Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2019-03

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:Metro Plaza de Espana.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: source - Alexis Jazz ping plz 22:23, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 15:56, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

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

File:MediaWiki bureaucrat.svg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: because and because..

For what it's worth, there's a png version still available.. Deletions for files like these really shouldn't happen under the radar like this. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 22:51, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per Alexis. --Yann (talk) 15:52, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Tekniikanakateemiset logo rgb.png

I'm trying to upload TEK's current logo to Wikimedia Commons. Apparently this has been tried before, but the current logo has been deleted, which is why I am asking for undeletion.

--Heiditomperi (talk) 10:12, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

@Heiditomperi: Which file exactly are you talking about? There is no deleted file uploaded to Commons by you and no file with above-mentioned name ever existed on Commons. Ankry (talk) 15:33, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tekniikanakateemiset logo rgb.png maybe? —LX (talk, contribs) 20:05, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
@Ankry: @LX: Yes that's the one! Is it possible to undelete it? Wikimedia currently has TEK's old logo only, and I would very much like to change that.Heiditomperi --Heiditomperi (talk) 13:38, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 Support I see no copyright problem as it is {{PD-text}}/{{PD-shape}} IMO. Ankry (talk) 13:58, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 15:50, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Szikszay György debreceni esperes arcképe (Prixner Gottfried pesti rézmetsző alkotása 1803-ból).JPG

This work is from 1803, see here. The author was Gottfried Prixner died in 1819, see here. --Regasterios (talk) 12:20, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

 Support per above. Ankry (talk) 15:28, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 15:37, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Badly scolded IWW.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Badly scolded IWW.jpg

1923 US photograph taken during the Liberty Hill Strike in San Pedro, California. https://www.iww.org/history/campaigns/sanpedro/images Abzeronow (talk) 15:28, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

 Support per above. Ankry (talk) 15:35, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. @Abzeronow: Please fix the description. --Yann (talk) 15:36, 28 February 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Locandina Partenze.jpg.jpg

https://storage.googleapis.com/ff-storage-p01/attachments/files/003/829/720/original/Locandina_corto_INGLESE.jpg?1551211228

The image is my creation and is copyrights free. --NikMP3 (talk) 09:38, 27 February 2019 (UTC) 27.02.2019 Nicolas Morganti Patrignani

 Oppose I do not see the declared CC-BY-SA 4.0 license on the above-mentioned page. Ankry (talk) 14:04, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: We need a written and verifiable permission. @NikMP3: If you're not comfortable with English, you can write to permissions-it@wikimedia.org. Ruthven (msg) 15:53, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Fotogramma scena film.jpg

This image is taken from my short film and I am the holder of the copyrights. So, I allow the use of the image on wikipedia. --NikMP3 (talk) 09:41, 27 February 2019 (UTC) 27.02.2019 Nicolas Morganti Patrignani

 Oppose We cannot rely on on-wiki license declarations for already published works. Either public evidence that the film is freely licensed (or that its copyright expired) of COM:OTRS permission from the film copyright owner is needed. Ankry (talk) 14:08, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: per Ankry, please write to OTRS. Ruthven (msg) 15:52, 28 February 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Chiba TV logo.jpg

As you can see in logs, the file has been deleted, restored, and deleted again by mistake due to a wrong copyright infringement tag. I've already explained why it is not speedy deletion material here. The second sysop who deleted it couldn't make up for it because he hasn't logged on since.--Sakretsu (talk) 16:28, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

 Support the DR procedure here. Ankry (talk) 21:49, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. IMO this is {{PD-textlogo}}. Please create a DR if you think otherwise. --Yann (talk) 16:01, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Hourglass-advancedemotions.png

Not copyrighted - illustrates the article --Doomdorm64 (talk) 08:23, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

 Question which article? Ankry (talk) 20:37, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: With limited exceptions, none of which apply here, all creative works have a copyright from the moment of creation until it expires, usually 70 years after the death of the creator.. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:45, 28 February 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Grass-water-fire.png

Not copyrighted illustrates article --Doomdorm64 (talk) 08:27, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

 Question which article? Ankry (talk) 20:38, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: With limited exceptions, none of which apply here, all creative works have a copyright from the moment of creation until it expires, usually 70 years after the death of the creator.. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:45, 28 February 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Wandsworth, Putney and Hammersmith bridge opening.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Wandsworth, Putney and Hammersmith bridge opening.jpg

1880 British illustration. Name of artist is initialed in lower left corner. Seems PD-old-assumed Abzeronow (talk) 15:31, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 16:07, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Aly Ryan.jpg

No copyright violations of File:Aly Ryan.jpg Right to share and publish photo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wewantaly (talk • contribs) 17:21, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Looks like a TV screenshot from German TV channel Das Erste. Are you a TV Producer involved with this broadcast? Thuresson (talk) 20:47, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose No evidence of a free license. --Yann (talk) 16:04, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
 Not done Per Yann + OP do not cooperate to establish facts. Thuresson (talk) 21:33, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Russian Orthodox Church in Antwerpen (Sint-Jozefkerk).jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/centralasian/7935754578/in/photostream/. This Flickr account was blacklisted because of https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Office_actions/DMCA_notices&oldid=260924975#Igor_Stravinsky.2C_New_York_City_.281946.29. The photo of the church that was deleted here appears to have been own work though. They appear to own at least a Canon EOS 5D Mark II and an iPhone 4. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 15:57, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose I am afraid that as the Flickr user used to provide false copyright information, we cannot apply AGF here and we need a valid OTRS permission in order to restore the photo. Ankry (talk) 16:53, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
@Ankry: please see https://www.flickr.com/people/centralasian/: "The majority of the photograph in this Flickr stream are of my own 'production'. I post them here to share with the community but also to use them in my blogs, so this stream works as a storage space (these days they call it 'cloud'). At some point I began to gather here not only my own works, but also the images of other people - photographs, artworks, charts, maps, and whatnots. I try to attribute all these works as accurately as I can, but it's not always possible, unfortunately. Too many things are just 'laying there' on the web, unattributed and untitled."
Yes, this Flickr user made some mistakes, but if you look at the Flickr stream you will find they own at least a Canon EOS 5D Mark II and an iPhone 4. Images without metadata from this Flickr user can't be accepted so easily, I get that. The Flickr user appears to have changed their ways since then btw. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 17:48, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done per above. Ankry (talk) 08:49, 1 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Olsw couv 1.jpg

I am the writer agent of writer Jérémi Bentham and this file is one of the covers of his book. All the covers belong to us. --JBOLWSAGA (talk) 16:59, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose For already published media, like published books, a written free license permission send by the actual copyright owner following COM:OTRS is needed. If you are not the cover author, you may ąlso need to prove that you own copyright. Ankry (talk) 15:20, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done Per above. Ankry (talk) 08:44, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Planetshakers band en concierto en vivo.jpg

I need you to see my problem because it always erases my wikimedia image. Please help me. Thank you. Chico sensación (talk) 23:03, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Did you follow the advice given earlier? Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2019-01#File:Planetshakers band en concierto en vivo.jpg. 23:38, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done No response. Ankry (talk) 08:44, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Video of Antarctic krill performing metachronal swimming.ogv

Hello,

The above name is the title to my video which shows the metachronal swimming of an Antarctic krill. I request undeletion of this file because it is my own work. It was filmed in the lab at the University. The phone was used to film the animal, and the animal is in the jar. Please undelete the file since the page describes the metachronal swimming in words. It is always good to see an example of the animal performing this swimming technique. Especially this video communicates the idea better than words, and visual learners like me will greatly benefit from this video. --Kuvvat Garayev (talk) 05:14, 27 February 2019 (UTC) 2/27/2019

@Kuvvat Garayev: As you have been notified, COM:OTRS permission is needed here. When the appropriate permission is received and processed, the wile will be restored. Ankry (talk) 14:51, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done Waiting for OTRS. Ankry (talk) 08:43, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Poruvazhy Peruviruthy Malanada Temple.jpg

Hi,

File:Poruvazhy Peruviruthy Malanada Temple.jpg deleted for copyright violation.

malanada.com official website of Malanada Temple owns the photo, The temple authorities give the photo to me for wikipedia, How can verify the copyright, is site verification possible from wikipedia.

What are the steps to undelete the photo ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Renishar (talk • contribs) 05:21, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose As malanada.com is not a freely licensed site, we need a written free license permission following COM:OTRS send directly by the image copyright owner in order to restore the photo. Non-written free license permissions are void. Ankry (talk) 14:48, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done Per above. Ankry (talk) 08:43, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Civilní Obrana - Promo 2018.png

I'm the member of the band Civilní Obrana and the fact that the photo was used on some website does not mean I'm violating anyone's rights. I own all the rights to manipulate with the image I have uploaded to the Civilní Obrana's Wikipedia page. --Genetic99 (talk) 07:32, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose According to our rules, if the photo was used outside Wikimedia without evidence of free license prior to upload to Commons, then a written free license permission from the actual copyright holder send following COM:OTRS instructions. On-wiki license declaration is allowed only for unpublished works uploaded here by their original authors personally. Ankry (talk) 14:37, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 08:42, 1 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:AB Forever på Gladsaxe Stadion.jpg

I've sent an OTRS request but still the file was deleted. Best, Grasmusb (talk) 13:18, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

  •  Oppose If a free license has been sent to OTRS, then the file will be restored automatically when and if the email is received, processed, and approved. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.
If the message was sent to the English language version of OTRS and the email has been properly received there the sender will receive an automatic reply with the ticket number. If the sender has not had a reply, please check that it was sent correctly and try again. Other language versions may or may not provide the automatic reply. Ankry (talk) 14:18, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 08:41, 1 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:500px photo (49407980).jpeg

I apologize for not coming here in time to defend this undeletion, a few days ago. This is not an unidentified place in Paris, it is a photo of the popular Category:Café de Flore in Blv. Saint Germain. It can be cropped to the image and become very much in scope, as we've not any photo showing this particular part of the café, including the street sign over the place plaque which is generally hidden in the other photos. Can you please consider it's undeletion? -- Darwin Ahoy! 23:50, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Pinging @Mates, Ankry, and Jameslwoodward: -- Darwin Ahoy! 23:52, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

 Support Fine with me, provided the one who does it adds the description and cat from Darwin. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:45, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done per Jim. Ankry (talk) 08:54, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Sebastian Kurz RDV.jpg

Link der Veröffentlichung: https://www.facebook.com/RettetDieVereinsfeste/photos/a.876448345763923/981024891972934/?type=3&theater


Hier die Nutzungsbedingungen und der Link direkt zum Foto File:Sebastian Kurz RDV.jpg, welches auch auf Facebook öffentlich für alle im freien Internet zugänglich sind:

Linke zum Facebook-Foto: https://www.facebook.com/RettetDieVereinsfeste/photos/a.876448345763923/981024891972934/?type=3&theater Facebook-Nutzungsbedingungen und Richtlinien: https://www.facebook.com/policies Facebook-Terms: https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms/

16:39, 25. Feb. 2019‎ SimsalaBim (Diskussion | Beiträge)‎

 Oppose I do not see a permission for free commercial use by anybody under the above-mentioned links. Such a permission is one of the requirements for Wikimedia Commons upload; see COM:L. Ankry (talk) 06:52, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Ankry. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:59, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Логотип фестивалю БарРокКо.jpg

Це зображення належить мені. Я є його власником. Тому його видалення є помилковим.--Sera527 (talk) 01:47, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Unpublished, personally created logos are out of scope. And for logos already used outside Commons the COM:OTRS permission from the logo copyright holder is needed. Only logos published under an explicit free license or with expired copyright do not require written permission. But this is not this case. Ankry (talk) 08:58, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Ankry. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:55, 1 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Evil Eagle Logo.png

Hello,You have deleted my logo, which I made myself.Please explain why — Preceding unsigned comment added by V1T0xGoD (talk • contribs) 13:18, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

@V1T0xGoD: Hi, If it is your logo, it is out of scope. Otherwise, it is under a copyright, even if you made a copy from the original (see COM:DW). Regards, Yann (talk) 15:32, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: per Yann. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:54, 1 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Coastal Dunes (26763585902).jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This image was created by the NPS and has been uploaded to Flickr under public domain. https://www.flickr.com/photos/naturenps/26763585902/ ButteBag (talk) 16:52, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: Posted by NPS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:53, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

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

 Oppose All but the last of these are text only. It is well established that type fonts, however complex, and single words in such fonts do not have copyrights. For the last, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:AmaRoma-logo.png. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:25, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

File:PabloRuz.jpg

I own that picture, i took it! i don't know why you keep erase it from wikimedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alromo (talk • contribs) 12:53, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Your image is out of scope (es:Pablo Ruz Villanueva). --Patrick Rogel (talk) 15:24, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Patrick. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:55, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Example.jpg

Hapus — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 114.125.62.59 (talk) 21:13, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done Procedural close, file is not deleted. Thuresson (talk) 23:13, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Koncert Svitavy 2019.jpg

As a member of the band who actually took the picture "Koncert Svitavy 2019.jpg", I am allowed to use the image I have uploaded to the page Civilní Obrana on Wikipedia. --Genetic99 (talk) 07:34, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I am the holder of the rights as our band took that picture during our show. Genetic99 (talk) 09:53, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

@1989: Why did you consider it copyright violation? any hints? Ankry (talk) 14:44, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
@Ankry: Low resolution, no EXIF, prev upload was copyvio. OTRS is needed to provide the full resolution with metadata included. -- 1989 (talk) 16:07, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 Neutral here then. Ankry (talk) 16:56, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
@Genetic99: Could you please upload the original file with EXIF data? Regards, Yann (talk) 15:59, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: No answer. --Yann (talk) 11:33, 2 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Andew J. Hanson.jpg

This photograph was taken by Tracey Theriault, a communication staff member at Indiana University. She has given me permission to use this photograph on Wikipedia. Her email is <privacy snip>. She said there is no licensing or copyright on this photograph. I am a half time staff member in charge of making the Wikipedia for our faculty at the School of Informatics, Computing, and Engineering at Indiana University. I have full permision and legality to use this photo. Additionally, this phot should be renamed as Andrew J. Hanson.

--Mkrampen (talk) 15:04, 28 February 2019 (UTC) Maridee Krampen 2/28/19

There are several problems here:

  1. "there is no licensing or copyright on this photograph" is incorrect. With limited exceptions, none of which apply here, all creative works have a copyright from the moment of creation until it expires, usually 70 years after the death of the creator.
  2. Who owns the copyright? Since you say she is a communication staff member, it is possible that this is a work for hire and the University owns the copyright. Equally possibly, photography is not part of her job and she owns the copyright.
  3. "permission to use this photograph on Wikipedia" is not sufficient. Both WP and Commons require that images be free for any use anywhere by anyone, including commercial use.
  4. The image is very small (308x308 px), which gives rise to the question of whether she is actually the photographer. If she is, once the license is given, please ensure that you upload a version at full camera resolution.

In any case, policy requires that the actual copyright holder must send a free license using OTRS. In the case of the University, that would be an officer of the university corporation. If it is not a work for hire, then Theriault herself must send it. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:35, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 11:36, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Shalini Singh journalist.jpg

--Ss81 (talk) 15:49, 28 February 2019 (UTC) Hello, I had uploaded this photo which is my own and I had released it to the site http://www.theweekendleader.com/Columns/2777/taste-of-china.html to use alongside my column in November 2018. Request that this photo be undeleted and duly uploaded on the Wikipedia page.

Thanks and regards, Shalini Singh

 Oppose There's no mention about free license on that page. For already published photos, COM:OTRS permission from the actual copyright owner is required. And a proof that you are exclusive copyright holder, if you are not the author. Ankry (talk) 06:39, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: per Ankry. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:28, 2 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:가수 새빈.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: The copyright of this file belongs to me, Saebin. (ID:Gorgeous90) Please do not delete or edit. Thank you.:) Gorgeous90 (talk) 01:20, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose But it was published elsewhere prior to upload here. For already used photos, COM:OTRS permission is required. And do not reupload deleted content. Ankry (talk) 06:34, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Ankry. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:27, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Michael David Calnan.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Photograph belongs to the estate of the late Colonel M.D. Calnan, CD which has bequeathed that it may be released to public use. Pcalnan (talk) 01:54, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose "Released to public use" is not the same as "free license". We need the latter. And only the exclusive copyright holder (presumably the photographer) can declare that (written form required). Ankry (talk) 07:00, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose Agreed. Owning a paper or digital copy of a photograph does not give the owner the right to freely license it. That right is held by the photographer and may be transferred only by a written license. If such a license exists in this case, it may be provided via OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:03, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Per discussion. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:26, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Family_Symbol.jpg

I created this symbol over 15 years ago. It is open for all to use to describe the Gerety family. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Irishtigger416 (talk • contribs) 04:06, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose for already used images, COM:OTRS permission is required. Ankry (talk) 06:29, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose As a personal symbol, it is out of scope. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:49, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Per discussion. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:26, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:AMH 1.jpg

Photo is MINE, i did take it in Oaxaca in 2017 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bakencio (talk • contribs) 06:01, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose But it was published elsewhere prior to upload here. For already used photos, COM:OTRS permission is required. Ankry (talk) 06:30, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Needs OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:26, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Sarajevo Roses

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Sarajevo Roses

Holes made from shells and filled in with resin stretches the definition of "modern monument". Thread in VPC about this. @Eleassar: @Jameslwoodward: @Smooth O: Abzeronow (talk) 15:56, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

The only file that is in "what links here" for this DR is listed above. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:15, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: per discussion. Ruthven (msg) 21:54, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:LOGO DGCINE.png

Buenos días, Estoy trabajando en un articulo sobre la comisión fílmica de la República Dominicana (Dirección General de Cine, DGCINE), y quería alimnentar la ficha usando el logo de esta institución, el cual está dispoinble en la sección de descargables en su página web. En ese sentido, considero que no existe ninguna posible violación de los derechos de autor.

--Filmarenrd809 (talk) 15:04, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

@Filmarenrd809: Que sea descargable no quiere decir que sea usable. Un responsable de DGCINE tiene que enviarnos a OTRS una autorización u pueden añadir en su pagina web una licencia libre. --Ruthven (msg) 22:06, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: No permission. Ruthven (msg) 22:06, 3 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Mahesh Athirala.jpg

This file has granted permission from the source itself, please do check once.

source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/145126006@N02/45776436822/in/dateposted-public/

PandaBossa (talk) 04:21, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

    Support    This was deleted by User: Ronhjones because it had been deleted previously for lack of license, but it had passed Flickreview before the second deletion. Unless we think the Flickr user does not have the rights to this -- and there is no mention of that in the file's record -- we should restore it. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:02, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose Flickrwashed. Uploaded by Vampirus44 with source https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/930079566650941445/IX0DAbgq_400x400.jpg deleted 5:18, 20 June 2018 . Flickr upload is November 11, 2018. Then uploaded as File:Mahesh athirala1.jpg 12:04, 11 November 2018 by BlowDone with Flickr source, and deleted because of Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mahesh athirala1.jpg. Then uploaded by PandaBossa 06:27, 28 February 2019. Looks like some heavy socking to me. Ronhjones  (Talk) 12:08, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Per Ronhjones. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:23, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: per discussion. Ruthven (msg) 22:06, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:100m Athens 1896.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:100m Athens 1896.jpg

This was a 2005 file. Any chance this could qualify as PD-old-assumed? (since 1896 is date of creation). Abzeronow (talk) 15:19, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: per discussion. Ruthven (msg) 10:48, 4 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Jin Kim Montclare, Ph.D.jpg

This picture is owned by New York University's Tandon School of Engineering and grants its use under the standard Creative Commons license and requests its restoration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmdevitt24 (talk • contribs) 20:05, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose User:Kgberg also claims to own the copyright. Please ask the correct copyright owner to verify the license through Commons:OTRS. Thuresson (talk) 23:27, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: per Thuresson. Ruthven (msg) 10:50, 4 March 2019 (UTC)


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

Request undeletion of file File:Tom_Graves_author_headshot.jpg

URL of file no longer exists

In late April 2018, Tom Graves, the author of this image, sent a proper email giving his authorization to use the file.

An OTRS agent sent a reply 13 August 2018, but Graves failed to respond to that email which caused the file to be deleted.

I now request that the file be undeleted. If confirmation from Tom Graves is needed, he will respond to your request.

--TallVenusian (talk) 22:07, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: @TallVenusian: It works the other way around: once OTRS has verified the permission, the file is restored. Ruthven (msg) 10:42, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Ticket:2018082210005861

OTRS agent (verify): request: we've received Ticket:2018082210005861 regarding File:Saying Goodbye.jpg, File:Lightning talk about Stepanakert WikiClub.jpg abd File:Lightning talk at Wikimania"18.jpg. Please restore in order to verified veracity and finish the process. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 00:52, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Ganímedes: Please proceed. Ruthven (msg) 12:24, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Seder-Masochism

In January, all the images on Commons related to film Seder-Masochism were deleted due to lack of proper free-licensing. The same day they were deleted, however, Nina Paley (the creator of the movie) officially released the film under a CC0 license.[1] Although this public domain release was announced several weeks prior, the closer didn't notice and went ahead with deleting the images. We can now undelete them. Kaldari (talk) 02:02, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Please ping me when this is done so that I can add the images to article. Thanks! Kaldari (talk) 02:03, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: As noted at the cited site, the film is now explicitly CC-0. User:Kaldari. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:40, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:45Rest.jpg

This photo of Senator Ann Rest was deleted for possible copyright violation. The photo was taken from her page on the Minnesota Legislature website. Their policy (stated here: https://www.leg.state.mn.us/leg/faq/faq?subject=22) says that photos are considered part of the public domain unless listed otherwise on the specific website. Her website makes no claims (https://www.senate.mn/members/member_bio.php?member_id=1051). For this reason, there is no copyright violation and the image should be undeleted. Brow4067 (talk) 02:51, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Actually, the cited page says, at item (1):

"Except when specifically stated on a legislative page, anyone may view, copy, or distribute information found on a legislative website for personal or nonprofit use."

Commons requires that images be free for any use by anyone anywhere, including commercial use. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:24, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done Per Jim. Thuresson (talk) 22:55, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Files Uploaded by User:Davidzdh

According to Ticket:2018081210002892, an OTRS permission email has been sent regarding these files. Undeletion is therefore required to verify the copyright status of these files.廣九直通車 (talk) 09:22, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done @廣九直通車: please continue. Ankry (talk) 11:59, 5 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:JRL file 1.jpg

OTRS agent (verify): request: we've received Ticket:2019022610010731 regarding File:JRL file 1.jpg. Please restore in order to verified veracity and finish the process. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 15:17, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done @Ganímedes: please continue. Ankry (talk) 11:47, 5 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Deepak pun socialwork.jpg File:Deepak pun kpoli.jpg File:Deepak pun farming1.jpg File:Deepak pun magar.jpg

The following are the files in question:

I got the photos through the Facebook page of the person concerning the draft in review. Draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Deepak_Pun_Magar. I'm new to wikipedia, how do i verify the pictures with free licensing. Do let me know what can be done to resolve the issue.

Thank You Saurav Shandilya — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deviantsaurav (talk • contribs) 17:36, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Facebook is copyrighted and is not a valid source for Commons. In order for the images to be restored to Commons, the actual photographer(s) must send free license(s) using OTRS. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:32, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Jim: no evidence of free licence on Facebook. Ankry (talk) 11:49, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

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

I am the author of the deleted photo, please put it back on...

...I am also the owner and author of www.vladimir-georgievski.com and all its contents, where the deleted photo may have been featured.

Many thanks, Frosina — Preceding unsigned comment added by GFros (talk • contribs) 17:52, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

If this is about File:Vladmir Georgievski .jpg, the photo has been published earlier here with the following copyright license: "©2018 Vladimir Georgievski – All Rights Reserved". Please use Commons:OTRS to verify that the copyright owner allow publication under a free license. Thuresson (talk) 17:58, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
 Comment Very strange user is owner of "all the contents" since Vladimir Georgievski died 2017. --Patrick Rogel (talk) 23:32, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above: copyrighted photo, no evidence of free license at the source site. OTRS needed. Ankry (talk) 11:45, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Modest-solans-eugenio-ocana.jpg

File: Modest-solans-eugenio-ocana.jpg I have permission to edit because the author of this painting is my son-in-law.

EMCGS1953 (talk) 18:01, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Since we do not know who User:EMCGS1953 actually is or his relationship to the artist, policy requires that the artist must send a free license using OTRS. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:30, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Jim. Ankry (talk) 11:44, 5 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Je suis Charlie, Brussels 11 January 2015 (203).jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: The text should be in PD per {{PD-text}}. B dash (talk) 04:32, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Aside from the graphic elements, which probably don't have a copyright in France, we have a full sentence of text. That would probably have a copyright in the USA and certainly does in France where the ToO is lower. {{PD-text}} applies only to a word or two, such as on a logo, and not to sentences. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:13, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done per Jim & Ruthven. Ankry (talk) 11:42, 5 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Doerr,Cornelia-2017.jpg

OTRS agent (verify): request: we've received Ticket:2018091410003224 regarding File:Doerr,Cornelia-2017.jpg. Please restore in order to verified veracity and finish the process. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 22:16, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done by Gbawden. Ankry (talk) 11:37, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Jasmin-of-arabesque-2.jpg

Dear Sirs,

We own all the copyrights for this image, Can you please not delete it? What shall we do to make this image ramain?

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ssasha999 (talk • contribs) 20:42, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

@Ssasha999: It's a reupload of Jasmin Vetter Of Arabesque.jpg. Please as to Hans Keller or Volker Younas to write from their "official email" to COM:OTRS service. --Ruthven (msg) 10:41, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Ruthven. Ankry (talk) 12:17, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Files uploaded by Badelitsis

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I am the creator and legal owner of all these files - album art and promo photos produced and copyrighted by me. Please restore all of them! Thank you Badelitsis (talk) 14:29, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose They were deleted because they appear at https://elliniko-greek-rock.blogspot.com/2015/10/blog-post.html without a free license. You may either (a) add a CC-0, CC-BY, or CC-BY-SA license to the pages on which they appear or (b) send a free license using OTRS. We can restore them immediately after you have done (a); OTRS is likely to take several months. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:27, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Needs OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:26, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Hotchkiss Class of 1925.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hotchkiss Class of 1925.jpg

"The photo is from 1923, but is of the class of 1925. It is a scan of the Hotchkiss yearbook of that year". High school yearbooks tend to be PD-US-no notice. But anyway, 1923 US yearbook would be PD-US-expired now. Abzeronow (talk) 14:40, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

 Support per above. Ankry (talk) 11:39, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. @Abzeronow: Please fix the description. Thanks, --Yann (talk) 18:00, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Je suis Charlie, Brussels 11 January 2015 (110).jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: The text should be in PD per {{PD-text}}, and the drawing at the back is de minimis per DR discussion. B dash (talk) 15:04, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per B dash. --Yann (talk) 18:59, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Anrey_Istratov.jpg

Hey, please undelete the file. I've uploaded because I took on my camera during the Poligraphy photoshoot. Moscow, Malaya Nikitskaya str, 22. In October 2008. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gohardlikemf (talk • contribs) 00:15, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

@Gohardlikemf: Please ask to Бен Тюрпин to write to permissions-ru@wikimerdia.org, sending a valid permission to publish the file under CC BY-SA 4.0. Thanks --Ruthven (msg) 10:45, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: Undeleted by Ruthven. --Yann (talk) 19:16, 5 March 2019 (UTC)


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

Files uploaded by Afterbrunel

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Afterbrunel

The first if photographer is not named or unknown would be PD-old-assumed due to 1897 date. If the last 3 are illustrations from the 1840s, those would be mathematically PD-old-70. Abzeronow (talk) 15:18, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

 Support. The last three are obviously PD everywhere. In the case of the first one, while we have used 120 years as a basis for assuming that the author has been dead for 70 years, I think that is a little too soon. However, if we can agree that this author is unknown and is not likely to be found, then the law is 70 years after publication. In the case of an old postcard, we can assume publication soon after the photo was taken, so this was PD around 1970. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:55, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. @Abzeronow: Please check the description and the license.  Comment This was a bad DR. Most probably all the files are in the public domain. --Yann (talk) 19:38, 5 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:1990 - Canal 13 Río Cuarto.png

Me and Gnangarra (talk · contribs) think differently about is the logo eligible for copyright or not. Another opinion is needed. The file is usable in es:Canal 13 (Río Cuarto), so it's in scope. Taivo (talk) 15:50, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

It's a very close call for me -- therefore, I think PRP applies, so we should delete it. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:42, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: 3 colored squares. {{PD-textlogo}}. --Yann (talk) 19:40, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Monochrom--Kreativlaufhaus-2015.jpg

I am the copyright holder of this file. I'm Johannes Grenzfurthner (see my user page), founder of monochrom art group who created the art project that is documented with this image. Please undelete. Grenz (talk) 12:12, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose You say "I am the copyright holder". You do not say that you are the photographer and the file description says "press image". That suggests that you are not, in fact, the photographer. Please remember that owning a paper or digital copy of an image very rarely gives you the right to freely license it as required here. Unless you are actually the photographer, in order for this image to be restored, the actual photographer must send a free license using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:30, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

As mentioned on our press image page: http://monochrom.at/press/fotos.htm -- Quote: "all images by monochrom: Creative Commons BY-SA 4.0 (in case images were taken by external photographers: monochrom has contracts with external photographers and therefore holds all the rights to release images under Creative Commons license)" -- we have been handling this in this way since the introduction of CC. Grenz (talk) 20:53, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
Having a contract with the external photographer does not necessarily mean that you have the right to freely license the image -- photographers rarely grant that right to others. In any event, because the image is not "own work" as you incorrectly claimed, either (a) the actual photographer must provide a free license or (b) you must prove that you actually own the right to freely license the image, in both cases using OTRS. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:26, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Will file OTRS and provide contract with photographer that states that he transferred all rights to us. Grenz (talk)

 Not done: Thank you, Grenz. This can be restored when and if we get the free license from the photographer. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:27, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

@Jameslwoodward: Actually there is a ticket for this file: ticket:2019012210004346. Yann (talk) 19:14, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Yann that ticket has 95 entries -- I see one for File:Monochrom Eignblunzn (2003), documentation.jpg, but perhaps I missed the one for this file. Could you be more specific about where in the 95 it is mentioned. Thanks, .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:33, 5 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Aidan Earley looking sharp.png

deleted by a bot when the image is the public domain

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/craig-whytes-pal-raided-over-12400588 — Preceding unsigned comment added by NaughtyNuggles (talk • contribs) 14:52, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

  •  Oppose. Not deleted by a bot, deleted by a human administrator. Photo Credit is the Press Association, and I don't see any Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication on the page. So not public domain, and decidedly in copyright. Abzeronow (talk) 14:57, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: The page has © 2019 Scottish Daily Record and Sunday Mail Ltd and there is no reason to believe that this Press Association image is free. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:43, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:LUF560-lulli-tactel-lace-waist-x-back-camisole-leotard-florencia.jpg

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Oleggl88mail (talk • contribs) 10:43, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose No reason given. The named source is https://www.lullidancewear.com/shop/dance-leotards/lace-waist-x-back-camisole-leotard-florencia-luf560-lulli which does not have a free license. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:04, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Lifted from the Web without permission. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:18, 6 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Logo Mason Ewing Corporation - Fond blanc.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I want to put my logo on Wikimedia Commons. That's my right and that's why I've sent an email with the proof to Wikipedia. Sprinter7124 (talk) 22:09, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Anybody can say that. There is no evidence that Wikimedia User:Sprinter7124 is authorised to represent Mason Ewing Corporation. A written free license permission from authorised representative of logo the copyright holder following COM:OTRS instructions is needed in order to restore the logo. Ankry (talk) 12:48, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Needs a free license from an officer of the corporation owning the logo. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:06, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Relaga.jpg

