The dating & relationship glossary

A red flag is a repeated behaviour that undermines trust, safety or respect in a relationship — such as monitoring, punishing silence, blame reversal or contempt. One bad moment is not a red flag; a pattern is.

Examples

• Checking your phone, then denying it when asked.
• Going silent for days as a punishment after every disagreement.
• Turning every concern you raise into your fault.

Red flag vs yellow flag. A yellow flag is worth noticing once; a red flag keeps coming back and cannot be raised without blame or punishment.

Red flag vs the ick. An ick is about your attraction; a red flag is about how someone treats you.

Where it stops: A red flag describes a behaviour, not a diagnosis of a person. Fear, threats, violence or isolation are safety issues first.

Scores eight relationship behaviours in your own answers.

Related terms: yellow flag, green flag, beige flag, love bombing

A yellow flag in a relationship is a behaviour or situation worth noticing and possibly discussing, but it is not automatically a dealbreaker. Context, repetition and how the person responds when you raise it help you understand what it means.

Examples

• Reading a lot into a small change in texting tone.
• Wanting to speed things up before talking about pace.
• Agreeing to a plan before checking whether you want to go.
• Putting off a small, uncomfortable conversation.

Yellow flag vs red flag. One sharp reply on a hard day might be yellow; a repeated pattern that cannot be discussed may be red.

Yellow flag vs beige flag. A beige flag is a harmless quirk with no effect on trust; a yellow flag can create friction if nobody names it.

Where it stops: A yellow flag is a prompt for attention or conversation, not a verdict. Safety concerns are never playful yellow flags.

Sixteen situations across eight everyday dating habits; the highest one names your yellow flag.

Related terms: red flag, beige flag, mixed signals, green flag

A green flag is a repeated behaviour that builds trust and safety: apologising without a "but", respecting a limit the first time, staying consistent in private and in public, and coming back to repair after a fight.

Examples

• Apologising without adding a "but".
• Respecting a limit the first time you state it.
• Coming back to repair after an argument.

Green flag vs red flag. Green and red flags describe the same behaviours from opposite ends: what builds trust and what wears it down.

Every protective answer counts toward the green flag score shown with your result.

Related terms: red flag, yellow flag, relationship compatibility

A beige flag is a habit or trait that is a little odd but harmless — eating the same pasta every night, strong opinions about ice cubes. Unlike a red flag, it costs nobody anything; unlike a green flag, it builds nothing. It is just very human, and often the thing you end up loving.

Examples

• Narrating every trip from the kitchen to the sofa.
• Ordering the same dish at every restaurant.
• Strong opinions about ice cubes.

Beige flag vs the ick. A beige flag is a quirk you notice; an ick is the sudden drop in attraction it can trigger in some people.

Related terms: yellow flag, the ick, red flag

The ick is dating slang for a sudden, often irrational loss of attraction triggered by something harmless — the way someone runs for a bus, a word they overuse, how they hold a fork. It says more about your attraction than about the other person’s character, and it does not always last.

Examples

• Losing interest after seeing them clap when the plane lands.
• A baby voice used once, and now you cannot unhear it.

The ick vs red flag. An ick is information about your attraction; a red flag is information about the relationship.

Related terms: beige flag, red flag

A situationship is a romantic or sexual connection that works like a relationship in some ways — regular contact, intimacy, plans — but has never been defined, so each person can have different expectations. It is not a problem in itself; it becomes painful when one person wants a label and the other avoids the conversation.

Examples

• Months of weekends together, and neither of you has said "we are dating".
• You are introduced to friends by first name only.
• Plans are made the same day, rarely further ahead.

Situationship vs breadcrumbing. A situationship can be mutual and honest; breadcrumbing is one person giving just enough attention to keep the other hoping.

Where it stops: No chat analysis can tell you what the other person feels. Messaging patterns show effort, not intention.

Reads a two-person WhatsApp export on your device and shows who starts, asks and restarts.

