Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2017-08

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Konrad Wallerstein.png Undeletion request

File:Konrad Wallerstein.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

I got this picture here: http://www.e-jirgens.de/fotosw.htm I wrote with Eckhard Jirgens and he told me that I can use the picture because there are all right extinguished because the picture is from 1933. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anilemelina (talk • contribs) 10:59, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

  • (I adjusted this to use the actual filename.) Anilemelina, did Jirgens explain who was the photographer? The photographs are likely to be protected by their copyright until 70 years after the deaths of their creators. Do you have any other information about the photo? seb26 (talk) 13:37, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: OTRS permission is required. Daphne Lantier 18:51, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Lexical distance among the languages of europe.png

Composing the request on behalf of user:Alternative Transport, who is away and unable to compose a long request. This file was uploaded by user:Великий Антон Васильовичdeleted as a copyvio - tagged by user:Ellin Beltz and deleted by user:INeverCry - note that Alternative Transport made some edits to the page post upload. Some time after deletion it was later re-uploaded by Alternative Transport under a different name - File:Lexical Distance Among Languages of Europe 2015.png, and thus flagged as such by User:SteinsplitterBot, and was deleted again (by me). In the second upload it was explained that the image was based on work (I assume unpublished) by by Prof. Konstantin Tishchenko 1980 to 2000. Alternative Transport asked me to undelete, but I feel a proper discussion is required, particularly with respect to the fact that it could be regarded as a derivative work of someone else's data. On my talk page Alternative Transport stated So, I am on holiday right now and not logged in but I will rewrite this if necessary. When the file was first uploaded it was uploaded by an account that uploaded a bunch of images and claimed copyright for all of them. When I found the image on commons I corrected the authorship and added a bit of info but was the opinion it was then fine since I had already put a CCBY-SA 3.0 on all my original content of the blog. When the first upload was deleted it was deleted together with all the other images that the account had uploaded. I thought the deletion was unnecessary but I did not want to pu any effort into sorting things out. Now I have uploaded the image and I figure it should stay uploaded. To Prof Tishchenko, I have tried contacting the researcher who is I his 80s? (90s ? On holiday, I am not going to look that up) without any success, but I am the opinion and will argue that no permission is required to publish a graphic that is based on his research. What if a researcher puts the effort into testing the DNA of ~80 monkeys/primates and publishes a list of how far or close their DNA are to each other, and what if I take that list and research population estimates for all those species and draw a similar graphic to the lexical distance graphic. Would I need the permission of the original researcher that determined the DNA- distance to be allowed to publish my graphic? No. Thus, the image should be undeleted. I have plenty of chemistry graphs I would like to upload (based on other people's data), but I don't, as I think there is too much of the original in the graph to claim "own work". My view is that we need permission from both parties, and it needs to be done via OTRS. Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:42, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

I looked at this currently deleted file and find the following in lower right corner: "Alternativetransport.wordpress.com by S. Steinbach 2015 based on T. Elms 2008 and K. Tischenko 1999" The "fixed" source link read "https://alternativetransport.wordpress.com/2015/05/05/34/ Lexical Distance Among Languages of Europe 2015" with a link to "https://alternativetransport.wordpress.com/2015/05/04/how-much-does-language-change-when-it-travels/" which is the 2008 image cited to T. Elms. Thus it appears to be at least in part copied from T. Elms' diagram as reproduced. Not being able to see Tischenko's work, I do not know how much was copied from him. I do not know if our uploader is the owner of the wordpress blog. I do not think it can be reuploaded - or similar files uploaded - until further clarity is achieved via the system which already exists COM:OTRS. Which looks to me as if we need three COM:OTRS for the diagram, S. Steinbach, T. Elms and K. Tischenko. And no worries if the uploader is on vacation or whatever, this project isn't going to ever be finished and no one is in a hurry. Should permissions ever be achieved for it, the file can be restored. Ellin Beltz (talk) 23:11, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: OTRS permission is required. Daphne Lantier 18:51, 31 July 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Our Lady of Aranzazu 105.jpg

Please bring back the image please I am a devotee to that marian image Akoosijhon (talk) 10:01, 29 July 2017 (UTC)Template:Signed2

Please Restore The Image since this was a Picture of Mine last 31 May 2017. By the way I cannot understand why you deleted this picture since I was in this event and I have pictures taken there — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akoosijhon (talk • contribs) 09:48, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Akoosijhon (talk) 10:34, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose The file descriptions say that the source for the first is

http://aranzazushrine.ph/home/index.php/2017/05/31/aranzazu-coronation-vestments-fit-for-a-queen/

That page has a clear copyright notice. The second is from

http://pintakasi1521.blogspot.com/2017/05/nuestra-senora-de-aranzazu-of-san-mateo.html

While that page does not have a copyright notice, it also does not have a free license, so it cannot be used on Commons. There are many images on the Web and very few of them are acceptable for Commons. Please read our licensing policy. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:52, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Jim. Daphne Lantier 18:47, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Request File:Prof. Tony Jun Huang.jpg to undelete

Dear Sir/Madam:

I am a PH.D student of Prof. Tony Jun Huang. I am writing to request the undeletion of image File:Prof. Tony Jun Huang.jpg. Prof. Huang wants me to add his photo on the wikipedia and the website information.

Reason: The picture has been deleted and there is no copyright violation. Would you please help to undelete the picture? Is anything I can do for this?

Thank you very much for your help.

Best, shuaiguo 7/30/2017 --Shuaixiangzhao (talk) 13:43, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Shuaixiangzhao, no sorry, photographs are the copyright of the photographer who took them. If you wish this photo to be restored, please get in contact with the person who took the photo and ask them to submit a free license release to us by email. Read about this at Commons:OTRS. Thanks, seb26 (talk) 14:00, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
You could also take a new photo of Prof. Huang yourself and upload it under a free license. Guanaco (talk) 14:12, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: OTRS permission is required. Daphne Lantier 18:49, 31 July 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:William George Howes.gif

I believe this file was deleted in error. This image was sourced from the Papers Past Website which has a detailed reuse statement next to the article & image. You can see this reuse statement here This stated:

"The Royal Society of New Zealand has adopted this copyright and reuse policy to encourage the dissemination of New Zealand’s scientific heritage. If you have any questions about this policy, please contact the Royal Society of New Zealand. Unless otherwise stated, the Royal Society of New Zealand is the copyright owner for the Royal Society of New Zealand Transactions and Proceedings, 1868-1961. The Royal Society of New Zealand has granted permission to the National Library of New Zealand Te Puna Mātauranga o Aotearoa to host the digitised content and maintain this site.

In-Copyright Materials

In-copyright materials are made available under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 New Zealand licence. This means that you may copy, adapt and republish this material, as long as you attribute both the author and the Royal Society of New Zealand."

So on the basis of the above I had assumed that either the image is in the public domain or should the image still be in copyright that it had be licensed for reuse under the CC BY 3.0 licence. As I was unsure which of these situations applied I uploaded the image under the more restrictive licence of the CC BY 3.0. I would therefore argue that an error has been made in deleting this image and request that it be undeleted. --Ambrosia10 (talk) 05:10, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: restored as per above. Daphne Lantier 18:46, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Logotype intertelecom.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Я являюсь представителем и сотрудником компании Интертелеком и использование данного изображения логотипа не является нарушением авторских прав. Прошу Вас восстановить изображение. Dies Irae Rebel (talk) 06:23, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

(Per Google Translate) I am a representative and employee of Intertelecom and use of this image of the logo is not a violation of copyright. I ask you to restore the image.
Please have the owner of the copyright of the image (presumably the company) email consent to us using the procedure here. Rodhullandemu (talk) 08:12, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: OTRS permission is required. Daphne Lantier 18:44, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Tony Lupton.jpg

I am requesting undeletion of this file as it is a photograph of myself, Tony Lupton, taken on 16 November 2016. I took the photo and uploaded the file to my own Wikipedia page and the file is free content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TonyL1001 (talk • contribs) 08:06, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose It was deleted because it appears at LinkedIn without a free license. Policy requires that the actual photographer must therefore send a free license using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:58, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: OTRS permission is required. Daphne Lantier 18:44, 31 July 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Gleb_Tsipursky_screenshot_from_TV_on_5-2017.png

Screenshots used for noncommercial purposes are generally considered fair use: https://tinytake.com/screen-capture-copyright-violation-or-fair-use/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gleb Tsipursky (talk • contribs) 13:37, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Screenshots used for noncommercial purposes are generally considered fair use: https://tinytake.com/screen-capture-copyright-violation-or-fair-use/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gleb Tsipursky (talk • contribs) 13:37, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Gleb Tsipursky, Wikimedia Commons does not host fair use material. Depending on the specific wiki you would like to use the images on, there may be a policy that permits fair use images under certain circumstances, for example en.wikipedia. Please see m:Non-free content for more information. seb26 (talk) 14:16, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per COM:FU. Daphne Lantier 18:43, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:29th Da’i Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin and the Court of Mughal Emperor.pdf

[[File:29th Da’i Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin and the Court of Mughal Emperor.pdf]]This file contains all the primary sources and printed material from ad-Da'wat ul-Haadiyat ul-'Alaviyah Library (Vadodara, INDIA) describing a detailed account of h...

Hello Editor,

This document contains pure research work from the manuscripts and the images are in the possession of the author himself. I think there is no copyright violation issue. I request its undletion.

--NoorAlavi (talk) 17:01, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

NoorAlavi, that file has not been deleted yet, only nominated. If you disagree, you need to make sure you comment on Commons:Deletion requests/File:29th Da’i Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin and the Court of Mughal Emperor.pdf instead. Thanks, seb26 (talk) 17:12, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: comments should be directed to Commons:Deletion requests/File:29th Da’i Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin and the Court of Mughal Emperor.pdf. Daphne Lantier 18:42, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Tokujin yoshioka inc.

Permission received Ticket:2017073110007337 4nn1l2 (talk) 21:57, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: @4nn1l2: Please add the OTRS tickets. Daphne Lantier 23:18, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

OTRS requests: 00:11, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Request normal undeletion of the following as permission was confirmed by their respective tickets:

seb26 (talk) 00:11, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Seb26: Please add the ticket. Daphne Lantier 06:35, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Request File:Fest des hohen Ordens vom schwarzen Adler Berliner Kaiserschloss.png to undelete

Portrait portrait Adolph von Menzel, with the insignia of the Order of the Black Ace,, The image analyzed by me confirms that the copyright was not violated--Andrassy66 (talk) 16:14, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Please share your detailed analysis. Thuresson (talk) 17:09, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
https://picclick.de/Fest-des-hohen-Ordens-vom-schwarzen-Adler-Berliner-161981804390.html Inserting source with details about the file,,, Could you restore it?--Andrassy66 (talk) 21:18, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
Where is the analysis? Who is the artist who has been dead more than 70 years? Thuresson (talk) 11:42, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
"H. Boll" was most likely German photographer Hermann Boll. Apparently born 1848 according to the German National Library.[1] Had studios in Berlin at Friedrichstrasse 73 and 176,[2] and at one point also at Mohrenstrasse 59.[3] Active up to the early 1920s. Unfortunately his death year is unknown. But he would have had to live to the age of 99 for the photo to be still copyrighted in Germany today. Not impossible, but a bit improbable. Lupo 14:09, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
So would it be possible to restore it, or is it still copyrighted, despite the PD-70?--Andrassy66 (talk) 20:30, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
Who is the author and which year did he or she die? Thuresson (talk) 21:05, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
The author should be Hermann Boll, while the year I do not know, but he should obviously see the end of the nineteenth century, so a licensed PD should be--Andrassy66 (talk) 22:57, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
 Oppose You are guessing that the author is Herman Boll and then you make a second guess that he died in the 19th century? According to uploader this was published in 1903, do not meet the requirements for Template:PD-old-assumed. Thuresson (talk) 05:50, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: Hermann Boll was born in 1848, so he certainly died before 1947. --Yann (talk) 10:56, 1 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Severino di Giovanni a color.png

Por cuestiones legales, en Argentina las fotografías con más de 25 años de antigüedad pasan a ser de dominio público de acuerdo a la Ley 11.723, Artículo 34. Esta fotografía es del año 1925. Fuente de la fotografía: Severino di Giovanni, el idealista de la violencia por Osvaldo Bayer (página 12) cita: «Severino Di Giovanni. Foto de prontuario después de la detención en el Teatro Colón (8-6-1925). El ojo izquierdo, con rastros de los puñetazos recibidos.» Puedes chequearlo instantáneamente desde aquí. {{Custom license marker}} {{PD-AR-Photo}} --Mikelelgediento (talk) 02:02, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

I think this is in the public domain in Argentina but not in the United States. According to Commons:International copyright quick reference guide, 1925 is three years too late for this to be considered PD-US-1923, so it's a case of 50 years pma death of the photographer. Mikelelgediento, en el libro has encontrado el nombre del fotógrafo? Era también la obra de Osvaldo Bayer? seb26 (talk) 02:36, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
La referencia a Osvaldo Bayer es por la fecha de la foto. La fotografía fue tomada en una comisaría del extinto Orden Social de la Policía argentina, es decir, un empleado de esa comisaría. Generalmente no se les da crédito a quienes toman fotografías a personas arrestadas en comisarías.
--Mikelelgediento (talk) 02:43, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: PD-AR-Photo. --Yann (talk) 10:48, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:2015.389405.Gayopakhyanamu.pdf

This file about Telugu drama Gayopakhyanam has been deleted from commons: Commons:Deletion requests/File:2015.389405.Gayopakhyanamu.pdf. en:Chilakamarti Lakshmi Narasimham, the author died in 1946. This work published in 1934 in India. They are entirely copyright free. I request the authorities to undelete this important drama of this author. It is available in Digital Library of India.[4] and also in Archive.org.[5]. Rajasekhar1961 (talk) 05:59, 31 July 2017 (UTC) (moved from COM:VP Guanaco (talk) 10:31, 31 July 2017 (UTC))

The book Gayopakhyanamu, is a classical play in Telugu dealing with a story in the epic of Mahabharata. This particular version written in Telugu, was authored by Chilakamarti Lakshmi Narasimham. As per Copyright Act of India, {{PD-old-auto|author died 1956 or earlier}} and {{PD-India}} are applicable on this file. Please undelete it. --రహ్మానుద్దీన్ (talk) 09:13, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: PD-India. రహ్మానుద్దీన్, please add categories for author, date of publication, etc. --Yann (talk) 10:46, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Amy ng (cropped).jpg

File:Amy ng (cropped).jpg is just a cropped version of File:Amy ng.jpg. I don't know why while Commons:Deletion requests/File:Amy ng.jpg is "kept", Commons:Deletion requests/File:Amy ng (cropped).jpg with the same reason is "deleted". --Pineapplew (talk) 04:59, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose. Although the primary reason for deletion might seem improper, the cropped version is very blurry (as well as the original which makes me quite confident that it might be own work as Taivo said in that DR) and thus useless. --Mates (talk) 06:45, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
 Neutral. Here is no copyright problem, but quality is really very bad (and this goes for file:Amy ng.jpg too). Taivo (talk) 07:13, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
 Comment: Although the quality of File:Amy ng.jpg is not so good, it is the only free photo for her in Commons till now. As she is too small in that photo, it is not so proper to be used in the infobox of her article, so a cropped version is used instead (see zhwiki & yuewiki). I suggest restoring the photo temporary until there is another better free photo. --Pineapplew (talk) 05:16, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support undeletion per Pineapplew. This file can be deleted again when a better version becomes available. --★Poyekhali 04:36, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I cringe when I see an image of such horrid quality used in an article. The better than nothing argument isn't always true. I'd rather see no image in an article than this garbage. You can't even really see what she looks like. It could be any Asian woman for all anyone who looks at these things can tell. File:Amy ng.jpg should be deleted too. Daphne Lantier 05:15, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Daphne. --Yann (talk) 11:19, 1 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Khetho Davidson.png

I need the image for the modifications of the Khethukuthula Mhlongo article. The picture was designed by myself and uploaded to commons.wikimedia.org/

  • www.khethodavidson.gq/?m=1
  • www.facebook.com/mhlongokhetho
  • www.twitter.com/mhlongoketho

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mhlongokhetho (talk • contribs) 11:20, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Mhlongokhetho, the image was deleted with the reason: "Out of scope: promotional content". Can you give some reasons to explain how the file "can be realistically used for an educational purpose", e.g. such as serving as an illustration on a Wikipedia article? seb26 (talk) 14:04, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 11:20, 1 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Horse Riding training in Shiv Ganga Vidya Mandir Allahabad.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This photo is of horse riding training in Shiv Ganga Vidya Mandir Allahabad. This is not a copy right violation. Photo is of Shiv Ganga Vidya Mandir therefore it is used on page of Shiv Ganga Vidya Mandir in Wikipedia. Therefore it is not a copyright violation. This photo of Shiv Ganga Vidya Mandir enriched the Wikipedia page of Shiv Ganga Vidya Mandir Allahabad. Therefore kindly consider undeletion request & oblige. Director Henery Lucas (talk) 19:11, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Director Henery Lucas, photographers hold the copyright of the photos they take, it does not belong to people appearing in the photo. Kindly explain who is the photographer and what is the source of the image so your undeletion request can be evaluated. Also, respecting copyright is more important to our project: even if the image was valuable for an article, we can't host it if it isn't free. Please read Commons:Licensing well. seb26 (talk) 21:25, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 11:22, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Ushna shah at the premiere of oye kuch kar guzar.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: its a public photo owned by the subject of the photo whos a famous pakistani actress and i am someone updating the page on her behalf- she has the rights to this picture. Bnusrat (talk) 01:01, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS.  — Jeff G. ツ 01:07, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: OTRS permission is required. Daphne Lantier 01:11, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Eric_Daimler.jpg

We have permission to use this photo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hokkunyc (talk • contribs) 00:35, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS.  — Jeff G. ツ 02:38, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 09:15, 2 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Hilda 2015-08-07 0440Z.jpg

Wrong file is not a reason to delete the file, and the image has no copyright problem. --219.78.190.247 02:03, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

If you have a high resolution version of it, with EXIF, please upload it with a better name.   — Jeff G. ツ 02:35, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS.  — Jeff G. ツ 01:18, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 09:16, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Joël_Barre.jpg

The file is picture of my personal posession. I kindly request it's undeletion.--Tlopes (talk) 02:19, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 09:15, 2 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Spinning (1).jpg

This should fall into public domain, or not? It was taken in the year 1935.

An important factor in determining the length of time a work is protected is whether or not it was published. Until recently, copyright assigned ownership for a finite time and barring unusual circumstances, lasted for a maximum of 75 years for items created and published before the 1976 revision of the copyright law.

For material originally created and published after 1976, copyright protection is for the life of the creator plus 50 years. Unpublished materials, such as diaries and family snapshots, were protected for the life of the creator plus 50 years. Congress, however, delayed initial implementation of this provision. Under the copyright revision that took effect in 1978, the copyright holder of unpublished material was given control of use until 2003 regardless of the original creation date.

--Jan Filein (talk) 13:40, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Source says "Photo by Camerique Archive/Getty Images", so you have to show that it was published without a notice, or that the copyright was not renewed. --Yann (talk) 09:19, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Official portraits of United Kingdom MPs

(all currently recreated as redirects)

Per consensus at Commons:Village pump#Duplicate photos of United Kingdom MPs, where duplicates of images in Category:Official United Kingdom Parliamentary photographs 2017 exist, the versions named in series should be kept. Andy Mabbett (talk) 13:52, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Why? --JuTa 15:36, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
Why? Per consensus at Commons:Village pump#Duplicate photos of United Kingdom MPs, as I said above. Andy Mabbett (talk) 20:01, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
Added Rupa Huq pic. Andy Mabbett (talk) 20:09, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Pigsonthewing: I've reversed the duplicate processing and restored the series. Daphne Lantier 20:56, 2 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Der entsorgte Vater Plakat.jpg, File:120613_Doppelleben_Artwork.pdf, File:Wiedersehen mit Brundibar.jpg

Ich bin der Regisseur und Produzent der Filme "Der entsorgte Vater", "Doppelleben - Der Film" und "Wiedersehen mit Brundibar". Sämtliche Rechte an Plakaten, Artwork etc. liegen daher bei mir. Daher bitte ich Sie, die Dateien wieder herzustellen, so dass die Plakate auf den Seiten der Filme zu sehen sind. Falls weitere Informationen benötigt werden, bitte ich um eine Nachricht. Vielen Dank. --DWolfsperger (talk) 12:08, 1 August 2017 (UTC) DWolfsperger, 01.08.17, 14:07

Bitte wende Dich an das OTRS-Team. Ein Hinweis noch zum PDF-Format. Hystrix (talk) 08:41, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: OTRS permission is required. Daphne Lantier 20:09, 2 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Ralph Bombis.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Ich besitze das Recht an dem Bild. Ich habe es von der abgebildeten Person höchstpersönlich und ausdrücklich zur Freigabe auf Wikipedia erhalten. Ich bitte um undelition der Datei. Magubosc (talk) 22:13, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS.  — Jeff G. ツ 01:13, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: OTRS permission is required. Daphne Lantier 20:09, 2 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:2017-0122`JUDY-KWONG.jpg

I'm a copyright holder of File:2017-0122`JUDY-KWONG.jpg. I just uploaded it to my Instagram [6]. Would the page restore if I register a legal copyright through a company or website and paste it on " Summary " of the page? -- Miss Skyblue (talk) 01:05, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

I have already sent an email to OTRS team. -- Miss Skyblue (talk) 01:46, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as soon as the OTRS permission is processed and confirmed, the image will automatically be restored. Daphne Lantier 20:08, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Farmandeh Logo.gif

Hi, this is my own image. And I've made it myself, and I want to share it freely. You can not find this image in any site.!!! Please retrieve the image Behnam nazemi 31 (talk) 09:15, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS. This file was deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Behnam nazemi 31, reuploaded, and redeleted as a copyright violation. Where exactly did you get it? Who clicked the button? Why is it so small or unaccompanied by EXIF metadata?   — Jeff G. ツ 13:54, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: OTRS permission is required. Daphne Lantier 20:06, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Acontias lineatus00.jpg

This image is entirely my own work. The company 'bionerds' is mine. I have repeatedly made this clear in my posts and resent having to reiterate this when my images are deleted. What is necessary to ensure that this does not happen? Alouise Lynch (talk) 15:42, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Please send a permission email to OTRS. Daphne Lantier 20:05, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:RRay_Self_Portrait_1952

Hello,

I created this (robert ray artist) page today and used a photo from my camera of a self portrait of robert ray (RRay_Self_Portrait_1952). I initially went to commons and entered the image and verified the artwork is in my possession and that I grant the copyright/use of the image. I am requesting the image be restored or okayed for reposting. Othwerise, please advise, but after reading, I can find no copyright issues.

Many thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Booleaserate (talk • contribs) 18:45, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Jmabel -- OTRS permission from the copyright holder is needed. Daphne Lantier 20:04, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

ahrca

Permission received Ticket:2017080210013865 4nn1l2 (talk) 19:53, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: @4nn1l2: Please add the OTRS tickets. Daphne Lantier 20:02, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Roke 2017-07-22 1945Z.jpg

Hi, and as an uploader of the image, I would like to request an undeletion. I have been a helper in my project making images in the past couple of years and this has never happened to me, nor to anyone who uploads TCs like me. The reason why I wanted this is because the this is the only image closest to its peak intensity and planning to use this image for a future article about it, especially adding to a gallery section in our Wikiproject. The user who requested a deletion in that image stated that it was "low-quality and small". Doesn't mean the image is low-quality doesn't mean it needs to be deleted. But if so, then why not delete a hundred other TC images that are pretty low-quality? Thanks so much. Typhoon2013 (talk) 04:41, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Typhoon2013: I've restored this, but you need to correct the license asap -- the current license is obviously wrong. Daphne Lantier 06:20, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Tara Lynne Barr.jpg

There is no copyright violation surrounding this image, as it was taken by Tara Lynne Barr. --Muse6 (talk) 00:44, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose That means that Tara Lynn Barr is the copyright holder. We would need OTRS permission from her to host the image on Commons. Daphne Lantier 08:46, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Daphne. --Yann (talk) 10:19, 4 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:abhasingh.jpg

The provided image must not be deleted because the right for its usage has been granted by the person in the image herself and can be duly approved if required. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Inkoflove (talk • contribs) 10:05, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Inkoflove, the photographer's legal copyright is the only right that concerns our licensing policy. Personality rights are important but no sorry, photographers own their own work unless otherwise stated with evidence. Did you take the photograph? If not, please make contact with the photographer and follow the instructions at Commons:OTRS about how to appropriately release the photo under a free license. Thanks, seb26 (talk) 12:01, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Seb. --Yann (talk) 10:20, 4 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Re:File:Réunion des Etats de Languedoc.jpg

fichier contenant un tableau sur le siège d'un général français était « début du XVIIIe siècle — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.48.43.246 (talk) 23:43, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: PD-Art. --Yann (talk) 10:16, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Esss4f0.png

[reason]Excuse me, my photo data which file [File:Esss4f0.png] do not delete because i have a history of great good and have a movie creations. And the photo data is meaningful to me. :(

04/08/2017 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mubahancihan (talk • contribs) 08:32, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Yann. Daphne Lantier 21:07, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Jaodori of Nagasaki Kunchi.jpg

par Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jaodori of Nagasaki Kunchi.jpg

163.49.205.10 (talk · contribs) suspected to be sock of Yqm, who Japanese LTA user. He was blocked by me. This request is harassment against me and abuse of deletion policy. Similar picture exists in Category:Nagasaki Kunchi. --Marine-Bluetalk✿contribs 14:53, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

 Comment: Marine-Blue, the closing admin agreed with the statement that the image fails COM:FOP#Japan because it depicts a temporarily displayed sculpture. Can you give some more information about why this is not a valid reason for deletion? The category you linked to has 53 images so I am not sure which one you are talking about. In your response it will be important to argue about this image itself, because in deletion debates about freedom of panorama, every discussed image is almost always a different case. In saying that, perhaps this file could be temporarily undeleted to assist this discussion. No one else commented on the DR so it might be OK to give it some more airtime especially when concerning FOP. seb26 (talk) 18:49, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
I'm with seb26 on this. Without being able to see a photo or an Admin's description of it, judging whether or not it violates a particular country's FOP is nigh impossible.   — Jeff G. ツ 18:56, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: mistaken deletion by me -- this loos to be a costume carried by people. Daphne Lantier 21:06, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Karen-abudinen-abuchaibe.jpg

I own this picture, why it have been deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dgsa82 (talk • contribs) 20:18, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Dgsa82, it has not been deleted yet, this is the wrong place to post. I have posted instructions for you at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Karen-abudinen-abuchaibe.jpg. Thanks, seb26 (talk) 20:29, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: comments should be directed to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Karen-abudinen-abuchaibe.jpg. Daphne Lantier 21:02, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Bruno spitzjapones.jpg; File:Giovana spitzjapones.jpg

These two files have been deleted because they supposedly lacked permissions. The permissions were always there, though… Please restore them. Kind regards, --Usien6 (talk · contribs) 21:00, 1 August 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usien6 (talk • contribs) 21:00, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Somehow related: File:Spitz Japones Brasil.jpg + File:Spitz Japones.jpg (uploaded by Podolskijr) = no authorization for removing watermarks (which IMHO) is NOT compatible to COM:L. Gunnex (talk) 21:16, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: No permission. --Yann (talk) 20:31, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Files uploaded by Madduco

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: All of these files were taken from the public domain for the federal airports. They were simply airport gates information which is critical for the article. These files were added in order to increase the value of the articles they were added and the possibility of a copyright claim on them are virtually none as listed when I uploaded them. Please review this and hope to restore for the sake of accurate and valuable information for the airports public transport. Madduco (talk) 23:43, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Madduco, can you provide more information about where these images were sourced from and how you know that they are public domain? Copyright status is typically the only important thing in these discussions about deleting or undeleting files so as much information is needed as possible. This is because on Commons we only host copyright free or freely licensed works and have no ability to host copyrighted media for educational purposes: see fair use and precautionary principle. seb26 (talk) 00:55, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
 Not done OP do not respond to valid questions. Neither LaGuardia, Newark Liberty nor JFK are federal airports. Thuresson (talk) 13:42, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Files uploaded by Lucasfffaria

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: All this image/files were deleted by the justification of not having information about the given permission. It is important to inform that all this files/image in question were taken from a Brazilian Federal Public Institution, and therefore, must comply with Brazilian Copyright laws, in this case, Law No. 9.610, of February 19, 1998.


