Figured out what the problem was (the change actually was successful, but Facebook was simply in denial and only showed the change after a hard refresh and ignoring the warnings). Am updating the photo descriptions one by one now. <div>
<br></div><div>Lodewijk<br><br>El martes, 21 de agosto de 2012, Lodewijk  escribió:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi all,<div><br></div><div>I&#39;m having some technical problems adding the link in the descriptions - in case you&#39;re wondering why it hasn&#39;t happened yet. Somehow Facebook doesn&#39;t allow that change in all images. I&#39;m struggling a bit still what the reason for that is - maybe it doesn&#39;t like too many url&#39;s or too much text in a description. </div>

<div><br></div><div>Lodewijk<br><br>El lunes, 20 de agosto de 2012, Nicu Buculei  escribió:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On 08/16/2012 11:12 PM, Tomasz W. Kozłowski wrote:<br>


<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hi Matthew,<br>
I&#39;d take the freedom to disagree with you; as far as I know, the CC<br>
BY-SA licence (version 3.0, but also all the previous ones) does not<br>
require linking to its text (at<br>
&lt;<a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/" target="_blank">http://creativecommons.org/<u></u>licenses/by-sa/3.0/</a>&gt;), not to mention<br>
pasting the whole text.<br>
<br>
The only requirement is to attribute the author in the way specified<br>
by him/her, and in our case most of the time this means to mention the<br>
name of the author and the name of the licence. But taking into<br>
consideration Facebook&#39;s Terms of Use, it would obviously be safer to<br>
link to the licence, agreed.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Attributing the author is *not* the only requirement, we are talking about CC-BY-SA, not about CC-BY. You have to also keep the license and *write* that too.<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
On the other side, I would really like to see a legal case against<br>
Facebook, because it really seems weird if they could get a<br>
&quot;non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide&quot;<br>
licence for all content that is uploaded to their servers, especially<br>
if they could overrule a free licence like CC BY-SA simply by having<br>
such a phrase in their Terms of Use.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
nicu :: <a href="http://nicubunu.ro" target="_blank">http://nicubunu.ro</a> :: <a href="http://nicubunu.blogspot.com" target="_blank">http://nicubunu.blogspot.com</a><br>
<br>
______________________________<u></u>_________________<br>
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list<br>
<a>WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments" target="_blank">https://lists.wikimedia.org/<u></u>mailman/listinfo/<u></u>wikilovesmonuments</a><br>
<a href="http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org" target="_blank">http://www.wikilovesmonuments.<u></u>org</a></blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>