Joel Nankervis

Career overview

Role: Meticulous television and film archivist.
Task: Write a career overview of Joel Nankervis (Acting).
Constraints:
Use ONLY verifiable facts from provided sources.
No invented titles, names, dates, awards, etc.
Original, neutral, encyclopedic prose.
Plain text only (no markdown, no asterisks, no headings, no bullet points).
Word count: 180-260 words.
Structure: 2-3 short paragraphs.
No preamble or JSON.
Source [1]: Joel Nankervis (TMDB). Known for: Acting. Known credits: 4. Content score: 88. Gender: Male.
Source [2]: Joel Nankervis (ČSFD.cz). Mentions filmography, biography, etc. (no specific details provided in the snippet).
Source [3]: Joel Nankervis (Kinobox.cz). Profile of the artist. (no specific details provided in the snippet).
Name: Joel Nankervis.
Profession: Actor (Known for Acting).
Credit count: 4 known credits.
Gender: Male.
The sources provided are extremely sparse. They contain almost no biographical or filmographic details beyond the fact that he is an actor with 4 known credits.
Source [1] lists "Known Credits 4" and "Known For Acting".
Source [2] and [3] are just landing pages for his profile on Czech film sites.
Problem: I need to write 180-260 words.
Constraint Check: "Write ONLY verifiable facts that are explicitly supported by the provided SYNOPSIS and SOURCES. You never invent or guess... If a detail is not in the provided material, you omit it rather than guess."
Conflict: The sources do not contain enough information to reach 180 words without inventing facts.
Decision: As an archivist, I cannot invent facts. However, if I strictly follow the "omit rather than guess" rule, the text will be very short (maybe 20-30 words).
Wait: Let me re-read the sources.
[1] Joel Nankervis, Acting, 4 credits, Male.
[2] Profile link.
[3] Profile link.
There is literally nothing else. No movie titles, no dates, no awards, no birthplace.
Strategy: I must attempt to meet the word count if possible, but the primary directive is "Write ONLY verifiable facts... If a detail is not in the provided material, you omit it rather than guess."
If I write 180 words about a person with only 4 credits and no names of credits, I will be inventing information.
Self-Correction: The prompt asks for a 180-260 word overview. If the source material is insufficient to meet that length without violating the "no invention" rule, I have a conflict. Usually, in these LLM prompts, if the source is thin, the user expects me to expand on the existence of the profile or the nature of the data, but even that is risky.
Actually, looking at the sources again, there is absolutely nothing to expand on.
Let's see if I can describe the presence of his information in the databases.
"Joel Nankervis is a male professional known for his work in acting. According to The Movie Database, he has four known credits to his name. His profile on various film databases, including ČSFD.cz and Kinobox.cz, provides access to his filmography and professional profile."
This is only about 45 words.
Re-evaluating the prompt instructions: "Write a 1