Related terms: texting effort, breadcrumbing, mixed signals, soft launch

Love bombing is an overwhelming burst of affection early in a relationship — constant messages, declarations, gifts, future plans within days — that creates fast attachment. Intensity alone is not love bombing; the concern is intensity that expects something in return and turns cold or controlling when it does not get it.

Examples

• "You’re the one" on the second date, "you’re cold" on the fifth.
• Being asked to move in before you have met their friends.

Love bombing vs mixed signals. Love bombing is the intense start; the hot-and-cold swing that follows is what people then describe as mixed signals.

Where it stops: Two people who fall fast and stay steady are not love bombing. Research links it to narcissistic traits and insecure attachment in some samples, which is a correlation, not a way to diagnose anyone.

Covers intensity that cools when it does not get its way, among eight behaviours.

Related terms: red flag, mixed signals, attachment style

Ghosting is ending contact with someone by disappearing without explanation — no reply, no goodbye, often across every app at once. Researchers describe it as a digital way to dissolve a relationship while avoiding the conversation. What makes it hard is the ambiguity: the person left behind has no answer to work with.

Examples

• Three dates, then messages that are never read again.
• A friend who stops answering and leaves the group chat quietly.

Ghosting vs breadcrumbing. Ghosting stops all contact; breadcrumbing keeps a thin line of contact open without committing.

Ghosting vs orbiting. After ghosting, orbiting is when the person still watches your stories or likes your posts.

Where it stops: A slow reply is not ghosting. Silence can have many causes; only a long, unexplained end of contact is.

Counts restarts after three days of silence and who makes them.

Related terms: breadcrumbing, orbiting, reply time, situationship

Breadcrumbing is giving someone just enough attention — an occasional like, a late-night "hey", a vague "we should hang out" — to keep them interested without any intention of committing. The pattern is small, irregular signals that never turn into plans. In one study, people who reported being breadcrumbed also reported lower life satisfaction and more loneliness.

Examples

• A message every two weeks, always at midnight, never about meeting.
• "We should really get a drink" — for the fourth month in a row.

Breadcrumbing vs benching. Breadcrumbing keeps someone hoping; benching keeps someone in reserve while dating others.

Shows who starts conversations and how often plan words appear.

Related terms: ghosting, benching, situationship, mixed signals

Orbiting is when someone stops talking to you but keeps watching your life online — viewing every story, liking the odd post — without ever getting back in touch. It usually follows ghosting or a fade-out, and it keeps the other person wondering whether the door is still open.

Examples

• No reply for a month, but first to view every story.
• A like on a two-year-old photo, then silence again.

Orbiting vs breadcrumbing. Orbiting is passive watching with no message; breadcrumbing includes occasional messages.

Related terms: ghosting, breadcrumbing

Benching is keeping someone "on the bench" — interested and available — while you date other people, contacting them just often enough that they stay an option. Like a substitute player, the benched person is kept warm but rarely brought in. The difference from honest non-exclusive dating is that nobody said so.

Examples

• Warm messages when their other plans fall through, silence otherwise.
• Always "busy this weekend", never "not interested".

Benching vs situationship. In a situationship both people are usually in it; benching is one person holding the other in reserve.

Related terms: breadcrumbing, situationship

A soft launch is hinting at a new relationship on social media without showing the person — a second glass on the table, a hand in the corner of a photo, a jacket that is clearly not yours. It lets people test the waters publicly before committing to a hard launch.

Examples

• A dinner photo with two plates and no face.
• A story of a car ride with someone else’s hand on the wheel.

Soft launch vs hard launch. A soft launch hints; a hard launch shows the face and says it.

Related terms: hard launch, situationship

A hard launch is making a relationship officially public online — a clear photo of the two of you, a tag, sometimes a caption — after which friends and followers know you are together. It often follows a soft launch, and for many couples it is the moment the relationship feels "real" to others.

Examples

• A carousel ending on a photo of you both, tagged.
• Changing a profile picture to a couple photo.

