Wikipedia:Help desk#Lupton family

{{courtesy link|Adam Shapiro (television reporter)}}

Your description of me is inacccurate. I have updated the description. 69.193.176.10 (talk) 13:28, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

:Your changes were reverted; not least because we cannot tell if you are who you say you are. Please see the advice at WP:About you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:53, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Since that case is not covered by Help:Logging_in, I went to this page as directed there.

A few days ago I got logged out from the mobile app, and, upon trying to log back in, I got told I had to input a verification code that had been sent to my email address. The problem is, I no longer have that email account, which I literally deleted. When I noticed that, I tried going to my profile on my desktop browser, to change the email - which doesn't work, since changing the email requires me to login, with that very same verification code. Does that mean I will be locked out of this account? Ntechs (talk) 16:32, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

:I'm afraid so. If you no longer have access to the mail, and you are not still logged in anywhere, then there is no way to recover your account. You'll need to make a new one, and you are recommended to put a note on both user pages (the old and the new) explaining that one is a successor to the other). ColinFine (talk) 16:50, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

::Ntechs is still logged in here. You can mail ca@wikimedia.org. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:01, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Thanks, @PrimeHunter: I missed that @Ntechs was logged in - somehow I looked at the signature and saw the figures in the time and date, and thought I was seeing an IP address! ColinFine (talk) 22:27, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Can someone help me with getting my page back up on Wikipedia?

Thanks

Pedro 2601:58A:8F02:88D0:5844:1F39:5486:510D (talk) 22:11, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

:There's no such thing as "my page" (except, to a limited extent, the userpage of a registered user). What page are you talking about? --Orange Mike | Talk 22:15, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

::Hey Orange Mike i appreciate your response, didnt mean it was my page like i own it, lol, but it was about me used to have one and now noticed its not there anymore. Is everything here public meaning not a private conversation to help?

::Page Pedro Power 2601:58A:8F02:88D0:5844:1F39:5486:510D (talk) 22:38, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Pedro Power was deleted according to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pedro Power. 331dot (talk) 22:57, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Most Wikipedia business is conducted on Wikipedia, for openness and transparency. Only the most sensitive personal information may be discussed privately. 331dot (talk) 22:59, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

::::Perfect thanks for the reply, but what was mentioned is not true. Its hard to pull up detailed sources from those days, but there is still some sources that provide actual facts on my career and also as a NBA Agent. How do i provide these? 2601:58A:8F02:88D0:5844:1F39:5486:510D (talk) 23:20, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::Since the article about you was deleted, there's not much you can do. While not forbidden, autobiographical articles are highly discouraged per the autobiography policy. Also know that there are very good reasons to not want an article here. Nevertheless, if you feel that you can demonstrate that you are a notable person and received significant coverage in independent reliable sources that you can summarize, you could use the Article Wizard to submit a draft. If you do, you should note on the draft talk page that you are writing about yourself. I advise against this, but that is how you can proceed. 331dot (talk) 23:29, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::If there are three sources that each meet all of the requirements of our golden rule, you can post details (as web links or bibliographic citations) here, then undeletion of the article can be considered, so that it can be updated. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:14, 28 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::Hello, Pedro. Facts on your career are not enough. Did several people, wholly unconnected with you or your clubs, choose to write in some depth about you, in reliable publications? If the answer is yes, then an article about you may be possible; if no, then no article is possible. At the time of the deletion discussion in 2019, the consensus was that no such sources (or, at least, not enough such sources) existed. ColinFine (talk) 14:05, 28 June 2025 (UTC)

The template Template:Airport-Statistics is broken due to use of the disabled graph extension. It needs to be rewritten to use the chart extension, but I don't know enough about that extension to do it myself. Is there a tag that can be applied to this template to get attention from a qualified editor? That template is used on 1,100 pages so fixing it would be a huge benefit. Funnyfarmofdoom (talk to me) 19:28, 28 June 2025 (UTC)

