstanding research, Part 2 [UPDATE: song_and_dance_man volunteers for this task]

And here’s the second of song_and_dance_man’s info-packed emails from two-and-a-half years ago:

“anti-idiotarian

First mention of mainstream media by thnkr222 9/11/2002 04:00PM PST

And MSM First mention Stephen 3/26/2004 09:57AM PST http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=10354#c0006

PIMF First mention RoP really chappin’ my hide 12/2/2003 02:37PM PST http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=9143#c0055 as RIMF Review Is My Friend,

∑and Right Wing Conspirator 12/2/2003 02:47PM PST http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=9143#c0063 suggested a change to PIMF

PIYF First mention Right Wing Conspirator 3/16/2004 06:43PM PST http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=10192#c0004

FNDT First mention http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=11276#c0097

Rathergate First Mention tada Charles http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=12674

GAZE First Mention http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=6267#c0203

No advanced or requested definition at this point. The GAZE at the Troll http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=6879#c0160 No advanced or requested definition at this point. http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=9671#c0108 Again here No advanced or requested definition at this point.

See if a search by Charles will return different results.

Sent 1/13/05 ^^^^

Nazimedia First mention Damian Penny 4/10/2002 11:47AM PST http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=2768#c0012

Bigels first post http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=4833#c0084

2nd http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=4918#c0106

3rd http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=4920#c0145

4th http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=5019#c0050

This ones interesting. He slams Fisk.

The bigel derived (bigel + another word) search is too big. I tried.”

2 comments July 19, 2007

Task #14: Inputting song_and_dance_man’s outstanding research, Part 1 [UPDATE: song_and_dance_man volunteers for this task]

Two and a half years ago (no kidding), song_and_dance_man was the first person to really help out with the dictionary, and researched the origins of several words. He emailed me his results, but to my great shame I never “had the time” or got around to inputting his results into the various dictionary entries.

Luckily, because I’m an organized person, I still have his original emails. Each of the two emails contains several bits of information, some of which may have already been implemented (I can’t remember). Anyway, I’ll make a separate post out of each email.

Whoever tackles these (including possibly s_and_d himself!) needs to just plow through the research and input it into the relevant dictionary definitions.

Here’s Part 1:

“lizardoid. Coined and first mention, Throbert McGee. http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=5428#c0066

lizardette. Coined and first mention. Smit. http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=7911#c0125

minion (as applied to blog-followers) First mention, and a coined term. Spiny Norman, who clearly defined it‚s use by compounding (is that the right word?) Lizardoid & Minion as a difinitive term. http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=6679#c0025

Both subsequent entires (as said by members of the evil lizardoid Zionist conspiracy acknowledging their global power)

Bwahahaha. First mention, Jeff B. http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=2832#c0010

Muwhahaha. First mention, Charles. http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=3888#c0047

Morlocks (as referring to Indymedia types — borrowed from HG Wells), First mention, JND. http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=5760#c0021

Oldstream Media approx 20 times to date and has been used by other as well. Geepers the most prominent poster. Coined by me. The singer and dancer of songs. http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=12767#c0009

Newstream Media. Only 7 entires. Coined by me. The singer and dancer of songs http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=12706#c0008

Sent 1/17/05 ^^^^^^^

Also, errata; 2nd paragraph, second sentence, ” This schema may change eventually ” “

2 comments July 19, 2007

[UPDATE: DONE] Task #13: The easiest one of all: fixing ROTFLMAO

Here’s one that will take 1 minute:

“ROTFLMAO :Roll On the Floor Laughing My Ass Off

That should be “rolling”. It’s an extension of the original “Rolling on the floor laughing”. Extending ROFL to ridiculous lengths was an common thing in the 90’s, but MAO is the only one to stick.

Some contend that ROFL was from the Internet and BBSes, and use of LOL was proof that the user came from AOL.”

3 comments July 19, 2007

Task #12: The origins of “Morlock” on LGF?

