Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2021-06

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:Jan de Bray kol.1627-1697 - Podobizna petileteho devcatka.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This painting image is PD-Art-100-expired and I can't discover the reason for deletion anywhere. I created a Wikidata item for it to be added to the file upon undeletion: Q106813052 Jane023 (talk) 07:01, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Ankry. This was deleted under Commons:Deletion requests/Uploads by NGCZ - I had to a batch delete of all the files uploaded by this user. Gbawden (talk) 10:56, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Good grief I can't believe that happened! Of course the non-free files need to be deleted, but in the case (such as this one) where no other file is on Commons yet, then they should definitely not be deleted! I thought I was going after one specific file but I am cringing at the thought there are others. PD does not mean "only with the institution's say-so". Jane023 (talk) 11:56, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done: PD-art. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:42, 31 May 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Ham on Rye - Official Poster.jpg

I own the copyright to this image and wish to use it on the wiki page for my film. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spamalicious (talk • contribs) 22:16, 29 May 2021 (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. Ankry (talk) 11:29, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: undelete if ever OTRS has been received. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:54, 31 May 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Logo of Jensen Hughes.png

Apologies for posting this again, but I didn't realize I would have to respond within a few days!! Anywho, the image under consideration is of a logo that uses no distinct or copyrightable drawings or designs and therefore I am not sure why it was deleted. I am simply trying to add the logo to the Wikidata page for the company, much like how Arup's page has one. Please reconsider its deletion and restore the image with Public Domain licensing. Thank you kindly. IanCappelletti (talk) 00:39, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@IanCappelletti: For licensing of published images see COM:EVID and COM:OTRS. This cannot be done on-wiki. Ankry (talk) 11:32, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done no evidence of free license provided. Ankry (talk) 15:50, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Thürmer Gyula.jpg

This photo was taken by me. The source is only stated for information about the event. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elekes Andor (talk • contribs)

✓ Done: the EXIF data matches other uploads by this user, AGF. Please change the description to avoid future confusion like this. Thanks. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:02, 31 May 2021 (UTC)


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

File:May Day - Munkáspárt.jpg

This photo was taken by me. Source was stated only for available information on the event related. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elekes Andor (talk • contribs)

@Túrelio: as the deleting admin: the photo was used in https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fhetilapunk.hu%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2019%2F06%2F2019-17sz%25C3%25A1m.pdf&psig=AOvVaw0bUM8WNDT6dbkFDlQ7y5OA&ust=1622473471594000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAkQjhxqFwoTCICm1OjW8fACFQAAAAAdAAAAABAE <-- this document, but the document is newer. I see no evidence of copyvio. Ankry (talk) 15:18, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done: per User:Ankry and the EXIF data matches other uploads by this user. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:07, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

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

3 files from Memorybank2019

  1. File:Memorybank2019-員林473巷 - 雅麗芳皮鞋.jpg
  2. File:Memorybank2019-藍皮普快火車.jpg
  3. File:Memorybank2019-叭噗冰車小販.jpg

These 3 files was initially tagged by Kai3952 as no permission. However, via the discussion, all photos from Memorybank2019 (including these 3 files) are under CC-BY-SA.--Reke (talk) 13:03, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@Fitindia: Pinging the deleting admin as the nominating user is blocked for inpolite behaviour and so we cannot ask them for comment why they find an OTRS permission necessary despite the site license has been accepted in the DR. Ankry (talk) 15:28, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
I think I got this one wrong. If the site has released in the said license and has been accepted in this DR then I think the files should be restored. Thank you. --- FitIndia Talk ✉ 16:58, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done per above. @Reke: I strongly suggest adding a link to the site licensing info in the "permission" field of the {{Information}} template to avoid such problems in future. Ankry (talk) 19:57, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Annonanutans1.jpg

Image was collected from social website with users consent. No copyright applied, released under public domain. Addysgreenhouse (talk)

 Oppose Above TOO, definitely copyrighted. No license template. No evidence of public domain release provided. Ankry (talk) 18:38, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per User:Ankry. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:09, 31 May 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Logo de la UANL.svg

It shouldn't have been removed. This template corresponds: {{PD-Coa-Mexico}}. --BartocX (talk) 06:58, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

  1. {{PD-self}} is not {{PD-Coa-Mexico}}
  2. university is neither municipality, nor a political subdivision
Ankry (talk) 08:47, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
@Ankry: The template says that literally any governmental or non-governmental organization can NOT copyright their emblems, logos or symbols. That includes universities. --BartocX (talk) 09:39, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 Support per {{PD-Coa-Mexico}}. Ankry (talk) 12:54, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done: per User:Ankry. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:13, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Poster of Metamorphosis in the Slaughterhouse.jpg

==Summary==
{{Non-free use rationale poster
| Media = film
|Source=https://javaddaraei.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/ms-web-1.jpg
| Use = Infobox
| Article = Metamorphosis in the Slaughterhouse
| Name = مسخ در مسلخ
| Distributor = Javad Daraei
}}

==Licensing==
{{Non-free poster|image has rationale=yes}}

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Javaddaraei (talk • contribs) 07:47, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Fair use not permitted on Commons. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 10:23, 31 May 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Die Gartenlaube (1895) 840.jpg undelete

09:38, 8 November 2020 Arthur Crbz deleted page File:Die Gartenlaube (1895) 840.jpg (Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing. Author died in 1953. Will be in PD 70 years later.) I dispute the reason or kindly ask that author to be named. To my knowledge the page has three authors. 2 anonymi, "Br." and "--t--", plus "Woldemar Kaden", who died in 1907. [1], [2] --Maasikaru (talk) 09:17, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

 Info The image seem to be deleted as User: Kilom691 added in to Category:Walther Püttner in 2011; I am unable to verify that action. Ankry (talk) 12:58, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
Well, the page seems to contain an image by Walther Püttner at the bottom. @Maasikaru: It can be hosted here if the image is cropped out. Ankry (talk) 13:01, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello Ankry, thank you for your answer. Not being able to see the page, I couldn't detect that. Since our project will not be finished by 2024, I leave it like this for the moment. Thank you for clarifying. --Maasikaru (talk) 14:35, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done withdrawn. Ankry (talk) 15:01, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Euxropa Konstitucio Parto IV subskriboj (Svedio).PNG

Speedied in 2007 by EPO under F5 ("No source for at least 7 days").

Coming at this from investigating articles with missing files at English Wikisource (where this file is still "in use" 14 years later!), I find that this was just one of multiple scanned signatures on s:Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe/Part IV, the rest of which are in Category:Signatures on the European Constitution. The source is necessarily ultimately the treaty itself, and given Commons doesn't recognise sweat of the brow any intermediate steps are irrelevant in terms of copyright (i.e. the lack of a direct source, while desirable, isn't critical in this particular case). The rest of the signatures are tagged with {{PD-text}}, but the more apposite tag is probably {{PD-signature}} (per COM:SIG); and signatures like this are extremely unlikely to pass COM:TOO Sweden (it is also {{PD-EdictGov}} in the US and {{PD-Sweden-URL9}} in Sweden, so I think we're covered by both belt and suspenders in this case).

PS. Just to be completely didactic about it, m:Wikilegal/Sweat of the Brow wasn't settled until 2012, so the original speedy here was clearly a good one and in line with then-current practice. Absolutely no criticism of the original call is implied in this undeletion request: the @mention above is just a courtesy ping. --Xover (talk) 06:31, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Comment: the deleted image lacks any and all description info. And considering the length of time it has been deleted, I would recommend uploading a new version from a reliable source. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:49, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
@P199: What would that effort gain us beyond what we get by simply undeleting and fixing the description to be in line with the 53 other files from the same document? There is no chain of provenance between the original physical document and the digital file here that accrues any copyright, so any specification of an intermediary source is of limited value. If anybody modified the signature in any way, they could equally well have modified the 53 other signatures that we do still host, so restoring this file makes little difference. Bottom line is that one out of a group of 54 files, all COM:INUSE, was speedied on a technicality, and subsequent investigation has revealed that apart from the technicality the file is suitable for hosting. Xover (talk) 06:10, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done: per User:Xover. Please add/fix the description and source. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:07, 1 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:AlfonsoVinci_ritratto.JPG

The image is a portrait of my father Alfonso Vinci, during the Shiriana expedition, picture shot by Enrico Middleton (died more than 10 years ago), exploration mate of my father, with the camera of my father, on my father request. This is proved by the fact that in the Alfonso Vinci's archive that I own, being the daughter, I have the complete negative stripes. Furthermore the picture has been published in Alfonso Vinci's book "Samatari", published in Italy, Bari, by Leonardo Da Vinci in the year 1955, and republished in 1960 and in 1989, as the author picture. Ialina Vinci--Ivinci (talk) 16:22, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

@Ivinci: Please give a full and detailed account of how copyright was transferred from the photographer to the subject and how it came about that your father released the photos to public domain. Thuresson (talk) 16:51, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
@Thuresson: Both my father and Enrico Middleton were italian and in Italy pictures after 20 years are in the public domain because their copyright terms have expired. According to Law for the Protection of Copyright and Neighbouring Rights n.633, 22 April 1941 and later revisions, images of people or of aspects, elements and facts of natural or social life, obtained with photographic process or with an analogue one, including reproductions of figurative art and film frames of film stocks (Art. 87) are protected for a period of 20 years from creation (Art. 92). This provision shall not apply to photographs of writings, documents, business papers, material objects, technical drawings and similar products (Art. 87). Italian law makes an important distinction between "works of photographic art" and "simple photographs" (Art. 2, § 7). Photographs that are "intellectual work with creative characteristics" are protected for 70 years after the author's death (Art. 32 bis), whereas simple photographs are protected for a period of 20 years from creation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivinci (talk • contribs) 19:21, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
{{Question}} @Ivinci: Where and when the photo was published? This is a low-resolution copy: where does it originate from? Ankry (talk) 00:13, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
Please note, that unpublished photos are copyrighted in US 70 years since the photographer death. Regardless of who created them and where. And we need to follow US copyright law also. Ankry (talk) 08:46, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
If the photo was published in Italy in 1955, then its Italian copyright expired before 1976 per{{PD-Italy}} and no URAA problems.  Support undeletion. Ankry (talk) 11:42, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done: PD-Italy + PD-1996. Ruthven (msg) 09:28, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

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

Collection of Hungarian Portraits

With Ticket:2021052710004414 we received permission for

The permission comes from an official hungarian government email address, which gives it credibility. However, I cannot see the pictures, hence cannot give a definitive judgment. Can someone please check, and restore if it seems justified?

Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 16:30, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

  •  Oppose - The sender gives no evidence of why they would be authorised to license intellectual properties on behalf of the Hungarian Research Institute (they do not even bother to include a title, for example). Being employed by a given institution (i.e., having a related email address) is not to be conflated with occupying a role with the aforementioned authority. Эlcobbola talk 16:54, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
    I asked him by which reason he became the holder of the full and exclusive copyright. Lets wait and see what he answers. --Mussklprozz (talk) 17:02, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
    Note also that the sender does not even purport speak on behalf of the Hungarian Research Institute, but instead says that they personally are the creator/copyright holder. This is nonsense, and someone with genuine authority to license that organisation's IP would not have made this sort of misrepresentation (i.e., this is not mere carelessness, but a material misstatement that no one with any degree of sophistication regarding IPs would have made.) This is a COM:PRP issue whatever their response. Эlcobbola talk 17:05, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
    The uploader claims indeed that he personally took those pictures. I will ask him for additional evidence. Please keep the case open. Meanwhile, can you give me a link to the previously published versions at the Hungarian Research Institute, please? Since I cannot see the pictures, I only know half the story. --Mussklprozz (talk) 12:01, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
    @Elcobbola: We now got a message from the Director-General of the Institute of Hungarian Research, with full signature, in which he confirms that: (a) the person who claims to have taken the pictures is indeed the official photographer of the institution, and (b) the release of the license of the pictures. So please restore them now. Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 07:41, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
  • @Elcobbola: Do you still oppose undeletion? Ankry (talk) 05:13, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done @Mussklprozz: FYI. Ankry (talk) 12:31, 2 June 2021 (UTC)


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

Ticket#2021052510005122

OTRS agent (verify): request: we've received Ticket:2021052510005122 regarding

Please restore in order to verified veracity and finish the process. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 15:57, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

@Ganímedes: I just realized that I forgot to upload File:2018 Grand Prix of Helsinki - Yuzuru Hanyu FS (5).jpg. Can I upload it retrospectively?
The files File:2015 Grand Prix Final - Yuzuru Hanyu FS (3).jpg and File:2018 Grand Prix of Helsinki - Yuzuru Hanyu EX (3).jpg are both uploaded already, there is just a spacing typo in the file names above. Henni147 (talk) 16:50, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
@Ganímedes: One file restored; the others do not exist. Ankry (talk) 21:13, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
@Ganímedes: Any problem with the image? Should it be redeleted? Ankry (talk) 11:19, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ankry: The last file was never uploaded. If an admin think we specifically need this extra file, to add for the batch of 60, I'm ok with that. I can accept permission if the user upload the file and the admin agrees. --Ganímedes (talk) 13:04, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ganímedes: I am asking about the file that I have undeleted. Ankry (talk) 13:35, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ankry: Sorry! I've accepted permission for it. The rest seems not exist. Thanks! --Ganímedes (talk) 20:22, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done 1 file Ankry (talk) 21:32, 1 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Example.jpg

La photo est autorisée — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 176.155.108.14 (talk) 17:00, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Procedural close: example image obviously not deleted, is not e photo, and IP user has no own uploads.

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

Pictures for Premil Ratnayake

Hi, I want to kindly request the restoration of the photos under Premil Ratnayake, because I took them myself with the express permission of Mrs Ratnayake (his wife who is still living), they are from her personal albums. I took all the photos on the page, EXCEPT (File:While_working_at_the_Lake_House_(On_the_Right).jpg) which was taken from his Employer, who did not have a way of being contacted.

Besides that, regarding all the other photos, they do not exist anywhere else, except in Mrs Ratnayake's album. Therefore I do not see how copyright has been violated. Kindly let me know how I can go about this. These photos were taken by me -

— Preceding unsigned comment added by ShArk50008 (talk • contribs) 16:20, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. ShArk50008 (talk) 16:17, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Ankry P199 Hi, that photo (with the trophies) was taken by Mr Ratnayake's family, and is in the ownership of his wife, who legally inherited everything belonging to him (there are no other living relatives). I would be more than happy to legally prove anything required. Please let me know how we can go about this. Also would American Copyright laws apply to Sri Lankan photos? Let me know, as to how I can go about proving it to you, without you dismissing what I say, please do be fair. I can put you in touch with his daughter even, through Mrs Ratnayake. You can email me or her even. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShArk50008 (talk • contribs) 18:22, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Please follow the OTRS process, see COM:OTRS. Thanks. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 20:28, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:09, 2 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Supercopinter.png

The deleted file was my own creation and represents a cup played in 1988 that had only one edition and was never played again. I request that you review your deletion. Best regards. --Wolverine (talk) 19:33, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@WIKI-WOLVERINE: If it represents a cup played in 1988 how is it not a COM:DW of the real cup? Is it completely different, designed by you from scratch and unrelated to the real cup? (If so, it is likely out of COM:SCOPE, but otherwise it is a DW.) Ankry (talk) 19:46, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Dear Ankry, The image was created by me completely, it represents the 1988 trophy (Supercopa Interamericana), but it's a symbolic representation, they are only simple geometric shapes. The work is not based on a real photo, and it's different enough to be considered even another cup. Thanks for your quick response. best regards. --Wolverine (talk) 21:35, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
This is the trophy in the real life (there are not many good images on the internet) = https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EiFnv7zWoAYSf7t.jpg
@WIKI-WOLVERINE: How is it in COM:SCOPE then?
@Ankry: Because I created the file to be shared by everyone, I made it commons. I repeat, it is not based on a real image, its a simple shape design that emulates a cup that was played 33 years ago only once and then disappeared. I still don't understand why it was deleted. Regards. --Wolverine (talk) 12:40, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: If it is a DW then it was correctly deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/File: Football Trophy. If it isn't a DW then it is out of project scope. Deletions which are correct based on the current deletion, project scope and licensing policies will not be undone. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:14, 2 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Таранець_М.С.jpg

File:Таранець_М.С.jpg

Определение причины удаления файла File:Таранець М.С.jpg и необходимости его Восстановления обсуждение удаления было закрыто. обстоятельства, связанные с этим файлом File:Таранець М.С.jpg, заметно изменились, не учтены пользователем Missvain необходимо восстановить файл File:Таранець М.С.jpg.

Commons - первое место публикации File:Таранець М.С.jpg, фото с дрона (otrs). ОК. Но явно НЕ за рамками проекта.

Я проверил журнал удаления и узнал, почему файл File:Таранець М.С.jpg без доказательств неправомерно был удалён. Также Я использовал функцию «Какие ссылки здесь», узнал, Что фактически Злоупотребление со стороны пользователей: Missvain, Iluvatar, Tatewaki в связи что нет каких-либо обсуждения с явными доказательствами и правовыми основаниями, ссылающиеся на необходимость удаленния файла File:Таранець М.С.jpg. Я загрузил файл File:Таранець М.С.jpg, Я смотрел, на моей странице фейковые без доказательств обсуждения пользователей: Missvain, Iluvatar, Tatewaki, Злоупотребление их сообщения не объясняющие не доказавшие правомерного удаления моего файла File:Таранець М.С.jpg.

Я оспорил удаление и подтвердил права на файл File:Таранець М.С.jpg и разрешил свободное использование файла

Я просил не оставлять без мотивированых без доказательств запросы на удаление файла File:Таранець М.С.jpg пожалуйста, еще раз ознакомьтесь с политикой удаления, политикой области проекта и политикой лицензирования, чтобы выяснить, почему мой File:Таранець М.С.jpg файл был разрешен в Викискладе.

Если указанная причина не ясна Я оспорил причины удаления File:Таранець М.С.jpg ранее со стороны пользователей Missvain, Iluvatar, Tatewaki, Явно Злоупотребление Я оспариваю удаление File:Таранець М.С.jpg повторно, пользователи что причастны к удалению файла File:Таранець М.С.jpg не объяснили не предоставили новые доказательства причины удаления.

Я Использую Свои права связаться с любым другим активным администратором (возможно, с тем, кто говорит на моем родном языке)

Прошу помочь, была допущена ошибка, исправьте ситуацию восстановите пожайлуста File:Таранець М.С.jpg.

Оспаривание удаления

Удаления файла File:Таранець М.С.jpg, не правильные с учетом текущего удаления, масштабов проекта и политик лицензирования, должны быть отменены. Предложения по изменению политики могут быть сделаны на их страницах обсуждения.

рассматриваемый файл File:Таранець М.С.jpg не нарушал авторских прав и не выходил за рамки текущего проекта: администратор (ы), который (е) удалил файл File:Таранець М.С.jpg Не дал подробное объяснение и не предоставил доказательства для удаления.

Я прошу восстановление сообщаю Присутствует свидетельства лицензионного разрешения от правообладателя, пожалуйста, по соответствующей процедуре подачи свидетельства разрешения. Я уже это сделал. предоставленно разрешение в порядке, файл должен быть восстановлен. В описании удаленного изображения File:Таранець М.С.jpg присутствует какая-либо необходимая информация,во избежание задавания дополнительных вопросов.