I've been working on the Xavier Cugat biography. A quite famous subject, there is a surprising dearth of reliable sources and information. Or at least the usual reliable sources (WA Post, LA Times, NY Times etc.) have proven to be error ridden and contradictory, at least the usual obituaries of the subject. Partly it is bad reporting, and partly it seems to be that Cugat self-promoted, embellished, told and repeated stories endlessly throughout his career, such that the historical record is hopelessly confused and often fiction. There are many other sources of a popular nature, given the famous subject (blogs, websites, etc) that recount facts, etc. but are similarly often in error, certainly unsourced, and, well, a little trashy; A LOT of other sources just echo material of the Wikipedia article before I got to it. Even the facts in Cugat's own two autobiographies do not seem to hold up to scrutiny. (e.g., Apparently early on, Cugat played the violin for Caruso...maybe.) The best source seems to be that by an academic Galina Bakhtiarova, who explicitly acknowledges this situation. To address the issue and warn article readers, I am contemplating including an "Editor's Note" at the end of the article's first section warning of the fluidity of the facts and contradictory sources. What do you think of this situation? What do you think of the idea of including such a disclaimer? (I've never seen such a thing in a Wikipedia article.) Bdushaw (talk) 21:19, 28 June 2025 (UTC)

:Thanks for your work! Yes, a tricky case. There aren't usually "editors note"s within articles, but if the subject made various dubious or contradictory claims about themselves, mentioning that in the article is certainly appropriate. Longer explanations on the talk page seem a good idea. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 22:11, 28 June 2025 (UTC)

:It seems a good idea ... but on reflection, not one that's likely to succeed in the medium/long term. Some well-meaning editor is very likely to remove it; and those who think it was constructive might not quickly notice the removal, or have the energy to either defend it or to defend it so overwhelmingly as to crush the (well-meant but unsatisfactory) arguments for keeping it. But how about something on the lines of {{Blue|Pointing out problems such as the implausibility of Cugat's claim[reference to superficially convincing newspaper article] that he [blah blah] and the contradiction with a single study[reference to superficially academic source] in claiming that he [blah blah] despite [blah blah], Galina Bakhtiarova concludes that [damning indictment of meretricious sources on Cugat]}}? -- Hoary (talk) 23:56, 28 June 2025 (UTC)

While I am here...I have contemplated including the image of the Neptune's Daughter (1949 film) movie poster in the Xavier Cugat article. The image is one of "fair use", which is never quite clear to me what that means. Can the Neptune's Daughter movie poster image be included in the Xavier Cugat article? Is that a proper "fair use"? Such movie posters always include "Xavier Cugat and his Orchestra" in big letters. Thx, and thx for the above suggestions. Bdushaw (talk) 23:40, 28 June 2025 (UTC)

: Generally no. "Fair use" are generally only used when there is no known free licensed alternative images that can illustrate a subject. They are usually used in just one article, and if used more than 1 place should have an explanation for fair use in each place used. -- Infrogmation (talk) 00:02, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

:An image is not "(of) fair use". That's a category error. The use of a particular image in a particular article, if that image satsifies various conditions (irreplaceability, small pixel count, etc etc), might be a fair use. Could the use of :File:Neptune's daughter poster.jpg in the article on Cugat be a fair use? Probably not, as it's not about Cugat. However, if, say, the article made a big thing of pointing out that Cugat's name was printed in as large a font as those of the stars, it might be. You'd have to add to :File:Neptune's daughter poster.jpg a "fair use" rationale for this additional use. -- Hoary (talk) 00:05, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

::{{u|Bdushaw}}, I would oppose an editor's note. We simply do not address our readers in Wikipedia's voice in articles. Instead, report the discrepancies between sources and let our readers draw their own conclusions: Something like, "According to the Los Angeles Times, Cugat was paid $50,000 for his performance in the XYZ film, but the New York Times reported that it was $30,000". Galina Bakhtiarova is your friend in this venture. You cannot call Cugat a prevaricator and shameless self promoter. But she can, and you can paraphrase what she says and attribute it to her. Cullen328 (talk) 05:14, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

Thanks to you all for your advice - I've been thinking about what to do, and have crafted a paragraph that might work. Happy to have a review of it (middle paragraph of "Early life" section, Xavier Cugat) I enjoy writing biographies - this one has been fun, but entirely challenging to get the facts right, fitting together, and supported. I keep hearing the Wikipedia mantra "...we write what the reliable sources say!", which in this case turns out to be a big mistake! Bdushaw (talk) 05:26, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

hey, so i was wondering how or if someone can color code on my bracket for winners and losers.

the color code would look like this:

Key

. – Eliminated after Atlanta
. – Eliminated after Chicago
. – Eliminated after Sonoma
. – Eliminated after Dover
. – Eliminated after Indianapolis

thanks! Brycenrichter (talk) 00:22, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