Here’s a murky email from someone claiming to have originated the term “Morlock” on LGF:

Hiya zombie,

Here’s the post where I referred to Democratic Undergound’s faux-underground-revolutionaries as “Morlocks”:

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=6188#c0300

The term had once been used previously here:

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=5760#c0021

comparing the Palestinians (Morlocks) and Israelis (Eloi). It’s possible I got the idea there, but I had also recently seen the new movie of “the Time Machine” on the SciFi Channel as well.

Charles first used it in reference to Indymedia here:

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=6623_20_Killed_in_Saudi_Arabia

Waaaay back in 2001, there was a commenter “morlock”:

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=1410#c0010 “

Anyone willing to take this on, and see if he has a case for being the first person to use “Morlock” on LGF? (Refer to the current dictionary definition of Morlock for more details.)

(This is the exact kind of semi-trivial yet difficult-to-resolve request that made me stop updating the dictionary in the first place!)

Add comment July 19, 2007

Task #11: Interesting theory about the origin of “Fisking”

My definition of “Fisking” is already pretty complete and well-done, but a year ago I got this email from someone who has an alternate theory about the origin of the term. What do you think?:

“I’m a new LGF member and was looking through the dictionary…

I’m thinking fisking may actually have started as a verbalization among UNIX
system administrators for running the fsck command (file system check).
Fsck, often pronounced “fisk” is a comprehensive review of the UNIX file
system for any integrity errors…generally as it’s running the errors are
listed out line by line. Since it would be kind of like the item by item
debunking of idiocy, someone familiar with the UNIX command might have used
it in that error-checking sense. I’ve heard and said fsck’ing (”fisking”)
in the 80’s while working with UNIX systems both in the computer-sense and
as a slang substitute for “fixing”.

At some point, fscking morphed into a generally derogatory term in the
internet newsgroups and it looks like fisking is an alternate spelling as a
specifically derogatory term as defined in the LGF dictionary.

–David”

Intriguing! Do you think we should add this to the derivation of “Fisking” in the dictionary? If so: take the plunge!

1 comment July 19, 2007

Task #10: The origins of “Stan” — worthy of a new entry?

Here’s an email with a claim about the word “Stan”:

“BabbaZee originated and right wing zephyr (me) helped to popularize the mispelling now used often instead of Satan - Stan.

as an example “Get thee behind me, Stan!”
It’s worthy of some consideration.”

Questions:

Didn’t “Stan” originate on South Park?

Is it even used much on LGF?

Does it merit being a new entry in the dictionary?

I leave it in your hands.

1 comment July 19, 2007

Task #9: Correcting the “FOAD” definition

Here’s a real easy one, as all it entails is fixing a definition:

“Zombie

Excellent reference page. Up to the high standards of the rest of your website.

Second. The reference FOAD was actually in use in the US Army (and probably other branches) at least as far back as the early 70s. I still have a set of military transfer orders that I posted on the company bulletin board (until the 1SG gave them back) that had FOAD and FIGMO scrawled across them. The definetion is correct though. The FIGMO means Fuck It, Got My Orders.

Just submitting this as a point of interest and in the name of accuracy.

Keep up the outstanding work on your blogsite and your posts in LGF.”

Any volunteers? Should take 5 minutes to fix the definition.

Add comment July 19, 2007

Task #8: Fixing “St. Pancake” definition, moving “Nekama’s Troll Hammer”?

He’s an email with two different (minor) suggestions together:

“Your LGF Dictionary should be revised/amended by replacing the noun “militants” in the St. Pancake entry with “terrorists”. No doubt just an oversight.

Also, any chance of giving Nekama’s Troll Hammer more prominence? Lotsa lizard newbies have no idea what it is, I reckon.”

Sigh. Who wants to tackle this one? Should take just a short time.

Though I’m not sure in what way we can give “Nekama’s Troll Hammer” more “prominence.” I think having the ability to link to individual words (as we now have) may solve this problem pre-emptively, since people can link directly to the definition (hence it doesn’t need to be “prominent” on the page).

Add comment July 19, 2007

Task #7: Updating “ICQ” origins in the “Do not trust the Shover Robot” entry

This one is very trivial and easy, perhaps so unimportant as to not even merit doing? You decide:

“Hi Zombie!