Il s'agit d'un fichier classique en relativité. Qui correspond au texte joint. Ceux qui ont demandé sa suppression affichent simplement leur ignorance , ou leur volonté de nuire.Chessfan (talk) 23:40, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

@Chessfan: Deleted as out of scope. If you disagree, explain why. Ankry (talk) 12:44, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
@Ankry: That graph is useful to visualise the written text. That's all! I can't understand why you censored it ? --Chessfan (talk) 23:35, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
@Chessfan: Which text? I do not censor anything. The scope of this file was open for discussion for a week, but nobody contesred the deletion. Ankry (talk) 10:30, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Hand drawn graph with no caption, no useful description, and no categories. Out of Scope. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:05, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:印军越界现场照片（一）.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: These files are all inseparable part of The fact that the Indian border guards crossed the border into the Chinese territory in the Sikkim section of the Sino-Indian border and China’s position(《印度边防部队在中印边界锡金段越界 进入中国领土的事实和中国的立场》), a diplomatic statement announced by The Department of Foreign Affairs, People's Republic of China. According to Article 5 of Copyright Law of People's Republic of China,, these files are out of copyright protection. Also, a part of vandalism of INeverCry. WQL (talk) 14:17, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

  •  Support per nom.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 13:46, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose. Why there pics is "laws; regulations; resolutions, decisions and orders of state organs; other documents of legislative, administrative and judicial nature"?--shizhao (talk) 02:01, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
    • It's an original (author: a part of PLA, affilated to Chinese Government) and indispensible part of a diplomatic statement, which clearly shows its administrative in nature. --WQL (talk) 13:53, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
      • It depends on the context, I think. My understanding is that if the pictures are merely illustrative - if the document is understandable without the pictures - then it wouldn't be "indispensable" and can be treated separately, copyright-wise. --whym (talk) 12:15, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support. Pictures are obviously captured *in* the official statement, which is a part of a PDF, instead of from a website that segments of "statement" and "non-statement" cannot be clearly devided. Statements are not text-only. --Techyan（Talk） 12:06, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 Question which license template should be applicable if undeleted? Ankry (talk) 12:41, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
@WQL, Techyan, and Jeff G.: Any hints? If none appropriate exists, it should be discussed in COM:VPC before coming here. Ankry (talk) 16:17, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
@Ankry: {{PD-ROC-official}}.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 17:53, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: Definitely not. ROC != People's Republic of China. Ankry (talk) 20:21, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
@Ankry: Sorry, I meant {{PD-PRC-exempt}}. A diplomatic statement by an organ of the PRC state government appears to qualify as a decision or news thereof. I agree with your proposal below of restore and DR, as there is no mention of "text-only" in that template.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 00:32, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
@Ankry: {{PD-PRC-exempt}} is what they are getting at. However, the argument against using this license template is that it only applies to textual documents but not images, and for numerous times in the past here in Commons, the admins have agreed with such an argument. A few examples here:
--Wcam (talk) 20:47, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
@Wcam: Indeed, some of the above cases make me doubt. However, I would  Support restoring and starting a DR to test whether the PDF document mentioned above should be considered covered by this template as a whole, or only its textual part. Ankry (talk) 21:07, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
@Ankry: If in doubt, maybe COM:PRP should be considered? --Wcam (talk) 02:55, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
Maybe it should, maybe not. I refrain from taking final decision here as I do not speak Chinese and the douubt seems to be language / translation related. I just thing that DR is a better place where Chinese speakers can present their opinion in this matter. Ankry (talk) 22:55, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
Also  Support restoring and starting a DR Abzeronow (talk) 15:48, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose I think the precedents cited by Wcam are persuasive. I see no reason to start a new DR unless someone who reads Chinese joins this discussion in the next day or two and argues that the "textual document" translation is incorrect. Without such an opinion, we must follow precedent. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:50, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

  • It seems that this image was taken by the army, which is a part of the government. This image is obviously shown as an evidence of India army soilders invading China's territory according to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, P.R.C. I would argue that this image was indispensible to the document, obviously. --WQL (talk) 03:58, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
That may be, but unless someone who reads Chinese can show that the "textual document" language is incorrect, we are stuck with the fact that documents that contain images -- and, obviously, the images themselves without the document -- do not qualify for PRC-exempt. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:36, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
I agree with Jim here and I would also like to see a clear opinion of Chinese speaking users in this matter. That was the main reason for opening a DR: to get an opinion of wider Chinese-speaking community. Maybe ping a few users? But somebody would need to make a choice... Ankry (talk) 16:20, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: per discussion: only texts fall under the PRC-exempt (and shizhao is a trusted Chinese speaker). Ruthven (msg) 16:37, 6 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Nate-Greenslit-By-Reid-Simpson.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: For verifying OTRS ticket:2019030510007774 ✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 12:17, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

@Tiven2240: Done as requested Gbawden (talk) 12:30, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: per above. Ruthven (msg) 16:33, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Naked male.jpg

It is in use. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.175.84.215 (talk) 11:27, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Procedural close. Not deleted yet. Answer in the DR. Abzeronow (talk) 15:49, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Unser Logo hat sich geändert, hiermit beantrage ich eine neue Prüfung.

Guten Tag,

unser Logo wurde von einem Designer neu erstellt und ich bitte Sie unseren Namen mit dem Neuen Logo zu akzeptieren. Unsere Webseite https://www.reisetraum-schwarzwald.de hat das Komplette Design geändert.

Wir sind ein neues Startup und wir wissen, dass wir nicht mit booking.com oder andere Größen konkurrieren können. Ich bedanke mich im Voraus für die Prüfung.

Mfg Edgard Buckowitz — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reisetraumschwarzwald (talk • contribs) 18:21, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose This appears to be about File:Reisetraum Schwarzwald Logo.svg which was deleted because there is no evidence of a free license. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder must send a free license using OTRS. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:09, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Jim. Ankry (talk) 18:00, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:JFK at Rally for Smollette.jpg

I took this picture with my camera at the rally on 2/1/2019. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kanemaster (talk • contribs) 10:47, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose No EXIF and available on Instagram. Both are reasons to request a COM:OTRS permission from the photographer. If you are the author, follow instructions on that page. Ankry (talk) 12:41, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 17:58, 7 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Michael David Calnan.jpg

This image was originally taken in 1975 as an official portrait of Colonel Michael David Calnan by the Canadian Department of National Defence. When Colonel Calnan retired from the military in 1988, DND gave him the photograph and released all copyrights and reproduction rights to him. When Colonel Calnan passed away in 2018, ownership of the photograph was assumed by his estate. A copy of the image was given to the funeral home to be posted with his obituary with limited reproductive rights granted at that time for that purpose. Full copyright and reproduction rights remained vested with Colonel Calnan's estate. As a representative of Colonel Calnan's estate, I have been instructed to release this image to the public, relinquishing all copyrights and reproduction rights so that the image may be available for public use. Please undelete this image so that it may be used in Colonel Calnan's Wikipedia article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pcalnan (talk • contribs) 14:46, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

@Pcalnan: You can provide the evidence of copyright transfer to OTRS while providing a written free license permission as required for already published photos. Read COM:OTRS for details. Ankry (talk) 17:46, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 17:59, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Roberta Rabellotti new.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: The file is a not utilised picture of Roberta Rabellotti, I named it "Roberta Rabellotti new" as the previous, that were given to me by Roberta, my wife, appeared to have already been on the Internet. The picture was requested by Aalborg University, Denmark, for their website. Juliusdutchman (talk) 17:02, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

@Juliusdutchman: Who is the photographer who made the photo? Ankry (talk) 17:48, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done No response from the requester. Ankry (talk) 17:57, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Foto de presentación de Carlos Maya.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I can proof i have persmission to use this image. The photograph gave it to me. Please give me tips and were to put that permission Julianaloaizamaya (talk) 17:03, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Permission "to use" does not fit Wikimedia Commons licensing requirements. Can you prove that you are the photographer who made the photo, as you declared? Ankry (talk) 17:40, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
I think he means "I have permission to use this image. The photograph[er] gave it to me." in which case, the answer to Ankry's question is "NO". If that is the case, in order for the image to be restored, the actual photographer must send a free license using OTRS. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:03, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Jim. Ankry (talk) 17:56, 7 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Robotics Arts.png

Buenas Tardes, un saludo desde argentina. recien entro a wikipedia y tengo un aviso del mismo diciendo que borraron mi imagen (Robotics Arts.jpg) por cuestiones de copiryght, cuando el logo fue creado por mi, y el nombre y la imagen estan echas por una sola razon y es el inicio de mi empresa de robotica, entonces quiero que vuelvan a revisar por cuestiones de tengo la suficiente evidencia o como quieran llamarlo, que es MIO y YO TENGO LOS DERECHOS DE AUTOR, la imagen fue puesta en wikipedia para poder concluir con crear una nota aca sobre mi futura empresa.

Muchas Gracias Alejo Costa. AlejoCosta50@hotmail.com RoboticsArts@hotmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alejo Costa (talk • contribs) 22:07, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done our of scope. Ankry (talk) 17:53, 7 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:André Carreiras no Campeonato Ncaional De Séniores de Portugal.jpg

I think you should undelete that image because it was me who took this picture. Thank you for your comprehension. — Preceding unsigned comment added by André Carreiras (talk • contribs) 22:53, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose That may be, but the image was taken from Facebook and therefore policy requires that the actual photographer must send a free license using OTRS. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:58, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Jim. Ankry (talk) 17:55, 7 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Surabaya collage.jpg

The file was wrongly deleted. The source of the pictures is wiki commons and the collage is my own work. Please undelete.

--Buhadram (talk) 16:38, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

@Buhadram: If the source images license are compatible with the license you provided (CC-BY-SA 3.0), the image can be undeleted. Could you list the used images? Note: most Wikimedia Commons image licenses require autor attribution which you did not provide for used images. Ankry (talk) 17:56, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
Eg. File:Tugu Pahlawan Surabaya.jpg is CC-BY 2.0 licensed and requires atribution to sbamueller in derivative works, which is missing. Ankry (talk) 18:02, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done copyvio. Ankry (talk) 17:50, 7 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Þórdís Lóa Þórhallsdóttir.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: For verifying OTRS ticket:2019030610000108. Thank you. ✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 16:38, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done @Tiven2240: Ankry (talk) 17:47, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Insurance-arena logo.png

I reckon that the file I was trying to add on Wikicommons does not meet the threshold of originality needed for copyright protection, since letters' logo are not stylized enough to be eligible, since the logo consists only in 2 words. Even Amazon logo, Amazon Alexa App logo, &samhoudlogo, and so many others do not meet the threshold of originality (and are on WikiCommons) and I do not undertsand why Insurance-arena logo does. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carloia13 (talk • contribs) 10:32, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

@Carloia13: Amazon is a US, not Italian company. TOO in US is much higher than in EU. Can you provide an Italian court case example where a logo of similar complexity was considered not copyrighted? Or a clear declaration from the logo owner, that they do not consider it protected by Italian Copyright law? Ankry (talk) 06:47, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. I found some italian logos that are considered not copyrighted like *File:Logo Pirelli.svg

and others... I still can't find differences with the logo I was trying to upload... thank you :) Carloia13 (talk) 14:42, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose All but the last of these are text only. It is well established that type fonts, however complex, and single words in such fonts do not have copyrights. For the last, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:AmaRoma-logo.png. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:25, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
The problem is the red curved line above the text, not the text itself. Ankry (talk) 12:21, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
This is still a simple shape IMO. --Yann (talk) 19:31, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done per above discussion. Ankry (talk) 18:11, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Interim Manager Siegfried Lettmann.jpg

I would like to request the undeletion of this file. We (User: SLIM Redaktion) own all the rights for the photo as it belongs to us. Patrick Rogel refered to a press release, where the same photo was used (by us). As said, we own the photo and all the rights to use it. Please undelete if possible. Best regards! — Preceding unsigned comment added by SLIM Redaktion (talk • contribs) 08:01, 6 March 2019 (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) 10:35, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: requires a free license via otrs. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:35, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:François Veyrunes.jpg

Cette photo est libre de droit. © Christophe Guibbaud — Preceding unsigned comment added by François Veyrunes (talk • contribs) 14:55, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: The uploader is apparently the subject and Christophe Guibbaud is the photographer. In order to restore this, Christophe Guibbaud must send a free license using OTRS. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:31, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Верблюд в Чуйской степи.jpg

Хочу сообщить, что эту фотографию сделал я сам/ Непонимаю зачем его удалять --Alexandr frolov (talk) 19:43, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose But it was published elsewhere prior to upload here. For already used photos, COM:OTRS/ru permission is required. You will also need to prove your authorship there. Ankry (talk) 06:35, 1 March 2019 (UTC
My photos are many where applied. I photographed this camel at home. I have a lot of them. If you want to see other photos of this camel on my site www.camp-altai.ru --Alexandr frolov (talk) 21:16, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Not deleted. --Yann (talk) 15:27, 8 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Raja Ram Mohan Roy.jpg

This file was deleted due to copyvio, stating that the artist, Atul Bose, died in 1977. No evidence given that it was drawn by that particular artist. The deleted image can be seen here: http://www.kamat.com/kalranga/art/2480.htm, where it is ascribed to Bose. But a better source is the website of the Indian Parliament, where the Bose painting is actually kept. The portrait by Atul Bose can be seen here: https://rajyasabha.nic.in/rsnew/picture_gallery/mm_roy_7.asp. By comparing, you can see that the two images are different. Hrishikes (talk) 03:37, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

  •  Oppose These are not the same paintings, but they are very similar, so it is quite probable that Atul Bose is the author. Regards, Yann (talk) 11:09, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

(Edit conflict)  Oppose I agree that the two paintings are different:

  1. sky to the right of the subject's head in the deleted version versus the column in the cited version
  2. a lighthouse(?) on the horizon in the cited version
  3. the balustrade to the left is much closer to the horizon in the deleted version

However, they are so close that one is almost certainly a copy of the other.

In order to restore this image, it must be shown that

  1. another artist painted the original and Atul Bose painted a copy
  2. the other artist's work is out of copyright, presumably because he died before 1941. Note that the subject died in 1833, so this may well be long out of copyright.

.     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:05, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

  • This image from a 1914 book may also be seen, which is in nearly the same style. And as agreed by the opposers above, the deleted image is different from the painting by Bose kept in the Indian Parliament, although very close. The image from 1914 is also very close, but still different. Obviously, different painters rendered their versions, based on some more ancient version. The deleted image is the most well-known version among this set (1, 2, 3, 4) of similar images. Hrishikes (talk) 17:43, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
That adds little to this discussion. A painted copy of a painting has its own copyright, even if it is as exact a copy as possible. As we have seen, the deleted image is not identical to the others, so it certainly has or had a copyright. Without knowing the author, we cannot restore it. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:32, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 15:28, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Monochrom Eignblunzn (2003), documentation.jpg

I am the copyright holder of this file. I'm Johannes Grenzfurthner (see my user page), founder of monochrom art group who created the art project that is documented with this image. Please undelete. Grenz (talk) 12:10, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Entirely aside from the question of whether you are the actual photographer here, as you claim, is the question of whether this contact sheet is actually in scope. While several of the images might be in scope if printed large, these are small, mixed, and have no useful descriptions. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:34, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

This is the official documentation format of the performance. We released the images in this way back in 2004. It's high res, we could also extract one of the single images. No prob with that. Here it is on Flickr, CC licensed: https://www.flickr.com/photos/monochrom/8754592394 -- Another option would be to use the logo of the performance on Wikimedia Commons: https://www.flickr.com/photos/monochrom/8754572924/ --- Grenz (talk) 20:50, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
Again, are you the actual photographer of all of the images shown on the contact sheet? .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:27, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
In this case, I am. Grenz (talk) 10:07, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

 Support undeletion per AGF. Ankry (talk) 12:13, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

OK, so it is not a copyvio, but there is still the scope question. I think this violates our policy of wanting images as large as possible -- having only a contact sheet makes it impossible for anyone to use any of the individual images and there is no likely use of the whole contact sheet. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:29, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

 Support The resolution is still high enough to use the images. However it would be better to scan each negative individually. --Yann (talk) 19:08, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
How can I be of help? Should I pick 2 or 3 of the individual images and upload them? Grenz (talk) 20:01, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
 Support The resolution is really high enough to use the images. People will be able to extract better pics later on. K-pachs (talk) 16:07, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 15:17, 8 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Sculpture Sias International University- 10420101534.jpg

out of process. FoP china. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 02:37, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Chinese FOP requires that the name of the creator and the title of the work be present in any derivative work.

"A work may be exploited without the permission from, and without payment of remuneration to, the copyright owner, provided that the name of the author and the title of the work are mentioned and the other rights enjoyed by the copyright owner by virtue of this Law are not infringed upon...
in the case of:
copying, drawing, photographing, or video recording of an artistic work located or on display in an outdoor public place.""

Neither are present here, so FOP does not apply. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:01, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

 Question So this would be OK if the artist is mentioned? Regards, Yann (talk) 19:43, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
The law calls for artist and the title of the work. I looked for them and found a further problem. The image comes from https://www.flickr.com/photos/101561334@N08/10420101534/ where it has the PDM. That site says it is from WorldHistoryPics.com, which no longer exists. I doubt that the Flickr user is the actual photographer and there's no reason to believe that the image has any free license. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:39, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 15:29, 8 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Badener Salon 1895.JPG

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Badener Salon 1895.JPG

1895 German photograph from an unknown photographer. Would be PD-old-assumed. Abzeronow (talk) 18:37, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

 Info If the 2009 book was the first publication of this photo, it may be hit by the EU "first publication" 25-year protection, the right belonging to the book publisher. Do we care of this? Ankry (talk) 10:47, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, if 2009 was first publication, it would seem this would have to wait until 2035. (Still learning I guess, hadn't heard of EU "first publication" protection until now). Abzeronow (talk) 14:54, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
The original DR was willing to assume it was published before 1923 (i.e. the 2009 book was most likely not the first publication). If so, the EU publication right would not apply. It would also not apply if 2009 was less than 70 years after the photographer's death. I'm not sure I would delete over that unless the book itself documented that the photograph had never before been published. Otherwise, it would seem that we have crossed the PD-old-assumed threshold since this was deleted. Carl Lindberg (talk) 16:01, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 Support per above. Ankry (talk) 07:52, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 15:20, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:ZjHeinrich Brüning.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/Image:ZjHeinrich Brüning.jpg

Apparently by w:Erich Salomon who died in 1944. Public domain in Germany. Abzeronow (talk) 15:08, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose This is the upper photo from https://web.archive.org/web/20070405114817/http://www.dhm.de/lemo/html/biografien/BrueningHeinrich/index.html IMO unlikely to be pre-1924. SO Copyrighted in US. Ankry (talk) 15:28, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 Info Clicking on that photograph gives this information
"Heinrich Brüning während einer Rede im Reichstag
Photographie. Berlin, Februar 1932. DHM, Berlin" Abzeronow (talk) 15:44, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
So Undelete in 2028. Or later. Ankry (talk) 16:57, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
Yann, why do you support restoration. It appears to fail URAA, so it is copyrighted in the USA. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:57, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
I think we should have an exception for URAA-affected files. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:13, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
The subject has been debated endlessly here and the conclusion was that since the URAA has given USA copyrights to many works, they cannot be kept here since they violate the US copyright. This is not the place to reopen the URAA discussion. Given the state of the DR backlog, I hope we don't reopen it any time soon. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:28, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
This was discussed on COM:VPC recently. While there are divided opinions, I think there is a majority for having an exception for URAA affected files. Regards, Yann (talk) 11:22, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
That may be, but you are proposing a major change in policy. A discussion at VPC does not change the fact that our official statement at Commons:URAA-restored copyrights says:
"If the end result of copyright evaluation is that there is significant doubt about the freedom of a file under US or local law, the file must be deleted in line with the precautionary principle."
I agree that the URAA law is not a good law, but should Commons be in the business of picking and choosing what laws we should obey? If we take that route, then we need to do more than have a discussion at VPC and we certainly cannot change our rules arbitrarily on a case by case basis. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:42, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
we are following the guidance of WMF legal. do you want hebrew and german wikipedians to come again and re-establish that consensus again? or perhaps you could write a strongly worded legal opinion to WMF legal? Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 03:34, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
  • This is not a mere alegation. This is a 1932 German photo, so clearly copyrighted in Germany at least till 2002. More likely, till 2014 as the author died in 1944. Clearly copyrighted there in 1996. How can URAA not apply here? IMO, only if it was published initially in the US without copyright notice or without renewal. Very, very unlikely and we would need an evidence for that. Ankry (talk) 12:31, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Again, I would not object if Commons changed its policy on the URAA -- I think it is a bad law -- there is no reason why the USA should give a longer period of copyright protection than that given in the country of creation. However, at the moment it is our policy to honor the URAA and I am committed to uphold our policy as it stands, not as I would like it to be. Individual DRs and UnDRs are not the place to have this discussion. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:15, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
again produce actual evidence of a violation. maths calculations are not evidence. i am committed to seeing the WMF legal advice followed, to the letter. you will not cherry pick to suit your deletionist ideology. if you delete files without evidence you should expect undeletion requests across the board. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 03:36, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 18:44, 9 March 2019 (UTC)


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

Makfa Pasta promoted in Brazil

The Makfa pasta was promoted and sold to Wal Mart in Brazil by the first time because of the expertise in sales of Mr. Antonio Carlos Rosset Filho. Mr. Rosset worked as Commercial Director to Hyundai Corporation Brazil and Samsung C&T. He is also the President of the Brazilian Russian Chamber of Commerce and Industry - www.brasil-russia.com.br — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arosset (talk • contribs) 15:06, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

@Arosset: And what do you request to undelete? Ankry (talk) 18:05, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: No answer. --Yann (talk) 18:47, 9 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Escudo Aguilas 2015 Blanco.jpg

Logo oficial del club, de mi propiedad.--Luchouski (talk) 19:17, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Policy requires that for corporate, sports club, school, and association logos, an authorized official of the organization owning the rights to the logo must send a free license using OTRS. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:41, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 18:48, 9 March 2019 (UTC)


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

Restaurar Página

Saludos cordiales Por medio de la presente solicito a ustedes que restauren "Sabina Paredes Artista" la información fue subida con mi autorización ya que yo soy la autora de la obra subí dos imágenes y una biografía, me gustaría saber cuál es el procedimiento para restaurar, soy una artista y académica publica en el Ecuador, la información se encuentra en el internet para comprobación,

https://www.efe.com/efe/america/cultura/guarichas-la-rebeldia-femenina-hecha-arte/20000009-3324985 --© Agencia EFE, S.A. Avd. de Burgos, 8-B. 28036 Madrid. España Tel: +34 91 346 7100. Todos los derechos reservados:https://artepopularecuatoriano.blogspot.com/2017/10/exposicion-guarichas-presente-y-paso.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LT0mc6_X9ks - not freely licensed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlQ-OeXyufQ - not freely licensed
https://www.metroecuador.com.ec/ec/entretenimiento/2017/07/13/guarichas-la-rebeldia-femenina-hecha-arte.html -- © Copyright 2009 - 2019 Metro International

Agradecería mucho me ayuden con la restauración.

Sabina Paredes. MSc. Artista Plástica, Master, Esp. Diplm. Estudios del Arte. PhD student. E. [snipped email addresses] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sabina Paredes (talk • contribs) 02:54, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose See Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Sabina Paredes for the three images uploaded by this editor. Each of the three contains modern works of art. The second one also has a variety of copyrighted photographs. I am not sure why you listed the web sites above, but as shown, all of them are either explicitly copyrighted or do not have free licenses and therefore are implicitly copyrighted.

File:" Con mi corazón en tus manos".jpg -- requires a free license from the artist using OTRS.
File:"Proyecto de arte y género ".png -- As a general rule we do not keep collages on Commons unless each of the individual images is properly licensed. In order to keep this, each of the photographers and artists whose work is shown must send a free license via OTRS.
File:"taller de la artista".jpg -- The photographer and the artist must send a free license using OTRS.

.     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:33, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 18:51, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Osmand auf Samsung Galaxy S Advance (Hamburg).jpg

Please undelete this image as it was deleted for invalid lilcense. Should be fine by just adding "ODbL OpenStreetMap" license template therefore. Would have been nice if the deleting admin would have communicated this issue in advance, since the initial argument in the request was about the GUI elements. --Alexrk2 (talk) 12:42, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose I suggest you read Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:OsmAnd again. While the OSM maps are free, the GUI is not and therefore screenshots of Osmand are not acceptable on Commons. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:17, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 18:27, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:PashupatinathTemple.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: please don't delete my file because what i have done is all legal and is confined within the competition terms and conditions I can also prove my work is all authentic because in the first page of the competition it says that if the monument is more than 150 years old then copyright is allowed and for your kind information the file that I have posted is a temple which is more than 200 years old and according to the information you have provided to me my work is legal and there should be no copyright. i am really sorry to say Wikimedia that in this case your team is irresponsible .so for this reason my work should be granted and Wikimedia should also be responsible in its work and yes Mr Rohnjones i want to say you that first read full information about your competition then only think about deleting others work. Puskar chapagain (talk) 13:13, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose The problem here is not the temple, which is, as you say, old enough to be free of copyright, but the image itself. Google turns up at least 50 uses of it on the Web. Policy therefore requires that the actual copyright holder must send a free license using OTRS. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:13, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 18:26, 9 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:10 Custom.jpg

This is an image of a Chinese Custom Gold Unit, I came to ask an administrator if this image was a scan or not, according to Chinese copyright © laws this banknote is in the public domain, and its uploader (Schazzennegar) uploaded another image of this series which was their own work which makes me think that they might also be the author of this image and simply didn't know how to fill in the form of the old UploadWizard. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 16:21, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Note that for whatever reason my notifications don't seem to work that well but pings seem to still work so please ping me when replying, if this file gets undeleted I could organise it properly.

Also the log reads: "Warning: You are recreating a page that was previously deleted. You should consider whether it is appropriate to continue editing this page. The deletion and move log for this page are provided here for convenience:

Also whenever I start a new request it States this. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 16:21, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

@Donald Trung: This was deleted as no license tag was provided. A valid tag is needed in order to undelete. Ankry (talk) 11:16, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
@Ankry: , alright, but was it a simple scan or not? If so both "{{PD-Scan}}" and "{{PD-China}}" apply. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 14:32, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done @Donald Trung: please categorise. Ankry (talk) 14:39, 9 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Adalbert Seligmann - Recital im Studio.jpg

no evidence provided of actual violation, merely speculation. "URAA cannot be used as the sole reason for deletion" [2] Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 03:29, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Assuming it was not published prior to 2003, it may be PD in US. So  Weak support unless an evidence of earlier publication (prior to the 2007 auction) is found. Or a clear evidence is found that it was made and published before 1.1.1924, what would make it obviously is PD. Ankry (talk) 07:39, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
The URAA cite above is obsolete. Policy is set forth at Commons:URAA-restored copyrights:
"If the end result of copyright evaluation is that there is significant doubt about the freedom of a file under US or local law, the file must be deleted in line with the precautionary principle."
I don't like the URAA any more than anyone else here, but unless and until we change our policy and explicitly decide to ignore the URAA, we are stuck with the fact that our policy is that images must be free in the source country and in the USA. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:26, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
you are selectively quoting the consensus policy. you need to provide actual evidence, to support your "significant doubt". your history suggests you have never seen a license you have not doubted. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 11:19, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per Ankry and Abzeronow. --Yann (talk) 18:22, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Pedda Manushulu movie poster 1.jpg

Although initially, I forgot to mention license, I added later. This poster is in the public domain due to this reason: "This is a movie poster created by an unknown and uncredited artist of Vauhini productions, Madras, India. As Vauhini productions employed the artist for that, Studio holds copyrights. Per, Indian copyrights laws it was in public domain post-2015." I even wrote that in Deletion request. As this is a public domain work, please restore the file. --Pavan santhosh.s (talk) 03:59, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

 Support Typo in license template name should not be a reason for deletion. {{PD-India}} pointed out in the DR is a valid license template. Ankry (talk) 07:45, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose PD in India in 2015, but will be under copyright in the USA until 2049 due to the URAA. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:20, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
 Support Abzeronow (talk) 15:10, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per Ankry and Abzeronow. --Yann (talk) 18:17, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Please do not delete this Picture. I've been to the other website you named as the reason why the picture is going to be deleted. This Website is an extern Website with tons of Pictures of different E-Bikes. They did not take these pictures by themselves. As the user MyStromerAG represents the company myStromer AG we do have all the rights needed to use the picture. Thank you for your understanding. MyStromerAG (talk) 09:14, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose In the image's description, you claimed that you were the actual photographer of the image. Above, you say that your company has the rights to use the image, which tells me that your claim of being the photographer is incorrect. That is a serious violation of Commons rules. In the case of images where the uploader is not the photographer, we require that either (a) the actual photographer grant a free license using OTRS or (b) the holder of a license from the photographer which allows the holder to freely license the image send proof of such a license also using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:13, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 18:17, 9 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Bandeira de Camutanga.png

This is a public image, belonging to the people. This is not violate the copyright. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucenaneto (talk • contribs) 14:53, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

 Comment Even if distributed free to the public, photograph may still have copyright. @Jcb: Abzeronow (talk) 16:58, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
This is not a photo, this is a municipality flag image. And no copyright tag was provided (neither PD nor free license). Ankry (talk) 11:06, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Ah, OK, well, I'd presume the flag is copyrighted unless it can be shown to fall under an exemption. Abzeronow (talk) 16:04, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose - in principle everything is copyrighted, unless there is a proper explanation to the contrary, which is absent in this case. Jcb (talk) 19:45, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Source site does not have a free license. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:45, 9 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Bobby Robson More Than A Manager.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Accidental deletion request. ErtritK (talk) 16:54, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Not accidental. An evidence of free license should be provided by the copyright holder(s) in order to restore the poster. Read COM:OTRS for details. Ankry (talk) 10:27, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Requires a free license via OTRS from the holder of the copyright to the poster, probably the movie's producer. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:28, 9 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Дело чести(постер к сериалу).jpg

What is the problem ? I did not install the license correctly? All the rights belong to the company that made this movie, I just make a wiki page for this movie. Help solve this problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikazz777 (talk • contribs) 19:15, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

@Nikazz777: You did not provide an evidence (in the Permission field) that the copyright owner declared the DVD cover to be CC0 licensed. If no such public evidence, COM:OTRS permission is needed. On-wiki license declaration works here only for original, unpublished works made personally by the uploader. Ankry (talk)
@Ankry: I already know, thanks. Nikazz777 (talk)

 Not done: Requires a free license via OTRS from the movie's producer. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:25, 9 March 2019 (UTC)


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

Category:Shelley Long

Category deleted for being empty but now has images. William Graham (talk) 18:50, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: Not empty. --Yann (talk) 18:54, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Wiederherstellung für gelöschte Bilder beantragen

Names of the files to undelete:

Begründung: Fotorechte-Erklärung (ausgefülltes Standardformular) vom Urheber wurde am 27.2. an permissions-commons@wikimedia.org gemailt

Rosa Schöffmann Rosa Schöffmann (talk) 19:55, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

  •  Oppose If a free license has been sent to OTRS, then the file will be restored automatically when and if the email is received, processed, and approved. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.
If the message was sent to the English language version of OTRS and the email has been properly received there the sender will receive an automatic reply with the ticket number. If the sender has not had a reply, please check that it was sent correctly and try again. Other language versions may or may not provide the automatic reply. Ankry (talk) 08:06, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done:

  •  Oppose If a free license has been sent to OTRS, then the file will be restored automatically when and if the email is received, processed, and approved. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.
If the message was sent to the English language version of OTRS and the email has been properly received there the sender will receive an automatic reply with the ticket number. If the sender has not had a reply, please check that it was sent correctly and try again. Other language versions may or may not provide the automatic reply.. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:22, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Juan Carlos Izpisua Belmonte.jpg

OTRS permission has been arrived (ticket:2019022710000571), please restore the file. Thanks! Bencemac (talk) 12:43, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Bencemac: FYI. --Yann (talk) 13:14, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:YolanDa Brown Portrait 2019.jpg

I write to request that this file reinstated as the required information (shown Below) regarding copyright was mailed on the 31st January 2019 at 13.18 under [Ticket#2019012910026551] File YolanDa Brown Portrait 2019.jpg

To: Permissions-commons@wikimedia.org

I hereby affirm that I, Ivan Brown, the creator and sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the media work as shown here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:YolanDa_Brown_Portrait_2019.jpg and have legal authority in my capacity to release the copyright of that work.

