Talk:Erica Tazel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Biography / Actors and Filmmakers (Rated Stub-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers.
 
Note icon
It is requested that a photograph or picture of this person be included in this article to improve its quality.
Note: Wikipedia's non-free content use policy almost never permits the use of non-free images (such as promotional photos, press photos, screenshots, book covers and similar) to merely show what a living person looks like. Efforts should be made to take a free licensed photo (for example, during a public appearance), or obtaining a free content release of an existing photo instead. The Free Image Search Tool may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Encourage correction and improvement...[edit]

...to this first pass over a talented younger actor's page. Note, especially, the citations are limited and redundant as they appear, and no wiki structure has been created to contain the text. Cheers. LeProf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.175.245.235 (talk) 19:42, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

I added an "issues" tag ... but I don't know where to start. I'll give this some thought.GcT (talk) 17:50, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Actually I don't see any real issues here for such s short article. I neither see what "redundant citations" are supposed to be (though the quality of the sources should be improved) nor what "Wiki structure" is supposed to be missing here. Note that the text part of short articles usually doesn't really need any further "structuring".--Kmhkmh (talk) 00:19, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
It's kinda clunky. Maybe the article's shortness is part of what makes worthy of improvement: you can see some standard information is not there. Eh? GcT (talk) 16:09, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Well, no argument that the article can and ultimatly should be extended, but imho the normal extension process requires no templates. It is perfectly fine to have to have a rather short biographic entry, such a shortness in itself isn't really a quality issue requiring a template. Imho the use of such templates should be restricted to articles with serious issues or at least something ideally requiring immediate attenttion rather than for articles simply having room for improvement and not being an optimal article yet. Because if we tag based on the latter we will end up tagging of 50% of our articles and clog all maintenance/quality improves queues, which in a way defeats the purpose of tagging in the first place.--Kmhkmh (talk) 21:59, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Potential sources to be used and to replace the tvguide/imdb stuff[edit]

--Kmhkmh (talk) 03:15, 16 April 2015 (UTC)