According to Chapter IV - Limitations on Copyright, Article 48 - Works permanently located in public places may be represented freely, through paintings, drawings, photographs and audiovisual procedures. Therefore, from a legal point of view, the files / images do not break the rules and Copyright laws. It is noteworthy that Brazilian laws are in accordance with international laws, since Brazil is a signatory to the Berne Union Convention

http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/L9610.htm Lucasfffaria (talk) 23:45, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose Article 48 of Law nº 9.610 of February 19, 1998 states: "Works permanently located in public places may be freely represented by painting, drawing, photography and audiovisual processes."
Apparently you seem to believe that freedom of panorama means that photos can not be covered by coyright. This is not the case. From: Commons:Freedom of panorama: "Also, the exception does not eliminate the need for a license from the photographer.". Thuresson (talk) 08:42, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, I understand your point. However, new doubts have arisen and I ask for your help.
Most of the photos / images are from laboratories, classrooms, projects or physical space of a Brazilian federal university, which is part of the Brazilian Ministry of Education, that is, an organ of the federal government of Brazil.
The photos / images have been posted on government websites and the rights are from the government. However, all published content authored by the Brazilian government is under Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivations 3.0 Brazil (CC BY-ND 3.0 BR) *. According to the Creative Commons website, third parties have the right to: Share - copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even if commercial. **
Is it possible to send photos in this context?
(*)Example: http://www.brasil.gov.br/defesa-e-seguranca/2017/08/ministro-garante-novas-operacoes-das-armadas-no-rio-de-janeiro
(**)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/br/
Lucasfffaria (talk)
We don't host content under licenses that prohibit derivative works; see the second bullet point under Commons:Licensing#Acceptable licenses. —LX (talk, contribs) 17:23, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done Even if freedom of panorama applies to the subjects photographed here, the photos themselves are copyrighted to the individual photographers. Works offered under a non-derivatives license, however, are not accepted by Commons. De728631 (talk) 15:33, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:SC Janus CSD Party 2017-3913.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: OTRS Ticket#2017071710015195 Olaf Kosinsky (talk) 08:51, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

@Olaf Kosinsky: Hello, we need more info. As per deletion reason the file was deleted due to mistakenly uploaded bad version, is this surely the correct file? In the ticket there is a permission for another file that is still in consideration? Thanks. --Mates (talk) 15:31, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: stale request -- no reply in more than a week. Daphne Lantier 20:05, 6 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:MKA - Hermandad, La S02(V).jpg

File:MKA - Hermandad, La S02(V).jpg Poster: la hermandad, segunda temporada (vertical). hi I'm producer of this serie and I want to update the image in order to give the users the updated correct information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rocio PeCr (talk • contribs) 19:49, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Rocio PeCr, if you are representing a company who owns the copyright for this work, you need to give a free license release to our OTRS team by email. Follow the instructions to use the release generator at Commons:OTRS. Please make sure you write from an email address professionally associated with the company and that you attach the file to your email. If the poster contains any other substantial graphics, please explain briefly who created them and where they came from (if they were not created specifically by someone for your company). When the team receives your email with the free license release, then they will consider restoring the file. Thanks, seb26 (talk) 12:27, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: OTRS permission required. Daphne Lantier 20:06, 6 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Flag of the United Socialist States of America (50 stars).svg

My flag of Socialist America was deleted for being a "personal artwork".

The user who requested the deletion was blocked for mass deletion of fictional flags.

The flag currently is sold [7] and used [8] IRL by people unrelated to me.

Can it be restored? Hellerick (talk) 15:42, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: stale request -- no reply. Daphne Lantier 20:07, 6 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Virginia Sinclair Harry Sinclair Margaret Bradshaw Belmont Track002.jpg

The photo was published in 1933. This is from Nolo.com:

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/determining-length-of-copyright-protection-29483.html

1. Works published from 1909 through 1921. The initial copyrighted term of the work was 28 years from the date of publication. If the copyright was renewed during the 28th year, the copyright was extended for an additional 28-year period.

2. Works published from 1922 through 1963. The initial copyrighted term of the work was 28 years from the date of publication. If the copyright was renewed during the 28th year, the copyright was extended for an additional 67-year period.

3. Works published from 1964 through 1978. The initial copyrighted term of the work was 28 years from the date of publication, with an automatic renewal of an additional 67 years.

4. Works created on or after January 1, 1978. The following rules apply to published and unpublished works: 

  For one author, the work is copyright-protected for the life of the author plus 70 years.
  For joint authors, the work is protected for the life of the surviving author plus 70 years.
  For works made for hire, the work is protected for 95 years from the first publication or 120 years from the date of its creation, whichever is less.
  For anonymous and pseudonymous works, the work is protected for 95 years from the first publication or 120 years from the date of its creation, whichever is less. (However, if the author's name is disclosed to the U.S. Copyright Office, the work is protected for the life of the author plus 70 years.)

As you can see, the publication date is critical when determining copyright protection. This cheat sheet can provide you with a solid guide for determining whether a particular work is still protected.

Since the work was created on 1933 its copyright would have expired in 1961.

From Library of Congress http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/res/220_acme.html

Acme Photographs

Rights and Restrictions Information

Prints and Photographs Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C., 20540-4730

The use of photographs taken by ACME (which includes Acme News Photos) may be restricted.

Access: Permitted; subject to P&P policy on serving originals.

Reproduction (photocopying, hand-held camera copying, photoduplication and other forms of copying allowed by "fair use"): Permitted, subject to P&P policy on copying.

Publication and other forms of distribution: May be restricted. The ACME archives has been bought by CORBIS, which controls the copying of ACME images physically housed in its archives in New York City. CORBIS can be contacted at: CORBIS 902 Broadway New York, NY 10010 telephone (800) 260-0444 web site: http://www.corbisimages.com

CORBIS does not control the copying of ACME images housed in the Library of Congress. However, any copyright held by ACME that is still current would now be owned by CORBIS. In an attempt to determine if ACME registered any copyrights and if those copyrights were renewed, Specialists in the Prints and Photographs Division of the Library of Congress searched the Copyright Office files. It was found that only a FEW images were registered for copyright and those copyrights were NOT RENEWED. However, the Library’s legal office has advised the Division that photographs published with proper copyright notices between 1923-1963 may be protected if properly renewed, while works published after 1963 and unpublished photographs in the collection may be protected even if they were not registered with the Copyright Office. Additionally, researchers should be advised that determining the copyright status of photographs can be problematic because of the lack of pertinent information, and researchers often have to make calculated RISK DECISIONS concerning the appropriate use of an image when its copyright status is unknown or ambiguous. Privacy and publicity rights may also apply.

Credit Line: Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, [reproduction number, e.g., LC-USZ62-123456]

For more information, please read: Copyright and Other Restrictions: ... Sources for Information

The photo is more than 80 years old and it is very likely that no copyright has been renewed for this photo as the paragraph above mentions that none of the photos that had a copyright were renewed. So please don't delete the photo. The photo that you do have for Harry Sinclair is really poor in quality. I think we can trust the specialists at the Library of Congress — Preceding unsigned comment added by ErnstblofeldX (talk • contribs) 21:02, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose There are several problems with the summary above:

  1. "Since the work was created in 1933 its copyright would have expired in 1961." No. During that period, copyright began with publication, not creation. I see no proof that this work was ever published. If it was not published until recently, it will be under copyright until 2051, 120 years after creation.
  2. "it is very likely that no copyright has been renewed" Our standard of proof is "beyond a significant doubt", so "very likely" is not a sufficiently strong statement to meet Commons requirements.
  3. Searching for copyright renewals of photographs is very difficult because they usually don't have titles and because the copyright for a photograph first published in a periodical would have been renewed if the copyright for the periodical were renewed. I cannot believe that the LOC staff actually researched at that level.

.     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:32, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Jim + no reply to Yann's question. Daphne Lantier 20:08, 6 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Puffin Scan 72 dpi.jpg

This image is the front cover of the Alaska Quarterly Review. We wish to replace the old cover on the Wikipedia page for the AQR with the newer cover. The image of the front cover is made available with no copyright restrictions under the Creative Commons license. 137.229.185.207 00:55, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

If you represent the AQR, please send a release by email to OTRS, using an official AQR email address. Guanaco (talk) 05:16, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS.  — Jeff G. ツ 22:46, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done There is no evidence at the AQR homepage that the cover image was published under a Creative Commons licence. The only information there is "© 2017 Marion Owen". We need a permission by email from Mrs Owen. See COM:OTRS for details. Alternatively the AQR could add a note at their website stating that the cover is licensed under cc-by-sa-4.0.De728631 (talk) 20:05, 6 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Hosingen zendmast.JPG

Ten years ago this file was correctly transferred from nl.wikipedia but was later deleted by @Bryan: without providing a reason. The quality may not be optimal, but I think it can still be useful. A copy is sitting at en:File:Hosingen Transmission Mast.JPG but instead of transferring that one we should rather restore the Commons version. De728631 (talk) 15:19, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

 Support + please add Category:Hosingen Transmitter after undeletion. Te750iv (talk) 16:08, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
Please don't undelete this image yet. There was something about this user making legal threats over his photographs. Perhaps the deletion is related. Will look into this closer. Natuur12 (talk) 16:10, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
@Jcb: could you also take a look? Natuur12 (talk) 16:16, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
If I remember well, original uploader was related to multiple copyright violation and introduction of false information to Wikipedia articles. This is about a decade ago, I will see if I can find a related discussion at NL Wiki. Jcb (talk) 16:26, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
@Natuur12: See this from 2005. Jcb (talk) 16:36, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. I also found NL:Gebruiker:Erik Creugers/Fotogebruik. In short we have someone who made a lot of conflicting statements about the copyright status of his work and tried to release and relicense his work under a Wikipedia only license and other stuff. I even read something about a possible personal bankrupt if the images wouldn't be deleted because off some exclusive license deal with a third party and a lot off legal threats. We have other pics in Category:Hosingen Transmitter. This picture represents a shithole from the early days. There are so much conflicting statements about this picture that this pic wouldn't be safe to use by re-users. Natuur12 (talk) 16:52, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
plausible, thanks for checking the history. Te750iv (talk) 17:00, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
Thank you indeed for checking the background. In light of this new information I would rather withdraw this undeletion request. De728631 (talk) 18:04, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: withdrawn. Daphne Lantier 20:05, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Files uploaded by VIACCOZ Anne-Marie

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: OTRS agent (verify) request: Permission provided by the author with Ticket:2017073010006974. Arthur Crbz (talk) 16:01, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

The deletion request was not only about the copyright status but also about the educational usefulness of these images "because they might be artworks without obvious educational use (Paul Viaccoz has no Wikipedia article)." So instead of bulk-restoring these files we might first want to consider if we really need them. De728631 (talk) 19:40, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
fr:Paul Viaccoz has a Wikipedia article. Regards, Yann (talk) 21:05, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Arthur Crbz: Please add the OTRS tickets. Daphne Lantier 21:42, 6 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:OA Button.webm

The uploader claims that they have inadvertently forgotten to list MIT license for their derivative work. They say that the original work has been released under MIT license. Ticket:2017080610009907 4nn1l2 (talk) 21:10, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: @4nn1l2: Please add the ticket. Daphne Lantier 21:25, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Udanako Alemanak.jpg undeletion request

Hello Ellin,

the pictures that have to do with Ene Bada! belong to the disappeared magazine, that was freely distributed and made with volunteer work, at the end of the last century. I was one of the volunteers, back then, for awhile. Nowadays, there is none to give permission about it, so taking a picture of the old magazines seems to be the only way to show/remember what it looked like. This also affects this files:

If you think there is something different I could do about it, please let me know, but I can´t thing of anything really! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josebabarandi (talk • contribs) 08:14, 7 August 2017

@Josebabarandi: These images have not been deleted yet, so you should post your reasoning at the deletion discussion: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Josebabarandi. Ww2censor (talk) 10:34, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
 Not done No files to undelete. Thuresson (talk) 11:40, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

‎Official portraits of United Kingdom MPs (2)

(most currently recreated as redirects)

Per consensus at Commons:Village pump/Archive/2017/07#Duplicate photos of United Kingdom MPs, where duplicates of images in Category:Official United Kingdom Parliamentary photographs 2017 exist, the versions named in series should be kept. Andy Mabbett (talk) 10:07, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

That discussion seems rather woolly and unclear. We're not having duplicates are we. I suggest we undelete the images which fit the naming convention and delete the remaining duplicates (recreating them as redirects, if necessary, though it shouldn't be as they're such recent uploads). If you drop them into a maintenance category for deletion, I'll run through it later on and sort it out for you. I'm also interested (idle curiosity) on how you'll deal with this after the next general election, if someone else uploads files with a different naming scheme. It seems like an awful lot of work for no reward, really, but whatever. Nick (talk) 10:40, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
No, we're not having duplicates; those will be orphaned and nominated for deletion. This is - as the heading suggests - the second batch; the first were dealt with without objection. Andy Mabbett (talk) 10:46, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: per request/clarification - if you want me to deal with orphans/duplicates or further undeletions, just ping me. --Nick (talk) 12:38, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Artofjohnpugh

Permission received Ticket:2017080610011001 4nn1l2 (talk) 22:55, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: @4nn1l2: Impressive artworks! Please add the OTRS tickets. Daphne Lantier 21:55, 7 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Three Musketeers of Indian Photography.jpg

I have the proper copyright of the file File:Three Musketeers of Indian Photography.jpg as its owner and don't find any reason as to why the file has been deleted. My humble request to the Wikipedia authority is to bring back the said file as soon as possible for further use of it. Thank you. Photographer Sunil K. Dutt (talk) 06:34, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: OTRS permission is required. Daphne Lantier 21:43, 7 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Gold Coast 2018 logo.png

The picture is the logo of the Gold Coast Bid for the 2018 Commonwealth Games. The picture was taken from http://thecgf.com/games/2018/2018_CGF_Evaluation_Commission_Report.pdf I apologize for not licensing it properly. Can you please undelete it? If you feel the picture is not licensed properly, you can delete it completely and I will try to upload it properly with full description and license --Rishabsingh.nitt (talk) 16:06, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose hosting on Commons. The Federation's copyright/use policy explains that no material can be reproduced without permission. Rishabsingh.nitt, consider uploading this directly to a Wikipedia project that has a fair use policy, for example en.wikipedia or others. seb26 (talk) 17:32, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Seb26 -- file is not free. Daphne Lantier 21:42, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Andrés Salgado en 2017.jpg

Hola, me han borrado varias fotos subidas, reconozco que algunas son de internet, pero esta es real, del Whatsapp personal del escritor. Por favor déjenla en el artículo. Gracias. --Sanandresito38 (talk) 16:28, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Sanandresito38: este archivo ya no ha sido borrado, favor comente en la discusión actual:
Commons:Deletion requests/File:Andrés Salgado en 2017.jpg.
I suggest closing this UDR thread, the file has not been undeleted but is simply at DR. seb26 (talk) 17:34, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: procedural close -- file hasn't been deleted -- please direct comments to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Andrés Salgado en 2017.jpg. Daphne Lantier 21:41, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Bergström/Wallgren

Please undelete the following files:

Kropp, Mode, Kläder
* File:1106 Kropp, Mode, Kläder10.tif
Bundna händer
* File:Bundna händer - indianskt hantverk från Sydamerika 1975 RU1290 1.tif
Den rike mannens bord
* File:Den rike mannens bord 1968 RU17 1.tif
Ögon från rymden
* File:Ögon från rymden 1993 RU2357 01.tif
Förbud mot handikapp
* File:Förbud mot handikapp 1971 RU1017 1.tif
Kalejdoskopet öppnar sig
* File:Kalejdoskopet öppnar sig 1985 RU1944 1.tif
Köpet
* File:Köpet 1968 RU8 1.tif
Vem är Sama från Ghana?
* File:Vem är Sama från Ghana? 1975 RU1274 1.tif
May include different tickets. Please undelete, replace ticket-template with license template, then delete those with other ticket numbers
* File:Amandla 1983 RU1884 1.tif

Swedish VRT agent (verify): These files has a valid OTRS release, only that the template was added by the uploader and sender rather than an OTRS agent. I can, however, confirm that the release is valid and that the file should be ok. The files were deleted due by a reason not related to this ticket, and on a technicallity, rather than anything being actually wrong, should have been tagged with OTRS pending instead. Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 11:35, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

 Comment @Josve05a: I think this is enough to look at for now... we can worry about the others once these are addressed. They actually needed to be temporarily undeleted for review, even by admins, because the filesizes are extremely large....without being able to see the thumbnails, it would be a matter of downloading several gigabytes of data to look at each set. Even undeleting them was rather slow, as it lagged the database a bit. - Reventtalk 05:38, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close as per Josve05a -- no action on this in 3 months -- we can't have files temporarily undeleted for an indefinite period -- I've redeleted them. Daphne Lantier 02:35, 8 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

восстановление файлов:

привет, я прошу о восстановлении этих руд два удаленных файлов, которые четко представляют две картины itliana школы восемнадцатого века,, где вы можете ясно увидеть название «художник в огласно файле, то имя следующего автора уже встроено в название; ) — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.5.4.153 (talk) 23:27, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Google translation: "Hello, I ask for the restoration of these ores two deleted files that clearly represent the two pictures of the eighteenth-century school itliana, where you can clearly see the name "artist in the file, the name of the next author is already embedded in the title; )". Translation added by Thuresson (talk) 20:30, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: uploaded by Глинистый сланец. Daphne Lantier 02:42, 8 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Postcards of Mantua

By the way, I ask for the restoration of cartridges of north italy of the beginning of the twentieth century ,,,, the license is right (PD-Italy)--82.52.36.224 20:27, 6 August 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 95.244.102.111 (talk) 17:58, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: uploads of Глинистый сланец. Daphne Lantier 02:41, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Spidercow.jpg

Spidercow.jpg is my photo, I took it in 2006 in Greece. I don't understand why it was deleted by "glorious 93"!

Santiag Stucchi-Portocarrero — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santiagostucchi (talk • contribs) 00:47, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Antranig Granian Անդրանիկ Ծ. վրդ. Կռանեան.jpg Շաքէ Մանկասարեան (talk) 01:29, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: deleted as per Commons:Freedom of panorama#Greece. Daphne Lantier 02:40, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Church in Glyfada Greece in January 2015.png

I named this photo during the upload process, and thus can't be absolutely certain which shot is referred to. However, I'd wager that the shot in question was of:

Saints Constantine and Helen Orthodox Cathedral of Glyfada Ιερός Καθεδρικός Ναός Αγίων Κωνσταντίνου και Ελένης Γλυφάδας

at Leof. Posidonos 55, Glifada 166 75 in Greece. If so, I took this shot, and don't understand why it was deleted, or ever suspected of copyright infringement. It is an unexceptional daylight shot of the cathedral, taken from a photo angle available to anyone passing by.--Tim Adams (talk) 04:56, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Commons:Freedom of panorama#Greece. Daphne Lantier 08:35, 8 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Statue of archibishop Damaskinos in Athens.jpg

Эй, я сам фотографировал этот памятник. Я был в Афинах в 2009 году, у меня есть куча других фоток того же периода. Так что никаих нарушений нет! Юкатан (talk) 06:44, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Или хотя бы перешлите мне оригинал на это мыло: yuri_kat@mail.ru Юкатан (talk) 06:57, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: I've emailed the image. Daphne Lantier 08:34, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Official portraits of United Kingdom MPs (3)

(most currently recreated as redirects)

Per consensus at Commons:Village pump/Archive/2017/07#Duplicate photos of United Kingdom MPs, where duplicates of images in Category:Official United Kingdom Parliamentary photographs 2017 exist, the versions named in series should be kept. FYI, User:Nick. Andy Mabbett (talk) 06:42, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: per Andy. As usual, just ping with the next batch. --Nick (talk) 09:08, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Alexandroupoli Cathedral.JPG

I took the picture. As you can see I took many photos in Alexandroupoli. I spent two years there, from 2007 to 2009 and visited it until 2011. Does not the data from the photo show that it was taken by me? I took the photo on my Casio EX-Z75. There must be some mistake for this to be deleted. Pjposullivan (talk) 05:43, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Commons:Freedom of panorama#Greece. Daphne Lantier 08:35, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Daphne Lantier and Glorious 93, I wish I was told it was Commons:Freedom of panorama#Greece when it was tagged for deletion. I was on Wikipedia until midnight local time last night and had no notifications. Then I wake up and see a pic has been nominated for deletion and not only that, but has already been deleted, without giving me a chance to say anything about it. There was nothing in the edit summary that it was Commons:Freedom of panorama#Greece, no mention of Commons:Freedom of panorama#Greece where the file should be, and nothing about Commons:Freedom of panorama#Greece when it was deleted. Only when I asked for an undeletion, did I finally get told that it was because of Commons:Freedom of panorama#Greece. Before that, it was generic Commons:Licensing tags. "Editors should treat each other with respect and civility" is a pillar of Wikipedia and I saw no respect or civility. This generic tagging of photos is so draining to the efforts of the community. This is why I rarely upload pics to Wikimedia, there is no appreciation of editors' efforts here. I go on to Flickr now. There I can use the Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 license and people respect you far more than they do here. Pjposullivan (talk) 11:21, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
@Pjposullivan: I'm sorry to see that you're bothered by the way this went. The generic deletion rationale comes from my using a gadget we have called autodel.js. I meant no disrespect or offence to you personally, and I apologize for causing frustration for you. I personally don't care that much for FoP laws, and I only do FoP-related deletions because we have to. I hope you'll stay on Commons, and again, I'm sorry for any upset I've caused you. Daphne Lantier 17:25, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
@Daphne Lantier: Thank you for getting back to me, genuinely, it means a lot. Perhaps the gadget could be altered to accommodate FoP laws for individual countries. I will cease writing in this section now, Thanks again, Pjposullivan (talk) 20:08, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Ismagil Sharafiev.jpg

Я прошу восстановить это изображение так как на нем изображен мой родной и ныне покойный дедушка, к слову известный журналист о биографии которого собственно и идет речь в моей статье, я считаю не корректым удаление фотографии так как она взята из открытого источника (сайта однокласники) и плюс ко всему фотографировал его я, и никакой лицензии на эту фотографию никто не оформлял, по этому я прошу вас восстановить фотографию так как по сути я ничего не нарушил. Надеюсь на понимание с вашей стороны, и заранее спасибо) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DonMedichi (talk • contribs) 19:04, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per COM:NETCOPYVIO -- https://ok.ru/profile/570589642944. Daphne Lantier 21:41, 8 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:夏芽まい.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Works by authors themselves わすぺる (talk) 21:52, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

わすぺる, can you explain who the author(s) are? If they are not you, you will need to follow the instructions at Commons:OTRS/ja. Thanks, seb26 (talk) 12:20, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: OTRS permission is required. Daphne Lantier 21:40, 8 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Asalgado.jpg.