Дополнительно Временное восстановление Файл File:Таранець М.С.jpg необходимо временно восстановить для облегчения обсуждения этого файла File:Таранець М.С.jpg, Commons приняла свободный контент со ссылкой на положения о добросовестном использовании удаленный файл File:Таранець М.С.jpg, соответствует требованиям Для облегчения обсуждения Файлы должны быть восстановлены. описания файла или цитаты со страницы описания файла не достаточно. Запросы на удаление File:Таранець М.С.jpg, должны быть отклонены, сочтено, что полезность обсуждения перевешивается другими факторами (такими как восстановление, файлов, есть существенные проблемы, связанные с злоупотреблениями причастными к удалению пользователями Commons.

Восстановление необходимо для облегчения обсуждения, для обсуждения полезно восстановить файл имеет описание со ссылками на доказательства, и файл File:Таранець М.С.jpg, фактически удален без правовых оснований и доказательств файл File:Таранець М.С.jpg, не может быть удален в связи с указаными причинами должен быть восстановлен, Прошу Восстановить Файл File:Таранець М.С.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mykola Taranets (talk • contribs) 16:17, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Я понятия не имею, почему файл удалили с обоснованием per nomination, а не out of scope, однако ваши попытки тщетны. У Викисклада нет цели собрать фотографии всех жителей Украины. Ничего примечательного на фотографии не было, причём само фото очень низкого качества. Файл невозможно использовать ни в одной из статей, ото всюду ссылки на него будут удалены просто как самопиар.—Iluvatar (talk) 22:09, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
  • @Iluvatar and Mykola Taranets: Neither the DR discussion nor this request explain why the subject name and the photographer name are the same while this image is not a selfie. The authorship doubt is the basic deletion reason. If the doubt cannot be resolved on-wiki, COM:OTRS is the right way. Providing false authorship information is copyright violation as most CC-licenses require proper author attribution. BTW, the COM:SCOPE doubt has also not been resolved. (No information which particular article the photo is appropriate to. General declarations cannot be considered sufficient.)
  • Repeating the same sentence multiple times does not make it "more" valid as an undeletion reason. This behaviour just decreases chance that anybody will ever handle this request. Everybody is volunteer here and nobody has to do something they do not like to. Ankry (talk) 05:59, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done no response / explanation to the doubts raised. Ankry (talk) 19:52, 2 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File: Libertadores.png

It does not infringe any copyright, this is just an illustration of the trophy.

Victoralves12 (talk) 17:07, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

 Oppose Trophy designed in 1959 by Italian artist Alberto De Gasperi (b. 1934), see en:Copa Libertadores (trophy). Thuresson (talk) 23:31, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:14, 2 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Waynelai2018.jpg

I believe this file has been publicly circulated by the owner of the photo, which is a portrait of him and posted on social media by himself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tuduongworld (talk • contribs) 07:26, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

 Oppose Well, that is the business model of photographers, licensing their works and getting paid every time a photo is used. Thuresson (talk) 15:20, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:16, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Berlin, R.F.A (1979) - Nina Hagen - © Alain Bizos Zone contenant les pièces jointes.jpg

Please restore. We got a permission by Ticket:2021052810004109. Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 11:22, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done @Mussklprozz: FYI. Ankry (talk) 20:06, 2 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Black masturbation.gif

i ask that it should not be deleted — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronan letsholo (talk • contribs) 12:08, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

They were tagged as being copyright violations. Non-free/unlicensed images are not allowed on commons. There are messages saying exactly this same thing on your user-talk page (User talk:Ronan letsholo). DMacks (talk) 15:31, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: No valid rationale for undeletion. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:17, 2 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Example.jpg

The copyright holder of this work has released right for the image to be uploaded. Please refere to this email thread (Redacted) for verification and kindly restore the image. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ruby D-Brown (talk • contribs) 15:58, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

@Ruby D-Brown: Which one image you mean? You were notified that COM:OTRS is the right procedure. Once a permission is send, verified and accepted, the image may be undeleted. Ankry (talk) 20:12, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: No file listed for undeletion. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:17, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Дружинина Елена Сергеевна.jpg

На основании чего удаляют фото? Оно со ссылкой и из открытого источника. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Russianfiks (talk • contribs) 17:53, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

@Russianfiks: It was deleted per COM:L and COM:EVID: no (free) license information and no evidence of free license was provided. Ankry (talk) 20:16, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done procedural close: not an undeletion request. Ankry (talk) 20:16, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:10 LEI 2014 Romania.png

Моя снимка е от моя фотоапарат, както съм го посочил. Илиев2010 (talk) 18:26, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Likely {{PD-money-Romania}}, but {{Own}} declaration can be accepted only from users that do not provide false or incorrect authorship/copyright claims. Evidence of your authorship is needed, eg. the original photo. Ankry (talk) 19:49, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Авторство на кое? Аз не съм автора на монетата, а на фотографията. Илиев2010 (talk) 22:38, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
We need an evidence for this. The photo is preprocessed, not the original one: cropped, no camera settings in EXIF, etc. Ankry (talk) 13:34, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Заповядайте вкъщи. Имам голяма колекция и малко време за да ровя в нея. Илиев2010 (talk) 16:08, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done withdrawn. Ankry (talk) 18:18, 3 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:LogoIIOU.png

Качвам с позволение в удачна резолюция. Илиев2010 (talk) 18:29, 2 June 2021 (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.
Why do you need permission if you claim to be the logo author and exclusive copyright holder? Ankry (talk) 19:41, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Аз не съм автор на логото. Аз съм представител на училището. Логото е изработено след 1957 г., само това е известно. Илиев2010 (talk) 16:07, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
1957+70+1=2028 (PD in Bulgaria), 1957+95+1=2053 (PD in US). Before those dates a written free license permission following COM:OTRS instructions from the logo copyright holder legal representative is needed in order to host the logo in Wikimedia Commons. Ankry (talk) 18:01, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 20:49, 3 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:張淨桐.jpg

無侵權問題，此為出席活動的照片。 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 綺思 (talk • contribs) 01:51, 3 June 2021 (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. Ankry (talk) 13:17, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per Ankry. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 20:50, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Intercontinental Cup.svg

Hi everyone. The file is very different from the original trophy, it is just only a stylization of the original trophy.--Luca•M 07:57, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

The file was deleted because of this request Commons:Deletion requests/File: Football Trophy.--Luca•M 08:01, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
In the past, for the same reason, several trophies were undeleted, so I think it could be done the same here.--Luca•M 08:13, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
I would be very sorry if they were canceled considering the passion and the time spent to draw them. The drawings of the trophies published, have only the purpose of increasing the content of WIKIMEDIA COMMONS.
I put at the disposal of the community my good skills as a designer, as many of us do with photos and texts. I think that these trophy drawings differ from the true three-dimensional trophies, even if the general aspects are similar, they have no proportionality to the original and the details of the decorations are not the same, but simply recall those elements.
These reproductions can be considered as PARODISTIC WORKS and not as copies.
Sorry for my english. MacMoreno
 Oppose Blatant copyright violation, see COM:DW. A copyrighted work of art is not a utilitarian object. The "right to paradoy" argument is a reference to fair use. You can't have your cake and eat it. Thuresson (talk) 15:49, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
 Support Likely below TOO. Ankry (talk) 21:16, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
  • I don't know if I can comment here, but as I was responsible for the elimination discussion, I would like to highlight: I consider it a flagrant violation of COM:DW; all files indicated presented representations of protected works. The use of these would be, at the very least, plausible in fair use, which the Commons does not adopt. However, I do not know the history of each file and I understand that the person responsible for the deletion should observe such factors. If this is considered sufficient for the restoration, I will ask for guidance on how to proceed given copyright infringement. Conde Edmond Dantès (talk) 22:46, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
I say this and then do not disturb more, for respect. I see, like the others see and how you see that on Commons is full of images (for example) the FIFA World Cup trophy (as seeen here) Then I imagine common policies That administrators are more tolerant with this type of imagini now. Thank you all for your attention. MacMoreno) 18:42, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - A derivative work is one "based upon one or more preexisting works ... [in] any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted" (17 U.S.C. § 101) That is precisely what this is; recasting a preexisting trophy as stylized cartoon version. Such recasting does not magically dissolve the underlying copyright. A previous DR with no reference to statute or case law (i.e., i.e., opinions untethered to any genuine basis) is OTHERSTUFF. The claim it is below TOO is offered without evidence and is utterly bizarre. Smoothing away some features (the work on which it is based remains clearly recognisable as such, which is the entire purpose of the image) does not remove originality. To quote myself: "'Original' in reference to a copyright work means that the particular work 'owes its origin' to the 'author.' No large measure of novelty is required." (Kamar International Inc v. Russ Berrie and Co., 657 F. 2d 1059 (9th Cir. 1981)) "All that is needed to satisfy both the Constitution [of the United States of America] and the statute is that the 'author' contributed something more than a 'merely trivial' variation, something recognizably 'his own.' Originality in this context 'means little more than a prohibition of actual copying.' No matter how poor artistically the 'author's' addition, it is enough if it be his own." (Alfred Bell Co v. Catalda Fine Arts, 191 F. 2d 99 (2nd Cir. 1951)). Эlcobbola talk 15:40, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per Thuresson and Elcobbola. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:51, 4 June 2021 (UTC)


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

Photos of indoor works in China (Category:Chinese FOP cases (indoor))

A new version of China's Copyright Law, which allows indoor FoP, came into effect on June 1st. --沈澄心✉ 02:33, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

@沈澄心: Is the law retroactve? If not, we need to verify if the photographed objects are still where they were on case-by-case basis. Ankry (talk) 18:44, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per Ankry @沈澄心: Undeletion shall be on a case-by-case basis and if the law is retroactive. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:48, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Награда „Митрополит Методий Кусев“.jpg

Моя снимка е от моя фотоапарат, както съм го посочил. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Илиев2010 (talk • contribs) 18:24, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

@Илиев2010: The photographed object is not your own work and likely copyrighted. If not, you need to provide evidence for this. Ankry (talk) 20:19, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Това е публична награда. Аз не съм нейния дизайнер, но тя бива разпространявана в медиите свободно. Това не е Нобеловата награда. Илиев2010 (talk) 22:33, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
And anybody can extract it from your photo, fill with arbitrary data nad sell commercially? I do not think so. IMO above TOO. Ankry (talk) 18:40, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Не, не може всеки да си попълни данните на тази снимка. Това не е шаблон пригоден с празни полета, нужната резолюция за печат или каквото и да било способстващо такъв род операции. Илиев2010 (talk) 06:46, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per Ankry. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:47, 4 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Медальонът от паметника на Васил Левски в Стара Загора.jpg

Моя снимка е от моя фотоапарат, както съм го посочил. Илиев2010 (talk) 18:25, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

@Илиев2010: The photographed object is not your own work and likely copyrighted. If not, you need to provide evidence for this. No FOP in Bulgaria. Ankry (talk) 20:22, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Фотографираният обект!? Това е паметник на публично място и по силата на българското законодателство мога да го снимам колкото си пожелая. Погледнете статията, в която съм го прикачил. Илиев2010 (talk) 22:24, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Per COM:FOP Bulgaria such photos are non-commercial; incompatible with Commons requirements. Ankry (talk) 18:37, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:46, 4 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:10 LEI 2014 Romania (2).png

Моя снимка на моя монета с моя фотоапарат! Илиев2010 (talk) 18:27, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Likely {{PD-money-Romania}}, but {{Own}} declaration can be accepted only from users that do not provide false or incorrect authorship/copyright claims. Evidence of your authorship is needed, eg. the original photo. Ankry (talk) 19:47, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplished here. @Илиев2010: For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under an accepted free licence to OTRS at permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Please note that OTRS is not able to accept forwarded statements or proxy permissions for legal reasons. Once OTRS has determined to have receive sufficient permission and there is no other valid rationale for deletion, an OTRS agent will perform or request undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:45, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Милена Желязкова.jpg

Моя снимка, както съм го посочил. Илиев2010 (talk) 18:28, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

@Илиев2010: Low-res photo, unlikely your own. But you can provide the original, full resolution photo with complete camera info in EXIF to prove your authorship. Ankry (talk) 20:26, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Качил съм изображението нарочно с малка резолюция. Не желая да споделям изображението с пълната му резолюция. Илиев2010 (talk) 22:22, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
@Илиев2010: You can prove your authorship, contacting OTRS volunteers and providing them information that you do not wish to be published, then. See COM:OTRS for details. Ankry (talk) 13:30, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Не разбирам абревиатурите Ви. Правя дарения. Илиев2010 (talk) 16:11, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
See the linked page. Ankry (talk) 17:18, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplished here. @Илиев2010: For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under an accepted free licence to OTRS at permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Please note that OTRS is not able to accept forwarded statements or proxy permissions for legal reasons. Once OTRS has determined to have receive sufficient permission and there is no other valid rationale for deletion, an OTRS agent will perform or request undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:45, 4 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Училищният колектив.jpg

Моя снимка, както съм го посочил. Илиев2010 (talk) 18:28, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplished here. @Илиев2010: For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under an accepted free licence to OTRS at permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Please note that OTRS is not able to accept forwarded statements or proxy permissions for legal reasons. Once OTRS has determined to have receive sufficient permission and there is no other valid rationale for deletion, an OTRS agent will perform or request undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:45, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Guilherme Isnard por Flávio Colker .jpg

The image was licensed by the author to Guilherme Isnard via a special contract — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurabatitucci (talk • contribs) 18:52, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

@Laurabatitucci: This contradicts your previous claim that it was made personally by you and you own exclusive copyright. Ankry (talk) 20:29, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done COM:OTRS permission needed. We cannot verify on-wiki whether the mentiond contract exist and whether it allows relicensing under a free license. Ankry (talk) 18:44, 4 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Susana Bloch, creator of Alba Emoting.jpg

Hello. We were unable to receive permission during the first review period, as our contact in the Susana Bloch family (Bloch's daughter) was at a long retreat where there was no electronic contact. That person has now returned, and has given permission to Patricia Angelin [the editor of Bloch's latest (2017) book] to use the image. We would therefore like to ask to undelete the image in order to be reviewed a second time please to use it in Bloch's article. Thank you. Remando (talk) 14:57, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

When the free license permission from the actual copyright holder (who is likely the photographer, not the subject) is received, verified and accepted, then the image may be undeleted. Ankry (talk) 18:14, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Understood. Thanks very much, Ankry. Remando (talk) 19:58, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:42, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Brandy Norwood 2021.jpg

I know the person who made this photo and they allowed me to use it for wikipedia. I could provide some screenshots if it is needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elysee15 (talk • contribs) 16:45, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Commons is not Wikipedia. "Use for wikipedia" is not compatible with Wikimedia Commons licensing requirements. Permissions should come from the copyright holder directly; forwarded ones cannot be accepted. Ankry (talk) 18:12, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Not done, per Ankry. Thuresson (talk) 21:36, 4 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Summation of tidal waves in a semi-enclosed basin.gif

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Dear person in charge of undeletion of files, This gif has been made a professor of mine, who used this animation in his lectures. I have asked personal approval to use this file and he has added a watermark on the gif, such that the original creator is credited. When uploading this, it was asked where this animation was published/taken from. However, as the file was used in his lectures, it has never been officially published as such, and therefore was personally send to me by the creator of the gifs. I can provide the e-mail in which the gifs were send to me and personal approval was given to use for the wikipedia article: Amphidromic points. I hope that this has clarified any uncertainty regarding the copyright status of this file. With kind regards, Hinne HinnevdZant (talk) 10:31, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

 Oppose per COM:FU. There is no license info about a free license granted by its author. No Fair Use images on Commons. Ankry (talk) 18:55, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per Ankry. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:41, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Sum of Kelvin waves.gif

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Please note that this is the second file for which I request undeletion. As both files come from the same source, the reasoning for this request is the same. Therefore, I have added the same description in this request;

Dear person in charge of undeletion of files, This gif has been made a professor of mine, who used this animation in his lectures. I have asked personal approval to use this file and he has added a watermark on the gif, such that the original creator is credited. When uploading this, it was asked where this animation was published/taken from. However, as the file was used in his lectures, it has never been officially published as such, and therefore was personally send to me by the creator of the gifs. I can provide the e-mail in which the gifs were send to me and personal approval was given to use for the wikipedia article: Amphidromic points. I hope that this has clarified any uncertainty regarding the copyright status of this file. With kind regards, Hinne HinnevdZant (talk) 10:33, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

 Oppose per COM:FU. There is no license info about a free license granted by its author. No Fair Use images on Commons. Ankry (talk) 18:54, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 Oppose I'm afraid but we cannot accept forwarded permissions. Please ask Mr. Roos to send a permission by email as explained at COM:OTRS. It is also insufficient if only you got permission to use the file because uploads at Commons need to be free for anyone to use for any purpose. De728631 (talk) 18:55, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:40, 4 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Kim Hanbin in his first China interview.jpg

Undeletion request File:Kim Hanbin in his first China interview.jpg--Iamking131 (talk) 12:35, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

@Iamking131: Where is an evidence of free license by the author (photographer)? Ankry (talk) 18:52, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: No valid rationale for undeletion. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 03:36, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Raspadori Progresso.jpg

I don't understand why the file Raspadori Progresso.jpg shoul be deleted. It's my own work, you cannot find it on the Web.I already send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS, why you deleted it? What's the reason? --Aramis974 (talk) 21:23, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplised here. To quote the UDR instructions: If the file was deleted for missing evidence of licensing permission from the copyright holder, please follow the procedure for submitting permission evidence. If you have already done that, there is no need to request undeletion here. If the submitted permission is in order, the file will be restored when the permission is processed. Please be patient, as this may take several weeks depending on the current workload and available volunteers. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:40, 4 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Raspadori U21.jpg

Pictures are my own Work, you cannot find it on the Web.I already send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS. Why you deleted it from commons files?--Aramis974 (talk) 21:27, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplised here. To quote the UDR instructions: If the file was deleted for missing evidence of licensing permission from the copyright holder, please follow the procedure for submitting permission evidence. If you have already done that, there is no need to request undeletion here. If the submitted permission is in order, the file will be restored when the permission is processed. Please be patient, as this may take several weeks depending on the current workload and available volunteers. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:40, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:1975 Alaska License Plate.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: deleted through Commons:Deletion requests/File:1975 Alaska License Plate.jpg. However, the year is 1975, and there is a possibility that the license plate may be {{PD-US-no-notice}} (as a pre-1978 work in the United States). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 05:25, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done per above. Ankry (talk) 10:53, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Lion's Head, Baguio City.jpg

To be reuploaded under fair use in the English Wikipedia.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 08:39, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done @Hariboneagle927: {{Temporarily undeleted}} for up to 2 days. Please, notify when finished. Ankry (talk) 10:59, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done @Ankry: Move complete.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 03:04, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:TromboneAttraction.jpg

Please undo the deletion of File:TromboneAttraction.jpg, as the permission of the photographer was sent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org on 2021-06-05 at 12:36.

