Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2020-07

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:Delfau-louis-personnage sur une jetee .jpg

This is the picture of a painting from Louis Delfau, a painter who died in 1937. The reference given with the nomination for deletion was an online arts sales point. I am sure there is no copyright violation, and kindly request that this picture is reinstated.

Besides, is it normal that the picture is deleted in 30 minutes time from first notice onwards? It doesnt give the user time to respond. In my case, I am new to Commons, and had to revert to an Administrator whose answer I am waiting for on how to deal with this.

Regards, --Chescargot (talk) 15:04, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Image has not been deleted. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:47, 29 June 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Corrado Ocone.jpg

OTRS agent (verify): request: Ticket:2020061610004579 alleges permission. I request temporary undeletion to assess the validity of that allegation, mark as {{subst:OR}} or otherwise appropriately, and ping me.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 17:32, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Jeff G.: FYI. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:45, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Palmaresprimero.jpg and File:Liberalprogresista.jpg

Both files are flags of political parties registered into the Tribunal Supremo de Elecciones (Supreme Electoral Tribunal) as can be seen here and here. According to the Tribunal own resolution number DRPP-1992-2016 all political party flags in Costa Rica are in public domain and can't hold copyright. I can send the resolution to everyone who wishes to, I have it in PDF sent to me by the president of a political party that received it or I can upload page by page in the form of screenshot I guess. Is not online as far as I'm aware. --Daioshin (talk) 16:11, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

The TSE's resolution can be read here in full:
Category:DRRP-1992-2016 --Daioshin (talk) 18:18, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
I wasn't trying to "make a point" I was trying to make available a judicial sentence (the TSE is a court). Anyway, I will try to upload the PDF doc to Mega and leave the link, but if it feels that is unnecesesary and that my word that the TSE document says what I say it says is enough fine for me. --Daioshin (talk) 22:53, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
I hope sharing a mega link doesn't violates any rule (I really didn't expected judicial sentences to be copyrighted). Link. --Daioshin (talk) 00:19, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
The text says that only if the author registers the image as his own thus he can claim authorship and gain moral rights (although not commercial rights as the text specifies that the flags can't be copyrighted for profit or for exclusive commercial use, in fact it says there's no way to avoid for third parties to profit from the images if they choose to do so). Non of those images are registered in the National Registry. --Daioshin (talk) 20:34, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 Comment The only way to verify this I think it's to deliver the resolution to OTRS and we read it. However, I'm questioning myself the validity of a resolution like this, which is not public. Besides, clearly these files are over the TOO. The only way to verify the flags are not registered in the National Register and to know the content of the resolution it's via OTRS, IMHO. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 01:31, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
What is OTRS? Ganímedes --Daioshin (talk) 03:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. I can do that, any email in particular I should send it? --Daioshin (talk) 04:05, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Send the files, the explanation of the problem and the resolution. If you speak Spanish, you can write in that language, or English, if you wish. --Ganímedes (talk) 12:22, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

OTRS agent (verify): request: we've received Ticket:2020061810009687 regarding these files. According to the note (which it's a reply letter and no a "resolution" of legal matter),

  1. although it is true that political parties cannot have copyrights, there is still the moral rights of whoever designed the badge ("moral copyright holder") and, even when he can't request money for that, "indisputably, the intellectual author of a party badge maintains, for all intents and purposes, its moral right over the work" (page 5).
  2. In the final abstract added:
    "Coalitions are not legal entities and therefore have no rights to intellectual property on their badges"
    A third party may commercially use the badges without the permission of the party or coalition, "as long as they are not previously registered with the Industrial Property Registry".
    Copyright of a moral nature is not extinguished in the event of dissolution, merger or cancellation of a political party

So, as far I understand:

  • nothing here says in explicit way that the badges are in public domain
  • IMHO we still need permission from the (moral) copyright holder (a.k.a. the author of the badge)
  • We need the confirmation of the political parties that their badges are not registered. Maybe a second opinion could be nice. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 22:47, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Alright I think it's a valid interpretation, what I would ask is if checking the National Registry to see if the work in question is not registered (and notice that I've chek myself and it seems that no political party flag or logo has ever been registered to this date, however some might have skipped my search) would imply that the work is free to use for the time been. I don't how Commons policies work with material that can be copyrighted at some point but it isn't at the moment.
Because I also wonder how the moral rights work. As the author can't profit from the work and can only request to be acknoledge, is this accomplished if the author's name is place in the file? And what happened when the name of the author is unknown (which is the case of the 100% of party's flags and logos as far as I'm aware). --Daioshin (talk) 02:45, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Uncertainty regarding their copyright status means that we cannot proceed with undeletion at the moment. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 12:17, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Carl Nicolas C. Cari.jpg

File deleted is under the public domain as it was created by a government entity, the Philippine House of Representatives. Source:http://congress.gov.ph/members/search.php?id=cari-c --AFLBulawan (talk) 17:33, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

@AFLBulawan: No image with this name has been deleted, nor any of your deleted images has a similar name. Which image you are talking about? Your deleted image are listed on your talk page. Ankry (talk) 18:13, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
@Ankry: Sorry, I meant File:Carl Cari Congressional Photo.jpg. --AFLBulawan (talk) 18:17, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
@AFLBulawan: Parliament is not government. Any evidence that the copyright law exception applies also to this site? Ankry (talk) 18:32, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
@Ankry: As to the Congress not being part of the PH Government, it is. I'm unaware if it's the same case in other countries, those with parliamentary systems, but in the Philippines, it is a branch of government, consisting of the executive, the legislative (the Congress), and the judiciary. Refer to https://pia.gov.ph/branches-of-govt. On the exception of copyright, refer to Section 176, Part IV of Republic Act No. 8293 or the Copyright Act of the Philippines on the matter of copyright of the works of the government, stating " No copyright shall subsist in any work of the Government of the Philippines." The Act's copy is here: http://booksphilippines.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/ra-8293.pdf. It's also on tackled a bit on a Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_Philippines#Works_of_the_government. --AFLBulawan (talk) 18:48, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
 Info Section 176: "No copyright shall subsist in any work of the Government of the Philippines. However, prior approval of the government agency or office wherein the work is created shall be necessary for exploitation of such work for profit." Thuresson (talk) 19:39, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
Well, if a work is not copyrighted, then the required permission for commercial use is a non-copyright restriction and irrelevant for Commons. This has been discussed earlier. Ankry (talk) 18:53, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment Both the website of the House of Representatives and that of the Senate of the Philippines both assert copyright (Please see the footers: © HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES and © Senate of the Philippines. All rights reserved.). --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 13:44, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
    • Unsure, how this should be interpreted. Maybe, the copyright declaration applies to works for hire, made by third parties who are not govt employees? Ankry (talk) 18:59, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
    • The problem I see is there is very little clarity. And very much akin, but also different to the issue I was dealing with a while back with works of the U.S. State of Washington. The executive branch of the Washington State Government, through the Washington Secretary of State's office asserted that works of the WSG are in public domain. On the other hand, while the Washington State Legislature makes no assertions concerning legislative business (bills and statutes, meeting agendas and minutes, legislative journals, etc), it does specifically assert copyright on photographic works by employees of the legislature (specifically, the Legislative Support Services).
      Regarding the Philippines, while the legislature is a branch of the Philippine government, the question is whether it is part of the Government of the Philippines for the purposes of this act. Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 06:23, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
      • The Philippines inherited the no-government-copyright aspect of their law from the U.S., so I'd think all branches (executive, legislative, judicial) are all part of the government. The existence of copyright notices is probably just placeholder stuff in website software. A "work of the Government of the Philippines" is a work created by an officer or employee of the Philippine Government or any of its subdivisions and instrumentalities, including government-owned or controlled corporations as a part of his regularly prescribed official duties. Carl Lindberg (talk) 18:33, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
    • I will also note, general practice, in such cases, is for someone (i.e. the uploader or UD requester per COM:EVID to contact the Legislature (such as their Press and Public Affairs Bureau) and have OTRS in cc. Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 07:30, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
    • Another issue I see is the fact that photos on the websites of both houses of Congress, of the government and other in the Philippines have a tendency to post images stripped of their metadata, and no notice or credit is given either to themselves, to their staff, or to whatever photographer was hired to take the photo, adding to the uncertainty of the photo's copyright status. Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 17:47, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
    •  Info Administrative Code of 1987 (E.O. 292 (1987) §2(1)) states "Government of the Republic of the Philippines refers to the corporate governmental entity through which the functions of government are exercised throughout the Philippines, including, save as the contrary appears from the context, the various arms through which political authority is made effective in the Philippines, whether pertaining to the autonomous regions, the provincial, city, municipal or barangay subdivisions or other forms of local government." --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 00:10, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
      •  Comment: I will note, however, this does not make any more clear as it could easily interpret the term "corporate governmental entity" as either being just the executive or both three branches of power. Additionally, even if we accept the latter, there remains a number of issues such as lack of credit and the complete stripping of metadata, the clear assertion of copyright on the website of both houses of Congress, etc. There is just a substantial lack of clarity. As I've stated above: the general practice, in such cases, is for someone (i.e. the uploader or UD requester per COM:EVID to contact the Legislature (such as their Press and Public Affairs Bureau) and have OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org) in cc. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 00:10, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 Oppose I'm not convinced that residents of Philippines can safely use government works for profit. More information is required as to how this has been handled in the courts or if there is any legal opinion by legal experts in Philippines. Thuresson (talk) 14:02, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per the discussion above. If you disagree with this decision: for the possibility of undeletion, please contact the Legislature (such as through their Press and Public Affairs Bureau) to confirm whether or not the image is in public domain and have OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org) in cc. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:41, 30 June 2020 (UTC)


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

Files by Luis Bagaría

Copyright in Spain for content by authors dead before 7 December 1987 lasts 80 years after the death, per this, not 80+1. Luis Bagaría (Q504959) died in 26 June 1940. Restoration should not happen until tomorrow. Strakhov (talk) 11:46, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

  •  Oppose - No, copyright expires at the end of the calendar year of the term, which is why we commonly state terms as date of death + term + 1. Ignoring URAA issues, if any, these will not be PD until 01.01.2021. (26 June 1940 + 80 = 26 June 2020, which "rounds" to 31.12.2020 as copyright terms are generally based on whole years.) Эlcobbola talk 13:32, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
 Comment According to Spanish law " La propiedad intelectual corresponde a los autores durante su vida, y se trasmite a sus herederos testamentarios o legatarios por el término de ochenta años. También es trasmisible por actos entre vivos, y corresponderá a los adquirentes durante la vida del autor y ochenta años después del fallecimiento de éste si no deja herederos forzosos."
According to 1879 Spanish law " y corresponderá a los adquirentes durante la vida del autor y ochenta años después del fallecimiento de éste" (no next year clause)
So these works are in the public domain in Spain. Aren't they? If not, why not?
Are they in the United States? They were published in 1908-05-08... According to COM:URAA: "No works published before 1 January 1925 anywhere in the world are in copyrighted in the US. This is absolute and not changed by the URAA". How does URAA affect these files? Anyway, if they are not, someone may want to revisit this recent undeletion. Strakhov (talk) 13:44, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
They're not for the reason I explained, which is consistent with comments at your linked discussion. Why do you believe Spain is unique in allowing for mid-year term expiration? I didn't say the URAA affects these files, thus the "if any." Эlcobbola talk 13:48, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Clindberg explained it pretty well in the link I provided in the first comment: Their 1987 law had the January 1 provision, but you're right, not sure the older law does (that type of clause became more common in the second half of the 20th century) so those 80pma terms may expire on the anniversary itself. But the EU is now a minimum 70pma to the end of the year; older laws are mostly obsolete except in rare cases like Spain's. Strakhov (talk) 13:57, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
"[N]ot sure the older law does [...] so those 80pma terms may expire" is neither an explanation nor substantiated conclusion. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and the purport that Spain calculates terms differently than all, or substantially all, of its treaty partners is a claim that needs more evidence than hemming and hawing. Эlcobbola talk 14:27, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
"hemming and hawing" is some how disrespectful. Extraordinary? It's what the law says. I guess prolonging copyright of old authors for a few months when precisely trying to set a shorter copyright doesn't make much sense. Anyway, feel free to revisit previous undeletions on this basis. Strakhov (talk) 14:36, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
"hemming and hawing" is not disrespectful. When your self-proclaimed English is only EN-2, perhaps you, especially as an admin, should not make uncharitable linguistic assumptions. Эlcobbola talk 14:43, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
I did consult merriam webster before replying. And, TBH, reading I'm bypassing, circumventing, caviling (or cavilling), quibbling, straddling, equivocating, fudging, hedging, pussyfooting, tergiversating, waffling, weaseling feels irrespectful to me, and, as a bare minimum, pretty condescending. Strakhov (talk) 15:14, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Those on the correct side of an issue do not resort to tone policing--it's a distraction, and telling. Your interpretation of the term is wrong, and that you simultaneously complain about disrespect and call me condescending is amazingly tone deaf. Эlcobbola talk 15:23, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Well. Ok. We can close the tone policing bit, both ways. Have you actually read the Spanish law, or the links below? You only list German and English in your userpage after all. Strakhov (talk) 15:39, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Spain used to have 80pma terms. In 1987, they changed the law to have 60pma terms instead. However in the transitional provisions, they said that the term for authors who died before the 1987 law came into effect continued to have the terms from the old law (which dated from 1879). The 1987 law was 60pma then to the end of the calendar year, but it's not clear if the previous law had that provision. Older laws typically expired on the anniversary of the date of death; it was not until more in the middle of the 20th century that the "end of the year" provisions started to appear in laws. The U.S., for example, I think only implemented that in their 1976 law. I have not found the text of the 1879 law in effect immediately prior to the 1987 law, to know if there was some modification of that law later in the 1900s which implemented the end-of-year thing, but I'm pretty sure the original 1879 law[1] did not. The EU extension to 70pma in Spain is also end-of-year of course, but those longer 80pma terms (being longer) are still in effect basically. However, you could not lengthen the terms more than they already were, if longer than 70pma. We have undeleted some files here recently under the assumption that the older grandfathered 80pma terms did not contain an end-of-year provision, meaning they continue to expire on the anniversary of the date of death -- that would seem to be the most likely. I don't think anyone has pointed out an amendment to the 1879 law which added the end-of-year provision, at least, so the only text we know of does not contain that provision, so that is what we have been going by. Carl Lindberg (talk) 15:29, 26 June 2020 (UTC)