I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the following free licence: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International.

I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work, even in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the licence and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.

I am aware that the copyright holder always retains ownership of the copyright as well as the right to be attributed in accordance with the licence chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by the copyright holder.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

Ivan Brown Copyright holder 31st January 2019 Idtenti (talk) 22:05, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Please patiently wait until the OTRS ticket is being processed. Jcb (talk) 22:56, 10 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Yolanda Brown plays the Barbican London.jpg

I write to request reinstatement of the above mentioned file as the required certification of copyright was submitted on the 31st January 2019 under [Ticket#2019012910026382] File YolanDa Brown plays The Barbican London.jpg

Please advise

Regards, Ivan Brown

Idtenti (talk) 22:17, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Please patiently wait until the OTRS ticket is being processed. Jcb (talk) 22:57, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Comcast Ventures.png

I want comcast ventures to have a logo — Preceding unsigned comment added by NevinMaasa (talk • contribs) 08:32, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

@NevinMaasa: So which image you wish to undelete and why is it free? Ankry (talk) 10:29, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) There has never been a File:Comcast Ventures.png. There is nothing similar in your uploads. I see that you added a link to File:Comcast Ventures logo.png to the WP:EN article Comcast Ventures, but that file name has never been used either. It is possible that the logo at https://www.comcastventures.com/ simple enough to be PD, but there is nothing to do about that here. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:32, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done nothing to undelete. Ankry (talk) 08:01, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:JewHyper - Banner.png

Hello, My name is Maor (JewHyper) and I really don't understand why someone deleted my banner. Firstable, this is a file with the banner I created and I said that no one can use this banner except me. Secondly, I didn't even understand why you deleted my file, I'm only using this file as my banner in my wikipedia's profile. Hope you will undelete my file! — Preceding unsigned comment added by JewHyper (talk • contribs) 11:19, 9 March 2019 (UTC) JewHyper (talk) 11:19, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Banner made from screenshots from the computer game Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six. Thuresson (talk) 17:45, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Thuresson: no evidence that the uploader is the game author. Ankry (talk) 07:58, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Транс-Атлантик.jpg

Уважаемый EugeneZelenko, Данная фотография была предоставлена, Клубу Форте и клубу ДуровЪ в качестве превью для концерта. Авторские права им не пренадлежат. У меня имеется pdf файл оригинала фотографии откуда была взята данная фотография. (09.03.2019) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nik-chip (talk • contribs) 11:23, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Almost every photo is copyrighted until copyright expires (usually 70 years after the photographer death). Ankry (talk) 14:43, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 07:57, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

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

undeletion request for File:Sunit Gajbhiye.jpg file

Hi, Please can you undelete the file as i have taken the picture and the source is https://www.sunitgajbhiye.com/ in the crew section --Aditya.ya (talk) 15:03, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose The image appears there with "© 2018 Sunit Gajbhiye. All Rights Reserved." Policy therefore requires that the actual photographer must send a free license using OTRS. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:19, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Jim. Ankry (talk) 07:55, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Files uploaded by Bruin2

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Bruin2

First photograph is from 1878 and looks like it was published before 1924. http://cdm15020.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/singleitem/collection/p15020coll1/id/4695/rec/1

2nd is from 1886. Photographer is not named, and photo was created more than 120 years ago. PD-US-unpublished http://cdm15020.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/singleitem/collection/p15020coll1/id/7362/rec/4

3rd photo is from 1894. http://cdm15020.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/singleitem/collection/p15020coll1/id/8605/rec/32

4th is from 1893. Photographer not named, and was created more than 120 years ago. Would be PD-US-unpublished

http://cdm15020.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/singleitem/collection/p15020coll1/id/16665/rec/14

5th photo is from 1884. http://cdm15020.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/singleitem/collection/p15020coll1/id/6205/rec/2 Abzeronow (talk) 15:50, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

 Support If these were first published between 1923 and 2002, then they may still be under copyright. Otherwise they are PD. It's a close call, but I think it is safe to assume that they are either unpublished or published in the 19th century. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:40, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done per above. Invalid license changed to {{PD-old-assumed}}. @Abzeronow and Jameslwoodward: feel free to change to something more appropriate if you wish. Ankry (talk) 08:22, 11 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Kansas-Governor Laura Kelly.jpg

Official portraits of state government officials are openly available public records according to Kansas law.

Kansas statute 45-217 defines "public record" as "any recorded information, regardless of form, characteristics or location, which is made, maintained or kept by or is in the possession of... any public agency." Furthermore, 45-217 goes on to specifically state that "this act shall be liberally construed and applied." Under a normal definition, let alone a "liberally applied" one, the official portrait of a Kansas government official is a form of recorded information and is maintained by their related public agency in records and on an official state government website.

Kansas statute 45-216 declares it "the public policy of the state that public records shall be open for inspection by any person unless otherwise provided by this act." The act provides no exemption for official government portraits. Furthermore, statute 45-219 allows that "any person may It was deleted because we do not know who you are or whether you actually are the photographer as claimed or whether you simply lifted the image from the copyrighted newspaper. Because we get liars and forgers here, policy requires that when an image has appeared elsewhere without a free license that the actual photographer must send a free license using OTRS. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 179 days before the email is processed and the file is restored of any public record to which such person has access."

In conclusion, official portraits of state government officials in Kansas are public records that are available for inspection and copying by any person. They therefore qualify as public domain and are available for free use on Wikimedia Commons.

--Kurtwfan13 (talk) 21:02, 8 March 2019 (UTC) March 8, 2019

 Oppose Public record is not the same as public domain. A DVD copy of the 1992 movie Titanic will not become public domain if somebody sends a copy to Kansas State department of education. Thuresson (talk) 22:24, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Titanic is from 1997 if you mean the movie with Leonardo DiCaprio. But yeah  Oppose per Thuresson and Jameslwoodward Abzeronow (talk) 01:04, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Further, I can legally go to the library and make copies of copyrighted works, or photograph copyrighted works, but that does not mean that I can freely license them for commercial use. Allowing "inspection and copying" is very much less than freely licensing for any use anywhere, including commercial use. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:45, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Jim. Ankry (talk) 08:06, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Metin Kayar (Hanshi - 10. Dan).jpg

This file is my own work as a photographer. We put this file on the homepage of Metin Kayar, so of course I have the right to use it.

Please undelete my file.

Marxer001 (talk) 21:12, 8 March 2019 (UTC)MArxer001 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marxer001 (talk • contribs) 21:05, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

 OpposePolicy requires that when an image has appeared elsewhere without a free license that the actual photographer must send a free license using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:39, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Now I understand and sent email for OTRS Licencing. Thanks

--Marxer001 (talk) 12:50, 10 March 2019 (UTC)Marxer001

 Not done per above: waiting for OTRS. Ankry (talk) 08:04, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:WKU 2018 Toni Dietl and Metin Kayar.jpg

This is my own work as a photographer. We gave the picture to the newspaper which displayed it for the news. I cannot understand why you deleted it. please undelete the picture.

Marxer001 (talk) 21:13, 8 March 2019 (UTC)Marxer001 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marxer001 (talk • contribs) 21:08, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

@Marxer001: "My" or "we"? Our rules do not allow to accept on-wiki license declaration for already published images. The license should be provided either via the initial publication site, or following COM:OTRS. However, I see also a COM:DW problem because no evidence that the photographed items are free/not copyrightable. They are not COM:DM. Ankry (talk) 10:36, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose It was deleted because we do not know who you are or whether you actually are the photographer as claimed or whether you simply lifted the image from the copyrighted newspaper. Because we get liars and forgers here, policy requires that when an image has appeared elsewhere without a free license that the actual photographer must send a free license using OTRS. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:36, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

So you deleted it, no problem. Don't need it to be here on Wiki. --Marxer001 (talk) 12:52, 10 March 2019 (UTC)Marxer001

 Not done withdrawn. Ankry (talk) 08:03, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Files uploaded by Survivethis

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Hi, there.

I previously uploaded a couple of images from our library of press photos. The images is owned by, and and fully licensed by, NITO Norway. Most of them were approved, but some seems to not have been taken to consideration. I’ll paste the approval from our media manager below.

I would like the images to be available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 license. I want it to be attributed to the organization who owns the images, "Norwegian Society of Engineers and Technologists". In Norwegian: "Norges Ingeniør- og Teknologorganisasjon".

“Dear whomever this may concerne.

This is a free license release to Patrik Svendsen from NITO for the use of the attached photos of our former presidents.

I am the media and content manager for NITO, and can confirm that all photos have been bought, licensed and paid for with the agreement to use publicly, since they also serve(d) as press photos.»

This regards the following images:

File:Gro Harlem Brundtland and Lars Harlem.jpg File:Marit Stykket 1996.jpg File:NITO Offshore.jpg File:Trygve Haneas and Erik Bjore.jpg

Best regards Survivethis (talk) 14:51, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Except for works where the uploader is the creator, all uploads require that the actual creator of the work or a person who holds a license that allows him to freely license the work must send a free license using OTRS. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:25, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Jim. Ankry (talk) 15:55, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Files by the Nipponese Dog Calvero

I'd rather not post an undeletion request here but I've pinged @Jdx: on their talk page with no response and they keep deleting often useful files which have been hosted here for years many of which are "COM:INUSE", I request an admin to undelete them and if possible convert them into regular deletion requests (and not a mass one as these files have individual merit), Jdx has taken the rules upon himself, deleting files simply because a ussr has been previously blocked is not a criteria for deletion on Wikimedia Commons and many of these files are the only files of notable Taiwanese human rights activists. Also please hurry as the CommonsDelinker could remove a large number of these soon, these deletions are without consensus and against policy. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 08:36, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Please look at Category:Stella Chen as an example of a notable person who doesn't have any images anymore on Wikimedia Commons, if anyone undeletes these files then also undo the CommonsDelinker, the damage has in some cases already been done. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 08:53, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@Donald Trung: OK, I have undeleted almost all of them. Four still deleted fall into category "recreation of previously deleted content". --jdx Re: 12:31, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
@Jdx: , thank you, please forgive me for pinging you often, I'll try to add the images back that were delinked later when I will have the time. Also I will add as much as possible to my watch list as I usually detect the Nipponese Dog through his sockloads (get it, sock uploads, not funny, I will let myself out). --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚)
@Donald Trung: Almost all of delinker edits are already undone. There is one article left on enwiki which requires extended-confirmed privileges an one on zhwiki which is guarded by a kind of abuse filter (likely created specifically against the Dog). --jdx Re: 14:41, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done as it seems thereis nothing to do here. Ankry (talk) 16:24, 11 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Texas Tech Adminstration Building 1923.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Texas Tech Adminstration Building 1923.jpg

Circa 1923 United States photograph. Abzeronow (talk) 15:37, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done withdrawn. Ankry (talk) 16:42, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:The Thomann In(ter)vention. Poster of short documentary about monochrom's Georg Paul Thomann (2018).jpg

Request undeletion. I am the producer and copyright holder of this film (and poster). I am willingly releasing this image under CC 4.0. Grenz (talk) 19:01, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Not currently deleted. --Yann (talk) 19:26, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Escudo de cortegana.svg

What is this all about? Yann (talk) 23:12, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 Comment @Yann: I don't understand. Anyway, this is about this user requesting the deletion of this file under a bad rationale (see {{Coa blazon}}: Any illustration conforming with the blazon of the arms is considered to be heraldically correct. Thus several different artistic interpretations of the same coat of arms can exist. The design officially used by the armiger is likely protected by copyright, in which case it cannot be used here.) and that file being deleted when it shouldn't have been. Strakhov (talk) 21:43, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 13:16, 12 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Curtiss CR3 1923 A.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by MAC06130

Circa 1923 United States photograph. (Airplane was American-made). Pinging @Jcb as a courtesy. Abzeronow (talk) 18:54, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done - Jcb (talk) 22:08, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

As a rule, Jcb, we leave UnDRs up for 24 hours before acting. In this case, I  Oppose restoration. "Circa 1923" is not sufficient. In order for the images to be restored, the user must prove that the images were actually published before 1/1/1924. Also, I think the first two are the same -- note the gray dot a little above and to the left of the upper wing. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:15, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Do you have a source for that 24 hours rule? It's not at Commons:Undeletion_requests#Instructions_for_administrators where I would expect it. Many UDRs are closed in less than 24 hours. Jcb (talk) 22:29, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Waiting for 24 h is not a written rule, but is what I usually do, unless it is a non controversial closure. IMO these are OK. We usually assume that the images were published soon after being taken, unless we have a different evidence (family archives, etc.). Regards, Yann (talk) 23:06, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
I'm also now working on trying to find if I can narrow down when it was published. The first two photos(which are similar but slightly different in shading) are from September 28, 1923 http://wight.hampshireairfields.co.uk/cowes.html Third describes it being the same event. Abzeronow (talk) 23:16, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
OK, found a 1925 publication in Flight. Matches up with source that mentions that too. November 5, 1925 issue: https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1925/1925%20-%200725.html?search=Rittenhouse%201923 Abzeronow (talk) 23:23, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Third photograph was published in Flight in the August 30, 1923 issue. https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1923/1923%20-%200521.html?search=Irvine%201923 So, all three were published in a British magazine with no photographer credited, and both were published before 1926: PD-UK-unknown and PD-1996 @Jameslwoodward: Abzeronow (talk) 00:23, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
That's good, thank you all. However, we still have the first two -- I think we should pick one and delete the other. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 08:58, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
My personal preference would be to keep the 2nd one but I'll leave that matter up to you. Abzeronow (talk) 15:27, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
A photo published anonymously in UK in 1925 was PD in UK on 1.1.1996, and so escaped from URAA copyright restoration. IMO, all three are PD in both: UK & US. Ankry (talk) 07:48, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done by Jcb. Ankry (talk) 14:01, 12 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Naked male.jpg

Incorrect "Deleted" rationale at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Naked male.jpg#File:Naked male.jpg 2. The file satisfied COM:INUSE by being in use at simple:Nudity, therefore it was in scope.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 06:39, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

  •  Support per Jeff. I'm also quite surprised about the closing rationale provided by Jim in the DR. A file inserted into an article by the uploader does automatically become "in use", or the whole purpose of Commons should be redefined. See also COM:INUSE: "A media file that is in use on one of the other projects of the Wikimedia Foundation is considered automatically to be useful for an educational purpose." De728631 (talk) 06:54, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose I disagree. As I said in my closing comment, an uploader cannot force us to keep an otherwise unacceptable file by putting it into use somewhere. That's particularly true when the place he puts it is not edited often, so it is likely to stay in use without being removed by another editor. Note that the consensus at the DR was that file should not be kept except for the fact that it was in use. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:21, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

@Jameslwoodward: Why do you say "otherwise unacceptable"? Did I miss anything? Yann (talk) 16:22, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Perhaps I am wrong, but I thought our policy was that since we already have hundreds of images of standing nude men (315 in Category:Nude standing men alone) that we were not taking new images unless they were exceptional in some regard. That was the opinion of the nominator and two others in the DR, in addition to me. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:44, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
So why deleting this and not the others? Ankry (talk) 21:00, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
@Jameslwoodward: We don't need such a special rule for nude pictures. This one looks fine to me. There are several billions men on Earth, so 315 nude pictures seem OK to me. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:18, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

It is worth noting that the DR was created by an anon IP, the same IP that is likely to have been here before as they are Commons-sophisticated enough to comment on this page diff apparently to undelete the image, and yet has made no other contributions to Commons apart from this DR. The only real delete !vote was from an account that has for a long time been a self declared pron warrior and has a notice on their Commons user page of "Fighting a never-ending battle against copyright vios and smut." Let's discount the other delete !vote as in the DR, they stated they had not even looked at the image, so their deletion was a somewhat meaningless "me too" statement.

At some point, it may be worth considering a case book for revising the COM:PENIS guidelines, the limitation of "we have enough" is debatable and lacks context, such as distinguishing between amateur graphicly sexual closeups versus culturally acceptable nudity and photographic life studies. The intention of the guideline is stated to target low resolution or poor quality, the DR should have focused on whether this recently taken and credibly released photograph was either low resolution or poor quality. The claim in the DR, by the uploader, that the photograph was copyrighted elsewhere had no source and would have been worth investigating, especially as it remains unclear if the uploader was effectively asking for deletion. As Yann points out, 315 photographs of standing nude men is not excessive. In fact if Commons were to be a useful resource for anyone wanting a selection of comparison photographs for examining the techniques used in classical statues or 18th century life studies, then we should really have several thousand good quality portraits to select from. If we were attempting to teach an AI how to distinguish potential porn from acceptable or artistic nudity, then again we need thousands not hundreds of photographs. --Fæ (talk) 10:44, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: per discussion. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:07, 12 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Haris Stamboulidis.jpg

this files has been provided to me by Haris Stamboulidis from his own collection and has given me the photo to use on his Wikipedia page

REgards, Aphrodite--Akarnikos (talk) 08:21, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose @Akarnikos: Maybe, but this does not give you the right to claim that you are the photo author (the photographer). COM:OTRS free license permission from the actual copyright owner is needed in order to undelete the photo. Ankry (talk) 09:07, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: First, please do not claim that you were the photographer when that is not the case. That is a violation of Commons rules and if you do it again you may be blocked from editing here. Second, it is unlikely that the subject of the image has the right to freely license it. That right almost always belongs to the photographer.

In order for this image to be restored, the actual copyright holder -- as noted above, this is almost always the photographer -- must send a free license using OTRS. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:43, 12 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:قاسم حیدری نژادد.jpg

با سلام و احترام. این صفحه که میخوام بسازم متعلق به استاد بنده بوده و این لینکی ارجاع دادین و عکسی که فرمودین هم متعلق به ایشونه. من الان موندم چیکار کنم اخه به ایشون قول دادم که براشون این رو میسازم

فایل مورد نظر : File:قاسم حیدری نژادد.jpg

--Rza khdi (talk) 10:51, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose @Rza khdi: As the photo was already published somewhere outside Commons, we need a free license permission from the fotographer send following COM:OTRS/ar instructions. Ankry (talk) 17:01, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Needs a free license from the actual photographer using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:42, 12 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Russ Wetmore.png

I understand that there was a lack of permission to use which resulted in my photo being deleted. My permissions have been sent under separate cover and I request the file be undeleted to that end. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rsswtmr (talk • contribs) 14:33, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose If you are the photographer, who made the original photo and you have send a permission to OTRS, then we can only wait until it is processed by volunteers. Ankry (talk) 16:58, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Your username indicates that you are the depicted person. As the image isnt a selfie, we would need a releasing mail by the real photographer through COM:OTRS for it. regards. --JuTa 17:59, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Needs a free license from the actual photographer using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:40, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Osmand auf Samsung Galaxy S Advance (Hamburg).jpg

Argument for deletion was: "Only one image had a proper license tag, all others were "licensed" under a clearly invalid CC license." The image can be restored with proper license tag "ODbL OpenStreetMap". Also see previous UDR. --Alexrk2 (talk) 12:34, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

@Alexrk2: Have you read comments to your previous request? Do not repeat rejected request with the same rationale: this is disrupting behaviour. Ankry (talk) 16:49, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Of course I've read this. And there is nothing about copyright of GUI elements. The decisions was made because missing OSM licence template. --Alexrk2 (talk) 16:15, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: repeat request with nothing new. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:40, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Hans am Ende 00001.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hans am Ende 00001.jpg

I don't speak German, so I had to use Google Translate for this. This seems to be an 1890 photograph with an unknown photographer Seems like it could be PD-old-assumed. Abzeronow (talk) 17:01, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose @Abzeronow: This is the same photo in much higher resolution. Isuggest uploading this version instead or undeleting a low-res one (193 × 267px), if you think that the photo is PD. Ankry (talk) 17:28, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose Agreed. Please upload the cited file with the same file name. It is not only larger, but is less contrasty, so it is a much better image. Good catch, User:Ankry. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:39, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
OK, uploaded cited file under this file name. Abzeronow (talk) 14:20, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: -- that is, did not restore the smaller file. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:21, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Matthew Yang King Powers.jpg

This is a photo taken of a public person in a public place, and I am the subject of the photo. I have the right to upload this photo.

--Maddking (talk) 17:17, 11 March 2019 (UTC) March 11, 2019

 Oppose First, the subject holds the copyright in three cases (1) if the photo is selfie (not the case), (2) is the employer of the photographer or (3) hes a copyright transfer contract with the initial copyright holder. The latter two cases needs a proof via OTRS. Moreover, the photo was published without evidence of free license that is also a reason to require a free license permission from the actual copyright holder through OTRS. Ankry (talk) 17:38, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 Not done "CULVER CITY, CA - MAY 26: Actor Matthew Yang King arrives at the 'Powers' Premiere at ArcLight Cinemas on May 26, 2016 in Culver City, California. (Photo by Rich Polk/Getty Images for Sony Pictures Television)" (gettyimages.com). Thuresson (talk) 20:23, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Phil hanson (racing driver) Silverstone August 2018.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Originally deleted because the Flickr source page ([3]) had a non-free license. It's now licensed CC BY 2.0. clpo13(talk) 18:41, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Support undeletion. Ankry (talk) 20:57, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: But EXIF says that the copyright holder is David Lord Photography. @Clpo13: Please add categories. --Yann (talk) 23:54, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Phil hanson united autosports LigierJSP217 elms 2018 01.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Originally deleted because the Flickr source page ([4]) had a non-free license. It's now licensed CC BY 2.0. clpo13(talk) 18:43, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Support undeletion. Ankry (talk) 20:56, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Clpo13: Please add categories. --Yann (talk) 23:50, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Alisa Pomerantz-Boro.jpg

I have added a Creative Commons License to the photo on Facebook. Sboro (talk) 17:31, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Neither non-commercial nor non-derivatives licenses are accepted in Wikimedia Commons. Read COM:L for details. Ankry (talk) 17:39, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: NC and ND are not acceptable. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:07, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Attraction Club logo.jpg

On March 10th, at my request, Attraction Club, the owner of the logo, has confirmed me sending an e-mail to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org allowing the usage of the file. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solicromania (talk • contribs) 15:28, 12 March 2019‎ (UTC)

  • @Solicromania: Signing your posts on talk pages is required by Commons:Signatures policy. 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).
  •  Oppose If a free license has been sent to OTRS, then the file will be restored automatically when and if the email is received, processed, and approved. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.
If the message was sent to the English language version of OTRS and the email has been properly received there the sender will receive an automatic reply with the ticket number. If the sender has not had a reply, please check that it was sent correctly and try again. Other language versions may or may not provide the automatic reply.  — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 16:54, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Must wait its turn in the OTRS queue. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:56, 13 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Attraction Club Insider first issue front cover.jpg

On March 10th, at my request, Attraction Club, the owner of the logo, has confirmed me sending an e-mail to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org allowing the usage of the file. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solicromania (talk • contribs) 15:36, 12 March 2019‎ (UTC)

Ibid.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 16:56, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Must wait its turn in the OTRS queue. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:56, 13 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Representative photo of Attraction Club swingers club.jpg

On March 10th, at my request, Attraction Club, the owner of the logo, has confirmed me sending an e-mail to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org allowing the usage of the file. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solicromania (talk • contribs) 15:36, 12 March 2019‎ (UTC)

Ibid.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 16:56, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Must wait its turn in the OTRS queue. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:56, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Pierre Romera.jpg

License changed and is now Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic (CC BY-SA 2.0) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Molestor (talk • contribs) 11:31, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done restored par above. Ankry (talk) 19:32, 13 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Liebestraum-01.jpg

The file is in this website: https://www.uniquefilmsupinc.com/Twilight-Films-US.html with a big sign that reads: "This website's content has been published under the Creative Commons CC-BY-SA 4.0 license"

We did this following your instructions 2 years ago.

Artemisalee (talk) 18:12, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

I tend to  Support undeletion. If there are copyright doubts here, they do not qualify as speedy. Maybe the nominator @Herbythyme: provide some rationale why they doubt the license? Ankry (talk) 19:04, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
RV self - yes this looks like an undelete. Although the free licesing statement is at the top of the website that is not where I usually look (!!) so apologies. I'll undelete --Herby talk thyme 19:09, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done by Herbythyme. Ankry (talk) 19:26, 13 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Apocalipsis Nuclear Stills-01.jpg

The file is in this website: https://www.uniquefilmsupinc.com/Twilight-Films-US.html with a big sign that reads: "This website's content has been published under the Creative Commons CC-BY-SA 4.0 license"

We did this following your instructions 2 years ago in an email sent by you with all the instructions.

Artemisalee (talk) 18:14, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Per the one above - apologies and undeleted - my mistake --Herby talk thyme 19:11, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done by Herbythyme. Ankry (talk) 19:27, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Brasão de Timbaúba.jpg

Public Domain. Image of the people of the city Timbaúba. Public art. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucenaneto (talk • contribs) 03:55, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

If you meant File:Brasão de Timbaúba.gif, please note that this has not yet been deleted. However, your reasoning might be correct. If the image of these arms was commissioned by the municipal government of Timbaúba, it qualifies for {{PD-BrazilGov}}. De728631 (talk) 06:58, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Already deleted. @Yann: your opinion? Ankry (talk) 17:03, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
This was uploaded with Google as source, and without a license. What's the rationale for being in the public domain? Regards, Yann (talk) 17:24, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose The Brazilian exemption for government works is very limited -- only "legislative and judicial documents". A flag or CoA is none of the three. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:52, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done no explanation from the requester. Ankry (talk) 20:43, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Bobby Robson More Than A Manager.png

I have requested an undeletion of this file with no response or help of any kind.

Please process my request for undeletion as this was a mistake because of miscommunication from the copyright holders. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ErtritK (talk • contribs) 14:08, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose @ErtritK: The poster cannot be undeleted until a proper free license permission is received from copyright holder(s) and processed; read COM:OTRS for details. Note, that there probably more than one copyright holder (for each photo used in the poster) or copyright transfer evidence may be needed in OTRS. Ankry (talk) 16:39, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose Note that a similar request for this image was closed on March 9 with much the same comment and reason. User:ErtritK, you say "with no response or help of any kind". That's simply not true.
User:Ankry commented:
"An evidence of free license should be provided by the copyright holder(s) in order to restore the poster. Read COM:OTRS for details."
And I closed the request with:
"Not done: Requires a free license via OTRS from the holder of the copyright to the poster, probably the movie's producer."
What part of that don't you understand? In order for the image to be restored, the actual copyright holder, which is probably the movie's producer, must send a free license using OTRS. There is full information about how to do that at OTRS, which Ankry suggested you read and I linked.
Since this is the third request you have made for the undeletion of this file, I must warn you not to do it again. You may ask questions here or at User talk:Ankry or User talk:Jameslwoodward. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:15, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done same reason as previously. Ankry (talk) 20:42, 13 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:折居社・由来の説明看板.jpg

過去2回において、著作権上の問題及びOTRSの方針にそぐわないために削除されていましたが、最新のアップロードにおいて、著作権者（姥神大神宮、現在の宮司による）からのOTRSの形式に従った許諾申請を得た上でOTRSに申請していたにもかかわらず今回の削除となってしまったため、削除の撤回を求めるものです。
著作権者側もOTRSの方針と「Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International（クリエイティブ・コモンズ 表示-継承 4.0 国際）」とする同意を許諾申請書類によって得ているので、今回行われた削除は全く不当なものとしか考えられませんし、許諾申請書類上、ファイル名の変更も困難となっています。
以上の点から、著作権上の問題はクリアとなり、OTRSの方針にも沿っていると考えられるため、削除の撤回を求めます。--BATACHAN (talk) 18:10, 11 March 2019 (UTC) （英訳：Google翻訳による）
（English translation: Google Translate）
In the past two times, it was deleted because it did not meet copyright problems and OTRS policies, but in the latest upload, it follows OTRS format from the copyright owner (Ubagamidaijingu Shrine, by current chief priest) Even though I applied for OTRS after obtaining permission application, this time it became deletion, so we ask for withdrawal of deletion.
The copyright owner also got the consent of OTRS policy and "Creative Commons Attribution - Share Alike 4.0 International" by permission application documents, so the deletion made this time is totally unjust It can only be thought of as a thing, and it is also difficult to change the file name on the application for permission application.
In view of the above, copyright issues are cleared and it seems to be in line with the OTRS policy, so we ask for withdrawal of deletion.--BATACHAN (talk) 18:19, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

As the image requires OTRS permission, we cannot restore it without a confirmation by an OTRS agent that there is a valid permission in OTRS. As OTRS (as almost everything in Wikimedia) is operated by volunteers, nobody can grant you a real estimation how long you need to wait for a response. You can try to ask in COM:ON (or directly a Chinese speaking OTRS agent - assuming the permission was send in Chinese) about the status of the ticket. But also here: nobody can grant you to receive a response. That is why it is much simpler when a photographer uploads themselves their own photo prior to publishing it elsewhere. Ankry (talk) 21:51, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per my comment. Ankry (talk) 20:39, 13 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Keeley Hawes 2019.jpg

Keeley_Hawes_2019.jpg

REASONS: image is not from Getty Image. It is from https://www.hawtcelebs.com/keeley-hawes-at-charles-finch-chanel-pre-bafta-dinner-in-london-02-09-2019/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Random bestest (talk • contribs) 00:09, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

http://prideandprejudice05.blogspot.com/2018/10/happy-birthday-matthew-macfadyen.html.jpg

http://prideandprejudice05.blogspot.com/2018/10/happy-birthday-matthew-macfadyen.html

The twitter account you mentioned is also a fan based account and was not even certified by twitter — Preceding unsigned comment added by Random bestest (talk • contribs) 00:39, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

  • @Random bestest: Signing your posts on talk pages is required by Commons:Signatures policy. 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).
Where are the free licenses for these files?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 03:50, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose You say the file is from

www.hawtcelebs.com/keeley-hawes-at-charles-finch-chanel-pre-bafta-dinner-in-london-02-09-2019

Unfortunately, that site is clearly marked " Copyright © 2019 HawtCelebs". In order to restore this image, the actual photographer must send a free license using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:28, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done OTRS permission needed. Ankry (talk) 20:36, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Mike Gruntman.jpg

Kindly restore file Mike Gruntman.jpg as it was again deleted in wiki commons despite permission email sent by mike gruntman himself dated Jan 26 2019 from his usc emial id. What more is needed to get this sorted out once and for all ?

