Talk:Internet slang/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 1 Archive 2 →



Can anyone tell me what these faces mean? I am socially inept and have no clue: ;0 >:) o_0 ;( ?

I know anout these faces and think we should list them in the main article (if not already listed): :) :( :] :[ ;) <:0 PatPeter 00:04, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

o_0 means you are weirded out by something or someone.

See Emoticons. - crazyscot 17:14, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


Redirected here from "IDK", though there is no reference to it on this page. It's obviously an acronym, and most people looking probably know it has to do with the Internet--in other words, redirect is counterproductive to the average user, having them waste time while they scan for answers, only to realize it isn't even the correct article. If it must redirect here, at least it should explain what it is somewhere on the page... If not, then redirect to some place that does (see what happens with brb for an adequate solution).

can some one add this? Where would it fit?

When people do !!!!!!!!111111111111 is an example of people doing lots of exclamation marks, but lets go of shift and it turns into ones. And some people do it just to be funny going !!!11!!!11111111.

i think it would go under typos since it is technically a purposefull typo. Any other opinions? --koolone0 16:10, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Noobspeak. :D but other wise, I agree with koolone0 20:39, 29 April 2007 (UTC)


Isn't the singular of "pix" "pic"? As in, "do you have a pic?", but "I have pix". Or something :) Adam Bishop 05:57 13 Jul 2003 (UTC)

yah i think ur rite. "pics" is also a common plural, as in "pics plz". --Delirium 05:58 13 Jul 2003 (UTC)

has anyone ever seen "qoolz" used?

Nope, never. A Google search only returns 109 results, and most of those are definitions.

--Could it possibly be a plural form of "qool"? Is there such a thing (But, it wouldn't be grammatically correct, as there is no such thing as "cools)? Unless you're saying something like, "Hand me a pack of Kools" but mispelling it. I don't know.--Nyx Abbing 03:04, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Would like to add....

who keeps putting that "warning this site contains incorrect material" stuff next to the microsoft link. I read it and found it very truthful. Nothing jumped out at me as dead wrong. What on it is so wrong? Please explain.

puter - Refering to one's PC

There's way too much impertinent stuff in the article. leet phrases like "j00", "j00r" "kewl", "qo0l", "sux0rs", "woot"... are hardly acronyms or abbreviations. Things like "C|N>K", "CYS", "2B||!2B", "JOOC", "WDUWTA", "Counter-Terrorists Win", "sroucks" are hardly popular... and there's a fair bit of duplication, too. I think I'm going to do some copyediting. --Shallot 10:02, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I agree, this article could use some copyediting. While what is popular really depends on where you are located and what you do online, I think everyone would agree that things like CYS shouldn't be on this list (although I believe I've heard that for "see you soon"). On the other hand, some of the leet phrases are quite common (kewl, woot, etc.) but don't belong in the abbreviation or acronym section. Neither does Smeg, by the way, which was just added (unless its an abbreviation I'm not familiar with). Perhaps another section for "Phrases" or something along those lines that are common but not abbreviations or acronyms. -- Jrdioko 22:09, Apr 8, 2004 (UTC)
On the subject of copyediting, I have marked the article for cleanup due to the inconsistent capitalisation. List of computing and IT abbreviations sets a good standard for this, this article should be reformatted in the same style. PhilHibbs 10:17, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Back in the Compuserve days, before HTML came around, people would express grinning either with the emoticon :-) or with <g>. You can't do that any more or it's too much trouble to type &lt;g&gt; . Perhaps there needs to be a section on the history of net slang?


nm - never mind. Also can be placed as nvm.

Incorporated into English?

I'm fairly certain "prolly" existed as a casual pronunciation of "probably" long before AOL (or even computers) came onto the scene. Anyone able to confirm this, though? Mariko

One of my former colleagues (he's a native English speaker, I'm not) used to write "parbly", with the same meaning. 08:40, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)^
yes prolly is a version of probably --koolone0 16:12, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I have removed the following, in relation to the use of "own" in mainstream English: Hi can also mean hello!!1111oneoneone

Its purposefully misspelled variant, "pwn", is just as often used. This seems to be due to a perception of a hole being filled in the English language: a slang term for "completely dominate".

I don't think "pwn" as a term for total dominance is mainstream yet. It's still there in the main list. PhilHibbs 10:15, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

User:Norm, you have re-instated "pwn" as a mainstream term for total domination. I have never gotten into a revert war, and I'm not going to now over something as inconsequential as this, but can you explain why you think this could possibly be described as mainstream usage? PhilHibbs 08:33, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
User:Norm has indicated that the revert was unintentional and due to an update conflict, so I have again removed it from the common usage section. PhilHibbs 10:00, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I hear the term "pwn" (prononced like "owned") pretty frequently outside the interweb. And not just by people who spend their time on forums.DxPatxb 02:19, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
In my opinion, the word "pwn" is pronounced "pawn" like the chess piece. In fact, I believe it is a chess reference. Having almost any piece captured by a pawn is a humiliating experience... hence "pawned", or "pwn'd".
There's an entire page on Wiki dedicated to the word "pwn" that this page should link to. Although I didn't see a reference to the chess aspect of it, the pronunciation is explained thoroughly. I personally pronounce it to rhyme with 'own', like 'pone', which I say in chess constantly.

Hu Master Edit

I originally meant to make a change to a couple of typos. Three hours later I had done a master edit. Hu 10:32, 2004 Nov 17 (UTC)

<----EDITED COPYRIGHT 2004 BY K W---->

I can see this now, this is a new type of place for me that I ended up "this"..."Dis" see the slang. I just decided to put in some words for you here. "Tang" "Dang"..."Swang"....those words match...let's go along ABC's

Out of hand?