Great dictionary you’ve got there!

I’ve got a small thing that you may or may not want to use… I’m offering it for you because your work can be just a little bit more perfect than it already is…

Under the entry for “Do not trust the Shover Robot” you include a small explaination for “ICQ” which pretty closely follows the Wikipedia definition, which unfortunately is slightly incomplete.

Yes, ICQ is a shorthand way of saying “I seek you” but it wasn’t entirely coined by the people that invented the ICQ instant messenger. It is an expansion on ‘CQ’ (”seek you”) which actually is an 100+ year old radio call invented by the Marconi Company in 1904 and adopted internationally in 1912. It is still in wide use today by amateur radio people worldwide (including your truly).

For further details, go check the source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CQ_%28call%29 “

Anyone want to update the “Do not trust the Shover Robot” definition?

Add comment July 19, 2007

Task #6: Adding key Islamic terms [UPDATE: Killgore Trout volunteers for this task]

This is a suggestion that several of the admins have already made to me, so this should be a popular one. I got an email about it last year, which I’ll paste in here:

“Islamist jargon is not very well known, so I would like to see at least words
like ‘hudna’, ‘jizya’, ‘caliphate’ and ‘ummah’ covered as Terms that Originated
Elsewhere.”

Who wants to take this one on? It should be pretty fun and easy, since there will be little or no need to research the “first usage” of the words, as they date back to antiquity. Just add the new terms to the list and write the definitions!

Perhaps you could even create a new “section” in the dictionary for them. (If you do, just copy the code for one of the existing dictionary category headers, and re-use it.) And feel free to add in any other relevant Islamic-themed terms you think might be appropriayte: taqqiya, burqa, Dar ul Harb, hijab, and so on.

Remember to be completely fair, scholarly and non-sarcastic in your definitions!

2 comments July 19, 2007

Task #5: Theories about the origin of “Balestinian”

This will be a combo-post, since I got several emails concerning the origin of the term “Balestinian.” I’ll just paste them all in here together, and they can be dealt with en masse:

————————————-

“I was looking at your cool dictionary.

As far as I know, “Balestinian” is used for Palestinian since most
“Palestinians” (or Arabic speakers in general) have difficulty
distinguishing between the “B” and “P” sounds. Listen to a guy like
Erekat being interviewed in English and you will hear it prett quickly.”

————————————-

“I’m just guessing, after having lived for sometime with arab people, that this term may have been invented because in the arab language there is no letter P. Instead the letter B is used to mimic this sound so a Pencil would become a Bencil, Parking Place would be Barking Blace and Palestinian == Balestinian. Maybe the word bale has nothing to do with it and it is just being used to mock the accent in which they pronounce their own name. Either way im sure eventually we can all get along, until then it would bea good idea to not kill too many people.”

————————————-

“Pretty sure it is becuase arabs can’t say proper P’s, and it comes out sounding like a B.

Love youre blog.”

————————————-

Your task (actually pretty simple): determine that this “P/B” thing in Arabic is true, then change the definiton of “Balestinian” to reflect this fact.

1 comment July 19, 2007

Task #4: The origin of “Uncle Chom”?

Here’s a note I have in my “to do” pile regarding the term “Uncle Chom”:

“http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=20399#c0050

#50 BabbaZee 5/05/2006 8:45:03 am PDT

I used Uncle Chom here something near to 2 years ago, it caught on then….I think I hwas using it before 9/11 actually, …. anyway - then I was gone from LGF for 7 months so I guess it fell out of usage, LOL!

I am hoping to see it enter into popular slang one day. Use it whenever you can!
Call a leftist Jew an Uncle Chom today! “

Question: is “Uncle Chom” (referring to the Jewish equivalent of an “Uncle Tom,” referencing Noam Chomsky) a neologism worthy of being in the dictionary? Is BabbaZee correct in claiming to have coined it?

This one may take some serious Googling.

1 comment July 19, 2007

Task #3: Is “Diggbats” a valid new entry?