:This appears to be a very strange question/request, Brycenrichter. You seem to be saying that you're wondering how, or if, someone can do what you are here demonstrating. But perhaps I misunderstand. -- Hoary (talk) 08:08, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

::yeah, im wondering if its even possible but basically… Brycenrichter (talk) 13:47, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

I became aware of General Aviation inc. Flight 115 when it was nominated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. I wanted to add a link to the National Transportation Safety Board's investigation of this airplane crash, but I found when I went to the NTSB's website that I could not get a "normal" link to the document -- instead, the only link that the website provided, as far as I could tell, was a link to download the PDF. [https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/6893/pdf] I realize that many users, including myself, would prefer not to download a document without warning, so I added "(Download PDF)" to the link description in the external links section. I didn't see anything prohibiting this kind of link in WP:ELNO, but if anyone knows of a more "normal" link to the document, I'd much prefer to use that instead. Can anyone find such a link? If not, is the existing "download" link acceptable? -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:19, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

:{{ping|Metropolitan90}} Some articles use Template:Cite web#Using "format=" to say |format=PDF file, direct download, often followed by a size ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?go=Go&search=%22PDF+file%2C+direct+download%22&title=Special%3ASearch&ns0=1 search]). It's not common and I haven't seen a guideline about the issue. If you found a web page with a link to the PDF then you could also link the page and use |at= at Template:Cite web#In-source locations to briefly say how to get the PDF from there. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:32, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

::Thanks. Unfortunately, the PDF was only accessible (as far as I could tell) from a search result, which would not have been linkable itself. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 15:22, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

what is the error?

{{cite web |author1=48south7th |publisher=San Jose Peace and Justice Center |title=Napalm Ladies |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omkdv8gz_PM |via=youtube |access-date=29 June 2025 |date=12 January 2011}}

• {{cite web |author1=48south7th |publisher=San Jose Peace and Justice Center |title=Napalm Ladies |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omkdv8gz_PM |via=youtube |access-date=29 June 2025 |date=12 January 2011}}

Piñanana (talk) 04:42, 29 June 2025 (UTC) Piñanana (talk) 04:42, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

:See the intro section of :Category:CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list for an explanation of what triggered the error and how to resolve it. DMacks (talk) 04:47, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

Why does African humid period suddenly throw a bunch of harv errors even though the codicils seem to match? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:13, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

:Picking di Lernia (2022) (permalink) as an example, someone changed the author surname in the (apparently) matching long-form citation to Di Lernia (permalink). Don't do that. Surnames and publication dates must exactly match.

:—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:36, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

::I fixed a few, but there seem to be some missing sources. Common problem with short references. DuncanHill (talk) 12:40, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

::{{re|Jo-Jo Eumerus}} I am working on fixing the rest. Someone has broken sources by removing the editors names used in the sfns. In others, the order of authors has been changed, but the order in the sfns hasn't been changed. I reiterate, sfn is a lousy system, 99% of the editors who like to use it haven't the faintest idea how to make it actually work. DuncanHill (talk) 12:51, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

:::I have now fixed them all. None were spurious, all were the result of mismatch between the source and the sfn. See [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=African_humid_period&diff=1297934048&oldid=1297928791 here] for the changes I made. DuncanHill (talk) 13:01, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

::::There were no Harv error messages in the 17:46, 20 June 2025 version, so it seems that the subsequent citation bot cleanups caused the current Harv error messages. {{u|Chris Capoccia}}, did you see the recent edit summaries? "Please install User:Trappist the monk/HarvErrors.js and watchlist :Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors to help you spot such errors when reading and editing". TSventon (talk) 13:05, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::I fixed a couple of citation template errors too, by looking back to the edit TSventon linked. See [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=African_humid_period&diff=1297935534&oldid=1297934048 here]. DuncanHill (talk) 13:15, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

There is someone named 65.93.183.249 (I don't know how to link it) who keeps on writing redirect requests on Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects. They wrote multiple synonyms about "Aptera", but they were making so many different request templates. I saw they make 5! Can you remove this? Or combine them into one template? Or anything else? Rafael Hello! 15:10, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

: Link is: User:65.93.183.249. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:36, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

::Thanks, but that's not what it is about. Rafael Hello! 15:58, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

:::@Rafaelthegreat That editor has been quite active creating articles through AfC, which suggests they think they know what they are doing. Their talk page at User_talk:65.93.183.249 has several messages, so you can reach them there, although they won't be alerted. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:52, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