The picture is mine, i took it!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanandresito38 (talk • contribs) 21:40, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

This image appears on the subject's YouTube page, which has been around for about ten years. If you took this image I would expect it to have some EXIF data associated with it, but it doesn't. Tell us how you took this picture, please. Rodhullandemu (talk) 22:14, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Rodhullandemu. Daphne Lantier 21:40, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Hans_Kauri.jpg

This photo was taken from Estonian Encyclopedia. It was published there under CC! It was easy to check. The info was there! Alarsara (talk) 03:41, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose As per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hans Kauri.jpg. Thuresson (talk) 13:51, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Thuresson. Daphne Lantier 21:39, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Rio-Andirrio-Bridge in construction 3.jpg

Eigenes Bild, in der Serie mit File:Rio-Andirrio-Bridge in construction 1.jpg entstanden und Teil eines Value image Sets --Arcalino (talk) 19:00, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Es ging nicht um das Bild an sich, sondern um den Inhalt. Das Design der Brücke ist urheberrechtlich geschützt und in Griechenland gibt es keine COM:Panoramafreiheit. Eigentlich hätte das Bild nicht schnellgelöscht werden dürfen, denn Probleme mit der Panoramfreiheit müssen immer per Löschdiskussion geklärt werden. Aber da es nun mal weg ist, können wir es auch nicht einfach wieder herstellen. Andererseits gibt es bereits eine ganze Category:Rio-Antirio Bridge
Quick summary in English: This is a FoP issue. The bridge depicted is still under construction in the image so the design is still copyrighted. There is no FoP in Greece so we should not undelete the image. Speaking of deletion, the speedy deletion was out of order because FoP always requires a full deletion discussion. Add to that Category:Rio-Antirio Bridge with dozens of images that also need to be evaluated with regards to freedom of panorama. De728631 (talk) 19:55, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per De728631. Daphne Lantier 21:39, 8 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Tranka tranka.jpg popular song

This being a popular song, probably centuries old, I don´t fully understand what the problem is to put it there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josebabarandi (talk • contribs) 04:23, 7 August 2017‎ (UTC)

  • Signing your posts on talk pages is required and it is a Commons guideline to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ 12:39, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
 Oppose @Josebabarandi: This image does not exist, and neither does File:Tranka tranka.jpg nor File:Tranka-tranka.jpg. File:Tranka-Tranka.jpg has not been deleted yet, so you should review COM:L and COM:SCOPE, and then post your reasoning at the deletion discussion: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Josebabarandi.   — Jeff G. ツ 12:39, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close -- no actionable file presented. Daphne Lantier 21:38, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Example.jpg

El kef Jalaba Jalaba & hijab Moroccaine — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zer0chick (talk • contribs) 11:03, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

  •  Oppose The first of these might be useful, but it has no useful categories or description so it is a meaningless photo of a street. The other four are blurry personal images, out of scope for quality and no educational purpose. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:02, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: out of COM:SCOPE -- no COM:EDUSE. Daphne Lantier 21:37, 8 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Antranik Granian.jpgFile:Antranig Granian Անդրանիկ Ծ. վրդ. Կռանեան.jpg

Dear All,

Father Antranig Granian photo is freely available through his FB and through his friends pages. The page was created for father Antranig Thanks for help . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Շաքէ Մանկասարեան (talk • contribs) 22:47, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose Facebook is copyrighted. The stated source, http://www.aztagdaily.com/archives/294313, is also copyrighted:"Copyright 2013 Aztag Daily". Most images that are freely available on the Web are copyrighted. Commons can accept only those that are explicitly freely licensed.

 Not done: OTRS permission from the copyright holder is required. Daphne Lantier 21:32, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Josef H Neumann- Gustav I (1976)

Das hochgeladen Bild File : Josef H Neumann - Gustav I (1976) stammt sowohl als Original als auch der Scan von mir als Autor selbst. Dieses habe ich auch bereits im Verfahren ordnungsgemaess gemeldet. Daher verstehe ich die weiteren Massnahmen nich! Mir deshalb anzukuendigen, dass mir die Korrekturrechte entzogen werden sollen, befremdet mich sehr. Das Verfahren gestaltt sich viel zu kompliziert. Ich bin als Autor selbst an einer Wahrung von Rechten nicht nur interessiert, sondern ich halte mich auch daran. Wenn das alledings durch ein so kompliziertes Vefahren mit unuerbsichtlichen Verlinkungen in alle Richtungen und das nicht nur national sondern eben auch international erschwert wird , macht es die Sache nicht einfacher, Ich bin nun mal kein Programmierer. Herzlichen Dank !!! """ Juniperi (talk) 03:42, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose The artist Josef H. Neumann is still living and, therefore, this work will be under copyright for at least 70 years from now. There is no evidence that Neumann has given his permission for this painting to be on Commons. In order to restore the image, the artist himself must send a free license using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:49, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: OTRS permission is required. Daphne Lantier 21:31, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:PosterTST(c).jpg

The file "PosterTST(c).jpg" has been deleted some days ago because of missing permissions.

However, I'd like to draw your attention to the fact that the image is now released under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, and this is stated in the official website of Ibidemfilms, i.e. the company that produced the film "The Strawberry Tree" (http://www.imdb.com/company/co0349274/). Please check here:

http://en.ibidemfilms.org/films.html (bottom of the page)

Besides, I am the author of the image.

As demanded by some administrator on the occasion of a previous attempt to publish this file on wikipedia, some logos of film festivals have been removed.

Hence, I (again) kindly request its undeletion.

Many thanks,

--Bbaxit (talk) 09:46, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose Commons licensing policy explicitly forbids NC and ND licenses. Either change the release or have the producer of the film send a free license using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:31, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Change of license or OTRS permission is required. Daphne Lantier 21:34, 8 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:The Coronation of H.M. King George IV.jpg

By the way, I ask for the restoration of this painting of English nationality of the first eight hundred, the source is part of the royal collection site, painted around around 1821 — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.15.94.5 (talk) 19:27, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: sock request by Глинистый сланец. Daphne Lantier 21:35, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Abraham Alewijn

Gallery Abraham Alewijn was deleted for having only image. However, of this particular painter only one painting is known. So in my view this gallery was deleted for the wrong reason. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 22:24, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

From Commons:Galleries: "Galleries with only a single image are permitted if they highlight an image which has been elected by the community as a featured picture, quality image, or valued image."- Thuresson (talk) 22:33, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: One lonely image and no hope of ever growing. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 02:24, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:WLR-Wikimania2017-poster-frhdkazan.pdf

I forgot to remove deletion request after I've managed to update the file. This request is here because I think that having it undeleted is better than re-uploading it under a new title. Thank you. Frhdkazan (talk) 23:16, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: per user/uploader request. --Nick (talk) 10:22, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Ella Soto.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: A valid OTRS permission has been provided – ticket:2017062710019932. As an OTRS agent (verify), I will make sure that the permission is enough to keep the picture(s) (media work + depicted work), update the license (if needed) and add the appropriate OTRS template when this gets restored. Feel free to notify me and thank you in advance. AntonierCH (d) 14:10, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: @AntonierCH: Please add the permission template and update the license if needed. Thanks. --Mates (talk) 20:26, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Files uploaded by Félix Basseterre

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: A valid OTRS permission has been provided – ticket:2017060210014635. As an OTRS agent (verify), I will make sure that the permission is enough to keep the picture(s) (media work + depicted work), update the license (if needed) and add the appropriate OTRS template when this gets restored. Feel free to notify me and thank you in advance. AntonierCH (d) 14:42, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: @AntonierCH: Please add the permission template and update the license if needed. Thanks. --Mates (talk) 20:24, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:PosterTST(c).jpg

The file "PosterTST(c).jpg" has been deleted some days ago because of missing permissions.

Following your instructions, he file is now released under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License and this is stated in the official website of Ibidemfilms, i.e. the company that produced the film "The Strawberry Tree" (http://www.imdb.com/company/co0349274/).

Please check here: http://en.ibidemfilms.org/films.html (bottom of the page)

I am the author of the image. As demanded, some logos of film festivals have been removed.

I (again) kindly request its undeletion.

Many thanks,

--Bbaxit (talk) 09:25, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

 Support Acceptable license. But the file name should be changed. Thuresson (talk) 14:16, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, I can easily do that! --Bbaxit (talk) 15:31, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
@Bbaxit: Restored and renamed: File:The Strawberry Tree.jpg --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:46, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: as above. --Yann (talk) 14:35, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Красный Марс.jpg

Почему этот файл удаляют? Я указал сайт источник и сайт издательства. Также уведомил издательство https://eksmo.ru/fanzon/ о переводе статьи. И лицензия должна быть правильная. Очень прошу восстановить его!  :)

--Zeka3535 (talk) 12:03, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Not deleted yet. --Yann (talk) 14:34, 10 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Files uploaded by Gabarro marion

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: A valid OTRS permission has been provided – ticket:2017053110010292. As an OTRS agent (verify), I will make sure that the permission is enough to keep the picture(s) (media work + depicted work), update the license (if needed) and add the appropriate OTRS template when this gets restored. Feel free to notify me and thank you in advance. AntonierCH (d) 13:55, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

@AntonierCH: All your links leaded to broken redirects. I restored the last five (Hymne a la vie to Tour odeon) in their latest positions please add the OTRS templates. The others doesn't seem to be deleted yet and they do have the template added already. Please check if I am correct and write back to confirm that we restored all files which have permission according to that ticket. Thank you. --Mates (talk) 20:42, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
@Mates: Thank you, this looks good. I will add the appropriate templates to clarify that the depicted work is also freely licensed --AntonierCH (d) 08:24, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: closing after confirmation. --Mates (talk) 14:58, 10 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Tabatière et étui-cachet de Louis Champy.JPG

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This is very likely PD, since Louis Champy died in 1831 and copyright holder is certainly dead more than 100 years ago. AntonierCH (d) 09:02, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 14:29, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Lady Gaga Born This Way - Tacoma, Joanne World Tour 2.jpg

The picture's source is Flickr, where it was uploaded by a nice girl who attended the event. I asked her to change the license to Attribution if she willing to let the photo tobe used. She agreed, and then I uploaded the picture. I see no reason for the deletion. Flickr link: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ginatee/36312957731/in/dateposted/

--Sricsi (talk) 17:50, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: no reason to delete, let alone speedy delete. --Yann (talk) 17:59, 10 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Lady Gaga Born This Way - Tacoma, Joanne World Tour 1.jpg

The picture's source is Flickr, where it was uploaded by a nice girl who attended the event. I asked her to change the license to Attribution if she willing to let the photo tobe used. She agreed, and then I uploaded the picture. I see no reason for the deletion. Flickr link: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ginatee/36450038845/in/photostream/

--Sricsi (talk) 17:53, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: no reason to delete, let alone speedy delete. --Yann (talk) 17:59, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Works by Lynn Gilbert

Permission received Ticket:2017080610009416 4nn1l2 (talk) 15:38, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. 4nn1l2: ✓ Done --Yann (talk) 18:16, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Sam Lowes 2017.jpg

Hi, I'm the Press Officer of the Aprilia Racing Team. Every picture I add to Wikimedia is free for this kind of use and has no copyright. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndreaZeta (talk • contribs) 08:10, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your donation of copyright material. This will need to be properly logged through our OTRS system, if you could confirm via e-mail to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org our OTRS agents will talk you through the process and can advise on any Attribution or By-Line credits you may wish to establish for your material. Nick (talk) 10:25, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: OTRS permission is required. Daphne Lantier 19:42, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Yellow Sticky Notes Poster.jpg

I own the copyright to this image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meditatingbunny (talk • contribs) 17:29, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: OTRS permission is required. Daphne Lantier 19:41, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Prof. Tony Jun Huang.jpg

Permission received Ticket:2017080310014764 4nn1l2 (talk) 21:59, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

@4nn1l2: ✓ Done but recheck your ticket. The exif data shows a different name as copyright holder. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:34, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
@Hedwig in Washington: Thank you for the heads-up. I will investigate more and have the file deleted if need be. 4nn1l2 (talk) 13:45, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: restored. Daphne Lantier 19:41, 10 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Asrarkhan.jpg

Dear Wikimedia commons, I would like you to undelete the picture i uploaded named Asrarkhan.jpg this picture is taken by me and i am the owner of this image then how can i am violating the copyright law by uploading an image which is taken by myself? i don't understand? the image is of my father, who is a politician and journalist, and as a picture of public figure this image seems to stand within the laws.

i request you to please undelete my file

thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ishankhan (talk • contribs) 22:47, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Please use the process outlined at Commons:OTRS to verify that you own the copyright. You may be asked to submit the original photo with Exif data, not this version that you downloaded from Facebook. Thuresson (talk) 19:34, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: OTRS permission is required. Daphne Lantier 19:41, 10 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Antonio_Castellanos_Mata.jpg

I have seen that the photo of Antonio Castellanos Mata has been deleted because one of Wikipedia administrators suspected the violation of the copyright law. I would like to assure that there is no violation of the copyright here. I am Elena Grekova, the widow of Antonio Castellanos. His colleagues from the University of Seville, members of Antonio's research group, asked me for a photo of Antonio they wished to put in the Wikipedia and also at the group webpage at the University of Seville website. The photo which was deleted was made by me in St. Petersburg (one can see there some Russian books in the library) in 2004 and I explicitly gave all the permissions to Antonio's colleagues to use this photo. Therefore, no one could complain about the copyright violation in this case. It was a sad surprise for me to see it deleted. I do not know how to prove it but I just wanted to inform Wikipedia's administrators about this situation. As a member of Antonio's family, I think I have no right to edit Wikipedia's pages devoted to him, so I would like to ask to correct this error. I would be very grateful if it is possible, also for personal reasons. For any other information please contact me at elgreco@pdmi.ras.ru . — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 37.158.218.239 (talk) 00:48, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Dear Elena Grekova. Thanks for your message and apologies for the confusion over the image. Hundreds of images that are deleted every day are indeed copyright violations, so we have to be cautious in the material that we keep (see Precautionary principle) and there is the expectation of evidence when it comes to permissions. To have the image restored, we would need to have an email from you stored in our system as a way of confirming in writing that you, the copyright holder, have indeed released this image under a free license for use on Wikimedia Commons and Wikipedia projects. So, please see the template text on this page, fill it in making reference to the filename of the photograph above, and send it as an email to <permissions-commons@wikimedia.org>. The volunteers on this team will respond to you and arrange for the file to be restored (for more information see Commons:OTRS). It is easy to restore it, nothing is permanently lost. Feel free to reply below if you have further questions before emailing. Thanks, seb26 (talk) 01:23, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Muchísimas gracias, Seb26. Ahora voy a proceder con lo que me dices, espero que no me confunda. ¿Tengo que pedir después a mis colegas a poner otra vez un enlace en la página de Antonio cuando van a restorar el fichero? Muchas gracias por tu trabajo. Elena — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 37.158.218.239 (talk) 02:30, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

I have sent the licence agreement. Thank you very much, Seb! — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 37.158.218.239 (talk) 03:15, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Image can/will be automatically restored once OTRS permission is processed and confirmed. Daphne Lantier 19:40, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Laetitia Velma concert Val Cenis.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: A valid OTRS permission has been provided – ticket:2017071710008327. As an OTRS agent (verify), I will make sure that the permission is enough to keep the picture(s) (media work + depicted work), update the license (if needed) and add the appropriate OTRS template when this gets restored. Feel free to notify me and thank you in advance. AntonierCH (d) 08:29, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

@AntonierCH: ✓ Done Yann (talk) 14:31, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: restored. Daphne Lantier 19:39, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:TRK Poster.jpg

This was created by our company, Guru Studio, for the release of our new show "True and the Rainbow Kingdom". We want to release our poster as it was been posted on IMDb and other sites online already. It is our own work, we own it, please let us post it!

--Justin Olive (talk) 14:49, 10 August 2017 (UTC)Justin Olive, August 10, 2017

Justin Olive, please follow the instructions at Commons:OTRS. Thanks, seb26 (talk) 18:37, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: OTRS permission is required. Daphne Lantier 19:02, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Flag of the Israeli Army (Land Arm).svg

One of many Israeli flags here, it is {{PD-IsraelGov}}.--Antemister (talk) 17:15, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

 Support Looks like OK. Yann (talk) 18:05, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
@Antemister: There's a second deleted file mentioned at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of the Israeli Army (Land Arm).svg that looks to be closely related. Should that be restored too? Daphne Lantier 19:01, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
NO, it is the same, only in GIF, we do not need both.--Antemister (talk) 19:32, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: restored. Daphne Lantier 19:37, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Example.jpgSalvatore Ruocco mentre dirige The Stranger

Ho duplicato l'immagine. Per cui la devo cancellare. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Filmbyfilm (talk • contribs) 15:43, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Daphne. --Yann (talk) 01:30, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Am I selecting the wrong image options when uploading? This is ridiculous, this is an official image of a public official and therefore not the property of ANY private entity.

PLEASE stop picking on my image uploads unless I am actually violating a specific copyright. Why would anybody want to contribute to wikipedia if everything they add just gets deleted for no good reason??? Ridiculous.Alexbarbershop (talk) 07:36, 8 August 2017‎

 Oppose If the photographer was a California government employee then this is PD, but that fact must be proven. Many public officials have their official portraits taken by private photographers because they think, rightly or wrongly, that they will get a more flattering image. Note also that your broad assertion is actually true only of official portraits taken by the employees of the US Federal Government and four states. All other official portraits are under copyright until expiration. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:39, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, James - it is an official portrait, you can see that it is a higher resolution version of the exact same portrait shown on the official county website: https://www.lacounty.gov/government/supervisors/kathryn-barger

Hopefully this will be considered sufficient evidence as to the PD status for the image to be undeleted.Alexbarbershop (talk) 02:05, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done What matters is not if the photo is an "official photo" or not. Thuresson (talk) 05:45, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Victor Fink Book Covers.jpg

The file contains covers of the books published in the Soviet Union before 1973, when the USSR signed the Universal Copyright Convention. Moreover, according to the Soviet copyright law, the copyright of a published work lasted only 15 years after the author's death.

Therefore, they are not the subject of copyright. --Doctor Gregory (talk) 09:35, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose First, I would not restore this even if it were not a copyvio -- it is too small to be really useful and is blurred. There is no reason why this sort of image should not be tack sharp.

Second, I see no WP article on Fink. I see only a smattering of Google hits. Amazon does not carry any works by him, so whatever his importance may have been 50 years ago, he is forgotten. That suggests strongly that his book covers are out of scope as not useful for any educational purpose.

Finally, I see nothing at Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory#Russia_and_former_Soviet_Union which even hints that the applicable law is pma 15. In fact, the rule is pma 70 and since Fink died in 1973, these will be under copyright until 1/1/2044 unless it can be shown that the copyright to the covers lies with the publisher, not Fink, in which case it will probably last until 70 years after the publication of each of these editions, but that has yet to be proven. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:56, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

If he was a published author, he would be in scope for Wikipedia and also for us, regardless of Google hits. Part of an educational mission is to try to preserve the memory of such people, not forget them just because they do not appear online (especially those for non-English authors, where fewer works are online thus far and they are harder to search for, since you may have to search in Cyrillic, etc.). And if the only available photo is small and blurry, we should keep it until we get something better. He does have a Wikipedia article -- ru:Финк, Виктор Григорьевич. Something like this is way, *way* within scope.
However, while Soviet copyright law was 15 years after death, more recent Russian law has retroactively restored copyright to a much longer term. It sounds like Fink was born in Odessa, lived in Paris quite a bit, and also Moscow. Whichever country of those his books were published in, the copyright is today 70 years from the author's death for any of his works. Both Russia and Ukraine retroactively restored copyright to 50 years after the author's death in the early 1990s ; this was a requirement to join the Berne convention. That means that even though the 15 pma term may have expired, copyright was restored going forward. Both Russia and Ukraine later non-retroactively extended copyright to 70 pma (meaning that if a work was still under the 50-years-after-death copyright in the early 2000s, then the term was extended to 70 years after death, but not if the 50 year term had previously expired). Russia later made the 70 year term retroactive as well. France, as with all EU countries, was at least 50pma to begin with, and retroactively restored works to 70pma in the 1990s. So, if these covers were the work of Fink himself, they are all still under copyright. If they were the work of anonymous people at the publishing companies, they would still have a copyright of 70 years from publication. It's possible some of those have expired, although anything published after 1946 would likely still have a U.S. copyright even if they have since expired in Russia/Ukraine (since the U.S. retroactively restored works in 1996 if they were still under copyright in the foreign country on that date, and the terms would have been 50 years from publication then). So... we would need to know the authorship of the covers. If by Fink, they are still under copyright. If anonymous, we would need to know the publication country and date, they would likely have to be from before at least 1946. Carl Lindberg (talk) 12:35, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
I withdraw my objection on the grounds of Scope, thank you for pointing out the article. The quality objection is debatable, but, as Carl has verified, it is moot, because there is a clear copyright problem. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:17, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for doing research on the subject. Unfortunately, deletion of the file seems to be inevitable, but I'd like to make some things clear.
Firstly, neither Victor Fink is forgotten, nor his works are useless; his original works are in demand and his translations from French are still in print. Information about him in English is in An Anthology of Jewish-Russian Literature. Two Centuries of Dual Identity in Prose and Poetry. Vol. 1: 1801-1953. Edited, selected, and cotranslated, with introductory essays by Maxim D. Shrayer. Armonk, NY, London: M.E. Sharpe, Inc., 2007. — P. 361-364. ISBN 978-0-7656-0521-4.
Secondly, the file in question is of good quality, unlike File:Victor Fink.jpg, which is really blurred, and which is nominated for deletion.
Now about the authorship of the book covers. There are 8 of them in the file. All books were published in the USSR; the books in the first row were published in 1925, 1931, 1932, and 1942, in the second row -- in 1966 (two books), 1962, and 1968. Copyright in the USSR belonged to the publisher, not to the author/translator/artist/designer.
I hate seeing the files deleted, but by no means want to violate the law. --Doctor Gregory (talk) 21:18, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
We clearly have very different standards for quality. 676 × 509 pixels would be small for a scan of one of these covers and is very much too small for all of them. I would expect to see that, when magnified, all of the smaller print on the covers was legible, which it is not here, and the edges of all of the lettering to be crisp, rather than fuzzy. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:27, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Most images on Wikipedia articles are rendered at less than a 500 pixel resolution. So, any image that big is still useful for an educational purpose. If it's too small for even a Wikipedia article thumbnail, that gets more arguable. We would of course prefer larger, so that people can look at the more detailed larger-resolution image, but that does not put the smaller images out of scope if they can still be used on a Wikipedia article. If they are additionally blurry at that resolution, that can be more arguable as well. File:Victor Fink.jpg is in scope too at that resolution, though it likely has other copyright issues. For something like book covers, even small thumbnails are useful for identification purposes and can be used on book listings, etc. To me, they would have to be unrecognizable as that particular book cover to fall out scope. Reading the lettering is highly preferred, but not a requirement to be useful. Carl Lindberg (talk) 14:37, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
I can't see the image, so I can't say for sure, but such use would not likely violate the law -- it would almost certainly be fair use of the book covers. However, Wikimedia Commons does not accept works which are only legal due to fair use, as they are not "free" -- we want works which can be used in all situations. U.S. fair use is fairly broad, but does not apply in most other countries. So, it's more of a policy issue -- we need works which are either licensed by the copyright owner, or where copyright is currently expired. Even if the copyright was owned by the publisher, the copyright would still exist -- we care about the author because that determines the *length* of copyright, and when it expires, regardless of who actually owns it. It's possible the retroactive Russian laws changed who owns the restored copyright, but the main issue is does that copyright exist or not. If it does, actual ownership of the copyright would matter if we can get a license from that person/entity, but most of the time we have to wait for copyright to expire. If a human author was known, the copyright term is based on their lifetime; if published without a human author being credited, and (in most countries) if the human author did not become known in the subsequent 70 years, it would be anonymous and the term is usually based on when it was published. It sounds like the bottom row doesn't have much hope either way. I may have found a thumbnail cache version on Google Images -- if so, the top left and top right book covers appear to be lettering-only, and laid out in normal lines -- as such, those book covers are likely {{PD-ineligible}} to begin with, so no copyright would exist, and individually those should be OK. The other two on the top row may qualify for {{PD-Russia}}, but that would depend on demonstrating anonymous status, which is different than simply not knowing -- it would depend on the cover author being someone other than Fink who died before the 1940s, or not credited on the publication and not becoming generally known in the subsequent 50 years. Information like that can be hard for non-Russians to search for and find out. Some Wikipedias do allow fair-use images, if there was an article specifically about the book or something like that -- but that is up to the policy of each Wikipedia. Carl Lindberg (talk) 14:37, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: per Carl and Jim. I can make the file available for transfer to local wikis that have Fair Use, if requested. --Storkk (talk) 10:57, 11 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