✓ Done: per discussion above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 12:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:La Lagunita Country Club, año 1987.jpg

Photos are from a family archive. Wikinfo123 (talk) 07:12, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: There are alot of unanswered questions. Therefore, we cannot proceed with undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:43, 30 June 2020 (UTC)


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

File:20200319Long Beach, California.jpg

Request undeletion of file for inadequate attribution, please add Own work for attribution 木头灵 (talk) 10:17, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

  •  Oppose Image was previously published elsewhere (per its metadata). Per policy, the copyright holder (typically the photographer, unless transferred by operation of law or by contract--written and signed by the original copyright holder) must send permission and a specific release under an acceptable free licence using OTRS for the possibility of undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 11:50, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per above. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:43, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Truman Taylor.jpg

Own work. Please undelete. Happlyi (talk) 17:32, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

 Oppose OTRS needed. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:37, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder (typically the photographer, unless transferred by operation of law or by contract--written and signed by the original copyright holder) must send permission and a specific release under an acceptable free licence using OTRS. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 11:52, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

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

PPFCPoster.jpg

To Whom it May Concern,

As the producer of Project: Puppies for Christmas and co-owner of 1 Media Productions, I do indeed have the rights to the poster, I was instrumental in the design and layout. I appreciate the steps you all have taken to protect us. Please undelete the image and remove the copyrights violations complaint against me.

Thank you,

Frank Parrillo 1 Media Productions, LLC 5300 West Sahara Ave #106 Las Vegas, NV 89146 702-829-4104 frank@1mediaproductions.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panch10963 (talk • contribs) 22:52, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

  •  Oppose - Because any user can upload anything, we require additional evidence of permission when works have been previously published and when rights are owned by a corporate entity (to verify, for example, that users are in fact authorised agents thereof). This permission can be provided using the process at COM:OTRS. The OTRS agent who processes the ticket will restore the image, or request its restoration, for you; there is nothing to be accomplished at UDR in the mean time. Эlcobbola talk 14:31, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per Эlcobbola. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 00:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Detail of Joannes Couchet virginal lid, Antwerp, krulbollen.png

There are three files:

All 3 images are from the Vleeshuis Museum in Antwerp, Belgium. According to an email I received from the museum, "we share all our photos under the CC0 1.0-licence, so they can be shared freely". I instructed the museum (a curator) to forward his written permission to permissions-commons wikimedia.org, but he must not have done so. I'd like to reach out and ask him again, so I'm requesting for these images to be undeleted. Bob9999999 (talk) 03:28, 30 June 2020 (UTC)Bob9999999

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 11:52, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:BarrelRollGames1.jpg , File:Wa1BarrelRollGames.jpg and File:Wa2BarrelRollGames.jpg

Those file we're deleted. The reason is "Copyright Violation" but there aren't copyright violation. I asked first the owners of these pictures and i work at this studio Barrel Roll Games. ZKiosk (talk) 12:49, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done @ZKiosk: The copyright holder must send a release under a free license following the instructions at COM:CONSENT. To verify the authenticity of the message, the email address should come from a domain such as witchit.com or barrelrollgames.com. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:59, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

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

File:BenjaminDisraeli.ogg

This is a recording of the Benjamin Disraeli wiki article. When I uploaded it, I didn't complete the licence template correctly. It should have said that it was licensed on the ShareAlike 3.0 licence. So a bot deleted the file. But now I can't reupload the same file with the correct licence template because I have previously uploaded an identical file which has been deleted. But am I right in saying that you don't usually undelete files unless the reason for deleting them was no right? So how would you recommend I go about reuploading this file with the correct licensing information? Thanks! {{Shayday~enwiki (talk) 14:48, 30 June 2020 (UTC)}}

✓ Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:17, 30 June 2020 (UTC)


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

File:SHALMA ELIANA.jpg

These files are deleted under the assumption of 'no permission' from the photographer and 'not own work'. I work for the recording company who these artists are signed to, who paid for the production of these photos and therefore own the copyright to them, and do not need permission to use them on our own artist pages. The photographer is listed as a courtesy credit and not as an owner. --Nadiah Ramli (talk) 14:53, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 12:18, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Example.jpg

The file is my own work and always has been. I don't know why it's been taken down as a possible copyright violation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Account2468 (talk • contribs) 15:39, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per Эlcobbola. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 10:43, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Roman Retzbach 2020.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Future-Institute?markasread=24314999&markasreadwiki=commonswiki#File:Roman_Retzbach_2020.jpg_was_recently_deleted

I have the permission to use the data (photo, bio, ...) "YvesMe (Wikipedia editor) is allowed to use my data (bio, cv, image, …)" https://future-institute.com/roman-retzbach/ --2003:E4:A740:2280:F170:2461:2B17:8EAF 15:53, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 12:19, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Monica_sharma_cosmetic_brand_shoot_2020.jpg

File:Monica_sharma_cosmetic_brand_shoot_2020.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cringethetics (talk • contribs) 19:59, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

  •  Oppose As the image was previously published elsewhere, per policy, the copyright holder (typically the photographer, unless transferred by operation of law or by contract--written and signed by the original copyright holder) must send permission and a specific release under an acceptable free licence using OTRS for the possibility of undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:54, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: No rationale for undeletion and OTRS required. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 12:20, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Olga Soldatova Opening Night.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: My name is Viacheslav Sidorenkov. I am the marketing director of our gallery (SAAS Gallery). We took this photo during the opening event (an exhibition by Olga Soldatova) at our gallery - SAAS Gallery. The photo belongs to our gallery and can be found on our site www.saas-kondon.com 82.31.125.87 20:32, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

  •  Oppose As the image was previously published elsewhere, per policy, the copyright holder (typically the photographer, unless transferred by operation of law or by contract--written and signed by the original copyright holder) must send permission and a specific release under an acceptable free licence using OTRS for the possibility of undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:50, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 12:20, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Maria Cevic opening night.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: My name is Viacheslav Sidorenkov. I am the marketing director of our gallery (SAAS Gallery). We took this photo during the opening event (an exhibition by Marija Cevic) on 28 FEBRUARY 2019 at our gallery - SAAS Gallery. The photo belongs to our gallery and can be found on our site https://www.saas-london.com/events. On the picture you can see the owner of the gallery Sofya Abbott. It doesn't belong to ValmonS photography, it's false information. 82.31.125.87 20:39, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

  •  Oppose As the image was previously published elsewhere, per policy, the copyright holder (typically the photographer, unless transferred by operation of law or by contract--written and signed by the original copyright holder) must send permission and a specific release under an acceptable free licence using OTRS for the possibility of undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:51, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 12:20, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:SAAS Gallery June 2018.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: My name is Viacheslav Sidorenkov. I am the marketing director of our gallery (SAAS Gallery). We took this photo during the opening night (an opening night of our gallery) on 29 June 2018 at our gallery - SAAS Gallery. The photo belongs to our gallery and can be found on our site https://www.saas-london.com/events. It doesn't belong to ValmonS photography, it's illegal claim and false information. 82.31.125.87 20:46, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

  •  Oppose As the image was previously published elsewhere, per policy, the copyright holder (typically the photographer, unless transferred by operation of law or by contract--written and signed by the original copyright holder) must send permission and a specific release under an acceptable free licence using OTRS for the possibility of undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:51, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 12:20, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Birshtein-Beautiful Summer-95x95cm.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: My name is Viacheslav Sidorenkov. I am the marketing director of SAAS Gallery where I personally took this picture. The artwork was exhibited during the solo exhibition by Anna Birshtein at our gallery and now belongs to SAAS Gallery. We would like to restore the image on our wikipedia pages as soon as it supports the section 'Notable exhibitions" in our article. Slavaholborn (talk) 20:53, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

  •  Oppose As the image was previously published elsewhere, per policy, the copyright holder (typically the photographer, unless transferred by operation of law or by contract--written and signed by the original copyright holder) must send permission and a specific release under an acceptable free licence using OTRS for the possibility of undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:51, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 12:21, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Silver_Ringed_Pin.jpg

Permissions in process of being updated — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Hunt Museum 2020 (talk • contribs) 08:33, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Image has not yet been deleted. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 11:41, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Bronze_Ringed_Pin.jpg

Permissions in process of being updated — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Hunt Museum 2020 (talk • contribs) 08:35, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Image has not yet been deleted. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 11:41, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Cresent-Shaped_Scraper.jpg

Permissions in process of being updated — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Hunt Museum 2020 (talk • contribs) 08:36, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Image has not yet been deleted. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 11:41, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Silver_Roman_Brooch.jpg, File:Flint_Arrow-head.jpg, File:Funeral_Vessel-_Kundika.jpg

Permissions in process of being updated — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Hunt Museum 2020 (talk • contribs) 08:37, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Image has not yet been deleted. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 11:41, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Lily Lian.jpg

File:Lily Lian.jpg

The reference image used for the illustration is in public domain

reference Source: photos and illustrations dated 1942 from Mandragore database of the Bibliothèque Nationale de France The underlying source material is in the public domain for the following reasons:{{PD-France}} {{PD-1996}} {{PD-BnFMandragorePic}} — Preceding unsigned comment added by Audioboss (talk • contribs) 19:22, 30 June 2020‎ (UTC)

Here is a link to a scanned document of Summary of inquiry (résumé de l'enquête) from the French National Library that clearly states the "public domain" status of the photograph that I scanned and used as a reference to my illustrated digital drawing for Lily Lian-- https://www.flickr.com/photos/44518673@N00/50064007228/in/dateposted-public/


Please note that the correct date of the file was 1948 --Audioboss (talk) 09:02, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

--Audioboss (talk) 09:00, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

  •  Oppose (1) {{PD-BnFMandragorePic}} has been depreciated and cannot be applied to uploads after 18 January 2018. Furthermore, the image does not belong to the BnF's Mandragore collection and, therefore, the tag is not applicable to this image. (2) While {{PD-France}} may apply (and the file is, therefore, in public domain in France), the file does not qualify for {{PD-1996}} as it does not fulfill all three requirements laid out in the tag: the file was not in public domain in France on 1 January 1996--as such, per COM:URAA, U.S. copyright laws apply and is, therefore, copyrighted for 95 years and will enter public domain at the end of 2043. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 11:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Image will enter public domain in the US at the end of 2043 at the earliest, and can be undeleted at such time. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 17:01, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:מיכל ויצמן - יוני 2020.jpg

we are a digital service provider that are authorised by the questioned facebook account holder we are requested by her to change the wikipedia profile photo

it is an urgent matter and would like it to be resolved asap please

alon simhi citcom Digital Marketing citcom.co.il--Alonsimhi (talk) 10:09, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done Per De728631. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:40, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Txusmi, Tatyana y Evgeniya.png

== [[File:Txusmi, Tatyana y Evgeniya.png|thumb|Fotografía del escritor Jesús María Sáez junto a las modelos Tatyana Romanovich y Evgeniya Zakusylo]] ==

The photograph is allowed for free distribution by its owner who is Jesús María Sáez. As indicated on its page: https://www.txusmi.com/multimedia Pilar Vázquez (talk) 16:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. @Pilar Vázquez: If you disagree with deletion of this file, please join the discussion located at the following: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Txusmi, Tatyana y Evgeniya.png. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 17:43, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Solareclipse2020.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Should be own work. The user just use a telescope to view the eclipse. 58.152.205.76 16:53, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done: I think JuTa was confused about where the blue circle came from, thinking it must have been copied from somewhere. I was also confused for over a minute. Then I realized, the user just took his phone and held it up to the eyepiece of their telescope. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:16, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Brad barron KYsenateUS1 (2).jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Candidate for office. Public face. Deletion is vote suppression. Bobisthegood (talk) 18:14, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: One's political beliefs or political leaning are irrelevent to the question at hand--deletion is NOT vote suppression. Our sole concern with regards to the image in question is its copyright status. Deletion was in accordance with Commons' licensing policy and policy on fair use. Please note that non-free content ('free' defined as libre and not gratis) and non-free content under fair use is not permitted here and is subject to immediate deletion. For images to be hosted on Wikimedia Commons, the images must either be under an acceptable free licence or in public domain as defined by the law (either as a result of the expiration of copyright protection or an exemption from protection as enumerated under the copyright laws of the country of origin AND the United States). As this image was previously published elsewhere, for the possibility of undeletion (which may not be guarenteed if the image is subject to deletion under another policy), the copyright holder (i.e. the actual photographer, unless transferred by operation of law or by contract (written and signed by the original/first copyright holder as defined by copyright law)) must send permission and a specific release under an acceptable free licence using OTRS. Please note: Do not recreate/reupload the image under any circumstances, as recreating deleted content outside of process is not allowed, and doing so repeatedly may cause you to lose your editing privileges. Thank you for understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:45, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Brad barron KYsenateUS.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Political candidate. Fair use is authorized. Editors attempting election interfering, guess they are alright with that. Bobisthegood (talk) 18:25, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