Ticket#: 2018121910007152 Profile Pic Request and wiki Release agreement

wikipi3146 Sat, Jan 26, 6:29 PM to mikeg


Hello Prof. Gruntman,

Can you please authorize us to use the attached ( Mike Gruntman.jpg) image sent earlier (by you) as your profile pic on your wikipedia page. Moreover, kindly also confirm to the below text (in green) that affirms that you agree to the below release agreement from wiki commons.

Please include permissions-commons@wikimedia.org in cc to your response. Thanks, pi3146

I hereby affirm that I represent Mike Gruntman, the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of both the work depicted and the media attached to this email. I agree to publish the above-mentioned work under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International. I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work, even in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws. I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites. I am aware that the copyright holder always retains ownership of the copyright as well as the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by the copyright holder. I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

wikipi3146 Wikipedia creator of page Mike Gruntman of Mike Gruntman 2019-01-26

[generated using relgen]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Pi3146 (talk • contribs) 20:37, 11 March 2019 (UTC) Mike Gruntman <redacted> Sat, Jan 26, 6:34 PM to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org

Dear wikipi3146,

Yes, I authorize you to use the attached image in the wiki pages.

I understand that this photograph will be used following the rules

described in your email (below) and that you represent me

on that matter

Thank you again

Sincerely,

Prof. Mike Gruntman, PhD

Professor of Astronautics and Chair

Department of Astronautical Engineering Viterbi School of Engineering

Pi3146 (talk) 04:59, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Krd, you own this OTRS ticket. It looks good to me. Is there a reason why the file was not changed from {{OTRS received}} to {{OTRS permission}}? .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:05, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done OTRS permission needed. Ankry (talk) 20:35, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Рыбас Тарас Михайлович.jpg

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen! Restore this file, please. It's my father's photo from the family album. All T.M.Rybas relatives agree, that it would be better to change the photo on Рыбас,_Тарас_Михайлович wiki page. Not the best one is used in present, maybe the source photo was distorted some way. He never wore a beard and never appeared unshaven, as one can see on his wiki page now. His 100 anniversary comes in a few days, so restore the photo ASAP, please.

--Rybas AT (talk) 16:34, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@Rybas AT: Who is/was the photographer who made the original photo? You claimed that you are the photographer, what is doubtful. Ankry (talk) 07:13, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose First, claiming that you were the photographer when you know that the image came from a family album is a serious violation of Commons rules. If you do it again, you may be blocked from editing here.
Owning a paper or digital copy of a photograph does not give you the right to freely license it. That right almost always belongs to the photographer or his heirs. This looks like a professional studio portrait. In order for this image to be restored to Commons, the photographer or an heir must send a free license using OTRS. If you cannot determine who the photographer was, then the image is a copyright orphan and cannot be kept here until 120 years after its creation. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:58, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done unclear copyright status. Ankry (talk) 21:05, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:David Petrovsky in 1924.jpg

Dear Administrator in Wikipedia:

The "File:David Petrovsky in 1924.jpg" - is a photo of my grandfather David Petrovsky (from Petrovsky Family Archive). I am the only grandson of David Petrovsky. My father - Alexey Petrovsky (he died in 2010) - was the only son of David Petrovsky. My family (wife and adult children) decided to published this photo in the article about David Petrovsky. The article about David Petrovsky is the result of many years of work of famous researches, historians, and writers from the US, Great Britain. Please, don't delete this photo from the article about David Petrovsky.

Sincerely,

Michael A. Petrovsky

E-mail: (Redacted) Phone number: (Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.86.152.117 (talk) 06:07, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose From Commons:Deletion requests/File:David Petrovsky in 1924.jpg: "The author of the picture is unknown, the photo is taken from the family archive, there are no sources of lawful disclosure of the picture." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thuresson (talk • contribs) 07:57, 10 March 2019‎ (UTC)
Yes and no. As a general rule, owning a paper or digital copy of an image does not give you the right to freely license it. That right is almost always held by the photographer and his heirs. However, this appears to be a studio portrait. If this was taken in the UK, then the UK law before 1989 applies and copyright to the image belongs to the person who paid for the portrait -- the subject. In that case, this is OK. If, however, this was taken in the USSR, then the photographer's heirs own the copyright until it expires 70 years after the death of the photographer. There is no special provision for unknown photographers. So, if it can be proven that this is a UK image, then it can be kept, otherwise not. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:23, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Good afternoon, James.

Thank you for your comments. This photo of my grandfather David Petrovsky (from family archive) was digitized for Wikipedia by me - Michael A. Petrovsky (the only grandson of David Petrovsky). The cousin of my father Joyce Rathbone gave this photo to our family when she came to Moscow to visit us from UK in 1985.

Sincerely,

Michael A.Petrovsky

E-mail: (Redacted) Phone number: (Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael A. Petrovsky (talk • contribs) 20:40, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@Michael A. Petrovsky: It is irrelevant who is on the photo and who did digitize it. Copyright belong to the original photographer, regardless whether we know who they were or not and expire (in US) in most cases 95 years after the first publication (unless it was a US publication) or 120 years from creation with rare extempts. If you cannot provide photographer name and their death date and you cannot point out a pre-1975 publication of the photo, it is unlikely that it can be restored before 2045. Ankry (talk) 07:35, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Support It appears from the image itself and the circumstances described above that this is a studio portrait made in 1924 in the UK. In that case, the copyright belongs to the person who commissioned the work, presumably the subject. see:https://www.gov.uk/guidance/ownership-of-copyright-works

"Prior to 1 August 1989 though, the copyright in photographs, portraits and engravings (and only those types of work) which were created as a result of a commission were owned by the commissioner and NOT the creator."

Since AGF tells me that I can assume that the uploader is, as he says above, the grandson and an heir of the subject, he has the right to freely license the image. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:12, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done per above. @Jameslwoodward: marked as {{PD-UK-unknown}}; please change if you find more appropriate license template. Ankry (talk) 23:58, 13 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:NarendraRocherolle.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Public Domain photo on flickr.com

https://www.flickr.com/photos/narendra/47306515622/in/dateposted-public/ Narenpublic (talk) 14:02, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

  •  Oppose per COM:PDM. Please have the Flickr license changed or send permission via OTRS. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:20, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose The Flickr user, the subject, and the account here all have similar names. Since the image does not look like a selfie, we will need a free license from the actual photographer. Only if the Flickr user is actually the photographer will changing the license on Flickr be sufficient. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:25, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Jim. Ankry (talk) 23:43, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:東森集團總裁王令麟.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I, an OTRS agent (verify), found that the copyright holder of the file(s) send a permission request to OTRS (Ticket:2019031310003404). I checked this ticket and confirmed that the declaration of the permission is valid. Please restore the file(s) and, if necessary, add the {{PermissionOTRS}} on the description(s) of the file(s). Thanks! This is Taiwania Justo speaking (Reception Room) 04:44, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

已由此照片著作權擁有之ETtoday.net 官方公用信箱提出版權聲明，懇請恢復此照片於「王令麟」頁面上使用。代表人 曾雅玲 yaling@ettoday.net — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sylviatyl (talk • contribs) 02:19, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
✓ Done per OTRS agent request. Ankry (talk) 05:34, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Alaska via Canadian Pacific. Taku Glacier (3531517944).jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Boston Public Library collections - Vintage Travel Posters

Poster by Charles James Greenwood, a Canadian artist, who died in 1965. Now Public Domain in Canada. Pinging @Yann Abzeronow (talk) 14:52, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

 Support Canada is pma 50. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:15, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 15:46, 14 March 2019 (UTC)


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

Request for restoration

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Why not the uploader can be the subject of the photograph? timer, camera stand do exist in this world? right? Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 08:09, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

The uploader can be a subject if the photo is a selfie or there is an evidence of serf-timer in the photo EXIF data. The conference/meeting photo is unlikely to be made using tripod & self-timer. Ankry (talk) 09:39, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, I withdraw this request. Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 10:57, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Withdrawn. --Yann (talk) 15:44, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:بیدی.jpg

hi,

i took this picture myself, and add it in a relative essay, please Undeletfe it‍‍ --13:59, 13 March 2019 (UTC)79.132.208.107

 Oppose The packaging is copyrighted. We cannot keep the image here without a license from the manufacturer. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:36, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Per COM:PACKAGING. --4nn1l2 (talk) 18:33, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Ratnamanjarii Poster.jpg

The above file is own work. Requesting for speedy undeletion of the same. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DexterBud (talk • contribs) 18:28, 12 March 2019‎ (UTC)

No such file has ever existed. DexterBud: If you followed the instructions and signed your entry, it would be much easier to find your upload log via your contributions to figure out that the file you're talking about is probably File:Ratnamanjarii Poster.png. —LX (talk, contribs) 22:53, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
And for copyrighted posters, like this one, free license permission from the poster copyright holder is necessary in order to undelete it. Read COM:OTRS for details.  Oppose until proper permission is received and processed. Ankry (talk) 19:57, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Ankry. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:08, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

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

request to un delete file:20171125_Day_8_studio24596.jpg and file:Congo Tales image.jpg

Hi, I am Pieter Henket. I submitted a declaration of consent for the following images, 2 of which were deleted. I emailed it in from pieter@pieterhenket.com. Primage2 is currently awaiting OTRS approval. The other two images were deleted before I sent the email in. Because I have sent the declaration for consent in for the other two images I am requesting that they be un deleted. Thank you.

I hereby affirm that I am Pieter Henket, the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the media work as shown here:

and have legal authority in my capacity to release the copyright of that work.

I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the following free license: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International

I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work, even in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.

I am aware that the copyright holder always retains ownership of the copyright as well as the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by the copyright holder.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

Pieter Henket

March 7, 2019 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pieterhenket (talk • contribs) 19:22, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

  •  Oppose If a free license has been sent to OTRS, then the file will be restored automatically when and if the email is received, processed, and approved. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.
If the message was sent to the English language version of OTRS and the email has been properly received there the sender will receive an automatic reply with the ticket number. If the sender has not had a reply, please check that it was sent correctly and try again. Other language versions may or may not provide the automatic reply. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:05, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: must wait their turn in the long OTRS queue. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:08, 14 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:1899 - Radu S. Corbu - profesor de gimnastica la Liceul Nicolae Balcescu din Braila.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Macreanu Iulian

"The image was published for the first time in Atanasie Popescu, Liceul "N. Bălcescu" din Brăila şi Şcolile a căror continuitate este. Monografie; 1863-1908, Tipografia Românească, Brăila, 1937 and reproduced latter in Vasile A. Cocoş, Liceul „Nicolae Bălcescu” - Brăila. 1863-1963, Brăila, 1970." Meets {{PD-RO-photo}} Abzeronow (talk) 16:16, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

 Support per above. Ankry (talk) 19:26, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: per Ankry. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:05, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:ROC-1912-10cash.jpg

Just curious, but is File:ROC-1912-10cash.jpg a scan? If so then this image is in the public domain, if it's not a scan then please don't undelete it. Also please ping as my notifications don't work properly. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 20:32, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose The coins may be PD, but the image is not. It has no author, source, or license, all of which are required for Commons. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:35, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

@Jameslwoodward: , my bad, I thought that this was a banknote as I only saw a discussion on it describing it on the English-language Wikipedia. Coins are 3D objects so you could close this request. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 06:12, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Nom. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:52, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Portrait de Gérard Haas.jpg

Bonjour,

Je me permets de vous écrire suite au message suivant émis par Ronhjones reçu le 8 mars 2019 : "Votre document File:Portrait de Gérard Haas.jpg a été supprimé récemment dans le cadre de nos procédures et de notre politique de gestion des contenus. Vous avez de nouveau téléchargé ce fichier sur Commons. Ce n'est pas une pratique recommandée. Si vous souhaitez contester la suppression, merci d'aller sur la page Commons:Demandes de restauration et de suivre les instructions qui y sont mentionnées, afin qu'une nouvelle discussion s'engage sur le bien-fondé de la suppression. Recréer le contenu supprimé en dehors de ce processus n'est pas une bonne idée, et la répétition d'un tel comportement peut conduire au blocage de votre compte, vous empêchant ainsi de continuer à contribuer. Merci de votre compréhension. Ronhjones (Talk) 20:27, 8 March 2019 (UTC)"

Le 5 mars 2019, j'avais reçu un message de Patrick Rogel me spécifiant que le fichier File:Gérard Haas.jpg (ancien nom du fichier File:Portrait de Gérard Haas.jpg) avait été marqué comme violant le droit d'auteur : "File:Gérard Haas.jpg a été marqué(e) comme violant le droit d'auteur. Wikimedia Commons n'accepte que des documents libres, c'est à dire des images ou d'autres médias utilisables par tout le monde, dans n'importe quel cadre. Vous trouverez plus de détails sur ce que l'on considère comme acceptable sur Commons:À propos des licences, et vous pouvez si besoin poser des questions sur le Service d'aide. Le fichier que vous avez ajouté va bientôt être supprimé. Si vous pensez qu'il ne constitue pas une violation du droit d'auteur, vous pouvez l'expliquer sur la page de description de l'image. Ce fichier viole des droits d'auteurs pour les raisons suivantes : https://www.haas-avocats.com/presentation-cabinet/equipe/"

Suite au message de Patrick Rogel, j'ai fait ajouter la mention "Licence libre – réutilisation autorisée sans but commercial" sur le fichier de la page https://www.haas-avocats.com/presentation-cabinet/equipe/ comme expliqué par BrightRaven (d) 10:18, 6 March 2019 (UTC) sur https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Service_d%27aide#toc-bottom : "Bonjour. Pour que cette photo publiée précédemment soit acceptable sur Commons, il faut : soit transmettre l'autorisation de l'auteur de publier cette photo sous une licence libre en suivant cette procédure : COM:OTRS/fr ; soit afficher une licence libre sur le site où la photo a été initialement publiée."

J'ai ensuite de nouveau importé le même fichier dans Commons mais en changeant son nom pour éviter toute confusion.

Le fichier File:Portrait de Gérard Haas.jpg est maintenant un document libre. Serait-il possible de le restaurer svp ? Sinon, pourriez-vous svp m'expliquer la marche à suivre ?

Je vous en remercie et reste à votre disposition.

Cordialement,

--Catherine Pin (talk) 15:10, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@Catherine Pin: Bonjour, vous avez envoyé un courriel à OTRS indiquant une license libre? Dans ce cas, le fichier sera restauré quand l'autorisation sera lue et acceptée (quelques petites semaines à attendre). Ruthven (msg) 18:34, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@Ruthven Bonjour, je vous remercie pour votre message. Je n'ai pas envoyé de courriel à ORTS, je pensais que le fait de préciser Licence libre sur la photo était suffisant. Merci. --Catherine Pin Cela me l'avait été précisé ainsi dans Aide Commons : Bonjour. Pour que cette photo publiée précédemment soit acceptable sur Commons, il faut :

  • soit transmettre l'autorisation de l'auteur de publier cette photo sous une licence libre en suivant cette procédure : COM:OTRS/fr ;
  • soit afficher une licence libre sur le site où la photo a été initialement publiée.

Vous me confirmez que je dois malgré tout envoyer un courriel à OTRS ? Je vous remercie par avance pour votre réponse. --Catherine Pin 09:44, 11 March 2019

Bonjour, Je me permets de vous soumettre de nouveau ma question ci-dessus qui est restée sans réponse car j'avoue être un peu perdue. Faut-il faire un courriel à OTRS alors qu'il était spécifié que j'avais compris que le fait d'"afficher une licence libre sur le site où la photo a été initialement publiée" était suffisant ? je vous remercie par avance pour votre réponse à ce sujet. --Catherine Pin (talk)

@Catherine Pin: Bonjour,
S'il y a une licence libre à la source, il n'est pas nécessaire d'envoyer un courriel. Mais la licence mentionnée ici est "utilisation non-commerciale" uniquement, ce qui n'est pas une licence libre. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 10:15, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Bonjour Yann, Je vous remercie. Cela signifie qu'il faut supprimer la mention "réutilisation autorisée sans but commercial" pour ne laisser que "Licence libre" ? C'est bien cela ? Merci. --Catherine Pin(talk) :@Catherine Pin: 11:22, 12 March 2019

@Catherine Pin: Indiquez simplement : "Licence CC-BY-SA-4.0" avec le nom de la personne à qui il faut attribuer l'image. C'est obligatoire pour la licence, et en droit français, pour sauvegarder les droits moraux de l'auteur. Avec éventuellement un lien vers https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.fr . Cordialement, Yann (talk) 10:30, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

@Yann, Je vais faire placer "Licence CC-BY-SA-4.0" avec le nom de la personne à qui il faut attribuer l'image sur la photo présente sur le site où elle a été initialement publiée (https://www.haas-avocats.com/presentation-cabinet/equipe/) et ensuite, le fichier File:Portrait de Gérard Haas.jpg sera restauré de manière automatique ? OU est-ce que j'aurai une manipulation à faire ? si oui, pouvez-vous me dire laquelle ? Merci par avance. Cordialement, --Catherine Pin(talk) :@Catherine Pin: 12:08, 12 March 2019

@Catherine Pin: Non, vous n'avez rien à faire, sinon de nous prévenir. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 11:16, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

@Yann, D'accord, pour prévenir suffit-il de laisser un nouveau message ici ? Merci. Cordialement, --Catherine Pin(talk) 12:33, 12 March 2019

@Catherine Pin: Oui. Yann (talk) 11:43, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

@Yann, Avec mes sincères remerciements. Je vous tiens au courant dès que possible. Cordialement, --Catherine Pin(talk) 12:53, 12 March 2019

 Not done: as per above. Please request undeletion once the change is made. --Yann (talk) 11:14, 15 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Willie Haggart and Wife Likkle Miss.png

This is photo is from an old AMATEUR VHS TAPE ..it is not from a 'copyright' video. The process of automatically dismissing Screenshot is FLAWED, not all screenshots are from copyrighted videos. Regards.

File:Willie Haggart and Wife Likkle Miss.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by AROO8 (talk • contribs) 11:33, 11 March 2019 (UTC)  Question Who did make the video and where? Who did add the blurred text and why is it added/blured? Ankry (talk) 23:18, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 11:13, 15 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Example.jpg propriété de aarfa-groupe.com

je suis propriétaire de cette photo je souhaite la partager — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aarfagroupe (talk • contribs) 21:14, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Aarfagroupe: File:Example.jpg hasn't been deleted. Three of your uploads have been deleted. The last one to be deleted was File:Tenu d'un groupe aarfa en france.jpg. It was deleted because it was deemed a likely copyright violation. As explained on your user talk page, it was a low resolution image with metadata indicating that it was an edited version of an image originally sourced from Facebook. If you are the author of the photograph, you would be expected to be able to provide a full resolution version with original camera metadata. —LX (talk, contribs) 23:01, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 11:12, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Fiat Centoventi (interni).jpg

Buonasera, l'immagine in oggetto è stata segnalata (e rimossa) a causa di una possibile violazione di copyright. Si tratta tuttavia di una fotografia fatta dall'amministratore del portale Autopareri.com, durante una delle 2 giornate riservate alla stampa (5-6 marzo 2019), presso il salone dell'auto di Ginevra.

Le immagini originali sono visibili a questo link, cercando a fondo pagina l'album “Fiat al salone di Ginevra 2019”.

Ringrazio per l'attenzione e saluto.

--Autopareri (talk) 21:20, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose There are two problems here. First, there is no evidence of a free license on the source site that you show above, www.autopareri.com. Therefore, to keep this we would need a free license from the photographer. Second, concept cars are generally not usable on the street. Therefore, they are not utilitarian and are copyrighted. So, to restore the image, we need a license from Fiat as well as from the photographer. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:54, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. Although, I don't there is a copyright on the vehicle: no one can drive a F1 on the street, but there is no copyright on it either. --Yann (talk) 11:10, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Womanspreading.jpg

The rationale for deleting this file was "out of scope". But the file is not out of scope. It was used on enwp's page Manspreading to show that thing is not unique to males. The editor who had nominated the file for deletion had reverted and removed the photo from that article. I do not find the media is out-of-scope.
acagastya 04:31, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

And, user :acagastya, it is not helpful to mislead us by stating that the reason for deleting this file was "out of scope", when in fact it was given as "Out of scope & personal-rights-problems". The fact that it was in use clearly eliminates "out of scope" as a problem, but does not change the fact that it violates Indian law and Commons policy, "Images must not unfairly ridicule or demean the subject." .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:46, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
that is not misleading. On the thread for deletion, I have explained about the rule in India, and how it was for the "intimate" body parts of females.
acagastya 08:10, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 11:10, 15 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:J.T. Carter's Crests.jpg There is no copyright restrictions on this image!

This image is not from the website with that rights reserved, please feel free to research it. It is not on any website that has a copyright notice! — Preceding unsigned comment added by BillyB1950 (talk • contribs) 07:32, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose The source shown in the file description is:

www.swinginsoiree.com/crests

which is a 404 error -- page not found. Since we cannot verify that the image is freely licensed at the named source, it cannot be restored. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:03, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Lack of copyright notice does not mean that something is not copyrighted (at least for post-1977 pulications). We need an evidence of free license or en evidence of PD status (eg. because copyright expired or a copyright exception applies). Ankry (talk) 00:09, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 11:10, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Katrin Helling-Plahr MdB.jpg

Bei dem Foto handelt es sich um ein eigenes Werk von Frau Helling-Plahr, welches durch einen Mitarbeiter (Marius Hoppe) des Büros aufgenommen wurde. Die Rechte an dem Foto liegen vollständig bei Frau Helling-Plahr. Im Auftrag von Frau Helling-Plahr soll ich (Martin Jäger) das (auch öffentlich zugänglich und frei zu verwendende Pressefoto, https://helling-plahr.de/presse.html) bei Wikipedia hochladen.

Eine Urheberrechtsverletzung liegt nach meinem Dafürhalten deshalb nicht vor.

--Poppxa (talk) 10:53, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose First, I note that in the file description, you claimed that you were the photographer. Now you say that Marius Hoppe was the photographer. Incorrectly claiming "own work" is a serious violation of Commons rules. If you do it again, you may be blocked from editing here. It also makes it difficult to believe that anything else you say about the image is correct.

In any case, because the image appears at https://www.helling-plahr.de/presse.html with "© 2018 Katrin Helling-Plahr", policy requires that the actual copyright holder must send a free license using OTRS. It would be easiest if the photographer sends the license. If anyone else does, they must document that they have a license from the photographer that allows them to freely license the image or that Marius Hoppe is employed as a photographer by the person or entity sending the license. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:17, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 14:11, 16 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Petr Svoboda.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I have an explicit permission from the author (Miroslav Lepeška - https://www.fotomirekle.cz/) to upload the photography on Wiki. Třiatřicet (talk) 07:05, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose permission to uploade is not the same as free license. We need a free license directly from the copyright holder (author). Read COM:L and COM:OTRS for details. Ankry (talk) 09:55, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 14:10, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Амбивалентность_(постер).jpg

I am a representative of the film company holding the rights for the film and all the marketing media and we want to publish the movie poster. --Kkalegina (talk) 08:37, 14 March 2019 (UTC) Ekaterina Kalegina March 14 2019

 Oppose In order to restore the image a written free license permission from the copyright holder(s) of the poster and of the photos used is/are needed. Read COM:OTRS for details. Ankry (talk) 08:58, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 14:10, 16 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Betty Bossi Hauptsitz.jpg

Reason for request: I am the head of communication of Betty Bossi and also the person responsible for media relations, my name is here on the Betty Bossi Website in the lower part: https://www.bettybossi.ch/de/Admin/Display/37 This photo shows the entrance of our current head quarter in Zurich.

Zurich, March 14 2019

--Viviane Buehr (talk) 09:11, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose From Swiss FOP restrictions: freedom of panorama does not apply to interior spaces. Permission from the artist (wall art inside) is needed in order to restore the photo. Ankry (talk) 09:52, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 14:11, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Land your dream career.jpg

This is educational content we use to Facilitate group discussions and presentations to school learners and unemployed youth. How can it be deleted when it is Learning material that does not go against your Policy. Please read message body as Mr. Herbthyme did not because if he did he would see that we offer free educational course, skills development workshops,on-going support to previously disadvantaged youth from the rurals of KZN, South Africa which is FREE ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by SINAZO SOLUTIONS (talk • contribs) 11:34, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose You have six deleted files, none of which have the file name above. That's not a problem, because all of them are copyrighted text and photos. In order to have them restored, an authorized official of the copyright holder must send a free license using OTRS. Note that this policy is in place because we do not know who User:SINAZO SOLUTIONS actually is and, unfortunately, we get far too many liars and forgers here to do otherwise. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:57, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 14:07, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:FrancescoFranchi.jpg

It's not a copyright violation. I took the picture. Do not delete it please.

--NeelixIT (talk) 13:40, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Comment Please note Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#NeelixIT. --Patrick Rogel (talk) 13:37, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
@NeelixIT: EXIF says Author and Copyright holder is JING, and the image is also available online. Could you please send a permission via COM:OTRS, or faster add a free license at this URL. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:42, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 14:06, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:1944 liberated soviet civilians return home near vitebsk.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:1944 liberated soviet civilians return home near vitebsk.jpg

1944 anonymous Russian photograph. Abzeronow (talk) 17:03, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 14:05, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:CollinsKeyHeadshot.png

The image previously updated "Collins Key headshot or image", is wholly owned by Collins Key. He is requested I upload it for him as his hired publicist, so I'm trying to attach the headshot to his wikipedia page. The company "Undefeated Creative" took the photo (specifically, one of their photographers name Cynthia Gonzalez Espinos), but Collins Key wholly purchased it from them so he has 100% ownership of this image. I'd like to get this connected to his wikipedia page soon -- thank you for your help. --TheJonesKnows369 (talk) 17:30, 14 March 2019 (UTC)Kat Jones

 Oppose In the case of images not actually taken by the uploader and not PD for some reason, policy requires that either (a) the actual photographer must send a free license using OTRS or (b) a licensee of the photographer (in this case presumably Collins Key) must send a free license together with appropriate evidence that he has the right to sublicense the image freely. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:45, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 14:05, 16 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Αμετανόητος Δικαστής 1 Logo.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This image has gone up to the discogs by me. Οδυσσέας123 (talk) 21:55, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Policy requires that for corporate, sports club, school, and association logos, an authorized official of the organization owning the rights to the logo must send a free license using OTRS. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:32, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 14:05, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Dinosaria wa Tendaguru.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: File:Dinosaria wa Tendaguru.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation and was deleted on Feb 21,2019. When I uploaded it again on Mar 14, I made sure to include the copyright licence under Commons 04. - Maybe I made a mistake in uploading the licence? Anyway, I would like to know why it cannot be used and request revision for eventual undeletion. Thanks Munfarid1 (talk) 22:33, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose It was deleted the second time because you uploaded it out of process, which is a violation of Commons rules and wastes time and resources. Please don't do it again or you may be blocked from editing here. Instead, do as you have done now -- come here.

The image is a book cover. Since we don't know who you are, policy requires that the copyright holder, usually an authorized official of the publisher, must send a free license using OTRS. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:11, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 14:05, 16 March 2019 (UTC)


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

Metro Carmes Toulouse1 copie

Madame, Monsieur,

vous serait-il possible d'annuler l'interdiction de transfert des photographies des oeuvres de Jean-Paul Marcheschi par M. Stefan Meyer qui vous a envoyé une autorisation de diffusion de ses images il y a deux jours ? En particulier cette photographie : File:Metro Carmes Toulouse1 copie.jpg

Mille mercis, et sincères salutations,

Stéphane Bily — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stéphane Bily (talk • contribs) 13:58, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

See ticket:2019031210008901
@Stéphane Bily: Bonjour,
L'autorisation doit venir de l'artiste lui-même, ou M. Stefan Meyer doit fournir une preuve qu'il est habilité à agir au nom de M. Jean-Paul Marcheschi. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 14:58, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 14:04, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

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

AEPROSER.

Dear Sirs,

By using this account of ChezChaton, managed by one employee of the entity, I would like you to learn that in the wikipedia page of AEPROSER (the Spanish pool of banking BPO companies), the legitimate, all-rights-granted logo of the organization (check it in the official web: www.aeproser.org) has been deleted. I beg you to undelete it because neither domestic no international laws han been breached, and the page is now shown incomplete without that relevant part of our public identity.

Kind Regards.

Julio Marcos García Maceiras Managing Director / General Counsel AEPROSER

c/ Juan Bravo 51 Dpo 28001 Madrid <redacted> www.aeproser.org — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChezChaton (talk • contribs) 11:12, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Please wait for other user's OTRS ticket to be processed. (Deletion log for File:AEPROSER logo.jpg). Thuresson (talk) 22:23, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 23:52, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:informe Brailovsky.pdf

Buenas tardes 

                       Quisiera saber si alguien me puede ayudar con un problema que tengo en un articulo de wikipedia.
                       En el artículo "caso carrasco" era de vital importancia, especialmente para referir a una investigación posterior que ponía en duda la sentencia de ese caso judicial, un informe de un perito oficial que se denominó "Informe_Brailovsky.pdf" y fue borrado, aparentemente.
                     Quisiera si alguien me puede explicar el motivo, y en su caso, si me puede aconsejar cómo puede restaurarse el informe Brailovsky en el "Caso carrasco". 
                     Entiendo que hay un problema de licencia, pero la verdad es que no manejo el tema. lo unico que pude ver es lo que sigue:

"...Este documento persuasivo está en formato pdf y se adjunta a una página wiki interesante en español. No estoy muy seguro de que los archivos * pdf se usen de esta manera, y sé que en general * los archivos pdf están fuera de COM: SCOPE . Ellin Beltz ( conversación ) 19:54, 10 de noviembre de 2017 (UTC)..." 

                     Lo único que puedo asegurar es que el informe es de dominio publico ya que está dentro de un expediente judicial, que como se sabe, expresa las decisiones de un magistrado que como es sabido, sus actos son públicos, por el principio republicano de la "publicidad de los actos de los magistrados" amparados por la Constitución Nacional Argentina.
                     El archivo en cuestión sigue siendo de importancia investigativa como así tambien histórica. Si alguien pudiera explicarme el motivo de la eliminación, se los agradecería.

Razones admisibles para los formatos PDF y DjVu [ editar ] ••• • El archivo es un escaneo de un documento de importancia histórica u otra importancia externa, por ejemplo, escanea libros, informes, periódicos, etc., libres de derechos de autor o con licencia. ••• 

                   Les pido si ud me puede ayudar a restaurar este documento indicándome cómo hacerlo.
                   les envío mis respetos y un saludo cordial

(Ignaciocanevaro (talk) 18:21, 6 March 2019 (UTC))

 Oppose First, there is the question of whether the PDF is in scope -- we do not generally keep PDFs of text, but we do keep documents of historical interest and this probably qualifies.
However, there is the question of copyright. In most countries, judicial decisions are PD, but that does not extend to copyrighted material contained in them. This PDF contains at least two substantial excerpts from a newspaper and a scholarly journal. Since they have copyrights which are not eliminated by the PD status of the judicial decision, we cannot keep this. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:39, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done Scope doubts not responded by requester. Ankry (talk) 09:16, 17 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Johan_Lundin.jpg

The image is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. It can be seen here: https://www.galleryextra.com/johan-lundin-3/

--ArtworksData (talk) 14:58, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

@ArtworksData: Any evidence that it was "licensed" by the photographer? Ankry (talk) 08:25, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done no response; evidence of author's permission needed. Probably via OTRS. Ankry (talk) 09:17, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Erect micropenis.jpg

File:Erect micropenis.jpg

It is a picture of me that I took

--Micro1522 (talk) 02:56, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Well, this is not your Facebook page or personal album of penis pics. Please read COM:NOTHOST. --E4024 (talk) 05:10, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
I explained here why I deleted this photo. This is almost certainly cyberbullying. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 11:53, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Obviously not. --Yann (talk) 12:21, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:N.ermekbayev.jpg

Добрый день! Файл File:N.ermekbayev.jpg был скопирован с сайта https://mod.gov.kz/rus/rukovodstvo/ministr_oborony/ для использования на вики странице Нурлан Ермекбаев. Разрешение на использование данного изображения имеется. Прошу восстановить изображение. --QZRustemmedia (talk) 18:45, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose The copyright notice at the bottom of this page states: "2009 – 2019 © Министерство обороны Республики Казахстан Все права защищены" that is not a free license. @QZRustemmedia: plese do not upload images from sites that do not claim a free license explicitely. Ankry (talk) 10:02, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 22:02, 18 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Dr Jonas Ekfeldt.jpg

I, personally, own the copyright to this image, as well as the domain https://www.jurit.se. Hence; It's publishing on Wiki has wrongfully been flagged as a potential copyright violation.

