This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.
If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
A child prodigy, "Alicia, possibly started reading at the age of six-and-a-half, seven months" - Is this a hoax? Don't get me wrong, I am a huge fan, but I have never heard of a child that does not read at six years of age, unless traumatic or exceptional social circumstances have prevented this pretty normal developement. A "child prodigy" would be able to read at age three or four. This sentence is completely superfluous and I guess it has to be a result of vandalism/pranksters. -- 126.96.36.199 (talk) 12:13, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
The answer is in the very text you quoted. 6-7 months, not years. Elizium23 (talk) 12:23, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
…to create sections for theatre and music aspects of career, and for personal information (currently, limited to a statement already appearing at the Ben Fields article). As well, the very poor state of the sourcing of the article is noted, which is a serious issue for a BLP article. Please do not remove tags without cleaning up the bare URLs, and sourcing the vast tracts of career information that is currently unverifiable via non-publicity, non-IMDB (i.e., independent, encyclopedic) sources. Le Prof 188.8.131.52 (talk) 07:49, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
New reference 13 is offered as an example of what complete citations may look like (where, in the case that the URL becomes obsolete, the citation is not useless in tracing the original information). 184.108.40.206 (talk) 07:54, 24 January 2015 (UTC)