:::@Rafaelthegreat I see no reason why these redirects shouldn't be requested. Someone will in due course either make them or decline them. About half the requests for redirects are declined anyway. Just let it run. Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:29, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

I am having a problem viewing the logs of deletion discussions that have been closed in a particular way. It happens when I try to view the listing of Miscellany for Deletion via Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion. The page is briefly displayed showing the deletion discussion for Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject/Computer Programming/to do, but then the main MFD page is redisplayed, and the MFD for that page shows up in the Table of Contents, but no longer on the page itself. This also happens when viewing the RFDs for 18 June 2025, if I click on Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2025_June_18#Westlake,_Washington. After momentarily displaying all of the RFDs for the day, some of the closed RFDs disappear from the screen. Is this a misfeature, in which something is trying to help me by hiding the closed XFDs so that I don't see them? Does this also happen to everyone, or have I turned on this misfeature via a preference? Robert McClenon (talk) 16:17, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

:Using your final link, I see the closed discussion for Westlake Washington at the foot of the (PC) screen, but can scroll up to the many others including the one just above for Returned ticket, which is also closed. I'm using WP:Vector 2022. I have no idea what preference you might have used to suppress this. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:47, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

::Yes, User:Michael D. Turnbull. I see what you describe for a few seconds. Then it disappears Westlake Washington entirely, and disappears the discussion of Returned ticket except for the note that it was relisted. I am using Monobook. I will try using Vector 2022 and see what happens. I have always been using Monobook, and I know that I only have had this problem in the past few days. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:34, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

:::I just tried switching to Vector 2022. I still have the same problem that it causes certain closed XFDs to disappear. I don't like the appearance as much as Monobook, probably because I have always been using Monobook, so I will switch back to Monobook. The choice of skin does not appear to be what causes this. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:44, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

::::Since I am not getting a quick answer here, I will be asking this question at Village pump technical. I don't think that asking there is forum shopping when I haven't gotten an answer from the first parent. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:31, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

Am I allowed to respond to edit requests at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Edit if I have sufficient permissions to edit the pages requested, or are only admins able to respond to these? Justjourney (talk | contribs) 20:34, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

:If you are able to make the edits, and consider the requests are justified, then you should go ahead. Maproom (talk) 22:02, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

Can you review my requests on Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects? They haven't been reviewed in a long time.Rafael Hello! 23:02, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

:A couple still haven't been reviewed. They're dated 29 June. If the temperature in your kitchen is 30°C, then "since yesterday" is a long time to have left your butter outside your fridge. But as they await review, redirect creation proposals don't turn into butyric acid. -- Hoary (talk) 08:44, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

My question is: is the website greek-genocide.net a non-reliable source? Especially in the context I used: I used a link to that website to prove that the name "Macri" is/was used as the Greek name for Fethiye. Is it correct that an anonymous editor reverted my edit? Thanks, --Dick Bos (talk) 15:36, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

:It's not clear to me. I can't see anything about its staff on the website, which is a red flag. Insofar as it collects resources, they are probably reliable (though often primary); but I'm not sure that any text about them should be so regarded.

:I suggest asking at WP:RSN. ColinFine (talk) 16:37, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

:: Thanks a lot for your quick answer. I'll certainly do that! --Dick Bos (talk) 09:26, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:A more general pont, @Dick Bos: when another editor reverts your edit, the appropriate action is not to go somewhere else and ask if people agree with you, but to discuss it with the editor who reverted you (and possibly other interested editors) on the article's talk page: see WP:BRD.

:If the other editor won't engage, or you are unable to reach consensus, then further steps are outlined at WP:DR. ColinFine (talk) 17:20, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

:: Done. (my problem was that this was an anonymous editor) --Dick Bos (talk) 09:26, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:::Regardless, the above advice applies. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:50, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

: Samuel Whiting Jr.

