Googlewhackage

So a friend of mine just bought "Are you Dave Gorman?" and "Googlewhack" and she is now trying to find a googlewhack for herself. Which, in turn, has lead me on a similar quest (fraut with peril and dragons!)

It's mental I tells ya! The closest I have come is "Nudzh Qin" with 5 results. A cheeky combination of China's first emperor and my new favourite word, meaning: One who persistently pesters, annoys, or complains.

There were a few close calls last night, which I can no longer remember, netting me a cool and VALID 1 result. Alas, the link was invalid due to it be just a compendium of of words on some guys blog which turned out to be a list of already known googlewhacks. Failure!

Here are the rules, according to Googlewhack.com:

What are the rules?
Rule Number One: Your two Googlefactors must exist in Google's view of legitimate words in this dictionary. Not your view; Google's view! Google does the work, and Google has the final word on what may be legitimate! In the blue bar atop your Google results, accepted terms are linked, and so appear 'underlined.' No line, no link, or no legitimate word = Googlejack! (As in, You've got jack, so see the FAQ :-)

Rule Number Two: Google also is the arbiter of a whack's uniqueness. Look to the right end of the blue bar atop your Google results. If you see "Results 1 - 1 of (any number),' you found exactly one hit = Googlewhack!

Rule Number Three: Google shows you an excerpt of the page you whacked. Look at that text. If it's merely a list of words (such as a bibliography, concordance, encyclopedia, glossary, thesaurus, dictionary, domain names, or plain old machine-generated random garbage), No Whack For You!



However, I shall remain vigilent in the face of such travesties and press forth. Excelsior and all that malarky. I would list my attempts here, but I do not want some poor unfortunate schleb to think he has found his El Dorado, only to be directed here, to my list of failures. Such was my fate.

And now...on with the whacking!!!