15 March 2019 Viroptimus (talk) 14:35, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose @Viroptimus: All permissions have to be confirmed via OTRS mailing system. Please follow the procedure. Due to high backlog of requests it might take up to 185 days to proceed your e-mail. I recommend sending your e-mail to permissions-sv@wikimedia.org in order to get response speedily. The file will be undeleted once the request is processed. --Mates (talk) 14:21, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 22:02, 18 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:KingsprimeTV Logo Icon.png

This file is owned by me. i created this file by myself. please reinstate File:KingsprimeTV Logo Icon.png--Joseph Ozojie (talk) 15:21, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

 Info The file was deleted based on Commons:Deletion requests/File:KingsprimeTV Logo Icon.png closed by @Ruthven: . I assume the problem with the file was not because of copyright but COM:SCOPE (marked as spam). I recommend to specify where would you like to use the file if restored.  Neutral --Mates (talk) 14:17, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
I should have written "closed per discussion". Begoon had it right, because the copyright violation identified by Jeff G. was very relative: the file was used for self-promotion, being apparently out of scope as well. --Ruthven (msg) 23:25, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
Meh, it seems pretty spammy to me, see also w:File:Kb global, kptv kingsprimetv.png and w:Draft:kingsprimetv (from which I just removed a chunk of copyright violations) which will never be accepted in its current form, if at all. Again, my heart says delete because [a] I dislike spammers as much as the next man, and [b] I personally think US(/Canadian) TOO is too permissive (and we can tend to be even more permissive in our interpretations) - but my head says keep because those are my personal opinions rather than policy and it seems to me to be below TOO as we do interpret it. This time, though, I'll vote with my heart:  Oppose -- Begoon 11:50, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose. It was used for spam, we have no approved OTRS permission, and there is no actual use for it at present. If an unbiased policy-compliant article were to emerge and we had approved OTRS permission for it, I would reconsider.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 13:21, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 22:01, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Ineffable EP Album Artwork.jpg

I own the record label that this EP was released through and created the artwork. I own all the rights to this content. My company is registered with PPL and companies house in the united kingdom. We also have deals with Gracenote, Nielsen and Lyricfind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alystarhynes (talk • contribs) 17:13, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose @Alystarhynes: All permissions have to be confirmed via OTRS mailing system. Please follow the procedure. Due to high backlog of requests it might take up to 185 days to proceed your e-mail. The file will be undeleted once the request is processed. --Mates (talk) 14:02, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 22:01, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Petra_Ahola.jpg

Photo was taken by Kari Sunnari from TTT-Theatre. Permission has confirmed via phone to use this picture at Wikipedia.

Kari Sunnari, tel. +358 44 7201 218
 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Genz (talk • contribs) 08:56, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose @Genz: All permissions have to be confirmed via OTRS mailing system. Please follow the procedure. Due to high backlog of requests it might take up to 185 days to proceed your e-mail. Based on your phone number, I recommend sending your e-mail to permissions-fi@wikimedia.org in order to get response speedily. The file will be undeleted once the request is processed. --Mates (talk) 13:59, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 22:01, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:CAPA APPLE MUSIC.jpg

venho fazer esse pedido levando em conta que sou o outro da imagem e a mesma refere-se a mim mesmo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nestorferras (talk • contribs) 19:04, 16 March 2019 (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) 10:15, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 22:01, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Landa Freak foto de perfil.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: The link has been deleted and the picture is public we have the rights and we give the rigts to anyone to distribuite or share for any purpose this pic Landa_Freak_foto_de_perfil.jpg SKYREDBot (talk) 19:13, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose All permissions have to be confirmed via OTRS mailing system. Please follow the procedure. Due to high backlog of requests it might take up to 185 days to proceed your e-mail. The file will be undeleted once the request is processed. --Mates (talk) 00:15, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 22:01, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Headshot - Dan_Pickett_CEO_nfrastructure.jpg

Hi -

I am trying to undelete the head shot that we had previously uploaded on Daniel T Pickett III's wikipedia page. This is a head shot that was purchased from a photographer years ago.

Please advise as to how I can re-upload or undelete the photo. I still don't understand why it was deleted.

Thank you, Amy Harlow on behalf of Daniel T Pickett III

--Abharlow (talk) 21:50, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

@Abharlow: You didn't upload any file here, and you don't have any deleted one. You probably want to ask on Wikipedia instead. Regards, Yann (talk) 23:50, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose This is probably about Dan Picket CEO nfrastructure.jpg. Uploader claimed that the subject himself is the author, now it is claimed that the author is an unnamed photographer. The permission should be clarified through Commons:OTRS. Thuresson (talk) 14:11, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 22:01, 18 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Αεν τιμησ logo.jpg

Please undelete this image since is the logo of our team and since I am in the board of the team I own the copyrights to upload this photo.

Thank you in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Proman545 (talk • contribs) 08:53, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose @Proman545: you provided contradicting info in the image description: (1) that this is the official club logo, and (2) that you are the author and exclusive copyright owner of the logo. If the club wishes to make the logo available under a free license, their official representative still can send a free license permission following COM:OTRS instructions. Ankry (talk) 10:31, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose per Ankry. Another – and faster – method would be releasing the logo under a free licence at the club's website. De728631 (talk) 16:43, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 21:59, 18 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Giza zoo 1950.jpg

Kindly undelete this image. The copyright has ended in Egypt. It's in public domain as by Egyptian bylaws. It was taken in 1959 AD. The photographer is unknown. The source is a facebook group of history interested critics. Regards. --Ashashyou (talk) 10:25, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

@Ashashyou: The copyright lenght depends not on photo creation date, but on the photo publication date. What is the initial publication date/place of the photo? If in 2019 on Facebook, then the copyright did not expire yet. Ankry (talk) 10:35, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done no response in 24h. Ankry (talk) 22:00, 18 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Example.jpg

The pictures were artistic impressions of free copyrighted pictures available on the Internet. They were not any type of copyright violations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maiju Perälä (talk • contribs) 15:03, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Why do people request all the time to undelete File:Example.jpg, although this file has not been deleted for the past decade? Jcb (talk) 15:13, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
@Jcb: If you expand the "request undeletion" box, you'll get the answer. --Mates (talk) 16:17, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose All of user's deleted files were copyright violations of pictures available on web. I don't know what is meant by "Artistic impressions of free copyrighted pictures" but I guess it would be considered against COM:DW or COM:L. --Mates (talk) 16:17, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 22:00, 18 March 2019 (UTC)


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

Ticket:2018080810009018

OTRS agent (verify): request: we've received Ticket:2018080810009018 regarding

Please restore in order to verified veracity and finish the process. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 19:21, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

@Ganímedes: ✓ Done - please process the ticket - Jcb (talk) 20:29, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done by Jcb. Ankry (talk) 21:36, 18 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Aouatefe LAHMANI.png

--Shihab.iglesias (talk) 21:39, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 21:59, 18 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Passiflora pectinata.jpg

The use has agreed to make this photo public domain. See the original Flickr page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaattc (talk • contribs) 22:25, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

 Support CC-Zero at flickr.com. Thuresson (talk) 08:01, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
 Support per Thuresson Abzeronow (talk) 20:43, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done per above. Ankry (talk) 21:34, 18 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Tonnara Bordonaro.jpg

Seems to be a self-made, unpublished, photo. --Vituzzu (talk) 13:11, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: Restored. I started a regular DR, so that Gbawden can clarify his doubts. --Mates (talk) 20:28, 18 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Katrin Helling-Plahr MdB.jpg

OTRS permission has been arrived (ticket:2019031810003548), please restore and rename the file to a better name. Many thanks! Bencemac (talk) 17:05, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Bencemac: Restored. Please close the OTRS ticket (locked by you) and add categories to the file. Please propose a better file name on its discussion page. --Mates (talk) 19:49, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:1944 destructed buildings pushkin road bobruisk.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:1944 destructed buildings pushkin road bobruisk.png

Description is cut off in all public logs, but it might be PD for the same reason that [[5]] was (could be PD-Belarus if description is the same or similar) Abzeronow (talk) 14:50, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

 Info Image description: "destructed buildings Pushkin Road Bobruisk (Belarus), autumn 1944". Source: "Russian State Archive (former Archive of the USSR), scanned from book: Е. Морозов (Ed.); Преступления немецко-фашистских оккупантов в Белоруссии. 1941-1944 Минск, "Беларусь", 1965". The same photo is also available at [6] with the caption "Zerstörungen in Babrujsk, Bereich Puschkin Straße" (Destruction in Babrusjk, area Pushkin street". Thuresson (talk) 16:42, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
 Info If autor is unknown, the photo seems to PD in Belarus since 2016 (50 post publication) but we still have URAA problem here. Ankry (talk) 10:11, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: per ankry. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:25, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Turkish newpaper reporting on arrests of turanists may 1944.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Turkish newpaper reporting on arrests of turanists may 1944.jpg

"The newspaper has been published in 1944 and according to Template:PD-Turkey it will be public domain in 2015." Abzeronow (talk) 00:09, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

 Info And PD in US in 2040? Ankry (talk) 10:18, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
At this point, my views on URAA are well known enough. Abzeronow (talk) 21:13, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: I, too, don;t particularly like the URAA, but it is the law in the USA and our current policy requires us to honor it. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:25, 19 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Associação Nacional de Estudantes de Engenharia Biomédica.jpg

A imagem foi feita pelo departamento de Marketing da Associação Nacional de Estudantes de Engenharia Biomédica (ANEEB). Não existe qualquer violação dos direitos de autor, uma vez que estes são da ANEEB. É importante termos a imagem na wikipedia da ANEEB pois esta refere-se ao atual logo da associação.

17-03-2019 Diana Cruz, Presidente da Mesa da Assembleia Geral da ANEEB — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diana S Cruz (talk • contribs) 22:01, 17 March 2019 (UTC)  Oppose So you are not the copyright holder for the logo as you declared. For images that are not private personal ownership of the uploaders or were published elsewhere prior to upload to Commons, the actual copyright holder (or their official representative) needs to send a free license permission following COM:OTRS instructions in order to keep or restore the image. Alternatively, they can claim that the logo is freely licensed on their official web page. Tha latter is faster. Ankry (talk) 06:19, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: per ankry. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:20, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:JR 2019-1.jpg

Greetings,

When I first uploaded the photo, I thought it was copyrighted material and it was sent to me following an interview I did with the artist an I assumed it was a professional piece.

It was actually a personal photo and actually has no copyrights on it at all.

Does that qualify for un-deleting the image?


--Wayneb13 (talk) 23:23, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

 Comment Unless copyright is specifically waived or a free license is given, all photographs made in this year are under copyright and that copyright lasts until 70 years after the death of the photographer. Have the photographer contact COM:OTRS. Abzeronow (talk) 21:30, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: requires a free license from the photographer via OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:19, 19 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:A. Walker.jpg

I am requesting deletion of this file.

This photo is a publicity headshot of Arnetia Walker. It is from her personal collection, commissioned by her with rights secured and as such, she owns any and all rights. However, considering the purpose of a publicity headshot, Ms. Walker has granted free use of the photo in public domain and creative commons which is why the website (https://www.tvmaze.com/people/157625/arnetia-walker) cited by the editor who deleted, it has it posted on that site. They do not own the photo, nor did they create it, but instead use it from it's availability in in public domain.

Please let us know if your need further documentation, or support for this claim directly from Ms. Walker

Trevsdad1 (talk) 03:18, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose @Trevsdad1: If there is no publicly available evidence that the photographer made the photo freely licensed or that copyright has been transferred to somebody else, then the actual copyright holder must send a free license permission following COM:OTRS instructions in order to restore the photo. If the copyright holder is not the author, then an evidence of copyright transfer may also be needed. Ankry (talk) 21:20, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Needs a free license via OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:16, 19 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Como ministro, Gustavo Rocha participou de Prêmio Direitos Humanos 2018.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: File:Como ministro, Gustavo Rocha participou de Prêmio Direitos Humanos 2018.jpg

Foto publicada com autorização. Hellen Lopes dos Santos (talk) 12:51, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose This page states: "All rights reserved" which is not a free license. Ankry (talk) 21:11, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: per Ankry. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:12, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:CNMP adere à campanha de apoio a gestantes.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: File:CNMP adere à campanha de apoio a gestantes.jpg

Foto publicada com autorização. Hellen Lopes dos Santos (talk) 12:52, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose this page states: "All rights reserved" which is not a free license. Ankry (talk) 21:13, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: per Ankry. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:12, 19 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Jonathan González.jpg

Puse creditos — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guerolol2001 (talk • contribs) 18:23, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose I can se no indication that credited source added free license to their photo. --Mates (talk) 19:54, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Todos los derechos reservados | miseleccion.mx ©. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:05, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:N.Ermaekbayev.jpg

Копия изображения разрешено использовать на викистранице Ермекбаев, Нурлан Байузакович на всех версиях языка <img style="float: left;" src="/uploads/11на сайт.jpg" width="349" height="350" alt="Копия изображения разрешено использовать на викистранице Ермекбаев, Нурлан Байузакович на всех версиях языка"> Источник-https://mod.gov.kz/rus/rukovodstvo/ministr_oborony/

Копия изображения разрешено использовать на викистранице Ермекбаев, Нурлан Байузакович на всех версиях языка

<img style="float: left;" src="/uploads/11на сайт.jpg" width="349" height="350" alt="Копия изображения разрешено использовать на викистранице Ермекбаев, Нурлан Байузакович на всех версиях языка">--QZRustemmedia (talk) 16:15, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose I can't find any indication for a Creative Commons licence at https://mod.gov.kz/rus/rukovodstvo/ministr_oborony/. Maybe someone with a knowledge of Russian or Kazakh can find anything there? De728631 (talk) 16:39, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

 Info This is Wikipedia-only permission in the page source code. Invalid and not acceptable for Commons. But even if there is a free license provided this way, I would  Oppose per COM:PCP as the site claims that everything there is "All rights reserved". @QZRustemmedia: We need a free license that allows any use by anybody, including commercial reuse. And if a permission is not from the photographer, it should follow COM:OTRS instructions. Please, do not request undeletion of images from this site anymore (unless the site license is changed). This can be considered as abusive behaviour. Ankry (talk) 21:57, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per De728631 and my comment. Ankry (talk) 10:31, 20 March 2019 (UTC)


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

2009-02 surprise 38x53cm.jpg

I am the author of the image and I permit its use. ProfDrDrB (talk) 09:24, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Permission "to use" does not fit Wikimedia Commons licensing requirements; see COM:L. Ankry (talk) 21:15, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 10:32, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:L.amidor2.jpg

greetings, it's my first time creating a page on Wikipedia. i wanted to build a page about the first law firm in Israel to represents tenants in projects of urban renewal. unfortunately, i didn't know quite well how to write a description and it ended as an advertising page. after changes, i wrote a page which not looks like an advertise, based on facts only. i would like to undelete the picture above so i can use it again for the upcoming page. i got this picture from the firm and they accepted to publish this picture on wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yali0607 (talk • contribs) 11:54, 18 March 2019 (UTC) thanks in advance, --Yali0607 (talk) 11:52, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose When and if the article is published and accepted on WP:EN or WP:HE, or both, come back and make the request again. That will prove that the logo is in scope. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:15, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 10:32, 20 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Paul T. Liamos.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I took this picture and I thought I had released all rights to it. Please direct on how I can correct it so it can be uploaded on Wikimedia Commons. Thank you! Tlobrien (talk) 15:07, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose @Tlobrien: please upload a full-resolution image with EXIF data from your camera, or follow COM:OTRS instructions to send free license permission and prove your authorship. The latter can take few months till your permission is verified and accepted. Ankry (talk) 21:02, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 10:31, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Tomasz Papaj.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This is my photo, I've rights to this photo Bossmsz (talk) 18:33, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose @Bossmsz: The picture was published on Facebook previously, please follow the procedure of COM:OTRS and send a permission. Please note that due to high backlog in requests it might take up to 185 days to proceed your e-mail. I recommend sending your e-mail to permissions-pl@wikimedia.org to get response speedily. The file will be undeleted after your authorship is confirmed. --Mates (talk) 20:00, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 10:30, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Felder2018.jpg

This photo was taken by Michael Helms and from https://donfelder.com and http://facebook.com/donfeldermusic. Don himself is asking us, his management team, to re-upload use as the primary Wikipedia photo.

--Mattwcoh (talk) 18:58, 18 March 2019 (UTC)Matt Cohen, 3/18/19

 Oppose As the photo has been already published and there is no evidence that it was published under a free license, the actual copyright owner has to send us free a license permission following COM:OTRS instructions in order to restore the photo. Plase note also, that this is up to the Wikipedia community, not up to the subject which photo is used in Wikipedia. Ankry (talk) 06:11, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 10:30, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Lisa_Beres_headshot.jpg

For some reason, the image I added to Lisa Beres' page on February 28th was deleted. It says the reason for deletion was that I did not have permission but I was given permission from Lisa Beres herself to use the image. --KB (talk) 19:28, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

@Kari Brownson: Have you sent the permission you were given to COM:OTRS? If not, please do so. If yes, please wait until it is processed. Due to big queue it might take up to 187 days to proceed your request. I recommend sending the permission to some language-specific e-mail address according to your babels to speed up the process (see page COM:OTRS in your language version for more information). Regards --Mates (talk) 20:14, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 10:30, 20 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:CartaoAEIOU.jpg

Hi,

this file is a photo about an old SIM Card.

The reason for undelete is, this image was taken by me, and this SIM Card belongs to a company that no longer exists.

--Rafaelbf (talk) 00:25, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Copying a 2D image by you does not establish new copyright, so you cannot be copyright owner here. And I see no way that the image copyright expire. So we need permission from the image copyright owner in order to restore the photo: it belongs either to the company legal successor(s) or to the image author(s). Ankry (talk) 06:01, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 10:29, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:ASEM map only.pdf

Do not delete the file.

Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) is a Process, and does NOT have secretariat. Therefore, the map showing the Partners' countries belongs to all 53 partners. The image permission is not applicable to this case.

--AdelaJLN (talk) 02:30, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose. @AdelaJLN: First, images in pdf are not acceptable for Wikimedia Commons. Second, you declared that the image is copyrighted and freely licensed. Our rules require that for any copyrighted image we have either (a) an evidence that it is a personal, exclusive work of the uploader (which is not), or (b) a link to a site where it was published under the specified free license, or (3) a written free license permission from copyright owner(s) via email, following COM:OTRS instructions. Ankry (talk) 05:51, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 10:28, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:YY的WIKI大頭照.jpg

Dear WIKI,

We're the agency, Project House, who represent the actress 張榕容. And we uploaded the profile picture of her which has deleted or removed. The profile picture is our company took the actress to shoot for a magazine in China. Please kindly restored the file and upload to the page, thanks.

Sincerely,

人民舞台有限公司/澤東電影有限公司 經紀部 陳臻 Avelyn Chen

T：(Redacted) e-mail：(Redacted)

11083台北市信義區松山路421號17樓 17F, No.421, Songshan Rd., Xinyi Dist., Taipei City 110, Taipei, Taiwan (R.O.C.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avelyn Chen (talk • contribs) 03:09, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose @Avelyn Chen: Only freely licensed images can be stored in Wikimedia Commons. There is no free license evidence on the source page provided. Read COM:L for details. Ankry (talk) 05:41, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 10:23, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:2019年3月18日港鐵金鐘站車禍.jpg, File:2019年3月18日港鐵金鐘站車禍01.jpg, File:2019年3月18日港鐵金鐘站車禍02.jpg


Reason for not deleting: These photos are widely posted all over the web including Facebook, Instagram, also, sent to lots of people via. Whatsapp and other tools. Even newspapers have copyrights to use these photos as the photos are posted to be distributed to the public. Therefore, I don't see any reasons for deleting them as offending copyright.

I hope admins will make a fair decision and with a convincing reason. Thank you.

Anson. (talk) 13:17, 19 March 2019 (UTC) For more about me, please visit my Chinese Wikipedia Page at https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Anson.

 Oppose The fact that images are widely distributed says nothing about their copyright status. The sites mentioned above frequently have images that are not free. Unless you can prove that the images have an explicit free license, they cannot be kept on Commons. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:53, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Obviously not. --Yann (talk) 10:23, 20 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Instagram.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: need to get my divorce done 2600:1700:8F80:19F0:C4CE:9CCC:F7C2:77A5 02:46, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Obviously not, no reason provided anyway. --Yann (talk) 10:22, 20 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Emancipación UR.jpg

Reference Licence CC 4.0: https://ias1.larioja.org/cex/sistemas/cmu/v3/consultaRecursoFicha.jsp?idSesionVirtual=b58eee2a44c59f2a6be14946e4cdf540080f03d7&f_intervalo=T&f_etiqueta=emancipaci%F3n&f_calidades=-Imagen-&NPRE10020=&NPRE10030=&NPRE10040_SEP=,&NPRE10050=&NPRE10080=&NPRE10080_2=&NPRE10150=&NPRE10160=&E050100=&dccobe=&dcocur=&dcocup=1&fichero=NPRE10&kint=NPRE10010&tarea=&modelo=P010&nfoto=&modoGestion=A&avanzada=&lMediaSel=&cobes=463140&nhref=1

--Wikitcher (talk) 10:32, 20 March 2019 (UTC) Wikitcher

 Not done: Not deleted (yet). --Yann (talk) 10:38, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:RCoury.jpg

The subject of the article, Mr. Robertino Coury, owns the photo (RCoury.jpg) that was posted and would like it to be included

Minc3597 (talk) 14:17, 19 March 2019 (UTC) Jamie Kuhn 3.19.2019

 Oppose Owning a paper or digital copy of a photograph does not give one the right to freely license it. That right almost always remains with the photographer. In order for this image to be restored, either the actual photographer must send a free license using OTRS or Mr. Coury must send a free license together with evidence satisfactory to the OTRS agent that he has the right to freely license it. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:49, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Strakhov (talk) 11:28, 20 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Ohio State Rep District 42 Niraj Antani.jpg

The owner of this photo has given me permission to use this specific photo for his wiki page as it is off of his official Facebook page --Feelthehurns (talk) 16:47, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Permission "to use" is incompatible with Wikimedia Commons licensing requirements; read COM:L for details. Ankry (talk) 17:19, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Please, ask the photographer to send their permission to COM:OTRS. "Derivative works" & "commercial use" should be explicitly allowed. Read COM:L. --Strakhov (talk) 11:27, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Bel_fiore_dança_(keyboard).ogg

Please undelete this file [7]. Reason for deletion was: "Dw no source since 2 February 2019". Music was written in ca. 1450 and performed by myself in 2019. I am pretty sure (cannot check since the file got deleted) that I checked "own work" and licenced it under a permissive licence. 151.82.74.207 18:19, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

If you perform music composed by somebody else, this is not your purely own work, even if you hold copyright for this. You need to provide author/source info about the original work even if it is PD. As you did not compose the music, you did take the composition from somewhere. So more information is needed in order to restore the file. Ankry (talk) 10:52, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
The author is unknown, the collection is "Codex Faenza", compiled in the 15th Century. I believe I added this information when I first uploaded the file, but I cannot be sure because the metadata is public no more. Is there anything else needed? 151.36.74.27 11:26, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
It seems you did not:
|source=Own work
|author=Fari2
but I  Support undeletion per the above explanation if the above information is confirmed by the logged in uploader. Ankry (talk) 08:08, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
I am logged in, I confirm the above information Fari2 (talk) 10:57, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done per above and converted permission request to a DR. @Fari2: You may need to provide some explanations there. Ankry (talk) 18:53, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks @Ankry: I edited in the relevant info, Hopefully the DR can be closed now. Fari2 (talk) 13:22, 20 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Dr. Beth Shubin Stein.jpg

I added the Creative Commons licence in the backend of the website, on Wordpress. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doinashalaru (talk • contribs) 14:33, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

@Doinashalaru: Which license, where, and who is the photo author (photographer)? Ankry (talk) 21:09, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
I, too, do not see any free license on https://www.drbethshubinstein.com/our-office/dr-beth-shubin-stein/ .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:11, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

The license is in the footer of the home page, bottom right corner.

 Comment There is indeed a mention of a free license at the bottom right of [8]. Yann (talk) 10:57, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: Huh? Either I missed it, or it has just been added. Sorry. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:11, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Dietiminsta.jpg

Image is publicly available on Istagram and has been supplier by the owner, @dietim_ (Tim van teunenbroek). Unreasonable marked as copyrighted and not Proven with evidence — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luxurylifenl (talk • contribs) 13:55 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Publicly available doesn't equal free from copyright. Have dietim send permission via COM:OTRS if they are the photographer Abzeronow (talk) 14:31, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Needs a free license from the actual photographer via OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:08, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Bust of Salvochea in the Loreto neighbourhood, Cádiz, unveiled March 23rd 1985 and paid for by popular subscription.jpg

"{{Dw no source since}}-tagged" by User:Jeff G., deleted by Jcb. This is a sculpture in a street/park of Cádiz (Spain), covered by COM:FOP, regardless of when the sculptor died.

[SPAIN]: Works permanently located in parks, streets, squares or other public places may be freely reproduced, distributed and communicated by means of paintings, drawings, photographs and audiovisual processes

The uploader, User:Percy Moo, claims "own work" on the photograph (credible claim, IMHO). Strakhov (talk) 01:16, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

@Jeff G.: [9] Are you aware a user with no contributions in Commons most probably doesn't even know what "FOP" is? Strakhov (talk) 13:15, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
@Strakhov: They probably know how to click a "Convert to DR" button or reply to what became Commons talk:Abuse filter/Archive 2019#Report by Percy Moo, though.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 13:45, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
It would be wise lowering the expectations wrt how much a 4-edit-newbie know about Commons, and the expectations wrt someone replying to a question whose answer they simply don't know (and do not need to know, after all). Strakhov (talk) 14:08, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
@Strakhov: UDR is not the right place for raising such expectations. Please, go to the COM:VP to gather consensus for that. Ankry (talk) 06:29, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 Support starting a DR here to resolve doubts. Ankry (talk) 08:40, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per Ankry. See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bust of Salvochea in the Loreto neighbourhood, Cádiz, unveiled March 23rd 1985 and paid for by popular subscription.jpg. --Yann (talk) 18:45, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:MaryPilonByjuliegoldstone.jpg

Pretty sure I filed an email with you when I originally uploaded this photo, indicating it was sharable: The file name even states the author. Will resend email.--A21sauce (talk) 21:35, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

What is Wikipedia's email address for this again? It seems like I'd need to upload the file again to find it. If's you'ad answer on my Talk page, thanks.A21sauce (talk) 21:41, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

@A21sauce: If you has already send a permission following COM:OTRS instructions, we can only wait. And you should have received an automatic response with a ticket number. Ankry (talk) 06:22, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Ankry. --Yann (talk) 18:45, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Jason clendenen

The name is EXIF data matches the uploader username. No reason to doubt that these are his pictures. This was part of abusive deletion requests by T Cells. See also COM:AN/U#User:Anthere. Regards, Yann (talk) 00:10, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Yann Please stop this falsehood! I didn't nominate these photos for deletion. You have threatened me with a block and now you are spreading falsehood against me. Stop! You are always bias in your judgement in cases involving me and Anthere. You only draw conclusion from her own comments and you don't bother to read mine. Anthere made this claim and she has retracted it after my comment on the thread. And because you don't care about my own view and you are one-sided, you repeated her false claim here. I know I don't have powerful friends around but note that the person behind the T Cells account is human too. T Cells (talk · contribs · email) 00:51, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
@Incnis Mrsi: ping the actual DR nominator. Ankry (talk) 21:27, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
@Ankry: , I have told Yann that I didn't nominate these images for deletion. Rather than retract their false claim above, they left a warning on my talk page and called my comment bushit. Could you please tell Yann to correct this misinformation? Thank you. T Cells (talk · contribs · email) 22:07, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
Responded on your talk page as we should focus on file undeletions here, not on other issues. Ankry (talk) 22:35, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per my comment above. --Yann (talk) 18:43, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Stefan Roy Frederiksen.jpg

I would like to request to having the file File:Stefan Roy Frederiksen.jpg in wikimedia's database again.

In full agreement, the primary copyright owner has consented with me to have the rights for this item File:Stefan Roy Frederiksen.jpg, too.