I find that this whole "chatspeak" or "internet slang" has gone far out of hand. I look at some of those abbreviations and think how anyone could possibly know what it means. Some of those are hardly commonly used. Disco Bandit 06:27, Nov 21, 2004 (UTC)

That depends on the environments that you generally see - some of these are common only on Usenet or Slashdot - Aaron Hill 08:17, Nov 21, 2004 (UTC)

A misguided attempt to instill in this article some semblence of quality

Just in case anyone cares (hah!), I went through this removing/condensing several redundant or otherwise unneeded entries, wikified some stuff, fixed some consistency, and fixed a few formatting errors. We really don't need 3 entries for "pron", and it's not that difficult to understand how "file transfer protocol" might be abbreviated as "ftp". If you really miss any of the things I removed (you probably won't)... well, there's always the history ;) It's quite frankly not worth posting them again here. All in all, a very useful device for putting off my Englilsh paper -- Jacius 02:37, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Removal of the "list"

Someone removed the list, and according to this, did nothing to sum it up or whatever. So, it wasn't a "rewording to not be a list", it was just a "removal of the list except for Oh My God because I'm a vandal", and I've reverted it. No complaints, I hope. --TIB (talk) 00:55, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)

I removed a few pieces of inappropriate hate speech. Call that what you want, but the pieces I was referring to were particularly offensive and targeted one specific minority with no other intent, meaning or purpose than to convey hatred toward members of that group. If you want that kind of thing, then go to the KKK's website, but I don't see it as an essential part of this particular discussion.

Removal of non-english terms

I've recently noticed a lot of Chinese and Arabic terms entering this list, none of which I have come across in my online travels. I will start removing them at the start of February, 2005 unless someone contradicts me. Also, I think that some of the older terms - like the more archaic Unixisms - should remain, unless they are replicated in the Jargon File (or similar). Either that or move to an "archaic" section. Alphax (t) (c) (e) 05:12, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)

AFAIK and others

There are a number of slang terms in here that are used quite a lot, but for which there are not independent defitions (e.g., AFAIK). I would just add independent definitions, but AFAIK (just as an example) is redirected to this page, and I am not smart enough to figure out how to undo that. Suggestions?

Removed duplicate thing. Anyway, at the top when you see the "redirected from AFAIK", you can click the afaik there, and it will let you edit the redirect. However, that's not the point, I think "LOL" also redirects here. The best policy is to remove the link in the page to AFAIK, as people looking for info on it will be directed to this article and that's a good thing. This article doesn't need to link to it if it's a redirect here, so remove that. --TIB (talk) 06:16, Feb 5, 2005 (UTC)

AFAIK and others

Someone threw "AFAIK" at me and I was clueless so I looked it up and landed here. This page does not contain AFAIK. Bummer. Found my answer elsewhere. Updated my expectations of where to find information in the future.


Well, the NPOV says that there is discussion on the talk page about why it's NPOV, and I see absolutely none. I really don't see whats "POV" about it, but I may be overlooking something. Any help? --TIB (talk) 06:16, Feb 5, 2005 (UTC)


I think this predates the Internet. Zscout370 18:38, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Leet, Used Ironically

I disagree that 'leet', '1337', '31337' etc. are used ironically. Many AOL Speakers (hehe) use these terms to actually mean 'elite' or use them as alternatives to similar words such as 'cool' or 'wicked' or whatever the little blighters say nowadays. May I suggest that the several occurances of 'used ironically' are removed and/or amended to reflect this? Fuck predates god!!!111

Aol references are dumb

AOL references are stupid. Thats like publicly defining a word as zacism because a guy you named Zac uses that word or like saying al-quida wears pants so we should ban them.

What does this mean?

OMFGBSHAX. It's used in [L0rd 0f teh Ringz0rz], where Aragorn says "OMFGBSHAX, my toe! Arrrgh!". Can't find a definition on the net, maybe someone here can work it out. Possibly "Oh my f**king god b*llsh*t hacks?". That sounds wrong somehow...

A lot of the time syntax is not an issue and a message can be deliberately incoherent to convey agitation or confusion, e.g. the famous canon "omgwtfbbq". Another example: "we should invade or have a nuclear war wtflol". According to one of the less popular, but according to my experience valid definitions of "hax" it can be used as interjection for "d*mn", "f**k" etc.

What does (sic) mean? I've seen it used on the internet, always in parenthesis after a sentence. I first thought it meant "sick" but sometimes that doesn't fit.

sic means that there'sa mistake but it wasn't yours. like if you quote someone and they misspell something, you use sic to show that the mistake was there already.

(sic) is either some Latin word, or "spelling incorrect". Alphax τεχ 01:56, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

'Sic' is latin for 'thus' - it's short for, essentially, "it was thus in the original", with the implied continuation "so I'm not the one that screwed it up". -- 14:28, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Yes, so on the internet it tends to be used as a form of mild sarcasm or disdain, often at the use of various types of slang, leet, or just excessive typos and grammatical errors. Depending on the forum in which it was used it can either be seen as very staid or potentially mildly humourous. Sfnhltb 00:32, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

OMFGBSHAX would probably best be translated into "Oh My Fucking God Bull Shit [you] hack." 22:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Might I suggest...

...removing the double-dot (I confess ignorance as to what that symbol is actually called) from the initial "u"s on the two "über" entries? Minor gripe, I know, but it's rare in my experience that anyone actually takes the time to enter it. Or maybe I'm just obsessive. Who knows? Also, I'm adding "CoH". If World of Warcraft gets its own entry, why shouldn't City of Heroes?

