Talk:Alicia Silverstone

Lead and lead sentence
Just want to point out that WP:BLPLEAD states: "avoid overloading the lead paragraph with various sundry roles; instead, emphasize what made the person notable. Incidental and non-notable roles (i.e. activities that are not integral to the person's notability) should usually not be mentioned in the lead paragraph"

and "In general, a position, activity, or role should not be included the lead paragraph if: a) the role is not otherwise discussed in the lead (per MOS:LEAD, don't tease the reader), b) the role is not significantly covered in the body of the article, or, c) the role is auxiliary to a main profession of the person (e.g. do not add "textbook writer", if the person is an academic)."

LK (talk) 01:03, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Nationality
If Silverstone's parents were both British citizens, then unless she has since renounced it, she is also a British citizen, no matter where she was born.

When Clueless came out she was on a UK TV interview programme where she mentioned that she was actually in fact British and not American. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.150.10.248 (talk) 11:36, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Today's edits

 * The following has been ported over and combined from Ronz's and Tenebrae's talk pages as background for today's major edits, and probably should have taken place here centrally anyway.--Tenebrae (talk) 00:09, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

I didn't even think I was involved in an edit war with you; never my intention, and to be honest, it's not even an interest to be involved in one. I thought it would be appropriate to mention her other film roles as a whole timeline. As for her stage credits, the woman has constantly starred in plays, so I thought it was also noteworthy. I'd love to add something else in the lead, as it only addresses specifically her film trajectory until her Batgirl role, and her 'Golden Globe nomination' sentence seems a little isolated. Hope we can agree on something and warm greetings to you, regardless of my miscommunication. 190.249.179.87 (talk) 00:36, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
 * The lede should summarize and introduce, identifying why she's notable. She's done a lot of work, but she doesn't seem to get much press or other coverage beyond initial publicity campaigns. Disputes over what should belong in the lede have been a huge problem with article for a long time. Quality references are scarce, especially anything written from a historical context. I'm happy to help you, but I'm mostly just keeping an eye on the article so we don't backslide with the latest publicity campaign or controversy. --Ronz (talk) 02:11, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Overall, I think the edits by the ip are an improvement. The ip contacted me (User_talk:Ronz), and I contacted Davey2010 (User_talk:Davey2010). Could you take another look? --Ronz (talk) 19:06, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Happy to leave it up you, Ronz. I saw he was edit-warring and making unexplained major changes, so I thought it prudent to pull back on them until they could be discussed, as is happening now. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:19, 13 May 2018 (UTC)