If my request would be declined once again, I would like to know further for other possible ways of licensing this file File:Stefan Roy Frederiksen.jpg due to the Wiki terms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Androphilijaslobodna (talk • contribs) 13:30 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Owning a paper or digital copy of a photograph does not give one the right to freely license it. That right almost always remains with the photographer. In order for this image to be restored, either the actual photographer must send a free license using OTRS or another person must send a free license together with evidence satisfactory to the OTRS agent that he has the right to freely license it. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:51, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 18:26, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Nowrooz-Yousef Abdinejad-50x70cm-oil on canvas.jpg

OTRS agent (verify): request: Ticket:2017041310021351 alleges permission. I request temporary undeletion to assess the validity of that allegation, mark as {{subst:OR}} or otherwise appropriately, and ping me. This file was deleted by @Shizhao after having been tagged {{No permission since}} for less than 3 hours, rather than the requisite 7 days.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:54, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Jeff G.: FYI. --Yann (talk) 18:23, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

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

:Joyce Murray: Joyce Murray.jpg

Requesting undeletion of the file Joyce Murray.jpg

It is taken from the House of Commons, Parliament of Canada website - it is her headshot. Please see: https://www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/Joyce-Murray(35950)

JRob59 (talk) 21:59, 20 March 2019 (UTC), March 20, 2019

Procedural close, double entry. Thuresson (talk) 22:03, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:JonathanGrayerProfile.jpg

We own this image and want to use it for Jonathan's profile page on Wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WeldNorth2 (talk • contribs) 16:17 19 March 2019 (UTC)

@WeldNorth2: and who owns copyright to the image? Are you the photographer as you claim? Can you point out a publicly available evidence of free license from the copytight holder? If not, COM:OTRS is the only way. Ankry (talk) 19:00, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 14:34, 21 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Abinta.jpg Undeletion request

Hi, This Image is copyright free. And it's checked by me. This image is for an article. please do undo.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mash sajid (talk • contribs) 19:12, 19 March 2019‎ (UTC)

 Oppose "© Abinta Kabir Foundation 2016 - 2018" at [11] Thuresson (talk) 19:36, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose With few exceptions, none of which apply here, every created work has a copyright until it expires, usually 70 years after the death of the creator. Therefore we do not keep recent images on Commons unless they are freely licensed by the creator. There are at least two instances of this image on the web with explicit copyright notices. Therefore, policy requires that the photographer must send a free license using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:05, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 14:34, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Governour DKI Jakarta Djarot Saiful Hidayat.jpg

No consensus achieved, the nominator no longer gave response after nearly 2 months since facing two oppositions. No one supported the deletion but User:Jameslwoodward deleted for no reason at all, not even involved in the discussion. – Flix11 (talk) 14:09, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

 Comment @Flix11: You should have missed something. Please re-read User talk:Flix11#File:Governour DKI Jakarta Djarot Saiful Hidayat.jpg dixit "Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!" It means I've not to argue more than I've already have ("© 1995 - 2019 Dinas Komunikasi, Informatika dan Statistik Pemprov DKI Jakarta"). It was up to you to prove that this image - I quote - "was never copyrighted" but you failed to. Please note too that deletion requests are not votes. --Patrick Rogel (talk) 14:31, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Flix11: please note:

  1. It is a waste of your time and mine to have placed this request both here and on my talk page. I had already restored the image before I came here.
  2. It is incorrect and disingenuous to say "No one supported the deletion" -- both the nominator and I did.
  3. I deleted it because Patrick Rogel cited the law as saying that article 43e applies only if there is no copyright notice. Most Admins who close DRs are very conscious of the large and growing backlog and work fairly fast. We do not check to see whether every statement made in a DR is accurate. That is particularly true when the person making the statement is as experienced as Mr. Rogel. It is disingenuous to claim that I deleted it for no reason at all. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:26, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done As noted on my talk page and above, I restored this based on my own reading of Article 43e, which makes any use of any image of the type named there free of infringement. That is apparently true whether or not there is a copyright notice on the same page. Note that this does not mean that the image is free of copyright, but simply that use of it will not infringe. This is similar to FoP. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:31, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Foto Benjamin Dalle.jpg

File:Foto Benjamin Dalle.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eguns (talk • contribs) 15:48 21 March 2019‎ (UTC)

 Not done: Not deleted yet. --Yann (talk) 16:16, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Ana Lucía Martínez con el gafete de selección Nacional guatemalteca.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: The reason is because the article that you found is about me Ana Lucía Martínez and the photo was taken for my instagram account which the user is analu_m and im a professional soccer player and all I want is that people have more knowledge about my carreer Analumarmal (talk) 00:04, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

  •  Oppose Copyright is usually held by the photographer and not by the person depicted, so we need a statement of permission by email from the original photographer. COM:OTRS has more information on this process. De728631 (talk) 21:23, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Needs a free license from the actual photographer via OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:31, 22 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Signe du triomphe.png

Bonjour,

l'image File:Signe du triomphe.png a été prise par moi même. Cette image provient de serveur Minecraft Les Fous Du Puy que je gère. Le bâtiment qui est visible sur l'image à d’ailleurs été fait par moi même et une autre personne de l'équipe de construction. Je pense donc que la suppression de cette image n'est pas justifier. Je m'excuse d'avoir remis cette image, je débute sur Wikipédia et je pensais qu'il me suffisais de le faire directement depuis Wikimédia Commons plutôt que sur Wikipédia. Merci de considérer ma demande de remise en ligne de l'image.

Cordialement,

--McSiivia (talk) 14:48, 21 March 2019 (UTC) McSiivia 21/03/2019

 Not done: Minecraft copyright. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:31, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Polaroid Originals logo.svg

Image looks simple enough for PD-textlogo (put {{Trademark}} on it still). Attributing to https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1135/7914/t/67/assets/img_header_polaroid-originals.svg (that's the polaroidoriginals.com header) should do. --Artoria2e5 contribs 18:16, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

 Support Agreed. {{PD-text-logo}} .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:28, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: per Jim (simple logo). Ruthven (msg) 15:33, 22 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Human penis2 1.jpg

This page contains important information about the male penis and should not be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 31.57.150.82 (talk) 05:05, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Human penis2 1.jpg. Thuresson (talk) 05:49, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Obviously not. --Yann (talk) 15:09, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Joyce Murray.jpg

The picture is the House of Commons head shot (public): https://www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/Joyce-Murray(35950)

JRob59 (talk) 21:52, 20 March 2019 (UTC) March 20, 2019

How did it come about that you know that The House of Commons has licensed this under a Creative Commons license? Is there any verifiable evidence that supports this? Thuresson (talk) 21:56, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose OP do not respond to reasonable questions. Above web site says "© House of Commons". Thuresson (talk) 21:13, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: per Thuresson. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:09, 22 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Razmik Grigoryan.jpg

Hi, the author of the image Mkhitar Serobyan has already sent permission letter to the address "permissions-commons@wikimedia.org" for the image, for it's free usage on Wikicommons. So, please, if it's possible review the deletion. --Ղուկասյան Մարո (talk) 05:52, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

  •  Oppose If a free license has been sent to OTRS, then the file will be restored automatically when and if the email is received, processed, and approved. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.
If the message was sent to the English language version of OTRS and the email has been properly received there the sender will receive an automatic reply with the ticket number. If the sender has not had a reply, please check that it was sent correctly and try again. Other language versions may or may not provide the automatic reply. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:39, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 Not done The image may be undeleted if and when the ticket has been duly processed by an OTRS volunteer. Thuresson (talk) 22:11, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Artur Janibekian.jpg

Hi, This is my own work, why deleted.--Էդմոնդ Խաչատրյան (talk) 09:34, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose The image appears at http://picdeer.com/renaissance_armenia with "© 2019 Picdeer". Policy therefore requires that the actual photographer must send a free license using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:39, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 07:57, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Gustavo do Vale Rocha assume o comando da Sejus.jpg

Foto utilizada com autorização. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hellen Lopes dos Santos (talk • contribs) 12:50, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

@Hellen Lopes dos Santos: Hi,
You uploaded this file twice. Once you claimed to be the author, and the other one, you wrote that Geolando Gomes is the author. So the copyright holder has to send a permission via COM:OTRS. Regards, Yann (talk) 18:36, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Yann. Ankry (talk) 08:13, 23 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Alexandra Olaya-Castro.jpg

La imagen en cuestion fue solicitada directamente a Alexandra Olaya-Castro con el expreso proposito de usarla para wikipedia. Entendiendo así que autoriza su uso, modificación y venta. Ella, dueña de la imagen que tambien ha sido utilizada en otras plataformas, la compartio libremente y autorizando su uso para el proposito expresado. Amariarv (talk) 20:23, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

This was uploaded with the claim that you are the copyright owner, is this correct? Published [12] here and here in 2016. Thuresson (talk) 21:56, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose OP do not respond to reasonable questions + published previously without an acceptable license. Thuresson (talk) 21:58, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Thuresson. Ankry (talk) 08:11, 23 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Thielska Galleriet.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason:

Author died in 1946, these files have been public domain in Sweden since 2017. Abzeronow (talk) 14:42, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done as per above; @Abzeronow: please, fix invalid licenses to avoid redeletion. Ankry (talk) 08:04, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Jacob Gils in gallery.jpg

The file File:Jacob Gils in gallery.jpg is a picture that has been taken by my PA personal assistant with my camera, therefore the picture belongs to me and I have sent this picture to many journalist that have also published online in some article and blogs.

Let me know if you need any forward explanations.

Regards,

Jacob Gils — Preceding unsigned comment added by JacobGils (talk • contribs) 12:45 21 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose The ownership of the copyright will depend on whether the image is a work for hire, The fact that it was your camera is irrelevant. In these circumstance, policy requires that either (a) the actual photographer -- your PA -- must send a free license using OTRS or (b) you must send a free license together with whatever documentation is required by the OTRS volunteer to satisfy them that it is a work for hire. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:36, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Jim. Ankry (talk) 08:26, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:莊子富Nico 星際大戰.png

our team own the copyright of the pic, we are the managing team of the fan page "https://www.facebook.com/FM1007Nico/" — Preceding unsigned comment added by N3dspsv (talk • contribs) 15:46, 21 March 2019‎ (UTC)

 Not done per De728631. Ankry (talk) 08:23, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Bryan.nabuurs

Hola buenos dias.

Soy de la empresa Global Vacuum Presses y me gustaria crear un articulo informativo de la empresa.

Por tal reazón subo imagenes nuestras de la empresa.

El problema es que no me deja subirlas como trabajo propio, ya que dice que solo pueden ser fotos tomadas con una cámara.

Me gustaría poder utilizar nuestras fotos y no entiendo porque las eliminan.

Si pudieran lo mas pronto posible, mejor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bryan.nabuurs (talk • contribs) 08:27, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

@Bryan.nabuurs: Photos in Wikimedia Commons should be freely licensed by their copyright holders, who are photographers in most cases. See COM:L for details. Also, if you upload a photo that has been published elsewhere prior to its upload Wikimedia Commons, you need to prove that the initial publication was under a free license you specified or the photo copyright holder needs to send a written free license permission to our OTRS system; see COM:OTRS/es for details. I see no evidence of free CC-BY SA 4.0 license on https://globalvacuumpresses.es/ .
Also, the photos may be out of scope of Wikimedia Commons as the article you had created was rejected by Spanish Wikipedia community. Promotional content is not accepted in Wikimedia projects. Ankry (talk) 07:42, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: per Ankry. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:18, 23 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:HRH_Prince_Fahad_M_S.png

Undeletion requests — Preceding unsigned comment added by فهد مشعل أل سعود (talk • contribs) 08:46, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close -- the file has not been deleted. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:21, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Carl Javér.jpg

I am new to wikipedia so had struggle to upload a picture of the Swedish filmmaker Carl Javiér, I forgot to sign as free licens. and that this was already in different pages. Carl told me that I could use as own work, but now I know I have to change some things to have permission to use it again. I am very sorry. I am trying to solve this problem on my own. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessicagomez96 (talk • contribs) 22 March 2019‎, 02:36 (UTC)

 Oppose If I understand you correctly, this is not actually your own work. In that case, and because the image has appeared elsewhere without a free license, policy requires that the actual photographer send a free license using OTRS. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:19, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Jim. Ankry (talk) 13:37, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:"Summer of Love", 2004.jpg

Also:

Please restore the following pages: Reason: We do have explicit permission from the owners of the copyright -- Source (WP:NFCC#4) Used with permission from Galleri Sand in New York, NY Taylorengstrom91 (talk) 04:10, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Owning a created work does not give one the right to freely license it. That right almost always remains with the creator. It is therefore unlikely that the gallery has the right to freely license these works. In any case, however, since we do not know who you are, policy requires that either (a) the artist, Marianne Aulie, must send a free license using OTRS or (b) the gallery must send a free license together with documentation sufficient to satisfy the OTRS volunteer that the gallery has the right to freely license the work.

Note also that you specified the author of the works as Galleri Sand -- that is incorrect. The author is the creator, Marianne Aulie. Finally, I hope that the gallery and the artist understand that freely licensing these works here means that anyone can make and sell posters, tee shirts, and other reproductions of the works provided, of course, that they give credit to the artist..     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:15, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Jim. Ankry (talk) 13:36, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:AIBA Logo.png

Dear concern,

The file is deleted for missing enough information and permission to use this file. This file is a logo of my current educational institute and I can confirm that, I have permission to use this file in the wikipedia page. Also, the file does not have any copyright or legal issues involved. It was simply created by the administration of our institute and no one holds the actual right for this logo. We use this logo for our banners, promotional activities for our clubs without seeking the authority permission as we, the students, have full rights to use this logo anywhere we need. I request you to fulfill my Undeletion request.

Thank You Ahasanul Kabir Musanna Date: 22.03.2019 05.22PM UTC+6.00 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahasanul Musanna (talk • contribs) 11:02, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose First, "I have permission to use this file in the wikipedia page." is insufficient. Images on Commons and WP must be free for any use anywhere by anyone, including commercial use, not just for use in WP. Second, "the file does not have any copyright" is incorrect. With very limited exceptions, all created works have a copyright, including this logo.

Since we do not who you are and the copyright is owned by the logo's creator, policy requires that the actual owner of the copyright must send a free license using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:03, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Jim. Ankry (talk) 13:36, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:philip Birk Porträtt.jpg

I was very selective and I made sure i could use the picture. The picture is Creative Commons approved and i also mentioned the photographer under the photo.

--Maiianilsson (talk) 19:25, 11 March 2019 (UTC) 2019.03.11

@Maiianilsson: Where did you find information that the photo is under CC-BY-SA 4.0 license? Free use is not the same as free license. Ankry (talk) 22:09, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose The source shown in the file description is:

http://historiskamedia.se/forfattare/philip-birk/

That site is clearly marked "© HISTORISKA MEDIA 2018. Allt material på denna webbplats tillhör Historiska Media." Therefore, in order for the image to be restored, the actual photographer must send a free license using OTRS. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:32, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

OP probably found the photo here (CC-BY-3.0). Thuresson (talk) 15:44, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 Support per Thuresson above. Ankry (talk) 20:38, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
Again, Thuresson,Ankry, as I said above, the source given in the file description is http://historiskamedia.se/forfattare/philip-birk/ whcih has an explicit copyright notice. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:13, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
@Jameslwoodward: I am unsure what do you suggest here: that the photo should be uploaded with another source? or that using a photo from a freely licensed site (like a photo from Commons) in a copyrighted site makes resonable doubts about the original license or revokes it? Unless there is a clear evidence that the license here was stated after upload to commons (or just before), I tend to consider that the historiskamedia.se usage may be a copyright violaion (however linking to the author/license information might fulfill the CC-BY-SA license requirements). historiskamedia.se copy seems to be newer than the freely licensed one (and because of the link I tend to consider that the historiskamedia.se copy is under the same license). Ankry (talk) 09:51, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
If you click on the caption below the photo at historiskamedia.se, the link will take you to the other site with a Creative Commons license. Thuresson (talk) 22:06, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 Support do not know why we should give veto power to every fee site, that grabs CC license photos. see also Commons:How Alamy is stealing your images -- Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 23:14, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done undeleted per above discussion. @Jameslwoodward: please, start a DR if you still have doubts. Ankry (talk) 09:51, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Files uploaded by DarwIn

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Deletion reason ignores 500px had free licenses up until July 2018. See Commons:500px_licensing_data. All files have documented free licenses. Chico Venancio (talk) 20:17, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

 Comment What about the rationale that these were intended as advertisements? Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by DarwIn Abzeronow (talk) 22:15, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
Abzeronow, I'd refer you to the answers there. In a nutshell, we have no rules about users uploading images here that were made intended to be advertisements by the author, only a rule to remove files uploaded as intended advertisements. Falling back on the project scope the files can be useful for to illustrate several aspects that are clearly on scope for Commons. As stated there by Teles DarwIn and myself. Chico Venancio (talk) 13:55, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose I see no evidence that they originate from 500px prior to their licensing change. You enter into license contract while downloading. The pending license contracts are irrevokable, but after license chabge you no longer can download under the earlier license. So Darwin's uploads are copyvios, IMO. Regardless of the above scope doubts. Ankry (talk) 23:38, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
Ankry, as can be seen Commons:500px_licensing_data (here using the first file as an example:
500px

Going to the correspondent 500px page you can see the license snippet in the source code, including a link to the license:

<a about='https://drscdn.500px.org/photo/181181839/q%3D80_m%3D2000/v2?webp=true&sig=f8d16cd0aef7e37356cd78a83b99228b7036589bbdd10db7d6b5d4341aff7ac9 ' href='https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/' id='server_photo_cc_license' rel='license'></a>

archive.org

Check the existence of the snippet "license_type": 6 on that page by viewing the source code.

And you can confirm that 6 there means CC-BY-SA in the 500px API documentation (version 3.0 can be confirmed in the archived version of the 500px CC page). Chico Venancio (talk) 13:55, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Support, I don't believe there can be any doubt that the files I uploaded here from the Internet Archive originated on 500px, and that they were freely licensed back then, at the time they were exported to the Internet Archive. There even is a Panoramio style import project going on dedicated to import what is on scope for Commons from there. The reason stated for the elimination is invalid, indeed, and the files should be restored.-- Darwin Ahoy! 14:25, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Aside from the copyvio question, there is the fact that these have significant watermarks top and bottom showing name, address, telephone, and e-mail. Such watermarks cannot be removed from a CC-BY licensed image, so they cannot, as a practical matter, be useful anywhere. Note also that COM:ADVERT explicitly prohibits images that constitute advertisements. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:05, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

(Jameslwoodward), Why would the license not allow the image to be cropped? That seems a like very strange interpretation of CC-BY-SA 3.0.
COM:ADVERT explicitly states it is not a policy but a shorthand for COM:SCOPE, and the argument here is that these files are "realistically useful for an educational purpose". As all have stated in the DR, cropping the advertisement is the ideal solution here. Chico Venancio (talk) 00:27, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
As I understand it, WMF Legal's interpretation of section 4B of the license is that you cannot remove watermarks that tend to identify the source of the licensed work.
As for COM:ADVERT, you're splitting hairs. It describes the rules we follow when looking at images as dictated by policy. This is clearly advertising and therefore it cannot stay. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:01, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
(Jameslwoodward), what is your source for WMF interpreting CC-BY-SA 3.0 in such a manner? Chico Venancio (talk) 17:16, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
I must say this is the first time I heard that interpretation about cropping images. Cropping stuff to remove water marks has been common practice here in Commons since I joined a decade ago. If I've been doing something wrong all of this time, I would really like to know. @Jameslwoodward: the right link is [this one], this is CC-BY-SA-3, not 2.-- Darwin Ahoy! 16:31, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
As for COM:ADVERT: "As dictated by our scope, content which constitutes advertising or self-promotion may be deleted from Commons." May be deleted. Not must be deleted, not even should be deleted. If it's useful and educative, advertisements and other files originally spammed here are welcome on Commons, given that there are no copyright issues with them.-- Darwin Ahoy! 16:36, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

For the watermark issues, please see Commons:Watermarks#Legal_issues_with_the_removal_of_watermarks where it says:

"Opinion from the Wikimedia Foundation legal staff indicates the removal of watermarks may place the remover at legal risk given the provisions of the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act regarding "copyright management information" (such as the title, author's name, copyright notice, etc.)"

Note that this is not limited to removing copyright notices, but extends to removing "copyright management information", which includes name, address, etc.

Also note the intro to that page where we have:

2.✘ Promotional watermarks, which go significantly beyond asserting authorship/copyright, for example to promote a website.

Obviously, the watermarks on these images promote the web site. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:20, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose restoration per Jim. @Yann: if you wish to take yourself the legal risk related to removing the watermatks, feel free to upload cropped, non-watermarked images. Ankry (talk) 09:57, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
If the images are free, I don't see what is the issue with removing the watermark. I would undelete the files, crop them, and then hide the old versions. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:42, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

(Jameslwoodward), as can be noted in the actual WMF's legal opinion CC-BY-SA is compatible with watermarks removal. About this new DMCA goalpost I would not be certain these watermarks qualify as copyright management information (information not directly listed in statute or case law and the intent of the author here, per you interpretation, is advertisement. You either have to imagine a copyright management intent without copyright notice or believe the author did not intend these as advertisements). And together with Yann, and DarwIn I volunteer to do the actual cropping. Chico Venancio (talk) 13:17, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

I would be happy to see these restored if someone is willing to take the DMCA risk and crop out all of the watermarks. While I think it is highly unlikely that an Indian company will come after a Commons user under USA law for that act, it is not something that I can recommend. However, we have all seen many unfilled promises of image modification in the past, so if the watermarks are not removed promptly after restoration, I will delete the images again. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:24, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
Please ping me once/if they are restored so I can crop them quickly. Chico Venancio (talk) 20:05, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
 Support we already explained, even to James about the license at 500px, and removing watermark is not a cc-by infringement, we still have the version with the watermark in the previous versions. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 20:12, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

The 4 images supported by Yann undeleted. @Chicocvenancio: please crop. Ankry (talk) 10:28, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done. I maintain the request to restore the other, except File:The Wedding Candid (181181017).jpeg. Chico Venancio (talk) 12:07, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
@Chicocvenancio: I see no consensus to undelete the others. However, feel free to create (a) separate request(s) providing info why are they in scope or how watermarks can be removed or why are the watermarks irrelevant. I think it is better to keep discussion more compact. Ankry (talk) 12:44, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done partially. Ankry (talk) 09:27, 24 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Female journalists at 2018 CPJ awards.jpg

And the related images listed at the deletion request - if you read to the bottom of the discussion, you would have seen that the copyright was clarified by the appropriate party Kingsif (talk) 23:20, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

@Kingsif: If you wish to reopen the DR discussion, please, elaborate: why? We cannot override community decissions here; we can reopen the discussion if there is new information, not taken into account while deleting. Ankry (talk) 06:06, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose These are the work of Getty Images. As a general rule, the copyright remains with the photographer or the organization for which the photographer works. While it is possible that CPJ has licensed the use of the images from Getty Images, such licenses rarely give the licensee the right to further freely sublicense the image. It is very common for images on Flickr to have a license which the Flickr user is not entitled to give -- so common that we have a name for the practice -- Flickrwashing. Therefore, in order for these to be restored, someone must prove using OTRS that CPJ has the right to license the work of Getty Images as CC-BY. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:03, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Comment It is quite possible that the CPF owns the copyright, but the best would be to ask the photographer. Regards, Yann (talk) 18:32, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Jim. Ankry (talk) 09:26, 24 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Conrado_Escobar.png

Licence cc 4.0 reference: https://ias1.larioja.org/cex/sistemas/cmu/v3/consultaRecursoFicha.jsp?idSesionVirtual=7124a497c1ff0be9e842530567cd6b4ed5e8a254&f_intervalo=T&f_etiqueta=&f_calidades=-Imagen-&NPRE10020=&NPRE10030=&NPRE10040_SEP=,&NPRE10050=&NPRE10080=01/01/2015&NPRE10080_2=30/01/2017&NPRE10150=&NPRE10160=CC4.0&E050100=&dccobe=&dcocur=&dcocup=1&fichero=NPRE10&kint=NPRE10010&tarea=&modelo=P010&nfoto=&modoGestion=A&avanzada=NPRE10080%7CNPRE10080_2%7CNPRE10160&lMediaSel=L0210&cobes=467621&nhref=0

La foto borrada dispone de licencia cc 4.0. Pido que se restaure el archivo. --Wikitcher (talk) 10:09, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks

--Wikitcher (talk) 10:15, 20 March 2019 (UTC) Wikitcher

The above links directs to an error message only. Ankry (talk) 10:43, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
The link is https://ias1.larioja.org/cex/sistemas/cmu/v3/consultaRecursoFicha.jsp?ltcnx=L0210&id=ay8O6sZcSoo%3D
Comment I deleted the file as the nom provided a URL that took me to a page that clearly said (C) at the bottom. The new link provided appears to have a different license Gbawden (talk) 12:45, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
{{S}} Now I also think that we can restore the image with link fixed. Ankry (talk) 13:30, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Hmm. The linked page says "CC 4.0". That's not enough, IMO. It could be anything from CC-0 to CC-BY-SA-NC-ND. --Túrelio (talk) 13:34, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Thats what I thought Gbawden (talk) 15:50, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
@Wikitcher: Any link to the license text from this site? Creative Commons licenses generally require such a reference, AFAIK. Ankry (talk) 08:10, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Unclear copyright status. Ankry (talk) 09:22, 24 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Elad Ratson - אלעד רצון.jpg

This image is my own. It was taken by an employee of mine, working for me, with my camera. It is me who have uploaded the image... — Preceding unsigned comment added by EladRatson (talk • contribs) 18:27 21 March 2019‎ (UTC)

 Oppose The ownership of the copyright will depend on whether the image is a work for hire, The fact that it was your camera is irrelevant. In these circumstance, policy requires that either (a) the actual photographer -- your employee-- must send a free license using OTRS or (b) you must send a free license together with whatever documentation is required by the OTRS volunteer to satisfy them that it is a work for hire. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:21, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

 Info I have a doubt concerning the (a) suggestion: if the information provided by the requester is correct, such a permission would be legally void. Ankry (talk) 07:55, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
If it is a work for hire, that is certainly true, but that was the question above.
However, that is apparently moot. The file description says:
"Elad Ratson is a career Diplomat of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Israel."
If that is correct, then Mr. Ratson does not have employees in the sense required for this to be a work for hire. The image may have been taken by a subordinate, but that does not make Elad Ratson the copyright holder. The copyright is owned either by the photographer or by the Government of Israel. If the latter is the case, the copyright lasts for 50 years from creation. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:17, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Jim. Ankry (talk) 09:47, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Lil Pump's mugshot.jpg

The subject was arrested in Miami-Dade County. Works created by local governments in the state of Florida are public domain. See also Template:PD-FLGov. GMGtalk 21:30, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

 Support Agreed. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:08, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Courtesy ping for User:Jcb. GMGtalk 22:44, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

 Support valid copyright template; unclear deletion reason. A mistake? Ankry (talk) 08:29, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done restored. No valid deletion reason. Ankry (talk) 09:18, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Ajinomoto Sweeteners Collection.jpg

Hello , This image is based on the image with the following OTRS ticket.

Other images you deleted are created based on images with OTRS tickets in the same way.

Please return these images.Thank you.Jonathan7375 (talk) 01:21, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose First, please note that the files were deleted as violations of COM:ADVERT, not for copyvio. I agree with that. Second, while OTRS ticket:2018121410000239 is long and complicated and I don't read Japanese, so I may have missed something, it appears to contain several lists of files which are approved for Commons. The files above are not on the lists. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:27, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

 QuestionIs it easier to resolve by applying new tickets to OTRS?—Jonathan7375 (talk) 00:01, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
  • I'm inclined to support undeletion, because they are depictions of a notable company's products are likely to be used in Wikimedia projects. The 'collection' images here seem to be essentially collages made of OTRS-approved images, created for the purpose of comparison and maybe presenting a timeline - it was also what I was told in the last part of the OTRS conversation. (I'm assuming good faith and I believe they contain no new images - at the moment I don't have time to match the images one by one.) If so, there wouldn't be copyright problems. Jonathan7375 said they wanted to put collection images to Wikipedia pages about the company who produces the depicted products. If Wikipedia uses (and continues to use) the images, they will automatically be in scope. whym (talk) 11:37, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I would undelete under the request of an OTRS agent, if checking the files is needed during the verification process, or because the permission is checked and approved; in case @Whym: you can directly do that. But undeletion is not possible on a random request. Ruthven (msg) 09:05, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
    • I'm not sure what OTRS agents are supposed to do here. In my view, what is neededd is review by admins, not OTRS agents. Base images of these collage images are already uploaded and approved (at least that's what is claimed here). You would need to match deleted images and uploaded images - no new privately provided images would be involved. Any admin can see deleted images and check if they all consist of images already uploaded and marked confirmed by OTRS agents. In case a new or questionable image is found, the matter can be passed onto OTRS agents, but I don't see how OTRS agents will be involved before that. whym (talk) 09:47, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
  • @Jonathan7375: チェックを助けるため、合成画像と個別画像の対応表をここに書くといいのではないかと思います。 (I would suggest providing the list of base images for each 'collection' images.) whym (talk) 09:52, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Pinging @Whym, Roy17, EugeneZelenko, Jeff G. The sentences will be longer. Please pardon me for troubling you.

that's all. — Jonathan7375 (talk) 03:07, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done per above discussion, mainly per whym. If the single product photos are OK, as notable, their sets with descriptions are even more useful for Wikipedia. Ankry (talk) 10:45, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Dnldnl0901

OTRS permission has been arrived (ticket:2019032010000528), please restore the files. Thanks in advance! Bencemac (talk) 13:54, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Bencemac: Please add the permission template. --Yann (talk) 14:14, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Regisseur Karl-Martin Pold auf dem Filmfest München 2017.jpg

Ich habe alle Rechte an diesem Foto vom offiziellen Filmfestival und des Fotografen per Mail bekommen und dieses Dokument auch an Wikipedia Persmission geschickt. Es sind alle Rechte somit geklärt und es gibt keinen Grund das Foto zu löschen. Anbei das Permissionformular ausgefüllt.

Hiermit erkläre ich in Bezug auf das Bild [ Regisseur Karl-Martin Pold auf dem Filmfest München 2017 ]

[ ] dass ich der Urheber (Fotograf, Grafiker, Maler, etc.) bin.

[ x] dass ich der Inhaber des vollumfänglichen Nutzungsrechts bin, das mir beliebige Veröffentlichungen, Bearbeitungen und Unterlizenzierungen dieses Werkes gestattet. Der Name des Urhebers lautet [Dominik Bindl].


Ich erlaube hiermit die Weiternutzung des Bildes/der Bilder unter folgender freier Lizenz/folgenden freien Lizenzen:

[LIZENZ (z.B. „Creative Commons Namensnennung-Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen Deutschland in Version 3.0 (abgekürzt CC-by-sa 3.0/de)“)]

Mir ist bekannt, dass damit in urheberrechtlicher Hinsicht Dritte das Recht haben, das Bild zu nutzen und zu verändern. Dies schließt auch eine gewerbliche Nutzung ein.

Mir ist bekannt, dass ich diese Einwilligung üblicherweise nicht widerrufen kann und kein Anspruch darauf besteht, dass das Bild dauernd auf der Wikipedia eingestellt wird.

Mir ist bekannt, dass sich die Unterstellung unter eine freie Lizenz nur auf das Urheberrecht bezieht und es mir daher unbenommen ist, aufgrund anderer Gesetze (Persönlichkeitsrecht, Markenrecht usw.) gegen Dritte vorzugehen, die das Bild im Rahmen der freien Lizenz rechtmäßig, auf Grund der anderen Gesetze aber unrechtmäßig nutzen.

[11.2. 2019], [Dominik Bindl]

Volcanus99 (talk) 10:55, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

I'm not an OTRS member, so I don't think I can help here. De728631 (talk) 17:36, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: @Volcanus99: Bitte die Freigabe per E-Mail an COM:OTRS senden. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:00, 24 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Fernando_Clavijo_Batlle,_Presidente_de_Canarias.jpg

Hi, mi name is Mauro Rguez and i work for the President Fernando Clavijo on his comunication group at the Canarias Goverment. Some one has request that delete the actul president photo. We are owners of this photo because is from the Canarias Goverment archives. So we want that photo restored please.

Thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editordebiografia (talk • contribs) 09:29, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

@Editordebiografia: Anybody can say that.
Our rules require that any photo uploaded here is licensed by its author (photographer) under a free license that allows any use for any purpose including commercial reuse. For photos that were already published on non-freely licensed sites (like Twitter or Facebook), it is required that the actual copyright holder sends us a free license following COM:OTRS or COM:OTRS/es instructions. Unfortunately, the queue for handling those emails is very long, and exceeds 180 days for the English queue. And we cannot undelete a photo until a permission is processed if it is needed. Ankry (talk) 13:34, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 17:41, 24 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:AkademiaArteve.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:AkademiaArteve.jpg

Would appear to be covered by {{FoP-Albania}} Abzeronow (talk) 14:54, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

 Support per above. Ankry (talk) 09:38, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done per {{FoP-Albania}} Ankry (talk) 17:44, 24 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Jpna 2.jpg

Jpna 2.jpg please dont delete this image because i want to use it for Jawani Phir Nahi Ani (film series) article please — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sabeeh butt (talk • contribs) 15:19, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose This is not Wikipedia. And since you are not the copyright holder, you can't upload this to Commons. Abzeronow (talk) 15:36, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Abzeronow. Ankry (talk) 17:45, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

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

All deleted uploads of Kunalvm

Please restore all deleted uploads of Kunalvm per the bottom right corner of http://www.danmunteanu.com/index.htm and COM:ON#File:Danmunteanu3.jpg.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 17:52, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

@Jeff G.: They are uploaded as {{Own}} without any source provided or with invalid licenses. Somebody needs to fix information there, if undeleted. Are thay related to an OTRS permission that contains appropriate information? Ankry (talk) 18:18, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
@Ankry and Kunalvm:  I withdraw my nomination, sorry, we are waiting for permission from actual photographers (except photos 21 and 21b) since 8 April 2018 per Ticket:2018040810002317.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 01:35, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done withdrawn. Ankry (talk) 06:08, 25 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:ELT.png

¿Porque pretenden borrar mis archivos? ¿Qué es lo malo de subir estos escudos de equipos de Fútbol de la Provincia de Catamarca? No estoy subiendo ni publicando nada malo, ¡Sólo son escudos de equipos de Fútbol! ¡La concha de su madre!