I accidently removed the "succession box" at the end of the is page. I have found a reference - which is seen now ref number 1 (identical to ref number 6) at the bottom page to support that Samuel Ruggles succeeded Samuel Whiting Jr. as the next minister of Billerica. Please put the "succession box" back at the end of the page. ALSO reference number 6 is in the red - please fix. Brrowbottom (talk) 01:40, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:{{done}}. On a not totally unrelated note, this user talk page mentions our policy on logged out editing and use of multiple accounts. I wonder if you have anything to say about that. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 03:56, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:I was about to do some of that, but D 'n' B beat me to it. I read "access-date=3 May 20255" (a considerable distance in the future). Yes, all of this looks curiously familiar. -- Hoary (talk) 03:59, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi! I noticed a lot of the bios related to Wikipedia:WikiProject Electronic literature are missing photos and I would like to ask people to upload photos they've taken of people to Wikimedia Commons. Is there a way to automatically identify all the articles in the WikiProject that are missing photos to motivate people to fill in the gaps? I feel like I've seen this on other WikiProjects but can't find it now. Lijil (talk) 08:30, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:Add {{para|needs-photo|yes}} to the project template(s) on the talk page of the relevant articles (example at Talk:Thomas Bolton (microscopist)).

:This will add them to categories like :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of people; you can then search for articles that are in both that and the project category. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:22, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:Try [https://petscan.wmcloud.org/?max_sitelink_count=&sortorder=ascending&interface_language=en&depth=1&wikidata_prop_item_use=&wikidata_item=no&outlinks_any=&ores_prob_to=&page_image=no&sitelinks_no=&project=wikipedia&cb_labels_any_l=1&wikidata_source_sites=&language=en&langs_labels_no=&outlinks_no=&categories=Electronic+literature+writers+by+nationality&ns%5B0%5D=1&langs_labels_yes=&sitelinks_yes=&since_rev0=&larger=&show_disambiguation_pages=both&output_limit=&edits%5Banons%5D=both&format=html&cb_labels_yes_l=1&edits%5Bbots%5D=both&wikidata_label_language=&combination=union&labels_any=&search_max_results=500&cb_labels_no_l=1&min_redlink_count=1&min_sitelink_count=&links_to_all=&manual_list_wiki=&subpage_filter=either&outlinks_yes=&templates_yes=&doit= this link to a pre-filled Petscan query], is that what you were after? - X201 (talk) 11:35, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello! In October 2024, Poppy released a double single titled "The Cost of Giving Up / Crystallized", and both songs are from her album Negative Spaces. However, in March 2025, "The Cost of Giving Up" was officially sent to radio as a single. How should this be reflected in her discography page? Should it be kept as "The Cost of Giving Up / Crystallized" (2024) or "The Cost of Giving Up" (2025), and what would happen to "Crystallized"? Gabriella Grande (talk) 19:39, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:Gabriella Grande, you might ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pop music. -- Hoary (talk) 08:55, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

I noticed that "Mascot horror" is not an article on Wikipedia, so I've been doing some preliminary research on the topic to see if it's notable for Wikipedia. Just based on prior knowledge, I feel like it would be notable, given its popularity in modern online culture. I have found thus far three journals that focus on the topic; however, this is really all I've been able to find that is based on strictly reliable sources. Other sources I've seen include screen rant, game jolt, and other similar websites, but I am unsure if these are considered reliable. It feels like a notable topic, but I'm conflicted with source availability, so I'm wondering if this would be a topic that is considered notable and could exist? SonOfYoutubers (talk) 05:32, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:Suggestion, SonOfYoutubers: Here, within this discussion thread, post links to three journal articles (not just journals) that "focus on the topic". A DOI is good enough. If the article is behind a paywall, as most are, then the abstract should be good enough: The DOI should point to it. -- Hoary (talk) 07:42, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

::Google Scholar has 9 hits [https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=&as_epq=Mascot+horror&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=any&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5 for "mascot horror"], a term I've never heard before. Many are not in English but in principle if one were so motivated these might become the basis for an article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:59, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:::@Hoary@Michael D. Turnbull I actually did use Google Scholar to find these journal articles, links here: [https://digitalcommons.njit.edu/jrpssteam/vol4/iss1/7/ one], [https://dl.digra.org/index.php/dl/article/view/2483 two], [https://www.kci.go.kr/kciportal/landing/article.kci?arti_id=ART003074890 three], all are open source. The English and Spanish one I can easily interpret since I speak both, but the Korean one would be harder to use, although its abstract is in English and already provides good information. Besides these, I'm having trouble finding sources. SonOfYoutubers (talk) 14:24, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

::::Newspapers.com gave me The Globe Sat, 04 Nov 2023 ·Page 4, which mentions this as a new genre but is not really WP:SIGCOV. That was all there was there. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:52, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

::::If that is all you can find, I suggest you read :WP:TOOSOON. It may not be time yet for an article here about this topic. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:56, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

::::See WP:LIBRARY for places where you can find, or get help finding, sources. You may also get help at your local public library (or your school or college library, if you are a student). Remember that paper sources, as well as those found online, can be used. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:44, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

::::SonOfYoutubers, I looked at those three.