File:Brad barron KYsenateUS1 (2).jpg

Restore image. Political candidate — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobisthegood (talk • contribs) 18:31, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


 Oppose Per Commons:Fair use. Thuresson (talk) 18:58, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: One's political beliefs or political leaning are irrelevent to the question at hand--deletion is NOT vote suppression. Our sole concern with regards to the images in question is their copyright status. Deletion was in accordance with Commons' licensing policy and policy on fair use. Please note that non-free content ('free' defined as libre and not gratis) and non-free content under fair use is not permitted here and is subject to immediate deletion. For images to be hosted on Wikimedia Commons, the images must either be under an acceptable free licence or in public domain as defined by the law (either as a result of the expiration of copyright protection or an exemption from protection as enumerated under the copyright laws of the country of origin AND the United States). As these images were previously published elsewhere, for the possibility of undeletion (which may not be guarenteed if the images are subject to deletion under another policy), the copyright holder (i.e. the actual photographer, unless transferred by operation of law or by contract (written and signed by the original/first copyright holder as defined by copyright law)) must send permission and a specific release under an acceptable free licence using OTRS. Please note: Do not recreate/reupload the images under any circumstances, as recreating deleted content outside of process is not allowed, and doing so repeatedly may cause you to lose your editing privileges. Thank you for understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:47, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:NTP Level 3 wall fence message 20200510.jpg

Reason: Not clearly to show the whole graphic works (an unavoidable part of the image subject and blocked by the notice and fence) and it is not the focus point of this photo, it is de minimis.--

  •  Support Despite the size of the advertisement, intent is what matters for COM:DM. The texts on the protest signs are too short to be eligible for copyright protection. In most such cases we would crop out the offending portion, but here if we tried to crop the top it would destroy the context that the photo is taken in a shopping mall, and cropping the left would also diminish the image by removing the protest sign on the left. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:59, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Weak oppose Unfortunately, I disagree with KoH assessment. The image, in its current state, does not qualify under COM:DM as the copyrightable work is just so prominent and, as such, I would need to  Oppose undeletion at this time. However, if a gaussian blur was applied to just the add (or even just the cars pictured), I would inclined to  Support undeletion. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 00:19, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment Wpcpey has uploaded a blur version File:NTP Level 3 wall fence message 20200510-blur.jpg. --A1Cafel (talk) 02:45, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: With the uploading of File:NTP Level 3 wall fence message 20200510-blur.jpg, this request is now moot. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 02:55, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Jennifer Provencher .jpg

OTRS agent (verify): request: we've received Ticket:2020063010000921 regarding File:Jennifer Provencher .jpg. Please restore in order to verified veracity and finish the process. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 01:10, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: The submitted photo does not match the deleted photo. Please proceed to upload the photosubmission on their behalf. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:14, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Lola Astanova new.jpg

Hi there, this photo was properly credited and should be put back. The credit belongs to "Misha Levintas" who took the photo and owns the copywrite. His name was included in the submission. The facebook link that flagged this picture is from the same exact source. Please reconsider this. Thank you.--Danielinnov8 (talk) 05:19, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

As with all previously published images, we need confirmation from the copyright holder that they wish to publish it under a free license. Such confirmation can be sent through COM:OTRS. The copyright holder will usually be the photographer, in this case possibly Misha Levintas. Mr Levintas could also have a contract with the photographer that allows him to use the photo on facebook and such, this is not a free license! --rimshottalk 06:06, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Rimshot. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 01:53, 3 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Yaelbendel.jpg

Hi. This photo is the official portrait taken by the Ministry of its head, Yael Bendel. As such its been used in many media outlets to ilustrate an interview, editorial or mention. There is no copyright violation as the Ministry is part of the Justice system, and the photo is offered for publication and use. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcrube (talk • contribs) 17:37, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

 Oppose That does not allow me to sell coffee cups with this photo. See also Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Argentina. Thuresson (talk) 21:15, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 01:53, 3 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:ADLINK-I-Pi-SMARC-devkit.jpg

Hello, this picture ADLINK-I-Pi-SMARC-devkit.jpg shows ADLINK product and I"m ADLINK product marketing manager for this product. This image can be viewed, shared and copied without any restrictions. Tomasz Swatowski tomasz.swatowski@adlinktech.com--TomaszSwatowski (talk) 02:48, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done @TomaszSwatowski: Please send us an email from your adlinktech.com email address, following the instructions at COM:CONSENT, so we can confirm the permissions. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:07, 3 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Test 8.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This is window, no copyright violation 219.78.191.207 02:49, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done I didn't realize we had so few images of insect screens. Clearly in scope now. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:02, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Different Ring Of Fire.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Probably the uploader's work, just in telescope view 219.78.190.195 02:37, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

  •  Oppose This image is different from the above image that KoH has restored. It is small, a bit unnatural. It is somehow copied from others, and pretends to have a telescope view. IMO it is unlikely to be own work. --A1Cafel (talk) 06:24, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:39, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

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

Images deleted as a result of Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Pyramid of Tirana

Would it not be appropriate to undelete these images? FoP is now accepted in Albania (per COM:FOP Albania)

Thanks. - Themightyquill (talk) 19:21, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done per {{FoP-Albania}} Ankry (talk) 17:31, 4 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Леон_Вайнстайн_и_Сергей_Михалков.jpg

This is real photo, my personal property, made by myself. I'm sure it's deleted because of political reasons - because of U.S.presidential campaign. Re-nomination of the file brings nothing - they will delete it again and again. Milena Cotliar 1970 (talk) 02:54, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done No response. @Milena Cotliar 1970: Please, reopen when you are ready to respond. Ankry (talk) 06:45, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Persian gulf university logo.png

Dear Team wikimedia

hello! unfortunately ive forgotten to mention image licenses so you have deleted the image ive uploaded. as a member of the university they told me to expand their article and its their logo that i use in persian gulf university and دانشگاه خلیج فارس article although here are the informations and licenses:

Description Persian Gulf University Logo
Date between 1990-1995
Source https://en.pgu.ac.ir/
Author https://en.pgu.ac.ir/ 
licenses :

{{Non-free Scout logo}}

{{PD-Iran}}

{{Non-free with permission}} --Miladdavoodi (talk) 08:38, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm afraid these licenses are not all applicable. Non-free licenses are not allowed on Commons, that's why the license links don't work for #1 and #3 (what's a scout logo got to do with a university anyhow?). As for PD-Iran: if the rights were transferred to the university (quite likely, for a logo), then the 30 years from publication might apply. Is there any information on when this logo was first used? First half of 1990 would just be enough for 30 years. --rimshottalk 10:53, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Rimshot. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:34, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:AmirBlumenfeldIfIWereYou.jpg should be undeleted because it was uploaded by the photographer

The nominator for deletion said they 'doubt' that the uploader is actually the photographer, but provided absolutely no explanation for this. This image is used in multiple articles and its removal reduced the quality of those articles. The image should be restored or the nominator should provide evidence that the uploader is not the photographer in question, for example by contacting the photographer. Anne drew Andrew and Drew (talk) 16:42, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done Per above. Uploader, who left the project four years ago, was notified of the deletion request. Thuresson (talk) 16:09, 4 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Олимпия.png File:Logo CD Marino.png

I ask you to restore the file File: Олимпия.png since this is the official logo of the club, which is present on the team’s form, it is on the team’s website http://mhkolimpia.ru/ where work is temporarily underway, as well as social networks team https://www.instagram.com/mhkolimpia/ https://vk.com/mhkolimpia

In addition, restore File: Logo CD Marino.png since at the moment it is the club’s official logo, which is listed on the team’s website http://www.cdmarino.es/ and in all the team’s social networks in the public domain . Before that, there was an old logo, which showed the wrong year of foundation of the club .-- Rzhevka ( talk ) 17:38, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

 Oppose "АНО МХК "Олимпия" © 2020" at [2]. "© Copyright 2018, Club Deportivo Marino" at [3]. Thuresson (talk) 09:24, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:44, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

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

Polandball-related images uploaded by Universalis

I request the restoration of the following files:

The reason: these files were done entirely by me, without any outside source of inspiration. Therefore, they are appropiate for Commons.

Thanks in advance.

--Universalis (talk) 18:29, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

  •  Support No evidence of prior publication found on Tineye, so I see nothing wrong with these specific images; unlike photos, there isn't really anything the creator can do to prove that they created it so we ought to take their word for it absent evidence to the contrary. As for Polandball in general, precedent shows that reasonably high-quality Polandball comics are in COM:SCOPE, and the basic idea behind Polandball is below COM:TOO for the purposes of COM:FAN. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:49, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:02, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

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

Category:License plates of Heilbronn

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This category will be revived without re-creating the category with empty description. Allo002 (talk) 19:09, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done No longer empty. Ankry (talk) 17:20, 4 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Hong Kong Palace Museum Consultation 201701.jpg

Just a exhibition display and cannot show the 2D works clearly. It should not delete. User 17jiangz1 making frivolous copyright violation claims. --Wpcpey (talk) 09:01, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

  • Weak  Oppose While the text (beyond what is PD-ineligible for being too short) is illegible and the images, taken individually, would be COM:DM, the display as a whole was clearly arranged with intent, so in the end I think we are looking at one collective work featured prominently in the middle of the photo. But I'd like to hear the opinions of others here. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:22, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The image focuses on the tables. And I found User:Wpcpey's comment about another user activity unnecessary and inappropriate. Ankry (talk) 17:52, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per KoH and Ankry. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 00:44, 5 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Toman Pavel PhDr. - předseda SVUV.jpg

Stránka pochází z webu SVUV jehož jsem správcem. Jedná se o foto předsedy sdružení pana Tomana, který o umístění fotky na Wikipedii ví a za tímto účelem mi ji i zaslal.... pokud by to, bylo nutné, mohu jej požádat o nějaký jiný způsob autorizace... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xhavlicd (talk • contribs) 20:17, 4 July 2020‎ (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 13:25, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Aarohi Patel.jpg +1

File:Aarohi Patel.jpg and File:Aarohi Patel At GIFA 2019.jpg; OTRS permission received (https://ticket.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentTicketZoom&TicketNumber=2020070110004274). The admin who deleted the files seems to be inactive for about a month now, so placing a request for undeletion here. KCVelaga (talk · mail) 23:07, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done: @KCVelaga: FYI. Please note the sender does not match the attributed artist in the EXIF metadata. Thank you. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 00:40, 5 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Muntader.jpg

it's for famous person — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muntader saleh (talk • contribs) 09:25, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Procedural close, no file with this name has been created or deleted. Thuresson (talk) 11:05, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Muntader (2).jpg

it's used in Wiki data and Wikiquote — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muntader saleh (talk • contribs) 09:26, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Procedural close, discuss this at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Muntader (2).jpg. Thuresson (talk) 11:03, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Los Saicos en televisión vivo directo '65.jpg

The image has Free Copyright permission, it was my mistake not to put the corresponding template that allows this image to be here: {{PD-Peru-photo}}

(Rolo Mai (talk) 17:47, 21 June 2020 (UTC))

✓ Done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 02:28, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

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

Madonna's photos deleted as a result of Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Fashion dolls

Not sure if COM:TOYS applies here, I think it didn't because a person is not a cartoon with copyright like Mickey Mouse/Pokemon etc. All of them have appropriate licenses.

--Apoxyomenus (talk) 10:01, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per De728631. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 20:01, 6 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Kalmen Wewryk nach Krieg undatiert.jpg bitte wiederherstellen

Dies ist das Bild eines der wenigen Überlebenden des Aufstandes von Sobibor. Und es wäre eine Schande, wenn wir, nachdem wir erst jetzt auf Kalmen Wewryk aufmerksam geworden sind, dises Bild nicht bereitstellen.

Ich will die Berechtigung/Bewilligung kurz darlegen. Bitte unterstützt mich gegebenenfalls bei der wiederherstellung:

Kalmen Wewryk war mehrmals Gast des BILDUNGSWERK STANISŁAW HANTZ, und mit Einverständnis von Kalmen Wewryk hat das Bildungswerk sein(e) Foto veröffentlicht. https://bildungswerk-ks.de/img/sobibor/kalmen-wewryk/view

Und Mitarbeiter des Bildungswerkes haben mir das Bild ausdrücklich zur Veröffentlichung auf der Wikipedia-Seite zugesandt und sich danach für den Artikel bedankt. Man könnte auch dort moch einmal direkt (ausdrücklich) nachfragen.

Ich bitte um die umgehende Wiederherstunng des Fotos auch auf der Seite https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalmen_Wewryk , danke für eure Unterstützung.

This is the picture of one of the few survivors of the Sobibor uprising. And it would be a shame if, having only now become aware of Kalmen Wewryk, we do not provide this picture. I will briefly explain the authorization/authorization. Please support me in restoring it if necessary: Kalmen Wewryk has been a guest of BILDUNGSWERK STANISŁAW HANTZ several times, and with Kalmen Wewryk's consent the Bildungswerk has published his photo(s). https://bildungswerk-ks.de/img/sobibor/kalmen-wewryk/view And employees of the Bildungswerk sent me the picture explicitly for publication on the Wikipedia page and thanked me afterwards for the article. One could also ask there directly (explicitly).

I ask for the immediate restoration of the photo also on the page https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalmen_Wewryk , thanks for your support.

