The image at right is traditionally assumed to refer to Sallust the historian. That identification is not strong. It may refer instead to another Template:Tq, Template:Tq.[1] It is also clearly a fictitious portrait, regardless of who was the person intended to be depicted. I reverted (or will shortly revert) its addition. Ifly6 (talk) 22:24, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply
I understand that the portrait is imaginary, but isn’t it a precedent to use such portraits if there is no accurate one? For example, the infobox images of people like Horace, Suetonius, and Apuleius are all fictional portraits done centuries after their deaths. I am new to Wikipedia editing, so am I missing something? Thanks. Dantus21 (talk) 02:52, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply
The reason I think it shouldn't be there is because it's misattributed, not merely because it's a fictitious portrait. Ifly6 (talk) 19:30, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply
I am sorry about my misunderstanding. In that case, I will upload the image below. File:Salluste.jpg
I understand that it is almost certainly an imagined portrait. However, as it precedent to provide one rather than none (as I have mentioned before), and the subject is Sallust the historian (his full name is written, and at the bottom right it states “Conjuratio Catilina” on the scroll, referencing his work), I will upload this one. Dantus21 (talk) 22:43, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply
I still think an ancient representation is better for the infobox than an 18th century engraving. Perhaps "Bronze medallion with an effigy sometimes identified as Sallust, AD 360–450" would be a better caption and address concerns about misattribution. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 02:29, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply