Talk:Thomas Ashton, 1st Baron Ashton of Hyde

Original photo restored

The photo was changed in this edit a year or so ago without any explanation. After examining the sources prompted by a query on Wikipedia:Help desk, I have restored the previous photo.

These are the sources:

• this source from 1895, which makes no mention of being a Baron of Hyde. The Help Desk comment says this is the subject's father, and I agree that this is possible.
• Several other photos of what appears to be a younger man, and each photo is labeled "1st Baron Ashton-of-Hyde"

Therefore I see enough to convince me that the previous photo is the accurate one, so I have restored it. ~Amatulić (talk) 05:39, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

I uploaded the 1927 image in 2013. I then uploaded the 1895 image in 2014. :I have restored the 1895 image as it is a free image, unlike the 1927 image which is a fair use image. Wikipedia only permits fair use images when a free use image is not available.

The 1895 source describes the person as T.G. Ashton. Thomas Gair Ashton did not become 1st Baron Aston of Hyde until 1911, so any caption for an image of him from 1895 could be T.G. Ashton but could never be 1st Baron Aston of Hyde.

The wikipedia article confirms that Thomas Gair Ashton (1st Baron Aston of Hyde) was elected MP for Luton in 1895, and the 1895 image is associated with that very election.

In 1895 T.G. Ashton was aged 40. The image shown in the 1895 source looks to me more like a man aged 40 than a man aged over 60 which is what the age would be if it were his father Thomas Ashton.

There is no evidence to suggest that the image in the 1895 source is not as described in that source. Graemp (talk) 07:03, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

@Graemp:

Free / fair use is irrelevant. The fair use in this case is a valid use, particularly if the free version shows the wrong man. In this case a free use image is not available for the correct person.

There is no argument about the 1895 image. Yes, it's T.G. Ashton, likely the father of the same person who became the 1st Baron, according to the numerous photos that exist of the 1st Baron, which is clearly a different (and younger) person than shown in the 1895 photo.

"The Wikipedia article confirms" nothing. We don't use Wikipedia articles as evidence, and that section does not cite any sources.

The 1895 image, with that thick beard, could easily be a man of 60. The images in the second source I listed above show a younger person.

There is no evidence to suggest that the numerous photographs of the 1st Baron are not as described in the second source. If they are different men, as they obviously appear to be, there is no reason to use an image of someone who was clearly and obviously not the 1st Baron Ashton of Hyde if, as you say, this title didn't even exist until 1911. ~Amatulić (talk) 07:55, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Looking further at the cited (self-published) sources, I can see why there would be confusion, and I also see your point. How do you reconcile the dramatically different appearances in the two sources? ~Amatulić (talk) 08:00, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

It is unusual to come across an image from around 1895 of a man over the age of 60 with few signs of greying head or facial hair. To me, this image is clearly that of a man aged around 40.

The NPG images taken between 1917 and 1927 clearly show to me, a grey haired man aged between 60 and 70.

Photos of a person taken 20-30 years apart will show differences in appearance. I think that is all we have here. Graemp (talk) 08:28, 18 April 2016 (UTC)