--Stefan Obmann (talk) 11:09, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

 Oppose If a permission has been sent to OTRS, the image will be restored after the permission is verified and accepted. Ankry (talk) 11:20, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done by Krd per OTRS. Ankry (talk) 00:53, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:$$+gsource

commons:sandbox;00:05#redirect[[Media:$$gsource(commons:sandbox;00:05)]108.67.84.12 13:54, 5 June 2021 (UTC){{PAGENAME:TALKPAGE,namespace,--!WIKI test-GRCF:review [[Category:wanted category]616/discussion ]}} — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 108.67.84.12 (talk) 13:54, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Procedural close, test. Thuresson (talk) 19:55, 5 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Le Pont de Québec vu du ciel.jpg

Please undelete. We have a permission per Ticket:2021060210011497. Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 15:19, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done @Mussklprozz: FYI. Ankry (talk) 00:48, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:xomu.jpg

please restore my 'xomu.jpg' image — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akinaharukowiki (talk • contribs) 07:42, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

@Akinaharukowiki: No such image; do you mean File:Xomuu.jpg? You need to provide a reason (eg. an evidence that the declared CC0 license has been granted by the logo copyright holder). The letters may be PD (depending on the country of origin), but the background is not. Ankry (talk) 11:04, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
Not done, no response. Thuresson (talk) 19:52, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Nery Castillo con la selección de México.jpg

Nery Castillo jugando con la selección Mexicana — Preceding unsigned comment added by José Edmundo 99 (talk • contribs) 15:15, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Not done, no rationale. Thuresson (talk) 20:02, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Dan Riskin CEO.jpg

This file belongs to Dan Riskin, and we just want to post it to his page on his behalf: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Riskin

Laura Hill 6/7/21--Lauraannhill (talk) 16:10, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

  •  Oppose - You've previously claimed it was your own work both when you first uploaded it under a different name, and when you tried to Flickrwash it under this name. Notwithstanding you implicitly acknowledge those lies here ("this file belongs to Dan Riskin"), this is, per the EXIF, the work of Karina Louise Photography. Ownership of a file is not ownership of the related intellectual property. Riskin, as the mere subject, would not own the copyright unless formally transferred by the author (Karina Louise) in writing. A copy of this document, or direct (not forwarded) permission from Louise would need to be provided through the COM:OTRS process (previous publication, on its own, requires this). Эlcobbola talk 16:25, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per Elcobbola. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 15:59, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:1862-63 Territory of Dakota Session Laws.pdf

I didn't tag the document quickly enough. Can someone undelete this and tag it in the public domain, it was created in 1863, so it's definitely in the public domain. EthanRobertLee (talk) 01:15, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Done, @EthanRobertLee: . Thuresson (talk) 22:19, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! @Thuresson: EthanRobertLee (talk) 22:49, 8 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Poster de Guardian Tales.jpg

Hello, i have asked the game support to make a spanish wikipedia of it and they agreed. They also gave me a link of the "fanks kit" it's a material to make a fanmade content, to take a photo for the wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmorlesven (talk • contribs) 04:32, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplished here. @Cmorlesven: Works previously published elsewhere requires that the copyright holder send permission and a specific release under an accepted free licence using the OTRS process. Once OTRS has determined that received sufficient permission, an OTRS agent will perform or request undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 15:58, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Poster de Guardian Tales.jpg

Hey, i have contacted the game support in their facebook: https://www.facebook.com/guardiantales, and they agreed to let me make their game wiki.They also gave me a link for theri "fans kit" which cntains images to make fanmade content to take the needed for the wiki, i don't know what more i need to do it, but i agree if you want to contact them. Thanks.


--Cmorlesven (talk) 04:44, 8 June 2021 (UTC) 06/08/2021

 Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplished here. @Cmorlesven: Works previously published elsewhere requires that the copyright holder send permission and a specific release under an accepted free licence using the OTRS process. Once OTRS has determined that received sufficient permission, an OTRS agent will perform or request undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 15:58, 9 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Movie TV Tech Geeks News Logo 512X512.png

Hello,

I am the sole copyright owner of this logo, and I can confirm that it is fine to undelete for the Movie TV Tech Geeks news site which was used on that Wikipedia page.

Thank you,

Curt Johnson — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gooma2 (talk • contribs) 17:39, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

 Oppose For the reasons at Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2021-01#File:Movie TV Tech Geeks News Logo 512X512.png. Thuresson (talk) 21:33, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Undeletion already rejected at Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2021-01#File:Movie TV Tech Geeks News Logo 512X512.png. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 15:54, 9 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Kapulett in icon South Beach visiting Nicky Jam in 2018.jpg

Esta imagen está siendo objeto de un atentado contra las contribuyentes de wikimedia esta foto reune todo los requisitos — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2601:58D:400:9180:C1BB:D5AA:384:163E (talk) 18:57, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Google translate: "This image is under attack against wikimedia contributors this photo meets all the requirements"

Procedural close, file is not deleted. Thuresson (talk) 20:37, 8 June 2021 (UTC)


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

Kapulett

Necesitamos más razones para el borrado rápido. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2601:58D:400:9180:C1BB:D5AA:384:163E (talk) 18:59, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Google Translate: We need more reasons for the quick erase.

Procedural close, page has not been deleted. Thuresson (talk) 21:29, 8 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:The last mercenary.jpg

This is the movie poster please put it back on there — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesjenks53 (talk • contribs) 19:36, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Procedural close, double entry. Thuresson (talk) 21:27, 8 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:The last mercenary.jpg

The director of this movie David charhon and action star Jean Claude Van Damme has been posting this picture all over social media so it's only right for the picture to be on here LOL so please make it happen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesjenks53 (talk • contribs) 23:15, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: procedural close. duplicate request. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 15:31, 9 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:210512 山下達郎様14101.jpg

この写真の著作権ライセンスは弊社（スマイルカンパニー）が所有しています。 山下達郎はスマイルカンパニーに所属しているシンガーソングライターです。 今回はウィキメディアでの使用は著作権の侵害に当たりません。 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smile-Co (talk • contribs) 10:46, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplished here. @Smile-Co: Works previously published elsewhere requires that the copyright holder (i.e. the photographer, unless copy was transferred by operation of law or by written and signed conveyance) send permission and a specific release under an accepted free licence using the OTRS process. Once OTRS has determined that received sufficient permission, an OTRS agent will perform or request undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 15:43, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Logo SC Bayer 05 Uerdingen.svg

Only the redirection was nominated to be deleted which is not common. (I see that now). Both files or pages should be undeleted. Nordat (talk) 11:46, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done: per above @Nordat: FYI. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 15:41, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Barbara Kanam1.jpg File:Barbara Kanam2.jpg File:Barbara Kanam3.jpg File:Barbara Kanam4.jpg File:Barbara Kanam5.jpg File:Barbara Kanam6.jpg File:Barbara Kanam7.jpg File:Barbara Kanam8.jpg File:Barbara Kanam9.jpg File:Barbara Kanam10.jpg File:Barbara Kanam11.jpg

Les fichiers ci hauts supprimés sont des photos personnelles de l'artiste Musicienne Barbara Kanam et étant son agent communication je suis en charge de mettre son contenu en ligne et en respectant les règles du jeux wiki commons. seulement qu'après uploads les fichiers ont été supprimés. Raison pour laquelle je demande sa restauration puisqu'elles contribuent à l'amélioration de l'article ne terme de contenu.

--Feliccakikadi (talk) 06:34, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

@Feliccakikadi: While only the File:Barbara Kanam1.jpg photo is under CC-BY-SA 2.0 license on Flickr (the others are marked "All rights reserved), I doubt if the license has been properly granted: this is not a selfie and no information about the author (photographer) is provided. IMO, we need for all the photos a free license permission from their actual copyright holder(s) following COM:OTRS instructions and an evidence that the permission is granted by the author(s) or can be tracked to the author(s) following appropriate contract(s). Ankry (talk) 11:15, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per Ankry. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 16:50, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Vaccine_Plant_Shamirpet.jpg

Hello User,

The source of this image is this and the company page of terms of usage lets you use their logo and images as media kits as said here quoted "The contents of Biological E. Limited website may not be copied other than for non-commercial, individual reference with all copyright or other proprietary notices retained and thereafter may not be recopied, reproduced or otherwise redistributed except as specifically mentioned above."

I hope the above resolves the issue and image be able to be used again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neburner11 (talk • contribs) 14:51, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Non-commercial restrictions are not allowed on commons. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:20, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 16:07, 9 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Biological E Ltd Logo.png

Hello User,

This logo image consists only of simple geometric shapes or text. It does not meet the threshold of originality needed for copyright protection, and is therefore in the public domain. The source of the image is here and the company page of terms of use specifies that "The contents of Biological E. Limited website may not be copied other than for non-commercial, individual reference with all copyright or other proprietary notices retained and thereafter may not be recopied, reproduced or otherwise redistributed except as specifically mentioned above."

I hope the above resolves the issue and that the image will be able to be used again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neburner11 (talk • contribs) 14:56, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Deletions which are correct based on the current deletion, project scope and licensing policies will not be undone. Non-commercial restrictions are not permitted on Commons. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 16:08, 9 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Reza Abbaszadeh Entrepreneur.jpg

I have noticed File:Reza Abbaszadeh Entrepreneur.jpg has been removed because of copyright of londondailypost.com/reza-abbaszadeh-is-expanding-his-multi-million-entrepreneurial-empire-in-europe/ . But This photo is not the copytight of Londondailypost. This Photo is a picture of mr Reza Abbaszadeh as you can find it here: https://rezaabbaszadeh.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/vojq4t5b.jpg . He does own and reserved the copyright and i have a persmission from him to publish this photo in Wiki Commons. So please undo the deletion immediately.--Robflick (talk) 16:55, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

 Oppose Please follow the instructions at COM:OTRS to verify the claimed license. Thuresson (talk) 19:54, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: file not yet deleted. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 16:08, 9 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:ABCozyOfficialLogo.png

The file File:ABCozyOfficialLogo.png was uploaded by ABCozy(Japanese Novelist) official website abcozy.com administrator. The user "橋場巌夫", which I'm requesting Wikipedia to change user name into "ABCozyOfficial", is the administrator of the ABCozy official website and ABCozy.com now indicate that any quotation of literary or logo from abcozy.com by the user "橋場巌夫" or "ABCozyOfficial" is done by abcozy official website and doesn't violate copyright of abcozy.com, in the link "wikipedia情報の更新について"(About information in wikipedia) link in the bottom of page https://abcozy.com/author

\\ \\ Please recover the official logo in the wikimedia commons. ABCozy official understand the policy of Wikimedia commons. 橋場巌夫 (talk) 23:51, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplished here. @橋場巌夫: Works previously published elsewhere requires that the copyright holder send permission and a specific release under an accepted free licence using the OTRS process. Once OTRS has determined that received sufficient permission, an OTRS agent will perform or request undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 16:18, 9 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Chloé Delaume 2020.jpg

This request because I am the author of this photo, and I don't understand why it has been delated Zita beretta (talk) 14:46, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplished here. @Zita beretta: Works previously published elsewhere requires that the copyright holder (i.e. the photographer, unless copy was transferred by operation of law or by written and signed conveyance) send permission and a specific release under an accepted free licence using the OTRS process. Once OTRS has determined that received sufficient permission, an OTRS agent will perform or request undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 17:01, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Manon UK blogger.jpg

Hello, I have the right to use this file, the owner allows me to publish it in Wikipedia, what can I send to prove it? Please clear me up. image public source : https://manon.uk/

StacyCarringtons (talk) 16:04, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplished here. @StacyCarringtons: Works previously published elsewhere requires that the copyright holder (i.e. the photographer, unless copy was transferred by operation of law or by written and signed conveyance) send permission and a specific release under an accepted free licence using the OTRS process. Once OTRS has determined that received sufficient permission, an OTRS agent will perform or request undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 17:00, 9 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Manon andrieux fragrance advertisement.jpg

Hello, I have the right to use this file, the owner allows me to publish it in Wikipedia, what can I send to prove it? Please clear me up. image public source : https://manon.uk/ StacyCarringtons (talk) 16:05, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplished here. @StacyCarringtons: Works previously published elsewhere requires that the copyright holder (i.e. the photographer, unless copy was transferred by operation of law or by written and signed conveyance) send permission and a specific release under an accepted free licence using the OTRS process. Once OTRS has determined that received sufficient permission, an OTRS agent will perform or request undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 17:00, 9 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Поляков Максим Валерійович.jpg

Please undelete my photo of Max Polyakov and return it to the mainspace in the Wikimedia Commons. Thank you. (Kickzzz (talk) 16:22, 9 June 2021 (UTC))

 Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplished here. @Kickzzz: For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder (i.e. the photographer, unless copy was transferred by operation of law or by written and signed conveyance) must send permission and a specific release under an accepted free licence using the OTRS process. Once OTRS has determined that received sufficient permission, an OTRS agent will perform or request undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 17:04, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

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

Files provided by Société Baltayan

Please undelete

We received permission per Ticket:2021052910003662. Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 10:20, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done @Mussklprozz: Gbawden (talk) 08:25, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done by Gbawden. Ankry (talk) 12:12, 11 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:The last mercenary.jpg

This is the movie poster it is supposed to be on there — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesjenks53 (talk • contribs) 19:33, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

@Jamesjenks53: Do you believe that the copyright owner of this movie poster has released the poster under a free license? Which license? Thuresson (talk) 21:27, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done no evidence of free license. Ankry (talk) 12:11, 11 June 2021 (UTC)


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

Portraits of DJ Catch

Please undelete

Per Ticket:2021060810005957 we have permission from both photographers.

Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 14:50, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done @Mussklprozz: FYI. Ankry (talk) 11:17, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Christopher Convery on Build.jpg

The person who deleted the photo said the photo was a derivative work of a copyrighted material, which is incorrect. It is a private photo taken during an interview and does not belong to the entity that conducted the interview or any other entity. It was a personally taken photograph and should be undeleted. Adresfreds (talk) 15:47, 10 June 2021 (UTC) Adresfreds

 Not done requester blocked and cannot respond in 24h. Ankry (talk) 11:13, 11 June 2021 (UTC)


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

Files by British Antarctic survey

Please restore

We have permission per Ticket:2021060910005651 from an official representative with an official email of the organization.

Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 19:54, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done @Mussklprozz: The files have no license. Please, provide this information as otherwise they will be speedily redeleted. Ankry (talk) 08:47, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Aya to Majo title.jpg

I'm sorry I didn't explain it earlier. I think this logo image consists only of simple geometric shapes or text and It does not meet the threshold of originality needed for copyright protection, and is therefore in the public domain. Please restore the following pages:

File:Aya to Majo title.jpg - Hijikatayyy (talk) 10:44, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

@Thibaut120094: Pinging the DR nominator who seems to think otherwise. Ankry (talk) 11:34, 9 May 2021 (UTC) Ankry (talk) 11:58, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Above ToO. Clearly not simple geometric shapes or text. It is not even a traditional text logo, and is not composed of a non-copyrightable standard font, but appears to be hand-drawn when it was created and it has “artistic appearance that is worth artistic appreciation” (COM:TOO Japan). Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 13:28, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done: likely below TOO. Renominate for deletion if legal precedents show otherwise. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:47, 11 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Eclipse solar (32292625364).jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Public Domain Mark 1.0 is accepted on Commons now, per {{PDMark-owner}} A1Cafel (talk) 03:54, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

File:Eclipse solar (32292625364).jpg is watermarked; COM:OTRS still needed.
Can Assembleia Legislativa do Paraná be the photo author? Can the photos published by them be legally claimed their {{Own work}}? Otherwise, {{PDMark-owner}} cannot apply. Ankry (talk) 06:12, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Oppose restoring File:Sideboob-example-2017-5-18.jpg. Watermarked with "Xin Photography"; this is a professional photographer who do semi-nude photographs of women for Suicide Girls and similar web sites. The Flickr account is not the photographer's. Thuresson (talk) 21:19, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Nothing to be accomplished here. Batch request is not the appropriate method of requesting undeletion as there are files that are listed here that should remain deleted per COM:PCP. New requests may be opened, but in this case, not in batch form. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 08:57, 12 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:ECDF-0.png

I was just reviewing an image that I created some time ago; File:ECDF-100.png. The file page includes the JavaScript that I wrote to produce the image, which uses File:ECDF-0.png, a blank graph without which the JavaScript is virtually useless. I guess that the blank graph was deleted because it was an orphan, and I probably hadn't clearly linked the two files. If possible, could someone please restore the file? I may still have a copy of it somewhere. If so, I can re-upload it if necessary. If not, it may be permanently lost. Any help would be appreciated. nagualdesign 23:47, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

@Nagualdesign: No such file. And I see nothing with similar name among your deleted contribution to Commons. Ankry (talk) 12:39, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Nothing to be accomplished here. No such file was uploaded to Commons. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 09:06, 12 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:NOKIA 7250.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: deleted due to "copyright violation". However, if the concern was derivative work, then I assume the screen may be "blurred" or the copyrightable elements like icons are not clearly visible, like File:Nokia N70 2.jpg (which was kept at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nokia N70 2.jpg). See also File:NOKIA 7250i 2.jpg, another upload by the same user as File:NOKIA 7250.jpg. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:53, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

No. Deleted as published elsewhere. The image looks like a promotional image by the vendor, not Own work. Ankry (talk) 08:43, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ankry: if this is true, then  I withdraw my nomination of undeletion request. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:10, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: withdrawn. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:43, 11 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:S crassus habit-1.jpg to undelete

Hi,

Permission has been obtained from the author of the photo by the person uploading the images (tle003). The author of the photo has sent an e-mail to Wikimedia Commons using the template recommended, and we are waiting a response. The bot did not allow sufficient time for the review process to be undertook.

Cheers, Tammy Elliott, PhD Tle003 (talk) 07:22, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Tle003: No information about the permission sent was provided at upload. So the image can be undeleted after the permission is received and verified. Ankry (talk) 16:19, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplised here. To quote the UDR instructions: If the file was deleted for missing evidence of licensing permission from the copyright holder, please follow the procedure for submitting permission evidence. If you have already done that, there is no need to request undeletion here. If the submitted permission is in order, the file will be restored when the permission is processed. Please be patient, as this may take several weeks depending on the current workload and available volunteers. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 08:43, 12 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:S crassus inflorescence-2.jpg-undeletion

Hi,

The file has been deleted by iNaturalistReviewBot without sufficient time for the permissions to be reviewed by Wikimedia Commons.

Permission by the author of the photos has been given to the person uploading (tle003), an e-mail has been sent, or is in the process of being sent, to Wikimedia Commons (using the recommended template), and we are waiting confirmation. This process takes time, which iNaturalistReviewBot did not allow. Tle003 (talk) 07:22, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Tle003: No information about the permission sent was provided at upload. So the image can be undeleted after the permission is received and verified. Ankry (talk) 16:18, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplised here. To quote the UDR instructions: If the file was deleted for missing evidence of licensing permission from the copyright holder, please follow the procedure for submitting permission evidence. If you have already done that, there is no need to request undeletion here. If the submitted permission is in order, the file will be restored when the permission is processed. Please be patient, as this may take several weeks depending on the current workload and available volunteers. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 08:43, 12 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:S ligulatus inflorescences-1.jpg undeletion

Hi,

The file has been deleted by iNaturalistReviewBot without sufficient time for the permissions to be reviewed by Wikimedia Commons.

Permission by the author of the photos has been given to the person uploading (tle003), an e-mail has been sent, or is in the process of being sent, to Wikimedia Commons (using the recommended template), and we are waiting confirmation. This process takes time, which iNaturalistReviewBot did not allow.

Repeated message

Tle003 (talk) 07:21, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Tle003: No information about the permission sent was provided at upload. So the image can be undeleted after the permission is received and verified. Ankry (talk) 16:16, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplised here. To quote the UDR instructions: If the file was deleted for missing evidence of licensing permission from the copyright holder, please follow the procedure for submitting permission evidence. If you have already done that, there is no need to request undeletion here. If the submitted permission is in order, the file will be restored when the permission is processed. Please be patient, as this may take several weeks depending on the current workload and available volunteers. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 08:43, 12 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:S prophyllus base-1.jpg undeletion

Hi,

The file has been deleted by iNaturalistReviewBot without sufficient time for the permissions to be reviewed by Wikimedia Commons.

