:::::::If it is needlessly strict then please explain how a copyrighted image could possibly convey information to the reader that a free image could not?  The subject does not exist, so any image is of someone dressing up like someone else.  Your Homer Simpson example highlights exactly why this article does not apply to that logic; that is a single character with a very exact appearance, so much so that any other image would give a false impression of what Homer Simpson would look like, which would be a disservice to the reader.  That logic does not apply to this article, as the article does not depict a single character, it depicts a very large and diverse group of fictional characters that vary wildly in appearance and as such a free image is both possible and serves the same encyclopedic purpose, which is to convey information and understanding to the reader.  Suggesting that a free equivalent should not be used because it is not "officially licensed media" is not an argument reflected by Wikipedia policy when the free equivalent provides the same exact understanding to the reader; that argument is in direct opposition to WP:NFCC #1.  If this were an article about a specific character that argument would make more sense, because only the actor playing the character would be accurate; another person dressed as a specific character would not be accurate.  This article does not have that issue.  Given the wildly varied appearance of Jedi in the Star Wars universe (both in the fictional sense and real life portrayals), the only real constant between Jedi is the lightsaber, and arguably robes of some kind.  That can easily be described in text so under Wikipedia policy a non-free image should not be used anyways, even if the concept of using free equivalent images are unsatisfactory.  That is why WP:NFCC #8 applies.  That the image be "an improvement" is not the criteria of WP:NFCC #8, so it's hardly appropriate to dismiss that as "silly" without actually addressing the policy or what was said. -