The double-dot is an umlaut - see Heavy metal umlaut for why this is used/needed. Alphax τεχ 02:04, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
"anyone actually takes the time to enter it" I do when possible. :) --Snaxe920 18:57, August 29, 2005 (UTC)
The double-dot has an English name, dierisis. Umlaut is German. As it tends to be used more in the German language than in English, it frequently gets called by it's German name. The only English word I can think of where the dierisis is used is "naïve". -- sydb
Of course even in that instance its fairly common (more common?) for people not to bother with it in that word either. -- Sfnhltb 00:34, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
I have never used a "umlaut" and probably never will to tell the truth so i dont see why they should be included in a list of slang that is used to save time typing becuz it takes more time. So im changing it back --koolone0 17:58, 8 February 2007 (UTC)


Stevertigo says this means "I've been doing this stuff for years", but the acronym does not exist in a Google search. It doesn't seem to exist anywhere except on Talk:Crusade where he used it, and here where he added it after I asked him what it meant. The expanded form (with both "stuff" and "shit") gets marginal Google hits (and none at all with "man"). I'm not a big proponent of the Google search here, but tt seems that Google would be the best place to search for a supposed Internet acronym...Adam Bishop 21:44, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

I agree however I'd say that there are most likely a few of others that need a bit of checking too, a quick look shows a couple that are only present on mirrors. Also I'm not sure that words like "Über" or "dunno" are really internet slang... they're just plain slang in my book. -- Lochaber 08:28, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

I like π

"I like pie — Used to express apathy or confusion towards the present subject matter, invented by YINever of the GameFAQs message boards"

Did YINever invent this before or after the first Weebl and Bob became publicly available? --Damian Yerrick 03:16, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

umh. "i like pie" still redirects here, but its mentioned neither in this article nore in the internet slang phrases list article. so, someone want to write something on it? 16:04, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

It's not necessary to list every possible use of internet slang. It redirects here because it is, and I think the readers will understand that. --LaraLove 17:55, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


"# ajkaf;lsdjfjdskl;afj (any random string of lowercase characters, usually from the keys in home position on the keyboard) — hysterical laughter"

I've never seen alksjdlfaksj being used as hysterical laughter. Just nonsense, or frustration. FatherGuidoSarducci 06:50, May 9, 2005 (UTC)

dfijhsldfjflkfghLOL! What a newb.

Historical Context

The section of the article titled Internet Slang for Parents implies that the short list of terminology which follows comes from AOL's instant messenger service. In fact, at least half of those terms predate AIM by quite a few years (many are mentioned in a book I wrote in 1996). FUBAR is military. TTYL and BRB were common in TTY discussions by deaf people. LOL and ROFL were common in IRC and CompuServe/AOL chatrooms long before IM. This section should either have a clearer introduction, or a list of terms that were spawned in the AIM days.

Above comment by Gary D Robson, 15:54, 2005 Jun 2
I agree that it's very misleading; the article seems to imply throughout that such slang sprung autochthonously from the new medium. I've expanded on the history a little bit more, to the extent that I'm capable of doing accurately. Please review the text and feel free to make further changes! HorsePunchKid 22:54, 2005 Jun 2 (UTC)
I won't have a chance to look at this for a few weeks, but it's on my list. Thanks. Gary D Robson 01:36, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Formatting of entries

I would like to see this lists be replaced with definition lists to make it semantic correct according to W3C. It may also be prettier/easier to read, and easier to place several meanings to one word.

Instead of

  • RTFA -- "Read the fine article" or "Read the freakin' article"

it should've been like this:

"Read the fine article"
"Read the freakin' article"
: "Read the fine article"
: "Read the freakin' article"

-- Pål Drange

Good idea! I'll go ahead and do one section to see how it looks, but I won't have time to do all of them until I get back next week. I'll make it obvious in the edit summary (article history) which section I do. —HorsePunchKid July 6, 2005 01:08 (UTC)


Not to be anal, but doesn't the phrase about "chaq" being pronounced as "chalk" really depend on the speaker? "Chalk" isn't entirely phonetic. I pronounce the word with a New York (City)/Long Island accent (chaw(l)k).... same thing with coffee and chocolate. Couldn't we find a more phonetic example of pronunciation? --Thorns Among Our Leaves 00:37, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Is this an article or a list?

Should this article be moved to "List of internet slang"? It's not so much an article about internet slang as it is a list of acronyms, many of which are far from being internet related. Also, should there be some sort of minimum bar a term/acronym must reach, such as X number of hits on Google to be included? —RaD Man (talk) 05:26, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, many of the terms are rare or even made up on the spot. This article attracts a lot of jokes, and cleaning it up is tedious. Ideally, every term should have some sort of reference. That may be too much to ask right now, but we should work on removing the obvious jokes from the list. Rhobite 16:29, August 23, 2005 (UTC)
I'm going to set the bar really low... to 500 hits. Given that the subject here is internet slang and we're searching the internet for relevancy, I think this is a fair number. ROTFL gets 497,000 hits, LMAO well over a million. SICL gets 4 and so it goes and so it went. Agreed? —RaD Man (talk) 08:04, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
Good idea, but the “Google test” lacks internal validity as there can exist a collision between acronyms. For example, a search on MML (“Make Mine Linux”) would also produce hits for “Minimum Message Length”, “Music Markup Language”, and more. You cannot measure the ubiquitousness of a slang term without filtering for context so the Google test fails. Again, I think you are on to something good but until a valid measure is introduced and agreed upon, it is not responsible to editorialize the page based on the Google test. Keep thinking on it.--Bdmcnitt 07:11, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
I'm using it no so much as a tool to validate, but to invalidate. —RaD Man (talk) 07:51, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
Still doesn’t work (invalidate) because of the possible existence of collisions. Suppose someone proposes BYOC “Bring your own Chipmunk”. Probably not valid based on popular use logic but BYOC will still show a high Google hit rate so the Google test *alone* cannot invalidate all submissions. To treat all submissions the same, you must find a new or second test that controls for context (collisions), and that could be difficult.

