It has been discussed before. Can't remember where or the verdict. Hopefully someone else will find the debate, and the latest form of it.

OK, here are some:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_25#P...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_25#R....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)/Archive_44#Phot...

Found by using Wikipedia's internal search function. Search terms like "image credit" and "caption credit" will find most of them. Probably similar debates on Commons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Captions

This guideline page says (at the bottom):

Credits: "Unless relevant to the subject, do not credit the image author or copyright holder in the article. It is assumed that this is not necessary to fulfill attribution requirements of the GFDL or Creative Commons licenses as long as the appropriate credit is on the image description page."

I would suggest looking in the talk page archives for more.

Carcharoth

On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 6:41 PM, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:

I like having credit right at the article level.  This is the typical thing I see in print media (obviously as there is no other level).  Are you stating that this was discussed before and rejected?  It's what I was  thinking might be a good way of getting more photo contributions.  Just  give credit as a byline under the picture.  Even include a link at the  credit line to an article on the photographer if one exists.  To me credit,  isn't advertising.  It's just attribution.

For example, in-article we give credit to quotations of text and those can lead directly to the sale of a book by direct links, without the reader needing  to know that clicking an obscure item, like a picture, might lead somewhere  else.

Will Johnson

In a message dated 7/20/2009 10:36:10 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, carcharothwp@googlemail.com writes:

How many  people click through to the image itself? That is where the credit is, and  the link onwards to the source. Would it help if the source (if it was an  institution, rather than an individual photographer) was automagically  credited in the articles, not just on the image page? Or would that be the  thin end of a wedge and be seen as overt advertising? There are some  photographer names that will never be suitable to be treated this way, but  if doing this for reputable organisations made it more likely they would  donate images, is it worth looking at it  again?

**************What's for dinner tonight?  Find quick and easy dinner ideas for any occasion. (http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?ncid=emlcntusfood00000009) _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l