Jump to content

Talk:Internet slang

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mattworld (talk | contribs) at 01:55, 1 June 2007 (→‎Merge). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconInternet culture Start‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Internet culture To-do:
Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Sort of useless

This should definately get a complete rewrite. And it should reference leet more. I think this article should even be deleted. If you read some of the parts to it, it is definately talking about leet. Also, "lmao" directs here, but "roxorz" directs to the leet article, when they are pretty much the same thing. THEemu 02:52, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for contributing! I'm the one who added the rewrite tag, so I suppose I can only agree with you--making my opinion worthless. LOL. Thanks for investigating the issue though! --PureRED - Kyle Floyd 02:58, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not so much delete, just written out properly Tytrox 22:15, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - so fix it! Anyone can edit Wikipedia, including you. --h2g2bob (talk) 03:43, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

A merge was proposed between LOL (internet slang) and Internet slang. I've fixed the tags and brought discussion to one place (ie here). --h2g2bob (talk) 03:34, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I also approve merger. --Shaymus22 19:06, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I think it's a good idea.

— from Talk:Internet Slang (which is a redirect)
  • I'm personally in favour of keeping LOL in its own article. I feel lol is notable enough to warrant its own article, with 176 million Ghits and several good quality references from independent sources. Lol is even used in more everyday speach by people like Charlie Brooker (here). My opinion is there is enough distinct information on lol that it should have its own entry with a brief summary in this one. --h2g2bob (talk) 03:34, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd like to see a keep per h2g2bob. LOL is definitely one of the most used acronyms on the net right now. bibliomaniac15 04:40, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'll say merge because it's basically in the same category. Deletion Quality 16:13, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge that confused article, much of which is about "ROTFL" anyway. We read above: I feel lol is notable enough to warrant its own article, with 176 million Ghits (emphasis added). Feel has 550 million; it lacks an article here -- and quite rightly, as WP is not a dictionary. Additionally, I'm underwhelmed by my first try at looking up the "good quality references" for the significance of the use of these rather tiresome but anyway linguistically uninteresting terms. -- Hoary 09:56, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's far from confused. And much of it is not about ROTFL, any more than it is specifically about LOL. Some of it is about both. However, that's an argument for renaming it (I've thought that for a long time a better name is in order.), not an argument for merger, given that there are elements of Internet slang that it most definitely isn't about.

      As for your failure to find good quality references, I suggest (a) following the link that h2g2bob gave above and (b) using Google Scholar to find academic papers instead of using Google Web to find web log postings. When you do, you'll see how the sources often separate the smileys and emoticons from the (laughter) slang initialisms. (This paper in JCMC separates the twain, for example, calling LOL, ROTFL, et al. "disclaimers".) Uncle G 16:03, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • h2g2bob hits the nail right on the head. A merger is not a good idea. Wikipedia:Summary style, just as is used for the discussions of emoticons, is the way to go here. The problem to be addressed is not a merger of a sourced article into here. It is sorting out the unsourced mess of this article, so that it is more in line with what sources actually say. Doing that will reveal that there's plenty of scope for separate articles.

    It is this article that is the confused one, in part because it appears to have grown as an accumulation of original research and yet another attempt to write a folk dictionary, rather than as encyclopaedic content based upon sources. Ironically, what is in fact needed is the same sort of attention to finding sources that have analysed Internet slang, to adding verifiable content to this article that is actually based upon them, and to removing original research and folk dictionaries and keeping them removed, that editors gave to LOL (Internet slang). Merger isn't anything to do with that, and doesn't help it in the least. Uncle G 16:03, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    • KeepIf someone is on line and they read LoL and they wonder what it means they are going to go to Wikipedia and type LoL, not Internet slang. Many people may not see it for Internet slang, but youth slang, or my not place it in the construct interent slang. Merging would reduce the usefullness of the information and give this meme over to Google, which Wikipedia is proving to be good at. (Rhooker1236 15:33, 14 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
    • Incredibly strong keep. The slang "LOL" is extremely common, moreso than all other internet slang, and merits its own page.


ok just for an example since you want it to keep its own "site area", goto http://www.runescape.com log in or create an account and see how many times lol is used and then come back and tell me


NO! It dosen't need to be merged. 72.196.128.120 16:54, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever, don't care :P

blah blah blah

((8w —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.77.30.255 (talk) 00:03, 12 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]



BOL = BUSTIN OUT LAUGHING!!

Ok, what do you think?

I rewrote it, so I want to know whot people think of it now?
May 18 2007

I cleaned up your edit job, fixed a couple of spelling errors and created proper links to abbreviations and MMORPG (no offense). But truthfully, I think this article should have two categories: MMORPG & Message Board slang. They're both widely known but there are some that are exclusive to each individual genre.--DavePretty 23:29, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why it needed a complete rewrite. It was better the way it was before. Now it's just a list oh random expressions, some of them rather dodgy. I think this article should deal with the history of the Internet slang, like it did before, and another article should be created - List of Internet phrases - containing the list here. Plus, I'm sure there are 2 or 3 more lists just like this one. On second thought, all those should be merged. I request a revert to the original content. No offence, but here is a bigger list of phrases: List_of_Internet_slang Bravemuta 12:15, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

reverted. --Haigejobu 13:09, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The entire notion of LOL has expanded from the the boundaries of internet slang. I believe that LOL should be kept a separate article from internet slang, but I do believe that a rewrite could do it a lot of good.

I think that the easiest way to clean up this article would be to split it up into sections with lists of abbreviations/emoticons/etc. and their meanings. With that done, adding to the article would become easier as well.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Internet_slang&oldid=134985878"