On a different note, if enough people agree on developing a standard for submissions, then the standard should be stated explicitly and prominently in the body of the article verses administered behind the scenes. If this is the proposed direction, then the article should be entitled “Popular Internet Slang” or similar with “popular” defined by a set of impartial (and valid) tests so people can filter their own submissions, and if controversy arises, then an established metric exists for arbitration.

Again, I sense this is what you are working towards and I fully support you in the effort to keep the list clean but filtering needs some more work to be fair and defendable. My two cents.--bdmcnitt 19:10, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
Agree or disagree, I have moved the list of "slang" to List of internet slang. No, Google isn't everything, but in my opinion anything with less than 30,000 google hits has no place in the parent article, with a reasonably lower bar of ~500 for the list article. Internet slang should discuss the basic concepts of internet slang, not serve as a dictionary of acronyms. Did you know that as recent as yesterday "BBL" (be back later) was listed here three times? Seriously. —RaD Man (talk) 20:45, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
i think that the actual list part(s) could be incorporated into the list of internet slang page. whereas there could link directly to the section those words are in --koolone0 17:10, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Context section

The first section (context) lists sources of Internet slang supposedly from "most to least frequent use". It's not clear what this means:

  1. Ordered by the number of total slang messages sent in that medium?
  2. Ordered by the number of total messages (slang and non-slang) sent in that medium?
  3. Ordered by the proportion of slang to non-slang messages in that medium?

This needs to be clarified. Regardless of what is meant, a source is needed for this. I find it hard to believe that SMS beats instant messaging in terms of either total messages sent or total slang messages sent. If a source can't be found, we should just say "in arbitrary order" or perhaps list them "in order of appearance", as it were. Also, why aren't email or usenet listed as media where internet slang is used?

Colin M. 04:20, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

What consitutes a Parenthetical?

I moved from their former 'graph

* AFK (Away from Keyboard)
<!-- Not exactly a disclaimer: * STFU (Shut the fuck up) -->

which if, examples of parentheticals, are such neither by being enclosed in paren nor being rhetorical parenthesis: they are simply things that resemble the TLAs that are used parenthetically. If "parenthetical" is being used as a synonym for "TLA or XTLA", that should be said; the lk to parentheticals (which redirected to the rhetorical sense) implies that either the rhetorical sense or the punctuation explains the term, and if it is used more broadly, the article needs to explain that. So if you know "parenthetical" is used in this context, beyond enclosure in paren or rhetorical parenthesis, correct me and avoid misleading and confusing lks such as this one was.
--Jerzyt 19:27, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

I dont get the above, but AFK redirects to this page and it says nothing about it. -- 18:20, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
a parenthectical is a explanitory word expression or sentence to makes things clearer. In the above sentence the fact they're saying (not exactly a disclaimer) means that they arent sorry for what they are saying--koolone0 18:05, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Omitted Examples

Many examples of internet slang are omitted here. That is fine of course, as there is much of it. What I object to is the fact that gtg redirects here but is not explained here. There may be other examples of this. This is a problem which needs fixing.

I would do it but I'm not 100% sure what gtg means. That's why I looked it up!

gtg means "Got To Go. Added it to the list.
--Kraken72 19:11, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
can mean "good to go" as well - depending on context. Secretlondon 20:01, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Origin of the word 'nub'

I had always thought that the origin of 'nub' was just the phonetical spelling of noob, with the long ōō sound being substituted with a long u sound, as in 'tube'. -- MacAddct1984 04:21, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

lolz nub is a word read my post its below urs

List alphabetised

And split into non-offensive and could-offend terms. Merge them if you want to.

1437 - not sure where this belongs...

I'm not sure where this belongs, but I added this edit here: [1]. --HappyCamper 00:23, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

saveing keystrokes?

While some slang is designed to save keystrokes, a lot of 1337 and AOLish isnt, and some increases the number of keystrokes. Might we want to note this in the article? Eds01 16:38, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Dood, aimspeek almst alwys saves kystrokes?DxPatxb 02:23, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I <3 [this]

Hi, I noticed that people don't use leet anymore on forums, but more of some kind of "design talk" (or whatever I should call it) like this:

I<3U (<3 <33 <$ are the same thing -a heart-)

Also there's a lot of putting words in [squared brackets] or putting dots between words like.this or both combined [!]

And a lot other things like putting ___x at the end of some sentence, or: <me> is [so.lonely] withOut Uu [*TeaRS*]

Does anyone know more about this new form of typing?

Yeah, in usernames spaces are replaced with X's (e.g. IxAmxSoxCool) and often beginning and ending with "x", "xxx", or "xo". Unnecessary capitalization (studlycaps) is used too. Multipliers are common often paired with random numbers (x8590). A horribly cliched one would go something like XO_IxHeArTxUx43597_xO. I personally can't stand it but that's just me. =/ 23:14, 28 March 2006 (UTC)


/ponder - I think this comes from online games such as everquest - not from HTML-style markup language. Everquest 2 emotes are in the form /clap, IRC and (I think) YIM use /me. Secretlondon 20:00, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Emotes in the form of /me are most definitely from IRC and related systems before MMORPGs.


AFAICS redirects here but does not appear here AFAICS. — MFH:Talk 15:35, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Use of leetspeak

"Gurus, hackers and coders always use leetspeak sarcastically." You mean, there are people who use it seriously? Good grief. JIP | Talk 21:29, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

BBQ and WoW references

The entry for OMGWTFBBQ references BBQ, but there isn't actually an entry describing what BBQ is (especially as he List of Internet Slang article gives more than one meaning to BBQ). Also, the terms WTB and WTS both say that they are not WoW exclusive, but there isn't any suggestion on the page that it is WoW exclusive, so is it at all relevant to mention it? --Despair 20:00, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

The BBQ thing also has me confused - I'd add it but don't know what it means. As far as the WoW exclusive goes, I would say no, that's not necessarily pertinent information. -- Unregistered user 23:14, 4 May 2006

A BBQ is a method of cooking meat on a grill over either an open fire or pieces of hot charcoal. It's used in "OMGWTFBBQ" to make fun of all the three letter acronyms used in netspeak. Viltris 00:21, 14 July 2006 (UTC)


This question is teh spammeh-licious.





— Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:25, November 7, 2006

Sorry, this isn't the place for spam. --Ampersand2006 ( & ) 01:32, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

this should be erased —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Koolone (talkcontribs) 17:50, 8 February 2007 (UTC).


kthxbye redirects to this article so I'm adding it to the slang list.


From we can read "This user is able to contribute with a professional level of English."
Somehow I find that hard to believe...
-- 10:57, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

omg do u use nub?

ne1 here use nub instead of noob sometimes? cuz nub means core or root of something i just checked it and i used it all the time

When used in that sense, I think it should technically have, uh, whatever those two dots over the letter are called. I'm too lazy to open charmap to show you. Otherwise you're saying the word nub in the sense of, say, the nubs of someone's severed fingers. -- Unregistered user 23:14 4 May 2006

which "u" do you mean Ụ ụ Ủ ủ Ứ ứ Ừ ừ Ử ử Ữ ữ Ự ự--koolone0 12:40, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Removal of the list

I've removed the list, it makes this article too vandalism-prone, and by claiming obscurity a fake acronym can stay there for months, maybe even years, things like this are becoming exceedingly common:

  • CYA: see ya, or see you later (also CU) (or, less commonly and depending on the context, cover your ass) (can also mean Beat Up Mary Poppins)(can also mean beat beaver)
  • LYLAS: love you like a sister
  • LTTB: Listen to the beaver

WP:WINAD, and we have a List of internet slang page for this. +Hexagon1 (talk) Flag of Australia.svg 10:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Redirections of particular slang phrases to the list

IMHO, "IMHO" and other such "internet slang" should redirect to List of Internet slang, not here. Basically, being brought to this article when clicking a link that is "internet slang" doesn't help me find the definition of the slang I just clicked on—while the list would. Is there any argument against this? Outriggr 00:59, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Tough one, but I think it should point here based on WP:WINAD, if you need the definition, find it on Google, Yahoo, Hyperdictionry, whatever. Then feel free to create a stub expaining the meaning. There should be some sort of 'Net-slag stub' template. +Hexagon1 (talk) Flag of Australia.svg 01:30, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Rebuilding List of Internet slang

List of Internet slang looks like it got out of control. The list is now wiped out and needs rebuilding with referenced sources. Help is needed. Just don't start adding unreferenced stuff.--Rayc 04:22, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry - I just added extremely common abbreviations to the list (and I'm an authority in the field if I may say so myself (IRC)) without adding a reference. Perhaps each abbreviation should be accompanied with a 'source' like (usenet) (IRC) (MSN) etc. In my case, I only have experience with IRC; I see a lot of abbreviations in the list that I NEVER see on IRC. Carlo Wood 08:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)


If anymone can confir the notability of the expression "Screwtaping", we could merge the article here. --Abu Badali 21:04, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Attention: Slang Glossary policy discussion underway

Slang glossaries violate the following policy:

Wikipedia is not a dictionary

Wikipedia is not a dictionary or a usage or jargon guide. Wikipedia articles are not:

  1. Dictionary definitions. Because Wikipedia is not a dictionary, please do not create an entry merely to define a term. An article should usually begin with a good definition; if you come across an article that is nothing more than a definition, see if there is information you can add that would be appropriate for an encyclopedia. An exception to this rule is for articles about the cultural meanings of individual numbers.
  2. Lists of such definitions. There are, however, disambiguation pages consisting of pointers to other pages; these are used to clarify differing meanings of a word. Wikipedia also includes glossary pages for various specialized fields.
  3. A usage guide or slang and idiom guide. Wikipedia is not in the business of saying how words, idioms, etc. should be used. We aren't teaching people how to talk like a Cockney chimney-sweep. However, it may be important in the context of an encyclopedia article to describe just how a word is used to distinguish among similar, easily confused ideas, as in nation or freedom. In some special cases an article about an essential piece of slang may be appropriate.

Due to the many AfDs which are initiated to enforce this policy and due to the resistance to such deletion by defenders of the glossaries, I have started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not#Slang glossaries to rewrite the policy in order to solve this problem and to readdress this question: should slang glossaries by allowed on Wikipedia? --List Expert 23:28, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

The Common examples section

Is the Common examples section of this article necessary if there's already another article that has this same information in it? talk to JD wants e-mail 22:14, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I was just about to start a discussion on this, I think a Common examples section would be good with the most used ones such as lol and brb, but at the moment its becoming a comprehensive list which it should not be, In my opinion the full list should be used for all the less used ones such as "amof (As a Matter Of Fact)" with only the ~20 most common ones on the actual page. --Hamish (Talk) 16:19, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Regarding Language...

