[WikiEN-l] NYT: Wikipedia May Be a Font of Fac =?win...

[WJhonson at aol.com]

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 at 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)