undelete.jpg

--Deepaksinghsilvassa (talk) 10:22, 11 August 2017 (UTC)--Deepaksinghsilvassa (talk) 10:22, 11 August 2017 (UTC)--Deepaksinghsilvassa (talk) 10:22, 11 August 2017 (UTC)--Deepaksinghsilvassa (talk) 10:22, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: There is no request here. User has uploaded only one file, and it has not been deleted, so there is nothing to do here. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:31, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:KAS-Zehlendorf-Bild-4422-1.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This file belongs to a cooperation project initiated by the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung and Wikimedia Germany. It was deleted by Admin User:Daphne Lantier per COM:ADVERT. Since pretty much all images donated/uploaded by the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung are CDU related campaign posters, they are by definition (political) advertisement - but also important and widely used historical sources. That's why I'd argue that COM:ADVERT doesn't really apply here. Thanks --KAS-ACDP (talk) 08:09, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose I agree that COM:ADVERT does not apply. However, there is no evidence that the uploader or the source have the right to freely license the image. The source is an archive, which may own the physical poster, but usually will not have the right to license it. That right will belong to the photographer or to the campaign that created the poster. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:37, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 Comment Jim, we are the CDU's one and only offical archive. For all practical purposes we offically represent and make accessible the party's historical legacy including its archival records & fonds, documents, AV-material, photos, posters, in short: also everything created during and for election campaigns. See the CDU's multimedia portal: "Auf der Suche nach älterem oder historischem Bildmaterial? CDU-Bildmaterial der vergangenen Jahre und Jahrzehnte wird vom Archiv für Christlich-Demokratische Politik der Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung verwaltet. Bitte wenden Sie sich bei einer entsprechenden Suchanfrage an die dortigen Kollegen. Kontaktdaten und weitere Informationen über: www.kas.de". --KAS-ACDP (talk) 10:10, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose Autor = CDU ist weder eine gültige Autorenangabe für die Fotografie noch das Endprodukt. Siehe § 28 und insb. § 29 Urhg. Ein Archiv sollte grundlegende Daten wie Autoren zur Hand haben. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 15:23, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 Comment ohne jetzt in Details archivischer Theorie und Praxis abzugleiten: Die Metadatenstruktur mit Autor=CDU etc. ist dem Workflow mit Massenexport aus unser Datenbank und Batchimport nach Commons geschuldet. Weitergehende Informationen auch zu Werkbeteiligten finden sich idR im Feld "Description". Im Übrigen finde ich es doch erstaunlich, wie energisch seit Neuestem, so jüngst auch hier, gegen unsere Uploads vorgegangen wird. Angesichts einer beachtlichen Nutzung und unserer grundsätzlichen Sympathie für Open Knowledge wollten wir die Kooperation künftig sogar noch ausbauen und weiteres Material liefern - bislang scheiterte dies lediglich an knappen internen Ressourcen. Wenn das gar nicht gewünscht sein sollte, könnten wir uns die Mühe natürlich auch ersparen - dies wäre aber wirklich schade (pinging auch User:JeLuF und User:Mathias Schindler (WMDE) als damals Beteiligte sowie User:John Weitzmann (WMDE)...) --KAS-ACDP (talk) 15:51, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 CommentOhne jetzt in geltendes Recht abzugleiten: Bitte § 28 und § 29 UrhG nachlesen und dann Angriffe starten. Wir operieren hier im Rahmen der geltenden Gesetze, interne Probleme / Workflow entbinden nicht vom UrhG. DA hilft auch das pingen der halben WMDE nichts. Keiner hat mich lieb - Kommentare wie oben sollte die KAS sich doch ersparen, einfach nur peinlich. Sollte die KAS Hilfe beim Hochladen benötigen kann Commons sicherlich Hilfestellung leisten. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 16:49, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 Comment Wow. Wäre ich als privater Nutzer diesen Tonfall nicht durchaus schon gewöhnt, würde ich mich als Institution hier wahrscheinlich doch arg wundern... Natürlich hat die Community beim Hochladen geholfen. Und nicht zu knapp. Und natürlich war das Feldmapping und die Darstellung der Metadaten auch abgesprochen und koordiniert. --KAS-ACDP (talk) 19:55, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 Comment Only half-following the above with my barely adequate German, so someone should feel free to tell me if I'm off base. It seems to me that:
  • I agree that COM:ADVERT does not apply.
  • Someone took the photo, which would be inherently copyrighted under the Berne Convention.
  • Either (1) they signed the copyright over to the party or (2) they merely licensed it and retained copyright.
  • In either case, it should be possible to accurately credit the photographer (and probably the poster designer as well, for whom similar issues arise, though I think the design of the poster barely hits the threshold for copyright)
  • If they signed the copyright over to the party, we should get at least an explicit statement here to that effect; evidence, or at least a formal statement, sent per COM:OTRS/de would probably also be a good idea. Still doesn't make the party the author, though they may grant a license.
  • If they did not sign the copyright over to the party, then clearly we would need the copyright holder to send email per COM:OTRS/de granting a license. Assuming it's not the only time that photographer worked for the CDU, they might simplify things for the future by saying that your account is welcome to upload and offer licenses on their behalf for any CDU-related photography. - Jmabel ! talk 22:44, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
@Jmabel and KAS-ACDP: FYI: Transfer of copyright is restricted by German law, the only way to transfer is by inheritance. That's why I mentioned § 28 und § 29 UrhG. This file actually has three potential authors: 1) the photographer of the portrait 2) the photographer of the background 3) the person who put it all together. Just to state that the author is the party is morally wrong and unlawful. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:32, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
Btw.: "copyright" refers to two different things in German: a) Urheberrecht (which cannot be transferred - only by inheritance) and Nutzungsrechte (which can be transferred) --KAS-ACDP (talk) 06:42, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

 Support I suggest to undelete as there seems to be a consensus that the original deletion reason is not applicable. The historical campaign posters are clearly realistically useful for an educational purpose, as politicians tend to be public figures. Next we should try to work together to fix the issues with the image attributions. --Dschwen (talk) 13:48, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per my last comment above. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:54, 11 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:OttawaRowingClubCA025374 8x10.jpg

Good day,

The Archives Services of the City of Ottawa (Canada) provided an electronic copy of the picture to the Ottawa Rowing Club due to its historical importance for the organization. The picture was taken by a photographer of the Ottawa Journal on September 22, 1951 and published in their newspaper on September 24, 1951. The City of Ottawa archives number for the picture is CA025374.

The first attempt to load this picture on the wiki site did not include the above-mentioned information, hence the reason why it was deleted. I was able to obtain the above-mentioned information recently and were provided in my second attempt to load the picture to the wiki page.

I hope the information provided herein will suffice to reload the picture on the webpage.

Sincerely,

Eric Aubin member of the Ottawa Rowing Club Ottawa, Ontario Canada — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eric ottawa (talk • contribs) 01:56, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Do you still claim that the copyright owner has released this photo under a Creative Commons CC-BY-SA license? If so, on what ground? Thuresson (talk) 04:46, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose If the Ottawa Journal credited the photographer, then the law in Canada is 50 years pma, so, unless the photographer died before 1967, the image is still under copyright. If the Journal did not credit the photographer, then it probably can be considered an anonymous work, in which case the work is PD. So, in order to restore the image here you must show that the photographer was not credited. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:15, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim. --Storkk (talk) 11:05, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

8 files for which we now have the OTRS request

Can someone please undelete the following files?

  1. file:Rama Devi punishes, her son, Shekhar.jpg
  2. file:Vanaja and Radhamma, servants, in the landlady's kitchen.jpg
  3. file:Vanaja feeding her infant.jpg
  4. file:Vanaja rests in a Kuchipudi dance costume.jpg
  5. file:Vanaja learns a Kuchipudi dance jati from Rama Devi.jpg
  6. file:Vanaja dances Igiri Nandini to invoke Goddess Durga.jpg
  7. file:Vanaja Sewing by the light of a lantern.jpg
  8. file:Yadigiri, a farmhand, challenges Vanaja when she hangs her clothes on the landlady's line.jpg

These files have been deleted last December because there was no OTRS permission. This problem has been fixed now: The copyright owner, whom I had originally contacted in the matter, has filled out the E-mail template for release of rights to a file and sent it to OTRS yesterday at 22:37 UTC, with me on CC.

(In case anyone is curious: The pictures are from the film Vanaja, and I would like to add them, or some of them, to that article.) SebastianHelm (talk) 06:37, 11 August 2017 (UTC)


  •  Oppose If a free license has been sent to OTRS, then the file will be restored automatically when and if the email is received, processed, and approved. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.
If the message was sent to the English language version of OTRS and the email has been properly received there the sender will receive an automatic reply with the ticket number. If the sender has not had a reply, please check that it was sent correctly and try again. Other language versions may or may not provide the automatic reply..     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:40, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Request has been retracted.

Never mind. Sorry, Jim, for any inconvenience, and thank you for volunteering your time. I only posted this here because I assumed it was a cleaner way than resubmitting; I thought it would save server space and, if anything, be easier to handle than reviewing new files. Now that I learned that, contrary to my intention, this path creates significantly more effort for all volunteers, I am retracting the request and submitting the files from scratch, according to the following slightly corrected list:

  1. file:Rama Devi punishes her son, Shekhar.jpg
  2. file:Vanaja and Radhamma, servants, in the landlady's kitchen.jpg
  3. file:Vanaja feeding her infant.jpg
  4. file:Vanaja rests in a Kuchipudi dance costume.jpg
  5. file:Vanaja learns a Kuchipudi dance jati from Rama Devi.jpg
  6. file:Vanaja dances Igiri Nandini to invoke Goddess Durga.jpg
  7. file:Vanaja Sewing by the light of a lantern.jpg
  8. file:Yadigiri, a farmhand, challenges Vanaja when she hangs her clothes on the landlady's line.jpg

It might also help if I add why this matters to me. I am not someone who wants to push an agenda, but a long standing editor on various Wikimendia projects with an active interest in helping us get good pictures. Years ago, I saw that movie and was so impressed that I told my friends about it, and naturally also started improving its Wikipedia article. In the process, I turned to the director with the request for film still. He granted that request last year, but unfortunately at a a time when I wasn't active on Wikipedia, so that the deadline for the copyright was missed. – SebastianHelm (talk) 18:36, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

User talk:Daphne Lantier

Please restore the following pages:

Also any deleted archives and related pages.

Reason: The history of these pages should be open to examination, in light of recent events. Guanaco (talk) 18:55, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Talk page and archived talk pages at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 has been undeleted or has not been deleted in the first place. I can not find any other archive page to undelete for now. Thuresson (talk) 22:30, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
I've undeleted userpage. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 23:10, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: Userpage undeleted for whoever that wants to examine it. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 23:10, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:BSicon cdBHF.svg

to match other quarter-width icons BSicons --Rowan03 (talk) 00:24–00:29, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

 Support OK for me. Yann (talk) 01:31, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above request. --Yann (talk) 15:15, 12 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:GAMEXPOWebLogo3.png was posted with permission.

Howdy, folks.

As with many of the other game conventions I reviewed at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_gaming_conventions which include copyrighted logos, I would like to include the logo for GAMEXPO in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GAMEXPO.

I followed the specific example of the logo posted to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_by_Southwest and I'm confused about why the logo that I have uploaded (with permission from the owner and organizer of GAMEXPO, Vince Guzman.

If I overlooked some proper wiki etiquette, I apologize. Please point me at steps and I'll follow them.

Thanks.

DavidReedWrites (talk) 22:07, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose The South by Southwest image is hosted on WP:EN as fair use. Fair use is impossible on Commons. In order to use the subject logo on WP:EN you must either (a) upload it to WP:EN and follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content or (b) have the copyright owner of the logo (probably Mr. Guzman) send a free license using OTRS. After that message is received, processed, and approved (which may take several weeks or longer), the image will be restored here. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:46, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 15:12, 12 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Internal divisions of Germany 1944.png

Following a dispute over the accuracy of File:Greater German Reich NS Administration 1944.png I posted a derivative work of said file which, in my view, corrects certain obvious errors ("Francfort" for Frankfurt etc.) and removes unnecessary anachronistic additions (such as a thick anachronistic 1937 border in a 1944 map, etc. etc..). I attempted to do so on the original file, but the uploader Exec reverted me (and posted a bunch of overbearing warnings and insults). So I worked on the thing for a while, and posted an alternative for editors (as is recommended in our guidelines, I believe).

The particulars of the dispute shouldn't be rehashed here, though, as I believe its obvious on the face of it that the modification introduces significant changes, i.e. is not a mere clone, and can in fact be useful alongside Exec's "proprietary" variant. Even though the file is basically public domain and available for adaptation (CC BY-SA 3.0 DE), Exec's conduct towards anyone attempting to modify/correct it in any way is consistently aggressive, defensive, and frankly childish.. More to the point - his deletion request(s) have no basis in policy whatsoever.

Please reverse the deletion on those grounds. I invested considerable work fixing the map, so at the very least I would request a temporary undeletion (though obviously I don't think it should be deleted at all). --DIREKTOR (TALK) 12:08, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Vacation :) --DIREKTOR (TALK) 12:30, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
  • @Jcb: The second section of that DR was only open for 6 days, 7 hours, and 31 minutes, from 04:34, 3 June 2017 (UTC) to 12:05, 9 June 2017 (UTC). You closed it 16 hours and 29 minutes too early. Why did you do that? Kindly close DRs that are not about obvious copyvios only "after seven days" as per COM:DR#Closing_discussions and COM:D#Closure.   — Jeff G. ツ 12:50, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment - not a strong opinion on what should be done here. If there may be a chance that this would be useful in a Wikipedia article, I would not oppose undeletion - Jcb (talk) 13:14, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
    • Well, I specifically intended it for the infobox on en:Nazi Germany, as part of an old project to improve the quality of WWII maps (e.g. the current locator map was added as part of that effort). Back then I also found Exec's map at deWiki, and brought it over to enWiki (replacing an older, less-detailed map). Later I saw some errors, and perhaps some room for improvement.. tried to add my contribution, got reverted, uploaded the "fixed" (in my view) version separately. Exec seems to think I shouldn't/can't do that. That's the whole story. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 13:29, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Uh... sorry to bother you again fellas, but.. is that the latest version? From June 2017? Because this version does not incorporate the vast majority of my edits. Notice it still says "Francfort" e.g. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 14:08, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

@Jcb: Please restore all the versions.   — Jeff G. ツ 14:16, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
There are no other versions that were deleted, unless I am overlooking something obvious... are they by any chance in the history of File:Greater_German_Reich_NS_Administration_1944.png? Storkk (talk) 14:25, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
Are you looking for this file: File:Administrative divisions of Germany, February 1944.png - Jcb (talk) 14:30, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
Yup, my apologies (that one's for February/early 1944). I've been hoping to copy-paste the grammar fixes over to that file - thanks again! --DIREKTOR (TALK) 15:25, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:AMA Lessig and Wales 11899764 878342075584040 5481160341912772669 n.png.jpg

image was extracted from this image, rest of media spliced into the graphic would qualify as pd-shape and pd-text.

Graphic even included a watermark citing the photograph as c.c. 2.0 work of Joi Ito.

It was ridiculous for this to be deleted so hastily, a mere nine minutes after I was given notice of its nomination for deletion (and before I could even reply)

SecretName101 (talk) 20:55, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

 Support This seems to be OK. Yann (talk) 01:29, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
 Support The source given in the file description was Facebook, which is copyrighted, so the deletion was entirely correct. Images taken from copyrighted sites qualify for speedy deletion. The fact that it appears with a CC-BY license on Flickr was not disclosed until the mention above. The image would not have been deleted if the uploader had given the CC-BY source instead of a copyrighted one. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:55, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 18:06, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Chip Flaherty, headshot.jpg

Request undeletion because I hold copyright to image in question. Don't understand why this was deleted.

Thank you. OuterCrossing (talk) 22:05, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

  • OuterCrossing, we have to tread carefully with photos that have already been published on the Internet. If this is your work, can you please read the instructions at Commons:OTRS, use the release template here and write an email to <permissions-commons@wikimedia.org> (a) from an email address professionally associated/associated with your online presence (Londonderry Films?) , and (b) attaching the original camera file to the email? We'd love to host the image but need more info to be able to trust it is actually available under a free license. Cheers, seb26 (talk) 01:10, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
 Oppose Agreed. The actual copyright holder -- usually the photographer -- must send a free license using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:19, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: photographer must confirm license via OTRS, after which an OTRS agent will request the file's undeletion. --Storkk (talk) 16:46, 13 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:.maria ostrowska.jpg

I have granted full law to use this image in the article by gdanska.zhp.pl which posses copyrights — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChorGda (talk • contribs) 18:12, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: The copyright holder should confirm the license by following the procedures at OTRS, at which point an OTRS agent will request the file's undeletion. --Storkk (talk) 16:49, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Dr. Roberto Bergamaschi.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Ticket:2017081110013875 alleges permission for this file. Request temporary undeletion to assess the validity of that allegation, mark as {{subst:OR}} or otherwise appropriately, and ping me.   Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:20, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Scratch that... @Arthur Crbz: the file is attached to the first article in the ticket. I don't see a reason for temporary undeletion in this case. --Storkk (talk) 17:03, 13 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Prof. Dr. Mehmet Ayhan Kuzu.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Ticket:2017050810018417 alleges permission for this file. Request temporary undeletion to assess the validity of that allegation, mark as {{subst:OR}} or otherwise appropriately, and ping me.   Arthur Crbz (talk) 17:41, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Arthur Crbz: ✓ Done. Please ping me if you need it re-deleted. --Storkk (talk) 18:00, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Shannon Wynne.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Available on Flickr and released under a free license[10]. See also Ticket:2017080510012361. Arthur Crbz (talk) 20:03, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done @Arthur Crbz: Please add the final OTRS tag. De728631 (talk) 20:44, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Acontias lineatus00.jpg

I requested undeletion of this file in a previous post and received a negative response from a user who seems to have been blocked....see https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Daphne_Lantier Alouise Lynch (talk) 19:47, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose The issue is still the same: this image appears elsewhere on the web (e.g. here) without a free licence. In your previous request you claimed that the Bionerds company is owned by you. However, we have no way to verify this by means of your Wikimedia account. Anyone could create an account with your name and actually we get a lot of imposters and fans each day who claim to be someone else. So for you and us to be on the safe side, please send an email from a account associated with Bionerds.co.za. Please see COM:OTRS for details. Once the email has been processed and approved by our team of volunteers, the image will be restored, but this may take some time because there is already a huge backlog. De728631 (talk) 21:06, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Daphne's sockpuppetry did not affect your request. Please follow the instructions you were given and send a permission to OTRS. --Mates (talk) 21:07, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Example.jpg

Nonono — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hentaiisthegreatest (talk • contribs) 09:32, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

  • Signing your posts on talk pages is required and it is a Commons guideline to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ 21:51, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
@Hentaiisthegreatest: Which of your ten uploads are you concerned about? They were all deleted.   — Jeff G. ツ 21:51, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: gibberish request for unspecific file. --Storkk (talk) 23:38, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Sloan Digital Sky Survey

Per http://www.sdss.org/collaboration/#image-use, the SDSS has now moved to CC-BY as the license to apply to all images hosted on their website. The previous reason to delete no longer exists. --Fæ (talk) 10:01, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose Actually, the previous reason still exists, see http://classic.sdss.org/gallery/usage_policy.html. I suggest that before we restore these we ask Sloan which policy they intend to use and to take down the other one. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:28, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

I'm the Spokesperson of SDSS, and I state that the current license posted here at the Image Gallery supercedes that old one. I will see if I can get the old website edited to reflect that asap. :) KarenLMasters (talk) 10:48, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

 Comment Doing... Yann (talk) 01:30, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. A specific template may need to be added. --Yann (talk) 02:29, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:UN SOLO CORAZÓN (3000).jpg

ES UNA FOTO DE MI AUTORÍA... --John Frómeta (talk) 04:08, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose Taking a photo of an album cover does not give you the right to post it here. Policy requires that in the case of album covers, the producer must send a free license using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:46, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Non free image uploaded by person who is unable to release the image freely. --Nick (talk) 09:52, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:В.В.Мартынов (8).jpg

This photo was made in 1998 by my scientific supervisor, A. Hardzei, who is one of students of V.V. Martynov. It was published in the programm of conferense dedicated to V.V. Martynov (Program of conference) and after that in Conference proceedings (Научные чтения, посвященные Виктору Владимировичу Мартынову : сб. науч. тр. Вып. 3 / редкол.: Г.А. Цихун (отв. ред.), А.Н. Гордей (зам. отв. ред.) [и др.]. – Минск : РИВШ, 2016). Author of the photo, my scientific supervisor, A. Hardzei, asked me to upload this photo, because the article dedicated to V.V. Martynov do not have any. AryanAskary (talk) 08:31, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose All uploaded photos must have a copyright license. Thuresson (talk) 09:39, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
 Oppose The actual photographer must send a free license using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:44, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Please contact OTRS via e-mail permissions-commons@wikimedia.org from an official e-mail address to discuss releasing this material under a free licence. --Nick (talk) 09:52, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Sarmad.jpg

This file is v useful for people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarmad Mustafa Jatoi (talk • contribs) 17:42, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose Active contributors are allowed to upload "small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal Commons user page...". You are neither an active contributor nor was the image in use. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:50, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Jim. The use of Commons to host small numbers of out of scope images (personal images and the like) is a privilege reserved for active contributors to Commons and the wider Wiki community. We're not a free hosting service for drive-by users, unfortunately. --Nick (talk) 09:49, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Pl faultymaps.png

Deleted as out of scope, but it has been linked/used in a discussion on en.wikipedia since 2008. -FASTILY 18:10, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

 Support There is a link in the "Maps" subsection of the discussion mentioned by Fastily: [[:Image:Pl faultymaps.png]]. While not displayed as an image, the file was being used at the time of the deletion discussion so it was in scope. De728631 (talk) 21:15, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: Per request/rationale. --Nick (talk) 09:45, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Thamrin 1.jpg

These images are photographed by me, those are private property. I sought verbal permission from the owners before capturing those pics. I failed to realize why those pics nominated and deleted.---Reza — Preceding unsigned comment added by M R Karim Reza (talk • contribs) 02:01, 14 August 2017‎ (UTC)

  • Signing your posts on talk pages is required and it is a Commons guideline to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ 04:18, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Please reread Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by M R Karim Reza. COM:FOP#Indonesia is quite clear, there is no FOP for buildings in Indonesia. The buildings' owners don't hold copyright, their architects do. Please also have the architects email us permission via OTRS with a copy to you, don't upload any more photos of buildings less than 50 years old in Indonesia until we authorize you to, and be civil.   — Jeff G. ツ 04:18, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Please ask the architects involved to contact OTRS via e-mail permissions-commons@wikimedia.org from an official e-mail address to discuss releasing this material under a free licence. COM:FOP otherwise prevents us hosting images of these buildings. --Nick (talk) 09:45, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Re: S&l trade cover.jpg

I'm the copyright holder of this image. I'd like it undeleted, please. Thank you.

--Comicfan227 (talk) 03:44, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS. @Comicfan227: Convenience link: File:S&l Trade Cover.jpg.   — Jeff G. ツ 04:23, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

--Comicfan227 (talk) 04:47, 14 August 2017 (UTC)==Re: S&l trade cover.jpg ==

As the actual copyright holder, how to I upload this image without granting the right for people to use it commercially? The OTRS system you have recommended violates my own copyright. Again, I am the creator and owner of this image, and would like to put it on the Wikipedia page for my own book. Please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Comicfan227 (talk • contribs) 04:38, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

@Comicfan227: You don't upload it here "without granting the right for people to use it commercially". Instead, you upload it to English Wikipedia for Fair Use, with a link to your website allowing use on English Wikipedia only, and not commercial use, or an email via en:WP:OTRS, which could take many weeks due to the backlog. Also, please disclose your en:WP:COI on your English Wikipedia userpage and en:Talk:Spencer & Locke. I'll post more there.   — Jeff G. ツ 05:18, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Commons does not host material which is unavailable for commercial re-use, derivative works etc. Please consider uploading to the local project, if it permits Fair Use. --Nick (talk) 09:43, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Phoner.png

The file https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Phoner.png was deleted due any license issue. Please restore the file again. I am the author of the application Phoner (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoner) and I created and uploaded the screenshot file. That picture can be shared with the Creative Commons license. --2003:A:1001:5600:1C9B:1758:3B8:298D 06:33, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Please contact OTRS via e-mail permissions-commons@wikimedia.org from an official e-mail address to discuss releasing this material under a free licence. --Nick (talk) 09:42, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Millenniumaudios.jpg

File:Trade Mark Registration document.jpg


We , Millennium Audios is one of the leading Music company in South India, We have attached the copy of the proof . Pls let know that what to do for getting the same. Hope the attached document is enough for knowing the copyright ownership of our company.if you want any more clarifications or details please let us know.


https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3AToolbarSignVector.png

By UsabilityInitiative: Trevor Parscal, Roan Kattouw White fade, red arrow and shadow done by Krinkle [GPL (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html)], via Wikimedia Commons from Wikimedia Commons — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amjithambros (talk • contribs) 06:49, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Please contact OTRS via e-mail permissions-commons@wikimedia.org from an official e-mail address to discuss releasing this material under a free licence. --Nick (talk) 09:42, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Jamesd.jpg

I can see no valid reason for deletion. The article about the person has been deleted on English WP for various reasons, however it still exists in three other languages; I can only speak for German WP, but he clearly fulfills our criteria. So I find it unacceptable simply deleting a picture following an internal procedure of enWP.--XanonymusX (talk) 22:45, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

The reason for deletion is stated quite clearly here, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jamesd.jpg. Thuresson (talk) 05:17, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
No. It is needed for the German WP article, now please tell me what the missing “educational purpose” is. Of course it has been uploaded by the person themself, like countless other photos here on Commons.--XanonymusX (talk) 10:46, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
 Oppose It seems very odd to me that the German WP has an article on a minor American personage who is far outside the scope of WP:EN. However, given that there is such an article, the reason for deletion in the DR is not valid and this should be kept if its copyright status were clear.
However, the subject, uploader and named photographer are the same person. This image was taken in 2009, when selfies were much less common than now and does not appear to be a selfie. Therefore we need a free license from the actual photographer using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:18, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
Odd? Maybe, I am used to write a lot of articles about Italian pop singers in German, which do not fulfill the criteria of itWP; in fact it has already happened that some OTRS people refused to accept a photo because they only looked at the Italian criteria and totally ignored the German article! Imo it is indeed odd that the internal procedures of some WPs should be relevant for deciding on deletion requests here on Commons. The deletion was in any case invalid and I also think that it should be obvious to everyone that it is not a copyviol, only the information given by the uploader had been incomplete. Anyway, I will contact the uploader if someone can link me the user page.--XanonymusX (talk) 14:13, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
This person is a know LGBT-activist and the son of a famous singer. That alone makes a picture of him educational valuable. Even if there wouldn't be any Wikipedia article at all. Since there are some sources about him a picture for him may be usefull for a magazine or a newspaper for example. We have a pretty clear own work claim and this picture is without doubt shot by an amateur. Natuur12 (talk) 15:12, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

I grant that the image is probably in scope, but I still doubt that it is a selfie as claimed. I think we need a clear statement from the actual photographer, whoever that might be, via OTRS. I also note that this is a eight year old image of a young man -- surely he can provide a more recent one? .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:36, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Photographer should confirm license via OTRS. --Storkk (talk) 10:22, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Zieria odorifera habit.jpg

The files File:Zieria odorifera habit.jpg, File:Zieria odorifera.jpg and File:Zieria murphyi.jpg were copied from http://bie.ala.org.au. All the images on that site have a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia license. The original images are at here and here (with the license at the bottom of the page). Gderrin (talk) 05:59, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

I've been advised that the license is unclear as to whether they are CC-BY-3.0 AU or Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial. I think the latter expired in 2011 and CC-BY-3.0 AU now applies. The files were uploaded to http://bie.ala.org.au in 2014. However I can source images from other places. No need to undelete. Gderrin (talk) 10:39, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Withdrawn by requestor. --Storkk (talk) 10:23, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Tank Rum - IMG 7068.jpg requesting undeletion of photo

Reasons for requesting undeletion:

This photo is owned by Drink Tank Ltd., LLC.