Hard launch vs soft launch. A hard launch removes the ambiguity a soft launch keeps on purpose.

Related terms: soft launch

Delulu is internet slang for “delusional” in a light sense: believing a better story than the facts allow — that a story view means they like you, that a plan will happen because you can feel it. Harmless as optimism; costly when it makes you ignore what someone keeps doing.

Examples

• Deciding a story view means they are into you.
• Planning the holiday before the second date.

Delulu vs mixed signals. Mixed signals come from the other person; delulu is the story you write around them.

Related terms: mixed signals, situationship

A dating archetype is a playful label for how someone tends to approach dating — how fast they move, how they show interest, what they look for. On Wabiro, the Dating Archetype Test assigns one of a fixed set of archetypes from your answers with documented rules; it describes a style, not a personality type in the psychological sense.

Examples

• Someone who plans the whole first date vs someone who texts "wyd" at 10 pm.
• The friend who falls fast vs the friend who needs six months to say "we".

Dating archetype vs attachment style. Attachment style is a research concept measured with validated scales; a dating archetype is an entertainment label.

Dating archetype vs flirting style. Flirting style is how you show interest in the moment; a dating archetype covers the whole approach.

Related terms: flirting style, attachment style, delulu

A flirting style is the way a person typically communicates romantic interest — through teasing, sincere attention, physical closeness, polite restraint or traditional roles. Communication researchers identified five such styles in 2010 (traditional, physical, sincere, playful, polite). Wabiro’s Flirting Style test is an entertainment version that names your dominant style from a short set of situations.

Examples

• Remembering a tiny detail from last week and bringing it up.
• Teasing someone about their playlist.

Flirting style vs dating archetype. Flirting style is one moment of interest; a dating archetype is the whole approach to dating.

Related terms: dating archetype, mixed signals

Texting effort is how much of a conversation each person carries: who starts it, who asks questions, who restarts it after a silence, who suggests meeting. It is visible in a chat’s patterns over weeks, not in one exchange, and it shows investment in the conversation — not how much someone likes you.

Examples

• One person opens 80% of conversations.
• Questions only ever go one way.

Texting effort vs reply time. Reply time is speed; texting effort is who carries the conversation. Someone can reply slowly and still carry most of it.

Measures starts, questions, follow-ups and restarts per person, on your device.

Related terms: Wabiro Effort Balance, reply time, double texting, dry texting

The Wabiro Effort Balance is a 0–100 score from Situationship Autopsy that shows how evenly two people share a WhatsApp conversation. It weights messages (40%), conversations started (40%) and questions (20%); 100 means an exact 50/50 split on all three. It is computed on your device and describes effort, never feelings.

Examples

• A score of 92: you both start and ask about equally.
• A score of 40: one person carries most starts and questions.

Wabiro Effort Balance vs texting effort. Texting effort is the general idea; the Effort Balance is Wabiro’s documented formula for it.

Related terms: texting effort, reply time, situationship

Reply time is how long someone takes to answer a message. In a chat it is shaped by work, sleep, notifications and the topic as much as by interest, so a single delay means little. Patterns across weeks — who usually starts, who restarts after a silence — say more, and even they describe habits and effort, not feelings.

Examples

• Replies within minutes on weekdays, hours on weekends.
• A long pause after a serious question.

Reply time vs ghosting. A slow reply is a delay; ghosting is an end of contact without explanation.

Shows each person’s approximate median reply time, measured inside conversation sessions.

Related terms: texting effort, double texting, ghosting

Double texting is sending another message before the other person has replied to your last one. Dating advice often treats it as a faux pas, but it is mostly a question of rhythm: a follow-up after a day is ordinary; a string of messages after every silence can put pressure on the other person.

Examples

• "Also, did you see the news?" an hour after your first message.
• Three "??" in a row after no reply.

Double texting vs dry texting. Double texting is about frequency; dry texting is about how little each message carries.