There is no reason that we should include the spelling of profane words in acronyms. For instance, using F**king will be understood by adults who would need to be using them. Otherwise, there isn't a reason to include these listings for everyone (including kids) to see. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ebowdish (talkcontribs)

  • Please bear in mind that Wikipedia is not censored. The language may not be tasteful, but as long as it's accurate and verifiable, it can be considered appropriate. Of course, if you feel you can make the article more tasteful without removing valuable info or lowering its quality, then by all means you should be bold and do so. — NMChico24 Flag of New Mexico.svg 23:23, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I think you should use full swear words. When somebody say "WTF" they don't mean to say "F***". Besides, are you really hiding the word? I'm pretty sure any kids looking at this would know what the word means anyway.

i agree that u should use F**king instead of the full word because children can access this information very easily and its likely that they could accidentally go to porn sites or something becaues they tried to look up F**king on google --koolone0 18:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
i will make amends to this in a few hours if it has not been taken care of already--koolone0 18:10, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

There is already precedent for leaving the profanity intact: most printed dictionaries. Combine this with TV even having looser regulations on what can be said. I think censoring something like that does more harm than good, as it makes the article itself look ashamed of what it's saying. SporkWitch 19:27, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Have we made an official decision on which way to do it? Censored or not? (Most recent revision, done anonymously, censored the explanation of "LMFAO"). I personally think it should remain uncensored, but if the consensus is to censor it, I'll leave it. SporkWitch 00:42, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

The "common" list of examples is too bloated

The "common" list of examples is too bloated. It is taking up more than half of the space of the entire article, and it is too comprehensive. I have been using the Internet for years, and more than two-thirds of the list is made up of ones that I have never heard of. It seems almost as if some rude people have been making up new ones and adding them there just to try to circulate them for the sake of pride. Many of the examples in the list are also sickeningly offensive, and a common encyclopoedia should be safe for everyone to read.

Considering that a "List_of_Internet_slang_phrases already exists, I think the list within this article should be completely removed, or at least cut down to only include examples that really are common and are not offensive. -- Sampalmer4 11:18, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

  • I see that others have already complained about this. I've trimmed the list down a bit to remove the ones that are obviously anything but common (and most likely made-up). The list is still clearly far too long, so I think that other people should continue to trim it down. -- Sampalmer4 11:26, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
    • People keep adding uncommon things into the list. I think it should be deleted; the List of Internet slang phrases should be linked to instead. -- Sampalmer4 10:13, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
      • The list was blanked so I added some common examples. The list should be about this size in my opinion (4-5 examples) and if people want to get more example they can go to List of Internet slang phrases. Simply linking to "List of..." would also work, but then it should be linked under a "See Also" headline, not under "Common Examples". /Jiiimbooh 19:04, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

about external links

Why does absolutDan keep removing the link to from the external links?

It's listed in google results right below this article. It not only offers a dictionary (like all the other links that he didn't remove), but articles, and resources.

it's THE definitive site on the web about internet slang. I challenge anybody to find a site that deals more with the topic.

This link clearly belongs. If it doesn't, then no links belong here at all. Urban dictionary isn't even about internet slang... it's about street slang. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 19:14, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a linkfarm. We are in need of more cited content from reliable sources, not more external links. --AbsolutDan (talk) 03:15, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a dictionary: however, many people looking at this page may well want a dictionary. It seems to me, therefore, a reasonable thing to link to. Fredtheavenger 22:48, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

The Links Here

if FOLDOC belongs as a link here, then I submit the following sites also belong as links:

All of these sites are authorities on this subject, and all of them used to be linked here before somebody (cough dan cough) removed all of them except for foldoc. Yes I'm affiliated with one of them, however I didn't add it here originally. Some other editor here did, and it stayed there for over a year. Now all of a sudden foldoc has been given preferential treatment. Why?

Many of these sites offer additional features that foldoc does not offer such as articles about slang, blogs about slang, books about slang, quizzes about slang, and even slang translators. many of them also include slang words that are not included in foldoc or wikipedia's list of internet slang.

In fact, pretty much any wired, kim komando, ken leebow, or other "parenting" type website that talks about internet slang includes links to many of these sites in their articles.

Since we removed the list of slang terms from this article, the least we should do is link to more than one source of finding that content.—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

Your concerns have been answered above and on your talk page and do not need to be repeated ad nauseam. Obviously you are associated with, as that's the link you've tried to reinstate several times. You have been blocked for a period by the way, and if you do attempt to disprupt Wikipedia by "... having people checking it morning noon and night and removing all links to external sites. ", they will be blocked on sight without further warning. — Moondyne 14:50, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

If it's a useful site, who cares? It's relevent, as well as the sites he also added that you don't even seem to think he's affiliated with. Why is the only link being allowed getting such special treatment? There's a difference between providing a few relevent and useful links and starting a "link farm". et al are far more relevant to this article than FOLDOC and there is no problem with having a handful of external links. As far as I can see, apart from a bit of utterly harmless self-promotion, they don't violate the external link policy, which policy seems to have been forgotten by the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Spam zealots. —  FOLDOC Editor-in-Chief, Denishowe 23:13, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Easy Denis, we can do without the namecalling. Self-promotion is not harmless; the reason we have the need for WikiProject Spam is the self-promotion, and it is a part of WP:EL for a reason - to prevent it.
However, in hopes of ending this debate, I have replaced the links with a DMOZ link, which is the consensus-backed alternative when there are questions about the number of links and where some sort of external links could arguably be needed. We should have no need for any of the other links now. Remember - Wikipedia is in need of more cited content from reliable sources, not more bare external links. --AbsolutDan (talk) 00:40, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit conflict] Characterising the people who are working to rid Wikipedia of the thousands of articles containing linkspam and advertising in the pejorative is offensive. Their thankless task of dealing with vested interests who would let the encylopaedia deteriorate into just another link directory should be supported by anyone who cares about Wikipedia. The call-to-arms by Brad Patrick from Wikimedia Foundation[2] says it all. Adding links to every online dictionary we can find is not utterly harmless - it damages WP in a real way.
A link to the open directory has been now been added which should settle this matter. — Moondyne 00:57, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
I apologise for the offense my choice of words has caused and I'm sure link spam is a real problem but I still think contributions should be judged on their merits. — Denishowe 23:30, 8 January 2007 (UTC)


BBIAB links to here, but there is no mention of it in the page. perhaps it should link to List of Internet slang phrases which actually tells you what it means? -- 08:01, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Fixed. There are probably more slangs/abbreviations that links to the wrong page since the full list used to be here if I'm not mistaken. /Jiiimbooh 14:42, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Internet slang?