Drink Tank Ltd., LLC is the maker of the Tank Rum bottle, shown in the photo.

There are no infringements in using this photo on Wikipedia, nor any other objects in the photo that might be infringed (e.g. coconut, ocean backdrop, glass, umbrella, cherry, pineapple, etc.).

I was the one who uploaded the file in question.

You may contact the CEO of Drink Tank, Brooke Boak, at brooke@DrinkTankLtd.com for further approval, if needed.


P.S. How do I have Wiki "Alerts" sent to me via email, so that I know if an issue (like this deletion) has been made? I only found out about this deletion when scanning the site. Can I change settings in Wiki/Alerts to send me an email notifying me of the Alert?

2601:647:4900:D8C1:AC56:924F:9168:B2C2 06:56, 9 August 2017 (UTC) Brad Bishop Co-Founder Drink Tank Ltd., LLC brad@DrinkTankLtd.com +1.408.859.9299 (California)

To Brad Bishop. Thanks for your upload, but we would need confirmation via email to be able to trust that this image is available under a free license, as a post from an unregistered user on this page is not sufficient. Please see the template text at this page, fill in your name, mention the file, and send it as an email from your email account at that company to <permissions-commons@wikimedia.org>. When the team responds to your request, they will arrange for the photo to be undeleted. There is more information at Commons:OTRS. Thanks, seb26 (talk) 12:54, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
 Oppose Agreed. Both the bottle and the photo have copyrights so we need an OTRS e-mail from an authorized official of the company for the bottle and, unless the company owns the copyright for the photo, a separate license from the photographer. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:10, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
It appears this file was re-uploaded at File:Tank Rum.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log). I tagged it as NPD. seb26 (talk) 12:56, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
Not the same file, but the same issue applies -- the copyrighted photo and the copyrighted bottle. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:10, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

In order to be notified by e-mail when a message is posted on your talk page go (at the top right of any Commons page) to Preferences > User profile > Email options and check the box "Email me when a page or a file on my watchlist is changed". .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:10, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: OTRS verification required. --Storkk (talk) 10:24, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Cover HfdvK Brosch A4 1997.jpg

Die Datei zeigt eine vereinseigene Jubliäumsbroschüre. Alle Rechte liegen beim Verein, die abgebildeten Personen haben seinerzeit einer Veröffentlichung zugestimmt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agautor (talk • contribs) 07:58, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose An authorized official of the association must send a free license using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:34, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Jim, OTRS verification required. --Storkk (talk) 10:24, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Cover HfdvK Brosch A4 2012.jpg

Das Bild stellt die Titelseite einer vereinseigenen Broschüre im Jahr 2012 dar. Die Rechte liegen beim Verein. Die abgebildeten Personen haben einer Veröffentlichung zugestimmt, teilweise stammen die Fotos zudem aus Bilddatenbanken und wurden ordnungsgemäß lizenziert. Ich bitte um Wiederherstellung der gesamten Seite. Vielen Dank. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agautor (talk • contribs) 08:04, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose You say that the photographs were licensed. Most licenses for the use of photographs in brochures would limit the use to the brochure and would not give the licensee the right to freely license them as required here. In any case, an authorized official of the association must send a free license using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:33, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Jim, OTRS verification required. --Storkk (talk) 10:25, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Commons:Undeletion requests: PD-Italy?

Hi, I'm writing to ask you if these Italian cinematographic images of the eighties of the twentieth century are copyright free in the subject of the PD-Italy license?--95.245.76.76 16:55, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose The law in Italy is pma 70, so these will be under copyright for at least another 30+ years. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:00, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Jim. The confusion may have arisen because Italian copyright on film frames is 20 years pma, but the posters don't seem to be covered by the same provisions, and are likely 70 years pma. --Storkk (talk) 10:27, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Logo Emergencias Sanitarias redimensionar.gif

Was deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Logo Emergencias Sanitarias redimensionar.gif in which I sought a discussion about the licensing claims, which were not resolved unfortunately. Requesting undeletion so I can raise the issue on the copyright section of the Village Pump. Thank you. —MarcoAurelio 08:49, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose I oppose restoring the image for the purpose stated since it appears at http://www.saludcastillayleon.es/ciudadanos/es/urgencias-emergencias/emergencias-sanitarias-castilla-leon/datos/imagen-corporativa which could be used for any discussion at VP.
However, if others agree, I think we can simply restore it as PD-text logo, as suggested in the DR. That would not require the consent of the uploader since if it is PD, he has no right to put any license on it. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:36, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
Hi Jameslwoodward. That's the point I wanted to make in the DR. I was not sure, otherwise I would have changed the licensing template myself, if the file could be PD-TextLogo. I'm inclined to say yes. On the other hand, usage of that logo is restricted so it should be tagged as official logo/trademarked/etc. If you think it falls under PD-TextLogo as well, then we can restore it and tag it appropriately and look through the logs where the file was used and restore it. Regards, —MarcoAurelio 11:24, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
I think it is borderline PD-text logo, so I'd like to see another opinion that was not involved in the DR.... .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:08, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: likely PD-textlogo, per Jim and Yann. --Storkk (talk) 10:31, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

LOOK7463.jpg

i took this photo with my camera. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mttbrgh (talk • contribs) 13:09, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose for two reasons: The metadata of the image file credit a certain "Li,Fu-Sheng Copyright holder www.lookphoto.idv.tw". Apart from that, the globe logo in the background poster appears to be copyrightable, so any photographer would still need a permission from the poster's designer before publishing this photo (see Commons:Derivative works). De728631 (talk) 21:26, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: per De728631, both the photographer and the poster copyright holder would have to confirm the free license by following the instructions at OTRS, at which point an OTRS agent will request the file's undeletion. --Storkk (talk) 10:34, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Aladdin Franchise Logo.png

Not sure that the shading effect alone exceeds the threshold of originality in the USA. -FASTILY 18:18, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

 Support This is a USA logo, so only USA law applies. There is no copyright in the USA for logos that are purely text, no matter how complex the font is. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:01, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: PD-textlogo. --Storkk (talk) 10:35, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Rockhold.jpg

A moderator has been claiming it as copyright. Its a wrong claim, as its not a copyright but indeed my own work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 7leumas (talk • contribs) 10:56, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: @7leumas: the file has not been deleted, so cannot be undeleted. The correct venue to comment is at Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Rockhold.jpg... but the first step is to confirm you are the photographer by following the instructions at OTRS. --Storkk (talk) 11:04, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:印军越界地点示意图.png, File:印军越界现场照片（一）.png, File:印军越界现场照片（二）.png

These photos are from P. R. China Ministry of Foreign Affairs's official paper, titled with "facts and China's position concerning Indian border troops' crossing of China-India boundary"; there's also English version available. I think these photos, as attachments of Chinese MFA's official paper, should be considered as public record, since according to Government works, "Works of the United States Government and various other governments are excluded from copyright law and may therefore be considered to be in the public domain in their respective countries." and Copyright Law of the People 's Republic of China has already stated in Article 5 that "本法不适用于：（一）法律、法规，国家机关的决议、决定、命令和其他具有立法、行政、司法性质的文件，及其官方正式译文 (This Law shall not apply to: (A) laws, regulations, decisions of state organs, decisions, orders and other documents with legislative, administrative and judicial nature, and official official translation)". Please restore them, thanks. Liouxiao (talk) 05:48, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

A photo in a magazine is not a document of a legislative, administrative or judicial nature. China's copyright law is outlined here. Thuresson (talk) 21:08, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: per Thuresson. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:37, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Clarkson 3.jpg

undelete — Preceding unsigned comment added by Londonpixels (talk • contribs) 11:43, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Not deleted yet. The author has to send a permission via COM:OTRS. --Yann (talk) 13:16, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Premio Concordia a Rami Fernández, la primera profesora gitana con diversidad funcional (04).jpg and companions

Hi all, these files (File:Premio Concordia a Rami Fernández, la primera profesora gitana con diversidad funcional (04).jpg, File:Premio Concordia a Rami Fernández, la primera profesora gitana con diversidad funcional (05).jpg and File:Premio Concordia a Rami Fernández, la primera profesora gitana con diversidad funcional (06).jpg) were deleted on the grounds of an unknown copyright violation. As no regular DR was opened, I couldn't argue anything. Could you please restore and, if appropriate, open a DR (I can't see any reason for deletion, but anyway...)? --Discasto talk 16:45, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

@Discasto: the problem was the background... Guanaco cropped out most of the potentially problematic background, then requested a "revdel" using the regular {{Copyvio}} template... the fact that it was a "revdel" request appears to have been missed by Jcb. Would you be happy with just the cropped version restored? Storkk (talk) 16:50, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
Note: it is very easy to miss a revdel request, especially when the standard {{Copyvio}} tags are used... it is usually worth considering not using the standard copyvio tags. Storkk (talk) 16:54, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
@Storkk: Sure :-) --Discasto talk 16:51, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: Guanaco's cropped versions restored. --Storkk (talk) 16:58, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Sarr-Campagne-2017.jpg

The owner of this image has sent an email to permissions-fr@wikimedia.org and has given permission to use it under the license:<CC BY-SA 4.0>. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LigueyeKat (talk • contribs) 15:48, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Procedural closure. Nothing to do here. The file has not been deleted and a valid OTRS permission was added by AntonierCH on 9 August. De728631 (talk) 17:05, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:organigramm_bundesgericht.png.jpg

Ich arbeite als Medienbeauftragter des Schweizerischen Bundesgerichts und diese Grafik ist vom Bundesgericht ohne Einschränkungen freigegeben. Beim ersten Hochladen habe ich keine ausreichende Lizenzangabe gemacht, weshalb sie wieder entfernt wurde. Ich habe in der Folge die Grafik neu geladen mit Lizenzangabe {{Copyrighted free use}}. Die Grafik wurde von Wiki wieder gelöscht. Ich bitte um Freigabe.--Pjosibger (talk) 12:02, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

1) I think this file may be PD -- it seems to be an ordinary organization chart in a standard format. The facts shown are not copyrightable and I doubt that the chart is.

2) If others do not agree with (1), then we must have a source that shows the license shown above or other evidence via OTRS that the work is not, in fact, free.

Therefore I  Support restoration under (1) and  Oppose it if (2) applies. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:22, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: per Jim (1) – public domain. File restored at File:Organigramm bundesgericht.png (dead link was provided in the section headline). --Mates (talk) 19:19, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Kevin Walker 2015.jpg

This is my own picture, I took it in Antalaya 12 of February 2015. It got a deletion request so I uploaded the original on Imgur to show it as well. I wasn't logged in on Imgur so I can't delete it from there. But I would like this to be restored since it is my own photo which I took by myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cantis86 (talk • contribs) 09:45, 14 August 2017 (UTC) --Cantis86 (talk) 09:50, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose Unfortunately, Imgur does not appear to date uploads, so I can't confirm whether the Imgur version predates or postdates the Commons version. It also does not have a name attached. Therefore, it is entirely possible that this is someone else's work which you downloaded from Imgur, cropped, and uploaded here. I would give ten to one odds that that is not the case, but it is best if you send a free license using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:34, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

The server date of the imgur file is August 8. Carl Lindberg (talk) 13:40, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
And actually, you can look a the HTML page source of an imgur page, and it shows a "datetime" when the file was created. In this case, it is "2017-08-07 08:05:05". Carl Lindberg (talk) 13:45, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

 Support Thanks, Carl. I used "image info" to look for a date, but I didn't think to look at the HTML. Always learning.... .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:15, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: Per Carl and Yann. Larger image proves ownership. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:15, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Logo dsa

this image is from my own work, and upload to my client website, which is i have permission from the owner of the website to freely use this image — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chokyrice (talk • contribs) 05:16, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: not deleted yet.@Chokyrice: Please follow the instructions on OTRS when sending the permission for the file. Thank you. --Mates (talk) 07:53, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Carl Anderson.jpg

I started the deletion request on File:Carl Anderson.jpg because the source doesn't reveal the photographer's name and the photo's location. It was deleted without one objection, but the person who deleted the image turned out to have committed sockpuppetry. I was uncertain whether to request deletion, so I discussed the image instead at COM:administrators' noticeboard. I was told that it was published in a Swedish newspaper in 1936 and that the image can be relicensed and then reinserted into pages. Pinging Thuresson and Fæ for invitation. --George Ho (talk) 14:09, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

The educational value of the photograph, along with the early date, makes it worth revisiting. Undeletion and if still there is doubt, reopening the DR, would be a good move. --Fæ (talk) 14:19, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
 Oppose The fact that INC/DL closed the DR is not really important. With the exception of the burst at the very end, they were reliable Admins. It is possible that this is a USA image and that no-notice or no-renewal applies. It is also possible, as George suggested at the DR, that it is a Swedish image, in which case {{PD-Sweden-photo}} may apply. Unfortunately, though, our Precautionary Principle requires proof beyond a significant doubt, not merely possibilities, and it is also very possible that it is a US or Swedish image that is still under copyright. Without more information, it cannot be kept on Commons. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:53, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
 Info The newspaper frontpage is available here. Thuresson (talk) 17:10, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
Not if the image was first published in the US with notice and renewal or if it is a Swedish image and the photographer can be found. There are too many uncertainties here to assume that. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:54, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Jim, this is a Swedish newspaper. Why do you want US law to apply here? Regards? Yann (talk) 14:05, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
The newspaper publication is maybe not the first publication, example all the images under the title are about Eugene O'Neill works, and were likely not owned by the newspaper and come very likely from somewhere else, likely from the USA. I don't know if that help but less cropped versions of some of the photos shown in the newspaper are available in the web : Victor Hess Carl D. Anderson. Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:02, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Yann. maybe I wasn't clear. There are three possibilities here for the source of this photo which appears to be a studio portrait:

  1. The portrait was taken in the USA before he won the Nobel. Depending on its publishing history, it may or may not be PD. This seems most likely.
  2. The portrait was taken in Stockholm by a studio hired by the Nobel Committee. This is entirely possible, and, since the Nobel Committee probably has a record of who they used for such portraits, it should be possible to see when the photographer died. This seems possible, but not a likely as (1).
  3. The portrait was taken by the newspaper. Since newspapers rarely take studio portraits, this seems least likely. Also note that it is unlikely that the Nobel Committee would claim copyright to a newspaper photo.

Since both (1) and (2) have significant uncertainties, I don't think we can restore this without more research. Note also that we have several photos of him, see Category:Carl David Anderson. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:20, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

As mentioned earlier, the front page is from when the winners were announced, a few weeks before they arrived in Sweden. Thuresson (talk) 14:20, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose As mentioned in the file history, the picture was took from here. Since the institution clearly states that they "can unfortunately not grant permissions to use portrait photos of the Nobel Laureates of 1901–2006 due to copyright restrictions" and refers to other photo agencies according to copyright information (see part Photos of Nobel Laureates) we cannot (IMHO) rely on PD-Sweden-photo being applicable in this situation. The picture in the newspaper is clearly a cropped version of that photography and hence there is no proof of who did take to original one and where. --Mates (talk) 18:57, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

In the light of findings by Mates, I decide to withdraw the request. Unless proven that the Nobel Foundation or Nobel Media is committing copyfraud, nothing can change my mind about withdrawing the request. --George Ho (talk) 19:23, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Rodney-and-Jann-logo.jpg

How can you make the determination that this is a copyright problem. Do you see the domain whois for smalltownbigdeal.com? The registrar is vardeman.com. Me. I am responsible and the owner of this content that you keep deleting. Why are we playing this game? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mvandc (talk • contribs) 17:19, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

  •  Info: Reuploaded by nominator without proof of permission, tagged for speedy deletion again. 2001:2003:54FA:D2:0:0:0:1 18:15, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose @Mvandc: We cannot verify your identity on a public forum such as this one. If you are the copyright holder, please follow the instructions on OTRS, after which an OTRS agent will request the file's undeletion. We would love to have a freely licensed TV logo! We do, however, need to ensure that copyright holder is intending to release the file under a free license. Storkk (talk) 18:42, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done per Storkk. We need a permission sent by email (COM:OTRS). Since this file was repeatedly reuploaded without proof of permission, I have protected the file name. Once the permission email has been received and evaluated, the file will be restored. De728631 (talk) 14:29, 15 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Phoner.png

Permission received Ticket:2017081410008572 4nn1l2 (talk) 19:38, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done @4nn1l2: Do you think other files from Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Phoner are affected by the ticket? Anyway please add the OTRS template to the file. --Mates (talk) 19:50, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
@Mates: Thank you. I tagged the page with the appropriate template. He also gave permission for other files which were deleted at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Phoner. Could you please restore them too? And maybe the category itself. 4nn1l2 (talk) 21:15, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done @4nn1l2: Please add the OTRS templates. De728631 (talk) 14:40, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

All files and Category:Phoner have been restored. De728631 (talk) 14:40, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Rockhold.jpg

Again I repeat, this was uploaded an year ago, with all necessary information given at that time. I do not posses the original image with me now, as it was specially used to make the wiki page. Another image that was taken down by some guy named Ellin Beltz, was the original image "Own_work_LR.png". Please have a look at the same.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 7leumas (talk • contribs) 16:00, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done The original photographers of both images need to send a permission by email as outlined in COM:OTRS. De728631 (talk) 19:43, 15 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Jianianhualong4b.jpg

Ellin Beltz nominated the linked image for deletion despite having been previously informed by other users that it, along with many other similar images, was from a Creative Commons source. It was also inaccurately claimed that the image was copied from a book. The loss of the image is a detriment to the paleontology article which it illustrates. Lythronaxargestes (talk) 17:05, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

(Unknowingly undeleted the file at the same time, copy-pasting text from there) This is a file an open-access paleontology journal called Nature Communications. Commons hosts hundreds of files from this journal, and all of them fall under the exact same license (CC-BY 4.0). I will ping the uploader of the file Lythronaxargestes and a commons admin relevant to keeping these files up FunkMonk as well as the nominator (who withdrew the mass nominations) Ellin Beltz and the deleter of the file Jcb. IJReid (talk) 17:06, 15 August 2017 (UTC) IJReid (talk) 17:07, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
For clarity, I nominated that file prior to being informed by other users (check the timestamps), otherwise the foregoing is correct. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:02, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: per request, nominated by two administrators in good faith, restoring not an issue now copyright status is clarified. --Nick (talk) 17:41, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Uni gottingen siegel.svg

Merely "having doubts" as expressed in the deletion request is not really an argument. German public universities are Körperschaften des öffentlichen Rechts (corporations under public law) in general. The university charter reveals that University of Göttingen is no exception. --Mephistolus (talk) 21:51, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

One look into the German article about the University could have removed those doubts. m( Restored and added to WD and dewiki. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 22:32, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: per Hedwig. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:53, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

On the numbers.jpgFile:On- the- numbers--Category---Matematics----.jpg

I' m asking the undelection of this file, because I hope is a correct and significative little matematic work! Then I'll add at the file a significative graphic ! Thanks! Many regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Giustino Carinci (talk • contribs) 10:12, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose This is an image of a short text. Such works are not permitted on Commons, see COM:SCOPE:

"Excluded educational content includes:
  • Files that contain nothing educational other than raw text."

.     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:46, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: obviously out of scope. I would suggest using en:Help:TeX, but nothing in this would require it. --Storkk (talk) 11:17, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Inter Universidades Rap - UNMSM.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I"ts not a "music poster" as Eugene Zelenko said. I'ts a photograph of a poster of a rap competition in my university. I did both the photo and the poster. The poster was made in wood and paper with color markers. Reggalbflow (talk) 22:29, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Please send a permission via COM:OTRS for the poster. --Yann (talk) 16:00, 16 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:The Cypher.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: The file that I uploaded is a file that I have 100% free right to use. I am the one who took the picture and I own it entirely. The file has been featured and published on other sites, but those were posts made by me as well. I put it online for anyone to use. JustinFreem (talk) 13:33, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose In cases where the image appears elsewhere without a free license, policy requires that the actual photographer must send a free license using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:45, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 15:59, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Sepsey Barna.jpg

This image was taken by me and have the person's approval to post it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pappgab (talk • contribs) 18:46, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose @Pappgab: Please follow the instructions at OTRS to confirm that fact, after which an OTRS agent will request the file's undeletion. Storkk (talk) 18:48, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Storkk. --Yann (talk) 15:59, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Francis-BRUNELLE-detoure-v3.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Ticket:2017062910014166 alleges permission for this file. Request temporary undeletion to assess the validity of that allegation, mark as {{subst:OR}} or otherwise appropriately, and ping me.   Arthur Crbz (talk) 17:12, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Arthur Crbz: ✓ Done please take it from here, and ping me to remove the temp undel template (or redelete) if required. Storkk (talk) 17:21, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Grant Kirkhope Prague.jpg

The picture was taken by my friend at the orchestral recording sessions for a video game I was working on. Can you please undelete it please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chimpos (talk • contribs) 18:58, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

@Chimpos: Please specify which file undeletion do you request. Anyway if the picture was taken by your frined then he has to send a permission to OTRS (if agreed of course). --Mates (talk) 19:05, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
File:Grant Kirkhope Prague.jpg is the only plausible target for this request, I have update the section heading accordingly.  Oppose as Mates says, please have your friend follow the instructions on OTRS. Storkk (talk) 19:28, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above, no permission. --Yann (talk) 19:45, 16 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Sabse Bada Mujrim Official Poster

This image is a Poster of My Film. I am also a Cast in This Film and I have permission to use this image. Please undelete it.

Please make contact with our OTRS e-mail system by e-mailing permissions-commons@wikimedia.org from an official e-mail address. The agents will talk you through providing permission, attribution issues and such like with you there. We can then undelete the image if everything is in order. Your alternative option is to use the poster under Fair Use on local projects that permit it, such as English Wikipedia. Nick (talk) 16:56, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Nick. --Yann (talk) 19:44, 16 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Hylas Yachts Logo.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: OTRS agent (verify) request: Permission sent with Ticket:2017070510001507. Arthur Crbz (talk) 17:39, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. @Arthur Crbz: Please add the final permission. --Yann (talk) 19:39, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Take That set design as described by Es Devlin at FutureFest in 2016.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Temporary undeletion so I can upload this to enwiki as fair use on the article en:Es Devlin. Guanaco (talk) 21:28, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Temporary restoration not required. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:04, 17 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Australian Workers Party Centre Logo.png

Please undelete this image. It was recently re-uploaded with new permissions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Principessa38 (talk • contribs) 05:29, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose Given the low ToO in Australia, this logo is clearly under copyright. Policy requires that it can be restored only if an authorized official of the Australian Workers Party sends a free license using OTRS. Note also that uploading an image a second time after it has been deleted is a violation of Commons rules. Please don't do it again or you may be blocked from editing here. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:31, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim. --Storkk (talk) 10:57, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Betty Anyanwu-Akeredolu.jpg

The image in question is sourced from one of the cited references for the main profile article. The said domain is the official event information page for the state of Ondo, in Nigeria. If there are any perceived issues with the copyright, it would only be proper to state it and suggest possible specific solutions in the talk page within the 7 days stipulated period. Outright deletion is harsh in my opinion.

Victhur69 (talk) 12:14, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: File is not deleted. --Storkk (talk) 12:16, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Margaret 2016.jpeg

The photo has been taken down for no reason allegedly due to copyright violaton which is a nonsense as its been taken by me. Also the user who deleted the photo is now blocked so his credibility is questionable. ArturSik (talk) 13:08, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose The description says the author is Milena Fringee, so we need a permission. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:26, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Please have the photographer follow the instructions at OTRS. --Storkk (talk) 15:37, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Children in the Holocaust concentration camp liberated by Red Army.jpg

The image became public domain in 2015, deleted in 2012. If I could see the image or the source, I would upload it myself. --Fæ (talk) 18:28, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

@Fæ: https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/pa14532 --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 23:00, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Is there any reason left to not undelete the file? I thought this was an obvious one. @Jameslwoodward: --Fæ (talk) 05:35, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose The image was apparently taken by one Alexander Voroncov (see the file description). Since the rule in Russia is pma 70, even if he died immediately after taking the photo, it would not pass the URAA and it is far from our usual test of 120 years for images by people with unknown death dates.