--Hajog (talk) 12:35, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

 Oppose Looks like a professional portrait photo, not a selfie. Thuresson (talk) 13:38, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Having consent of the subject does not provide one with the necessary permissions to publish or host this image on Wikimedia Commons, as we need not the permission of the subject but of the copyright holder (typically the photographer, unless transferred by operation of law or by contract -- written and signed by the first/original copyright holder as defined by the law) and for that individual to provide a specific release under an acceptable free licence. Thank you for your understanding. Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 14:24, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 20:01, 6 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Videokonference JMK s JČK.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Not explained, why this picture should be a violation of Commons:Screenshots. No screenshot was a major part of the picture. It was an interior photograph of a videoconference room at the New State House building, residence of the South Moravian Region government. Bazi (talk) 16:06, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

The image is a shot of 3 monitor screen (insofar a screenshot), which shows 7 likely not-own images on 2 of the depicted screens. I do not object to a temp-restoration if others want to examine the image. --Túrelio (talk) 16:13, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Those monitor screens are life videoconference transmissions with no author influence on them, they can't be subject of copyright. If you mean the images on walls in those videoconference rooms, they definitely can't be major subject of the photo. I assume the deleted photo is very similar to these two: File:Videokonference JMK s JČK 2.jpg, File:Nový zemský dům - videokonferenční místnost.jpg. --Bazi (talk) 17:12, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
It shows indeed the same as File:Videokonference JMK s JČK 2.jpg, but only about the right half of that image. --Túrelio (talk) 18:20, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Ok. --Bazi (talk) 10:49, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: The image does cross into the territory of being derivative of copyrighted work as the work (the collage of images) and the works depicted (the images themselves) are a significant part. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 20:03, 6 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:IPadOS 13 Wallpaper.jpg

Undelete now please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikky4636 (talk • contribs) 21:41, 5 July 2020‎ (UTC)

If the image is the default background from Apple, then they would own the copyright, and would need to license it. I'm guessing that did not happen here. For what reason do you think this should be undeleted? Carl Lindberg (talk) 21:48, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: No valid rationale for undeletion. The file is assumed to be copyrighted, non-free content. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 20:04, 6 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Tawanda-kanhema-profile.jpg

Please undelete this file. It has permission since I received it directly from the subject of the photo taken at his request by his relative and released CC-BY by them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arjie (talk • contribs) 02:17, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Arjie (talk) 02:20, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

  •  Oppose Ownership or possession of a photo, proprietorship of the equipment used to take the photo, or being the subject of the photo does not equate holding the copyright. The copyright holder is the photographer (i.e. the person who took the photo), rather that the subject (the person who appears in the photo) or the person possessing the photo, unless transferred by operation of law (e.g. inheritance, etc.) or by contract (written and signed by the copyright holder, and explicitly transfers the copyright). For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 02:33, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 01:12, 7 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Despot in Action 2019.jpg

Photo has been taken by professional photograph per our request. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dvlpmt (talk • contribs) 11:09, 6 July 2020‎ (UTC)

  •  Oppose @Dvlpmt: Ownership or possession of a photo, proprietorship of the equipment used to take the photo, or being the subject of the photo does not equate holding the copyright. The copyright holder is the photographer (i.e. the person who took the photo), rather that the subject (the person who appears in the photo) or the person possessing the photo, unless transferred by operation of law (e.g. inheritance, etc.) or by contract (written and signed by the copyright holder, and explicitly transfers the copyright). For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 20:13, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 01:12, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:JuliaDraganovic-Villa-Massimo-Foto-Alberto-Novelli-cropped.jpg

The photographer Alberto Novelli just sent his release via E-Mail. Could you please undelete the image? Thank you. --Kaethe17 (talk) 15:16, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: File being processed by OTRS. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:39, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Example.jpg

Please undelete my page. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2401:4900:1217:2D6A:2:1:FE7C:B14 (talk) 16:01, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close: we are unable to identify the file concerned. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 20:08, 6 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:تصویر_پروفایل_من.jpg

آیا من حق چاپ را رعایت نکردم؟ توجه داشته باشید که من یک کاربر فارسی زبان هستم ، بنابراین ممکن است در متن متن مشکل ایجاد شود. من خودم این تصویر را طراحی کردم و البته از نسخه اصلی ، معتقدم قانون را رعایت کردم. لطفا بیشتر برای من توضیح دهید. بلوک الماس دکتر (بحث) 07:31 ، 6 جولای 2020 (UTC) 

لطفاً توجه داشته باشید که هر آنچه که در اینجا و در اینترنت مشاهده می کنید یا می بینید که تصویر من توسط من ساخته شده است.  من حتی خودم بلوک را طوری طراحی کردم که مجازات نشوم.  من به قانون حق چاپ اعتقاد دارم.  لطفا عکس من را بپذیرید و بدانید که من خودم آنرا ساختم.  همچنین توجه داشته باشید که متن را با بلاک الماس Google Translator Dr به زبان شما ترجمه کرده ام

Didn't I respect copyright? Note that I am a Persian-speaking user, so there may be problems with the text. I designed this image myself, and of course from the original version, I believe I followed the law. Please explain to me more. Dr diamond block (talk) 07:31, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Please note that everything you see here and on the internet or you see my picture is made by me. I even designed the block myself so that I would not be punished. I believe in copyright law. Please accept my picture and know that I made it myself. Also note that I have translated the text into your language with Google Translator Dr diamond block — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr diamond block (talk • contribs) 08:01, 6 July 2020 (UTC)


--Dr diamond block (talk) 08:36, 6 July 2020 (UTC)File:تصویر_پروفایل_من.jpgDr diamond block (talk) 08:36, 6 July 2020 (UTC)--

آیا من حق چاپ را رعایت نکردم؟ توجه داشته باشید که من یک کاربر فارسی زبان هستم ، بنابراین ممکن است در متن متن مشکل ایجاد شود. من خودم این تصویر را طراحی کردم و البته از نسخه اصلی ، معتقدم قانون را رعایت کردم. لطفا بیشتر برای من توضیح دهید. بلوک الماس دکتر (بحث) 07:31 ، 6 جولای 2020 (UTC) 

لطفاً توجه داشته باشید که هر آنچه که در اینجا و در اینترنت مشاهده می کنید یا می بینید که تصویر من توسط من ساخته شده است.  من حتی خودم بلوک را طوری طراحی کردم که مجازات نشوم.  من به قانون حق چاپ اعتقاد دارم.  لطفا عکس من را بپذیرید و بدانید که من خودم آنرا ساختم.  همچنین توجه داشته باشید که متن را با بلاک الماس Google Translator Dr به زبان شما ترجمه کرده ام

Didn't I respect copyright? Note that I am a Persian-speaking user, so there may be problems with the text. I designed this image myself, and of course from the original version, I believe I followed the law. Please explain to me more. Dr diamond block (talk) 07:31, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Please note that everything you see here and on the internet or you see my picture is made by me. I even designed the block myself so that I would not be punished. I believe in copyright law. Please accept my picture and know that I made it myself. Also note that I have translated the text into your language with Google Translator Dr diamond block

✓ Done: Undeleted to open regular DR Commons:Deletion requests/File:تصویر پروفایل من.jpg. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 01:20, 7 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Indian Election Symbol Lotus.jpg

The lotus election symbol is a work of Election Commission of India. Link. The Copyright policy of the website states that works of the ECI can be reproduced free of charge in any format or media without requiring specific permission. --manas (talk) 10:15, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

 Oppose And continues: "However, the permission to reproduce this material does not extend to any material on this site, which is explicitly identified as being the copyright of a third party. Authorisation to reproduce such material must be obtained from the copyright holders concerned." This is the party symbol of the Bharatiya Janata Party. Thuresson (talk) 20:30, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 08:30, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Monica sharma cosmetic brand shoot 2020.jpg

Please do not delete this file, it's authentic & verified by the owner of the image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cringethetics (talk • contribs) 09:02, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 00:51, 8 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Betul-Kacar.jpg

Hello,

This photo has been provided (to me) by Dr. Betul Kacar herself, who was given this professional headshot by Nividita Chatani for her use. I will direct the release/permission to Commons:OTRS as soon as possible. Please hold the deletion. Thank you for your consideration.IF 08 Jul 20 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Istfer (talk • contribs) 09:22, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close, image has not been deleted yet. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 13:46, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

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

Angela-cavagna-2020.jpg

Buongiorno la prego di voler ripristinare l'immagine caricata ieri, in quanto vuole essere l'immagine del profilo aggiornato della Sig.ra Angela Cavagna. Ho chiesto alla signora Cavagna, di rimuovere appositamente il testo "Copyright" anche nella versione inglese e spagnolo del sito ufficiale www.angelacavagna.com in questo modo non dovrebbero esserci problemi di Copyright, grazie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marepiatto (talk • contribs) 11:07, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Image was recreated under different name. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 12:41, 9 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Afida Turner.jpg

File:Afida Turner.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Afida_Turner.jpg

This file was deleted but it was an error because I had uploaded it with the real ticket 2019121110006273 and the identity and authorization of the photographer Ronnie Turner.

Moreover, this image was replaced by another photo (currently on the wiki page)https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Afida_turner.jpg without authorization of the real photographer by a false member.

--Nikkilopez18 (talk) 08:28, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

 Oppose Can be undeleted if and when an OTRS volunteer process the ticket successfully. Thuresson (talk) 15:17, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 12:49, 9 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:BAUER.png

I accednently said it was not my own work at first. So, it got marked as a "copyright" violation. Please undelete BAUER.png!


Thank You, LueDash — Preceding unsigned comment added by LueDash (talk • contribs) 16:04, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per Эlcobbola. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 12:50, 9 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:IMG-20200515-WA0004.jpg

It is a picture from a singer/songwriter to whom I am the manager. I need it to set his Wikipedia page. Please, undelete it; — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dominyque Regison (talk • contribs) 16:35, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

  •  Oppose - Previously published images require evidence of permission from the author (as opposed to singer/songwriter manager) to be submitted using the process at COM:OTRS. Note also that using a sockpuppet to recreate images out-of-process, as you have, is not generally a tactic employed by genuine rightsholders and is thus particularlly poor optics. Эlcobbola talk 19:35, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per Эlcobbola. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 12:50, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Angela-cavagna-2020.png

Buonasera continuate a cancellare questa immagine che mi è stata "inviata" dalla Sig.ra Angela Cavagna direttamente sul mio cellulare tramite email. La foto è stata scattata dal marito Paolo Solimano quindi non ci sono problemi di Copyright su questa immagine in quanto è uno scatto fatto dal marito, ma non essendo loro capaci di caricarla su Wikipedia, hanno chiesto a me di farlo... ma continuate a cancellare questa immagine. Vi serve una dichiarazione scritta per poterla accettare questa immagine?

Fatemi sapere di cosa avete bisogno e ve lo farò avere... ma per favore non continuate a cancellarla! Non capisco il motivo... ripeto: la foto è stata scattata con un Iphone dal marito Paolo Solimano, ci conosciamo da molti anni e non avrei nessun problema a farvi anche scrivere una mail per autentificare la mia dichiarazione.

Grazie in anticipo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marepiatto (talk • contribs) 21:07, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Image was recreated under different name. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 12:42, 9 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:GUIMA Logo.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: The logo is a public institution of which it is part Caiquecsb (talk) 21:08, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

 Oppose Previously published at [4]. OTRS required to verify the license. Thuresson (talk) 21:39, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 12:50, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Anne Devereux-Mills.jpg

We have an OTRS ticket Ticket:2020062210010372 for this file from the photographer. Please undelete at your convenience. Ww2censor (talk) 22:26, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:13, 8 July 2020 (UTC)


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

Cook_Blues_Are_Still_Blue_350ppi.jpg

I am requesting that the file File:Cook_Blues_Are_Still_Blue_350ppi.jpg be undeleted. The image is my own and was placed in the public domain on flicker https://www.flickr.com/photos/189231938@N06/50089572968/in/dateposted-public/

The image is of a painting that significantly alters the original source material and uses a parody of the copyrighted album cover for the purpose of a research project which explores the relationships between object and images with attention to how the images are disseminated and experienced on a screen.

Since the image is entirely mine, was placed in the public domain, and does not infringe upon any copyright laws, I ask that the file be undeleted.

