Image is not replacable. I do not speak Czech and do not have the ability to find someone to go take a picture of the subject. Therefore a "free replacement" cannot be found currently. User:Sebbeng 15:52, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I invite Chowbok to come up with the free replacement which is comparable or more informative than the image in question or, at least, with the sound advise which can be reasonably implemented by the image uploader to obtain a replacement. The advise like "take two weeks from work, buy a ticket on your own cost, fly to Czech republic, find the subject in the phonebook, call him and so on..." won't fly. --Irpen 19:55, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

The subject of the photo is very elderly and probably not in the best of health. Even if it were likely to find someone who could go take a photo of him, the possibility of this actually happening is extremely unlikely. Therefore, it is currently irreplacable. User:Sebbeng 16:38, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

It is not impossible to take pictures of old people. Our fair use policy forbids using a non-free image if a free image could be created that could be used in its place. See criterion #1 and counter-example #8. In this case, it would be possible to create a free image; therefore this non-free image may not be used. Whether a free replacement image exists or not at this time is not relevant. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 18:10, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I did not say that it existed at this time, and this person, as I clearly stated above, is not simply old. Fair Use policy forbids a fair use image if a free image can REASONABLY be created. If you're going to quote policy, get it right. It is UNREASONABLE to expect that someone (not just me, SOMEONE) could take a photograph of an ill man in his 80s who does not go out in public. Should people camp out on his lawn and snap photos through his bedroom window while he gets ready for bed? You must provide for the "reasonable" aspect of this, and if you do not, then you haven't proven it to be unacceptable under fair use guidelines. User:Sebbeng 19:01, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Sure, if he is truly a recluse, then the image is not replaceable. Can you provide a source for your claim that he is ill and does not go out in public? – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 20:18, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I'll search for it. User:Sebbeng 21:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Surely he has a friend or relative somewhere who would be willing to release a photo of him. It need not be a current photo. Also, I question whether any picture is necessary, considering that it renders the article unfree. He's not an actor or something where his physical appearance matters. Sure it's decorative to have a picture, but it doesn't really add any encyclopedia information. Not worth the cost. Herostratus 23:06, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

The image only serves to illustrate what the person looks like, therefore it could be replaced by any other image depicting the person. Also the Czech version (cs:Zdeněk Miler) does not have any image at all.--Oden 13:13, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, that doesn't matter, as it could only be replaced by another fair use image, currently. And just because the Czech version doesn't have one doesn't mean the USA one shouldn't. In any case, I'm still searching for the requested information in good faith, so please bear with me. User:Sebbeng 02:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I can't find this information, mainly because I can't understand Czech. Having this image on the article doesn't render it unfree, I'm not sure how that conclusion was found. Anyway, I don't think anything I say here is going to make a difference, so the image might as well be deleted, sadly. User:Sebbeng 02:20, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

A side note: this image depicts an old person. As long as the subject is alive a fair use image is against policy, but when the subject dies it becomes permissible. People who are old tend to be more reclusive, maybe there should be some kind of sliding scale? In any event, when the subject expires the image will no longer be replaceable, so if the uploader submits it again it would be allowed. --Oden 05:41, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

A general statement "as the subject is alive a fair use image is against policy" is an outright nonsense. Each case is different and should be judgedon its own merit. What article the image illustrates and what exactly in the article it illustrates is crucial to decide whether the FU claim is valid. --Irpen 05:48, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I just thought of something. The image is of unique historical significance because it depicts the artist/animator with a book of his drawings at an autographing session. As his notability is contingent upon his work in the realm of cartooning and animating, and as the artist is now retired, an image depicting the same conditions as shown in the curent image can't be created and it can't be replaced (except by another fair-use image). User:Sebbeng 14:44, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I think this is a borderline case. The image above was taken in 2002, when his last work (so far?) was published - and it was taken in his livingroom. He's 86 now. I can't find any information about his health either, or whether he ever goes out, but I've seen no indications he goes to book signings or whatever. I can't put together a compelling argument why this image is irreplaceable, but I suspect it is. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 17:59, 30 November 2006 (UTC)