The 2015 PD date that Fae claims is probably based on assuming that the image was anonymous, which does not appear to be the case, but even if it were, it still doesn't get past URAA. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:00, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

The Belarusian State Archive of Documentary Film and Photography has released this as public domain and the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum makes it available as public domain. The named photographer was based on their direct interview about the films they created. The photographer took this photograph as the official business of the First Ukrainian Front, itself part of the Soviet Union's Red Army during the Second World War. Consequently copyright should be read as part of official state documents, as supporting evidence for that conclusion, the film made by the same group is part of the official evidence submitted to the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg. All together this makes for a wealth of evidence for undeletion and applying {{PD-RU-exempt}} being correctly described as official "news reports on events and facts" or potentially {{PD-Russia-1996}} as the film crew was making a professional record/documentary in 1945, not an amateur one.
Jim, your closure of this DR is unusually phrased and to my reading seems unfortunately provocative. Perhaps you help me and probably others understand your DR closure better by replying to the two questions below:
  1. "Among the major nations, only USA government works are PD." This appears to make no sense, possibly because it has been separated from context. Could you give the context and clarify in the sense of verifiable copyright law, how only USA government works are public domain for this case or any more general case?
  2. "There are copyright issues -- there is no distinction between real and theoretical -- all are real." Again this appears to make little sense. There is a massive legal distinction in IP law between real copyright issues with supporting case law and relevant case outcomes and legal IP theory which has no supporting case law or cases which can illustrate theory. On Commons this is normally the heart of understanding the difference between having some doubt and having sufficient significant doubt that can justify deletion under COM:PRP.
Thanks --Fæ (talk) 10:36, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
Addendum, just to patch a remaining loophole, the photograph is not a photograph. Though the "record" type is a photograph, the image is described unambiguously as "STILL PHOTOGRAPH FROM THE SOVIET FILM of the liberation of Auschwitz, taken by the film unit of the First Ukrainian Front." As a still from the film, it seems sensible to apply {{PD-Russia-1996}}. --Fæ (talk) 11:18, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
My closure of this was five years ago, and I probably would use different words today. However, as to (1), as far as I knew then the USA was the only major country whose law provided that any created work made by a government employee was PD. Many countrys' laws exempt a list of specific things from copyright, but no others exempt everything. As far as I can see, Russia did not then and does not now exempt this sort of work from copyright -- it does not fit under any of the categories in {{PD-RU-exempt}}. As for (2), read the DR -- there were claims that the copyright problems here were only theoretical.
As for {{PD-Russia-1996}}, it would fit only under the fifth bullet there and only if it can be proven that the video was first shown before 1/1/1946. Given the chaos in that part of the world in 1945, I think it is entirely possible that the video was not edited and seen publicly until long after then. Certainly a significant doubt exists. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:29, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
You are demanding chocolate teapots in order to overturn your DR closure. The camp was liberated in January 1945 and the film was made from January 27th through February 1945, considering how high the international demand was for coverage of this event, there can be no doubt that broadcasts were made before 1946, especially in the context that Tass made a full report on the camp on 7 May 1945 after an enquiry and interviewing 2,000 survivors. However I see no evidence that article 1259 which PD-RU-exempt relies on is related to any date apart from date of creation of the work. The evidence of broadcast dates appears to be something invented outside of the legal requirement, unless you can point to it in the text. There is no significant doubt here, according to the two major institutions above who comfortably tell us the film is public domain. Let's undelete and move on as this case has a ludicrously large amount of verifiable evidence compared to 99% of the rest of the photographs on Commons, where even copyright releases from anonymous accounts who claim "own work" is okay but a named photographer and the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum are not good enough witnesses.
Your statement about PD-RU-exempt is untrue, this film very clearly satisfies the fourth bullet list of examples as a state official news documentary.
"Significant doubt" is not the same as "any hypothetical doubt" and this case is a very clear example of where insisting on infinite levels of proof, and ignoring statements from major archives who have professionally made their own determination of copyright, goes seriously wrong for our project. --Fæ (talk) 14:45, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per Fae above. --Yann (talk) 16:50, 18 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Fitness Trainer, Lawrence D- Marbury 2014-07-14 06-57.jpg

Deletion request was based entirely on Wikipedia notability, not a Commons requirement. The deletion had no apparent background check as this trainer has a website, videos and a reasonable internet footprint. Deletion may be needed on other grounds, but as I cannot see the image I can only go by what was stated in the DR. --Fæ (talk) 13:02, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

It's a photo of a man holding a microphone and Commons already have 4 219 photos like that. Thuresson (talk) 17:37, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Strange statement, Commons is not too full to host a file of, say, Jimmy Wales or Donald Trump holding a microphone. As far as I'm aware we have zero photographs of Lawrence D. Marbury. Neither was this stated in the DR. If we are going to close a DR, then the rationale must comply with Commons policies, not personal taste of whomever is doing the closing, in this case the now blocked sysop account Daphne Lantier (talk · contribs). --Fæ (talk) 18:03, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 Comment It could certainly be in scope, but this is a small image. Could it be possible to upload the original, or at least a bigger one? Regards, Yann (talk) 19:42, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 Info Photo already exists: File:Salim_El_Bey_.jpg, this is way bigger. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 22:43, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
I can't see deleted photos, but that photo says it's of Salim El Bey from a different date, and a quick search turns up other pictures of Salim El Bey that look like the man in the picture. So the deleted picture was mislabeled and misdated; i.e. basically a fake? That photo is itself problematic, as it lists the author as the person who copied it from en.WP.--Prosfilaes (talk) 04:32, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
This seems to demonstrate that the DR was more badly conceived than imagined. If the photograph (which I have not seen) is the same as the other, then a simple Google image search would have shown that the descriptions were wrong. My viewpoint was based on searching for the alleged subject, who looks nothing like Salim El Bey. I would be more comfortable if the DR was reopened and the file deleted for correct reasons, rather than leave the impression that it's okay for anyone to delete files due to non-notability on Wikipedia. --Fæ (talk) 05:33, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose The fact that there is no WP article is a good proxy for notability -- not final, to be sure, but a good start on the question. Beyond that, the fact that a person has an Internet presence does not make them notable. If we accept Fae's reasoning, we will host images of anyone who has a Facebook page and has someone to promote them.

Then there's the question of who this really is. We have two different versions of the same image, with different photographers claiming "own work". I am inclined to think that the images look more like the Lawrence D. Marbury images that Google turns up than they do of the ones of Salim el Bey.

Finally there is the fact that we have no categories and no description of the person other than his name and job.

Bottom line, I would not restore this and I would start a DR on the other version of it on the grounds that there is significant uncertainty about its copyright status and who it actually is. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:23, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Jim, your comments are based on perception not facts. Please do some reading and at least Google for some reference articles, before making claims such as this case is identical to undeleting photographs "of anyone who has a Facebook page", it's an unhelpful and untrue comparison.
I'm quite shocked at seeing any experienced administrator say "The fact that there is no WP article is a good proxy for notability". Wikimedia Commons' scope is not simply to host images for Wikipedia, nor is it a host for "notable" people photographs, that's why here on Commons we have no definition for notability, only a reasonable expectation of educational value. Please ensure that when you have the opportunity to correct this constant problem our community has with understanding our project scope, you do correct it, not reinforce this often damaging misunderstanding.
Thanks --Fæ (talk) 10:53, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

 Comment Um... Salim el Bey and Lawrence Marbury appear the be the same person, if that helps. ([11]) Storkk (talk) 10:49, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Storkk -- I missed that.

Fæ, of course my comments are not based on facts -- the question of notability is entirely subjective. I am not sure that any personal trainer is notable. I might accept one if it could be shown that he had written widely accepted articles or books or lectured at significant events. Being personal trainer to a wide range of notable people also might make one notable. But, as I said above, the fact that there is no WP article is a good proxy for lack of notability. In the absence of any evidence that this person has notability that goes beyond what any good publicist could create around any of us, I see nothing that suggests that this person passes over our threshold.

There is also the question here of copyright -- two different people claim this as "own work" -- that is surely a "significant doubt" about its copyright status. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:04, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, you are not getting it. I'm surprised that a Bureaucrat subscribes to the notability fallacy. Photographs hosted on Commons should meet COM:Scope, it is irrelevant whether the subject is notable or not. When discussing deletion rationales it is an unhelpful, and in my view damaging, tangent to start debating Wikipedia's interpretation of "notability" to justify deletion or un-deletion.
As for copyright, the DR never mentioned copyright and you have me at a disadvantage because I cannot see the image, read the descriptive text, or even see the sourcing. Undelete the file and I and the rest of the Commons community, will be able properly to engage in the reopened DR, if you think copyright is a problem. --Fæ (talk) 11:12, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
You must believe that Yann, Hedwig, and I cannot each determine that we are discussing two crops of the same image claimed as "own work" by two different people. So, fundamentally, you are accusing the three of us of incompetence or lying or both. The community has made us Admins because it trusts us to make exactly this sort of decision when dealing with an obvious copyright problem.
As for notability, I don't understand. You seem to be saying that we should keep any picture of any person -- that you would eliminate "Unused personal image" as a reason for deletion. I don't believe that you are actually proposing that, so how is it that this image qualifies to be on Commons when we delete many similar images every day? .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:13, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
Jim, how on Earth you go from my concerns about an incorrectly closed DR, entirely based on the Wikipedia Notability Fallacy rather than being based on project scope, to me accusing 3 administrators of incompetence is inflammatory and unnecessary. How about sticking to the facts.
I am not challenging that Hedwig thinks this is a duplicate, but I cannot see the file, I have no idea which is the better file, which has better EXIF data, which has a more credible release statement, which has a better source that might be able to verify the release. None of that is an allegation against anyone. However your allegation is personal and unhelpful. Reconsider how you routinely bat away issues with blatantly bad DR closure on this noticeboard. Sometimes it may be better for the community to ensure that bad DRs are reopened or at least correctly re-closed, rather than setting a formal record of bad work and bad conclusions and then hiding the facts by making the final decision not one that the community can correctly scrutinize, but limited to those privileged with sysop rights. There is nothing to hide here, there is no reason, such as IDENT issues, for the determination to be a matter of secrecy. The original source link and text of the image page could have been made available without damaging anyone, apart perhaps from a blocked administrator. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 13:23, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose as a likely copyright violation. And while I agree that it would be nice to be able to edit/update the deletion rationale, I don't think there is justification to undelete and then re-delete it. For the record, this image is a crop of the other, 46 pixels have been removed from the right and 275 from the left. There is no informative metadata in either version: the other version has an Exif section (empty except for a thumbnail), and this does not. Storkk (talk) 14:21, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above discussion. --Yann (talk) 16:54, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:آناتومی افسردگی جلد.jpg

این نگاره/پرونده از جلد کتاب دارای حق نشر است و گمان می‌رود صاحب آن ناشر باشد و احتمالاً استفاده از آن در اندازه کنونی مصداق حالت استفادهٔ منصفانه است و کپی رایت اصلاح میشود — Preceding unsigned comment added by Absoonoo (talk • contribs) 17:09, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose This is a book cover with an intricate design. The upload has not license and no evidence of permission from the publisher of the book. Fair use is not permitted on Commons. In order to restore the image, an authorized official of the publisher must send a free license using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:27, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 16:53, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:OttawaRowingClubCA025374 8x10.jpg

Good day. An Undeletion request for this picture has already been made (11 August 2017) but was denied. New information about the picture has been found and supports my second request for Undeletion. The picture was taken in Canada by a photographer of the Ottawa Journal on 22 September 1951 and published in the Canadian newspaper on 24 September 1951. The picture was referenced in the newspaper as a "Journal Staff Photo" without mentioning the name of the photographer. Copyrights regulations in Canada states the following: "In the case of a work where the identity of the author is unknown, copyright in the work exists for whichever is the earlier of: the remainder of the calendar year of the first publication of the work plus 50 years, or the remainder of the calendar year of the making of the work plus 75 years." In this case, the earlier would be the former, i.e. "the remainder of the calendar year of the first publication of the work plus 50 years" which would bring the copyrights coming to an end in 2001. Hence, as the author of the picture is anonymous and that the picture was taken 66 years ago, I conclude that the picture should be under public domain, and as such would request the picture being undeleted. Thanks for your consideration. Eric Aubin, Ottawa, Canada. Eric ottawa (talk) 02:34, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

 Support per discussion above. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:03, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

  •  Question would an uncredited "staff photographer" in Canada create works that would fall under "anonymous"? Would the Journal not own the copyright (that then expires 50 years pma whether we can figure out when that is or not?) Note: I restored this, then became uneasy while deciding whether to apply PD-Canada-anon to it, apologies for the confusion. Storkk (talk) 10:45, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
Yes and no. The Journal almost certainly owned the copyright as a work for hire, but the length of the copyright would be measured by the life of the photographer, or in cases like this, by the Canadian rule for unknown creators. The fact that Journal obviously knew who the photographer was does not change that status. Most "anonymous" works have a few people who know the creator's identity if only because the publisher has to write a check to someone..     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:53, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 16:53, 18 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:ExteriorShotWXELBuilding.jpg

I would like to request undeletion of this image on our wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WXEL-TV which was brought to my attention through a related email when requesting an undeletion of a seperate image. The photo in question was taken my me, using the stations camera, and I will give wikipedia/wikimedia permission to use it on our page.

--70.46.78.131 13:47, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose Commons requires that images hosted here are license for use by anyone anywhere, including commercial use and derivative works, so "I will give wikipedia/wikimedia permission to use it on our page" is not sufficient permission. If you want it restored, the actual copyright holder must send a free license using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:30, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 16:52, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:4.May 2013 Cover with Frame.jpg

Permission received Ticket:2017072910009723 4nn1l2 (talk) 11:41, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done @4nn1l2: please add the OTRS template. De728631 (talk) 22:04, 18 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Bum Phillips Opera.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Permission provided with Ticket:2017080410011381. Ty Arthur Crbz (talk) 16:44, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done @Arthur Crbz: please add the OTRS template. De728631 (talk) 22:06, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:PORTRAIT OF LOUIS XV OF FRANCE.jpg

Salut, j'ai récemment trouvé ces fichiers qui sont des portraits de quelques sept cents représentants de « l'aristocratie française, et certaines familles royales de « époque, personnages comme ils sont des portraits du XVIIIe siècle, où certains ont un artiste inconnu,, le droit d'auteur dovrbbe être complètement expiré, puis Egola droits d'auteur--Andrassy66 (talk) 16:49, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

I've duplicated it, I think my inquiry has forgotten you, you can take it into consideration, sorry if I did but I felt neglected eheheh,,Can you analyze the first request? --Andrassy66 (talk) 23:16, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Exact duplicate nomination. Please nominate only once (cf [12]). --Storkk (talk) 22:21, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Porn where there is sex

Porn is a female and a male/males where they have sex ...do you have any videos of those — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vou (talk • contribs) 06:01, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Formal close, no request for undeletion. Thuresson (talk) 08:47, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Tavtech logo.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: CEO of the nonprofit organization approves that its logo be shared/ used by Wikipedia JohnR1948 (talk) 21:16, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose We need a permission by email from the copyright holder (see COM:OTRS for details). Apart from that, a permission for Wikipedia-only is neither acceptable at Commons nor at Wikipedia. And please be aware that a Creative Commons license as you selected for your upload will allow anyone to use the logo for any purpose even outside Wikipedia. This is actually required for content at Wikimedia Commons as we do not accept "Wikipedia-only" licenses. De728631 (talk) 22:00, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: per above : an OTRS permission must be sent. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:18, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:100koruna Velká pardubická.gif

The file is taken from an ordinance of State bank of Czechoslovakia. Should be covered by {{PD-money-CZ}} tag (see Commons:Currency#Czechoslovak_Socialist_Republic_.28CSSR.29). Gumruch (talk) 02:22, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose I think it is correct that the coin is PD, but the question here was the photograph, not the coin. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:30, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

The source as a government gazette falls under {{PD-CzechGov}}. The source PDF file, page 8. Gumruch (talk) 15:34, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 Support I don't read Czech (or Czechoslovok for that matter) but the PDF does looks like an official gazette, so Gumruch is right. De728631 (talk) 22:12, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done License tag seems to be valid here. Feel free to start a DR if any other doubts. Ankry (talk) 00:46, 20 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Centre Logo.png

Please undelete this image. Permission was provided on the previous upload. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Principessa38 (talk • contribs) 05:31, 18 August 2017‎ (UTC)

 Not done for now Ankry (talk) 00:41, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Jenna Kim Jones, Sirius XM Studio, Nov 2016.jpg

I submitted Tickets 2017081010018836 & 2017081010018836 which included the permissions from the owner of the photo.

(Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jay.insley (talk • contribs) 10:36, 18 August 2017 (UTC); redaction by 2001:2003:54FA:D2:0:0:0:1 10:42, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose First, note that permissions forwarded by third parties are generally not accepted at OTRS -- the license must come directly from the copyright holder. Second, note that "the owner of the photo" is probably not the copyright holder -- copyright is almost always held by the photographer. Finally, if a free license has been sent to OTRS, then the image will be restored automatically when and if the e-mail is received, processed, and approved. If the e-mail has been properly received there, then the sender should receive an automatic reply with the ticket number. If the sender has not had a reply, please check that it was sent correctly and try again. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be several weeks or more before the e-mail is processed and the image is restored. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:53, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 01:04, 20 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Germin Fitness Tracker.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Ticket:2017070910008655 alleges permission for this file. Request temporary undeletion to assess the validity of that allegation, mark as {{subst:OR}} or otherwise appropriately, and ping me.   Arthur Crbz (talk) 10:29, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done per OTRS agent request; @Arthur Crbz: please continue. Ankry (talk) 01:24, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:An evening walk in Mechelen.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Ticket:2017070810013794 alleges permission for this file. Request temporary undeletion to assess the validity of that allegation, mark as {{subst:OR}} or otherwise appropriately, and ping me.   Arthur Crbz (talk) 10:30, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done per OTRS agent request; @Arthur Crbz: please continue. Ankry (talk) 01:24, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:GeorgeTscherny006.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Ticket:2017070710016113 alleges permission for this file. Request temporary undeletion to assess the validity of that allegation, mark as {{subst:OR}} or otherwise appropriately, and ping me.   Arthur Crbz (talk) 10:33, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done per OTRS agent request; @Arthur Crbz: please continue. Ankry (talk) 01:23, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:FM-Award.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Ticket:2017071010020227 alleges permission for this file. Request temporary undeletion to assess the validity of that allegation, mark as {{subst:OR}} or otherwise appropriately, and ping me.   Arthur Crbz (talk) 13:21, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done per OTRS agent request; @Arthur Crbz: please continue. Ankry (talk) 01:22, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Japinha-qualeadele.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Ticket:2017071110016301 alleges permission for this file. Request temporary undeletion to assess the validity of that allegation, mark as {{subst:OR}} or otherwise appropriately, and ping me.   Arthur Crbz (talk) 13:26, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done per OTRS agent request; @Arthur Crbz: please continue. Ankry (talk) 01:21, 20 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:PS035 196.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Ticket:2017071110021181 alleges permission for this file. Request temporary undeletion to assess the validity of that allegation, mark as {{subst:OR}} or otherwise appropriately, and ping me.   Arthur Crbz (talk) 13:28, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done per OTRS agent request; @Arthur Crbz: please read my note in the ticket and continue. Ankry (talk) 01:29, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:西雅圖達麗建設LA PLAZA商場.jpg

This jpg is my own I am the owner — Preceding unsigned comment added by James116888 (talk • contribs) 02:38, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

  • Signing your posts on talk pages is required and it is a Commons guideline to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ 02:54, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS. This file was reuploaded from File:西雅圖LAPLAZA.jpg, which was thrice deleted.   — Jeff G. ツ 02:54, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done No evidence of free license; COM:OTRS permission required. Ankry (talk) 07:00, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Carla Mauri.jpg

Soy propietario de los derechos de autor de esa fotografía, quisiera donarla a wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VictorHugoGN (talk • contribs) 05:29, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

@VictorHugoGN: Por favor vea Ud. al Template:Copyvionote/es y Commons:Licensing/es.   — Jeff G. ツ 05:39, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Google Translate says that means "I am the copyright owner of that photograph, I would like to donate it to wikipedia." That is not good enough, this file has been deleted three times already as a copyvio. I advised the user to read the Spanish translations of {{Copyvionote}} and COM:L, and I further advise them to send permission via COM:OTRS/es.   — Jeff G. ツ 10:30, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 10:26, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:شعار صحيفة الطريق.png

hello,

I request to remove this file File:شعار صحيفة الطريق.png from the list of deletion, this file has copyright belong to altareeq.info which I work for as developer, meanwhile can I know the reason to delete this file, and what the requirements to not delete it ?

Best regards

Comnarty (talk) 01:13, 15 August 2017 (UTC)15 august 2017

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 10:25, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Tiny Rebel Logo.png

Hi there,

I am trying to amend the information on the wiki page for the company I work for.

I am the Digital Marketing Executive here at Tiny Rebel and maintaining correct information on sites such as wikipedia is my responsibility here.

As such, I have permission from the copyright holder to use the image on wikipedia. If required I can provide my company email address and can confirm my role at Tiny Rebel.

Many thanks, Niall--Themissingdrink (talk) 07:54, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

@Themissingdrink: Please note that this project is Wikimedia Commons. We serve as the host for freely licensed media for a number of sister projects, including Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. As just intimated, we only accept freely licensed media, for which we have a clear definition at COM:L: the media must be available for anybody to use, including to modify, for any purpose, including commercial (with provisos for trademarks, etc.). If you are authorized to license your company's intellectual property in this manner, please follow the instructions at OTRS to confirm your intentions to do so... after which an OTRS agent will request the file's undeletion. We certainly would welcome freely licensed educational media that your company produces. That said, please note that Wikipedia (the encyclopedia) has very strict rules about editing articles concerning yourself or your company. You have a very clear conflict of interest, and as such you are essentially prohibited from editing entries about your company. If you find incorrect information about your company, please read the instructions around en:Template:edit request, and restrict yourself to commenting on the article's talk page, or you will likely find yourself blocked from editing. Indeed, you appear to be in breach of the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use regarding paid editing, see meta:Terms_of_use/FAQ_on_paid_contributions_without_disclosure. While you are welcome to edit Commons as a paid editor, you are required to disclose this when editing most other projects, including Wikipedia. Storkk (talk) 09:29, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 10:25, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Titelblatt Cartographica Helvetica 1990.jpg

Der Ausschnitt des Titelblatts der ersten Nummer der Fachzeitschrift für Kartengeschichte Cartographica Helvetica ist im Internet unter anderem zugänglich auf http://www.kartengeschichte.ch/ch/titel/01_cover.jpg oder unter http://www.e-periodica.ch/digbib/view?pid=chl-001:1990:1-2#4. Sie zeigt gemäss Quellennachweis http://www.e-periodica.ch/digbib/view?pid=chl-001:1990:1-2#4 den Ausschnitt einer Karte aus dem 18. Jh. Es spricht also nichts dagegen, die Abbildung des Covers der Fachzeitschrift unter der Creative Commons Lizenz in Wikimedia-Commons einzufügen.

-- Tkb (talk) 08:57, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose That is quite true, but I see no evidence of a free license at either site. In fact, the first of the two has an explict copyright notice. There are many things on the Web, but almost all of them are not freely licensed and cannot be uploaded to Commons. Please read COM:L. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:37, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

 Support The background image in the magazine cover is PD-old (18th century) and the derivative work (adding the logo and issue number) is not creative enough for its own copyright. De728631 (talk) 15:51, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
I tend to  Support in the extend the artwork is identified (date, country) for being indeed a PD artwork... But what is this artwork? is there a link to this PD artwork without alteration? why there is no version on Commons without the logo addition? is this version (with logo), the only version available? or is it a photomontage of different artworks? what are they?... ouch...maybe I should  Oppose. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:46, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
I agree with De728631 that if the background is a single work that is PD-Old, then the subject image is PD. However, that remains to be proven. Is it really out of copyright? Is it one work,or several, in which case the creation of the composite may have created a new copyright. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:39, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
According to the imprint, this is one single extract from a map made by Creator:Johann Jakob Scheuchzer. The illustrations are part of the map just like in File:Nova Helvetiae Tabula Geographica 01 12.jpg. De728631 (talk) 21:07, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: The background image is obviously old enough. Please fix the source(s) and the license as necessary. --Yann (talk) 10:24, 20 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Hope Hicks.jpg

Reason: Not a copyright violation. An attributed crop of the public domain image File:Watching final vote on AHCA. BIG win for all Americans. USA.jpg. -- Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 15:21, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

The tweet (source) doesn't say who created the picture File:Watching final vote on AHCA. BIG win for all Americans. USA.jpg. It most certainly is NOT Dan Scavino, as he is in the photograph. Starting DR for this file. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 04:42, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 10:19, 20 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Lali2017.jpg

Olá, diversas vezes as foto que contribui foram apagadas, algumas de minha autoria e outras não. Não sei mais o que fazer! Preciso delas para atualizar a página de wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lalinerodrigues (talk • contribs) . 02:03, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

  • I'm genuinely confused what is going on here. It was deleted based on a Google image search that turns up similar, but not identical images. On the other hand, I'm not at all convinced it's the user's own work: unusual cropping that looks professional, and the user is saying algumas de minha autoria e outras não ("some of my own authorship and others not"), which does not sound like an asertion that the user took this photo. - Jmabel ! talk 02:14, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 10:19, 20 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:James-Treble.jpg

Designer James Treble

This is the fourth file uploaded by me (the copyright owner of the image) and agreed by the subject of the image (my partner and subject of the wiki page we have just built about him). Already three images have been deleted from that wiki page (James Treble) without consultation, and despite understanding your concerns I find this unfair as I can guarantee the copyright ownership of any of the images that have been deleted so far.