Thank you, Benjamincookart --Benjamincookart (talk) 23:05, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per KoH. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 12:46, 9 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:SpogmaiMic.jpg

File:SpogmaiMic.jpg this file was nominated to be deleted from Wikipedia, as I am new to Wikipedia and did not find an option to delete that file and agree with the decision, I decided to ask here for further assistance on how to delete that file so that it does not go against Copyrights. --Obaidnasary (talk) 12:25, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Image was tagged as no permission but has not been deleted. @Obaidnasary: Please follow the instructions on the tag or challenge the tagging by starting a deletion discussion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 12:45, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Angela Cavagna infermiera Striscia la notizia.jpg

Salve, questa immagine può essere ripristinata su Wikipedia, in quanto è stato chiesto al webmaster della Sir.ra Angela Cavagna, di rimuovere le diciture (Copyright) anche sulle versioni inglese e spagnolo del sito ufficiale angelacavagna.com, appositamente per poter pubblicare le immagini senza problemi, grazie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marepiatto (talk • contribs) 11:27, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Thank you for understading. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:25, 9 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:चार चरित्रात्मक लेख.pdf

The deleted book is in Marathi language. It was published in 1908. The author died 70 years ago. The license tags applicable are {{PD-India}} and {{PD-old-70-1923}}. Please restore the file. Thanks, --सुबोध कुलकर्णी (talk) 16:25, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

I quote from scope page - "However, Commons can be used to host such material if included in a shareable media file that is of use to one of the other Wikimedia Foundation-hosted (WMF) projects, so scanned copies of existing texts that are useful to other WMF projects (e.g. to serve as the basis of a reliable, verifiable source) are in scope. Also allowed are files which embody something of value over and above raw text. For example, files consisting of scans of out-of-copyright books, newspapers and the like which preserve original font, layout, embedded images and the like are within scope." - This is reference value out-of-copyright book which is to be used in Marathi Wikisource project as reliable, verifiable source. There are many such books in Category:Books in Marathi. Hope this suffices..thanks, --सुबोध कुलकर्णी (talk) 05:33, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done I restored this file which is very obviously free and in scope (like for almost all the 4.4 millions text in Wikisource). Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 07:07, 10 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Anil-Jain.jpg

I am requesting that the file File:Anil-Jain.jpg be undeleted. The image is my own and placed on my facebook page also https://www.facebook.com/draniljainarogya/ Since the image is entirely mine and does not infringe upon any copyright laws, I ask that the file be undeleted. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yogaguruaniljain (talk • contribs) 06:54, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

undeletion request — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yogaguruaniljain (talk • contribs) 05:09, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

  • @Yogaguruaniljain: Please provide a reason for your request. --A1Cafel (talk) 06:07, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose (1) No evidence that the image is under an acceptable free licence. Ownership or possession of a photo, proprietorship of the equipment used to take the photo, or being the subject of the photo does not equate holding the copyright. The copyright holder is the photographer (i.e. the person who took the photo), rather that the subject (the person who appears in the photo) or the person possessing the photo, unless transferred by operation of law (e.g. inheritance, etc.) or by contract (written and signed by the copyright holder, and explicitly transfers the copyright). For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. BUT (2) all that may be moot if the image is out of project scope and there is no evidence that such an image is in scope. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 16:37, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 00:37, 10 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Brave Browser Transparent.png

work at Brave and can authorize copyright — Preceding unsigned comment added by W0ts0n1 (talk • contribs) 16:46, 9 July 2020‎ (UTC)

 Not done: For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 00:38, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Official Lewisburg High School Logo.jpg

I am the creator of this logo {{Own}} {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} --Lwikpat (talk) 16:59, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

It looks like you used Photoshop. Can you send over the original PSD file to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org for verification? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:17, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 00:38, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:SiddharthShirole-Profile.jpg

The said photo is in public domain. Siddharth Shirole is elected representative in the City of Pune and his Profile photo has been shared by his media team for public use across print, digital and social media. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siddharths123 (talk • contribs) 17:17, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

  •  Oppose Photos in India are protected for 60 years from first publication. Government works (with the sole exception of works of the Tamil Nadu government) are not in public domain and are protected by copyright from the date of publication plus 60 years. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 17:39, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 00:37, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:"Call Me When You Have the Time" Image.jpg

This is a photo of me taken by my father in our garage. How can he contact you to give permission to publish this photo? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rubesongs (talk • contribs) 13:59, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

 Oppose en:Draft:Rübe is out of scope. Thuresson (talk) 15:00, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Draft submission has been declined on English Wikipedia. The file is, therefore, out of project scope here on Commons. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:30, 10 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Emma_Ellingsen.png

I don't see how the image is not free - it is from a Creative Commons YouTube video. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beevor54 (talk • contribs) 16:11, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

@Ankry: If you type in Emma Ellingsen on YouTube and filter the results to only see Creative Commons, that video comes up in the search results. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beevor54 (talk • contribs) 17:39, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
@Beevor54: No, it does not. Ankry (talk) 12:05, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
 Not done Per Ankry. OP uploaded another image of the subject instead. Thuresson (talk) 14:25, 11 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Jan van Steenbergen.jpg

This used to be my profile picture on wp.en and wp.pl, perhaps on a few other ones as well. To my surprise, I found out it had been deleted a while back. Obviously, it's a photo from my own private collection. I would appreciate it if it could be undeleted and put back on the pages where it used to be. Thanks in advance, IJzeren Jan (talk) 19:32, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

@IJzeren Jan: There are two photos under this name: one from 2005 and one from 2006. Do you request to undelete both? Who is the author of these photos? Ankry (talk) 19:48, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
@IJzeren Jan: File:Jan van steenbergen.jpg Lotje (talk) 20:05, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Well, this is another photo: the top one in File:Jan van Steenbergen.jpg is the bottom one in File:Jan van steenbergen.jpg, and the bottom one in File:Jan van Steenbergen.jpg is just another one. Ankry (talk) 20:16, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
I don't remember what it looked like, I rarely visit my own user page. I can tell you the details if I see it. If the page has a history, it would be best to undelete it as well. IJzeren Jan (talk) 20:27, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
✓ Done temporarily. @IJzeren Jan: Please confirm the photographer of the two photos. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:38, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks! It's many years ago, but in the case of these two photos I think I made them myself. I'm not very familiar with Commons though, so I don't really know how to handle this whole copyright thing. IJzeren Jan (talk) 21:08, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
But I do. I fixed the file description based on the information you provided. Natuur12 (talk) 21:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you so much for that, old friend! IJzeren Jan (talk) 21:22, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:32, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Gangacharan Dixit.gif

I don't think that image is a copyright violation. It comes from a source where is no copyright tag. Please verify your review. Thanks. A. Shohag

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:05, 12 July 2020 (UTC)


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

Undelet Charity logo File:FRAMElogo 2018.png

Hi,

I replaced the logo on this page en:Fund for the Replacement of Animals in Medical Experiments

I did this because it was showing our old charity logo. My name is Amy Beale and I work for FRAME. I can be found on the charity website under 'team'. My work email is amy@frame.org.uk You can email me to verify this. We were not happy that when you searched for 'FRAME' e.g on google, the Wikipedia reference was showing our old logo. We replaced this in 2018. Check on the FRAME website to see this new logo.

I deleted the old logo and tried to add our new one. I work for FRAME and give permission for the image to be used: FRAMElogo_2018.png

I would also add our FRAME logo is not currently copyrighted.

Many thanks,

Amy Beale Likesscampifries (talk) 11:53, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

@Likesscampifries: on what basis do you claim that the logo is not copyrighted in UK? UK ToO is quite low; the rabbit is complex enough to make it copyrighted, IMO. Ankry (talk) 15:03, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:05, 12 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Lucky Star ginger ale and Super Sonico itacha, ASOBITCITY 2013-03-04.jpg

This file is one that was subject to a brief deletion request here. I wondered about this one for a while, but I now feel confident in having a case for undeletion here. For those who are curious, the file can be seen here. Essentially, it's a photograph of a store shelf with bottles of ginger ale. It was deleted under COM:PACKAGING. Indeed, the bottles have packaging on them using characters from the Lucky Star anime as well as Super Sonico. However, I do not believe the photographs are copyright violations because the photograph is about a display as a whole where all elements thereof are either purely textual or incidental. As far as de minimis or "incidental" is concerned, I have the following arguments:

  • A lot of the packaging is obscured as-is (compare File:SeoulBus202.jpg).
  • Even if the cartoon characters are visible and mentioned in the file name, the work can still be de minimis overall if that was not the main point (compare File:7Feb06Low9thDebrisPileSpongebob.jpg and its DR).
  • If it's of a display as a whole, it is de minimis (compare File:Hentai comicbooks sold in Japan 002.jpg and its DR).
  • U.S. court cases have affirmed that photographs of useful objects in their entirety are not derivative of any copyrighted labels on them (thank you, Carl Lindberg, which I got from this DR):
    • "We need not, however, decide whether the label is copyrightable because Ets-Hokin's product shots are based on the bottle as a whole, not on the label. The whole point of the shots was to capture the bottle in its entirety. The defendants have cited no case holding that a bottle of this nature may be copyrightable, and we are aware of none. ... Because Ets-Hokin's product shots are shots of the bottle as a whole — a useful article not subject to copyright protection — and not shots merely, or even mainly, of its label, we hold that the bottle does not qualify as a "preexisting work" within the meaning of the Copyright Act." Ets-Hokin v. Skyy Spirits, Inc., 225 F.3d 1068, 1081 (9th Cir. 2000).
    • "Further weakening defendant-appellees argument is the fact that the ZX-14 motorcycles were the subject matter and primary focus of Latimer's photographs. Latimer's photographs can best be described as being 'based upon' the ZX-14 motorcycles, useful articles not subject to copyright protection. The fact that Hathaway's artwork appears in the photographs is merely incidental. However, we need not resolve the derivative work question if the photographs were made with Hathaway's authorization." Latimer v. Roaring Toyz, Inc., 601 F.3d 1224, 1234-35 (11th Cir. 2010).

With that all in mind, I believe it is a usable and useful file. Pinging relevant parties: @Yuraily Lic, Solomon203, and Christian Ferrer. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 01:24, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

In answer to "*U.S. court cases have affirmed that photographs ...", the example given by Clindberg seems to be about potential DW of US protected works. The deleted photo don't show a US work (apart from the photo itself according to where it have been published), and I don't I know to what extent the US copyright law, hence a US courtcase, can be applied to potential issues including works potentially protected by the copyright law of other countries.
In answer to King of Hearts, the argument "incidental" may be debatable, but COM:DM it is not, I quote: "A useful test may be to ask whether the photograph would be as good or as useful if the poster were to be masked out. If no, then it is difficult to argue that the poster is actually de minimis, even if the poster is small and is "in the background", the answer is clearly no, excepted for the center of the photo. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:49, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
The Berne Convention means that the US copyright law will protect works of any Berne nation (i.e. almost all of them), and the Japanese copyright law will protect works of any Berne nation. How much deference is given to the laws of the source nation may differ, but this is potentially protected by the laws of 178 nations. The US is special because the WMF is founded here and has servers here; I'm not sure where and how much the laws of Japan affect how this work would be treated anywhere outside of Japan.--Prosfilaes (talk) 08:25, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done COM:UNDEL is generally for quick requests, and it looks like this one requires deeper analysis. I have undeleted the image and listed it at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Lucky Star ginger ale and Super Sonico itacha, ASOBITCITY 2013-03-04.jpg for further discussion. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:13, 12 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Logo Xaviers Behror.jpg

This is a Logo of an educational institution / School which under Wikipedia's policy may be used in Wiki pages. under certain templates . Find required info here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Logos . This is only a trademark and not a copyrighted material .Undeletion is requested based on that . — Preceding unsigned comment added by राकेश5678 (talk • contribs) 14:38, 11 July 2020 (UTC) राकेश5678 (talk) 14:40, 11 July 2020 (UTC) User:राकेश5678 11 July 2020 19:00 .

Only free logos (when copyright expired or freely licensed) may be hosted in Wikimedia Commons. Fair Use logos may be hosted in Wikipedia directly. If the logo is 60+ years old, then it may be free. However, you declared the logo to be fresh new design, created today. Ankry (talk) 15:34, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per Ankry. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:06, 12 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Tariq-Aziz-file-image.jpg

The said image was deleted for possible copyright violation. It's original source was from a Twitter account which was linked with the image. I request it's undeletion because it was not a copyright violation since after the death of that personality (Tariq Aziz), it went into public domain and was used by every major news outlet in the country reporting his death and remembering him. [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] — Preceding unsigned comment added by USaamo (talk • contribs) 07:41, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

 Oppose There is nothing in Pakistani copyright law that says that photos of people who have passed away are public domain, see Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Pakistan. Also, if this is public domain why did you tag your upload with a Creative Commons CC-BY-SA tag? Thuresson (talk) 08:56, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
@Thuresson: I'm not saying his death made it go in public domain but its widespread use after death by media outlets, newspapers and social media. USaamo (talk) 13:03, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
There is no such paragraph or section in Pakistani copyright law where widely used photographs becomes public domain. Thuresson (talk) 13:29, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
The author of the image has no where expressed that widespread use of his image even by national media is infringement of his copyrights. So we have to assume that it's in public domain. As to Pakistani law it is least practiced and mostly silenced over this issue which implies of it not being copyright violation. USaamo (talk) 18:35, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Commons:Project scope/Precautionary principle:
Commons' users aim to build and maintain in good faith a repository of media files which to the best of our knowledge are free or freely-licensed.
The precautionary principle is that where there is significant doubt about the freedom of a particular file, it should be deleted.
Also, arguments that amount to "we can get away with it", such as the following, are against Commons' aims:
  1. "The copyright owner will not bother to sue or cannot afford to."
  2. "The copyright owner will never find out."
  3. "The copyright owner will not mind/should be pleased that we have disseminated their work."
  4. "Nobody knows who the copyright owner is, so it really doesn’t matter."
  5. "The file is obviously common property. It can be found all over the internet and nobody has complained."
Thuresson (talk) 20:37, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 01:09, 13 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:LincolnNebraskaPoliceProjectileBananaForScale.jpg Undelete please

Hello! I was trying to add my image, which I had previously posted to social media. I have removed the social media post. I would like the image to be here instead.