Permission by the author of the photos has been given to the person uploading (tle003), an e-mail has been sent, or is in the process of being sent, to Wikimedia Commons (using the recommended template), and we are waiting confirmation. This process takes time, which iNaturalistReviewBot did not allow. Tle003 (talk) 07:20, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Tle003: No information about the permission sent was provided at upload. So the image can be undeleted after the permission is received and verified. Ankry (talk) 16:17, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplised here. To quote the UDR instructions: If the file was deleted for missing evidence of licensing permission from the copyright holder, please follow the procedure for submitting permission evidence. If you have already done that, there is no need to request undeletion here. If the submitted permission is in order, the file will be restored when the permission is processed. Please be patient, as this may take several weeks depending on the current workload and available volunteers. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 08:43, 12 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Sselinae habit-1.jpg undeletion

Hi,

The file has been deleted by iNaturalistReviewBot without sufficient time for the permissions to be reviewed by Wikimedia Commons.

Permission by the author of the photos has been given to the person uploading (tle003), an e-mail has been sent, or is in the process of being sent, to Wikimedia Commons (using the recommended template), and we are waiting confirmation. This process takes time, which iNaturalistReviewBot did not allow. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tle003 (talk • contribs) 07:12, 11 June 2021 (UTC) Tle003 (talk) 07:20, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Tle003: No information about the permission sent was provided at upload. So the image can be undeleted after the permission is received and verified. Ankry (talk) 16:17, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplised here. To quote the UDR instructions: If the file was deleted for missing evidence of licensing permission from the copyright holder, please follow the procedure for submitting permission evidence. If you have already done that, there is no need to request undeletion here. If the submitted permission is in order, the file will be restored when the permission is processed. Please be patient, as this may take several weeks depending on the current workload and available volunteers. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 08:44, 12 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:S auritus inflorescences-1.jpg; File:S bolusii inflorescence-1.jpg; File:S compactus base-1.jpg; File:S crassus base-1.jpg; File:S inconspicuus habit-2.jpg; File:S submarginalis base-1.jpg; File:S arenicola base-1.jpg; File:S arenicola inflorescence-1.jpg; File:S auritus base-1.jpg; File:S auritus habit-1.jpg; File:S australis-habit-1.jpg undeletion requestions

Hi,

The file has been deleted by iNaturalistReviewBot and AntiCompositeNumber without sufficient time for the permissions to be reviewed by Wikimedia Commons.

Permission by the author of the photos has been given to the person uploading (tle003), an e-mail has been sent, or is in the process of being sent, to Wikimedia Commons (using the recommended template), and we are waiting confirmation. This process takes time, which the bots did not allow.

The images named are as following:

File:S auritus inflorescences-1.jpg; File:S bolusii inflorescence-1.jpg; File:S compactus base-1.jpg; File:S crassus base-1.jpg; File:S inconspicuus habit-2.jpg; File:S submarginalis base-1.jpg; File:S arenicola base-1.jpg; File:S arenicola inflorescence-1.jpg; File:S auritus base-1.jpg; File:S auritus habit-1.jpg; File:S australis-habit-1.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tle003 (talk • contribs) 07:18, 11 June 2021 (UTC) Tle003 (talk) 07:20, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Tle003: No information about the permission sent was provided at upload. So the image can be undeleted after the permission is received and verified. Ankry (talk) 16:20, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplised here. To quote the UDR instructions: If the file was deleted for missing evidence of licensing permission from the copyright holder, please follow the procedure for submitting permission evidence. If you have already done that, there is no need to request undeletion here. If the submitted permission is in order, the file will be restored when the permission is processed. Please be patient, as this may take several weeks depending on the current workload and available volunteers. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 08:44, 12 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Royal Flag of HM Queen Suthida.svg

I don't think this work is subjected to copyright according to Thai laws. If it is, then all personal flags of Thai royal family members should also be deleted. For example, King Maha Vajiralongkorn's flag is uploaded in a similar nature, adopted in late 2016, and should also apply under similar conditions as well. --BustersRed8 (talk) 14:59, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@BustersRed8: It is irrelevant what you think. You need to provide an evidence that it is freely licensed, not copyrighted or personally copyrighted by Wikimedia User:Zsoy (as claimed at upload). The latter claim was blatant copyright violation. Ankry (talk) 15:31, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ankry: Is it possible to have the file uploaded to enwiki and thwiki under fair use instead? --BustersRed8 (talk) 15:42, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
You need to ask on enwiki/thwiki, not here. Definitely not if still claimed own work by User:Zsoy. However, I do not think that high resolution svg image is appropriate as Fair Use. Ankry (talk) 15:44, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ankry: , okay, I'm not sure whether personal royal flags in Thailand falls under Commons:FOP Thailand? If it is then I will be able to change the licensing claims. --BustersRed8 (talk) 15:48, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
A photo of the flag may fall, SVG rendering definitely does not. Ankry (talk) 15:54, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
Is {{PD-TH-exempt}} applicable? 3. Regulations, by-laws, notifications, orders, explanations and official correspondence of the Ministries, Departments or any other government or local units I see many of the royal monograms and emblems are covered under this, including the Queen's pre-marriage monogram. --BustersRed8 (talk) 16:48, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
IMO it is text-only. But it is not the right venue to discuss it. It is you who need to provide an undeletion rationale while requesting. Ankry (talk) 16:53, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Proper deletion rationale

The file was deleted due to mis-claimed CC license, and the deletion request specifies as it is a work of copyright.

Once the file is restored, change the tag to {{PD-TH-exempt}} for government symbols, according to the template's instructions.

I would also comment that this royal monogram consists merely of two Thai alphabets, and a heraldic crown, which is not protected under Thai copyright law. --BustersRed8 (talk) 17:56, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: request withdrawn. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 08:40, 12 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File: Edwin_Cardona.png

Es imagen no tenia copyright no era de nadie, literal varias paginas de noticias la usaron era solo Edwin Cardona — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thiagox2812 (talk • contribs) 20:42, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per Elcobbola. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 00:21, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Imperial Nebraska mural.jpg

I would like the picture (imperial nebraska mural) to be undeleted because, I work for the city of imperial and I was doing it with my coworker who took the picture so it isn’t copyrighted and we do use the photo on our websites. We changed the wiki page because wikipedia gave a preview that was unsightly and we wanted to help make Imperial look more appealing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacka782 (talk • contribs) 20:09, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

@Jacka782: For published images, we need an evidence of free license (eg. an evidence that the source site is freely licensed) or a legal evidence that a copyright exception applies. I see no evidence of cc-by-sa-4.0 license at www.imperial-ne.com nor an evidence of legal act granting that works presented on this site are not copyrighted. In this particular case we probably have two copyrights: copyright to the photo and to the mural. A license / copyright exception needs to cover both. Ankry (talk) 21:00, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done COM:OTRS permission needed. Ankry (talk) 01:48, 13 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:1921-10-09, La Novela Teatral, Ricardo de la Vega, Tovar.jpg

In spite of several errors in the uploads of this user (and socks such as User:アナナ), this one was completely OK. It was deleted after this request (Commons:Deletion requests/Files of Chaka Coolada). This is indeed a 1921-cover by Manuel Tovar (1875-1935) and source country is Spain (more info here (p. 174)). It complies with the 80 p.m.a in Spain. Strakhov (talk) 20:48, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

 Support Ankry (talk) 00:46, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done per above: PD image. Ankry (talk) 01:46, 13 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Alabama 1977 plate.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: deleted via Commons:Deletion requests/File:Alabama 1977 plate.jpg (license plate, DW issue). But as a 1977 work, this may qualify for {{PD-US-no notice}} as a pre-1978 work in the United States. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:06, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

 Support per above. Ankry (talk) 12:41, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done per above: {{PD-US-no notice}} plate. Ankry (talk) 01:47, 13 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:RicardoLopezMurphyDevoto.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: The photo was taken by me and was uploaded in a professional quality. Moreover, the photo on the site is just a hyperlink to the Commons resource. Renrov (talk) 12:17, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done nobody raised any objections . Ankry (talk) 01:39, 13 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Flixbug Logo.png

The given file is the logo of my company Flixbug and does not violate any copyright as it comes under the copyright of Flixbug only which is owned by Deb Chakrabarty. (DebFlix (talk) 18:31, 8 June 2021 (UTC))

@DebFlix: Where does the company confirm that Wikimedia user DebFlix is the author and exclusive copyright holder of their logo as you claimed at upload? Now you say something else: how can we rely on your claims? Also the logo seems to be out of COM:SCOPE. Ankry (talk) 16:41, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 01:34, 13 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Platea este - Estadio del C. A. Colón.jpg File:Platea oeste - Estadio del C. A. Colón.jpg File:Tribuna y platea norte - Estadio del C. A. Colón.jpg

Hola, solicito que se cancele el borrado de los archivos que mencione si es que no infringen los derechos de autor, ya que las fotografías son de mi autoridad, de no ser posible le agradecería que me informe que esta mal. Alejandro Raza (talk) 01:59, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

 Oppose The photos are low resolution and lack EXIF info. Please, provide the original photos from your camera if you are the photographer as you claimed. Ankry (talk) 11:59, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 01:33, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:JKM.img.jpg

== This file [[commons:File:JKM.img.jpg|JKM.img.jpg]] was on public domain and was deleted unnecessarily == 

File:JKM.img.jpg is on public domain and a more recent photo. There was no reasoning for its deletion. The article it was used Jose K Mani is disputed over BLP violations. The image removal also seems to be a part of passive vandalism.

Editorkutti (talk) 04:51, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

 Oppose Not obviously public domain; uploader claimed to own the copyright. Deleted after Commons:Deletion requests/File:JKM.img.jpg. Thuresson (talk) 20:50, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
@Editorkutti: This looks like a professional studio photo. If the uploader is indeed the photographer and wish the photo to be undeleted, they can upload (or provide via email to COM:OTRS) the original photo, with complete camera settings info in EXIF in order to prove their authorship. Ankry (talk) 11:47, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 01:32, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Cover danube connects Magazin.jpg

Cover danube connects Magazin.jpg

Wir als danube connects Magazin besitzen das Urheberrecht für das danube connects Logo sowie für sämtliche Magazincover, auf denen es zu sehen ist. Sämtliche Magazincover wurden von uns selbst unter Einhaltung aller Urheberrechte erstellt - es kann also kein Verstoß gegen das Urheberrecht vorliegen, auch nicht bei unserem Wiki-Profilbild. Danube connects (talk) 11:01, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

@Danube connects: For published images, we need evidence of free license from the actual exclusive copyright holder. Claiming that an anonymous Wikimedia user personally owns copyright to the magazine cover is blatant copyright violation. Regardless of the user username. Ankry (talk) 16:33, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done COM:OTRS permission needed. Ankry (talk) 01:31, 13 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Mario Guerra na sua HD.jpg

Essa foto é do álbum da minha família, como pode ter direitos autorais? Minha mãe tem esta foto, esta foi digitalizada por mim do original.

A foto que tem no site do DETRAN eu que mandei para eles, leia o texto da noticia.

Eu sou neto dele, ou seja, herdeiro e tenho os direitos autorais por herança. 

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Borchardt69 (talk • contribs) 14:12, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy 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.
  • @Borchardt69: Which local/US copyright law exception applies in your opinion? Photos made by humans are generally copyrighted. Eg. photos unpublished before 2003 are copyrighted in US 70 years since photographer death or 120 years since creation. And for any published photos we need a written free license permission from the copyright holder (likely photographer or their heirs). Ankry (talk) 11:40, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

A foto é minha, de álbum familiar da minha mãe, eu que digitalizei.

A foto no site do Detran eu que enviei para eles, inclusive isso consta no texto e meu nome (Hélio). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Borchardt69 (talk • contribs) 14:36, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

  1. @Borchardt69: Please, do not open multiple requests for the same file.
  2. Scanning a photo does not grant you any rights to it. The author (and likely tha copyright holder) is still the original photographer (or their heirs if they died). Ankry (talk) 15:40, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done no evidence of free license or PD status provided. Ankry (talk) 01:30, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Chianne.jpg

The image was used in their Wikidata entry. Commons must keep when used by other projects. --RAN (talk) 14:29, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): which Wikidata notability criterion applies here? Pinging also @ImprovedWikiImprovment and Gbawden: DR nominator and deleting admin. Ankry (talk) 11:25, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
  • That is no business of Commons to question why Wikidata chooses their entries. If it is used in Wikidata, Commons must host it, without question. --RAN (talk) 12:38, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
On reflection, I remember why I deleted. Although nominated for scope, this is a clear case of flickrwashing. Flickr account has 3 photos, no followers and the photo has no exif. If this must be undeleted OTRS must be provided Gbawden (talk) 13:02, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done regardless of scope issues, this seems to be flickrwashing. Ankry (talk) 01:28, 13 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Ermita-cucalon1.jpg File:IglesiaGallocanta.jpg

At first, these images were downloaded from the xilocapedia (URL: http://xiloca.org/xilocapedia/index.php?title=P%C3%A1gina_principal ), which means that the creator releases rights for its use. As it said on the botton of each page "El contenido está disponible bajo la licencia Dominio público a menos que se indique lo contrario." Translated it's "Content is available under the Public Domain license unless otherwise noted." Also, thinking that the images come from the website lorentearquitectos.com, the creator of the website and the images were contacted via email. He answered accepting the use of the media on wikimedia/wikipedia and similar projects. As you can see at Ticket: 2021052010009726 https://ticket.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentTicketZoom&TicketNumber=2021052010009726 Julian Barroso (talk) 16:52, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

The image at https://www.lorentearquitectos.com/proyectos/restauracion-y-rehabilitacion/iglesia-de-gallocanta-zaragoza/ is dated 22 June 2020, so it is alder than the xiloca.org upload. If the initial publication is not under a free license, we need an evidence that the license has been properly granted. Any evidence that xiloca.org is the original photographer's site or that the User:David Fuentes Monente is the account of the photographer? How can we verify this? COM:OTRS permission needed, if we cannot do this online. Ankry (talk) 08:55, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
OTRS-related requests need to be made by users with otrs-member permission (who you are not). Ankry (talk) 01:26, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplised here. To quote the UDR instructions: If the file was deleted for missing evidence of licensing permission from the copyright holder, please follow the procedure for submitting permission evidence. If you have already done that, there is no need to request undeletion here. If the submitted permission is in order, the file will be restored when the permission is processed. Please be patient, as this may take several weeks depending on the current workload and available volunteers. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 10:25, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Studio Barbell Set.png This is not a copy violations and this files can be used by anyone

Hello

Not sure why you deleted my file, This is not a copy violations and this file can be used by anyone, for any purpose! We have full authority by the owner and myself.

Thank you

==== -Juanin21 ==== 11/06/21 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juanin21 (talk • contribs) 13:16, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Juanin21: You claimed that CC-BY 4.0 license has been granted by the image copyright holder. We need an evidence of this in order to undelete the image. Ankry (talk) 16:02, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done CPM:OTRS permission needed if no public evidence of free license. Ankry (talk) 01:22, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Google Adds Dashboard.jpg This is not a copy violations and this file can be used by anyone

Hello

Not sure why you deleted my file, This is not a copy violations and this file can be used by anyone, for any purpose! We have full authority by the owner and myself.

Thank you

==== -Juanin21 ==== 11/06/21 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juanin21 (talk • contribs) 13:17, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 Info This may be below US TOO. @Elcobbola: your opinion? Ankry (talk) 15:59, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done per discussion. Ankry (talk) 01:21, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Indian_Cyber_Troops.png

hello there team Wikipedia, the file you have deleted is not a violation in fact, that picture is available on the internet, I have the right to use that for Wikipedia, I have taken permission from the organisation which the image belongs to — Preceding unsigned comment added by N00bh4sh (talk • contribs) 13:59, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done no free license. Ankry (talk) 01:20, 13 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:LINFINITY CEO Anndy Lian at LINFINITY Seoul Roundtable.jpg

I am the one who hired Jin. I am the owner of the images. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anndylian (talk • contribs) 6:20, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per Ankry. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 10:18, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Ion Ceban profile photo.jpg

This photo was made for public profiles of the person himself, not by someone who owns copyright — Preceding unsigned comment added by Savweb (talk • contribs) 11:52, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Savweb: So we have 3 issues here:
  1. the photo has been published elsewhere before upload to Commons; per policy a free license evidence is required in such cases, not just a simple declaration by an uploader
  2. if the photographer is not the copyright holder, we need an evidence of copyright transfer in order to know whose free license permission we can accept; by default the photographer is the copyright holder and we have to rely on this unless we have an evidence of otherwise
  3. the uploader (you) claimed at upload to be both: the author (photographer) and the copyright holder (but per your declaration this is someone else...)
Unless the issues are resolved basing either on public records or on processing described in COM:OTRS we cannot undelete the image. As only the actual copyright holder is legally authorized to grant a license, we have to verify that the license is properly granted as one of our goals is to protect reusers. Ankry (talk) 16:01, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per Ankry. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 10:18, 13 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Richmond Primary School 1930.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I now have written permission from the West Torrens Historical Society Reflexio (talk) 03:50, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplised here. To quote the UDR instructions: If the file was deleted for missing evidence of licensing permission from the copyright holder, please follow the procedure for submitting permission evidence. If you have already done that, there is no need to request undeletion here. If the submitted permission is in order, the file will be restored when the permission is processed. Please be patient, as this may take several weeks depending on the current workload and available volunteers. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 10:24, 13 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Mizanur-Rahman-Azhari.jpg

I think this image is not copyrighted. The news site just used it does it mean that the image is copyrighted? He is a religious man and famous. So please remove the deletion tag.--Tow7864 (talk) 09:42, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: procedural close. file not deleted as of 10:18, 13 June 2021 (UTC). no valid rationale for undeletion/as to why image should be retained. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 10:18, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Machi Francisca Linconao.jpg

The files "File:Machi Francisca Linconao.jpg" and "File:Machi Francisca Linconao (cropped).jpg" were deleted without proper consultation under a copyright violation argument. Well, both images were of my authorship, and therefore there should not be a copyright issue in accordance with the license I uploaded the files. The original version was a photograph that I personally took on a free poster attached to a tree on the public highway... User:Aeveraal 22:31, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

@Aeveraal: As the photo is COM:DW of the poster, there are two copyrights here: your (the photographer) and the poster author(s). The latter one is a problem. If the poster is freely licensed or not copyrighted, please elaborate why (eg. which copyright law exception applies here). Does FoP-Chile apply here? Ankry (talk) 23:55, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
FoP-Chile could apply, if depicted poster were be permanently installed, which seems unlikely, but might be discussed. --Túrelio (talk) 10:30, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
I doubt that the poster installer intended to remove this poster after some time period. It could have been removed per legal rationale. Unsure if permanent should be based on installer's intention or reality. Ankry (talk) 13:40, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: no consensus to undelete. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 08:48, 14 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Compositie, Waterverf Academie 1932.jpg

File:Compositie, Waterverf Academie 1932.jpg This work is by Eduard Hellendoorn who died in 1941. It is in public domain. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:59, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

@Nat: Where were the Eduard Hellendoorn's works published? This is the first time I have seen this criteria applied to a painting. Thanks WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 15:11, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
  • If the painting was unpublished, then what is the source of this photo? No information about this in the deleted description and the deletion was requested by the uploader themselves. In order to assume a painting unpublished, we need some evidence for this (eg. based on the painting history). Ankry (talk) 14:53, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 08:47, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:South Australian Railways 520 class locomotives -- evolution of design.tif

I can't remember the copyright details I provided, but I assume I made an error. Here's another try:

The image is PD in Australia because it was made by the Australian Commonwealth Government before 1 January 1969. See https://www.communications.gov.au/copyright/duration-copyright → Duration of copyright → PDF download page 5. {{PD-because|1= it was made by the Australian Commonwealth Government before 1 January 1969 (authority: https://www.communications.gov.au/copyright/duration-copyright → Duration of copyright → PDF download page 5).}}

The reason given above complies with Commons licensing policy.