Please, help me find the right way to add a portrait picture to the wiki page (James Treble).

thankyou

Sandro Nocentini wiki:pikkio66 —Preceding undated comment was added at 03:25, 18 August 2017‎ (UTC)

 Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 10:20, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Wxel.png

I would like to request undeletion for the file Wxel.png for our page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WXEL-TV , which was brought to my attention on August 16, 2017 that the file was deleted by user Josve05a. The logo in question is our logo that we designed for our station.— Preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.46.78.131 (talk) 13:40, 17 August 2017‎ (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim, OTRS verification required. --Storkk (talk) 12:29, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Pratul Mukhapadhyay.jpg

From the link, the photo is tagged as public. So I hope the photo can be licenced as CC-BY-SA.Nokib Sarkar (talk) 10:02, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: "Public" means you are allowed to see it on Flickr. It doesn't give you any rights to copy, modify or sell it. --Storkk (talk) 12:28, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Celestia screenshots

Deleted likely due to a botched move to commons which kept at {{Non-free use rationale}} template on them. Celestia is free software, released under the GPL. Storkk (talk) 14:47, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

 Support --Yann (talk) 10:06, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done per above. Ankry (talk) 13:59, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Allendorf Lumda Zionskirche Orgel (1).jpg

And the following files:

per Ticket:2017060910005132 4nn1l2 (talk) 14:23, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done @4nn1l2: please add the final OTRS templates. De728631 (talk) 17:04, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Zygmunt I Stary Wielki książę litewski.jpg

I undeleted this file temporarily. It had been deleted 3 years ago per missing license. Now a smaller one has been uploaded containing some more information, so that it can be checked and merged if lic rev passes. Painter en:Jan Matejko died in 1893. --Achim (talk) 13:15, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

 Support clearly PD. Ankry (talk) 13:55, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: Clearly pd indeed. --Natuur12 (talk) 19:12, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Deleted files

I ask for the restoration of these ores two remote files that clearly represent two pictures of the eighteenth-century school itliana, where you can clearly see the name "artist in the file of the file, the name of the next author is already embedded in the title; )--87.8.55.54 20:18, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

These files were nominated for undeletion on 4 August - 8 August 2017 and the request was closed without undeletion. Thuresson (talk) 00:45, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: Old enough. --Yann (talk) 07:59, 21 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:BudvaCoatofArms.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This is Budva Municipality official coat of arms, which can be used for free according to their rules (http://budva.me/sites/default/files/PDF/Informacije/odluka-o-upotrebi-simbola.pdf), which are not violated by publishing it in Wikipedia. Poegva (talk) 15:20, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS. The rules in that PDF prohibit derivative works, and are therefore incompatible with our licensing rules.   — Jeff G. ツ 09:57, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Jeff. --Yann (talk) 07:58, 21 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Porträt des Kaisers Franz Joseph I. von Österreich.jpg

Requiring restoration of the following file, executed by the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, still in PD - 100--87.8.55.131 20:30, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

 Info PD-100 means, that the portrait author (C. SCHERAK) died before 1917. Any evidence for that? Ankry (talk) 06:57, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
Let's say pd is always left,, The portrait was performed before the Great War and before 1917-

Link--> http://www.artnet.com/artists/c-scherak/kaiser-franz-joseph-i-von-%C3%B6sterreich-UevfrY-ssm66BFgqO9mvEQ2

Then file can be restored ??? -95.248.92.14 09:16, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: Old enough. --Yann (talk) 07:54, 21 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Герман Дробиз с призом «Золотой Остап».jpg

I puted in the article photos from the personal archive of the writer. Photos illustrated important moments. Original photos are kept at my house, I'm daughter of writer. Photos were removed from the article for the reason that authorship is doubtful. How can I prove authorship and return photos to article? Olga Drobiz (talk) 06:35, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Not deleted yet. Please answer in the deletion request. --Yann (talk) 07:51, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Chicken Theatrical Release.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: We are the copyright holder of the image (the production company behind the film CHICKEN) and fully authorise the use of this image on Wiki 77.102.80.219 16:44, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose If you are the copyright holder, please send a permission by email. Please see COM:OTRS for details. De728631 (talk) 16:57, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 10:59, 21 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:EgiseTaaraJuvvaluPoster1.jpg

Hi,

I am the producer of the movie Egise TaaraJuvvalu and deleted image is the poster of my movie, could you please undelete the movie.

Thanks Nagamalla Reddy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagamallareddy (talk • contribs) 08:34, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose Please send a permission via COM:OTRS. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:44, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 10:57, 21 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:New Zoo Logo transparent.png

Permission received Ticket:2017081410019711 4nn1l2 (talk) 09:55, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done @4nn1l2: you can continue. Ankry (talk) 10:53, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Final logo and name 2013.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Since I am the employee of Hong Kong Rope Skipping Club, we do have to right to own and use this logo. Please undelete this file for editing soon. Thank you. Yanwong.hkrsc (talk) 04:05, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose Please send a permission via COM:OTRS. Regards, Yann (talk) 07:52, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 11:04, 21 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Klein Tools

permission received Ticket:2017081410016278

We have also received permission for three other images which apparently have not been uploaded to Commons before (At least the system could not find an identical deleted file when I tried to upload them). Here they are:

4nn1l2 (talk) 10:26, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done @4nn1l2: please, continue. Ankry (talk) 11:16, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Троицкий Н.П.jpg

1894 photo of an artist of the Russian Imperial Theatres. Was deleted by Jcb as Missing permission as of 1 September 2016. But doesn't need any permissions as photos from the Russian Empire are in public domain and not a subject of any legal rights. ~Fleur-de-farine 10:14, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

 Support License should be fixed to {{PD-RusEmpire}} Ankry (talk) 10:56, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: I have restored this as PD-old-assumed. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:11, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Friherrliga ätten de Geer.PNG

hallo, ich bitte diese zuvor gelöschten Dateien wiederherstellen, Dateien d ‚Ära Gemälden, einige Mitte des sechzehnten Jahrhunderts, und einige nicht,, Ich möchte sie wieder hergestellt werden und analysiert richtig--95.244.103.202 14:28, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: These works are all PD as the painters died long ago.--Sanandros (talk) 17:55, 21 August 2017 (UTC). --Sanandros (talk) 17:55, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

file:Os Modeloz Go Low feat Kudi Manessa & DJ Vado Poster Google.jpg and file:Os Modeloz.jpg

Hello,

I'd like to request the undeletion of the two aforementioned files.
I'm not sure why they are up for deleteion as they are my own pictures.
What do I need to do to keep the files from being deleted?
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cardinha00 (talk • contribs) 16:14, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

@Cardinha00: Can you please send an e-mail to com:otrs then we are sure you are the copyright holder of the files. And one of your files seems to be uploaded again there is currently a deletion request.--Sanandros (talk) 18:30, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done COM:OTRS permission required. Ankry (talk) 18:57, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Apple Maps iOS.svg

As it was a good faith upload of an image, it should not have been speedily deleted, especially without notifying me. My reasons for tagging it as copyright ineligible are:

  • By design, iOS app logos are simple vector drawings. In this case, the logo consists of two rectangles corresponding to roads, an interstate shield, an annulus.
  • By design, the logo is a very simple map of the I-280 intersection near Apple Park in Cupertino.

For these reasons, I contend that the logo doesn't satisfy the threshold of originality and, as such, is copyright ineligible. Sceptre (talk) 13:43, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

  •  Oppose ToO decisions are necessarily very subjective. I agree with our colleague that this is close to, but over the threshold. I am sure some of the community will disagree. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:21, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support This is a close call but I think it's not yet original enough for copyright. De728631 (talk) 15:21, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose We've had multiple deletion requests for this logo (and its different version). This version which has been deleted I can recall at least 2 or 3 different deletion requests for (due to derivative works etc.). Good news is that iOS 11 will ahve a new logo for the app, whcih ay be below TOO. Suggest closing this as not done, since consensus is unclear, and previous DRs has been closed as delete due to COM:PRP, and perhaps discuss the new icon instead. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 15:25, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

No consensus defaulting to  Not done. De728631 (talk) 15:35, 22 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:LOGO PERSOMIL.jpg

Chiedo cortesemente l'undelete del file in oggetto perché il suo utilizzo risponde a

https://www.difesa.it/Info/Pagine/Copyright.aspx

Ovvero viene usato solo a carattere enciclopedico e non per fini di lucro.


Gerometta Luca 20-08-2017 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geroluke (talk • contribs) 12:44, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose Non-commercial permission is not compatible with Wikimedia Commons requirements. Ankry (talk) 10:58, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done Wikimedia Commons accepts only content that may be used for any purpose including commercial use. De728631 (talk) 15:18, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Lev tolstoi street.jpg

Фото (File:Lev tolstoi street.jpg) было сделано лично мной. Авторские права безвозмедно и безвозвратно передаю Википедии. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Швецов Юрий (talk • contribs) 10:37, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in Russia.

There are two copyrights here -- the one for your image and the one for the sculpture. You have correctly licensed the copyright for the image, but we cannot keep it without a free license from the sculptor or his heirs. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:15, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim. No indication the sculptor died > 70 years ago. --Storkk (talk) 16:06, 22 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

AL Brudno main

From Alexander Brudno archive — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abrudno (talk • contribs) 15:41, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Not deleted yet. However this doesn't seem to be an "own work". Please correct. --Yann (talk) 16:13, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Ջեյսոն Կուչակ.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Ticket:2017070210008195 alleges permission for this file. Request temporary undeletion to assess the validity of that allegation, mark as {{subst:OR}} or otherwise appropriately, and ping me.   Arthur Crbz (talk) 17:42, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: Per @Arthur Crbz: . --Sanandros (talk) 19:05, 22 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:الاجتياح.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Ticket:2017070510025269 alleges permission for this file. Request temporary undeletion to assess the validity of that allegation, mark as {{subst:OR}} or otherwise appropriately, and ping me.   Arthur Crbz (talk) 17:50, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: per Arthur. --Sanandros (talk) 19:08, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Stormy Promenade by Carl Rabus.jpg

No copyright violation because uploader owns the painting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlesschiffman (talk • contribs) 12:44, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS.  — Jeff G. ツ 12:55, 12 August 2017 (UTC)


 Oppose Note also that ownership of a work of art does not give you the right to freely license it. That right is almost always held by the creator. You certainly understand that if you own a book, you may not make and sell copies of it. Exactly the same rule applies to ownership of paintings and other copyrighted works. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:52, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Right (except I think "always" is missing from between "almost" and "held"). Given the name, we would need permission from the heirs of Carl Rabus (May 30, 1898 - July 28, 1983), as his paintings won't be PD in Germany or the US until after 1983+70=2053.   — Jeff G. ツ 14:06, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
Right, sorry, thank you. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:33, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
Ehr... Jim, I understand your point but - for example in our country - there has always been a distinction between a reproducible work (a music record, a book, and so on) and a not reproducible one (a painting, a sculpture, a piece of architecture). In the first case you only buy the licence to read or listen the work, and the paper or the vynyl of your property are only the material support on which the work, which is immaterial (can be said "immaterial"?), is stored. In case of an unique work like a house or a sculpture, where the support and the work are the same thing, often the material property is considered more relevant than the intellectual property because otherwise we would have the paradox that I couldn't exploit at its fullest a good of my property: if I owned a villa or a mansion designed by a famous architect, I couldn't take photographs of it for commercial use. Of course we are talking of my country, thus I don't know how is the issue elsewhere. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 14:38, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
SERGIO, what you say makes sense, but I'm not at all sure it is the law in Italy or anywhere else. Can you cite the appropriate paragraph in the law or another source for your comment? We all know that copyright law does not always follow what we might think of as common sense. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:33, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
Civil law is not like criminal law here (in criminal law nulla poena sine legem here), and the judge has a certain amount of discretionality in that field. There are no lawsuits for commercial use of photographs of architectures or publicly exposed works like sculptures or monuments. The only copyright violation lawsuits are about reproducible works like songs or books (memorable the one where Al Bano suited Michael Jackson for alleged copyright violation of an Al Bano's song). -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 16:24, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
You don't say whether you intend your comment to be general or specific to Italy. Certainly it is not correct in the USA. Frank Gaylord won $600,000 for the US Postal Service's use of a photograph of his sculpture at the Korean War Veterans Memorial without a license from him. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:04, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Italian law (Article 89) does have this for photographs: In the absence of agreement to the contrary, transfer of the negative or similar means of reproduction of a photograph shall imply transfer of the rights referred to in the foregoing Article, provided that such rights are the property of the transferor. Article 109 says: In the absence of agreement to the contrary, the transfer of one or more copies of the work shall not imply transfer of the exploitation rights afforded by this Law. However, the transfer of a mold, an engraved plate or any similar medium used to reproduce a work of art shall be deemed, in the absence of agreement to the contrary, to include the right to reproduce the work, provided such right belongs to the transferor. So, they do have some situations where the transfer of the copyright can be implied by the transfer of a physical object. I'm not quite sure which side of the line a painting would fall on though. By the letter, it would see that copyright transfer would not be implicit, as that seems reserved for objects which have no purpose (or worth themselves) other than to reproduce the main work in question. On the other hand, since it's not possible to mass-produce a painting, you would require the original to reproduce it, so maybe that could be read as a painting also being the medium of its own reproduction. I have no idea if there is case law on this topic or not. While normal U.S. law would not (or at least not since 1978) consider the transfer of the physical object a transfer, U.S. courts would likely recognize a transfer of a foreign work if the transfer was valid in that country, per w:Itar-Tass Russian News Agency v. Russian Kurier, Inc.. Carl Lindberg (talk) 05:54, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
I think you are reading too much into the law, Carl. As you say, molds and negatives have no use of their own, so transferring them logically transfers the right to use them to create works from them. However, that logic fails with anything else. The whole point of copyright is to prevent people from making free copies of works. If owning a painting gave you the right to make copies of it, then why would not the ownership of a copy of any work give the owner the right to copy it? .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:23, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
The logic would be because it is a single-copy type of work, not one made to be reproduced in the first place, so no reproduction-type item would exist. I would agree that a straight reading of the law text would exclude paintings from that assumption -- after all, you would think an artist should be able to sell a painting without selling the copyright as well. But, courts have used funny logic before, so it's possible someone else knows about a court case which did use some "interesting" logic along those lines. I wouldn't want to use logic like that here though unless someone could in fact point to such a court case -- the law as written does seem limited to items whose primary purpose is to reproduce works of art (and are not the works of art themselves). I was mainly pointing out that the U.S. requirement that transfers must be written is definitely not the case in Italy, so it's at least possible there are some differences in this area. Carl Lindberg (talk) 21:23, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Unclear that the uploader is the copyright holder, either of the photo or of the painting. --Storkk (talk) 11:07, 23 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Alleanza_dei_Progressisti.svg

Unsure where the Italian COM:TOO is, but I'd be mildly surprised if this was over it. Storkk (talk) 14:50, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

 Support I agree. "Creativity" is required in Italy for a work to be copyrighted but then this term is not legally defined. However, at least when it comes to industrial design, the threshold has so far been quite high [13]. So in terms of graphical design, this simple logo should pass PD-textlogo. De728631 (talk) 16:39, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim, this isn't a clear-cut decision, and we should default to not restore. --Storkk (talk) 11:09, 23 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Informe ataqueNIC VE-1.pdf

Image was deleted due to improper use license tag, but the Law on Copyright of Venezuela states that "the texts of laws, decrees, official regulations, public treaties, judicial decisions and other official acts shall not be protected by this law.", making it public domain. The license tag is {{PD-VenezuelaGov}}, which has been used in several official documents in Commons before. --Jamez42 (talk) 01:14, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

 Question Why this document should be covered by {{PD-VenezuelaGov}}? It does not seem to be a legal act. This template does not declare that any document issued by Venezuelan governement institution is free of copyright... Ankry (talk) 10:41, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Ankry. --Yann (talk) 11:19, 23 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Pink Zone Poster Final.jpg

Permission received Ticket:2017082010005778 4nn1l2 (talk) 09:49, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

 Info The ticket does not seem to be a permission ticket. Ankry (talk) 10:54, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
My bad! I sent an email requesting for a specific license. 4nn1l2 (talk) 12:10, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done for now. Ankry (talk) 11:35, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:How to import EEG data into OpenViBE.webm was deleted without specific justification

This file may have been deleted with insufficient justification. The deletion request did not specify which part(s) of the video were in violation. There was no response to the appeal made on the deletion request.

Brylie Christopher Oxley 15:20, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose I think there was no response to your appeal because you made it on the talk page of the deletion discussion instead of replying directly below the deletion request. Presumably the closing admin @Yann: simply didn't notice the talk page. Regarding the video, you are correct that OpenVibe is freely licensed (AGPL v. 3) but then you claimed fair use for the book at the Wiley website. Fair use content is not allowed on Wikimedia Commons. All content whether original or derivative must be completely free to use without any fair use parts. So I'm afraid we cannot restore the file. De728631 (talk) 15:38, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 11:18, 23 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Janov Stan (1024x768) für Wikipedia.jpg

Hallo, die o.g. Datei ist gelöscht worden! Da ich der Ersteller der Bilder bin, bitte ich um Wiederherstellung. Der Grund für das Löschen könnte das Copyright-Zeichen(c) auf dem Foto sein, welches ich zur Veröffentlichung im WP hätte entfernen müssen. Nach Wiederherstellen des Fotos entferne ich das Zeichen. Beste Grüße --Charly1234 (talk) 21:56, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per AntonierCH. --Yann (talk) 11:17, 23 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Unfertige Brücke (1024x685) für Wikipedia.jpg

Hallo, die o.g. Datei ist gelöscht worden! Da ich der Ersteller der Bilder bin, bitte ich um Wiederherstellung. Der Grund für das Löschen könnte das Copyright-Zeichen(c) auf dem Foto sein, welches ich zur Veröffentlichung im WP hätte entfernen müssen. Nach Wiederherstellen des Fotos entferne ich das Zeichen. Beste Grüße --Charly1234 (talk) 22:01, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per AntonierCH. --Yann (talk) 11:17, 23 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Laufstall oder Kinderbett im Kindergarten von Dolgij.jpg

Hallo, die o.g. Datei ist gelöscht worden! Da ich der Ersteller der Bilder bin, bitte ich um Wiederherstellung. Der Grund für das Löschen könnte das Copyright-Zeichen(c) auf dem Foto sein, welches ich zur Veröffentlichung im WP hätte entfernen müssen. Nach Wiederherstellen des Fotos entferne ich das Zeichen. Beste Grüße --Charly1234 (talk) 22:02, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per AntonierCH. --Yann (talk) 11:17, 23 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Eisenbahnwaggon aus Berlin.jpg

Hallo, die o.g. Datei ist gelöscht worden! Da ich der Ersteller der Bilder bin, bitte ich um Wiederherstellung. Der Grund für das Löschen könnte das Copyright-Zeichen(c) auf dem Foto sein, welches ich zur Veröffentlichung im WP hätte entfernen müssen. Nach Wiederherstellen des Fotos entferne ich das Zeichen. Beste Grüße --Charly1234 (talk) 22:03, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per AntonierCH. --Yann (talk) 11:17, 23 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:RESF Logo.jpg

Rights are not violated: this is the official logo of the Russian eSports Federation http://resf.su. Uploaded for using here https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%BF%D1%8C%D1%8E%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BE_%D1%81%D0%BF%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%82%D0%B0_%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B8. Just like here https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D1%85%D0%BE%D0%BA%D0%BA%D0%B5%D1%8F_%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B8 or here https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B9%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D1%84%D1%83%D1%82%D0%B1%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9_%D1%81%D0%BE%D1%8E%D0%B7. Please restore file. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barbarianbro (talk • contribs) 06:28, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Права не нарушаются: это официальный логотип Федерации компьютерного спорта России http://resf.su. Загружен для страницы федерации https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%BF%D1%8C%D1%8E%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BE_%D1%81%D0%BF%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%82%D0%B0_%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B8. Так же, как тут https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D1%85%D0%BE%D0%BA%D0%BA%D0%B5%D1%8F_%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B8 или тут https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B9%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D1%84%D1%83%D1%82%D0%B1%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9_%D1%81%D0%BE%D1%8E%D0%B7. Просьба восстановить файл — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barbarianbro (talk • contribs) 06:24, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose @Barbarianbro: an evidence that it is under a free license and can be used by anybody for any purpose is required. The ruwiki version describes it as non free and copyrighted. Ankry (talk) 06:35, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Ok, ty Barbarianbro (talk) 07:09, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Ankry. --Yann (talk) 11:18, 23 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Newdigate House, Castle Gate, plaque.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This file was in use by an article on the English language wikipedia: Camille d'Hostun, duc de Tallard. Just because another jpeg version of this image exists, is not sufficient reason to delete the file and create extra work for editors elsewhere. And I now cannot determine if the deleted version was being used bu other language wikipedias. Thank you . 86.151.120.146 17:35, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Why do u need the png version?--Sanandros (talk) 19:02, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Not deleted. --Yann (talk) 11:15, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Marie-Anne-Barbat-Layani en 2017.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: A valid OTRS permission has been provided – ticket:2017082310011532. As an OTRS agent (verify), I will make sure that the permission is enough to keep the picture(s) (media work + depicted work), update the license (if needed) and add the appropriate OTRS template when this gets restored. Feel free to notify me and thank you in advance. AntonierCH (d) 14:16, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: @AntonierCH: ✓ Done, please take it from here. Thanks. --Storkk (talk) 15:24, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Gulab Khandelwal.jpg

Yes, I have the complete authority on this photograph. The photo was taken by me. Vjhalani (talk) 04:47, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Vjhalani,
Who's the photographer? Regards, Yann (talk) 11:14, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

It has been so many back and forth for one picture which I already mentioned that it has been taken by me. I am his daughter. What's the meaning of asking who is the photographer? It was taken by me with my own camera. Vjhalani (talk) 14:17, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Vjhalani,
Why is it so small? Could you please upload the original with EXIF data (unmodified)? Thanks, Yann (talk) 14:25, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Reuploaded. --Yann (talk) 13:13, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Восстановление портретов

Список следующих полностью лицензированных картин и портретов ПД, поскольку следующие художники умер почти столетия назад--79.31.200.224 15:55, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

  •  Oppose. If they are indeed {{PD-100}}, they must be examined individually and carefully. These files have subtle sourcing issues as indicated above and higher. That there has been tomfoolery surrounding these undeletion discussions should make one even warier here. For each image requested, please indicate a verifiable source that confirms the authorship. Ideally it would also confirm the subject, but I suppose that could be questioned through the use of {{Fact disputed}}. Storkk (talk) 16:04, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

I'd suggest to undel them and then do a com:LR on each file. Bad files are then sorted out by the reviewers.--Sanandros (talk) 18:58, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: . --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:19, 24 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:100 meter DN Galan 20050726.jpg

Bilden är talande och visar personen i aktuell artikel på ett bra sätt. Bilden är tagen av pressfotograf och är en av få bilder sparade från aktuell tävling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by InterAthletics (talk • contribs) 21:40, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Bilden är skapad av Göran Lenz. När du laddade upp bilden hävdade du att det var du själv som skapat den. Är du Göran Lenz? Om du inte är det är det olagligt att hävda att du skapat bilden. Det är också olagligt att utfärda falska upphovsrättslicenser samt att sprida bilden utan upphovsrättsinnehavarens medgivande. —LX (talk, contribs) 22:31, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done Proof of permission needs to be sent by email. Only the original photographer Göran Lenz can grant free licences for this image. De728631 (talk) 14:30, 24 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Beijing Capital Airlines.png

Bom dia,

Este ficheiro não devia ser eliminado, pois foi copiado da Wikipedia em Inglês. Apenas o enviei para o Commons, para poder usá-la na tradução da página em que o encontrei. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pedrocoiso1 (talk • contribs) 14:16, 23 August 2017 (UTC) Pedrocoiso1 (talk) 14:16, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose. en:File:Beijing Capital Airlines.png is clearly marked as non-free. Please read Commons:Uso legítimo. —LX (talk, contribs) 17:33, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done Commons does not accept non-free fair use content. The Portuguese Wikipedia, howver, does accept such images so you could upload the logo over there. Please see pt:Wikipédia:Conteúdo restrito. De728631 (talk) 14:37, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Bill Water Body Shot.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Permission provided with Ticket:2017033110004276. Arthur Crbz (talk) 17:22, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done @Arthur Crbz: please adjust the file page. De728631 (talk) 17:43, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Giuseppe Mirabella.jpg

The Author Paolo Galletta gave me the permission to use the file. To verify that it is possible to contact Paolo Galletta through its website and ask him directly. Do I have to do something else in addition? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Passmartino (talk • contribs) 22:01, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose That will not be possible 50 years from now. Copyright owner must use the process outlined at Commons:OTRS instead. Thuresson (talk) 23:01, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done COM:OTRS permission required. Ankry (talk) 08:57, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:COA BM.png

We have been given permission by the company to use the logo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spotty93 (talk • contribs) 10:50, 24 August 2017‎ (UTC)

  • Signing your posts on talk pages is required and it is a Commons guideline to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ 12:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS.  — Jeff G. ツ 12:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done here. COM:OTRS permission is needed for Commons. However, it could likely be used under Fair Use rationale in English Wikipedia. Ankry (talk) 09:12, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Rising-of-the-phoenix.ogg

This file is part of the open-source video game Xonotic and can be extracted from the download-archive that can be found there. As stated here "Xonotic and everything that comes with our releases is licensed under the GNU General Public Licence v2", so I don't see any reason for deleting.--Trockennasenaffe (talk) 10:07, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Deep file link--Trockennasenaffe (talk) 10:25, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

 Support Let's restore this with a source link as provided above. Actually the missing source url was the reason why the file was deleted. De728631 (talk) 12:51, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done per above Ankry (talk) 12:55, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Raphaël Granier de Cassagnac - Utopiales 2014 - P960710.jpg

concerns:

Seriously, those files were deleted because of the tshirt the person was wearing.

