Talk:Tom Courtenay

Fair use rationale for Image:Tom Courtenay.jpg
Image:Tom Courtenay.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Billy Liar picture use
The user Leavesleeves removed the picture from the film Billy Liar even though the same picture is used for the Billy Liar Wikipedia entry. By the same logic, you must remove the pictures from most film entries on Wikipedia. Unfortunately, Leavesleaves does not have a user discusion page.--Punavuori (talk) 14:01, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The reason I removed the image Image:Original movie poster for the film Billy Liar.jpg is that the image has been uploaded under Non-free use rationale. This does not allow use of such images into articles unless a fair use rationale for each article is entered on the image page. Failing to do so results is removal of image, and that's what I did. If you think that the image is in fact relevant to the context of this article (which I'm doubt), please enter a specific rationale on the image page. If you wish to leave me a message, the link to my talk page is right at the end of this entry. Thanks. LeaveSleaves (talk) 14:28, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I did not upload the illustration on to Wikipedia images. The rationale given there by the person who uploaded it is: "Illustration of the film mentioned". Surely if that applies (and if it doesn't, then I don't understand why so many film posters are allowed illustrating Wikipedia entries on movies) to the Wikipedia entry for the said film it also applies when discussing the main actor featured in the picture, and who is depicted in the picture? --Punavuori (talk) 05:28, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * You need to enter fair use rationale for each and every article that uses the image. Plus, the reason why you cannot use this particular image on this page is because it is unacceptable under Wikipedia's Non-free content policy as described here in pt. 7. Thanks. LeaveSleaves (talk) 07:53, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Knighthood date
The lede says February 2001. Since when were routine knighthoods awarded in February? Presumably this refers to the date of his actual investiture; but if so, we normally date knighthoods from the date of their formal gazettal and public announcement, which I assume was the 2001 New Years Honours.

The rest of the article makes no mention of his knighthood at all. The lede is supposed to encapsulate the rest of the article, not to include material that is mentioned nowhere else. --  Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  02:57, 19 September 2020 (UTC)