::::*"one": The journal is La Revista de Estudios sobre Juegos de Rol y STEAM = Journal of Roleplaying Studies and STEAM. I think that the publication is web only (though such a distinction has probably lost whatever meaning it once may have had). Googling {{Blue|"Journal of Roleplaying Studies and STEAM" site:wikipedia.org}} doesn't show any citation in the Wikipedia of any language. The English-language abstract of this article reads (and I provide it in full): {{Olive|This proposal seeks to establish, show and delimit that transmediality and intertextuality play an important role at the moment of creating narratives in contemporary video games. Emphasizing the increasing complexity (and, therefore, highlighting the differences with conventional narrative structures) that exists in video game narratives and the necessity of interaction and non-lineal configuration in their stories.}} Perhaps I'm just dimwitted, but I cannot derive any meaning from this. When an abstract is as opaque as this, I rarely bother to look at the body text. Is the (Spanish-language) body text informative?

::::*"two": In refreshing contrast to the abstract of "one", this abstract is written to inform, and the conference paper as a whole seems to be as well, though I haven't read it. (This isn't a journal article. It's "2025: Conference Proceedings of DiGRA 2025: Games at the Crossroads / Papers". "DiGRA" is the Digital Games Research Association. Though "We thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments" sounds like peer review, so the distinction is perhaps unimportant.)

::::*"three": This appeared in volume 19 of a journal whose title Google translates or mistranslates for me as Journal of the Korea Knowledge Information Technology Society. I think that the journal is also cited in what's currently reference 21 of Korean phonology. It comes with an abstract that's in some Korean-flavored variety of English; I think I can guess what this means, mostly, but guesswork is of course inadequate. In order to derive anything useful from this article would I think need the help of somebody proficient in Korean.

::::My multifaceted incompetence (ignorance of games, inability to read Spanish or Korean, dimwittedness) might be to blame, but I'd toss "one" and "three". If doing so means you have to wait some months for material for a decent article ... the article Digital Games Research Association is splattered with templated admonishments; how about improving it? -- Hoary (talk) 23:02, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:::::@Hoary I read over "one", and the body text does seem to be informative, especially a particular part of it where it gives some qualities that Mascot Horror games have in common with each other, which would be immensely useful for a "definition" of Mascot Horror, similar to the definition section of first person shooter. Perhaps the reason for the abstract seeming opaque is maybe it was translated, but I can't say for certain. "three", I simply cannot derive much from because I, too, don't speak Korean, so I would need help from someone who does. Either way though, taking advice from the others, I likely will pass on this, at least for now, since there just doesn't seem to be enough sources at the moment to write a full article. I don't even think it's a "too soon" thing, I think it simply just doesn't have enough coverage from reliable news networks yet, despite its prominence, so I'll just have to wait. I'll keep it on my radar nevertheless. SonOfYoutubers (talk) 23:19, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

::::::That sounds sensible, SonOfYoutubers. -- Hoary (talk) 23:49, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

How can I get a list of articles Foo Jeffrey to populate a new surname page? Doug butler (talk) 21:16, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:Hi Doug butler - do you mean an "intitle" search for articles including "Jeffrey", like [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?sort=last_edit_desc&search=intitle%3AJeffrey&title=Special%3ASearch&profile=advanced&fulltext=1&ns0=1&ns4=1&ns100=1 this]? - Arjayay (talk) 21:24, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:There is already a surname page at Jeffrey (surname), but it may not be complete. TSventon (talk) 21:33, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

::Yes, I created it and have populated it with some of the most common (male) given names, but from experience I have only found 10% of those qualifying. Doug butler (talk) 21:45, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:::{{ping|Doug butler}} {{search link|intitle:Jeffrey -prefix:Jeffrey}} omits people with Jeffrey as first name. It's still a lot to go through. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:48, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

::::Quicker than going through my book of baby names (if I can find it — that was 60 years ago{{smiley}}) Doug butler (talk) 22:01, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

I mistakingly made this BioSpring Biotechnology Company. Can you delete this? Rafael Hello! 03:13, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

:You can request the deletion of any page that you are the only substantial author of by adding the template {{t|db-author}}.

:Nb. the page in question was moved to Draft:BioSpring Biotechnology Company. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 08:06, 4 July 2025 (UTC)