Sure, especially since my version had a typo that made the definition vacuous.

]]>I changed (at least the formulation of the) definition at abelian Lie algebra.

Check if you agree that it is better now.

]]>Well, heck, why not trivial algebra?

]]>trivial group, trivial ring, trivial Lie algebra, abelian Lie algebra (which may not be trivial exactly but by special dispensation is still too trival to be simple)

]]>