The following notice is necessitated because the Wikimedia Foundation's servers are located in the United States: {{PD-1996 |country= Australia}} — Preceding unsigned comment added by SCHolar44 (talk • contribs) 08:57, 31 May 2021 (UTC) 

=={{int:filedesc}}==
{{Information
|description={{en|1=Four images of line drawings produced by the [[w:South Australian Railways|South Australian Railways]] showing the evolution of the design of its [[w:South Australian Railways 520 class|520 class]] steam locomotives. Headings, caption material and [[w:Creative Commons license#Zero / public domain|Creative Commons Public Domain Mark]] are by [[w:SCHolar44|SCHolar44]].}}
|date=ca. 1945
|source=Scans of hard copy line drawings
|author=South Australian Railways Drawing Office
|permission=
|other versions=
}}
Thank you for your comments, Ankry, which I appreciate.
  • I originally signed but it appears I inadvertently included my signoff when deleting preceding text.
  • Re your comment, "The {{PD-because}} above does not explain why the document was PD in 1996", are you saying I should include US-jurisdiction coverage? I had thought it should contain only Australia-jurisdiction factors and the 2nd notice should cover US. Depending on your advice on this, I'll draft something appropriate.
  • Thank you for pointing out that using arbitrary templates is a potential source of future problems. I now guess that as you removed the imbox code, that triggers "I am a template". I'm not at all experienced in this area (though an editor of ~14 years' experience), and I don't want to create a problem; pure ignorance was to blame.
With renewed thanks, SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬 at 06:12, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Well, I meant that the use of {{PD-1996}} should be based on some rationale why the image was PD in 1996 (not necessarily in the other copyright template; maybe somewhere in the description) and, maybe, there is a more appropriate template mentioned in COM:Australia. Ankry (talk) 18:08, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
@SCHolar44 and Ankry: I have attempted to clean up the licensing and permission information on the file's description page in accordance with the information given here and already present on the page. Please verify that the results are accurate and reflect the facts. --Xover (talk) 06:29, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
@Xover: Aha! What a wonderful job: the results are indeed accurate and reflect the facts. You have implemented everything I wanted to achieve. I was especially interested to see template PD-scan-two, with which I wasn't familiar; I have much to learn!
One question: what US template would be used if the document had never been published?
I would be grateful if I could ping you, whether on this Talk page or another, as I try to deal with some of the consequences of recent changes to copyright policy in Australia. I haven't yet found people with a high level of expertise on the pages I've visited (granted that it's an esoteric field) and your expertise has been most valuable. SCHolar44 (talk) 07:42, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done: by Ankry. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 08:45, 14 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Geologische Karte der Antarktischen Halbinsel.png

  • The source PDF file (available at [6]; the exact link to the PDF is [7]) contains the following information:
© 2015 The Author(s). This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/). Published by The Geological Society of London. Publishing disclaimer: www.geolsoc.org.uk/pub_ethics

@Cepheiden and Fitindia: Do you think that an extra permission is needed?

✓ Done: Published under CC by 3.0. --De728631 (talk) 20:38, 13 June 2021 (UTC)


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

Category:Road bridges in Czechia by district

Please undelete Category:Road bridges in Czechia by district, it was deleted as "unsystematical category, districts are categorized through regions", but until now there is no category tree comparable with Category:Bridges in the Czech Republic by region, so it's necessary to have a category to link existing district cats. — Draceane talkcontrib. 19:37, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

 Oppose The category is empty. Ankry (talk) 01:13, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ankry: Surprisingly, as long as it's deleted now. Road bridges in Prachatice District (subcat) is created for some time and I'm going to create more similar categories. The category tree would be analogous to Railway bridges in the Czech Republic by district. — Draceane talkcontrib. 12:18, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
We do not create categories for future use. The abobovementioned one is not empty. I am OK with restoring this category if a file or a subcat needs it. I see no such file at teh moment. Ankry (talk) 13:01, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
The category isn't empty and it wouldn't be empty. Satisfied now? ;-) (w:WP:BURO) — Draceane talkcontrib. 13:19, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done not empty now: undeleted for consistency with other categories. Ankry (talk) 23:09, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Rukmini Devi Institute of Advanced Studies.png Rukmini Devi Institute of Advanced Studies

This is my logo — Preceding unsigned comment added by NKwisi01 (talk • contribs) 17:33, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done procedural close: image not deleted: nothing to undelete. Ankry (talk) 23:05, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Picture of the penis of a circumcised man.jpg

After some thought, I decided not to delete the image because it is useful for Wikipedia users, educational and of good quality--Redfox6600 (talk) 11:50, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close: image not deleted - comments can be entered at the DR. --Эlcobbola talk 20:02, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Cassandra Aarssen.jpg

Copyright for File:Cassandra Aarssen.jpg is fully owned by 2412254 Ontario Ltd. which I am an authorized representative for.--Abmyiz (talk) 16:46, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Abmyiz: please submit your proof via COM:OTRS correspondence process and not here. Regards, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 17:01, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you :@JWilz12345: Request has been submitted via COM:OTRS correspondence process. --Abmyiz (talk) 17:10, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close: OTRS submitted per above. Per COM:UD instructions, "If the file was deleted for missing evidence of licensing permission from the copyright holder, please follow the procedure for submitting permission evidence. If you have already done that, there is no need to request undeletion here." OTRS will restore, or request restoration, if everything is in order. --Эlcobbola talk 14:24, 16 June 2021 (UTC)


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

Two photographs by Juan Carlos Lorente Castillo

Please undelete

We have permission from the photographer per Ticket:2021052010009726. – Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 12:42, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done @Mussklprozz: FYI. Ankry (talk) 06:58, 16 June 2021 (UTC)


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

Alex_Eala

original material — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atikono1 (talk • contribs) 05:22, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Procedural close, discuss the file at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Alex Eala.jpg. Thuresson (talk) 05:27, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Das weisse haus moskau.JPG

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: deleted via Commons:Deletion requests/File:Das weisse haus moskau.JPG, citing a link which is https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Whitehouse_Moscow (no new media-friendly FOP in Moscow). But a new media (commercial) friendly Russian FOP for buildings have been introduced since 2014. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 17:04, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

 Support per {{FoP-Russia}}. Ankry (talk) 01:11, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done: per discussion. — Racconish 💬 15:23, 17 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Among Us image.jpg

I don't know what is the problem of Wikipedia, that it has constantly deleted my uploaded images. Thank god that some retained, but it looks like that it doesn't want me to add an image file in Hindi Wikipedia's Among us page. Please don't delete the image, or else I ask from the community to upload their contribution Utkarsh555 (talk) 13:10, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Utkarsh555:  Strong oppose if you meant File:Among Us image.png and File:Among Us theme image.png then you need to read COM:Licensing#Acceptable licenses. Wikimedia Commons requires files to be freely reusable even for commercial uses by all users across the world. Does the copyright holder agree to have your uploads of their work licensed commercially? If so, they must send a correspondence via COM:OTRS process. Local uploading to individual Wikipedia language editions is just a band-aid solution, as you must comply with the wikis' non-free content guidelines, or they will get deleted too. For English Wikipedia there are fair use tags. I don't know if Hindi Wikipedia accepts fair use (non-free) content. But on Wikimedia Commons all files must be free for commercial reuses, and fair use or noncommercial licensing types by copyright holders are not allowed. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:27, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done No evidence of free licene provided. Ankry (talk) 21:05, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Google Adds Dashboard.jpg

@Ankry and @Elcobbola I have spoken to the owner of the website and they can send me the permission. In what format do you need this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juanin21 (talk • contribs) 15:58, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Ping @Ankry and Elcobbola: (as the requestor failed to use the mention template). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:59, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done per elcobbola. Ankry (talk) 21:02, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Studio Barbell Set.png

@Elcobbola I have spoken to the owner of the website and they can send me the permission. In what format do you need this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juanin21 (talk • contribs) 16:00, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

  •  Oppose - What website? This is a product render used all over the internet ([8][9][10]) and thus likely the property of the manufacturer. Who's the author? Why do you think an "owner of the website" has anything to say about this image's copyright? This is not a venue for your spam. Эlcobbola talk 17:09, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Elcobbola Why do you say Spam this is purely an informative Image, related to a sport and fitness. The author is Stronger Wellness - this is their product range (tropical Vortex) and has been for some time and yes maybe other similar do exist on the web but nothing to do with it! This is their product and made for their brand so we have full permission. Similar to all these other images..... I really do not see the difference.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?search=barbell&title=Special:MediaSearch&go=Go&type=image

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juanin21 (talk • contribs) 17:21, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done per discussion. Ankry (talk) 21:00, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Affiche du film Garrincha (Fr).jpg

This file has been authorized in the OTRS ticket: https://ticket.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentTicketZoom&TicketNumber=2019071810007699 Regards, Antoine2711 (talk) 19:58, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

 Oppose OTRS tickets should be cleared by one of the hardworking OTRS volunteers. If nobody has cleared this there may be an inherent problem. Thuresson (talk) 20:14, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: awaiting OTRS. — Racconish 💬 15:20, 17 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Affiche_du_film_Médecin_de_campagne.jpg

This file has been authorized in the OTRS ticket: https://ticket.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentTicketZoom&TicketNumber=2019071810007699 Regards, Antoine2711 (talk) 20:00, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

 Oppose OTRS tickets should be cleared by one of the hardworking OTRS volunteers. If nobody has cleared this there may be an inherent problem. Thuresson (talk) 20:15, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
@Thuresson: I don't understand what you mean. OTRS took care of the ticket, but we are talking about more than a hundred pictures with 5 movies distributors… Should I contact OTRS instead of here? Regards, Antoine --Antoine2711 (talk) 01:44, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
I believe the best approach would be if you contact OTRS through their noticeboard and ask what happened with these 2019 tickets. Thuresson (talk) 14:40, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
@Antoine2711: This is general problem with such collages that they are derivarive works of all images used and so, we need an evidence that all copyright holders of all used images accept the free license for the collage. Ankry (talk) 19:26, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ankry: Well, it wasn't that much of a big deal with OTRS. The providers of the images are movies distributors. They put theses posters in newspapers and such. They pay the graphists themselves, and they get the appropriate rights from the movies producer. And from Wikimedia point of view, they have a credible organization that confirm they hold the copyrights. I've pushed, 2 years ago, a few hundred of those movies's posters. For some reasons, a few files where left behind. All those images are handled on the same ticket. So, I've reach to OTRS, and I will fix that with them. Thanks. --Antoine2711 (talk) 22:16, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
@Antoine2711: In this case the question is what exactly the appropriate rights mean? Does the contract allow free licensing of the resulting poster, or there are restrictions in the contract(s) that prevent this? An OTRS agent may need to get access to the appropriate contract(s) to verify this. By the right venue to discuss such issues is either OTRS itself, or COM:ON. Ankry (talk) 06:40, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ankry: I think you don't understand the situation. I've ALREADY, 2 years ago, got permission from the OTRS for the 5 distributors. They all signed the right release document. The distributors get their raw visual material from movie productor (obviously), but most of the time, they do the graphic work. OTRS cleared the rights for more than a hundred images. The 4 images left were uploaded at the same time, but for some reasons, they were not assigned the ticket number of the OTRS. Anyway, I'm back communicating with them, so I understand this page is no longer an appropriate venue to fix this issue. Regards, Antoine Antoine2711 (talk) 14:14, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
@Antoine2711: If the appropriate permission is in OTRS, then it is up to OTRS agent to undelete the image or request undeletiom. This is not right venue to discuss OTRS issues; you can ask about OTRS tickets in COM:ON. Ankry (talk) 15:13, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: awaiting OTRS. — Racconish 💬 15:20, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Patrícia Lobo cineasta.jpg

Olá, boa tarde.

Venho solicitar que adicionem a imagem Patricia Lobo cineasta.jpg, pois a imagem está liberada junto ao Vitor Campanario, autor da imagem. A imagem está liberada na rede e o próprio autor liberou a imagem para finalidade de informação para comunidade. Outros veículos usaram a imagem para matérias.

Luis G. 14/06/20121. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Comandodeapoio (talk • contribs) 16:52, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done as per elcobbola. Ankry (talk) 19:52, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Yaddie Vibes.png

== Undeletion requests yaddie vibes ==

File:yaddievibes.jpg

I own all rights to Yaddie Vibes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yaddievibes (talk • contribs) 18:00, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

 Oppose Speedy deleted per G10: "Files and pages created as advertisements". Thuresson (talk) 18:19, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 19:51, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Remolcador Tamayo.jpg

The file was uploaded indicating the page and the author of the photo, it is a creation of the Dominican Navy and was specified, at no time did I award the creation of the file. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpablo2 (talk • contribs) 00:20, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

 Oppose per COM:L. No licensing info provided. Ankry (talk) 11:42, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done No license. Ankry (talk) 19:50, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Poster O Palhaço PORTUGUES.jpg

Olá, Percebo que estou sendo perseguido em virtude de minhas postagens. Eu tenho autorização de uso de todas as imagens que inseri no sistema. Tenho mentor no wikipedia. Não faço absolutamente nada para ir contra a comunidade. Estou contribuindo com o surgimento de novos registros de pessoas realizadoras. Este poster eu tenho autorização da produtora pLobo produções para futura publicação do poster. Entrem em contato com a produtora para saber sobre minha autorização. Luis G. 14/06/2021 21:53 — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2804:14C:165:90B7:830:D76C:A6E1:41A1 (talk) 00:53, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

 Oppose Free license evidence is needed for any previously published image. Not an on-wiki declaration by uploader or another anonymous third party. Ankry (talk) 11:45, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done no free license evidence provided. Ankry (talk) 19:49, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Veena-516CastingWorkbook.jpg

This is a photo which I have full authorization to use as it was given to me by photographer Candace Woods. My personal website is also using this photo. Candace has ok'd my use of these photos for my own personal promotional materials. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maharani1 (talk • contribs) 16:43, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

  •  Oppose - Notwithstanding that you'd claimed yourself to be the author, which you now acknowledge to have been an untruth (and a breach of the purported license, as the by in cc-by-sa means attribution is required), previously published images require COM:OTRS evidence of permission directly from the author, and such permission may not be limited to "use [...] for my own personal promotional materials". Эlcobbola talk 16:48, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done as per elcobbola. Ankry (talk) 19:48, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Eth Clifford seated with cat.jpg

I am requesting that this file be undeleted and restored to the Eth Clifford Wikipedia article. Prior to using this image, I e-mailed David Wands, the founder and company director of Fantastic Fiction who granted personal permission for the image to be used in Eth Clifford's article. In fact, David had not been aware that she passsed away and updated his page based on information from the Wikipedia article. I cannot view the file information anymore, as it has been deleted but I do believe that this permission was listed under the fair usage rationale on the image page. Ruff tuff cream puff alerted me on my talk page that the file had been flagged as a copyright violation and Túrelio was the one who deleted the file, so I do not know what conflicting copyright claim they received that prompted them to take this action, as the only site that was listed already granted permission for the image to be used. HarlandQPitt (talk) 16:50, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done as per elcobbola. Ankry (talk) 19:47, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Logo SODEC.png

It's just a logo. Also, it's included in a template for a project they financed… Regards, --Antoine2711 (talk) 01:42, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

@Antoine2711: Only freely licensed or very simple logos can be hosted on Commons. Evidence of free license needed: through original source webpage ot through COM:OTRS process. Ankry (talk) 07:02, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done Above TOO and no free license evidence. Ankry (talk) 19:31, 17 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:F3M Logo.png

It's just a logo. Also, they sign an authorization with the OTRS, and this picture is part of the template build by the OTRS… Regards, Antoine --Antoine2711 (talk) 01:46, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

If a free license permission is verified and accepted by an OTRS agent, the agent will request undeletion or undelete the image themselves. Ankry (talk) 07:04, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done Need to wait for OTRS agent action. Ankry (talk) 19:33, 17 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Stan foto adevarul.jpg.jpg

The permission of using this Foto is received as describe on the Discussion page. Autor05 (talk) 08:42, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done As per elcobbola: no free license permission, ITRS needed. Ankry (talk) 19:35, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

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

Undeletion of iNaturalist images from iNaturalist user

Hi,

I request the undeletion of *iNaturalist* images taken by douglaseustonbrown that had been uploaded by myself (tle003) and subsequently deleted by bots because of licensing issues.

