Talk:quism

RFV — passed
This word doesn't seem like it could be a real word. The definition is a bit sketchy, and the Google Books search turned up results, but none would be satisfactory enough to cite for this word. Therefore, I would like to request some additional verification for this entry. Thanks, Razorflame 07:03, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Looks citable to me, but barely:  Remember we only need three. Equinox 14:31, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * And now we have three. Cited. Equinox 18:21, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Nope, just two. (The 1990 cite, being a mention, doesn't count.) —Ruakh TALK 19:20, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * There are hundreds of uses on Google Scholar; cited again by adding one. :-) -- Visviva 16:54, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Striking. Note that somebody seems to have put the neologism template on it. Equinox ◑ 13:53, 17 May 2009 (UTC)