Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Garage sale

Garage sale

 * Editors involved in this dispute
 * 1) – filing party


 * Articles affected by this dispute


 * Other attempts at resolving this dispute that you have attempted
 * Talk:Garage sale

Issues to be mediated

 * Primary issues (added by the filing party)
 * LoverofArt argues that the neologisms "Garage sale ing," "Garage sale'ing," and "Garage sale-ing" are the dominate neologism/s, citing Google SERP as the source. I argue that out of those three, it is not clear which, if any is dominate and have used Google's own suggestion of "Garage saling," and have cited a modern book found using Google Scholar. As a middle ground, I have also added the other neologisms discussed on the talk page. LoverofArt has reverted these edits many times and has failed to add citations. We are now in an edit war. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leitmotiv (talk • contribs) 04:12, 11 March 2014 (UTC


 * The discussion on the talk page about sums it up, so it would be redundant to repeat it all here again. I'm not a patient teacher and I don't want this to devolve into a bad faith sort of thing so I'd request someone else explain to the above party how Google works in regards to resolving serp, how search works and what is implied by certain search results. As things stand (and as a neologism), the word is in far more common usage iterated as "saleing", sometimes with a hyphen, sometimes not. Sometimes with an apostrophe, sometimes not. Sometimes with a space, sometimes not. The one thing that is absolutely inarguable is that "Saleing" is the most common usage, not "saling". Contra to this would be the formal rules of English (where ing subsumes the e), however neologisms aren't constrained by that, which is what we're talking about. So, either delete as a neologism (as suggested) or if we're going to accept it, then common usage dictates its form and aesthetic. Also worth examining what the above party considers 'adequately cited'. Trying to 'formally cite' a neologism is pointless, but we can, if we want to. Here's a book published in 1979 entitled "Sale-ing" . LoverOfArt (talk) 01:13, 14 March 2014 (UTC)


 * My mention of you failing to add citations is directly related to, and only, for the other neologisms that I added (including sailing, which was overlooked but very popular), but that you reverted completely. Yes you added citations for your other edits, but when trying to meet you half way, you did not. I like TransporterMan's idea to just do away with it all, since there is no definitive source. Leitmotiv (talk) 04:36, 14 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Additional issues (added by other parties)
 * I believe that the paragraph in question should be removed as unsourced since the sources proffered so far are only examples of the use of the term and violate NOR as sources for the existence of the term. If a source which actually discusses the term can be found, it (or they, if more than one) will determine which version or versions of the term are used in the article. —  TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 14:56, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * In light of the agreement of all parties at the article talk page that my analysis there is correct, I have removed the terminology paragraph from the article. Since part of that analysis is that there is no reliable source for the terminology issue which can be used without engaging in prohibited original research, the primary issue being discussed above would now appear to be moot. This request should be closed or withdrawn. When (and if) someone finds a reliable source which isn't just an example of the use of the term they can propose a proper terminology section built around it at the article talk page. — TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 14:13, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Is there any other actions needed of me at this point? Btw, I like the idea of proposing at the talk page first before making edits. Leitmotiv (talk) 17:07, 17 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Additional issue 2

Parties' agreement to mediation

 * 1) Agree. Leitmotiv (talk) 04:12, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * 2) Agree. TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 14:56, 11 March 2014 (UTC) (and, obviously, as a member of the Mediation Committee recuse myself as anything other than a party to the dispute)
 * 3) Agree LoverOfArt (talk) 01:04, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Decision of the Mediation Committee
I've asked a question of LoverOfArt at Talk:Garage sale Sunray (talk) 16:34, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Reject. Parties agree with resolution proposed by TransporterMan. For the Mediation Committee Sunray (talk) 06:44, 18 March 2014 (UTC)