The licenses of these images have now been all changed to CC-By-SA-4.0, which I have been notified is compatible with the requirements of *Wikimedia Commons*


The original *iNaturalist* images are as follows:

1) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/79874443; 2) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/30694654; 3) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/15444365; 4) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/15444369; 5) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/15444374; 6) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/48183476; 7) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/15979870; 8) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/65598536; 9) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/101719306; 10) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/51106815; 11) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/30694497; 12) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/30694376; 13) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/16088416; 14) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/16088420; 15) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/16088424; 16) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/16088406; 17) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/16088408; 18) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/16043346; 19) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/16043354; 20) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/16043357; 21) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/56863811; 22) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/63940588; 23) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/63940397; 24) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/63940572; 25) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/29006845; 26) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/62019411; 27) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/62019382; 28) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/66106497; 29) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/66106508; 30) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/45764076; 31) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/45764233; 32) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/101714630; 33) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/101714640; 34) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/43132092; 35) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/65605543; 36) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/65605533; 37) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/65605425; 38) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/15311884; 39) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/101717345; 40) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/45874485; 41) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/30695920; 42) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/101713451; 43) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/65602966; 44) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/65595424; 45) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/15906278; 46) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/82124610; 47) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/82124162; and 48) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/79611563,

These have been uploaded to *Wikimedia Commons* by tle003 as:

1) File:S_compar-base-1.jpg; 2) File:S_compar-inflorescence-1.jpg; 3) File:S_arenicola_inflorescence-1.jpg; 4) File:S_arenicola_base-1.jpg; 5) File:S_arenicola_habit-1.jpg; 6) File:Spictus_base-1.jpg; 7) File:Spictus_inflorescences-1.jpg; 8) File:S_megacarpus-inflorescence-1.jpg; 9) File:S_auritus_inflorescences-1.jpg; 10)File:S_auritus_habit-1.jpg; 11) File:S_auritus_base-1.jpg; 12) File:S_auritus_inflorescences-2.jpg; 13) File:S_graminifolius_inflorescence-1.jpg; 14) File:S_graminifolius_habit-1.jpg; 15) File:S_graminifolius_base-1.jpg; 16) File:S_graminifolius_inflorescences-1.jpg; 17) File:S_graminifolius-habit-2.jpg; 18) File:S_ligulatus_inflorescences-1.jpg; 19) File:S_ligulatus-plants-1.jpg; 20) File:S_ligulatus_population-1.jpg; 21) File:S_ligulatus_base-1.jpg; 22) File:S_exilis-habit-1.jpg; 23) File:S_exilis-inflorescences-1.jpg; 24) File:S_exilis-base-1.jpg; 25) File:S_bolusii_inflorescence-1.jpg; 26) File:S_submarginalis_base-1.jpg; 27) File:S_submarginalis-habit-1.jpg; 28) File:Sprophyllus-inflorescence-1.jpg; 29) File:S_prophyllus_base-1.jpg; 30) File:S_compactus_inflorescence-1.jpg; 31) File:S_compactus_base-1.jpg; 32) File:S_crassus_inflorescence-1.jpg; 33) File:S_crassus_base-1.jpg; 34) File:S_cuspidatus_inflorescences-1.jpg; 35) File:S_graciliculmus-inflorescences-2.jpg; 36) File:S_graciliculmis-habit-2.jpg; 37) File:S_graciliculmis-base-1.jpg; 38) File:S_graciliculmus-inflorescences-3.jpg; 39) File:S_gracillimus_habit-1.jpg; 40) File:S_gracillimus_habit-2.jpg; 41) File:S_gracillimus_spikelet-1.jpg; 42) File:S_complanatus_base-1.jpg; 43) File:Sselinae_habit-1.jpg; 44) File:S_schonlandii_inflorescences-1.jpg; 45) File:S_inconspicuus_habit-1.jpg; 46) File:S_inconspicuus_infloresceces-1.jpg; 47) File:S_inconspicuus_base-1.jpg; and 48) File:S_inconspicuus_habit-2.jpg

Thanks for your time Tle003 (talk) 11:15, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

The files are not deleted, so they cannot be undeleted. But the license warning should be updated. Currently, there's a warning in the images that says the images where originally published as cc-by-sa-nc, but the ones I checked now have cc-by-sa, which would be a compatible license. --PaterMcFly (talk) 18:36, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
The files are not deleted now because they have been undeleted by me and Shizhao. And licence review again was requested. Ankry (talk) 19:29, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done as described above. Ankry (talk) 19:29, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Martins'HomeNo2.jpg

I am the original uploader of this file. The image came from my own collection and is very likely unique (one-of-a-kind). I probably last clicked onto this file in very early June 2021. There was no tag of any sort on the page. It was deleted by an editor, and I had no opportunity to rewrite the description box depending on the issue ...OR... to save the image to my Flickr or likely another uploading sight instead. Please restore this image, even if only temporary. It's a signed artwork by an artist of his home studio. He died in 1932. It shows how reflective northern light (not direct southern light) came in through the extra-extra large window, which is prefers by artists when painting. Not in itself of major importance, but there is no reason to lose this image to history either, due to its abrupt, without warming deletion. It also backed up a couple lines in his WP article, which now has a dead link in a reference, due to this unexpected deletion. Thanks. JimPercy (talk) 04:35, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@JimPercy: Why did you request deletion a week ago and why did you change your mind? Ankry (talk) 20:03, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ankry: I NEVER request deletion of File:Martins'HomeNo2.jpg It has been on Commons CONTINUOUSLY for the past 11 months or so, until obruptly deleted by a editor at Commons, earlier this month. I did about 11 months ago request the deletion of File:The Martins' personallized Christmas card of their home in winter snow.jpg. It was only uploaded onto Commons for about ONE HOUR, before my deletion request placement. Probably because it was wrongly titled and a duplicate of my very shortly thereafter uploaded File:Martins'HomeNo2.jpg
I'm going by my memory of a year ago. One should have had nothing to do with the other, but something like a glitch in system occurred, and when this bogus File:The Martin's Personallized Christmas card of their home in winter snow.jpg was finally officially deleted after NEARLY ONE YEAR, it bizarrely triggered off the deletion of File:Martins'HomeNo2.jpg  : JimPercy (talk) 02:04, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done Looks like OP only requested deletion of a redirect to this file. Ping @JimPercy: Thuresson (talk) 21:34, 18 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Intellivision_Amico_Controller.gif

This file was added to Wikimedia commons by a member of the staff of Intellivision Entertainment, the rights holder, at the request of Tommy Tallarico, the CEO of Intellivision Entertainment. It is not a copyright violation. Daltonsatom (talk) 19:15, 17 June 2021 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Daltonsatom (talk • contribs) 06:03, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

  • Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy 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.
  • @Daltonsatom: Unless an image is personal work of the uploader which the uploader owns copyright to, it is irrelevant who added the image: per policy, the uploader is responsible for providing an evidence of free license basing on public records or ensure that the actual copyright holder (or their authorised representative) sent a free license permission following COM:OTRS. Note, that just being a member of the staff is not enough to grant an irrevokable license concerning the company property. Neither uploader identity, nor their authorisation can be verified on-wiki. Ankry (talk) 06:51, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
  • @Ankry: So, if the CEO of Intellivision Entertainment or his authorized representative sends an e-mail to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org giving permission to use the image in wikimedia commons, it will be returned to the commons images? Daltonsatom (talk) 19:27, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
    • No. Permission to use is not OK. We need a free license permission as described in COM:L and shown in the permission template in COM:OTRS. After a permission send to OTRS is verified and accepted by VTS volunteers, the image can be undeleted. Ankry (talk) 19:37, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: This needs a permission coming directly from the copyright holder. See Ankry's comment. --De728631 (talk) 12:56, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Michelle Edgina Axille.png

File:Michelle Edgina Axille.png

This file was deleted under the pretense that it belongs to GADIS magazine while in fact, it belonged to Michelle's team and was taken years ago, and was later used by GADIS and other media outlets in their coverage of her victory in the 2021 Bucharest Open. See also https://kemlu.go.id/bucharest/id/news/13183/indonesia-bangga where they used the same image. This sort of mishap is very common here in Indonesia, where the media and even government show no respect towards copyright laws.

I got the image from her team, nobody remembered who took the picture but it was first uploaded on May 21, 2019, on Michelle's personal Instagram. You can find it at this link https://www.instagram.com/p/BxuP9JpnNJI/?utm_medium=copy_link

Therefore, I did not violate any copyright laws because the Image was never a property of GADIS magazine, to begin with. It was a property Michelle Edgina Axille, displayed on her own Wikipedia page, based on a photo on her personal Instagram in 2019.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rizky Novalini (talk • contribs) 06:12, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

  • Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy 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.
  • @Rizky Novalini: Per policy, for any previously published image, you are required to provide an evidence that a free license has been granted by the actual copyright holder. If there is no such evidence in the initial publication nor at the author's website, COM:OTRS seems be be the only way to do so. "Commonly used" means nothing about copyright, see also COM:PCP. Ankry (talk) 07:01, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per Ankry. --De728631 (talk) 12:55, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:kim-petras-creativecommons.jpg

File:kim-petras-creativecommons.jpg

The photo is free to use under creative commons, I double-checked and received confirmation from KimPetras.com - the copyright claim came from Twitter repost.

Alefyi (talk) 07:14, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

@Alefyi: Which Creative Commons license grants you the right to claim authorship on an image from somebody else? Ankry (talk) 07:19, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ankry: To clarify, this image was taken by Kim Petras herself of which she allowed full use under Public Domain. The copyright claim stemmed from a Twitter repost. What are the next steps I should take? Alefyi (talk) 07:42, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
@Alefyi: Then you need to provide an evidence that she has granted the declared license in a written form. Either a link to a website or information that the author followed COM:OTRS procedure. The latter should be made at upload. Note, that false authorship information that you provided at upload does not make your other statements more reliable: we need an evidence of what you say. Ankry (talk) 11:07, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - Notwithstanding that a) the uploader falsely claimed themselves to be the author and b) that nonsensical statements here (i.e., simultaneously claiming the image to be "free to use under creative commons" and "she allowed full use under Public Domain", which are mutually exclusive) demonstrate fundamental concepts are not understood and thus that purports are not credible, previously published images require COM:OTRS evidence of permission. As Petras is acknowledged to be the author ("this image was taken by Kim Petras herself "), she will need to provide permission directly (i.e., not forwarded) using that process. No evidence whatsoever has yet been on offer. Эlcobbola talk 15:36, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per Elcobbola. --De728631 (talk) 12:54, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Searates.png

It's just a logo. I wrote to the company and they said that their logo does not have a license. How can I add this logo? Regards, Liliia.Kh (talk) 13:40, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

If the logo doesn't have a license, then we can't accept it unless the logo is very simple. Ixfd64 (talk) 18:15, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
...or very old. Ankry (talk) 19:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done no free license. Ankry (talk) 19:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Muriel.Brunswig.jpg

Das Bild wurde von der Autorin Muriel Brunswig zur Verfügung gestellt undd darf frei verwendet werden. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Filbel52 (talk • contribs) 17:36, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

@Filbel52: Das Problem ist, dass nicht die Autorin das Bild zur Verfügung stellen muss, sondern der Fotograf/die Fotografin. Es muss also der Fotograf eine Bestätigung schicken, dass er mit einer passenden Lizenzierung seines Bildes einverstanden ist. --PaterMcFly (talk) 18:41, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Wir benötigen eine Freigabe durch den Fotografen. Siehe auch COM:OTRS. --De728631 (talk) 12:53, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:KUBO Ramen.jpg

Request to undelete image file.

The reason why this image was deleted is because it has been marked as a possible copyright violation. I got the task to write this page for a client (paid job): https://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Semi-gesloten_kas&redirect=no The client has given me the rights to upload it on Wikipedia.

--WubbeAdit (talk) 20:23, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per Elcobbola. --De728631 (talk) 12:52, 19 June 2021 (UTC)


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

Files uploaded by Friendly8Gnome

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Uploader reached out via OTRS (ticket:2021050710006432) and provided contracts with the authors. Ivi104 (talk) 17:39, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

@Ivi104: Please add {{User OTRS}} template to your userpage for easier verifying that you are VRT agent if you wish to act here. Ankry (talk) 19:07, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
@JGHowes: I wonder why the images were speedily deleted. Per COM:FOP Croatia 2D images of the sculptures are free. Ankry (talk) 19:20, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
I do not have access to that specific OTRS ticket, so I can't comment on it. Apparently it's in a different queue than photopermissions.  Because all of these photos had been previously found on the web and tagged npd, were low res and lacked meaningful exif metadata, it seemed that speedy deletion was advisable‎. There was no indication that FOP Croatia applies, nor was {{Not-free-US-FOP}} mentioned on these files.  JGHowes  talk 21:49, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
@JGHowes: There were two tickets dealing with the same topic, one was in English (sent to photosubmissions), the other one was in Croatian (sent to permissions-hr). You replied to the English ticket (otrs:11801096#14259569). I merged them and continued replying in Croatian. I just moved the ticket over to photosubmission, see if you can access it now. Ivi104 (talk) 12:26, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for that Ivi104, I see the lengthy correspondence in Croatian. Since I can't read that language, is the gist of it that Friendly8Gnome affirms: (1) he's the photographer and copyright owner of these four photos; and (2) these photos were taken in Croatia, where COM:FOP Croatia applies for 2D images of sculptures, as noted by Ankry? If that's the case, I'll undelete them straightaway.  JGHowes  talk 12:59, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Per description, the photos are made in Croatia, so OP Croatia applies. I undeleted them as I see no other sculpture-related issues. @Ivi104: You can continue with OTRS processing. Ankry (talk) 13:32, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
@JGHowes: The photographer has given us permission for the images under ticket:2021050710006432#14259340. These photos were indeed taken in Croatia. The rest of the conversation concerns the copyright status of the sculptures themselves, whose copyrights have been transferred from the sculptors to the Croatian county the sculptures reside in, and as part of the transfer, derivative works of the sculptures are explicitly allowed. Ivi104 (talk) 13:33, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done: per OTRS and FOP Croatia.  JGHowes  talk 14:04, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Prime95 quad-core.png

Although Prime95 is technically not free software, the author does allow screenshots to be published under a free license: https://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?p=310235

An anonymous user nominated the file for deletion because "no corresponding source exists" for the screenshot. However, their argument doesn't seem to make sense because screenshots require no source code. See also this thread: https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/741/with-gpl-what-does-source-code-mean-for-non-software

Considering that the author is explicitly allowing screenshots to be posted under a free license, this file should be restored. Ixfd64 (talk) 19:12, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

 Oppose - Per COM:L, "Wikimedia Commons only accepts media that are explicitly freely licensed" (underline added) and "All copyrighted material on Commons (not in the public domain) must be licensed under a free license that specifically and irrevocably allows anyone to use the material for any purpose[...] In particular, the license must meet the following conditions: Republication and distribution must be allowed. Publication of derivative work must be allowed. Commercial use of the work must be allowed. The license must be perpetual (non-expiring) and non-revocable." (underline added, bold and italics in original) Comments on a software forum of "Go for it" and "They don't bother me in the least" are not a) explicit, b) specific, or c) irrevocable and thus are not adequate. The copyright-holder must identify a specific free license that meets the aforementioned conditions. Эlcobbola talk 19:27, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
All right, I'll see if I can get clarification from the author. Ixfd64 (talk) 19:34, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per Elcobbola. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 01:17, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Anthonywhitechocolatemartinez.jpg

Image was deleted because mistakenly was believed that the image was copyright from @WC_Boxing on twitter in which I have ownership of. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angel22M (talk • contribs) 20:02, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

  •  Oppose - Previously published images require COM:OTRS evidence of permission. The Twitter link in the deletion rationale thus functions solely as evidence of previous publication and is not necessarily (or represented to be) the actual origin. Twitter is further irrelevant as the appearance there is dated 28. May 2021. The image, however, appeared elsewhere well before that (e.g., here 8. March 2021 with attribution to "The Louis Collection"); thus, even if the purport that you have ownership of the Twitter account is true, "permission" therefrom would be license laundering. Эlcobbola talk 21:13, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

I own the image along with the account that the picture was posted in (@WC_Boxing twitter). And the image is of my person. The Louis collection was a hired photographer and the photographer personally provided me with the images for my personal use therefore I have ownership of the images. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angel22M (talk • contribs) 22:54, 16 June 2021‎ (UTC)

Procedural close, double entry. Thuresson (talk) 00:01, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Per Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reed, "Works for hire" have two categories: 1) works prepared by an employee (implicitly not the case per above) and 2) works prepared by independent contractors. A work created by an independent contractor can be a work made for hire only if it both a) falls within one of the nine categories in 17 U.S.C. § 101 and b) there is a written agreement between parties specifying that the work is a work made for hire. While I think it's clear this image does not fall into any of the nine categories, there is still the requirement of a written agreement, which would need to be produced to COM:OTRS. So, indeed as per above, there is nothing to be accomplished on-wiki as all possibilities require documentation. The comment that "the photographer personally provided me with the images for my personal use therefore I have ownership of the images" (underline added) betrays exactly what is going on here: the author has conveyed physical/digital property (the images) explicitly for personal use (!!!), which the uploader has erroneously conflated to be conveying of the intellectual property (copyright). 17 U.S.C. § 202 should be read, and the actual author should follow the processes referenced above. Эlcobbola talk 20:05, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per Elcobbola. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 01:17, 20 June 2021 (UTC)


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

Three pictures by Samia Halaby

Can someone please check? –

Please restore the one(s) that just show artwork. In this case we have a permission from the artist per Ticket:2021061510015861. For photo(s) showing the artist herself, please let me just know. Concerning those ones i will write to her that we (also) need the permission from the photographer.

Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 15:08, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done @Mussklprozz: FYI. Ankry (talk) 00:44, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:逢甲伙食團.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: ​Reason: As what I said on User:Shizhao's talkpage, surely the uploader uploaded a series of copyright images (from a website of a Ikuantao temple), but there aren't any findable sources of the image "File:逢甲伙食團.jpg." Moreover, the uploader also claimed that he/she is the author of the picture and licensed under CC. In sum, this is obviously a wrong part in a mass delete request. S099001 (talk) 04:13, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

  •  Weak oppose The photo is not the original image from camera as it lacks camera info in EXIF. And as the uploader provided multiple others photos that are doubtful "own work", we cannot just apply AGF here, we need some evidence of authorship. Ankry (talk) 08:33, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 08:14, 21 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:CPIEmblem.png

This work is done by me. But you delete it. Please restore the Image on wikimedia commons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arjun Madathiparambil Muraleedharan (talk • contribs) 16:51, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

@Arjun Madathiparambil Muraleedharan: Unofficial emblems are out of scope. For official logos, we may need an evidence that Communist Party of India confirms that Wikimedia user Arjun Madathiparambil Muraleedharan is the author and exclusive copyright holder of their logo. Where such information can be found? Ankry (talk) 19:09, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ankry: In the Constitution of Communist Party of India on ARTICLE II given the details of Emblem of Party. I give its link here https://www.communistparty.in/blank. I made the emblem based on this.
Then read the above once again. Ankry (talk) 13:26, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 08:13, 21 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Stella_Parton_Publicity_Photo_February_2021.jpg

Copyright information was corrected prior to deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gillespie10450 (talk • contribs) 16:49, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 08:12, 21 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Jan Macák (MenT).jpg

Hi,

I am a representative for Jan Macák in this matter and I have been given full right to upload that image. You have marked it as copyright violation and provided a link to his Instagram account as evidence. However Mr. Macák gave full permission for that photo to be used on Wikipedia or anywhere else excluding only advertisiment. Thereby I request the undeletion of this photo.

Thnak you, sincerely, Tomáš Šedivý — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrTomcatCZ (talk • contribs) 07:58, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

  •  Oppose Unacceptable restriction. Thuresson (talk) 10:58, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
  • If by "advertisement" you primarily mean that the pictured person is not waiving their publicity rights, that is fine. But that restriction cannot be enforced by copyright, and also be considered "free" (so not really a "copyright violation", rather more of not meeting site policy, but that is the term we use for all such issues). If this was not made explicit, it would sound like the "no advertisement" requirement is part of the copyright license, which would make it a "non-free" license, which we cannot accept. The copyright license cannot restrict its use anywhere, or by anyone. However the definition rests entirely on the copyright; any trademark or publicity rights would remain in full force (we often add the {{Personality rights}} template to images where that could be an issue). Additionally, often a license of that sort would need to come from the photographer (since in most countries, the photographer would own the copyright unless the contract specified otherwise). For works published elsewhere on the Internet, we tend to prefer a private email be sent per the procedures at COM:OTRS to spell things out carefully, unless an acceptable copyright license is declared at the source (and the more specific the license, the better -- Creative Commons licenses are preferred, either CC-BY or CC-BY-SA; the -NC or -ND licenses are non-free). Carl Lindberg (talk) 12:39, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
  • The no advertisiment restriction seems to be wider than the personality rights restriction: one may want to crop the t-shirt (no personality rights there) and want to use it in an advertisement... BTW, how this permission allows derivative works (that is required)? Ankry (talk) 13:39, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 08:11, 21 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Sojol_Rana.jpg

Why this file was removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poralikha (talk • contribs) 06:47, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done procedural close: not an undeletion request. Ankry (talk) 23:07, 20 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Clayton Keller (02).png

Undelete File:Clayton Keller (02).png. The deletion discussion was unreasonably closed mere MINUTES after the image was nominated for deletion. That deprived me or anyone else of any reasonable opportunity to contest the deletion. If I am not mistaken, this photo came from a youtube video that to this day is published on Youtube with a creative commons license. There is NO reason for this image to have been deleted. I am outraged that @Racconish: closed the deletion nomination merely three minutes after it was nominated, and (if I am not mistaken about where the image came from) did not do the due diligence to clearly see it was public domain. That is obscene on their part. SecretName101 (talk) 22:31, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

@SecretName101: Copyright violations qualify for speedy deletion, so speedy closing of a copyvio DR is OK. Where exactly can we see the Creative Commons license for this video? Ankry (talk) 22:54, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done The source video is indeed CC-BY licensed. Ankry (talk) 23:53, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Darcy Rose Byrnes at the world premiere of Cinderella at the El Capitan Theatre Hollywood March 1 2015.jpg

I am respectfully requesting the undeletion of: File:Darcy Rose Byrnes at the world premiere of Cinderella at the El Capitan Theatre Hollywood March 1 2015.jpg

I took this picture with my camera (DSC-HX9V) on March 1 2015 at 16:42:39 at the premiere. The metadata imbedded in the photo confirms this. (It is a very good, but non-professional, camera. Real photojournalists, like the ones shooting this "Red Carpet" event, would never use such a "entry level" camera.)

