out of a hundred image requests or submissions i may get one question about attribution its a pretty rare thing much more often i see yeah wikipedia can use it or some other statement that doesn't confirm the license the way we need if you don't wish to explain the problem up front there's no reason you can't explain it if asked and point to the caption guideline for further information it looks like the discussion has been mentioned on the village pump as well so hopefully some other viewpoints on the situation can help the discussion personally i agree with the general usage like i said i think its much of the same reason that the history is a separate page and text submission isn't credited in the article either accessibility readability and standardization i don't see a compelling reason yet to change the guidelines in this case there was another free image available without the caption concern i imagine there will be cases that it would be difficult to get another free image but in my experience most contributors to wikipedia are willing to abide by the policies and guidelines when someone takes the time to educate them babelfish