Talk:flawsome

Why not the alternate definition of flawsome that Tyra Banks, among others, has promoted?

Here's a link to Tyra Banks advocating for flawed + awesome = flawsome. https://www.instagram.com/tyrabanks/p/BLty9AZAzJ_/

I added the alternate definition, as we used it in our book, but somebody took it down. Frankly, I think the definition that's here is wrong, or at best incomplete, based on recent usage. Who referees such disagreements?

Here's what I added:

Adjective

flawsome (comparative more flawsome, superlative most flawsome)

1. 1. Characterised or marked by flaws.
   • 2010, V. R. Krishna Iyer, Wake Up Call for Indian Republic, page 31:

     A flawsome ruling of the Supreme Court, projected as judicial jurisprudence of dubious noesis, has exaggeratedly created an 'avatar' with power to choose 'justices' as a secret process.

2. 2. Someone or something that is both flawed and awesome
   • 2024, Tom Collins and Michele Molitor, I Am Perfectly Flawsome: How Embracing Imperfection Makes Us Better, page 33:

     The term flawsome ... is used to capture the paradox of striving for excellence while at the same time understanding and accepting that no matter how well we do on this attempt, it won't be perfect. Ever.

Can anyone explain why mine was removed? TomCollins842 (talk) 16:26, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

@TomCollins842: Please read WT:CFI. Terms may not be added unless there is proof of sufficient usage, and your citation is merely mentioning the word, not using it (see use–mention distinction). Binarystep (talk) 13:30, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

@Binarystep, Binarystep: With due respect, I don't know where you got the "mentioning" idea. Our whole book is about the mindshift we believe will help anyone suffering from perfectionism, imposter syndrome, and similar disorders (and we use that term purposefully, as there's a lot of research to back it up).

In addition to Tyra Banks using the term across her social media platforms, I just did a quick search on Amazon and found 19 books, including ours, with Flawsome in their titles.

The results also bring up dozens of t-shirts, wall art, and coffee mugs displaying the very definition we're advocating.

https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Flawsome&crid=38ARPH88PPRO4&sprefix=flawsome%2Caps%2C1320&ref=nb_sb_noss_1

Any assertion that the word is not in common usage is simply incorrect. I'm happy to provide further search results, if you need them. TomCollins842 (talk) 13:54, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

If you actually read use-mention distinction you will see why plastering a word on a T-shirt is not usage (e.g. in a sentence). 2A00:23C5:FE1C:3701:91DB:35AE:96FC:5768 17:19, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Aside from the fact that the use-mention distinct makes sense, if at all, primarily regarding nouns, you're ignoring the usage of flawsome in at least 19 books since 2016. The Use-mention article itself notes that the distinction may be viewed as pedantic. And your assertion that usage on a t-shirt, mug, etc., is "not usage" makes no sense at all. Do you really think words can only be treated as valid parts of the language if they're written out in full sentences? Will English wither and die because Gen Z doesn't want to bother? Probably not: https://nypost.com/2024/07/30/lifestyle/gen-z-slang-the-ick-and-boop-added-to-cambridge-dictionary/ Yet again I ask, why the resistance? TomCollins842 (talk) 17:49, 24 October 2024 (UTC)