Talk:Sierra McCormick

Infobox
Hi, there's currently an edit war inregards to the infobox, I've removed it based on all of what's in the infobox (bar her residence) is directly on the left ... therefore making it redundant, Geraldo Perez has reverted citing her calculated age is in it and therefore shouldn't be removed,

So I wanted to get others opinions on this, Thanks, – Davey 2010 Talk 16:18, 3 November 2019 (UTC)


 * I strongly object to removal. It calculates and displays her age. It shows years active. It correctly summarizes key info in the article so of course it is redundant, it is meant to be. It is standard for bio articles to have infobox and it is expected by readers. There is no valid reason to remove it. Leave it as it was until you get consensus to remove. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:03, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * It displays everything that is currently to the left of said infobox, Not all articles have infoboxes and many articles have reached consensus not to have them,
 * Given I've completely ignored BRD here it would be rather unwise of me to continue edit warring would it not?, Consensus shall be sought. – Davey 2010 Talk 18:08, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * It does not display everything as I noted. Age and years active are only displayed in the inbox and are expected for actor articles. It should have a discussion and consensus gained in that discussion for it to be removed. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:20, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Well it does as I too have noted. Hence why I stated "Consensus shall be sought". – Davey 2010 Talk 18:22, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Should this article have an infobox
Should this article have an infobox? – Davey 2010 Talk 18:24, 3 November 2019 (UTC)


 * No - As I've stated above everything in the infobox (bar residence) is directly on the left of it therefore IMHO making an infobox redundant. – Davey 2010 Talk 18:24, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment: My own rule of thumb is that a BLP infobox should have more than 3 items to be viable. This one has four items (five, if you want to count the DOB and the location-of-birth as separate items), which would be the bare minimum. Therefore, it's borderline for inclusion... I guess I'm on the fence. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:25, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
 * No I don't think its necessary. If there was more relevant and cited information in the article then maybe, but for now i agree with User:Davey2010. Cook907 (talk) 18:30, 6 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Yes - Although it is "skimpy" it does slightly improve overall quality of the page. Meatsgains (talk) 20:02, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep it It is not true that everything in the infobox is directly to the left of it in the lead. The infobox calculates and displays her age. It shows years active. It shows her residence. It summarizes key info in the article so of course it is redundant, it is meant to be. It is standard for actor bio articles to have an infobox and it is expected by readers. There is no reason to remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geraldo Perez (talk • contribs) 01:48, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
 * The "everything's on the left" argument is not helpful; the point of an infobox is to quickly summarise the basic information and, if possible, have an image to hang that information on; everything in it, therefore, should already be elsewhere in the article or "on the left" if, as here, the article is particularly short.  I see no reason to delete the thing, in the hope that at some point the subject will become older, more interesting, and, perhaps, more notable; in that case, more can be added to the infobox. Happy days, LindsayHello 20:23, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes I would hope that everything in the infobox is in the article body as the infobox is a summary of information included in the article. Bonewah (talk) 15:29, 26 November 2019 (UTC)