Here’s an email I got from an unknown source:

“Diggbats first usage

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=24563#c0263 “

So, the question is: Is this really the first usage of Diggbats? And even so, does “Diggbats” merit being in the dictionary? Discuss or cast your votes in the comments to this thread. Whoever takes on this task needs to research the first usage, and then add a new dictionary entry and definition if you determine that Diggbats is a valid LGF neologism.

Add comment July 19, 2007

Task #2: Reaganite claims to have coined L3

This one’s pretty straightforward - the following email came from Reaganite:

Can I get credit for L3? The html doesn’t work in my email!
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=7226#c0065

Here’s the problem: currently we have no “first usage” for L3. Reaganite’s link refers to a comment he made containing L3 on June 24, 2003. We need to do our own search for the earliest usage of L3, and if we can’t find one any earlier than Reaganite’s, then we’ll include his citation as the origin of the term.

Add comment July 19, 2007

Task #1: Bill at INDC Journal claims to have originated Latinized moonbat species names [UPDATE: song_and_dance_man volunteers for this task]

Here’s an email I got from Bill at INDC Journal:

“I noticed this line under “moonbat:”

“LGFers occasionally analyze the behavior patterns of various moonbat
’species’ as if they were actual animals, and even give them satirical
Linnaean taxonomical names, such as moonbattus berkeleyensis.”

I believe that my work with the species originated any latin fauna
classification naming system for moonbats with these posts:

http://www.indcjournal.com/archives/000331.php

http://www.indcjournal.com/archives/000343.php

Your etymology of the word should probably reflect that.

If I’m mistaken and there are earlier references, feel free to provide
them and correct me. Thanks.”

As you will see, his links go to posts dating to April 28 and April 30, 2004. What we’d need to do is see if we can find any usage of a faux-Latin moonbat Linnean classification name for a moonbat “species” used in a comment on LGF prior to April 28, 2004. If we can find one, then we can discard Bill’s claim. If we can’t find one, then we can add Bill’s claim to the definition.

13 comments July 19, 2007

Reader Suggestions for the LGF Dictionary: the Backlog

OK, admins, this is where the real work begins. Over the last year or two, I’ve been emailed many many suggestions by various people wanting me to make changes to the LGF Dictionary. The easy and simple suggestions, I quickly implemented. The ridiculous suggestions, I swiftly rejected. But there was a third category: valid and/or interesting suggestions that would take some time to research and write. All of those in the third category I set aside to deal with “later.”

Well, “later” is now.

So here’s what I’m going to do:

For each suggestion, I’m going to make a post entitled “Task #1,” “Task #2,” and so on, in which I will paste the reader’s email, and perhaps additional explanation from me if necessary. There will be about 20 short posts in a row like this.

Your job as editors will be to, whenever you feel like it, choose one of these suggestions, and implement it in the dictionary. And by “implement” I mean whatever that particular “task” calls for: add a new word, rewrite a definition, research and provide a link for the “first usage,” and so on.

When you start a particular task, you should make a comment on that thread saying, “I’ll do this one,” or whatever. When you’ve completed each task, you can then make another comment on the thread, saying “I’ve done this one.”

Eventually, for those tasks that have been completed, we can then either make the entire relevant post be “strikethru,” or perhaps delete each post entirely when it’s done.

Clear? So brace yourselves: Here come 20 or so posts containing “assignments” for all of you.

If you have any questions about all this, drop a comment on this thread.

Add comment July 19, 2007

I nominate: DinnerJacket

I’d like to request we add the word “DinnerJacket” to the dictionary and note its reference to Ahmedinejad, president of Iran (proper spelling to be confirmed). It’s different enough that people may not get the reference. It would definitely be interesting to find the first usage on the blog and see if anyone on the net in general uses that term. 

37 comments July 18, 2007

The Ethics of Dictionary Editing

This post is about all the non-technical aspects of editing the LGF Dictionary.

The basic underlying principles of our work are:

Altruism, even-handedness, impartiality, and reality-acknowledgement.

In practice, what this means is:

Only add those words to the dictionary that are in actual use by a “wide strata” of LGF users.

Or, to phrase it more negatively and cruelly:

Do not add words that are just used by you yourself, or by just you and a small clique of your friends.