The photo is similar to many pictures captured by photo journalists at the same event, but differs in two key ways: 1. The eye contact is looking past me to a photographer whose elbow I was shooting from under 2. The angle is "shooting up" because I am crouched under the elbow of the professional photographer All of the other (many) photos of Darcy Rose, are shooting "straight on" or from above ("shooting down") over the heads of the front line of photographers

The request to delete the photo is based on the assertion that my copyright claim is "dubious" because the picture has been posted & reposted, and can be found using google, but no specific example has been cited so no comparison can be made.

If, in fact, my picture (not just one that is similar) has been used elsewhere on the web, it would be owing to the fact that it is a good picture, and I don't mind it's use. Which is why I chose to make it available for use on the "wiki" platforms.

Additionally, I would like to note that the picture was nominated for deletion at 14:05, 19 June 2021 (UTC) ( Gbawden) and deleted at 15:43, 19 June 2021 (UTC) (Racconish) , 1 hour and 38 minutes later, while I was in bed sleeping. Depriving me from a opportunity to address the copyright concerns. Another picture of mine (of Darcy Rose Byrnes) was targeted for deletion at the same time. (File:Darcy Rose Byrnes - Voice of Ikki - DSC 0275.jpg) I also own this photo, and claim copyright, but I don't need it "undeleted." The other photo is a better representation of Darcy Rose Byrnes.

I am sure this is just a case of well meaning administrators, protecting the integrity of WIKIMEDIA COMMONS, with zeal.

In conclusion, I respectfully request the "undeletion" of File:Darcy Rose Byrnes at the world premiere of Cinderella at the El Capitan Theatre Hollywood March 1 2015.jpg because I took the photo, I own the photo, I hold the copyright, and I have permitted it's use on WIKIMEDIA COMMONS and WIKIPEDIA. Additionally, given no other copyright claim will be found, my copyright needs to be honored. Respectfully.

Wikiwikiq (talk) 20:40, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Ping @Racconish: , who deleted this file. Thuresson (talk) 22:06, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
And @Gbawden: who nominated them. Ankry (talk) 00:37, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Update: I have searched the web and cannot find another occurrence the photo. There are plenty of similar photos because it was a well documented Red Carpet event. But none are a match. Wikiwikiq (talk) 02:15, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

  • I am willing to admit I may have made a mistake, based mostly, on top of the nominator's rationale, on the difference of cameras between the two photos. I would have made the same admission if the uploader would have contacted me directly, since it was indeed inappropriate in such a situation to close the DR so quickly. — Racconish 💬 08:19, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
The image in question is an extremely tight crop, which is another reason I find it suspicious. Could you upload the non cropped image? Gbawden (talk) 09:08, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

You have made a mistake. The nominator's rationale is is based on there being "similar" photos of Darcy Rose at that event, photos perhaps of the almost the same moment, taken by others. This is common at a RED CARPET event. But nominator cannot identify even one example of the SAME PHOTO, or even a larger crop version of the same photo. Even after responding to this request, has not provided one link or example of the image existing anywhere else on the web. Nominator mentions use of the Tineye tool referencing 2018, ignoring the fact that the photo is from March 1st 2015, as reflected in the metadata. My first use was in a collage on March 9 2015 in a collage on my facebook page. ( https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=10205533508644476&set=a.4425716568439) on my public facebook page. No prior example will ever be found. Notice in the collage that the two pics on the red carpet are shot at an "up angle" because I was crouched on the red carpet, below the photographers' lenses, while the other shot is "dead on" because we are now in the theatre lobby and there are no professional photographers.

Regarding the difference in cameras used in the two photos. I have two cameras. The tiny DSC-HX9V is great to carry on the belt when you don't want to piss off the professional photographers (which I am not.) The Nikon D-3300 is what I used at ComicCon because I didn't have to shoot in "stealth mode." It is useful to note that as her father, I am a perpetual personal photographer of Darcy Rose Byrnes. As for nominators request for the uncropped original, it is on a usb drive, with 100 others, in a shoebox. The original was lost in a PC computer crash, two computers ago. So, no, I'm not going to find the original. Not until the nominator provides a link to ONE example of my photo being used by any one else prior to March 9 2015. Here is a google image search link for Darcy Rose Byrnes at the premiere. https://www.google.com/search?q=cinderella+premiere+MArch+1+2015+%22Darcy+Rose+Byrnes%22&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwjmptrNqqfxAhV_AjQIHXtHCLoQ2-cCegQIABAA&oq=cinderella+premiere+MArch+1+2015+%22Darcy+Rose+Byrnes%22&gs_lcp=CgNpbWcQAzoECCMQJzoCCAA6BAgAEB46BggAEAUQHjoGCAAQCBAeOgQIABAYULbGAViJigNgrIwDaAFwAHgAgAF8iAG7GZIBBDI3LjeYAQCgAQGqAQtnd3Mtd2l6LWltZ8ABAQ&sclient=img&ei=5crPYKagJ_-E0PEP-46h0As&bih=520&biw=1280&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS947US947 Other than my photo (third pic in results) posted on wikipedia, there is not one other posting of the picture. I did not contact nominator or anyone else directly because, given the circumstances, (nominators flimsy rationale and failure to provide evidence, speedy deletion without chance to defend baseless claim, etc) there appeared to be ill will involved. This appeared to be an attack on Darcy Rose Byrnes, during pride month, in response to her recent work in a high profile show on a major streamimg service. "Suspicion of copyright violation" is not "copyright violation" just like "suspicion of bias" is not "bias." If nominator is not willing to provide anything other than deeply flawed logic, and bias driven suspicion, I respectfully request the photo be restored to wikimedia commons, and then kindly restore it to Darcy Rose Byrnes' wikipedia page. I will accept that as an apology for recklessly accusing me of copyright violation, and damaging the web profile of Darcy Rose Byrnes. To be clear, decisions based purely on suspicion, are driven by bias. (Assumptions from prior experiences.) If one can find no evidence of copyright violation, in an event that is so well documented on the web; if one unable to conceive of the possibility that my copyright claim is valid, perhaps one should not be considered reliable to the task of being involved in such a process. Kindly restore my photos. Consider a Father's Day gift to me.

Respectfully Wikiwikiq (talk) 23:55, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Done, but please do not accuse others of having secret motives. Wikimedia users do not normally belong to secret cabals. If somebody wants to nominate this photo for deletion, please allow time for discussion. Thuresson (talk) 18:20, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

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

Files listed in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Images from FilmiTadka

Request temporary undeletion

This is a request for the bulk undeletion of the files listed in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Images from FilmiTadka. Racconish deleted them all when the request was less than two days old, and while they have now decided to leave the request open, they apparently don't have the tools to efficiently undelete all the files. I hope there is some other administrator who can do this without having to go through each file by hand. I think it's possible that some of the files can be saved, but if anyone is going to save them they're going to need to be able to see them. --bjh21 (talk) 11:36, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Undeleting some was actually not my idea and I had offered to undelete more if asked. Will do it then. — Racconish 💬 11:47, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done: All files undeleted to allow for discussion. — Racconish 💬 16:28, 22 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Suzanne Rogers.jpg

Please undelete this file as all rights and permissions has been granted by the photographer Chris Nicholls.

--Tchoja2021 (talk) 14:47, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done unclear request and the requester blocked permanently. Ankry (talk) 23:09, 22 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Betsy Beutler.jpg

See User talk:Elcobbola#Deletion of public domain work

This is Flickr sourced and was PD-dedicated there by the author. Elcobbola has decided that the Flickr account is a fake (on no evidence) and deleted it. I'm in contact with Colin Key, the photographer, who confirms that this is available, just as claimed by Flickr, and who has contacted OTRS (Ticket: 2021061810002771) to confirm this. I raised this with Elcobbola a few days ago but they have ignored it. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:22, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

This was already restored several days ago, 19 June 2021, when we (finally) received appropriate evidence of permission. This bizarre request comes at 22 June 2021. Эlcobbola talk 18:32, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Well thanks to Shizhao for that. Why did you ignore the thread on your talk: though and not even reply? Andy Dingley (talk) 18:54, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Procedural close: image not deleted. @Andy Dingley: please discuss other issues in the right venue, if needed. Not here. Ankry (talk) 23:06, 22 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:BrokenGodtxt.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: The image is under the CC-BY 3.0 based on the " Licensing / Citation" part of https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/church-of-the-broken-god-hub. A conlanger (talk) 03:54, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

@Shizhao:  ? Ankry (talk) 12:23, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
The image was not found in the source url--shizhao (talk) 13:20, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
ok, The source url on the file description page is incorrect. --shizhao (talk) 13:24, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done: undel. --shizhao (talk) 13:27, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

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

Leonid Kosakivsky's books

Please restore the files listed below. These are books of w:en:Leonid Kosakivsky. We have received proper VRT (OTRS) permission from author (Ticket:2021062210002521). I'm going to confirm it.

--sasha (krassotkin) 08:49, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done: restored per 2021062210002521. --rubin16 (talk) 09:11, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Darpan Inani.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: The other photo due to which it was removed was a french newspaper who after talking to me copied the image from here itself. Vitthal.inani (talk) 16:52, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

 Support 2018 publication should not be copyvio evidence for a 2016-uploaded photo. But pinging @Pppery and Túrelio: the copyvio nominator and deleting admin if they disagree. Ankry (talk) 01:18, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Done, @Vitthal.inani: Thuresson (talk) 20:44, 23 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Thürmer Gyula (2).jpg

This photo was taken by me. Source means only where to find more information on the subject. --Elekes Andor (talk) 12:15, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Done, ping @Elekes Andor: Thuresson (talk) 22:34, 23 June 2021 (UTC)


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

Apexer street art File:Apexer,_Psycho_City_San_Francisco_Oct_2020.jpg

I will try to get the artist to sign the appropriate license. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SJTatsu (talk • contribs) 02:13, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Please undelete this one too. https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Apexer,_18th_and_Guerrero_San_Francisco_Oct_2020.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by SJTatsu (talk • contribs) 02:15, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

@SJTatsu: please follow the instructions at COM:OTRS. The artist must send a correspondence of permissiom through this method. The file cannot be restored through your undeletion request alone. Just wait for an OTRS volunteer or admin to request undeletion here after the they received correspondence with appropriate permission from the artist. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:57, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Not done. Deleted after Commons:Deletion requests/File:Apexer, Psycho City San Francisco Oct 2020.jpg. Thuresson (talk) 21:30, 23 June 2021 (UTC)


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

Files by Necrocancer (talk · contribs)

All of this user's files were nuked last month following this DMCA notice. However, I believe at least some of the files may be legitimate. For example, the file name Sailing Boats Night, 1926.jpg suggests the image was this painting by Yoshida Hiroshi. He passed away in 1950 — which is more than 70 years ago — so this work should be under public domain. Each file should be checked on a case-by-case basis as Ymblanter (talk · contribs) originally suggested. Ixfd64 (talk) 16:53, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

This painting will only become public domain in the US in 2022.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:11, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
It may be PD if unpublished till at least 1978. But we would need an evidence that it was not exposed to public before this date. Ankry (talk) 23:01, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done No evidence of PD status in US provided. Ankry (talk) 08:02, 24 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Jacqueline Hernandez.jpg

== [[File:Jacqueline Hernandez.jpg|thumb|Jacqueline Hernandez, Business Executive]] ==

[[File:Jacqueline Hernandez.jpg|thumb|Jacqueline Hernandez, Business Executive]]

This photo was taken by Joseph Moran and he has allowed the photo to be used for this wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unirico41 (talk • contribs) 19:47, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

@Unirico41: Please ask the copyright owner to submit any permission through Commons:OTRS. Thuresson (talk) 21:31, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
@Unirico41: A permission limited to use for this wikipedia page is incompatible with COM:L. Ankry (talk) 12:33, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done no free license. Ankry (talk) 08:04, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

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

Image files associated with Principia Discordia

In Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Allrightsreversed, the following files were deleted:

List of files

See w:Principia Discordia for an overview of what this text is.

The deletion was based on the fact that Template:Allrightsreversed is an invalid license template, and AIUI all these files were tagged with that license tag. However, on investigating a related issue elsewhere (s:Principia Discordia), it became apparent that the Principia Discordia was first published in the US in 1963 without a copyright notice. In other words, these files are actually {{PD-US-no-notice}} (which the uploaders, had they not been so busy playing games with the nonsense "Kopyleft" stuff, could have figured out 14 years ago).

In other words, I would like to see these files undeleted (they are still(!) in use on English Wikisource, which was how I found them). My research indicates that the authors of the Principia Discordia had a somewhat vague grasp of copyright and may have included third-party copyright material in their text under some sort of fair use theory, but these are by all accounts shorter passages (quotes aiui) that can be dealt with surgically when identified (if not covered under COM:DM). --Xover (talk) 16:08, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

For reference, a scan of the work is also available at the Internet Archive as principiadiscordia. I can't definitively identify this as the actual first edition: it was "published" by literally xeroxing a typewritten manuscript, in an "edition" of 5 copies, so we can't really trust anything printed on it (unlike something by reputable publisher). But it is in all likelihood uploaded to IA by its author, Greg Hill (aka "Malaclypse the Younger", aka. "Mal-2"), and identified there as the 1963 first edition. As you can see on page 91, it contains a faux "Ⓚ All Rites Reversed" (which does not meet the requirements) instead of an actual copyright notice, and clearly does so deliberately. Xover (talk) 10:24, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done: per request -- these have no notice. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:14, 25 June 2021 (UTC)


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

Files in Category:Interior of Taipei 101

According to TIPO, photographing merely interior decor is OK. The office also mention 拍攝"室內"裝潢的行為是將實施結果的實體物為拍攝，並不涉及著作權之侵害 (translate: The act of shooting "interior decoration is to take the actual object as a result of the implementation and does not involve copyright infringement) , so it is OK for Interior architecture photography/video --Wpcpey (talk) 11:13, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Since there is no indication, these images should not delete. Meanwhile, those photos cannot see any 2D or 3D artwork clearly.--Wpcpey (talk) 12:12, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Taiwan FoP does not coever interiors. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:38, 25 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Devil's Lake SP Lynx Mound P7180248.jpg

--What I know-- With the image already deleted, it took awhile to locate another copy. After extensive checking. The following is what I can provide at this time.

  1. In the text below the image is a statement 'as it looked in 1919'. The presumes that the photograph must have been taken in 1919. It's not a sketch, which could be at some later date.
  2. Based on the 1919 date, I checked several on-line sources and have have identified a report by H.E. Cole and H.A. Smythe in The Wisconsin Archeologist; V.18 no 4, November 1919, Archeological Society of Wisconsin 1919 containing the words Devils Lake and Lynx. As I did not purchase access, I did not find the articles title, nor the specifics contained in the article.
  3. From that reference, further reviews of The Wisconsin Archeologist sources found a second article by H.E. Cole; The markings of the Lynx mound of Devils Lake; Wisconsin Archeologist, XX, July' An Indian Effigy Mound in the Devils Lake State Park, 1924.
  4. Further reading of The Wisconsin Archeologist from years before and after 1924, a few were available on-line lead to the information that Henry Cole was a director of the Wisconsin Archeological Society during these the late teens and early 20's of that century. He was also the President of the Baraboo Historical Society and owner of a newspaper in Baraboo, Wisconsin.

Therefore, I have concluded that the 1919 date in the museum text of the exhibit is a reference to an image made that year and used in one or both of the articles discovered in the Wisconsin Archeologist, making the the image now public domain. Chris Light (talk) 02:30, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

 Info copyright in US depends generally on publication, not creation date. So the question here is: when and where the image was published (newspaper, magazine, museum display) and whether it was before 1926 in order to determine its PD status. See COM:Hirtle chart for details. Ankry (talk) 07:10, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Note: if the image was unpublished before 2003, you may need to verify whether the photographer died more than 70 years ago. Ankry (talk) 19:33, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: No evidience of publication before 1926. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:44, 25 June 2021 (UTC)


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

Request undeletion of images uploaded by iNaturalist contributor

Hi,

I request that the following images (see below) uploaded onto Wikimedia Commons by tle003 be 'undeleted', because the iNaturalist contributor that they are attributed to has changed the permissions to CC BY-SA 4.0. This license is compatible with the requirements of Wikimedia Commons.

The images are:

1) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/117217898; 2) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/114620825; 3) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/110501170; 4) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/117217873; 5) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/117106119; and 6) https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/116393374,

as shown here: 1) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:S_megacarpus-inflorescence-2.jpg; 2) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:S_megacarpus-inflorescences-1.jpg; 3) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:S_megacarpus-inflorescence-3.jpg; 4) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:S_megacarpus-plant-1.jpg; 5) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:S_crassus_habit-1.jpg; and 6) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:S_crassus_inflorescence-2.jpg,

Thanks - Tle003 (talk) 07:07, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Appears to have been done.. files mentioned are not deleted. Doesn't look like there is anything to do here Gbawden (talk) 06:39, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done: Done earlier or not deleted. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:46, 25 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Polina-Pushkareva.jpg

Please, undelete the picture, below is the correct link to it with license: https://www.flickr.com/photos/193288366@N03/51260298152/in/dateposted-public/

--Polinapushkareva (talk) 07:39, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

 Oppose This seem to be COM:LL. Ask the photographer to use COM:OTRS process. Ankry (talk) 19:29, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - Unambiguous COM:LL. History is as follows:
    • 13:00, 16 June 2021 - You uploaded this as File:Polina-Pushkareva.jpg;
    • 15:54, 16 June 2021 - Deleted as NETCOPYVIO;
    • 12:47, 17 June 2021 - You recreate the image as File:Polina-pushkareva.jpg;
    • 15:46, 17 June 2021 - Deleted as NETCOPYVIO;
    • 00:00, 21 June 2021 - A Flickr account is created;
    • 00:00, 21 June 2021 - This image, only flipped on its horizontal axis, is uploaded there (what serendipity!);
    • 20:49, 21 June 2021 - You upload this flipped version (with no reference to the Flickr account) as File:Pushkareva-polina.jpg.
Notwithstanding that you purport to be the subject (Polinapushkareva vs Polina Pushkareva) and copyright initially vests in the author (photographer), do you seriously expect us to find these blatant machinations compelling? Эlcobbola talk

 Not done: Per discussion. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:00, 25 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Accelerometer-dimensions-short.png

Hi,

This is certainly not xscala's image. Xscala is a distributor of Brüel & Kjær products, and as such hold no copyright over our product images:www.bksv.com/en/transducers/vibration/vibration-calibrator — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madchr (talk • contribs) 12:08, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

@Madchr: For images that were published anywhere by anybody without evidence of free license, the copyright holder needs to use COM:OTRS process to grant a free license permission. Ankry (talk) 19:32, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

--Madchr (talk) 12:43, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

OTRS needed, see above. Ankry (talk) 19:34, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi. I am a Brüel & Kjær representative (as you can see on my email, which references our domain: www.bksv.com. This picture is posted on behalf of the Brüel & Kjær organization, and with full immaterial rights for the image in question.