I am requesting undeletion. We don't delete files because of logos in the background and part of the image, this exactly is the same here... those photographs are about Raphaël Granier de Cassagnac not about a flag. Esby (talk) 17:29, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

  •  Support as per above. Yann (talk) 18:44, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support The flag is de minimis. De728631 (talk) 18:01, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment While the subject is Raphaël Granier de Cassagnac, however the flag on the t-shirt is rather prominent which makes de minimis difficult. Another editor had suggested in the DR that it could be a "family flag" but never produced evidence and searching "Australian Aboriginal flag t-shirt" online is rather telling that it is an "Australian Aboriginal flag", Threshold of originality is "very low" in Australia (which is where the flag was created).
If the uploader is willing to make it less prominent (removal in photoshop or blur) and this were to be undeleted, it should be removed from the "Australian Aboriginal flag" category. Bidgee (talk) 00:02, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
De Minimis is not about something being prominant or not, it's about the subject of the photograph. I did not ask for categorization of the tshirt. The file was being used on the person page on fr wikipedia... If you wish to modify / alter the photograph, do it yourself, the licence allow such modification. Do not ask the uploader to do so. The argument about the threshold of originality is irrelevant. what is relevant is the usage of the file, not that the logo might be copyrighted. The photograph was taken in France, so here we have to apply the french law and the us law... Esby (talk) 08:22, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
  • Redeleting. After careful reading the Australian court decision, I  Oppose and I do not thing we can handle anything similar until the decision is changed or Australian copyright expire. Ankry (talk) 09:43, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Which court decision are you referring to ? Esby (talk) 11:25, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
this case study Ankry (talk) 12:58, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
What is making it different from a normal tshirt with a copyrighted drawing? I believe we allow photographs on Commons of people wearing any tshirt. I am not saying the symbol is not copyrighted, the tshirt might be a counterfeit, but it's irrelevant. I am just saying it is De-minimis, it's not linked to the proportion of the copyrighted element, but to the *subject* of the photography. Esby (talk) 13:40, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per Esby and De728631. --Yann (talk) 14:37, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Ian Gregson.png

OTRS agent (verify): request: Ticket:2017071010007804 alleges permission for this file. Request temporary undeletion to assess the validity of that allegation, mark as {{subst:OR}} or otherwise appropriately, and ping me.   — Jeff G. ツ 04:52, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done per OTRS agent request. @Jeff G.: you can continue. Ankry (talk) 17:44, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Giuseppe Mastromatteo.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Ticket:2017071110008481 alleges permission for this file. Request temporary undeletion to assess the validity of that allegation, mark as {{subst:OR}} or otherwise appropriately, and ping me.   Arthur Crbz (talk) 17:38, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

@Arthur Crbz: I have restored the file. De728631 (talk) 17:47, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
Ty @De728631: . --Arthur Crbz (talk) 17:51, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
@Arthur Crbz: Do we have permission for the first upload revision as well? If not, I'm going to zap it. De728631 (talk) 18:05, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
(BK) Arthur Crbz, for which of the 2 very different file versions you have a release? Should the other be (re)deleted, or should the file be splitted? --JuTa 18:07, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
@JuTa and De728631: Can you split the 2 files? Permission is OK for the first file uploaded. Then, please add "temporary undeletion" tag to the second version of the file. I will ask for permission for this file. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 18:32, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
Arthur Crbz, done. The first Version you find now at File:Giuseppe Mastromatteo 1.jpg. For the second one I left the OTRS received template from 24.8 in at File:Giuseppe Mastromatteo.jpg. Cheers. --JuTa 10:40, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

OTRS permission has been received for both revisions so they have been restored and separated. De728631 (talk) 21:53, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Dodatek k diplomu s ukázkou implementace ISCED stupnice.png

I am almost sure that this file does not violate any copyright law. It is the scan of my diploma supplement. It is the kind of document that is not principally protected by the copyright law.

Could anybody put the file back to the server? It is useful example of ISCED implementation in Czech republic.

Thanks a lot!

--DaSal (talk) 10:49, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose All created works have a copyright upon creation unless they fall under a specific exception in the law of the country of origin. The Czech law allows only limited exceptions for certain government works, so even if the issuing institution is a government institution, I doubt very much that its diplomas are free of copyright. If it is not a government institution then this is certainly under copyright. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:47, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 Question @DaSal: can you point out exact section of Czech copyright law that makes this document PD? Ankry (talk) 01:09, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

I just checked the first section of the englisch Diploma Supplement of the file which is of the Techinack University of Liberci and here of military university and it seems for me that this text is standadized (btw also here is another one and if you google you will probaly finde even more supplements). So I think the ministry of education formulated that text. Eventually somebody of the Czech users could do more research in this topic.--Sanandros (talk) 18:16, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 11:40, 27 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:SHIRAYUKI1227.jpg

削除理由とされている記事の掲載写真は撮影者の私が著作権者です。 https://lineblog.me/shirayuki_1227/archives/550272.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kobito1227 (talk • contribs) 22:54, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 11:39, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Nico and the Red Shoes images

File:Nico And the red Shoes-concert .gif

hello, Lakroner is the user name of nico and the red shoes on wiki .

we have the right to add and publish these photos to nico and the red shoes wikipedia's page.

thank you for adding them.

(Lakroner (talk) 21:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)) 23:32 August 24 2017

File:Nico And The Red Shoes- EP.jpg

hello, Lakroner is the user name of nico and the red shoes on wiki .

we have the right to add and publish these photos to nico and the red shoes wikipedia's page.

thank you for adding them.

(Lakroner (talk) 21:34, 24 August 2017 (UTC)) 23:33 August 24 2017

 Oppose [link to the file fixed] The file was already published elsewhere. Also doubts concerning author information. A permission following COM:OTRS is necessary in this case, IMO.

File:Nico and the red shoes - paper bag.png

hello, Lakroner is the user name of nico and the red shoes on wiki .

we have the right to add and publish these photos to nico and the red shoes wikipedia's page.

thank you for adding them.

(Lakroner (talk) 21:38, 24 August 2017 (UTC)) 23:38 August 24 2017

 Oppose We need a permission coming directly from the original photographer because usually only the photographer is the copyright holder. And please note also that a permission for use at Wikipedia only is not sufficient. Content at Wikimedia Commons needs to be free for anyone to use for any purpose even beyond Wikipedia. Please see COM:OTRS for instructions how to send an email to our team of volunteers. De728631 (talk) 12:59, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 12:44, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:UGGT-is-like-a-wrench-glycoproteins-like-nuts.png

I am the author of all parts of the image and I own the copyright for all its parts.

I would like to add this to the file description but I cannot do so because the file has been deleted.

Please undelete and let me complete the file description with the copyright ownership

P — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pietro1968 (talk • contribs) 13:56, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Unless you can point out here an evidence that the image was published under a free license, it cannot be restored without COM:OTRS permission from the actual copyright owner. Ankry (talk) 15:57, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Ankry is right. If you could send an email from your institution we would have some proof that your account is in fact operated by Pietro Roversi who is mentioned at the bottom of this page. De728631 (talk) 16:35, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 12:43, 27 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Surrounded By Idiots CD cover.jpg

The photographer Rob Trick told me he emailed permission. Can you confirm and undelete?

Funnysimon (talk) 22:31, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

@Funnysimon: I'm afraid what he sent wasn't quite good enough. Please review COM:OTRS with him, and ask him to CC you on his replies to us about Ticket:2017071210026156.   — Jeff G. ツ 22:58, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jeff. --Sanandros (talk) 12:27, 27 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Melanie Weisner 2016 World Series of Poker.jpg

Permission received Ticket:2017082610013767 4nn1l2 (talk) 00:28, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: OTRS ticket. --Sanandros (talk) 12:30, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:ESCUDO BANDEIRANTES AEB.png

O Escudo do time do bandeirantes foi criado em 1951, eu mesmo o refiz a partir de fotos da época o intuito é criar a página com a história do clube Bandeirantes de Itatiba. O clube possui referência bibliográfica, juntamente com imagem do escudo impressa:

referencia bibliográfica, Livro Itatiba na História: 1804-1959

{{Citar livro|autor=Rasmussen Gabuardi|nome=Lucimara|sobrenome=Rasmussen Gabuardi|título= Itatiba na História: 1804-1959|local=Itatiba|editora=Pontes|ano=2004|página=120-121|isbn =85-7113-193-7}}

Url consultável com o escudo https://www.escudosweb.com/escudos-sp?lightbox=dataItem-j2f4d0k9

também possui fontes na internet consultáveis, porém creio que a referência bibliográfica citada acima é o suficiente para compreensão de que se trata de arquivo legítimo. Disanf (talk) 12:49, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose Brasil has 70pma. No evidence that the image was published before 1947 ot that its author died begore 1947. Ankry (talk) 07:06, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done per Ankry. De728631 (talk) 14:52, 27 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Luc Lapraye.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: A valid OTRS permission has been provided – ticket:2017081710016567. As an OTRS agent (verify), I will make sure that the permission is enough to keep the picture(s) (media work + depicted work), update the license (if needed) and add the appropriate OTRS template when this gets restored. Feel free to notify me and thank you in advance. AntonierCH (d) 12:25, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done @AntonierCH: please update the file page. De728631 (talk) 14:47, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Achchige Patali Champika Ranawaka.jpg

Hello, I am Muvindu from the office of Political Party known as Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU) in Sri Lanka. I own the deleted photo of my employer Hon. Minister Patali Champika Ranawaka. He personally has instructed me to update his photo on wikipedia because the current photo isn't a professional one so i uploaded the high resolution unedited photograph (with the original background) to his wikipedia page.

Please reinstate the deleted photo. It is the current official photographic portrait of the Hon. Minister. Also, I have updated the description of the photograph you referred as the original work. See: https://www.facebook.com/PataliChampika/photos/a.1435131863434994.1073741825.1435124643435716/1942482099366632/?type=1&theater (Muvindu.JHU (talk) 16:05, 27 August 2017 (UTC))

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muvindu.JHU (talk • contribs) 15:16, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

  • Signing your posts on talk pages is required and it is a Commons guideline to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ 16:23, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS.  — Jeff G. ツ 16:23, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
  • @Muvindu.JHU: If you really wish to upload your own photo I stronly suggest you to made another photo and upload it to Wikimedia Commons not publishing elsewhere before. Facebook-published photos are a pain as Facebook/Wikimedia licenses are incompatible and it is hard to prove Facebook user identity (that this user is really the author and really is sending us a COM:OTRS permission). And providing false information about the author (photographer) is copyright violation. Ankry (talk) 18:32, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know about how things work around here. I will take another photo and upload it to wikipedia before uploading it to anywhere else. (Muvindu.JHU (talk) 16:05, 27 August 2017 (UTC))

 Not done: per Ankry + Muvindu JHU. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:29, 28 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Wanda Perry publ.jpg

Obviously older then 100 years, by an unknown photographer. -- Kürschner (talk) 15:33, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose Wanda Perry was born in 1917 and this is not a photo of a newborn. Uploader claim it is from the 1930s. Thuresson (talk) 19:33, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
Addendum. You added the category "Fur fashion from 1935". Please clarify. Thuresson (talk) 22:21, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Thuresson and not per captain redundant. --Natuur12 (talk) 00:15, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Sunil K. Dutt.jpg

File:Sunil K. Dutt.jpg There is no copyright problem. --Photographer Sunil K. Dutt (talk) 16:11, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose Per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sunil K. Dutt.jpg. Thuresson (talk) 22:54, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Thuresson and not per captain redundant. --Natuur12 (talk) 00:15, 28 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

On the numbers. jpg

I ask the undeletion of my file because I think is an important riflection on the immaginary numbers; then I'll add a graphic exemplifying.[1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Giustino Carinci (talk • contribs) 22:40, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ↑ I Think my work is to be considered.--~~~~

 Not done: Plain text, no need for a graphics file. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:25, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Andy Warhol, 129 Die in Jet!.jpg

The file is of the Daily Mirror (New York) Monday June 4, 1962

Please reinstate this. It is in fact the actual front cover of a the Daily Mirror of that date. The New York Daily Mirror's copyright was not renewed hence public use as in this wikipedia case here;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Daily_Mirror

Thank you!

--Penelopebckhead (talk) 16:55, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose File:Andy Warhol, 129 Die in Jet!.jpg is not the real front cover from the New York Mirror but a painting made by Andy Warhol. Even if it was based on the true front cover, Warhol's painting is a derivative work with its own copyright. Currently it is © The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts. [14] See also en:129 Die in Jet!. De728631 (talk) 17:38, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 07:43, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Allegory of the wedding of Archduke Ferdinand Karl and Anna de' Medici.png

Allegory of the marriage of Ferdinand Charles of Austria Count of Tyrol, Painted at the end of the 17th century by an anonymous artist File overloaded by another user--82.50.35.70 13:28, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

I place the source link of the painting:

--82.50.35.70 17:31, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

  • There is not this image there. It is this one. Unfortunately, a quick serch did not lead me to its description. So I cannot judge whether it is a 200+ year old painting or a modern counterfreit. Ant we cannot rely here on incomplete information provided by the uploader. We need another source of information (eg. a gallery/museum page or a book) about this painting, that will reliably prove that the original image is really PD. We cannot store images of unknown origin that we can only suspect they are PD, without any PD evidence. Ankry (talk) 18:12, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
I do not think it is a contraffort, unfortunately the original source of the following file, has been deleted not the deletion of the following file; it would be an administrator to see it personally, I will send you this link, containing some information about the file, that of Before I had seen it as a source using the google image creation on the image, but as you confirm it does not seem enough, i hope i can give you some info:

--82.50.35.70 18:34, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

There is no information about this painting there. Only information that a collection has been published. Nothing useful. Ankry (talk) 19:29, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
I do not know what to answer, I supply you the only information that internet manages to give me, the original source is in the file, and the file has been unfortunately deleted--82.50.35.70 19:56, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
The provided source is broken. Ankry (talk) 22:00, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
@Ankry: http://web.archive.org/web/20160304065832/http://bilddatenbank.khm.at/viewArtefact?id=2390 at least has the text of that page.   — Jeff G. ツ 14:27, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
Basing on this info (assuming 1646 is the creation date), I  Support undeletion. Or somebody may reupload the image as well. @Jeff G.: do you still oppose? Ankry (talk) 14:56, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
@Ankry: No, I now  Support, but once restored, I hope we can find the best online image of this painting, regardless of claimed copyright. Yes, I'm looking at you, British Museum, GettyImages, et al.   — Jeff G. ツ 23:07, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done restored per consensus above. Ankry (talk) 08:35, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Please undelete otrs has been resent (Australianblackbelt (talk) 03:21, 27 August 2017 (UTC))

otrs Ticket#2017082210001563 (Australianblackbelt (talk) 03:26, 27 August 2017 (UTC))
  • @Australianblackbelt:  Oppose The image will be restored automatically when the e-mail is processed and approved. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be several weeks or more before the e-mail is processed and the image is restored.   — Jeff G. ツ 14:15, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done Please wait until the OTRS email has been processed. De728631 (talk) 15:07, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:BhapaPitha.JPG

A photo taken by me uploaded by me cannot be a case of copyright infringement. Aditya (talk) 14:53, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

 Support The images found in this search appear to be uncredited backwards copies of the original Commons upload, so they, in turn, are copyright violations with regards to Aditya's photo. De728631 (talk) 15:16, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: own work. --Sanandros (talk) 21:47, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:SAIPA SAINA.jpg

There was no problem with the file, which was the source of the personal work. Upload history was also real. Please be patient. —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.60.159.183 (talk) 19:04, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

  • Signing your posts on talk pages is required and it is a Commons guideline to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you. Revibot (talk) 10:55, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS.  — Jeff G. ツ 16:28, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 22:35, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Christina manning waves.jpg

The photo has permission to be used as long as it is giving the proper information on who's work is being shown. There's is no reason the photo should have been taken down. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trackjunkie98 (talk • contribs) 14:55, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

  • Signing your posts on talk pages is required and it is a Commons guideline to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ 16:24, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS.  — Jeff G. ツ 16:24, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
  • @Trackjunkie98: While uploading an already published image under CC-BY-SA-4.0 license you are required to prove that its author (only the author is allowed to do it, not you) declared it to be under exactly this license. You can provide a link to this information or ask the author to send it to OTRS. No other way. Ankry (talk) 18:22, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Getty images are not free. --Yann (talk) 22:34, 28 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Blason du comte van den Berghe de Limminghe.png

The user who deleted this file has since been blocked indefinitely, making a request for detailed reasons a bit difficult. I suspect the file was deleted together with a number of other coat of arms uploaded by me; while the copyright violation unfortunatly rings true for the other files, it does not for this one. I challenge anybody to find this file online predating my creation of it. Zen3500 (talk) 23:37, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Tagged as copyvio with the following reason: "the shield has been taken from http://wappenwiki.org/index.php/File:Limmingen,_Godefroid_Uten.svg, where it was published under cc-by-NC-sa". Thuresson (talk) 09:04, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 22:33, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Cartell imprès a la Imprempta Masó (1922).jpg

About the copyright of this image, any document from CRDI is public domain. It comes from the archive of Ajuntament de Girona (Girona's Town Hall). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albaclopes (talk • contribs) 09:07, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

  • Signing your posts on talk pages is required and it is a Commons guideline to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ 14:08, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose unless authorship-related-info is provided. "any document from CRDI is public domain". Why is that? For example, here states:
Unknown copyright status" Crédito: Ajuntament de Girona. CRDI (Autor desconegut).
That is not "public domain". Ajuntment de Girona is not claiming copyright on this content -> these pictures are kind of orphan works -> we cannot host them here unless they could be considered public domain on its own merits. Since this cartell was published in 1922, it's in the public domain in the United States. But... is it in Spain? Does this "cartell" have an author? Strakhov (talk) 10:46, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 22:33, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Marcellus-Long-LA-Lakers-Anthem.jpg

The file was deleted based on outdated information. Photo was relicensed under attribution 2.0: https://www.flickr.com/photos/65486880@N08/36231844695/in/dateposted-public/

DB57 (talk) 00:08, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose The file on Flickr was taken from Facebook. Com:License laundering --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:27, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 Comment Photo was reuploaded anyways as File:Marcellus-Long-LA-Lakers-Game-STAPLES.jpg. Elisfkc (talk) 15:04, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
It was then deleted by Jcb as violating the claimed copyright of GettyImages. Are we sure that claim is valid?   — Jeff G. ツ 15:40, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
Yesterday on IMDB (where I linked to) it said that the file was from Evan Gole of Getty Images and had a copyright claim. While I cannot find that specific image on Getty's database, Evan Gole (who the Flickr file does credit) has 3,158 image on Getty's database, making me reasonably certain he is either a Getty photographer, or works for someone who licenses through Getty. Also, considering the subject of the image has the photo on his own Flickr as All Rights Reserved and credited to "Evan Gole/NBAE via Getty Images", I'd say we can be pretty sure. --Elisfkc (talk) 15:49, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
Not trying to be snarky or anything, wrote that as I was finding as much proof as possible and trying to open the check user on this account, so just annoyed by the user. --Elisfkc (talk) 16:04, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) Ok, so it appears Evan Gole is a professional photographer who does work for hire for the NBA Entertainment League (NBAE), including taking photos (including this one), selling his copyrights to NBAE, and managing NBAE's copyrighted works on GettyImages. Thus, I  Oppose until 1 January 2088.   — Jeff G. ツ 16:14, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 22:33, 28 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Jayne Mansfield & Kee Joon, owner of Empress of China, 1966.jpg

The source image carries Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic (CC BY-SA 2.0) license. Aditya (talk) 14:51, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose The licence is questionable (Commons:License laundering). Unless we get any evidence that the Flickr user is actually the copyright holder of the image, it cannot be restored. De728631 (talk) 15:10, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

    • The file's title and description have the correct date -- that is just the Flickr upload date, or digitization date, most likely. However yes, it is extremely unlikely the Flickr user is the copyright holder, so they cannot issue a license. The photostream has lots of images scanned from newspapers, etc.  Oppose Carl Lindberg (talk) 16:41, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 22:32, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Ritratto di S.M. Carlo Emanuele III di Savoia.jpg

Portrait of the King of Sardinia, performed by Maria Giovanna Clementi With a license expired for at least 100 years--87.14.89.91 13:42, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose per Jeff. Note also the stealthy vandalism that is coming along with these uploads and the related UDRs. De728631 (talk) 16:41, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Better to reupload it from the source: [15]. --Yann (talk) 07:53, 29 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Fichiers jpg photos et documents sommaire wikipédia de Ayi Eric Hugues EKUE

Bonjour Yann.Après la lecture de la requête au sujet des suppressions de fichiers je tiens à vous préciser l'assurance et la fiabilité des informations contenus de ma publication sur wikipédia et Commons.Je suis l'auteur personnel de mes publications et d'autant j'ai la couverture des droits d'auteur de la SACEM de Paris du moins les conseils du savoir faire de la SACEM de Paris. Merci. Ayi Eric Hugues EKUE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayi Eric Hugues EKUE (talk • contribs) 07:43, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose Related to Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Ayi Eric Hugues EKUE. Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons are not social networks, or free webhosts. As I told you on your talk page, please read COM:SCOPE. Regards, Yann (talk) 07:43, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: Not deleted yet anyway. --Yann (talk) 07:51, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Kochi metro train at Edapally.jpg

The file was deleted saying that EXIF data was missing. But the full EXIF data was present. Shady59 (talk) 21:28, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

The file was deleted as reupload as reuploading is against rules. However, its previously deleted version has EXIF data, indeed. I  Support its undeletion as deletion nomination does not seem valid here. Ankry (talk) 21:42, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
Thank you Ankry. Shady59 (talk) 23:45, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose The copyrighted billboards are far more prominent in this image than the train. Rather than restoring this, I suggest that the creator crop out the billboards and upload the image again using the same file name. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:52, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 23:06, 29 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Herengracht 426.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: foto hebben wij gekregen om hier te plaatsen Restauratiecoach (talk) 14:10, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose We need a permission coming directly from the copyright holder. This is usually the original photographer. In this case, the image is quite old though, so there is a chance that the copyright term has already expired. Do you know the name and lifetime of the photographer? De728631 (talk) 14:32, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 23:05, 29 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Mercy Adisafe.png

The source for this file is

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ng1_OMq6_js&t=65s

This has a cc by sa license. This bot should not have speedy deleted this file

This is not the first time that this bot has made this error

Cheers Victuallers (talk) 22:48, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: CC-BY-SA-3.0 at source. --Yann (talk) 23:01, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Ritratto di Carlo Emanuele I.jpg

Request for Restoration of Carlo Emanuele I of Savoy, Duke of Savoy, portrait performed by Giovanna Garzoni (1600-1670), around the end of the 17th century

--95.244.94.229 12:55, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 15:12, 30 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Example.jpg

DONT DELETE PLEASE — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imran Rajput Actor (talk • contribs)

Please clarify which file you mean. Thuresson (talk) 11:30, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 Comment The only file uploaded, and deleted, is File:Ishq Ka manjan.jpg, which requires a formal written permission from the copyright owner (see COM:OTRS). I deleted the user page and reverted his talk page, as autopromotion. Regards, Yann (talk) 12:14, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 15:11, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Rocca dell'Abisso.jpg

I ask to the flick user to change the licence, he change it, so you can restore the file? Thanks, cheers :)

--Paolo Effe (talk) 11:36, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: License OK now. --Yann (talk) 11:58, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:لواء يازجي صورة شخصية.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I got the permission. The for me too forwarded email (it is received to permissions-de and permissions-commons-de) arrived to me 28. August 2017. at 18:49 in Hungarian time. (I asked @Yann, who deleted the file - because there was no license -, that he can watch the email but he has not responded yet and I saw this page just now.) Fauvirt (talk) 09:23, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose If and when the OTRS team receive the mail it will be dealt with in a timely fashion. Thuresson (talk) 14:41, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
@Thuresson: If and when?... The permission was forwarded for me with the e-mail adresses permissions-de@wikimedia.org and permissions-commons-de@wikimedia.org... so if I got it (now) near 1.5 days ago nobody says me, that minimum one of them 2 OTRS e-mail would has it not arrived.... That's why I wanted to write here... I thought it should be indicated here. I'm sad about the attitude. I believe that many people write unduly here but "if and when".. after several weekly e-mail changes with the photograph... thanks... if I wrote to the wrong place please write me where should I write it? (On the hu.wikipedia I could know this.) Fauvirt (talk) 22:40, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: Restored. --Yann (talk) 12:02, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Tali 07.jpg - a photo I have taken myself!

Hi, as I explained already twice on the talk page of the guy who has deleted this photo of Ms. Tal Itzhaki, this is an authentic photo taken by me (during a conference of the International Federation of Theatre Research in Bermuda in 2009. I fail to see why this photo has been twice deleted. If one wishes, I may provide the contact to Ms. Itzhaki herself to vouch for the fact that this photo is my creation. How does one have to authenticate one's own creation otherwise? And by the way, this is only one of several photos I have stated to have been my own creation, which were similarly deleted. I fail to find in any of your guidelines a protocol for "authenticating one's own creation." Please let me know if I am missing something here. Dr Sarah FineSfine8 (talk) 09:57, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Please have a look at Commons:OTRS. Thuresson (talk) 11:32, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
I did have a look at Commons:OTRS, and didn't get an answer to my complaint, which is not the first, on the arbitrary decision - supported by no evidence or complaint - to mark a file created by me personally as "suspected violation of copyright." I demand the undeletion of the file in question, or to be provided by a solid counter-evidence which contradicts my claim to having been the creator of this file (which of course could not exist, since I AM the authentic creator of this file, as the person being photographed in it will testify. This relying on someone's "gut feeling" supported by no evidence starts to be ridiculous!Sfine8 (talk) 20:58, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 Comment At least you should upload the original file with full EXIF data. This is so small that it is quite useless. Regards, Yann (talk) 23:04, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 12:02, 31 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:K8 logo.png

Permission received Ticket:2017082910002513 4nn1l2 (talk) 11:24, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 12:05, 31 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Zoboki_Gábor_épitész.jpg

Per Ticket:2017081810010651. Thanks! Bencemac (talk) 15:29, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 12:08, 31 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Example.jpg

la foto dell'opera dell'Arch Angelo Barboni mi è stata data dallo stesso Barboni per l'inserimento nel suo profilo wikipedia, prego ripristinare alla stessa posizione. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul Barney (talk • contribs) 16:37, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

 Not done: No file name provided. --Yann (talk) 12:03, 31 August 2017 (UTC)


The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Heiligengrab - Bildstock - Maria Himmelfahrt.jpg

The title suggests that this is a wayside shrine in Austria - if that is indeed the case, the picture would be protected by Freedom of Panorama in Austria, therefore the deletion was not justified. Best, Braveheart (talk) 23:17, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

 Support per nomination. {{FoP-Austria}} is applicable. De728631 (talk) 22:38, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: {{FoP-Austria}}. --Yann (talk) 12:01, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/Archive/2017-08&oldid=567279219"