Do not add words that were used only once or twice.

Do not add words that were coined by you or your friends and which did NOT subsequently “catch on.”

Do not add words for the sole purpose of trying to cause them to become popular or enter into the lexicon.

Etc. I’m sure you get the gist.

Always keep in mind that we are the guardians of neutral knowledge, and we shouldn’t abuse that power to push our own private agendas (which is the exact trap that Wikipedia has fallen into). Entries into the dictionary should reflect actual common usage in the real world of LGF comments — not what we wish was actual usage. As frustrating as it is, sometimes the cleverest and most excellent neologisms fall through the cracks at LGF, and never get used widely.

And yes, I realize that there is currently a category in the Dictionary called “Brilliant Witticisms Posted Once or Twice on LGF But Which Never Caught on (Yet, at Least),” which violates this principle. If we get a majority vote, then we can simply remove that entire section, as it contains only five entries anyway. Alternately, if everyone agrees, we can keep that section and move it to the bottom and use it as the place where we post self-congratulatory wish-words, or words that people pester us to include but which normally wouldn’t make the cut. I leave the vote up to the admins.

So, how will this work?

This is what I propose should be the system:

If you get the urge to add a new word to the dictionary, then create a new post titled,

“I nominate [word].”

…with a short paragraph outlining your rationale for including the word. Then, each admin will leave a comment on that thread voting “Yes” or “No” on the word (appending an argument if the vote is “No”).

Since we’ll have 9 or 10 admins, if you then get 4 additional “Yes” votes (plus your own vote, totalling 5), then you can say that you’ve gotten a majority approval, and you can go ahead and add the word.

As for how to create a new post: it’s quite simple. Once you’re logged in, across the top of the window is a blue menu-stripe, containing the link “New Post.” Click that link, type in the title, type in the post-body, and press “Publish.” Voila! A new post.

OK, that’s all I can think of for now. If you have any questions about the issues raised here, drop a comment on this thread.

4 comments July 18, 2007

Let the Editing Begin!

Starting now, the LGF Dictionary “administrators” can begin editing the dictionary!

Before you get going, IT IS IMPORTANT THAT YOU READ ALL of these ground rules, notes and suggestions:

1. HOW TO EDIT: Once you’ve logged in under your username, click on “Site Admin” in the sidebar, then click on the “Manage” tab, then the “Pages” tab, then on the “Edit” link for “LGF Dictionary.” (Or, more conveniently, go to that page directly by clicking here):

Dictionary editing page.

You will see there a scrollable window with the underlying code for the dictionary in it. You can either type directly in this window, or “copy” the portion you wish to edit, paste into a word-processing document of some kind, edit it, and then paste it back in to the dictionary window. (The second method is preferred in case two different people are editing the dictionary at the same moment; if your changes get lost in the shuffle, you can simply re-paste them in from your saved offline document.)

Then click the “Save and Continue editing” button, to save your changes.
Then click the “View” link to see that your changes appear properly. If they do…
Click the “Save” button, and you’re done.

(Yes, this is a little convoluted, but I have no control over how the WordPress system works.)

2. I have just laboriously gone through the entire dictionary and fixed it such that each word can be linked to individually: now, if a word-entry in the list is clicked on, the page jumps to having that word at the top, and the URL in the address bar changes to specifically link to that word on the page. This, hopefully, will make the dictionary much more useful to the general public, as people can provide links to individual definitions, instead of to the dictionary overall.

3. All future new entries in the dictionary should also be linkable like this. So, when creating a new entry, you can simply copy a previous entry and replace all the components with new components. But to make things easier for everyone, newbie and expert alike, I present here the TEMPLATE for all dictionary entries:

<a name=”WORD”><b style=”color: white”>.</b></a><br>
<a href=”#WORD” title=”Direct link to this word”>WORD</a> - DEFINITION.

The only things you need to change in the template are the three instances of the capitalized word “WORD” and the “DEFINITION.”

So, for example, if you wanted to add the new term “jizya,” you would take the code above, and insert “jizya” in the three places where “WORD” is, and then write your definition where “DEFINITION” is.