Firma: (~~Iván A. Zárate ~~) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iván A. Zárate (talk • contribs) 04:37, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done procedural close" image not deleted. Please convert to a Deletion Request and provide copyright information there if you wish. Ankry (talk) 06:11, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Je suis Charlie, Brussels 11 January 2015 (107).jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: The drawing perhaps should be de minimis as it is not at the centre and not the main subject of the photo. B dash (talk) 15:06, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done per above discussion and Yann's opinion. Ankry (talk) 09:02, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Category:400th Anniversary Memorial of the Maritime Expedition of Legazpi and Urdaneta from Mexico to the Philippines

According to w:Plaza de Mexico (Manila), this sculpture was unveiled in 1964. In the Philippines, copyright for anonymous and pseudonymous works last for 50 years after publication (1964+51=2015). But then again, according to the wiki article, this sculpture was donated by the Mexican Secretary of The Navy Shipyards. According to Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Mexico, "works created by the Mexican government do not default to being public domain, being protected 100 years after publication." So, can these photos be undeleted or are we to wait until 2064?

-Howhontanozaz (talk) 14:17, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

I refuse to believe that a large work of art from the 1960s in a public place is the work by an unknown person. Works of art by known artists are protected for life + 50 years. Thuresson (talk) 23:53, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose per Thuresson. I also think that some search across Philippine/Mexican publications from 1960s-1970s should be made before claiming that the author is anonymous and/or unknown. No evidence for such a search. And, IMO, the Mexican law is irrelevant unless the monument was publicly exhibited in Mexico prior to its transport to Philippines that is unlikely. Ankry (talk) 09:34, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: per discussion. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:31, 25 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Conrado Escobar Las Heras.jpg

Reference and licence:

https://ias1.larioja.org/cex/sistemas/cmu/v3/consultaRecursoFicha.jsp?ltcnx=L0210&id=ay8O6sZcSoo%3D

(Wikitcher (talk) 10:35, 25 March 2019 (UTC))

 Not done: Procedural close -- not deleted, nothing to be done here. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:25, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Teddy Roosevelt Statue (Marble).jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Mparrishxx

circa 1923 US photograph. Both statue and photograph may now be PD-US-expired. Abzeronow (talk) 14:49, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Striked inaccurate portion since I misunderstood that portion of DR. Statue is circa 1923. I can't see file so I don't know how photograph was credited. Abzeronow (talk) 16:40, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
Description: Sculptor Vincenzo Miserendino with a Marble Statue of Teddy Roosevelt in his Bowery Studio. According to w:en:Vincenzo Miserendino the statue is from 1922 and the photo is also likely from 1922; both from US. No information when/whether the photo was published, however. Ankry (talk) 17:52, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. Do we have any reason to believe that it wasn't published around 1922 or 1923? Abzeronow (talk) 19:17, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose This is actually the 1923 portrait at the AB Davis school mentioned in the text at WP:EN with two images at SIRIS. This question might better be phrased in the positive ("was" vs "wasn't"):
"Thanks. Do we have any reason to believe that it wasn't published around 1922 or 1923? Abzeronow"
because the burden of proof is to show that the image is OK. Therefore it must be proven that this photograph was in fact published during 1923. Without that, we cannot restore it. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:32, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
If it's absolutely necessary, I can always put an Undelete in 2044 for this photo in the Deletion Request or put the file name directly on the "Undelete in 2044" page.(since 2044 would satisfy the 120-year rule) However, I think it's rather plausible that publication was around 1923. The sculptor had a 1923 book according to the en.wiki page and Theodore Roosevelt(who died in 1919) was a popular subject in 1920s books (Lord Charnwood even had a Roosevelt biography for a British audience published in 1923). It seems the sculptor's book is not available on Hathitrust so I don't have a way of searching for that to see if this photograph was somehow published in that book. Abzeronow (talk) 15:08, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
The problem with that line of reasoning is that the sculptor did quite a few works of Theodore Roosevelt. The WP:EN article, Vincenzo Miserendino, lists six and there may be more. The assumption that this particular image appeared in print within the year of its creation is beyond a significant doubt. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:57, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
I could try a few more attempts to see if I can find anything more about this particular sculpture and see if I can find something like this photograph(which I can't see but description Ankry unearthed is helpful). Otherwise, what would you recommend as far as when this can be undeleted? Abzeronow (talk) 17:08, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 Support as per above. Yann (talk) 15:24, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
I also tend to  Support undeletion despite we have no exact publication date. IMO, it is very unlikely that the photo is still copyrighted, considering US copyright registration/renewal formalities. Too weak to consider this a significant doubt as PCP requires. Ankry (talk) 10:02, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. @Abzeronow: Could you please complete the source and author? --Yann (talk) 14:10, 25 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Antóninho Baptista Alves 2018-11-20.jpg

Reason mention was "Copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing (F1)". I asked the deleter for further infomations. Answer was "No acceptable license is indicated at Facebook. Please don't grab pictures from Facebook"". But this doesn't matter. According the current law in TL the images "published and distributed by the Government of Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste" are for free use (Template:PD-TLGov). There is no need for further license needed, when it is published and distributed by government. In this case, it was the office of the prime minister. The kind of media is not playing a role. --JPF (talk) 13:52, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Since Facebook itself is copyrighted, it does not have a way to show whether an image is under another copyright or not. The Government of East Timor can make an image PD only if it has the right to do so. We do not know that that is the case here. Unless the image is a work for hire of an employee of the government, the actual photographer is the person who must freely license the image for Commons. I suggest you find this or another similar image on a web site belonging to the Government where its copyright status will be clear. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:12, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, FB does not have any copyrights. The owner is the government of Timor-Leste, which is publishing via FB. --JPF (talk) 14:48, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
To clarify: Facebook has using rights, but not copyright. A PD-image does not get copright, by posting it at FB. --JPF (talk) 18:38, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
@Jameslwoodward: in this case, like in a lot of other cases where a government or other organisation does not have the resources to host its own image library, Facebook is the only place it is published. John Cummings (talk) 16:39, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

 Info @J. Patrick Fischer: We need an evidence that the image is free in (1) the initial publication country and (2) the US. As Facebook is not located in Timor-Leste the copyright status in Timor-Leste may be irrelevant for Commons. Has the image been published in Timor-Leste prior to its publication on Facebook? Ankry (talk) 10:16, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

AFAIK not. But the government of TL is posting without any "infringement of copyright", according their law. Are there any American laws, which are restricting the will of publisher? --JPF (talk) 11:51, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
the copyright status in Timor-Leste may be irrelevant for Commons - sorry, but this is absurd and definitly incompatible with the Rules at Commons. The Commons rules say the images must be published under a license, that makes the images free for their home country and the United States. The rights Facebook climes are not of importance here. And not just because a lot of lawyers say, that FB did not have the right to claim any right on the images of others. Marcus Cyron (talk) 13:21, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
@Marcus Cyron: What is the publication country if first published on Facebook? What is the publication country if first published in Wikimedia Commons? I dispute assumming that it is just TL. That's all. If this is US, we need an evidence that it is PD in US. If it is "the whole world" we need a clear license from the author as PD status in TL is irrelevant for most of world. Ankry (talk) 08:41, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
The author is the government of TL. Even if they are publishing in the USA, they are bound on Timorese law, that all their publications are PD. When I am publishing my images under PD, US law is not restricting my images under a higher level of copyright. --JPF (talk) 08:57, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
What is the country of first publication? If it is USA, I have no opinion of the legal status; but it must be US copyright law based, not TL copyright law based. If a country that does not recognize PD as a legal category (like any EU country) should be taken into account, then the photo is copyrighted in these countries: rights belong either to the photographer or to the TL government, depending on their relations. Ankry (talk) 16:19, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

I think there is some confusion here. The Facebook copyright claim is irrelevant to the status of this image, but, as I tried to say clearly, because Facebook claims copyright, they do not make it possible for their users to declare an image's copyright status. Therefore we do not know the copyright status. It seems to me that this overreaches:

"According the current law in TL the images "published and distributed by the Government of Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste" are for free use "

Clearly the government of TL cannot make something PD if its copyright is owned by someone else. We all know that images created by US Federal employees in the course of their work are PD, but also know that many images on US Government web sites are not PD because they are the work of people who are not Federal employees. I have a significant doubt that whoever manages the TL Facebook page is very careful about ensuring that the TL government has the right to make PD everything posted there. Therefore, while material posted on the Facebook page may be PD in TL, it may be under copyright everywhere else in the world. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:56, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

"Everywhere else in the world"? I believe you, if you say, you do not know the copyright law of El Salvador, but this couldn't be an argument, because unknowledge of all laws in the world would request the deletion of all images in Commons. ;-)
But which copyright could be affected anyhow? A staff of the Timorese prime minister made a photo like it is usual on dozens of meetings there, added the watermarking of the Timorese government on the photo (check the linked source) and posted it on the Facebook account of the Timorese prime minister. This is not an image from outside of the state institution, like an countryside image for example, which maybe was taken by a tourist for example.
So, you are distrusting the staff, who is posting on FB? Why? Because this are Timorese, not US officers? What is the difference between PD-TLGov and PD-USGov?
Only your doubts can not be enough, there has to be concrete possible laws, which could be affected. --JPF (talk) 15:25, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
@J. Patrick Fischer: 17 U.S.C. ch. 3: "Copyright in a work created on or after January 1, 1978, subsists from its creation and, except as provided by the following subsections, endures for a term consisting of the life of the author and 70 years after the author’s death." You cannot refer to TL copyright status when investigating US copyright status unless you are considering a work that was published before 1996. And you need to point out the an appropriate exception in the copyright law if the general rule does not apply. Ankry (talk) 09:02, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
@Ankry: So, who is having the copyright on the image? The photograph gave it in Timor-Leste to the government. The government can not publish sth else than PD. --JPF (talk) 09:41, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Facebook isn't a publisher anything posted their is the responsibility of the person posting. FB conditions gives it rights to enable sharing across its platform, it doesnt create nor make any claim to ownership in the copyright of works. If the Timor government releases it as PD then the its PD in the US. Gnangarra 11:28, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Support The copyright holder is the TL government, Facebook has usage rights to the image but no copyright. It is unrealistic in this case, like a lot of situations when working with lower resource organisations to expect that an OTRS ticket or similar will be possible. John Cummings (talk) 16:42, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support Copyright holder is government of Timor-Leste. It should be treated as cc-0 under US law. Abzeronow (talk) 15:02, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. @J. Patrick Fischer, Gnangarra, and Abzeronow: Please complete the source and author. --Yann (talk) 14:13, 25 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Guillotinemodels.jpg

The photo should be grandfathered.

It was nominated, and deleted in 2015 due to missing OTRS permission over 9 years after upload. At the upload time, in September 2006, the COM:OTRS page did not exist and I found no evidence that forwarding permissions to the just created OTRS was required. It seemed to be suggested only. According to our current rules, pre-2007 photos are GOF-ed. No doubts concerning permission (information about permission included in the description) were raised in the DR, and I think we can consider this permission OK (per AGF). I also think that requiring a permission from the uploader after nine years without serious copyright concerns is unfair to the uploader.

The photo was/is used on a historical Wikipedia index page. Ankry (talk) 09:13, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 14:04, 25 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Gilbert Houngbo.jpg

IMAGE UPLOADED AT REQUEST OF GILBERT HOUNGBO, IFAD

--Jamesanteater (talk) 10:14, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Why should it be undeleted? Any evidence that it is freely licensed? Ankry (talk) 10:47, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: No anwser, no valid reason for undeletion. --Yann (talk) 14:15, 25 March 2019 (UTC)


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

Files uploaded by Unbaratocha

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Unbaratocha

Would appear to satisfy documentary photography under {{PD-Brazil-URAA}}. Pinging @Jameslwoodward the closing admin as a courtesy. Abzeronow (talk) 17:53, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

 Support That appears to be correct. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:05, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 14:25, 25 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Arsys logo.svg

Hello,

the source file / logo is available for public use here:

So please undelete it.

Thanks, --Grande013R (talk) 18:21, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

  •  Support Download websites like those linked above do not automatically allow free commercial reuse of the files offered there, i.e. just because something is offered for downlaoding it does not mean that the general public can do with it whatever they like. So the links offered by Grande013R are irelevant.
However, the file in question qualifies for {{PD-textlogo}}. De728631 (talk) 18:25, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: PD-textlogo. --Yann (talk) 14:36, 25 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:MrRobot intertitle.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: {{Pd-text}} as per the same file in en wiki File:MrRobot intertitle.png Sreejith K (talk) 04:19, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

 Support per above. Ankry (talk) 06:24, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. @Sreejithk2000: Please add categories, etc. --Yann (talk) 14:40, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Ofer Ben David.jpg

  • Hello, I closed as deleted this DR (@Yann: as nominator) and then I had a complaint on my talk page, I did not really pay attention to the wording of {{PD-Israel}} that say "51st year after the creation of the photograph". However the date of the photo is rough and I found no articles about this person to confirm a potential date (even approximate). I do not have a clear opinion, thanks for your help. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:51, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
    • If we ignore US copyright status, it should be OK. I doubt about authorship: this looks like a professional photo, but for PD-Israel, authorship may be irrelevant. Ankry (talk) 06:22, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
I did not think to US copyright indeed... If the delay of 51 years is possible for the current year (2019), I'm not sure that it was in PD in 1996, therefore it is likely copyrighted in USA. Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:31, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi, The license was {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}}, which is not OK. Yann (talk) 10:31, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 14:41, 25 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:010 Once a week Volume X Dec 1863 to Jun 64.pdf

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: in use by Wikisource, should not have been deleted Beleg Tâl (talk) 12:57, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

@Túrelio: why did you think that "dieses Bild hat mit Betty Bossi AG nichts zu tun, bitte löschen" was sufficient rationale to delete this file? Commons hosts lots of files that are not related to "Betty Bossi AG". Beleg Tâl (talk) 13:01, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
Also: user "Viviane Buehr" has falsely tagged many other files with spurious speedy-deletion notices. Please check any other files that were deleted under this rationale. Beleg Tâl (talk) 13:06, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 Support within scope as necessary to English Wikisource. (came from En:Scriptorium) –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 14:24, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 14:46, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Richard Boddington iEmmys.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Mr. Boddington, who is in the picture, purchased the correct photo license from Getty Images. Mr. Boddington has a copy of the license from Getty Images and can upload it if required. Mr. Boddington used his Flicr page to simply host the picture. W Green007 (talk) 18:14, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

  •  Oppose @W Green007: Getty Images offers no license on it's website which is compatible with Wikimedia Commons because doing so would destroy it's profit model. If you have a special case with a contract, please send a copy of the contract via OTRS.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 06:43, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
  • @Jeff G.: In order to simplify the process Mr. Boddington's wife uploaded pics of the event she took to her Flickr account with the correct release. I would like to add one of Mr. Boddington's pics he took himself and is on his Flickr page was incorrectly flagged by Wikipedia as a copyright violation for being the same as a pic on IMDB. It is Mr. Boddington who owns the pic and supplied it to IMDB, not the other way around. Mr. Boddington informs me he has sent emails to, permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, with the affirmations to release this pic and two others into Wiki commons. The pic you applied a copyright violation to is: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Erin_Pitt_&_CJ_Adams_in,_Against_The_Wild_(2013).jpg. This is Mr. Boddington's pic, correctly released on Flickr, and the copyright strike against me should be removed.   — W Green007 ツ please ping or talk to me 06:43, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
As the Flickr image is newer than the Imdb one, we need to wait for an OTRS agent decission. Ankry (talk) 22:17, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

@Ankry: Well please excuse me, but, the timing at which a pic appears on the internet has nothing to do with establishing who owns the copyright to that pic. 100% of the pics on IMDB for the movie, Against The Wild, are under Mr. Boddington's copyright ownership. IMDB does NOT own the rights to any of the pics appearing on their site. Mr. Boddington supplied all of those pics to IMDB, and he can just as easily delete them tomorrow if he chooses to. The fact that Mr. Boddington is now releasing the same pics onto his Flickr page, does not in anyway mean that he has lost the copyright to these pics.   — W Green007 ツ please ping or talk to me 17:55, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Well, if we have an evidence that the mentioned Flickr page belongs to the official Flickr service of the movie director, then I tend to  Support undeletion. Noting, that this discussion should be linked from the image talk page to prevent further deletion requests. Ankry (talk) 21:02, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
Mr. Boddington's IMDB credits provide this evidence, as does the name & picture on his Flickr page. As I am a new contributor, perhaps you could explain more clearly what you mean by, "Noting, that this discussion should be linked from the image talk page to prevent further deletion requests."W Green007 (talk) 00:23, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I did not find any link to the Flickr account from any official Mr. Boddington's page. So still waiting for another opinion. Ankry (talk) 09:21, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
Um, all you have to do is type, "Richard Boddington" into IMDB.com, and there it is. He is listed as "producer" on both Against The Wild, and An Elephant's Journey. Not sure it can get any simpler than that? W Green007 (talk) 16:51, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
I should add that from reading the other posts on this board photographers are going to have to start having another photographer, take a picture them, taking a picture. In order for the first photographer to prove that they took the picture and it belongs to them. In this case, a picture belonging to Mr. Boddington was deleted before any chance to reply was allowed. All based on the fact that it was also on IMDB, a site that Mr. Boddington provided the picture to! W Green007 (talk) 16:58, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done This photo is available at gettyimages.com who do not, as far as I can tell, sell images with Creative Commons licenses. Thuresson (talk) 22:57, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Colonneconcierto.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Colonneconcierto.jpg

Author was André Devambez who died in 1944. I don't see any evidence that he "died for France" so his works has been public domain in France since 2015. Painting seems to be pre-1924 too. Abzeronow (talk) 17:28, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

 Weak oppose. I am not sure that the World War extensions (together 14 years 272 days) don't apply to his works. COM:FRANCE mentions 30 more years of protection for those who died for France but for the other extensions there is no such condition. Devambez died in September 1944, so it should be safe to undelete the file in 2030. --Mates (talk) 22:03, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
This is a painting not a musical work. As far as I know, only musical works still get the old wartime extensions (not counting the "died for France" thing which doesn't appear to apply here.) "Standard copyright term: Life + 70 years, (except posthumous works, musical works, and works whose author "died for France", which are protected for an additional 30 years)
Wartime copyright extensions may apply to musical works: + 6 years 152 days for musical work published through 1920 (Art. L123-8); + 8 years and 120 days for musical work published through 1947 (Art. L123-9); these extensions are cumulative with each other and with the "died for France" extension" Pinging @Yann if I missed something. Abzeronow (talk) 22:09, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 Support There is no war extension anymore, as per a decision of the Cour de Cassation. Regards, Yann (talk) 22:21, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: OK now. --Yann (talk) 11:01, 26 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Conrado_Escobar.png

OTRS agent (verify): request: we've received Ticket:2019032010004131 regarding File:Conrado_Escobar.png. Now the municipality has fixed the license. Check here: [13]. Please restore in order to verified veracity and finish the process. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 10:34, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Ganímedes: FYI. --Yann (talk) 10:59, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Rukh-Brest1.png

Запрашиваю не удалять данный файл, потому что он необходим мне как работнику клуба для создания страниц о нашем клубе на разных языках, для этого он нужен в Commons и отсюда просьба не удалять его, он будет использоваться только для создания страниц о ФК Рух в разных языках и не более того — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saweliasz (talk • contribs) 10:32, 24 March 2019 (UTC) Saweliasz (talk) 13:52, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

@Saweliasz: Please read COM:L/ru what can be stored here. Ankry (talk) 10:49, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Вопрос в том, как можно перенести эмблему? С русскоязычной версии на польскоязычную?

This is not possible. Unlike Russian Wikipedia, Polish Wikipedia do not accept Fair Use logos. Only freely licensed ones can be used there. And only the logo copyright holder can declare in freely licensed (written form send directly by the club authorities to Wikimedia OTRS, the club authorities is needed here (see COM:OTRS/ru for details). It is likely, that you can upload a logo version that is more than 50 years old (from a pre-1969 source). Ankry (talk) 17:27, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 15:40, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Ania Spiering.jpg

Also

Hello there. I am relatively new to Wiki therefore I might have made some mistakes. Please let me know I can improve my contribution to the page. Regarding Ania Spiering photograph. I am representing actress Ania Spiering in New York City, NY. USA. I am an owner of the image (Ania Spieling.jpg)and have official rights to use this image publicly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sashahost (talk • contribs) 15:51, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

  • I am relatively new to Wiki therefore I might have made some mistakes. Please let me know I can improve my contribution to the page.

Regarding Ania Spiering photograph.

  • I am representing actor and dancer Sasha Korbut in New York City, NY. USA. I am an owner of the image (Sasha Korbut.jpg)and have official rights to use this image publicly (IMDB, Instagram, Facebook and other social media).

Please let me know if I made some mistake in submitting this picture — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sashahost (talk • contribs) 15:54, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

 Comment Have the photographer of this image contact COM:OTRS using the e-mail template to verify that image can be freely licensed. Abzeronow (talk) 16:19, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
@Sashahost: right to use is not enough to satisfy Wikimedia Commons licensing requirements. Unless you have a copyright transfer clause in the contract, that allows you to relicense the photo, we need a written consent directly from the photographer. Ankry (talk) 17:34, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 15:40, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Leslie Shatz.jpg

Hello there. I am relatively new to Wiki therefore I might have made some mistakes. Please let me know I can improve my contribution to the page. Regarding Leslie Shatz photograph. I was an executive producer of the Leslie Shatz photoshoot. This image has been used in various media however the rights to image belong to me. I share the rights with the New York City photographer Jeong Park.

Please let me know if I have Ade any mistake using this image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sashahost (talk • contribs) 15:56, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

 Comment Both you and Jeong Park should contact COM:OTRS if you share the copyright. Abzeronow (talk) 16:21, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 15:39, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Craig A Jones.jpg

The file is a photo of Craig Jones and the photo was taken by a Ministry of Defence Photographer under MOD Crown Copyright. MOD Crown Copyright grants worldwide, royalty-free, perpetual, non-exclusive licence for the image. The original deletion request was made because the photo was found elsewhere on the internet, namely website: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4285273.stm. As Craig Jones is depicted in the photo he has emailed his permission request under Crown Copyright license to wikimedia permissions. © Crown copyright [2003].

(Moorerichards (talk) 16:43, 4 March 2019 (UTC)) 4th March 2019

Can you clarify your claim "Craig Jones owns the photo and user moorerichards has permission to use the photo.". Can you explain why you uploaded this photo with a Creative Commons license? How did it come about that the subject owns the copyright? Also, Crown Copyright lasts for 50 years, see Commons:Copyright rules by territory/United Kingdom. Thuresson (talk) 17:27, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
please see information on the MOD Crown Copyright consent license on the link below. the subject does not own the copyright but under the license if he is depicted in the imagery he needs to consent to its use. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/617136/20161012-MOD_Consent_Licence-Final.pdf (Moorerichards (talk) 08:55, 7 March 2019 (UTC))
It does not seem to me that MOD Crown Copyright consent license is suitable for Commons: it seems to restrict derivative work creation. @Moorerichards: if there is no suitable copyright template in Wikimedia Commons, you should discuss the license suitability in COM:VPC prior to coming here. If there is one already, please point it out. So I tend to  Oppose undeletion. Ankry (talk) 10:21, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
  • I also am leaning  Oppose on this since Crown Copyright lasts for 50 years in the UK and as Ankry says, there doesn't appear to be a suitable template for this. Abzeronow (talk) 23:07, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 09:08, 27 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:LogoPAD.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: It's a CC file Pincoepallino (talk) 07:44, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

  •  Oppose about Logo as this is an empty, useless gallery created by an IP.
  • The File:LogoPAD.jpg may be considered simple, but it depends on the country of origin. You alse declared, that this is your {{Own}} personal ownership. Personally created logos are out of scope. Where the logo is intended to be used? Ankry (talk) 09:14, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. Should be SVG anyway. --Yann (talk) 09:07, 27 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Opening Ceremony of 2018 Commonwealth Games.jpg

This is the image of the opening ceremony of the 2018 Commonwealth Games which were held in Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia. Author, reference everything was provided while uploading the image. Please undelete this image. --2409:4072:30F:ECF9:5026:449D:F933:C3AF 18:49, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Deleted since the Creative Commons CC-BY-2.0 license could not be verified. Thuresson (talk) 20:46, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Opening Ceremony of 2018 Commonwealth Games.jpg. PDM is not a valid license on Commons. Abzeronow (talk) 23:13, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 09:04, 27 March 2019 (UTC)


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

2019032010004097

OTRS agent (verify): request: we've received Ticket:2019032010004097 regarding File:Emancipación UR.jpg. Now the municipality has fixed the license. Check here: [14]. Please restore in order to verified veracity and finish the process. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 10:56, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

@Ganímedes: The file is not deleted. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:58, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: See above. --Yann (talk) 09:02, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Zombie Boy (By Colin Singer).jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: OTRS sent by the copyrights holder Zom.b.fan (talk) 09:48, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

  •  Oppose If a free license has been sent to OTRS, then the file will be restored automatically when and if the email is received, processed, and approved. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 7 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.
If the message was sent to the English language version of OTRS and the email has been properly received there the sender will receive an automatic reply with the ticket number. If the sender has not had a reply, please check that it was sent correctly and try again. Other language versions may or may not provide the automatic reply. Ankry (talk) 10:47, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
 Comment Covered by ticket:2019021110007041, but I am not sure the permission is valid. Yann (talk) 14:20, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
Why is the permission not valid? (from the photographer himself) --Zom.b.fan (talk) 10:53, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 09:05, 27 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:UNAV-Wiki-Logo-Negro.svg

License: https://www.flickr.com/photos/169238426@N06/40496731163/in/dateposted-public/

Best regards, Jialxv (talk) 13:28, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose First, there is no evidence that the Flickr user had the right to freely license the image. Second, the image is NC, which is not acceptable here. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:34, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Jim. Ankry (talk) 10:49, 27 March 2019 (UTC)


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

OTRS ticket received - please restore

Please restore File:Ya_Tosiba.jpg for which we now have an OTRS ticket. Thanks in advance. Ww2censor (talk) 23:07, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

@Ww2censor: Please review and add OTRS information to description page. Thuresson (talk) 02:04, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

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

JARED GOSSELIN AND LIL CORY NEW BREED MAGAZINE.jpg

THIS IS MY OWN WORK, I HAVE WRITTEN CONSENT FROM EACH OF THE CELEBRITIES IN THE PHOTO. WHO DO I SEND THESE CONTRACTS TO SO THAT MY IMAGE WILL BE UPLOADED? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baynhamholdings (talk • contribs) 01:56, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

@Baynhamholdings: Please, do not shout. You have no deleted photos. If you wish to upload your own photos, please upload them in full resolution from your camera and ensure that they were not published on non-free sites prior to upload here. Otherwise you need to follow COM:OTRS. Ankry (talk) 10:36, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done procedural close: not deleted

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

File:Jan-Hendrik Pelz & Johanna Mangold, Zaubertrank, Performance 2018.jpg

Dear Ladys and Gentleman,

the picture File:Jan-Hendrik Pelz & Johanna Mangold, Zaubertrank, Performance 2018.jpg, got erased. Its made by myself. Whats wrong please? Thank you and best regards Jan-Hendrik Pelz Jan-Hendrik Pelz (talk) 14:13, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

@Jan-Hendrik Pelz: Hi,
That was previously uploaded by BalintGoldenstein as own work. Do not create new account(s) to reupload the same file, or you will be blocked. So you are the subject of the picture, but the copyright is usually owned by the photographer, who should send a permission via COM:OTRS. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:50, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

File:Jan-Hendrik Pelz.jpg

Dear Ladys and Gentleman,

its me and its made by myself. Whats wrong? Best Jan-Hendrik Pelz Jan-Hendrik Pelz (talk) 14:15, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

@Jan-Hendrik Pelz: Idem above. Yann (talk) 15:53, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Yann

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

File:Singapore Airlines A350 landing at Adelaide Airport.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: These images were reported for copyright infringement due to being on other websites. I am the owner of all these images. I have the RAW files for proof.

