Talk:Stuart Wagstaff

	Biography portal 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.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group.

Australia: Television Low‑importance

	Australia portal Stuart Wagstaff is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian television (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Information on his death.

If any editor feels motivated to remove the section on his death then please discuss with verifiable reasons from the Manual of Style first. Why any editor feels that removing known information about someone's death from a biographical article is somehow justifiable is beyond me. Afterwriting (talk) 06:23, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I missed this message before; my apologies. As I mentioned on Afterwriting's talk page, no one is "removing known information" from the article, but simply incorporating it somewhere else because, according to MOS:BODY, "Very short or very long sections and subsections in an article look cluttered and inhibit the flow of the prose" and should be avoided. Since information about his "Death" will never be expanded (there's nothing else to say), it seems sensible not to have a section about it. Perhaps if it does not belong anywhere that currently exists, it would be appropriate in a developed "Later life" section or something that might be more substantial. Canadian Paul 23:08, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree. Very short sections should be avoided. That's one reason why, when a section contains a single "main" link we instead add that link to "See also". WP:PARAGRAPHS says One-sentence paragraphs are unusually emphatic, and should be used sparingly. While it is common to include "death" sections, if the content in any section is a single sentence, it's more appropriate to try to incorporate that sentence into another section. Since the lead is supposed to summarise the entire article, and someone's death is significant, I see no reason not to mention it in the lead if that's the only suitable place, instead of creating a very unprofessional looking single section just for that sentence. The lead in this article is lacking (I'll tag it shortly) and the death sentence wouldn't be out of place there. This edit, which moved the sentence to the "Later career" section also seems appropriate and consistent with other articles, although I would have changed the heading to "Later career and death". --AussieLegend (✉) 03:22, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Since there appears to be no more opposition, I have gone ahead and taken the last suggestion mentioned above. Canadian Paul 22:15, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]