I think it is a matter of personal preference and depends upon what you're trying to say with the photo. I would not include the film edge markings but that's just me. To me, including the edge markings distracts from the actual picture.
Edit: Incidentally, your question really has nothing to do with the scan and mentioning scan in the pure analog area is asking for a shit storm...so, you might want to edit your post and title (not sure you can edit the title though)...or ask the mods to move the thread to the ethics and philosophy area
You can always ask the moderators to change your title to "Too Much Info in the Image?"
Just Report your Post, and include the request.
You could also ask that the thread be moved to the Presentation and Marketing sub-forum in the General Discussion (Mixed Workflow) part of the site.
The question isn't really exclusive to Pinhole photography.
With my pinhole photos, I sometimes like to include the edge artifacts that are added by the camera. Here is a fortuitous example:
I don't normally care to include the edge writing.
IMO, whether to include rebates or edge markings is a personal and artistic decision. For myself, I usually barely crop off the rebate, but I've seen a lot of images I liked a lot that had edge markings, partial or complete sprocket holes, etc.
Love that boat shot! I'm not a color person when it comes to photography, and would love to see a B&W version of this, but it works great just as it is because of the very strong composition. Good stuff.
The only problem I have with printing the rebate is when I see a rebate for Kodak Tri-X on a color print or Kodak Portra 400 on a black & white print, but our on site slave trader would probably have no problem with that.
There was a time (back then) when I found composites from filmstrips interesting. Today I find the rebates cluttered wit graphics (DX codes, etc.) that I dislike showing the rebates.