Thus, to continue the example, the finished code after your inputting, would look like this:

<a name=”jizya”><b style=”color: white”>.</b></a><br>
<a href=”#jizya” title=”Direct link to this word”> jizya</a> - A tax paid by non-Muslims to the Caliph or local Muslim administrators in an Islamic state, as a tribute indicating the infidel’s inferior social status, and as “protection money” to buy the non-Muslim’s safety. Often used sarcastically by LGFers to describe foreign aid payments or court settlements paid to Muslims groups or nations by non-Muslims. “Jizya” is an ancient Arabic term dating back to the time of the Koran.

Which, when pasted into the dictionary, would appear on the page looking like this:

.
jizya - A tax paid by non-Muslims to the Caliph or local Muslim administrators in an Islamic state, as a tribute indicating the infidel’s inferior social status, and as “protection money” to buy the non-Muslim’s safety. Often used sarcastically by LGFers to describe foreign aid payments or court settlements paid to Muslims groups or nations by non-Muslims. “Jizya” is an ancient Arabic term dating back to the time of the Koran.

(The link in the word “jizya” here is correct and functional, but for the moment won’t “work’ because it is not actually in the dictionary quite yet — but you get the point.)

So, everybody: just copy and use the blank template above for creating new words.

IMPORTANT NOTE: Often, terms in the LGF dictionary involve more than one word. If that is the case, in the first two instances of “WORD” in the template, you need to replace the spaces with underscores, because URLs can’t have blank spaces in them. So, for example, in the dictionary is the term “car swarm,” the code for which looks like this:

<a name=”car_swarm”><b style=”color: white”>.</b></a><br>
<a href=”#car_swarm” title=”Direct link to this word”>car swarm</a> - [...definition...]

See the underscores between “car” and “swarm” in the first two instances? (In the third instance, there shouldn’t be an underscore, because that is simply the text that readers will see, not part of the code.)

Also note that the “#” symbol preceding the second “WORD” is not a typo, and is in fact an essential part of the code: please leave the “#” there, as in the examples above.

I hope that is clear! Post a comment on this thread if it is not.

For non-computer-experts: don’t worry what all the little html code doohickeys are for. Just know that they work. If you are curious, ask in a comment and someone will explain.

For the experts: I have purposely made the internal reference tag be a line above the actual word, because it looks really annoying when the word one links to internally on the page is right at the very top edge of the window. But I’ve also discovered that you must link to some actual character (not just a “space” or nothing at all), which is why each entry links to a white “period,” which is my clumsy but functional way of linking to “nothing.”

4. For now, and for the foreseeable future, I would like the dictionary to remain all on one page. A few people have suggested breaking it up so the each entry is its own page, or each letter of the alphabet is it own page, but I think that would really decrease the dictionary’s usefulness factor. This is one point I’m pretty firm about. I’m willing to listen to arguments for breaking up the page, but it’d be pretty hard to sway me.

5. If you want to add or alter a definition to an existing entry, then you can ignore the template and just type in your definition. If you want to add a link within your definition, you can use this html code:

<a href=”INSERTADDRESSHERE” target=”_blank”>INSERTLINKTEXTHERE</a>

That’s about all I can think of at the moment concerning the technical details. If you have question, post a comment on this thread and hopefully someone can answer it.

Next, I will also post a thread about the non-technical stuff (such as how to nominate a new word, and ethics, and so on).

Administrators: Start editing!

16 comments July 18, 2007

Hello, admins! Time for some housekeeping.

Welcome to all new admins! There are now somewhere between six and ten of us, depending on who’s signed up so far.

For now, we’ll keep it at that, and not add any more, unless future circumstances warrant it.

This post is to outline a few basics, to get everybody oriented and settled in.

So here we go with a list!

1. Everybody has full “admin” powers, meaning you can change anything and everything to the blog — including delete it entirely. So please, I beg of you: use your power wisely and responsibly!