Nikkibinderup (talk) 13:35, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Nicole Binderup 07/13/2020

✓ Done The chance that a third party removed the Facebook post by sheer coincidence in the five hours between the deletion of the file and now is almost nil, so this is strong evidence that you are the owner of the Facebook post as claimed. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 13:46, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

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

Files uploaded by Berposen

What will happen to the other files? The topic has not been tackled, those are a separate dilemma. :( --Berposen (talk) 17:47, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

File:Monseñor Pedro Schumacher.jpg

The file was deleted in a very scrambled maintenance process. Several images were mixed that I uploaded myself, and I did not do it properly. I ask in the most attentive way to redo it, because they were already corrected, but they were mixed with the wrong ones. Best regards. --Berposen (talk) 17:18, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

@Berposen: The image was and is still missing an evidence that it is PD. You did not provide an evidence that its author "Bishopric of Portoviejo"(?) died more than 70 years ago, or, if the image is anonymous, that it was published more than 70 years ago. This site is definitely not so old. In order to undelete the image, we need the appropriate information that allow us to determine its copyright status. Ankry (talk) 07:14, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
@Ankry: If we take something this as an example?
Description lllll
Source lllll
Author Unknown author
Permission
(Reusing this file)		 PD-Old

What happens is that as much as I seek and seek, the portoviejo bishopric has not made clear who its author is. The source where I get the photograph, and many more places, also they are using the image of an unknown author, the photograph is over 100 years old, and because be in the public domain, they use it. --Berposen (talk) 21:47, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Can you provide a source showing that the image was created before 1900? Then we can accept it under {{PD-old-assumed}} even if we don't know anything else about the picture. The 1887 in this link appears to refer to when a particular event happened rather than when the picture was created. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:00, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
@King of Hearts: I have done my best to find, forgive my mediocrity. Digging deeper into Pedro's native language, German, I found that the photograph may have been extract from a source called katholischen Missionen, 1903 I beg for condescension. For now, logically, among all of us, we can conclude that the source extracts an image from before 1903, and that the person represented is between 30 and 40 years old. Pedro was born in 1839 and died in 1902 at the age of 63, one year before the source that extracted it, however it is unlikely that the author of the image had photographed it from the year 1900 onwards, and the closest thing to verifiability is the year 1887, the man represented in the image is not between 61 to 63 years old, which is the age he had between 1900 - 1902. But you are right that the years that this source has registered, more seem to refer to a particular event, but it is the closest thing I found to the date the image could have been photographed, I search and search and I cannot go further. --Berposen (talk) 17:41, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
✓ Done I am convinced by your arguments that it is unreasonable for the photo to have been created after 1900. Do you have anything to say for the other two files? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:51, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you. On the other two files, it does not happen in the same way, I downloaded them from the web equally, but in this case, it is very possible that the author of the images is still alive, however, I deduced that the newspaper that published the photos, under that license, those did it just because it was in the public domain, I don't know, I thought I corrected them correctly, sorry. --Berposen (talk) 13:48, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

One ✓ Done by King of ♥, three  Not done per discussion. Ankry (talk) 17:43, 13 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Zygmunt Klemensiewicz polityk portret NAC.jpg

The same reasons as in another deletion reject by User:Andrei Romanenko of similar juridical status. --Matlin (talk) 18:51, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

While it is rather clear to me that the photo is PD in Poland, it is still not clear what is its US copyright status (this was not discussed in the abovementioned DR). US copyright status depends on initial publication date for this photo: if it was published before 1989, then if falls under URAA and US copyright status depends on Polish copyright status in 1996 (so the photo would be PD); if it was published after 1989, then US copyright status is independent on Polish copyright status and 70pma or 95 post-publication or 120 post-creation rules apply (the latter two rules in the author is unknown or their death date is unknown). So the key question here is: was it published before March 1989, and if so, where exactly? Ankry (talk) 14:55, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Questions remain unanswer. User may resubmit UD request if they can answer the above questions. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 15:45, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

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

Restore following Marathi books deleted by mistake

@Ankry: Many thanks for looking into the matter. Lot of such old books were deleted by mistake. As all these files are transferred from IA, the source links are available. I am checking all files for eligibility under free license/public domain. As of now, I have checked following files. All these deleted books are in Marathi language. I have mentioned the publication year. The authors died 70 years ago. The license tags applicable are {{PD-India}} and {{PD-old-70-1923}}. The file name followed by publication year and name of the author -

  1. File:संसार घरातील कामे.pdf 1914 त्र्यंबक लेले
  2. File:मेणबत्त्या.pdf 1906 शंकर गर्गे
  3. File:श्रीएकनाथ .pdf 1903 वासुदेव शिरवळकर
  4. File:महाराष्ट्रातील किल्ले.pdf 1907 चिंतामण गोगटे
  5. File:वामनपंडित.pdf 1905 बाळकृष्ण भिडे
  6. File:बालाजी बाजीराव पेशवे भाग २.pdf 1906 दत्तात्रय पारसनीस
  7. File:अयोध्येचे नबाब.pdf 1899 दत्तात्रय पारसनीस
  8. File:महाराष्ट्र भामिनिविलास.pdf 1903 लक्ष्मण लेले
  9. File:देवमामलेदार.pdf 1903 विश्वनाथ किरकिरे
  10. File:ब्रिटिश लोकांचा जीवनक्रम व चरित्र.pdf 1915 माधव लेले
  11. File:हिंदु व मुसलमानात होणारे तंटे.pdf 1895 काशिनाथ खरे
  12. File:दूध व दुभते.pdf 1913 भास्कर घारे
  13. File:ग्वाल्हेर किल्ला व मराठे पेशवे शिंदे यांचा संक्षिप्त इतिहास.pdf 1897 नारायण पांडुरंग कुळकर्णी
  14. File:विवेकानंद खंड१.pdf 1912 विवेकानंद
  15. File:श्री तुकाराम नाटक.pdf 1901 वासुदेव शिरवळकर
  16. File:सार्थ प्राकृत प्रकाश.pdf 1900 शंकर हातवळणे
  17. File:माधवनिधन.pdf 1900 अनंत भागवत
  18. File:विधवा दुःख निवेदन.pdf 1901 सीताबाई छत्रे
  19. File:भरतपुरचा वेढा .pdf 1905 जगन्नाथ आजगावकर
  20. File:हिंदुस्थानातील दुष्काळ.pdf 1905 गोविंद टिपणीस
  21. File:बोधमणिमाला.pdf 1905 बाळकृष्ण भिडे
  22. File:भावी आयुष्य.pdf 1913 मथुराबाई जोशी
  23. File:रोगजंतू.pdf 1912 गणपत काळोखे

Kindly restore these files. I am checking other files also. I will post the next requests soon. Thanks for cooperation,
--सुबोध कुलकर्णी (talk) 16:40, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

 Doing… Ankry (talk) 18:43, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
@सुबोध कुलकर्णी: I think, the author of #6 is somebody else. Could you check his death date? Ankry (talk) 20:11, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
@Ankry: Thanks for restoration as these are rare reference value books in Marathi language. I have corrected the metadata of #6 after checking death date, done for other books also. Please remove the deletion tags as well.

As you are looking at these files closely, I kindly request you to rename the following files as the present file names are wrong -

  1. File:संसार घरातील कामे.pdf as - File:संसार (भाग १) - घरांतलीं कामें.pdf
  2. File:बालाजी बाजीराव पेशवे भाग २.pdf as - File:बाळाजी बाजीराव पेशवे यांची रोजनिशी (भाग २).pdf
  3. File:श्रीएकनाथ .pdf as File:श्रीएकनाथ.pdf
  4. File:महाराष्ट्रातील किल्ले.pdf as File:महाराष्ट्रातील किल्ले (भाग २).pdf
  5. File:ब्रिटिश लोकांचा जीवनक्रम व चरित्र.pdf as File:ब्रिटिश लोकांचा जीवनक्रम व चारित्र्य.pdf
  6. File:हिंदु व मुसलमानात होणारे तंटे.pdf as File:हिंदु व मुसलमानांत होणारे तंटे व ते बंद करण्याविषयीं विनंति.pdf
  7. File:भावी आयुष्य.pdf as File:भावी आयुष्य सुखमय करण्याची तरुण पिढीवर असलेली जबाबदारी.pdf
  8. File:बोधमणिमाला.pdf as File:मराठी कवींची बोधमणिमाला.pdf
  9. File:भरतपुरचा वेढा .pdf as File:भरतपुरचा वेढा.pdf
  10. File:श्री तुकाराम नाटक.pdf as File:श्रीतुकाराम (ऐतिहासिक नाटक).pdf
  11. File:विवेकानंद खंड१.pdf as File:स्वामी विवेकानंद यांचे समग्र ग्रंथ (प्रथम खंड).pdf
  12. File:ग्वाल्हेर किल्ला व मराठे पेशवे शिंदे यांचा संक्षिप्त इतिहास.pdf as File:श्रीगोपगडमणि.pdf

--सुबोध कुलकर्णी (talk) 07:16, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done with help from JuTa & Jayantanth. Ankry (talk) 17:23, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Cook_Blues_Are_Still_Blue_350ppi.jpg

I submitted this request to undelete my file and it was denied and closed before I had a chance to argue my case.

This image belongs to me, was uploaded to Flickr, and was placed in the public domain.

The image is a painting of an album cover, which I understand would not be allowed under a fair use argument. This image, however, should not be seen within that context for the following reasons:

This image is a part of an academic research project dealing with the relationships between image and object, and dissemination and experience. The image is of a painting of an image of an object, not a recreation of a copyrighted image. The work should be seen within the context of a painting of any object. This body of work is made to question the notion of what real experience is and to include the perception of images online as valid experience. The specific work in question utilizes a physical object(s) (three members of a band) which were photographed (digital image) and printed on the cover of an album (physical object), which was then photographed (digital image), recreated as a painting (object) and once again digitally photographed to be uploaded on Wikipedia. The experience of seeing the work within the native location of the Wikipedia article is intentional. This is not a question of fair use but instead a work that exists completely separate from the original source. The original source is merely an object, and the deleted image is a commentary on the perception of images as they relate to objects.

I have been exploring this theme throughout my career as an artist and professor which can be verified through my personal website (https://benjamincookart.com/home.html) and news articles about my work (https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathonkeats/2020/03/25/net-art/#69cb6b196cac).

I am happy to discuss this further. Benjamincookart (talk) 17:24, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

 Oppose Commons:Derivative works. Thuresson (talk) 18:13, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Could you elaborate please? Is every still life which contains a branded product a derivative work? I understand the notion that if a work is dependent upon a specific copyrighted image, it would be in violation, but as I explained earlier, the work is specifically referencing the relationship between object hood and documentation. The crux of the work does not rely on any value that the source material contains but rather the fact of its objecthood. If you think of the painting as an object rather than a depiction of an image, does that not change anything? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benjamincookart (talk • contribs) 22:30, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

"Is every still life which contains a branded product a derivative work?" Yes, as long as the branded product is sufficiently complex to garner copyright protection (COM:TOO) and is featured prominently in the derivative work (COM:DM). So as an example of the first case, it's OK to upload something that makes use of the Nike swoosh because it is too simple to be copyrighted (it is trademarked, however). As for the second case, it's OK to upload a photo featuring hundreds of copyrighted packages, because each one makes up a small portion of the whole. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:37, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

I don't see how those examples apply to this case? Here are 3 examples of works that are uploaded and were not deleted: This is an image of a street artwork that uses a copyrighted character. this is a sculpture by Jeff Koons which uses a copyrighted character, and this image, which is a photo of an object which utilizes an image of a painting which used came from a copyrighted product.

How do you see these as differing from the file in dispute?

--Benjamincookart (talk) 23:29, 12 July 2020 (UTC) benjamincookart

We get thousands of files a day, so inevitably some will slip through the cracks. The first two are pretty clear-cut and should be deleted. The third one (File:TAG Andy Warhol Soup Can 01.jpg) is a bit more complicated. First of all, is the Campbell's soup can copyrighted? See Commons:Copyright rules by territory/United States#Copyright formalities. If anything substantially identical has been published without a correct copyright notice before 1978, then the design is public domain (i.e. not copyrighted). Secondly, is Target's display a derivative work of Warhol's art? You can't copyright the idea of displaying a bunch of Campbell's soup cans; I don't see any evidence that Target has copied anything from Warhol's expression of the idea. Finally, assuming that the design is public domain but these colors have not been seen before, is the selection of this color scheme sufficiently original to attract copyright protection? Commons:Copyright rules by territory/United States#Threshold of originality is the right section to look at. Unfortunately it deals more with shapes rather than colors, so I'm not quite sure. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:43, 12 July 2020 (UTC)


I can see that there is a fundamental disagreement when it comes to classifying the file in question as depicting an image-of-an-object rather than an image-of-an-image. I understand your perspective though. Thank you for engaging in this discussion with me.

--Benjamincookart (talk) 12:16, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done per discussion. Ankry (talk) 17:29, 13 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Photo of Sangeet Bhullar.jpg

Note: This image was speedily deleted while this deletion request was pending.

This photo is of a member of Wikimedia UK's Board of Trustees; she stated that she intended to use it on the Wikimedia UK Board page. COM:SCOPE says that "Files relating to projects or events of the Wikimedia community, such as user meetings, are also allowed." I submit that this includes small numbers of photos of Wikimedia community leaders, such as members of WMUK's Board, for use on their page. Thus, I believe that this image should be restored. -Mdaniels5757 (talk) 00:30, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

@King_of_Hearts Hello, I took and uploaded the photo myself, so the copyright rests with me. However, I am happy for this photo to remain deleted as I have uploaded another on the Wikimedia Trustee page directly. Thanks! - @Sangeet2019

 Support undeletion, in scope. Ankry (talk) 17:13, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
  • @Sangeet2019: It wasn't clear what you meant by your last comment. If you specifically do not want the photo on Wikimedia Commons anymore, then we will leave it deleted as a courtesy. If you don't care either way, we plan to restore the image as it is in scope. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:18, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

@King_of_Hearts Thank you, and sorry for the lack of clarity. Yes please, if you can leave it deleted, that will be appreciated, as I have uploaded a new picture directly on the Trustee page. Thanks for all your help. - @Sangeet2019 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sangeet2019 (talk • contribs) 13:50, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done Per uploader request. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 13:54, 14 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Dirijorul Mircea Popa_crop.jpg

Poza a fost urcata la cererea explicita a proprietarului pozei Poetul Eugen Bunaru din Timisoara (si actualizarea datelor Dirijorului Mircea Popa)...dirijorul mircea popa fiind unchiul domnului bunaru si avand o relatie foarte apropiata. , Romania. Domnul Bunaru este o persoana de peste 70 ani si nu are abilitati tehnice (cel mult stie sa utilizeze email-ul) Pentru confirmarea directa din partea domnului bunaru, puteti sa-l contactati la adresa: eugenbunaru@yahoo.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Irusan (talk • contribs) 14:28, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Questions remain unanswered. Request can be resumbitted once the user can answer these questions. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 15:46, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Annamie Paul in Regent Park Toronto.jpg

This photo is owned by the uploader and does not violate any copyrights. Please let us know what to do to have it undeleted. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2607:FEA8:EC60:95C6:90EC:6846:34DA:DE04 (talk) 16:17, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

 Info Same photo as File:Annamie Paul in Toronto Regent Park.jpg. Thuresson (talk) 16:42, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, what information do we need to provide?