Please undelete this image.

Thanks Mads --Madchr (talk) 12:43, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Not providing free license evidence for already published images is violation of Commons policy and considered violation of copyright. Please follow COM:OTRS process as described above. Ankry (talk) 19:36, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

File:HeadphoneMeasurements ANewStandard PartI 01c1.jpg

Is provided by Brüel & Kjær, which i represent (my email references bksv.com), who is also the owner of the immaterial copyrights for this image. I have full rights o distribute this image on behalf of the organization.

Please undelete this image.

Thank you Mads --Madchr (talk) 12:42, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

See above. Ankry (talk) 19:38, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Needs OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:07, 25 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Governor General's Foot Guards Camp Flag.jpg

File:Governor General's Foot Guards Camp Flag.jpg

Non-commercial reproduction Unless otherwise specified you may reproduce the materials in whole or in part for non-commercial purposes, and in any format, without charge or further permission, provided you do the following:

exercise due diligence in ensuring the accuracy of the materials reproduced indicate both the complete title of the materials reproduced, as well as the author (where available) indicate that the reproduction is a copy of the version available at [URL where original document is available] Commercial reproduction Unless otherwise specified, you may not reproduce materials on this site, in whole or in part, for the purposes of commercial redistribution without prior written permission from the copyright administrator. To obtain permission to reproduce any content owned by the Government of Canada available on this site for commercial purposes, please contact the institution responsible for that content by referring to the institutions list available on the Government of Canada contacts page.

Some of the content on this site may be subject to the copyright of another party. Where information has been produced or copyright is not held by the Government of Canada, the materials are protected under the Copyright Act, and international agreements. Details concerning copyright ownership are indicated on the relevant page(s). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sofonias2000100 (talk • contribs) 00:50, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

  • Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy 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.
  • @Sofonias2000100: This contradicts your declaration about CC-BY-SA-4.0 licensing (which allows commercial use) and is incompatible with COM:L. Ankry (talk) 12:30, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - The source you've provided says "© 2021 GOVERNOR GENERAL'S FOOT GUARDS REGIMENTAL MUSEUM. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED." The terms above you've provided say "you may reproduce the materials in whole or in part for non-commercial purposes" (underline added). In no small part because you've not even offered a rationale here (merely pasted boilerplate), this is not even a good try. Эlcobbola talk 15:37, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Per discussion -- NC source. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:09, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Holy Spirit Poster web.jpg

File:Holy Spirit Poster web to undelete.jpg

The movie poster of Holy Spirit is a freely licensed work, as explained in the Definition of Free Cultural Works.

I am the producer of the film and also the author of the article. Therefore, I am able to allow the worldwide free use of the image for any purpose.

As further proof, you can view my IMDb profile


--Karin Lueders (talk) 19:01, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

@Karin Lueders: Which exactly free license you mean and where exactly can we find an evidence that the actual copyright holder(s) of the poster has (have) granted the license? See COM:L for details what a free license is. Ankry (talk) 07:46, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Not done. Both IMDb and Wikimedia are user-generated by anonymous users. Please follow the instructions at COM:OTRS to verify the claimed license. Thuresson (talk) 11:19, 25 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:StichburyPlatter.JPG

The photo has been removed with the argument that it might infringe the rights of the artist. This is not the case since I personally have bought the platter from Peter, I still own it and I took the photograph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sruppi (talk • contribs) 02:58, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

  • Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy 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.
  • @Sruppi: Ownership of the art itself is not the same as ownership of the art copyright (the right to make copies of the art). If you have bought the art copyright together with art itself (depends on your buying contract), we need an evidence of this that can be provided following COM:OTRS process. This cannot be resolved on-wiki. Ankry (talk) 07:51, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per ankry -- owning a work of art does not mean you own the copyright. Do you think that owning a book gives you the right to copy it?. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:10, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Sarah Kpossa.png

I am the owner of this picture and I am the one that poster the picture on imbd. Please stop deleting my pictures especially as I am the one that posting them and owe them — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chanceparis (talk • contribs) 09:43, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close: image is not deleted (has been restored due to receipt of OTRS permission). --Эlcobbola talk 16:43, 24 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Al-Hilal new Portuguese manager Leonardo Jardim.png

I am the owner of this picture and work i used canve to make it Please don't deleting my pictures I owe them إبراهيم الشعيبي (talk) 12:36, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close: image is not deleted. Please review the instructions at the top of this page, which include "Do not request undeletion of a file that has not been deleted," and enter any comments at the open DR. --Эlcobbola talk 16:40, 24 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Howard Marklein Portrait.jpg

This is Sen. Howard Marklein's official portrait that was taken by Joe Koshollek. You can find it on the public Wisconsin Legislature website here: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2021/legislators/senate/2105

This should not be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by District17 (talk • contribs) 16:35, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

  •  Oppose - Notwithstanding that you'd previously claimed yourself to be the author, which you now implicitly acknowledge to have been a lie ("taken by Joe Koshollek"), previously published images require COM:OTRS evidence of permission. The purported cc-by-sa 4.0 license does not appear at that site and no evidence whatsoever of Koshollek's permission has been provided. Эlcobbola talk 16:39, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: No evidence of permission. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:11, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:The Equalizer.png

I don't think it's a complex logo. 𝕃𝐖 (talk) 15:52, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

@EugeneZelenko: Pinging the deleting admin.
As the logo does not seem to be more complex than the Cyberpunk 2077 logo which is considered by the US Copyright Office as simple, I suggest opening a DR for wider discussion. Ankry (talk) 19:57, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
Background in letters are not trivial. You could upload same logo with solid filling. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 21:56, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
IMO, the letters are altered in similar way that in the abovementioned PD logo. Ankry (talk) 08:56, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

 Support In the US, logos that consist only of letters, however complex the type face may be, do not have a copyright. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:31, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 20:06, 25 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Hartley Headshot.jpg

I am writing to request a restoration of the previously uploaded image file File:Hartley Headshot.jpg.

While it is true that I do not own the file, I have access to it via my full-time position as the director of communications for the College of Science at Texas A&M University. The uncredited photograph, which is among our general file photos within the College of Science, is in common use by both the college and the Texas A&M Department of Statistics, which Dr. H.O. Hartley founded and was an active faculty member of from 1963 to 1979.

I am unsure as to the best way to credit it from among the several options listed in your reference pages, but one obvious option is by including one of the many links to feature stories in which it appears within the College of Science news archive, including this most recent example from October 2020:

https://science.tamu.edu/news/2020/10/texas-am-statistics-to-host-virtual-hartley-chair-celebration-friday/

Thanks in advance for your time and consideration of my request.

--TAMUSciComm (talk) 17:36, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

 Oppose The fact that the University and others use the image freely does not mean that it is actually free to use. Unlicensed use of copyrighted material is common. There are three possible routes to keeping it on Commons:

1 - Prove that it was published with the permission of the photographer and without a copyright notice before 1989.
2 - Prove that the photographer was employed by the University as a photographer and that, therefore, this is a work for hire. This would require an authorized official of the University to give a free license.
3 - Prove that the photographer or his heirs actual freely licensed the image.

.     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:55, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 18:13, 25 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Wiki 01 portrait mandjoukov.jpg

The image ownership will be verified by the original creator Zlatan Dekov immediately. Sulitzer2 (talk) 08:41, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplised here. To quote the UDR instructions: If the file was deleted for missing evidence of licensing permission from the copyright holder, please follow the procedure for submitting permission evidence. If you have already done that, there is no need to request undeletion here. If the submitted permission is in order, the file will be restored when the permission is processed. Please be patient, as this may take several weeks depending on the current workload and available volunteers. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 18:11, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:PogChampening Vote Results.png

The reason says "Screenshot of non-free app/website", but Twitch is a free website. Is there something I'm not understanding? I don't come to the Commons often. I won't argue or anything, just want to learn and understand. AntisocialRyan (talk) 03:39, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

@AntisocialRyan: On Commons, "free" generally refers to the copyright license of the content (free as in speech), not whether you have to pay to see it (free as in beer). Wikimedia Commons only accepts freely-licensed material -- that is, material that anyone can use and modify, for any purpose, including commercially, without any restrictions other than crediting the author and letting others do the same. Almost everything is protected by copyright from creation, and is not licensed under those conditions. This includes the Twitch website. For more information on what you can upload to Commons, see the licensing policy. For a more general introduction, see Commons:First steps. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 04:13, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
@AntiCompositeNumber: Ah, I understand now. Thank you for clearing it up! AntisocialRyan (talk) 14:51, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 18:11, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:26 May 2021 Lunar Eclipse in Sukoharjo.jpg

Should be own work. The user's previous name is User:Iqbal 8 — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 182.239.87.34 (talk) 17:17, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: No such user exists and no evidence provided. No valid rationale for undeletion. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 18:11, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:Nakamura Ganjiro as Tojuro, 1925.jpg

The information provided by the uploader (except license template) seems to be correct: see here and here. The copyright template should be {{PD-old-auto-expired|deathyear=1960}} (Japan has 50pma). Ankry (talk) 22:55, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

@Jeff G. and Fitindia: Ankry (talk) 22:57, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ankry: Thanks, but you may be under the misapprehension that I am an Admin here - I'm not (yet), so I technically can't advise on this file, other than to note that even a stopped analog clock is right twice a day.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 12:53, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: pinging you for potential comments as you nominated the image for deletion. The image source is linked above, so no need for admin rights in order to see it. Ankry (talk) 13:21, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - The 1925 date appears to be a creation date. We would need to know a publication date to make a determination of the US status (for example, 1960 + 50 + 1 = 2011, which is well after the 1996 URAA date. Per COM:HIRTLE, if this were published anytime from 1926 to 1960 (author death), the earliest PD date is 2022.) Эlcobbola talk 15:48, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
    • Our general practice was an assumption that an art was published just after its creation unless we have evidence of otherwise. Should we revise this practice and require evidence of publication date for every art presented in Wikimedia Cmmons? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ankry (talk • contribs) 07:56, 24 June 2021‎ (UTC)
      • This is both untrue and contrary to policy. As only a couple examples within just the past month: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5; as only a couple random examples each with a different admin closing: 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. There are thousands of others. COM:EVID requires "In all cases the uploader must provide appropriate evidence to demonstrate either that the file is in the public domain" (underline added) and COM:L asks for "information sufficient for others to verify the license status." When a PD claim relies on date of publication (which the US often does, as you appear to know), "appropriate evidence" and "information sufficient for others to verify the license status" are evidence of publication date; the creation date--again, as you know, is not the same thing and is never assumed to be in the absence of additional facts and circumstances. This is the current practice, and has been the past practice. Эlcobbola talk 13:33, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 18:02, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

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

שחזור מפות

שלום Billinghurst מחק מספר מפות שהעלתי בשביל ויקיפדיה העברית המפות היו עם שינוי קל אשמח אם תוכלו לשחזר אותם תודה ויקי4800 (talk) 11:28, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. No file listed for undeletion. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 17:59, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File:JaackMaate.jpg

It doesn't violate any copyrights. TheWeekdayz (talk) 20:09, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per Elcobbola. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 17:58, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

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

All deleted uploads of LuCKY

Extended content

OTRS agent (verify): request: Ticket:2021022410007146 and Ticket:2021050710004551 allege permission. I request temporary undeletion to assess the validity of that allegation, mark as {{subst:OR}} or otherwise appropriately, and ping me.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 09:28, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

 Info maybe about Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by LuCKY, but unsure. Ankry (talk) 11:35, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Yes it is, @Ankry: . LuCKY 💬 ✒️ 📂 17:42, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Maybe, but this is up to an OTRS member to verify this. Imprecise requests cannot be handled. Ankry (talk) 16:55, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
This request already has been started by an OTRS member (@Jeff G.: ). LuCKY 💬 ✒️ 📂 17:04, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ankry: Not all of LuCKY's deleted uploads were included in Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by LuCKY. I want precisely all of the user's deleted uploads to be undeleted, as I have permission on hand for all of them. They are all of the redlinks at https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/upload&offset=&limit=250&user=LuCKY&type=upload - do you need a complete list here? Also, I am an OTRS agent / member and I asked for a ping, as linked in my OP.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:35, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
I prefer this section to be handled by someone else. And I suppose a list of files may be helpful as I do not know a tool that can undelete All deleted uploads of [a] user. Ankry (talk) 15:49, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: Since I see you weren't pinged: Ankry's advice above to make an actual list of the relevant files is a good idea. It'll be easier for an admin to undelete files based on a wikitext list than a dynamic log. You can wrap it in {{hat}}/{{hab}} to make it look tidy. :) Xover (talk) 06:50, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ankry, Xover, and JuTa: Ok, I made a list of the 205 files with {{cot}}/{{cob}}. It wasn't easy.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 16:35, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Hmmm, is there anything new within the tickets compared to early May when I deleted the image the last time? --JuTa 22:49, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: ⬆︎ [Supplying Missing Pings™ is a service of Xover Inc.] Xover (talk) 08:52, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
@JuTa: Certainly, or I wouldn't have asked. Any combination Commons Admin and VRT/OTRS Member is welcome to check my work. @Xover: Thanks for the pings.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:09, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G. I now restored a few examples out of the list: File:Burcu Özberk.jpg, File:İrem Derici.jpg, File:Ahsen Eroğlu.jpg, File:Murat Özaydınlı.jpg and File:StephenAppiah.jpg. I hope thats enough to check the validy of the release according the (new) tickets. Give me a ping when you have a result. I will then either redelete them or undelete the rest. --JuTa 22:39, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
@JuTa: , *File:Burcu Özberk.jpg is not related with this topic, it is a different file and it should be deleted. LuCKY 💬 ✒️ 📂 06:20, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
@LuCKY: Sorry about that. FYI, that attempted ping did not work. Per mw:Extension:Echo#Usage, you must link to another user's page and sign in the same edit in order to effectively mention, notify, or ping them, and even then only if they have "Notify me when someone links to my user page" set (which is the default here).   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 06:32, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
@JuTa: Thanks, that's enough for all examples except File:Burcu Özberk.jpg. I can send you (or post somewhere) any of the originals with LuCKY's permission, or LuCKY can do that directly.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 12:52, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G., the list above is not the list to restore? then please correct it. --JuTa 16:10, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
@JuTa: The list above is the list to restore, less what you already restored 22:39, 17 June 2021 (UTC).   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 16:08, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G., i started to undelete the files, but I now need a break. I will continue later. --JuTa 01:15, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Finally i restored all files except 3 which are either deleted by author request or real cpvios. @Jeff G. please now complete the OTRS task. --JuTa 19:55, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done: By JuTa @Jeff G.: FYI. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 20:21, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

@JuTa and Nat: Thank you. @LuCKY: Please use {{Serkan Yakın}} instead of {{Cc-by-3.0}} for future uploads. It categorizes into Category:Photos by Serkan Yakın.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 16:57, 26 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Example.jpg

To whom it may concern:

I am Ying Wang, the director and producer of the film The World is Bright. I uploaded this file through my account Dylan Drolkar. I owns the right of the design and wish it could be uploaded again soon.

Thank you for your support.

Sincerely yours, Ying Wang --135.0.163.5 22:55, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. No file listed for undeletion. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:23, 26 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Cl-12.jpg

Hallo,

das Foto Cl-12.jpg wurde schon mehrfach gelöscht, obwohl erklärt wurde, dass unter der freien Lizenz »Creative-Commons-Lizenz „Namensnennung – Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen Deutschland“ verwendet werden darf. Dem Abgebildeten wurde vom Fotografen die vollumfänglichen Nutzungsrechte übertragen. Ich habe gerade eben auch eine Mail an permission-de@wikimedia.org, Vorgangs-Nummer: 4155-33609d8086dc86c7, geschrieben.

Bitte stellen Sie das Bild wieder her.

--Stefan Krude (talk) 10:35, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplised here. To quote the UDR instructions: If the file was deleted for missing evidence of licensing permission from the copyright holder, please follow the procedure for submitting permission evidence. If you have already done that, there is no need to request undeletion here. If the submitted permission is in order, the file will be restored when the permission is processed. Please be patient, as this may take several weeks depending on the current workload and available volunteers. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:21, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

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

File: Swelling of the foreskin 4.jpg

File: Swelling of the foreskin 4.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by JamesTan10307 (talk • contribs) 19:30, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Procedural close, file is not deleted. Not a request for any administrative action. Thuresson (talk) 19:59, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

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

Photos listed in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Kelly Madison

VRT agent (verify): request: Ticket:2007071810003376 alleges permission from the subject's business partner (despite what nominator FredWalsh wrote in the DR). I uploaded File:Kelly Madison 3 crop1.png and File:Nude Kelly Madison 8.jpg, but FredWalsh neglected to notify me, Anisur Uzzal, and Mbdortmund of the DR. Please ping me. Pinging @Explicit as deleting Admin. I stand by what I wrote in this edit 13:00, 19 July 2020 (UTC), preserved here: '"through the subject's website" does not necessarily mean it was the subject saying the photographer gave permission. No photographer is named in the correspondence.' I can speculate that the photographer was the subject's business partner, but I am not sure. Pinging @Adambro, who added the permission to the file description pages. Are we now expected to apply our current standards to 15-year-old tickets?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 11:45, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Done. @Jeff G.: please check the image description pages if OTRS information should be added. Thuresson (talk) 21:01, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
@Thuresson: Thank you!   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 01:52, 29 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Example.jpg Undelete TheNationalFrontier

This is a profile of the publication and not the advertisement. The link is added to ensure that this is a genuine company. The National Frontier is an online publication with exclusive articles and stories from reputed scholars, writers and media personnel. Please remove the deletion and you may remove the link if you desire. However, the profile may be retained. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheNationalFrontier (talk • contribs) 13:49, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

  • Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy 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.
  • @TheNationalFrontier: File:Example.jpg is not deleted. And if you mean your userpage, its creation is against our userpage policy (userpages are intended for information about the user contribution in Wikimedia; you have none). Any other information, especially related to any commercial activity, is advertisement. Moreover, your username is considered advertising and I suggest to change it, if you wish to contribute here. Especially, if the contribution is related to the web portal of the same name. Ankry (talk) 14:40, 27 June 2021 (UTC)


Not done per COM:NOTHOST. Thuresson (talk) 14:57, 29 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File:Chomel.jpg to undelete

Hi,

Please assist to undelete the image. The mentioned person is an established artist.

Refer below for more references:

Music Video from a record label in Malaysia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M82PjQpvD4Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3Civ7G1kSY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKp33KsyEYM

A publication from a big label publisher in Malaysia (mStar): https://www.mstar.com.my/spotlight/hiburan/2014/10/20/imej-tomboi-chomel

A publication from Singapore's Malay Newspaper (Berita Harian) https://www.beritaharian.sg/gah/tibanya-syawal-masa-bagi-chomel-beramal https://www.beritaharian.sg/gah/hiburan/chomel-tetap-wanita — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faizalabdrahman (talk • contribs) 15:04, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

--Faizalabdrahman (talk) 15:05, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

@Faizalabdrahman: The photo was not deleted due to scope issues. It was deleted due to copyright issues: we need a free license from the photo copyright holder as described on your talk page. This requirement cannot be overridden. Ankry (talk) 17:32, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Chomel.jpg -- the reason given is scope, but it is also missing permission. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:21, 29 June 2021 (UTC)


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

File: Kimsa Sok 1.jpg

This my own gallery. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.144.88.14 (talk) 22:43, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Personal photo of multiple offender sockpuppet. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:18, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/Archive/2021-06&oldid=608200112"