Counts follow-ups sent after 20 minutes or more without a reply.

Related terms: reply time, texting effort, dry texting

Dry texting is replying with the minimum — "ok", "lol", "haha nice" — without questions or anything that keeps the conversation going. It can signal low interest, but just as often it reflects someone who dislikes texting, is busy, or talks better in person. It says more when it is new than when it is someone’s constant style.

Examples

• "ok" as a reply to a long story.
• Answering questions but never asking one back.

Dry texting vs texting effort. Dry texting is one visible sign of low texting effort, but questions and conversation starts show effort more reliably.

Shows who asks the questions in a two-person chat.

Related terms: texting effort, double texting, mixed signals

Mixed signals are behaviours that point in opposite directions — warm one day, distant the next; enthusiastic about plans that never happen. They usually reflect uncertainty or divided attention on one side, and they leave the other person guessing. A direct question often clears up in one conversation what weeks of decoding cannot.

Examples

• "I really like you" followed by four days of silence.
• Asking about your weekend plans, never suggesting one.

Mixed signals vs yellow flag. Occasional mixed signals are a yellow flag; a hot-and-cold swing used to keep you anxious is closer to red.

Its Mixed Signal dimension scores how consistent your own signals are.

Related terms: yellow flag, breadcrumbing, situationship, delulu

An attachment style is a pattern in how a person seeks closeness and handles distance in relationships, usually described as secure, anxious or avoidant. The idea comes from attachment theory (Bowlby) and was applied to adult romance by Hazan and Shaver in 1987. It is measured with validated questionnaires; quick online quizzes only approximate it.

Examples

• Needing reassurance after a slow reply (often described as anxious).
• Pulling away when things get serious (often described as avoidant).

Attachment style vs dating archetype. Attachment style is a studied construct; a dating archetype is an entertainment label for a dating approach.

Where it stops: Wabiro does not measure attachment style. Styles can change over time and across relationships.

Related terms: dating archetype, love bombing, relationship compatibility

Relationship compatibility is how well two people’s needs, habits and plans fit together — how they communicate, handle conflict, share money and time, and what they want long term. Research suggests similarity on paper predicts less than how a couple handles differences, so a compatibility score is a starting point for conversation, not a forecast.

Examples

• One of you needs to talk a fight through tonight; the other needs a day.
• Different ideas about how often to see friends.

Relationship compatibility vs attachment style. Attachment style describes one person; compatibility describes how two people fit.

You and your partner answer separately; you both see the match, never each other’s answers.

Related terms: attachment style, green flag, red flag

A dating pool is the set of people someone could realistically date: within reach, in the age range they want, single and interested in their gender. Estimates start from population statistics and apply filters; because filters overlap (age, marital status, education), honest estimates give a range rather than one precise number.

Examples

• Everyone in your city within your age range, single, and open to your gender.
• The same pool, filtered again by height and education.

Where it stops: A dating pool estimate counts people who match criteria, not people who would match with you.

Applies filters inside age groups and shows a range, with every source listed.

Related terms: relationship compatibility

A purity score is the number out of 100 that a purity test gives: every yes/no question you answer "yes" to lowers it, so a high score means fewer of the listed experiences. The format is best known from the Rice Purity Test. On Wabiro it is a party game with original questions — a conversation starter, not a moral or health measure.

Examples

• Comparing scores with friends before a night out.
• Retaking the test a year later to see what changed.

Where it stops: A purity score says nothing about a person’s worth, values or health.

Related terms: dating archetype

Social battery is an everyday metaphor for how much social interaction someone can enjoy before needing time alone to recharge. People with a "small battery" drain faster at parties; others feel charged by crowds. It is a popular way of talking about social energy, loosely related to introversion, not a scientific measure.

Examples

• Leaving a party at 11 without saying goodbye.
• Needing a quiet Sunday after a busy Saturday.

Where it stops: A low social battery is not social anxiety; persistent fear of social situations is worth discussing with a professional.

Related terms: dating archetype