Shorthand is internet slang? What utter ;-( Shorthand is a form of dictation. This article needs a disambig. Encise 02:44, 30 October 2006 (UTC)Encise

LMIRL Speech - Wikiworthy?

Folks, I wrote a speech on and entitled, "LMIRL" which means Let's Meet In Real Life. I have given the speech severals times, including being paid for it. Now since I wrote the speech I can't add it here, but maybe you all might think it fits this wiki page to point out that a speech has been prepared about and entitled with an Internet slang term. The speech uses the term to get non-Internet savvy people curious but only reveals the meaning of LMIRL toward the end of the speech, and generally discusses the "dangers" of "cyberspace" to children and what adults can do to be prepared. Read LMIRL and see if it should be added to this page. Thanks. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 12:28, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Frankly, unless you can point to reputable sources for the information you cite in the speech (e.g. that 10% of the names in a child's chat program buddy list are likely to be paedophiles), and tone down some of the hyperbole, I'm afraid it would violate a number of Wikipedia's policies, including WP:V and WP:NPOV, which are basically the two most important policies we have. JulesH 20:28, 1 December 2006 (UTC)


Err... the usage of stuff like <sarcasm>some comment or other</sarcasm> predates the existance of XML. It should probably refer to SGML instead. JulesH 20:28, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it's a reference to any programming languange. I have seen "*sarcasm* yeah", "*sarcasm on* yeah *sarcasm off*", "/sarcasm yeah" (from MMO's mostly), and any number of variants... Mcapplbee 14:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Acronyms Vs Abbreviations.

Note: many uses of the word acronym here are wrong (and i've removed them)

to be an acronym, the abbreviation has to make a new word... like NASA or SCUBA.

Thus, lol and rotflmao are not acronyms (they can't be pronounced like real words)... they're simply abbreviations. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 16:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC).

I have re-updated the article to clarify the difference between acronyms and abbreviations. Several instances of the article mislabeled abbreviations as acronyms still. 3/7/07 - Ryan — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)

  • I have undone your edit, as you are working under false assumptions. An acronym does not need to form a new "word", an acronym is also an abbreviation formed from initial letters. Acronym is the more appropriate term, as such I have reverted to it. -- KirinX 21:51, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
  • I'll have to disagree with you there - lol and rotflmao can easily be pronounced like real words. --WikiSlasher 05:32, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Look at the dictionary defintions. You're still wrong. According to, an acronym is a "word" while an abbreviation is a shortening of a word. The definition of a word, from says "spoken sound". One cannot speak an abbrviation like bbiab or idk.

Please see the following article for an explanation: --Ryan

  • From your own provided link: This is why you are wrong. It is an acronym, plain and simple. It is, more specifically, however, initialism. And speaking more generally, both initialism and acronyms are both forms of abbreviation. -- KirinX 20:38, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Total Revamp of article.

I just re-edited the entier article and cleaned it up. I left out the following because I could not find a proper place to put it within the article as of right now.

" In some cases the source may be obscure or there may be multiple sources. An email or usenet signature is usually referred to as a ''sig'' or ''.sig''; this may be an abbreviation or it may come from the file ~/.sig used by many common email and usenet news clients on *nix operating systems. "Post-Whore" refers to a member of a forum website that solely concentrates on achieving a higher 'Post-Count'. Members usually slang the term 'Post-Whore' into 'Badger' who is infamous in for the coined phrase. In the event of finding a Badger in a forum website you should immediately let the member know that they have been caught Badgering. ==Recent News== Recently, New Zealand allowed students to use a type of internet slang known as "txt speak" in school and on tests so long as their answer is just as clear and grammar or punctuation are not the subject of the test.{{fact}}"

Deathsythe 18:44, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Seperate list

I think that this list should be serperated into two seperates lists. one list that has unoffensive terms. and a second which has offensive terms --koolone0 18
14, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Do you guys have jobs?


I just searched for a particular piece of internet slang, and found myself redirected to this page. This page does not define the term. I already knew that it was Internet slang, so that doesn't help me any. If things like brb, lol, lmao, ttyl, g2g, etc., are going to be directed here, they have to be defined here. Thanatosimii 23:51, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Various editors have created a legion of redirect pages for terms which aren't, or weren't included here. Why? many terms that get added are not referenced, or incorrectly referenced, or from a reference which does not meet WP standard for reputable referenced. If you have the time, tag the redirect pages for CsD to prevent others from making the mistake (CSD-R1).David Spalding (  ) 18:29, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

See list of internet slang terms

List of Internet slang phrases is probably what you are looking for —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Deathsythe (talkcontribs) 17:16, 28 December 2006 (UTC).


This article desperately, desperately needs sources - especially to prevent unverifiable information from creeping in. - Chardish 22:52, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


pwn = pawn?

I have never heard that reference in all of my years of gaming and being online. Can someone direct some kind of source to this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Deathsythe (talkcontribs) 01:32, 2 March 2007 (UTC).

It is statisticly unrealistic that what you say is true.--Can Not 01:13, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
In my experience "pawn" has been used as a way of pronouncing it out loud, but rarely if ever actually typed. On a similar note, I made a slight change to the section near the beginning, about the origins of the term "pwn." Myself and quite a few people I know don't realistically see a typo as a viable origin, as when normally typing you'd need to move your fingers in rather unnatural ways to actually hit "p" when aiming for "o." (Sorry I didn't make the suggestion here first, new to actually contributing) SporkWitch 09:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)


There's an article called KTHXBI that was created a while back. So if anyone wants to expand, reference, delete, redirect etc. go right ahead (just don't leave double redirects!) KTHXBYE --WikiSlasher 06:52, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Use of "u" and "e"?