The Paul Bennet image was uploaded on http://aviationtraffic.org/post/7996817/paul-bennet-mastering-his-aircraft-above-the-runway-at-the-avalon by me as I post frequently on that site. The other 2 were featured on my JetPhotos page. Meeshboi (talk) 10:50, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

@Meeshboi: Hi,
These files are of web size, and do not have EXIF data. If you are the photographer, please upload the original images with full EXIF data. Otherwise, the copyright holder has to send a permission via COM:OTRS. Thanks, Yann (talk) 10:56, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Yann. Ankry (talk) 19:45, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Bershanskaya, Gelman, and Smirnova.png

Wrongly deleted - the owner of the photo (the Russian government) released the photo under a permitted creative commons license on the mil.ru website at http://encyclopedia.mil.ru/encyclopedia/history/more.htm?id=11609470@cmsArticle, which clearly says in the footnote of the page "© Все материалы интернет-портала Минобороны России доступны по лицензии Creative Commons Attribution 4.0". There appears to have been NO discussion prior to the deletion of the photo, and the photo is clearly under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license, so it was NOT a copyright violation, which was stated as the reason for deletion. Please undelete ASAP, there is another user demanding that portraits cropped from the photo be deleted too.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 21:04, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose - the CC-BY-SA-4.0 is apparently a bogus license and there is no evidence or explanation of a valid PD rationale. Jcb (talk) 21:27, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
@Jcb: Huh? There is NO reason to stubsansiate that! The website clearly states "© Все материалы интернет-портала Минобороны России доступны по лицензии Creative Commons Attribution 4.0" on the page the photo is from. There is no footnote saying that the photo is not covered under the license, and there is no reason to think that the claim of the license being "bogus" is true. Template:Mil.ru is for all photo files from that website, like that one. The russian military website is permitted to release their photos under such license, and they do! --PlanespotterA320 (talk) 21:41, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
Template:Mil.ru was created by a LTA and has no official status. As far as I can see, the validity of it was never confirmed by a trusted member of our community. Jcb (talk) 21:58, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. @PlanespotterA320: Could you please fix the date and the author on all 4 pictures? --Yann (talk) 09:47, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Files uploaded by Tontonyua

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: These files are all inseparable and extremely important part of Beijing City Overall Plan (2016-2035) and Beijing City Overall Plan (2004-2020) announced by People's Government of Beijing Municipality. According to Article 5 of Copyright Law of People's Republic of China, as well as Article 9 of Urban and Rural Planning Law of People's Republic of China ("All units and individuals shall abide by the urban and rural planning approved and announced in accordance with the law, ..."), these files are out of copyright protection. Where are copyright violations? WQL (talk) 14:09, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

  • @Shizhao and Jcb: Pinging sysops concerned. --WQL (talk) 14:34, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose How can urban planning law make something public domain? ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 06:33, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
    • @Jcb and Gone Postal: Because in China, all plans are enforced according to these texts and maps in the plan. Government shall enforce the plan in reference of these maps according to the planning law. And, in many time, maps are the ONLY legal reference. So, these maps have an obvious administrative nature, and are not subject to copyright, which meets the criterion of "resolutions, decisions and orders of state organs". --WQL (talk) 07:15, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
      • Ok, that sounds reasonable, but I do not know enough about China's law to say more. There was that case where annotated legal documents were judged as public domain in the USA even though they were created by the private entity[1], so this is not unreasonable to believe that something that appears not to be "law" is still in public domain. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 10:31, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
        • In fact, all content created by government with administrative nature to all people are in public domain, and all these maps have this nature. In the letter Reply of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the State Council on the "Beijing Urban Master Plan (2016-2035)", the State Council said, "XIII. (The Beijing Municipal People's Government shall) [R]esolutely safeguard the seriousness and authority of the plan. The "Master Plan" is the basic basis for the development, construction and management of urban areas in Beijing. It must be strictly implemented. No department or individual may arbitrarily modify or violate regulations." Also, if there are any parts that are not covered in the planning text, planning maps shall be followed as the only reference. --WQL (talk) 11:45, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
          • I disagree that these maps would be documents with an administrative nature. They are also derivative works of maps that are unsourced and probably not in the Public Domain. Jcb (talk) 12:14, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
          • I have given sources in this request before (repeat them again:Beijing City Overall Plan (2016-2035) and Beijing City Overall Plan (2004-2020)), and I affirm that my view is right. Also, in China there is no doubt that all government planning documents' copyrights held by the government. WQL (talk) 13:18, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
            •  Support This appears to be a benefit to us of China's system of government.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 13:36, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
            • copyrights held by the government ≠ public domain (in China). and see [15]: "以北京市城市规划设计研究院、中国城市规划设计研究院、清华大学三家研究单位牵头，30个国家级和市级权威机构、近200名专家学者参与了研究工作。"，很难说这些文件与图表全部都属于PD（特别是政府完全可以以行政司法名义合理使用受著作权保护的作品）--shizhao (talk) 01:58, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
              • 或许我们也得看是相关机构做了这些工作是为了谁。您看，此类大型规划，政府必须向符合一级城乡规划资质的机构公开招标，同时也一定会拨给一定款项，所以我基于这一原因也相信政府拥有相关版权。--WQL (talk) 13:50, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
  •  Comment Inclined to support restoration and keeping files that were reuploaded by a different user out of process. They appear to be "indispensable" to the proposed city planning Abzeronow (talk) 20:48, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ↑ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elhDhnkXwDc
 Oppose As noted in the discussion below regarding File:印军越界现场照片（一）.png, {{PD-PRC-exempt}} applies only to "textual documents" and not to maps, plans, or photographs. Unless we can get a colleague who reads Chinese to offer a different opinion, I think we are stuck with the precedents cited there. Entirely aside from that, I think that the images that include photographs must be deleted on the grounds that the photos may well be copyrighted and all of the maps must be shown to actually be Chinese government creations. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:46, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
  • I think two articles of the law are most relevant in this case. (You may read the corresponding English translation.) Article 5, 本法不适用于: (1) 法律、法规，国家机关的决议、决定、命令和其他具有立法、行政、司法性质的文件，及其官方正式译文. Article 22, 在下列情况下使用作品，可以不经著作权人许可，不向其支付报酬，但应当指明作者姓名、作品名称，并且不得侵犯著作权人依照本法享有的其他权利: (7) 国家机关为执行公务在合理范围内使用已经发表的作品. What I think it says is, all government documents of administrative, legislative and judicial nature are not subject to copyright. 文件 means documents, which can include images. However, article 22 gives the government exemption to use copyrighted works. So my conclusion is, if an image is attributed to a government, or unattributed but included in a government document, it is free; if a work is attributed to some other organisations, for example File:福州烟台山历史文化风貌区土地利用规划图.jpg by Shanghai Tongji Urban Planning & Design Institute and Fuzhou Academy of Planning and Design, it is an instance of fair use by the government and hence unfree. For the free files, they should be verified by licence review. Also in this regard, 董辰兴 (talk · contribs) has recently uploaded a lot of copyvios.--Roy17 (talk) 22:20, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Roy17, I will gladly defer to your native Mandarin skills, but I would like to be sure we are clear. At Commons:Deletion requests/File:China Immigration Inspection brand image-nihao.jpg, Stefan4 says:

"Case 1 in {{PD-PRC-exempt}} uses the word 文件, which seems to mean 'textual documents', i.e. literary works"

That would not include photographs and maps as they are not textual. On the other hand, above, you say:

"... 文件 means documents, which can include images."

Are you sure that 文件 is not just textual, but includes images and maps? .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:10, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

@Jameslwoodward: wikt:文件[16][17]. What you cited is not even a valid precedent for this UDR, because (if that image is [18]) it should be deleted because it is not part of a document. The analysis in that DR was not correct, but the decision was.--Roy17 (talk) 15:35, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, Roy17, but I am not concerned about that as precedent here, but simply the meaning of 文件. Does it clearly mean "documents, including text, photographs, plans, and maps" or is its meaning limited to "textual documents" as Stefan4 says in the cited DR. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:38, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Then you should not be concerned with a Swede's words "the word 文件, which seems to mean 'textual documents'" in a wrong analysis.--Roy17 (talk) 15:46, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
There is a piece of regulations zh:s:党政机关公文处理工作条例(Regulations on the Handling of Official Documents by Party and Government Organs) in which all 14 types of official documents are enumerated, but the whole text does not mention any non-textual content such as images, photos, or graphics. Therefore, from a legal perspective (rather than a lexical one), it is safe to assume that "official documents" do not entail images, especially when images are taken out of a collection and presented as only images. --Wcam (talk) 12:51, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
zh:s:党政机关公文处理工作条例, article 9, 公文一般由份号、密级和保密期限、紧急程度、发文机关标志、发文字号、签发人、标题、主送机关、正文、附件说明、发文机关署名、成文日期、印章、附注、附件、抄送机关、印发机关和印发日期、页码等组成。 (9) 正文。公文的主体，用来表述公文的内容。 (15) 附件。公文正文的说明、补充或者参考资料。 There is no mention of excluding any form of media or restricting documents to the text. Part 15 goes on to say that attachments/appendices are indispensable components of the documents. (Often they take the form of photos and diagrams, but could actually be any kind of media.)--Roy17 (talk) 14:14, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: Stalled. Please renominate if there is anything more to do. --Yann (talk) 10:17, 28 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Miladin Zaric.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Miladin Zaric.jpg

Photo circa 1944. {{PD-Yugoslavia}} can be used for photos published before 1966. I can't see the file but if photographer is unknown, I think this would seem to be published before the 1960s. Abzeronow (talk) 14:17, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

 Support per Abzeronow. Ankry (talk) 10:41, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 Comment @Abzeronow: it's about Miladin Zarić so {{PD-Yugoslavia}} or {{PD-Serbia}}? --Alaa :)..! 15:11, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
I think it could be licensed under either, but PD-Yugoslavia would also be PD-1996 and thus no URAA complications. Abzeronow (talk) 15:23, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. @Abzeronow and Ankry: Please fix the categories. --Yann (talk) 10:08, 28 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Jonás Fernández.jpg

The picture belongs to Jonás Fernández. It was taken at the European Parliament on his request. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esteana (talk • contribs) 16:54, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: The copyright holder has to send a permission via COM:OTRS. --Yann (talk) 10:09, 28 March 2019 (UTC)


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

Pre-1924 Wassily Kandinsky paintings

Please restore the following pages:

Reason:

Kandinsky died in 1944 and all of these paintings are pre-1924. Abzeronow (talk) 14:46, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 10:47, 28 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:King's College London crest.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Deleted hastily without acknowledging previous discussion here Commons:Deletion requests/File:King's College London crest.png. This is own work by the uploader.

Deleted with the reason "Coat of arms of King's College London, how on earth is this the author's own work" Aloneinthewild (talk) 20:33, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

  • Given that two previous DRs have been closed as keep, I would  Support undeletion and a third DR if there are concerns that the uploader didn't create this version of the coat of arms. Abzeronow (talk) 20:38, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 10:28, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Doubice, chalupa severně od Jefa 2.jpg

Please restore the history of deleted file File:Doubice, chalupa severně od Jefa 2.jpg and join it with File:Doubice, chalupa čp. 108.jpg. The file was deleted as a duplicate of File:Doubice, chalupa severně od Jefa.jpg which was overwritten by mistake. --ŠJů (talk) 20:34, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 10:24, 28 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:University of Bristol logo.tif

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Simple logo which doesn't meet COM:TOO Aloneinthewild (talk) 20:48, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

A ship, a fish and a horse, even though stylized, will meet the threshold of originality pretty much everywhere in the world. The UK has a rather low threshold, so this is certainly not free. --rimshottalk 22:42, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Not simple. Copyright last for 70 years after publication. --Yann (talk) 10:26, 28 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:學姊黃瀞瑩.jpg

The picture is from Taipei city government website: https://www.travel.taipei/zh-tw/news/details/19354

The page https://imreadygo.com/44853 also leaves the footnotes "資料來源 台北市政府新聞稿", that means the article and photos are from Taipei city government. Therefore, we could be sure that the copyrights are owned by Taipei City Goverment, and according to the Taipei City Government website rules: https://www.travel.taipei/zh-tw/open-data We could use the photo on fair use with giving the credit to Taipei City Government. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ogk5d (talk • contribs) 02:03, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Fair use is not allowed on Commons. --Yann (talk) 10:20, 28 March 2019 (UTC)


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

FileThomasAbraham.jpg

The file image which need to be uploaded is related to the source of the content and it's for the own use and purpose. Please raise my concern for undeletion and it will be grateful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anish.mathews209 (talk • contribs) 05:55, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Obviously not. Images taken from various websites are not acceptable without a permission. --Yann (talk) 10:20, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:FBB Femina Miss India 2018.jpg

Please restore the following file

File:FBB Femina Miss India 2018.jpg. This image is on various sites and would like to use it in Wikipedia as well. And the image is of Thomas Abraham (IDeA Worldwide) events. Please do raise my concern for undeletion request and it would be of great help. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anish.mathews209 (talk • contribs) 06:02, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Obviously not. Images taken from various websites are not acceptable without a permission. --Yann (talk) 10:19, 28 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Writism.jpg

Please restore the following file

File:Writism.jpg. This image file is purely based on one of the finest works and contributions towards Writism and would like to see on Wikipedia to highlight the work of Thomas Abraham. Please do raise my concern for undeletion request and it would be of great help. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anish.mathews209 (talk • contribs) 06:12, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Obviously not. Images taken from various websites are not acceptable without a permission. --Yann (talk) 10:20, 28 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Brigitte Mohn 2016.jpg

A valid OTRS permission has been provided – ticket:2019032810003903.

As an OTRS agent (verify), I will investigate the undeleted media and make sure that the permission is sufficient to keep it (rights on media work + depicted work, FOP, copyright owner, country specific restrictions, etc.). I will also update the license (if needed) and add the appropriate OTRS template.
If you want, you can apply {{Temporarily undeleted}} on the media page to make sure a follow-up is done.

Feel free to notify me and thank you in advance.

✓ Done: @Olaf Kosinsky: Please sign your posts. --Yann (talk) 10:42, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Jin Kim Montclare, Ph.D.jpg

OTRS permission has been arrived (ticket:2019032610011256), please restore the file. Thanks in advance! Bencemac (talk) 13:22, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Bencemac: Please go ahead and process the ticket. --4nn1l2 (talk) 13:30, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Done, thank you! Bencemac (talk) 13:42, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Alex Henry Foster.jpg

Hello, I am contacting you regarding the deletion of the picture File:Alex Henry Foster.jpg.

As the owner of the picture mentioned above, therefore a picture for which I have the copyrights to, may I know why I can't upload it on Wikipedia, according to my own will?

As you can see in this article in the Journal de Montréal (Le Journal de Montréal is a daily tabloid newspaper published in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. It has the largest circulation of any newspaper in Quebec and is also the largest French-language daily newspaper in North America. - according to your own Wikipedia publication on the topic -), my name is written under the picture with a mention saying that I am the photographer who provided the file for public matters of publication: https://www.journaldemontreal.com/2018/11/20/alex-henry-foster-un-succes-inattendu

I thereby kindly ask for Wikipedia to put this picture back in the Wikipedia trafic, and especially upload it back to Alex Henry Foster's profile (in all languages available).

Thank you.

Stephanie.bujold (talk) 02:10, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

  • @Stephanie.bujold: Given previous publication and that you are a new contributor here, it would be best to send an email as described at COM:OTRS. Otherwise we have no way to know someone didn't just set up an account in your name. The most useful thing to send in the email would be something not just about this picture, but that clarifies that this is, indeed, your account, so that from here out if you do something similar we won't need to go through the OTRS process again. - 05:49, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
  • @Stephanie.bujold: This image is small size version for publishing on the web. If you are the photographer, please upload the original image with full EXIF data. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:43, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 14:36, 28 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Mailaul-6131.jpg and File:Mailaul-6346.jpg

Hi

I am requesting the undeletion of files Mailaul-6131.jpg and Mailaul-6346.jpg. These photos were taken by me, I have been in contact with the band in the photos who have struggled to keep the photos on their Wikipedia page even after I confirmed via email their rights to use the photos.

Feel free to contact me for further information

Kind regards, Oliver--Oliver6k (talk) 18:40, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose As the files were available in the Internet prior to upload to Commons, and we are unable to verify whether they are your photos or you just copied them, you need to send a free license permission following COM:OTRS instructions. Ankry (talk) 10:47, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 14:35, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:RaymondAdams Wikipedia Profile.jpg

This image file was deleted maybe because of lack of its copyright information. Dan Wood, whose profile page we are working on, gave us this profile picture of himself to use for this purpose.

Not sure what other information is required to provide for us to keep the image on our page.

The picture was taken by Raymond Adams.

Please let us know what other info we need to provide.

--HelloThirdEye (talk) 17:39, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose You declared to be copyright holder and author (protographer) of this photo, while Internet sources say something else. If the information provided by the uploader is not reliable for some reason or the photo was published elsewhere prior to upload to Commons, we need a free licence permission from the photo copyright holder following send to OTRS following these instructions. Ankry (talk) 10:59, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 14:32, 28 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Joanna Pickering and Brock Mullins.jpg

No reason this is not allowed -- released by film festival, photographer, private and public permission can send, and it is on flicker as public. Can you check it. Thanks so much.

Here is the link https://www.flickr.com/photos/chelseafilmfestival/31681243888/in/album-72157702813100885/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geordiedave2019 (talk • contribs) 03:21, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose "All Rights Reserved". Thuresson (talk) 04:08, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose not as public. Flickr said "All rights reserved" --Alaa :)..! 15:07, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Thuresson and Alaa. Ankry (talk) 14:31, 28 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Carolin Kloeckner.jpg

This photo is the official photo of the "Deutsche Weinkönigin 2018/2019" and is approved to be used for these issues.--Redwinemaker (talk) 10:32, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose @Redwinemaker: But you provided no evidence that the photographer accepted it to be freely licensed. Such an evidence is necessary for any photo published elsewhere prior to upload to Commons. Ankry (talk) 10:52, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 14:27, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:André du Bus 2019.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: André du Bus, who is the subject of the base article, has all the copyrights on the incriminated picture of himself. This picture is used on various sites, and André du Bus would like to use it as well on wikipedia to show himself. What else would be necessary ? Xdequinze (talk) 11:33, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

So why do you claim to be the copyright owner? Thuresson (talk) 15:38, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: When Xdequinze uploaded the image, he claimed to be the actual photographer, Now he claims something else. In order for the image to be restored to Commons, the actual photographer must send a free license using OTRS or the subject must send a free license together with evidence satisfactory to the OTRS volunteer that he has the right to freely license the image. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:28, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:ANEEB 2018 2019.jpg

Boa tarde,

Gostaria de saber a razão pela qual a imagem , logótipo atualizado da Associação Nacional de Engenharia Biomédica, continua constantemente a ser eliminado. Estamos a carregar de forma errada? Há algum motivo para ser eliminado?

-- ANEEB, 15h01, 27/03/2019 Diana S Cruz (talk) 15:01, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

This image was deleted because reuploading deleted images is against Wikimedia Commons rules. The File:Associação Nacional de Estudantes de Engenharia Biomédica.jpg was deleted because we have neither evidence that Wikimedia user Diana S Cruz is (personally) the author and copyright owner of the Associação Nacional de Estudantes de Engenharia Biomédica official logo, nor we have evidence that Associação Nacional de Estudantes de Engenharia Biomédica wish the logo to be available under the Creaative Commons-Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 license. Ankry (talk) 14:23, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: per ankry. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:26, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

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

YWB Philly

File: YWB Philly.jpg The file in question was made by me, Sunnyboya. It is original content that has not been copyrighted by anyone, group, or organization. I am requesting undeletion.

--Sunnyboya (talk) 18:01, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Not deleted (yet). Please upload the original file without full EXIF data. --Yann (talk) 19:12, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Hoteli Tirana.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason:

Might fall under {{FoP-Albania}} Abzeronow (talk) 15:03, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Support I don't know if the law has changed since these were deleted in 2015, but it is clear now that Albania has very broad FoP. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:24, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Albania section under Freedom of Panorama and the FoP-Albania template uses a 2016 law. Abzeronow (talk) 15:31, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done per {{FoP-Albania}} Ankry (talk) 21:18, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:DRG Header TwitchFormat.jpg

Hi Wikimedia Commons,

My name is Mads, and I am the community manager at Ghost Ship Games, creators of the game Deep Rock Galactic.

I have been notified that I have violated our own rights of our own image?

I wasn't able to upload the image via the Wikipedia page, which said I had to create the image as a Wikimedia Commons image, so I did.

Apparently, that has gone into that the image is deleted.

I admit that I might have done something wrong, but the guidelines on the Wikipedia domain is very confusing. I just want to upload an image and that is it.

hope you are able to assist me and able to contact me on my mail, and this communication tool is very confusing. Mail: mads@ghostship.dk

Yours sincerely Mads - Cookiemann (talk) 14:38, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

  1. Please, read COM:L: we do not accept images without a free license from the copyright holder. Fair use images are not accepted here.
  2. If you accept that, please ask the official representative of the copyright holder to follow COM:OTRS. Ankry (talk) 14:50, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Agreed. Mads, the problem here is that we do not know who you really are and, unfortunately, we get many imposters and forgers who make false claims to get images up on Commons. That is why we make you go to the trouble of using OTRS. where the OTRS volunteer can confirm your identity. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:01, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above.

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

File:2014 Korçë , Kisha e Shên Mërisë 01.JPG

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:2014 Korçë , Kisha e Shên Mërisë 01.JPG

Could now be {{FoP-Albania}} Abzeronow (talk) 14:19, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done per above.

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

Different files of "freset" of the file to undelete

Hi, could you undelete the files please :

These pictures are from me, from my personal collection of my great-grandfather paintings. I would like to apply the licence CC BY 4.0 , the most apropriated I think.

Thank you.

Namalric86 (talk) 16:18, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done by Ronhjones, but OTRS ticket still waiting for processing.

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

File:Logo-CRIS.jpg

Buenos días, el propietario de la marca mandó un mail a permissions-es@wikimedia.org y a permissions-commons-es@wikimedia.org el pasado 22 de abril autorizando a su uso Creative Commons y a su publicación en Wikipedia. Victurs (talk) 18:41, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Please clarify -- Google translate says that you claim a license was sent to OTRS on April 23. Since it is now only March 28 and the image was not uploaded until March 11, 2019, that seems unlikely. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:18, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done we need to wait for an OTRS agent action. Ankry (talk) 00:34, 30 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Lolita Files Press Photo.jpg

My name is Lolita Files and I own this photo. I included the name of the photographer I hired to take it (Bobby Quillard), but I own the photo and would like to request that it be undeleted.

Thank you.

Soulsustuh (talk) 03:47, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Owning the photo is not the same that owning copyright to the photo. If your contract with the photographer contains a copyright transfer clause, please follow COM:OTRS instructions. If not, than we need the photographer to follow COM:OTRS instructions. Ankry (talk) 14:30, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 00:33, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Adrian Miller.jpg

My name is Lolita Files and I work for Adrian Miller. Adrian Miller owns this photo and would like to have it undeleted.

Thank you.

Soulsustuh (talk) 03:50, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose the photo source mentioned that "All Rights Reserved", also there's notification in your talk page that you should proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Until now you not provided any evidence that the photographer accepted it to be freely licensed --Alaa :)..! 15:05, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per Alaa. Ankry (talk) 00:32, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Hesam Bani-Eghbal-Jey.jpg

Hello sir/ma,am

This is a formal request to UN-deletation of the file "Jey-Logo" which has been designed by myself and my studio.This issue has been occurred due to confusion in the uploading process of my colleague in studio. Because of the company's busy schedule, it was very hard for me to get any authentication/confirmation from them. Looking forward to hearing from you; Sincerely Yours; Hesam Bani-Eghbal Designer and director — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hesam b2000 (talk • contribs) 10:39, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

If you mean File:Jey-oil-logo.jpg you need to wait until the OTRS permission is processed. The queue is about 6 months long now. Ankry (talk) 19:40, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 00:31, 30 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Escudo Cuerpo de Bomberos de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria.jpg

The photo in the url isn't the same. The photo I uploaded is made by my phone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lavistadelaex (talk • contribs) 19:22, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

But image on the plaque is the same. Can you prove that its copyright expired already? (Is it more than 80 year old?) Ankry (talk) 20:13, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose - I traced back many of your uploads to 'all rights reserved' files at Flickr. Jcb (talk) 19:16, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose per Jcb Abzeronow (talk) 19:20, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 00:28, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:boyerwikipedia.png

Buen día, el motivo de mi intervención es la RECUPERACIÓN de MI archivo "boyerwikipedia.png" que fue recientemente eliminado con la nota "No permisson". Espero una pronta solución a mi problema. Gracias. --Roy1806 (talk) 00:06, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

@Roy1806: If you are the photographer, please follow COM:OTRS/es instructions providing a proof that you are indeed the photographer (eg. the original photo from your camera). Ankry (talk) 14:42, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 00:27, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Första uppsättningen 1982.jpg

BIlden är från privat samling som ägs a v min bror mvh Peter — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nattregn (talk • contribs) 05:50, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

So why you declared that you are the original author of this photo? Ankry (talk) 15:01, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done no response from the requester. Ankry (talk) 00:26, 30 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Tohoru Masamune.jpg

I purchased the license for this image through:

https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/los-angeles-ca-august-3-2014-213446470

Mar 26, 2019 365-day Images On Demand, with 2 Standard License Downloads $29.00 SSTK‑0BFDA‑DAC6

Thank you, Tohoru Masamune----L-Hexoses (talk) 06:46, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Purchasing a license neither makes you author nor allows you to relicense. Is the license that you purchased CC-BY-SA 4.0? Ankry (talk) 14:04, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 00:25, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done Terms and conditions: "You may not [...] Resell, redistribute, provide access to, share or transfer any Visual Content except as specifically provided herein. For example and not by way of limitation, the foregoing prohibits displaying Content as, or as part of, a "gallery" of content through which third parties may search and select from such content." Thuresson (talk) 00:29, 30 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:AnitraEggler Rosenheim byRonnyBuck.jpg und File:AnitraEggler byAndreasJakwerth.jpg

Hallo Wikipedia- und Wikimedia-Team, Anitra Eggler hält an beiden gelöschten Bildern File:AnitraEggler Rosenheim byRonnyBuck.jpg und File:AnitraEggler byAndreasJakwerth.jpg alle Urheber- und Verwertungsrechte. Sie hat diese Rechte vor jeglicher Veröffentlichung von den Fotografen Andreas Jakwerth und Ronny Buck erworben. Beide Bilder können von Wikipedia/Wikimedia und ihren Nutzern unter der beabsichtigten Commons-Lizenz frei verwendet und dem Eintrag von Anitra Eggler wieder zugewiesen werden. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alice Sommer (talk • contribs) 11:06, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

@Alice Sommer: Unfortunately you did not provide public evidence for the copyright transfer nor we have evidence that Wikimedia user Alice Sommer is the copyright holder. If the information cannot be public, the actual copyright holder needs to follow COM:OTRS instructions in order to undelete the files. Ankry (talk) 14:57, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 00:24, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:JoeDickson MPP OfficialHeadshot Ajax 001.jpg

The licensing statement could be verified from the archives. I don't know if CC-BY is an appropriate licence and how the photographer was identified though.--Roy17 (talk) 13:15, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose I see no valid Commons license in the archive: at least none that expliciely allows modifications. Ankry (talk) 13:51, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 00:23, 30 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:FrancescoFranchi.jpg

No copyright violation — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ffwiki22 (talk • contribs) 19:12, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose per Commons:Deletion requests/File:FrancescoFranchi.jpg. Requires OTRS permission from the photographer. Abzeronow (talk) 20:46, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 00:20, 30 March 2019 (UTC)


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

File:Leclerctank.jpg

https://www.militaryfactory.com/disclaimer.asp

8) Artwork and Photography Imagery in the form of illustrations, graphics, drawings or photography are presented throughout this site for the benefit of the user (you). Illustrations and drawings that are credited with the name of the true owner and cannot be reused on another website. United States Department of Defense imagery in the form of photography is credited in the bi line with proper ownership. All other images are images contained, or assumed to be, in the Public Domain and are free to be reused for your own projects. Any artwork containing the "www.MilitaryFactory.com" watermark is property of www.MilitaryFactory.com and the artist represented and cannot be reused in any form elsewhere. --Amanbir Singh Grewal,NHH (talk) 15:37, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

I'll wait until @Jcb: weighs in on this. Is Department of Defense a plausible source? Or was a creator credited? Abzeronow (talk) 15:45, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 Oppose - The picture is apparently from France, so it's highly unlikely that a US government PD rationale would apply. Also I do not see any source/authorship information at militaryfactory.com. As long as we do not have any evidence to the contrary, we must consider this file to be 'all rights reserved'. Jcb (talk) 15:53, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 Comment - I have blocked this user for repeatedly removing our comments at their UDRs - Jcb (talk) 16:38, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done closing as no evidence of CC-BY-SA 4.0 license at the source site and as we cannot expect a response from a blocked user. Ankry (talk) 00:09, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File: MV_tank.jpg

https://policy.pinterest.com/en/terms-of-service

9. Disclaimers

Our Service and all content on Pinterest is provided on an "as is" basis without warranty of any kind, whether express or implied.

Pinterest specifically disclaims any and all warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infringement, and any warranties arising out of course of dealing or usage of trade.

Pinterest takes no responsibility and assumes no liability for any User Content that you or any other person or third party posts or sends using our Service. You understand and agree that you may be exposed to User Content that’s inaccurate, objectionable, inappropriate for children, or otherwise unsuited to your purpose.

If you're a consumer in the EEA, we don’t exclude or limit any liability for gross negligence, intent, or death or personal injury caused by our negligence or willful misconduct.

--Amanbir Singh Grewal,NHH (talk) 15:45, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

  •  Oppose Commons doesn't allow fair use. If the author hasn't been dead for 70 years, or if not published 95 years ago in the US or if not public domain under exceptions for government created work, it is likely under copyright unless the copyright holder gives it a free license. Stuff published on Pinterest generally needs to go through COM:OTRS via the photographer if it is not shown to be public domain. Abzeronow (talk) 15:51, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 Comment - I have blocked this user for repeatedly removing our comments at their UDRs - Jcb (talk) 16:38, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done closing as no evidence of CC-BY-SA 4.0 license at the source site and as we cannot expect a response from a blocked user. Ankry (talk) 00:09, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:The_Auk.jpg

https://ww2db.com/termsofuse.php

7. Most photographs seen on WW2DB are in the public domain and those may be used by anyone without restriction. Whenever possible, each photo page lists the name of the source of the photograph beneath the caption of each photo along with the copyright status. If a photograph's copyright status is not listed, please contact us and/or consult an intellectual property attorney.

--Amanbir Singh Grewal,NHH (talk) 15:55, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

 Comment @Amanbir Singh Grewal,NHH: , linking to the context of the photo is a lot more helpful to linking to disclaimers which tell us nothing about if the file is actually public domain. Abzeronow (talk) 16:01, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 Comment - I have blocked this user for repeatedly removing our comments at their UDRs - Jcb (talk) 16:38, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done closing as no evidence of CC-BY-SA 4.0 license at the source site and as we cannot expect a response from a blocked user. Ankry (talk) 00:06, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with "From81"

This was a bad decision took by a sysop that clearly do not know what his is talking... Commons:500px licensing data, I've being importing free images from 500px, and this set of images receive an allegation of manipulation that do not affect their quality as an education media.

Moreover the sysop delete it writing: "Probably out of scope as noted -- we do not keep art from artists who are not notable. However, they also appear to be copyvios as there is no free license at 500px.", two false allegations, all photos are art, and this are free images. And note the "probably", if you are not sure, why do you took the most aggressive action, and delete it????

-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 20:14, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Comment Not all art is within Commons's scope. Were these photographs clearly labelled as photomanipulations? Abzeronow (talk) 20:50, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
 OpposeThey are obviously photo-manipulations and are therefore out of scope since the person doing the manipulation is not notable. Also note that I have carefully followed the instructions at Commons:500px licensing data to look for a license and found none. Finally, note that since 500px does not show a license icon or text with the images, the license may not be valid -- CC licenses must be shown with the image. In order to have a solid trail of evidence, we must have a clearly licensed image, not one where the license may or may not be buried in the source code at the source. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:40, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Jameslwoodward,
https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipP9Vqmou35w6ajS3vcDrEBbFaQGk56Kpiftl0ww7W3Cy3Jp8w3U7JJK3G3aUpq7FA?key=enRBVHhlZmpRZEhNc0czNnlseGFrUklJRlZQNnRR
You just need to correct follow the instructions
We have images from Paranomio here, that one time was clearly tag as free, now the project is over, we are the guarantee, exactly same thing here, with a bonus the possibility to verify.
A robot already did this work for us, even you not trusting the volunteers, is a fact that this images was previously published under a free license.
And we create permanent links with the license originally published:
example
Abzeronow,
As I explained before, 152946273, 152946275 are not "obviously photo-manipulations"
And excluding 156642269, 154288761, by a lack of warning is not the correct way to do things, this both photos only have "unreal" colours, but this colours do not completely remove their capability to illustrate the places and provide us a educational media.
-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 04:23, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

 Support see reasoning in #Files_uploaded_by_DarwIn. TL;DR: files have valid licenses and were deleted in error. Chico Venancio (talk) 20:09, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

The part of the decission referring to the copyright, may indeed be invalid. But the main part of the decission refers to scope issues that were not addressed in this request.  Oppose per Jim. Ankry (talk) 06:45, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done no evidence that images are in scope. Ankry (talk) 12:02, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

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

File:ZlWs9q3pxBM.jpg

Hello, I want to contact you with a request to restore this media file. I posted it in my article (https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Нурмагомедов,_Усман_Магомедович), because I think I have the right to use it, since it is in the public domain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aligiewa (talk • contribs) 19:13 29 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done From subject's Instagram post March 20, 2019, instagram.com. Thuresson (talk) 22:28, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/Archive/2019-03&oldid=344422496"