Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/3D Printing 2

3D Printing 2

The filing party (the editor who opened this request) will add the basic details for this dispute below.

Editors involved in this dispute

1. Sorein (talk · contribs) – filing party
2. GliderMaven (talk · contribs)
3. Gaijin42 (talk · contribs)

Articles affected by this dispute

1. 3D Printing (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Other attempts at resolving this dispute that you have attempted

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/3D_Printing

Issues to be mediated

What is this dispute about? What sections, sentences, or issues in the article(s) can you not agree on? If you are the editor who opened this request, list these issues to be mediated under "Primary issues". If you did not open this request, you can add additional issues to be mediated under "Additional issues". The issues to be mediated would be properly agreed upon later, if this request for mediation is accepted.

Primary issues (added by the filing party)

1. A couple of apparently illiterate users recklessly and repeatedly reverted my contribution, which is very important as it points out a linguistic flaw in using (abusing) the term "3D Printing". That is actually well known in the 3D Printing medium.

This is what they keep reverting:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3D_printing&oldid=583087059&diff=prev

Those two offenders cannot understand the matter because they seem to have no knowledge, either linguistic or technical. Linguistically, they don't understand the origin of the word "print". Otherwise, it is striking that the process has absolutely nothing to do with "printing". Even in the larger article, there are terms on which the described industry still debates to replace the silly "3D printing". It is strikingly obvious that what the crowd names "3D printing" is not any printing. That is only a vulgar term and it is a shame that Wikipedia put up with it. Such destroyers are a plague to Wikipedia and to any such collective project. It is true that the 2 offenders foolishly deleted my contribution without any reason and any discussion, as if they were the only masters of the page. They showed no interest in the linguistic matter. Some Wikipedia mediator treated the matter with irresponsibility and torpor. Please assign someone with enough linguistic understanding.

Additional issues (added by other parties)

• Additional issue 1
• Additional issue 2

Parties' agreement to mediation

If you are a named party, please sign below and indicate whether you agree or refuse to participate in mediation. Remember that all editors are obliged to resolve disputes about content through discussion, mediation, or other similar means. If you do not wish to participate in mediation, you must arrange another form of dispute resolution. Comments and questions should be made underneath the numbered list below, to avoid confusion.

1. Agree. Sorein (talk) 15:38, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
2. Disagree The filing party apparently has no knowledge of what WP:OR WP:RS WP:V WP:UNDUE mean. beyond that, his core complaint is trivia. The term is 3d printing. That the etymology of that term may have flaws is irrelevant unless covered by reliable sources in sufficient quantity and quality to merit inclusion. His addition is completely unsourced WP:OR. The meaning of words changes over time. Computer mice are not rodents, but we don't mention that in the relevant article. Indeed, almost all 2d printers would also be subject to his criticism, because they use a technology other than "pressing" to produce their output. Additionally, the fileing party has initiated any discussion on the article talk page, and their immediate use of WP:PERSONAL attacks and WP:ABF are indicative that any discussion with them will be futile. Past that, the last time the user attempted to add this content was in November, the issue is stale. Gaijin42 (talk) 16:15, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
3. Disagree And frankly, I think Sorein should be suspended for wasting everyone's time like this, and his consistent use of insults. GliderMaven (talk) 16:18, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Decision of the Mediation Committee

This section should only be edited by a mediator. The Mediation Committee's representative will indicate in due course whether the request is accepted (meaning a mediator will be assigned) or rejected (meaning you will have to try a different type of dispute resolution). If the mediator asks you a question in this section, you may edit here.

• Reject. Two of the three named parties do not agree to mediation. For the mediation committee Sunray (talk) 16:48, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

So, you approve of illiteracy. Nice work, Wikipedia! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sorein (talk • contribs) 08:18, 9 March 2014 (UTC)