I know more slang than most of my friends and I can honestly say I've never noticed people's use of " 'u' to mean 'you' and 'e' to mean 'he' or 'she'." --angrykeyboarder (a/k/a:Scott) 19:26, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

u is extremely common although it's more out of being too lazy to type a couple of extra letters. I've never heard of e either though. Do these really count as slang? --WikiSlasher 05:46, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
"u" is extremely common to be used in place of "you", however, I've also never heard of anyone using just an "e" for anything. I, and others, frequently use an "n" in place of "and". Of course, "r" is commonly used in place of "are". But I don't understand what |People also use "u" to mean "b" and "r" to mean "a"| means. What? --LaraLove 05:32, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
I've never seen "e" on its own either, it's usually used as "4e" = "forever" or "w/e" = "what/when/where/who-ever" SporkWitch 19:14, 6 April 2007 (UTC)


A good example of this is "TMC TEIT D" (2006), which is commonly used to replace "too much coffee too early in the day"

From the article, Acronyms and abbreviations section. Does anyone else think this is actually the opposite of a good example? Imagine one day I made up "EYAG". It means "Ew You Are Gross". It's a great word amirite? Yeah, me and all my friends say all the time. Let's add it to wikipedia and make it a red link and add the year I made it up in! LOL??!?!!?!?

That was all I got from this word. Google says that only one page contains "TMC TEIT D"...a myspace profile. The rest are wikipedia and wikimirrors. In a few days, if its not already done, I'm going to remove the red link, remove the year, and remove the term "good example". Any objections?--Can Not 13:43, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Go for it! One page link to some MySpace profile does not a good example make. Clearly almost no-one says it. --WikiSlasher 05:32, 19 March 2007 (UTC)


BEBO slang is quite unique (I sincerely hope so), eg:
HYaaaa!! Iim Gr8 Tah bbe uu?
Ii Kno Havnt Bin owt Wiv Tam Iin A While lol!!
Haha! Dno yy Tho
Wt Uu Biin up 2 Hun??

(Yes, this is very common form there - It seems to be also mainly british community) - G3, 14:06, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Removed some garbageo added some stf.

YOU know what i changed wellllll i removed pihb (pee in her butt),WHO the heck wrote that retard, you should turn OFF perv mode sicko.1337 H4XZ0R 09:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC)


I removed the sources tag. How can one cite sources on something like this? External links are posted as proof, so to speak. 'Hurry, someone go buy "Internet Slang Dictionary" by Ryan Jones so we can cite a source.' Negative. If someone has time, scan over the external links and convert them to references. If not, I'll do it in a few days. --LaraLove 06:02, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Examples -- specific terms

Removed the "MAIB" section under examples (seemed extraneous) and added a link to List of online-gaming slang under "other examples." I'd also question the term itself, as I've never seen it crop up in chat rooms or in the Battlefield series, as the guy that put it up said (he also added the term to the List of online-gaming slang at about the same time as he added it here). SporkWitch 19:39, 6 April 2007 (UTC)


PWND witch means power owned like "jimmy got Pwnd

I was wrong

I thought that the adults warning that internet slang was ruining literacy were crazy. After looking at this article, though, it seems that they have a point. Stupid grammar mistakes are everywhere, and it's clear in a lot of places that some random Wiki-n00b went to this article, stuck in a half of a sentence where it only barely fits in context, and clicked Save page. Check out just one example:

Some other Internet slang includes the folowing. If you are called a "tker" it means that you are a typekiller. For instance, if at any given time during an action game you need to type, and a person kills you, that's a type kill, or "TK." (TKER can also be used to mean team killer) Another slang is if the person has to go away for his keyboard, or "AFK" (this means you are not at your comp, or computer). He or she may say "BRB" or "be right back". One more is the saying, "OMG"/"OMFG." This term is usually used out of stress or anger and it means "Ohh my god!!"/"OHH MY FUCKING GOD!" and is frequently used when the connection is laggy

They didn't even bother to put in a period... and it's clearly biased. "OMG" is [i]not[/i] confined to gaming.

I am far too busy currently to go through and revise this article. To whoever is brave enough to attempt it: Good luck. Twilight Realm 01:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

The big problem is that people are simply editing the article because they believe that being capable of using Internet slang automatically makes them a linguist. It would be nice to have semi protection for this article, but I do not think there are enough edits in the past week to really merit this. The article just suffers from bad, bad writing. I'm sticking a cleanup template at the top. It needs it.
Mendaliv 05:49, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Jargon or Argot?

I have to ask whether it is the general consensus that Internet slang is a jargon and not an argot. The same realization occurred in leet; the description of the purposes of the language said that it was to "make fun of newbies", effectively excluding them, through use of orthographic shibboleths. This is a pretty clear definition of argot. Applying this to Internet slang, let us ask if the purpose of "OMFG" is to offset high-latency connections (as the current description implies), or to keep out certain people who might frown on the use of swear words- moderators, auto-kick scripts on game servers, parents watching over the shoulder of the user.
Mendaliv 05:44, 22 April 2007 (UTC)


Why is the "English pseudo dialects" box at the bottom? I do not see how this fits the bill of the description in that template- a language formed by the mixture of English and another language (or something like a pidgin involving English). Internet slang is a fusion of which other language and English? Possibly leet? I'm sorry, but I do not believe that Internet slang has reached this developmental level just yet.
Mendaliv 05:57, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

What the?


What is this!? I'll tell you. VANDALISM. I do not know the purpose of this...thing, so I removed it for the sake of the article. Ekansonic55 00:37, 27 April 2007 (UTC)