2. If you don’t know how something works, or how to do something, I very likely will not know the answer either, as I am as much a newbie with WordPress (and with blog software) as most of you are. Among all of us, it seems Thanos has the most WordPress knowledge, so you can try asking him (though he is going on vacation very soon, and will be inaccessible for a while). WordPress has a very useful FAQ (http://faq.wordpress.com/) and “forum” (http://en.forums.wordpress.com/) where you can ask questions, and they get answered pretty promptly, so you can try that as well. Or you can ask the other admins. One way or the other, we’ll muddle through!

3. Though one assumes we will all agree and cooperate about everything, and for the most part will function as a federal democracy (one admin, one vote) on matters of stubborn dispute, the Unforgiving Flyswatter of Totalitarianism still looms in the background, and as the initiator and founder of the LGF Dictionary, in extreme cases of group disagreement, I reserve the right to dictatorially make “executive decisions” to resolve intractable disputes. I seriously doubt that will happen much (if ever), and I’m generally extremely laid-back and agreeable, but I just thought I should mention that “the buck stops here.”

4. Until we have spruced up the dictionary and the site a little, PLEASE do not give a link to this WordPress site as a comment on any blog, especially LGF. Even a single link will cause the site to get indexed by the search engines, and then we will start to get unwanted visitors. So hold off on any links for a few days.

5. This will not really be a true “blog” in the familiar sense, as the “LGF Dictionary” “page” will be the URL that gets 98% of the traffic. The blog front page, with the threads, will exist just to communicate about changes to the dictionary. Threads may and will be deleted in their entirety (including maybe even this one), once they have served their purpose. Or, in certain cases, the threads can stay permanently, if they’re not embarrassing or confusing in any way.

6. Please leave the “theme” of this blog as the one I have chosen: “Blix.” I took a while to choose it, I like it best, and I even uploaded a custom header jpg (the antique dictionaries photo). If you have no idea what I’m taking about, good — and ignore this comment.

7. But aside from changing the theme, if you think of some interesting way to spruce up the design and look of the site, such as with “widgets” in the sidebar, or whatever, be my guest and “go for it”; but do notify everyone (with a comment on a thread or via email) what change you implemented. Also: Don’t start new threads quite yet, until we set up a system for them. Again, if you have no idea what I’m talking about — ignore this.

8. Soon, very soon, we will actually get down to the nuts and bolts of editing the dictionary. So in case you’re wondering — yes, the action will start in the next day or two. I will get the ball rolling with a post specifcally on that topic, and not about “housekeeping” (as this one is).

9. The basic locus of our work will be here: go to the LGF Dictionary “page” at http://lgfdictionary.wordpress.com/lgf-dictionary/, and then click on the “Edit page” menu choice at the top, which should take you to a page where you can edit the actual html code of the dictionary content (the page may be here, as a shortcut: http://lgfdictionary.wordpress.com/wp-admin/page.php?action=edit&post=3 ). Look into the abyss, my dearies, for that is where you will be playing. Scroll down the editing window to see what we’re talking about. And if you’re completely unfamiliar with html, don’t worry — everything will be “template-ized,” so it’ll be easier than you think.

10. If I’ve left anything out, concerning this basic “housekeeping” stuff, drop a comment on this thread and ask a question!

19 comments July 15, 2007

Welcome to the Little Green Footballs Dictionary!

This blog will (hopefully) be the new permanent home of the LGF Dictionary.

It will not function as a standard blog, such as having frequent posts that follow current events, or anything along those lines. Instead, the heart of the site will be the “LGF Dictionary” page linked in the menu bar above.

The blog posts on the site’s “front page” will only serve as a place for visitors to suggest new entries or corrections for the dictionary.

A small number of hand-picked site admins will maintain the dictionary. Details to be announced soon!

Bear with us as we work out all the kinks.

29 comments July 13, 2007


Pages

Meta

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

the poster formerly … on Welcome, visitors, to the new …
the poster formerly … on Implementing Suggestions from …
the poster formerly … on Progress Report: new definitio…
the poster formerly … on LGF Dictionary
ChenZhen on Progress Report: new definitio…

Categories

Calendar

May 2008
M T W T F S S
« Jan    
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  

Archives

Links

Feeds