User talk:46.177.150.99

Comment
Please. Don't strip of nuance the already bare-thin lead section please. There is a Galician audiovisual industry and the participation of the concerned individual in the Galician industry is not negligible (it is relevant). This is not about body-lead repetition but about the lead being required to provide a succint yet adequate context for the topic (I think it can be done better, way better, more explicit and with better sources but you are making it worse) Asqueladd (talk) 17:09, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Still disagree. I suggest a consensus where it will be removed from the lead and just link seperately Santiago de Compostela and Galicia since you also expressed a disagreement on that one. 46.177.150.99 (talk) 17:14, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Why would you remove it from the lead? I am open to removing the wording (that perhaps may suggest "origin" only) if you provide a better way to inform in the lead about the subject's participation in the Galician audiovisual industry, participation in Galician-set productions (Galician roles), with some of them being Galician-language productions, as well as the subject's participation in the wider Spanish audiovisual industry. If you wish, you can see "Spanish actor from Galicia" as a lazy, imperfect and succint way to convey the former that, if not the default way, it is not a way contradicting any Wikipedia guideline. This is about improving the article, and contrary to mentioning the birthplace in the opening brackets (that is discouraged: see MOS:BIRTHPLACE), there is no taxative prohibition to mention such details elsewhere in the lead, and it can indeed be mentioned (perhaps not as rule) if relevant. I don't see any need for the infobox link, as far as I am concerned. Regards.--Asqueladd (talk) 17:25, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * You said it yourself, no need to mention birthplace per a wikipedia guideline. And he may had been born in Santiago de Compostela but this is part of Galicia and you clearly cannot deny it's practically the same thing. Still disagree and once again suggest on putting in practise the compromise I propose above. 46.177.150.99 (talk) 17:41, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * You said it yourself, no need to mention birthplace Nope, I didn't exactly say that. I said that it is not a default rule, but it is also not prohibited in any guideline (other than in the opening brackets), and can be mentioned in any way if convenient. In light of what I have written above regarding roles et. al and the lack about any alternative so far, I think it is convenient. I am asking once again for your attempt to provide a more complete opening section (I know it is shitty... guilty as charged) conveying more information, not a thinner one.--Asqueladd (talk) 17:49, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Still, I proposed a compromise at least. Since I keep on disagreeing, you cannot force a preferred version. I can make a tag to the tp of the discussion we had here so that other users may see it and suggest their opinions as well, but till and if that happens, we should change to a version which is acceptable by the majority (at least partly) since 100% is impossible as it seems. 46.177.150.99 (talk) 17:56, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * A request for comment? I am ok with that.--Asqueladd (talk) 17:59, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * What do you mean? 46.177.150.99 (talk) 18:00, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I mean the standard proccess for such things: Requests for comment. The article usually stays in the statu quo ante, tho.--Asqueladd (talk) 18:01, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, but for the record, all the Galician notability you mention above does not exist anywhere in the article except A vida por diante. Mentioning it merely as a fact on my tp is not an argument. 46.177.150.99 (talk) 18:06, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, sure, perhaps it is not clearly detailed in the body (guilty as charged here too). In The Sea Inside, Allí abajo, Fariña, Elisa & Marcela, he is playing a a person from Galicia, to name four roles, and O corpo aberto is a Galician and Portuguese language film. The addition of such information is easier to include in the body than in the lead, as there is no requirement for being "synthetic" in the former.
 * Do you mind if, for the time being, I expand the body with such information?--Asqueladd (talk) 18:15, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Only the latter is justifiable, just because he happened to portray a person from the same city, does not make it notable since we are talking about two different individuals (though practically the same). 46.177.150.99 (talk) 18:16, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, mentioning the characteristics of the roles an actor play is quite standard for the article of any actor (I am asking you for permission not because I have doubt about the pertinence of such details, but because you may feel that I am taking advantage of the statu quo ante while pushing changes). And in Allí abajo, by the way, he is playing a Galician teacher in a comedy about regional stereotypes...--Asqueladd (talk) 18:21, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * No, I did not think of that even once. But anyway, since we continue disagreeing, what about mention Galicia in a seperate link (on the main body though) and just talk about all those you did above in this discussion? This way, it both remains and it we are both satisfied. Easy as pie. 46.177.150.99 (talk) 18:25, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * If you mean this, as a temporary solution, ok. But both the body and need expansion, and keeping in mind that, parallel to such expansion, the lead will probably include context about Galicia, in one way or another. It is not about being from the same city, people from Galicia generally speak Spanish and Galician and feature a very distinctive accent in the former. He is generally referred to in sources as actor gallego (Galician actor), btw.--Asqueladd (talk) 18:36, 31 August 2022 (UTC)