  •  Oppose Ownership or possession of a photo, proprietorship of the equipment used to take the photo, or being the subject of the photo does not equate holding the copyright. The copyright holder is the photographer (i.e. the person who took the photo), rather that the subject (the person who appears in the photo) or the person possessing the photo, unless transferred by operation of law (e.g. inheritance, etc.) or by contract (written and signed by the copyright holder, and explicitly transfers the copyright). For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 01:13, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 00:23, 14 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Common Sense for the 21st Century by Roger Hallam.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: The book cover mostly come from File:From this moment despair ends.jpg. It should be OK 219.78.191.210 08:27, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done: Per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 00:29, 14 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File: Emueje Ogbiagbevha.jpg

==Tagging and licensing== I just realised this file was deleted due to the file not being tagged or licensed and I'm about to rectify if it's undeleted. Josedimaria237 (talk) 18:40, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 15:36, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

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

Files uploaded by Roy17

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2020/05#RFC:_Acceptance_of_the_Brazilian_Flickr_photostream_mturdestinos_(163189519@N03). Roy17 (talk) 15:15, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 02:43, 15 July 2020 (UTC)


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

Files uploaded by High source

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: ditto Roy17 (talk) 15:42, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done: per Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2020/05#RFC:_Acceptance_of_the_Brazilian_Flickr_photostream_mturdestinos_(163189519@N03). --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 02:52, 15 July 2020 (UTC)


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

Fermo Guisoni (1510-1580)

I ask you please that these files relating to the following portraits made by the still firm Guisoni be restored, because the source containing precisely respects the data contained in the files and in the following source


source to which the portraits are linked: https://www.academia.edu/42734316/Collezione_Freddi_-_Dipinti_2015_

there is only one portrait that is not part of the (PD-old-100) license mode:

portrait made by Cipriano CEI (1864-1922), therefore it should be part of the license (PD-Art|PD-old-70-1923) OR (PD-Italy) --37.182.21.128 15:55, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: This seems to be part of an issue that cannot be dealt with here. Thank you for your understanding. Pinging @Krd FYI. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 02:59, 15 July 2020 (UTC)


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

Richiesta di pristino

potreste prististinarmi questo file per cortesia File:Ritratto di Federico Borromeo.jpg --Masira96 (talk) 21:43, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Pinging Krd since he is most knowledgeable about this sock. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:28, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: This seems to be part of an issue that cannot be dealt with here. Thank you for your understanding. Pinging @Krd FYI. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 03:00, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Cristina D'Avena - UPlay 2019.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Ogni volta faccio casino con licenze e copyright, e anche per questo motivo sono stato bannato per un mese. L'immagine che avevo caricato l'ho prelevata dalla pagina ufficiale dell'evento con i relativi permessi (ho chiesto personalmente all'organizzatore e alle fotografe se la potessi pubblicare). Se ci fosse un modo per poterla recuperare grazie. Perché su Wikipedia ancora non capisco niente di copyright. E non vorrei essere bannato di nuovo inutilmente. Kalo963 (talk) 08:45, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

  •  Oppose Image is not in public domain as claimed. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder (typically the photographer unless transferred by operation of law or by contract--written and signed by the first/original copyright holder as defined by the law) must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 15:42, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 01:59, 15 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:BrantArseneau.jpg this is a photo of myself that i submitted to a Waters magazine

this is a photo of myself that i submitted to a Waters magazine article about me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jbarseneau99 (talk • contribs) 12:30, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

No, but I paid for the photo to be taken and submitted to Waters Technology for an article. What is the correct process to upload it? Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jbarseneau99 (talk • contribs) 14:19, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

  •  Oppose @Jbarseneau99: Ownership or possession of a photo, proprietorship of the equipment used to take the photo, or being the subject of the photo does not equate holding the copyright. The copyright holder is the photographer (i.e. the person who took the photo), rather that the subject (the person who appears in the photo) or the person possessing the photo, unless transferred by operation of law (e.g. inheritance, etc.) or by contract (written and signed by the copyright holder, and explicitly transfers the copyright). For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 15:37, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 02:00, 15 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Tom Ruen - Lunar eclipses in 2003 (pd).jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Photo is in PD. Come from File:Lunar eclipse May 2003-TLR75.jpg and File:Lunar eclipse November 2003-TLR63.jpg 182.239.120.76 17:03, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done As evidenced in the original enwiki file description, it is derivative of two of the author's own photos. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:09, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Shohag Smilling.jpg

This is my own image, And the photographer who was behind the camera was my close friends and the camera was mine too. So why can't I upload it. Please elaborate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShohagS (talk • contribs) 04:26, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, User talk:King of Hearts. Most likely it's by me. And for my friend he is not charge to publish any of my photographs and those photo were captured in collaboration. If you want to reconsider, please reconsider it as we both (me and my friend) published it in Flickr under CC-BY-SA. It's same for the other personal pictures of mine File:Shohag S.jpg and File:Shohag and Sohag.jpg, thanks. A. Shohag 07:02, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done User asserts that the creative decisions are his. Everything else (Flickr, camera model, etc.) checks out so we will COM:AGF. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:34, 15 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Rural Boys.jpg

What is wrong with this image? This is the pictures of some boys in the locality where I visited once, they were playing outside seeing an camera in my hand they argued me to photograph them, I took several pictures of them. This is just one of them. Can't It be educational? Please, review your actions. Thanks.

They are truly non-notable children, but maybe doesn't have a good-quality environmental portraits. But will this image can be in that ctegory? Thanks A. Shohag 07:24, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

  • @Fæ and ShohagS: At the time of deletion the uploader was globally locked as an LTA, and I deleted all of their personal photos per COM:SCOPE. Since the global lock was rescinded, I've undeleted the file in question. I have no opposition to any admin undeleting any of their other uploads as well. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 20:18, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you both, The Squirrel Conspiracy and King of ♥ — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShohagS (talk • contribs) 03:35, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done by The Squirrel Conspiracy. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:35, 15 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Осинский Влвдимир Петрович.jpg

Dear Colleagues! Please undelete this file because was issued OTRS ticket Template:OTRS ticket. — Best regards, Niklitov (talk) 13:15, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 13:36, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Lightnin' Loops 1.jpg

I need that photo! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wacky Windjammer (talk • contribs) 14:49, 15 July 2020‎ (UTC)

 Oppose License review failed for the following reason: "This image was originally posted to Flickr by masonkim1020 at https://flickr.com/photos/187677271@N03/50059015491. It has been reviewed on 2020-07-15 09:13:03 by FlickreviewR 2, who found the author on the bad authors list. This means that the Flickr user is known to upload images with possibly problematic license information. The image should be checked carefully because some Flickr users are blacklisted for only a limited portion of their uploads. " Thuresson (talk) 15:45, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:09, 16 July 2020 (UTC)


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

Fichier: File:Eric Coudert Artiste - Auteur.jpg

Bonjour, le Fichier: Eric Coudert Artiste - Auteur.jpg à été suprimé. Je suis le propriétaire de cette photo Comment dois-je procéder pour pouvoir l'afficher. Cordialement Eric Coudert — Preceding unsigned comment added by André Rullier (talk • contribs) 20:07, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

  •  Oppose Owning a copy of a photo does not automatically make you the copyright holder. Copyright is usually held by the photographer and not by the person depicted in a photo. So we need a permission by email coming directly from the photographer, or a copy of the written contract that transferred the copyright in this portrait to you. Please see COM:OTRS for details. De728631 (talk) 18:23, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per De728631. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 14:54, 17 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:IPhone SE second generation designation.jpg

I shot the photo on my own phone and edited out the serial number for privacy reasons. I am not sure why it was marked as "copyright violation", given that it was my photo to begin with. It was only used to clear up confusion about the article name, which has since been resolved.

--Eightsixofakina (talk) 20:47, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

The photo was deleted because the content on your computer screen is most likely copyrighted and non-free. So even if you shot the photo yourself, it is a derivative work of the software and may not be published without permission from Apple. De728631 (talk) 18:20, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per De728631. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 14:54, 17 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Rajeevraisamajwadiparty.png

This photo was taken from Rajiv Rai's Facebook page and also named after him — Preceding unsigned comment added by DineshRedbull (talk • contribs) 12:12, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

  •  Oppose Facebook images are copyrighted and non-free. We need a permission by email coming directly from the copyright holder. This is most often the photographer and not the person depicted. Please see COM:OTRS for details. De728631 (talk) 18:17, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per De728631. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 14:54, 17 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Darius Azarpey (2019).jpg

Thanks for the feedback !

File:Darius Azarpey (2019).jpg is a personal file, taken by myself during a public interview and open to public. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeropsyrus (talk • contribs) 17:05, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Эlcobbola. For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 14:55, 17 July 2020 (UTC)


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

Vibhav.jpg photo undeletion

This photo of Mr. Vibhav Kant Upadhyay has been shot professionally for this purpose and its genuine. This is been vetted by the person himself and doesnt make any copyright violations.

  •  Oppose Copyright is usually not held by the person in the photograph but by the photographer. And even if copyright has been transferred to Mr. Upadhay we would require a copy of the written contract by email. Otherwise the original photographer needs to send a permission using the process described at COM:OTRS. De728631 (talk) 18:12, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per De728631. For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 14:56, 17 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Nastasja Vojinović in 2018 with her Carl Becker Violin from 1926.jpg

This photo belongs to me and I am the sole owner of this photo. Previously, I have released all the rights to the photograph which has already been featured in many other websites. I have given up all the rights to this image.

--ECzb2020 (talk) 19:13, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Эlcobbola. For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 14:57, 17 July 2020 (UTC)


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

Big Ben Phono logo svart txt.png

I'm the copyright holder and owner of Big Ben Phonogram. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben.hedenberg (talk • contribs) 21:02, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 14:58, 17 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Annamie Paul in Toronto Regent Park.jpg

OTRS agent (verify): request: we've received Ticket:2020071510011007 regarding File:Annamie Paul in Toronto Regent Park.jpg. Please restore in order to verified veracity and finish the process. The file has been deleted, but there is a comment on the TP. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 23:01, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:10, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

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

Template:FOTW

This speedy deletion Template I created was accidentally deleted by an administrator because {{Speedydelete}} does not have a "nocat" attribute. Please speedily undelete this page. –User456541

✓ Done: @User456541: FYI. <noinclude>{{Don't delete this template}}</noinclude> added. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:18, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Australian Stamp depicting Seedbanking (2018).png

And also:

I request that the file File:Australian Stamp depicting Seedbanking (2018).png be undeleted

I took the photo of the stamp(s) in question and own copyright of the photograph

D A R C 12345 (talk) 04:06, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done Per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Australia. Thuresson (talk) 12:05, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Мэвл.jpg

Файл взят не с Интернета. Это фото мне скинул сам Мэвл (человек, который изображен на фото) --RedactorBog (talk) 13:14, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

  •  Oppose @RedatorBog: The subject of a photo is often not the copyright holder, and, if this is the case, does not have the right to relicense the file. Ownership or possession of a photo, proprietorship of the equipment used to take the photo, or being the subject of the photo does not equate holding the copyright. The copyright holder is the photographer (i.e. the person who took the photo), rather that the subject (the person who appears in the photo) or the person possessing the photo, unless transferred by operation of law (e.g. inheritance, etc.) or by contract (written and signed by the copyright holder, and explicitly transfers the copyright). Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 14:44, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done as per Nat. Ankry (talk) 19:38, 18 July 2020 (UTC)


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

Ticket#2020061510008273

OTRS agent (verify): request: we've received Ticket:2020061510008273 regarding File:Sara_Hegazy_01.jpg, File:Sara_Hegazy_02.jpg, File:Sara_Hegazy_03.jpg and File:Sara_Hegazy_04.jpg. Please restore in order to verified veracity and finish the process. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 14:56, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Done Ezarateesteban 15:19, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
Ezarate: Creo que te faltó File:Sara_Hegazy_02.jpg. Saludos. --Ganímedes (talk) 17:48, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
Listo Ezarateesteban 17:52, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done by Ezarate. Ankry (talk) 19:39, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Soul generation backstage photo.jpg

OTRS agent (verify): request: we've received Ticket:2020062710006681 regarding File:Soul generation backstage photo.jpg. Please restore in order to verified veracity and finish the process. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 15:01, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Done Ezarateesteban 15:17, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done by Ezarate. Ankry (talk) 19:39, 18 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:The Wedding Poster Sam Abbas.jpg

I created this poster and have full copyright to it and the still used for the poster background. It must be undeleted immediately.

