wikipedia style is for wikipedia policy to determine i have trouble understanding this conflict people are saying such strange things they're sort of understandable from a new user like mr harvey who seems unfamiliar with wikipedia policy and principles but i find them incomprehensible from a seasoned editor like sam spade it seems to me self evident that if mr harvey controls the copyright then we can't use the image other than under the conditions he dictates and since those conditions include having an embedded uneditable caption in violation of the wiki principle that means we can't and won't use it at all that's apart from the phrasing of the caption being imo quite unacceptable it's enough that it's uneditable mr harvey it's just not the case that your regiment or the queen for that matter is in charge of wikipedia style you seem to assume that all that's needed for your caption to carry absolute authority is that a spokesman for the regiment should clarify the form of address title that should be used and then it will it must be used you are wrong about that forms of address and titles used here are matters for wikipedia consensus and policy your employers are not empowered to dictate to the world how to speak i can understand that you think they are but i don't understand sam at all sam how can you see mr harvey's demand to dictate the caption as part of an interpersonal conflict it's a conflict of principle you write i have recieved an email stating that richard harvey is the photo archivist at the duke of wellington's regimental hq and that a condition of their usage is that the the name rank title be embedded that is good enough for me i see no reason to doubt that this is the case or to refuse to utilise the images under these conditions those two conclusions are miles apart no there is no reason to doubt it yes there is every reason to refuse to utilise the image under such conditions it's a pity mr harvey has had second thoughts about the image he uploaded the first time the one without a caption and it's well just odd that he sees cropping off the caption as defamation but we'll have to live with that talk