Talk:Julian Holloway

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Actors and Filmmakers

	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 WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers (assessed as Low-importance).
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Not Married to Dahl

According to his IMDB entry, plus the Wikipedia articles on Tessa and Sophie Dahl, he was not married to Tessa. I'm therefore removing the claim that Roald Dahl was his father-in-law. Rojomoke (talk) 12:35, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Photo

I added an image to this article which did not have one. The image was already in use on Wikipedia and currently appears on two other pages. User:Cassianto removed it as a "problematic image"; what is the problem? --Nedrutland (talk) 11:49, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nedrutland, firstly, please don't be disruptive by conducting discussions in edit summaries. Please discuss things on the talk page, per WP:BRD. Secondly, see this from when the image appeared at FAC and was subsequently removed on problematic licensing grounds. Cassianto ^Talk 11:52, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How about you assume good faith rather than accuse me of being disruptive? I put a relevant image onto a page that lacked one. Was I supposed to be aware of a discussion about the image from 2011? You described it as "problematic" but clearly not so problematic as requiring removal from other pages at that time. Only now have you removed it. Nedrutland (talk) 16:25, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, see WP:REVTALK for an explaination as to why you were being disruptive; conducting a discussion in edit summaries is warring and that, in itself, is disruptive. Secondly, if you'd have followed the WP:BRD process, you'd have found the fact that this had been discussed in 2011. You didn't, hence why we're here now. Cassianto ^Talk 18:56, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Since all the people in the photo are dead, it can be added as a fair use image to this article (as soon as it is removed from Commons and given an appropriate fair use summary and license), even though it cannot be added to Stanley's article. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:29, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what their deaths have to do with this, but I should point out that Julian is very much alive and kicking. Anyway, I'm sure there are better, more up to date images out there we could use of Julian, rather than one that was taken 54 years ago with his parents. Cassianto ^Talk 19:52, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. If Julian is alive, then we cannot use it. Fair use images must generally include only deceased people, under NFCC#1, because a free photograph can still be taken of a living person. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:59, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Even more reason why this should not be used. Nedrutland, I hope you can understand this now. Cassianto ^Talk 20:03, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]