User talk:Willscrlt/Templates/ImageByWM

@Willscrlt: according to cc-by-sa pictures need an attribution of the author-name or a f.e. a link to the file-description-page on wikipedia (there is the attribution of the author). That's enough. If your pictures require more, like a link to your website, you can't publish them under cc-by-sa.

 — Johannes Kalliauer - Talk | Contributions 12:51, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

@JoKalliauer: : Thank you for your considered input. However, the template was written back when CC-BY-SA was in version 2.0 form (see details here), which specifically states: "Attributions: Copyright notice, author, title, URI, credit noting use of original in adaptation – all may be implemented in any reasonable manner, so long as at least as prominent as other authorship credit if an adaptation or collection" This template provided me with an easy way to: 1) keep links current through transclusion if the URLs ever changed in the future (not on the end-use that someone already did, but for any new uses), 2) to quickly provide all the desired information for the license, and -- most importantly to me -- 3) provide a preferred method of attribution. As long as they meet the letter of the CC-BY-SA (really any version), then I am satisfied. However, if they would be kind enough to use the format I provided, it would be really nice. It certainly doesn't hurt to ask them to use it. It has been my experience that about 1/10th of the uses have done so, while the majority do not. Looking at the template these many years later, I see no need to alter it or its wording. I include the correct CC-BY-SA templates, and anything I add does not alter that license. I also do not think it is confusing to end-users who see it. If they know and understand CC-BY-SA, then they know what they HAVE to do. If they are new, I give them a simple "template" to help them get the information out there. Simple. And that's the point of this template, after all. :-) —Willscrlt ( Talk | w:en | b:en | meta ) 05:01, 22 May 2018 (UTC)