• Keywords must be feasible Polglish mispronunciations, i.e. orthographic renditions of word-length phonetic strings typically erroneously pronounced by Polish learners of English instead of other, correct, English word-length phonetic strings.
• Mispronunciations must be typical of Polglish (Polish-English interlanguage), i.e. non-idiosyncratic and non-dialectal (in the narrow sense of dialect).
• The orthography of a mispronunciation must make it homographic with another English word, pronounced differently than the word originally intended by the learner, but mispronounced.
• The keyword must not be too difficult to read, pronounce or understand for Polglish learners at the proficiency level where they might be likely to substitute its pronunciation for the correct one.
• The part-of-speech tag attached after the keyword must refer to the original correct word, not to the keyword itself (sometimes, of course, the POS will overlap).
• The 'definition' of the keyword should be very short and simple; it is not meant to attempt to really define anything, but instead to lead the learner to the correct word which is commonly mispronounced as a phonetic string orthographically rendered as the keyword.
• The example sentence must illustrate the given keyword as far as spelling and (mis)pronunciation go, but the original correct word as far as sense is concerned, so that the learner is guided to see the incompatibility of his/her (mis)pronunciation with the meaning both in the 'definition' and example sentence.[1]
• The best entries are those where the keyword makes some twisted, humorous sense in the incompatible context of the example sentence in which it is embedded; such example sentences will effectively be quasi-ambiguous, with one ordinary sense illustrating the meaning of the original correct word, and the other sense (supported by the spelling of the keyword) building a pun upon the former.

Principles listed by Włodzimierz Sobkowiak on 15^th March 2001

[1] There is at least one entry in the Dictionary which goes counter to this principle. I leave it to the Reader to find it. Thanks go to Robert Eklund for pointing the entry out to me.