Talk:John Brereton (lawyer)

re picture of John Bramstom
I've removed this image of John Bramstom from the article because, after all, as far as I know from the article Brereton had nothing to do with him and maybe never met him. Bramston did date Brereton's (non-notable) wife Elizabeth before she married Brereton, and married her after Brereton died, and it's fine to talk about this in the text, but a picture? I mean an image tells a thousand words, and its just odd to feature a picture of a person that had nothing to do with the subject of the article. In my opinion.

In addition, FWIW, some descendant claims that the picture was picked up by the internet and described as picture of Brereton, which is none of our business really, but why contribute to the spread of misinformation on the internet when we really don't need or want the picture anyway?

Here is the permalink to the discussion where this came up. Herostratus (talk) 00:04, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree with . Illustrating an article about someone with a picture of another person that they may not even have met is not helpful. Maproom (talk) 05:42, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

I agree! Chrisdoyleorwell (talk) 09:47, 21 August 2022 (UTC)