(Kelly 23421 (talk) 15:46, 18 July 2020 (UTC))

 Oppose @Kelly 23421: As for any media published elsewhere before upload to Commons we need a written free license permission from the exclusive copyright holder following COM:OTRS instructions. In this case as this seems to be a DW of a film still, also evidence that you own copyright to the still or that you are authorized to license it is needed. Ankry (talk) 19:45, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

@Ankry and Ankry: Please find proof, I can publish directly from the original source, per Mr. Abbas' website. https://samabbasfilms.com/WikiPosterRelease.pdf

(Kelly 23421 (talk) 22:24, 18 July 2020 (UTC))

✓ Done License review added. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:19, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:DengelAndreas.jpg

OTRS agent (verify): request: we've received Ticket:2020072010003935 regarding File:DengelAndreas.jpg. Please restore in order to verified veracity and finish the process. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 14:47, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

@Ganímedes: ✓ Done Gbawden (talk) 15:03, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:HCmed Logo1-01.png

The deleted file is the logo of our company, and we wish to share it on this platform in order to include it on articles in the future. We own the rights of the image; therefore, we hope our request to undelete the file is considered. Thank you! --Henry Cuevas (talk) 03:20, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per KoH. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:44, 20 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Primera propaganda Pro-Universidad. (1972).jpg

The copyright from where the photo was taken can easily be seen in the link provided. As well as the newspaper author of it. For this reason, having clear copyrights, I don't think the photo should be deleted. When I was uploading, it was a MISTAKE of mine not to add the corresponding template, however I asked and did what I could. But the source itself is right there. Thank you very much for the hospitality, in advance.

El copyright de donde se tomó la foto, fácilmente se puede ver en un link proporcionado. Así como el periódico autor de la misma. Por tal motivo, teniendo los derechos de autor claros, no creo que se deba eliminar la foto. Al subir fue un ERROR MÍO el no añadir la plantilla correspondiente, sin embargo pregunté e hice lo que pude. Pero la fuente de por sí, está. Muchas gracias por la hospitalidad, de antemano.

--Twentyonepmorecvltbruh (talk) 16:07, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Where exactly in the source page is the Creative Commons licence for this specific photo? I can't seem to find it. De728631 (talk) 16:18, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

The guy who wrote the blog, I constantly helped him scan newspapers for the blog post. Being scans of a newspaper and having no problems at that time with the public domain and legal issues due to their intellectual permissions, I see no problem adding the blog as a source, since the newspaper article is not on the Internet due to the old date it dates from. That's why I give you the link of the blog post, but if u need one of the image itself, here it is: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Nu5tv58nCUY/SlTubTdDcPI/AAAAAAAAAFU/EQvzRH-JnKU/s320/placa+unerg.bmp

El sujeto que escribió el blog, lo ayudé constantemente a escanear periódicos para el artículo en el blog. Al ser escaneos de un periódico y no tener problemas en aquel momento con el dominio publico y cuestiónes legales debido a los permisos intelectuales de los mismos, no veo problema en añadir como fuente al blog, ya que el artículo de periódico no se encuentra en Internet debido a la fecha antigua de la que data. Por ende dejé el link del artículo, aunque si necesitas el de la propia imagen, toma: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Nu5tv58nCUY/SlTubTdDcPI/AAAAAAAAAFU/EQvzRH-JnKU/s320/placa+unerg.bmp — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twentyonepmorecvltbruh (talk • contribs) 16:34, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

 Support The source is not the problem but we need proof of the copyright status. You mentioned a Creative Commons licence for this file, but we could not verify this from the information provided by you in the first place. Since this is just a scan of simple text and a simple graphical bar, I would go as far as to say, the scan and the depicted part of the paper are not creative enough to be copyrighted at all. So the file could be restored and the licence information changed to {{PD-art|PD-simple}}. De728631 (talk) 16:50, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

With all this cleared up, could you do it, or at least tell me how to do it? And sorry for the inconvenience in advance. --Twentyonepmorecvltbruh (talk) 16:56, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done: per De728631. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:27, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Carlos Andrés Pérez, en conversaciones para lo que sería en un futuro, la Universidad Rómulo Gallegos. (1974).jpg

The copyright from where the photo was taken can easily be seen in the link provided. As well as the newspaper author of it. For this reason, having clear copyrights, I don't think the photo should be deleted. When I was uploading, it was a MISTAKE of mine not to add the corresponding template, however I asked and did what I could. But the source itself is right there. Thank you very much for the hospitality, in advance.

El copyright de donde se tomó la foto, fácilmente se puede ver en un link proporcionado. Así como el periódico autor de la misma. Por tal motivo, teniendo los derechos de autor claros, no creo que se deba eliminar la foto. Al subir fue un ERROR MÍO el no añadir la plantilla correspondiente, sin embargo pregunté e hice lo que pude. Pero la fuente de por sí, está. Muchas gracias por la hospitalidad, de antemano.

--Twentyonepmorecvltbruh (talk) 16:16, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

  •  Oppose This is a derivative photo of a copyrighted newspaper. Copyright in Colombia lasts 80 years past the death of the author or, in case of the copyright holder being a legal entity, 70 years past the date of publication. So there is no way for this newspaper being out of copyright yet, and it may not be photographed and republished without permission. De728631 (talk) 16:28, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
    • I'm sorry, of course this paper from Caracas is subject to Venezuelan copyright. Still, a term of sixty years past the death of the authors on that page has obviously not yet passed. De728631 (talk) 16:32, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
    • Ok, entiendo que no haya pasado el periodo de tiempo. Sin embargo tengo el permiso del autor de las fotos, lo tuve junto con el sujeto que escribió el blog y por eso no hubo repercusiones al publicarlo. Y al tenerlo no veo problemas al publicarlo por este medio. Además, se instaló en una plataforma de dominio público. Muchas gracias de antemano.

Ok, I understand that the time period has not passed. However I have the permission of the author of the photos, I had it with the subject who wrote the blog and therefore there were no repercussions when publishing it. And having it I see no problems when publishing it through this medium. In addition, it was installed on a public domain platform. Thank you very much in advance

--Twentyonepmorecvltbruh (talk) 16:47, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

There is still copyrighted text in the newspaper that is part of this photo. You said that "I have the permission of the author of the photos". Do you mean the photos in the blog or the particular photo shown on this newspaper page? Please note that photographing a copyrighted work does make you the copyright holder of the derivative photograph, but the original copyright still persists and you are not allowed to publish this new photo without permission of the original copyright holder(s). Please see Commons:Derivative works for this issue. De728631 (talk) 16:55, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I have the permission of the original copyright holder of the newspaper page. This is due to the contact that the author had with the person who created the blog, and therefore requested my help to develop it for the university. By having permission to post it in a public domain, I don't think that person has a problem having it in another encyclopedic public domain as big as Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twentyonepmorecvltbruh (talk • contribs) 17:04, 19 July 2020 (UTC) --Twentyonepmorecvltbruh (talk) 17:12, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but in such cases we need a permission coming directly from the copyright holder by email. Please see COM:OTRS for instructions. De728631 (talk) 17:56, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per De728631. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:40, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Logotipo Clásico Azul de la Universidad Nacional Rómulo Gallegos.png

This logo is my responsibility. It is the new logo for the university that already has the approval of different university authorities. So, in turn, when I create it, the copyright is mine, and I am transferring it. I don't know what I did wrong.

Thank you very much in advance.

El presente logo es de mí autoría. Es el nuevo logo para la universidad que ya cuenta con aprobación de distintas autoridades de la universidad. Así, a su vez, al crearlo yo, los derechos de autor son míos, y los estoy cediendo. No sé qué hice mal.

Muchas gracias de antemano.

--Twentyonepmorecvltbruh (talk) 16:21, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

 Oppose This logo has been published before without a free licence. Therefore our rules require that the copyright holder sends a permission by email. Please see COM:OTRS for instructions because we cannot verify anyone's identity through their Wikimedia account. Once our volunteer email team has checked and approved this permission, the file will be restored. De728631 (talk) 16:42, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per De728631. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:39, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Parsec.ogg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I really recorded the file by myself and I really intend to provide it for all other Wikipedia Users.

What shall I tell you more?? TI994A (talk) 21:13, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 00:47, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Porträt des K.K. Franz Joseph I.png

Ich bitte um die sofortige Restaurierung dieses Porträts eines anonymen Künstlers um die zweite Hälfte des 19. Jahrhunderts--Ałfred Moltke (talk) 21:39, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

 Oppose LTA A3cb1. Thuresson (talk) 15:33, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 03:25, 24 July 2020 (UTC)


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

Ticket:2020060810009339

The above ticket https://ticket.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentTicketZoom;TicketID=11411470 is for File:Lataisia Jones Power Pose.jpg. Please restore at your convenience. Ww2censor (talk) 18:13, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

@Ww2censor: no such file. Ankry (talk) 04:35, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Ankry: Oops!! link to file now fixed. Ww2censor (talk) 10:44, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
@Ww2censor: ✓ Done Gbawden (talk) 11:00, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 03:20, 24 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Rear view of woman, Surabaya.jpg

It has been taken by me back in March 2016. Please undelete to add cc-by-sa-4.0 license. Alex Neman (talk) 15:46, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:02, 24 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Lenin Raghuvanshi.jpg

Wikepedia asked about photographs of Lenin Raghuvanshi,so I posted that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shrutinagvanshi (talk • contribs) 18:50, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Procedural close. Image has not been deleted as of 23 July 2020. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 03:29, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Los Shain's junto a Erwin Flores.jpg

La imagen subida por mí hace ya un tiempo fue eliminada por no contar con licencia, etc. Al subir fue un ERROR MÍO el no poder añadir la plantilla correspondiente: {{PD-Peru-photo}}.

Solicito restaurar imagen. Gracias de antemano. (Rolo Mai (talk) 22:34, 16 July 2020 (UTC)).

 Not done: As the publication date is unknown, image may be copyrighted in the United States per COM:URAA. Additional does not qualify for {{PD-Peru-photo}} as author is unknown. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:55, 24 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Edelstahl-Beta-Behälter.jpg

The deleted file was accidentally given the wrong name, the author is castus GmbH & Co. KG and no external web address. We have the rights to the picture, we would like to publish the file again. Thank you!--CasRTP (talk) 07:44, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

@CasRTP: Not accidentally. You claim that the author is GmbH & Co. KG. At the upload (self license) you also claimed that you are personally the author and exclusive copyright holder. This is blatant copyright violation if you are not and we have no evidence that castus GmbH & Co. KG is your personal name or you are authorized to use it as pseudo. Also, as the image was published elsewhere before uploading to Commons (you declared this providing a source) we need an evidence that either (a) there is a free license declaration by the author at the source site, or (b) the actual copyright holder has granted a free license via email following COM:OTRS. Also, AFAIK, per German copyright law, a company cannot be the author.
 Oppose unless the above is resolved. Ankry (talk) 05:59, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per Ankry. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:59, 24 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Darius Azarpey Signature.png

The owner of the file has been notified and changed the licensing to free on Flickr in consequence.

Thanks !

--Zeropsyrus (talk) 20:59, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:42, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Spent tear gas canister.jpg

I asked my friend who took this photo to upload it because I wanted it as an illustration in a Wikipedia article. I'm an experienced Wikipedia editor, but apparently I don't yet know enough about how to demonstrate that a photo is in fact the work of the photographer. What proof of authorship would allow the file to be saved? Jno.skinner (talk) 01:52, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

@Jno.skinner: Why not ask them to upload the original photo with complete camera info? As you can see in the DR lack of this information was the main reason for authorship doubt. However, the uploader did not respond to this not they provided the original photo, as expected. Ankry (talk) 04:46, 23 July 2020 (UTC) Ankry (talk) 04:47, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 02:09, 25 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:CD Gouveia.png

Also File:CD Gouveia official.png

The reason for undeletion request is that the file in question is a crest of a sports team and it´s being used in a fair use manner to identify the sport team in question

Pmfnunes (talk) 20:00, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

 Oppose Per Commons:Fair use. Thuresson (talk) 20:59, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 17:58, 24 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Darker cover 072020.jpg

I request for undeletion. As a representative of Darker magazine (senior editor) I confirm that we have all the rules to use this image in public. If you will check the exif of the file, we set it for public usage. I confrim that this file is cc by 4.0

Have a nice day! — Preceding unsigned comment added by SergioOren (talk • contribs) 07:53, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

 Oppose as:
  1. right "to use this image in public" is not the same as the right to grant a free license. We need a free license that allows any use, including commercial reuse and derivative work creation
  2. as you claimed at upload that you are personally the author and exclusive copyright holder of this work, we cannot rely on your further claims and an evidence is needed; do not make incorrect claims: this is not helpful
  3. for any image published elsewhere (eg. in a magazine) before upload here we need evidence of free license: either in the initial publicarion or via email following COM:OTRS instructions.
Ankry (talk) 12:53, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per Ankry. For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 02:08, 25 July 2020 (UTC)


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

Bored To Death.pdf

No copyright issue, we need it as source and upload history for the raster versions and as a future source for an vector version, see here. --Ras67 (talk) 18:01, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done procedural close: file not deleted. Ankry (talk) 18:04, 24 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Hypselonotus linea 55939245.jpg

I received a notification of a deletion proposal for this image imported from iNaturalist. I was taken aback by the fact that I had less than 12 hours to challenge a wrong flag generated by the bot before it got deleted. INaturalistReviewBot flagged this image as incompatible with Commons but, as it turns out, the image had originally been licensed under CC BY SA at the time of the import and that license is irrevocable. I'd like to request that the file be undeleted and that further deletion nominations based on flags INaturalistReviewBot is generating be put on hold, because others have reported (frustratingly) similar false positive issues, until we figure out a general solution. @Kaldari: this is the case I emailed you about, but there are more.--DarTar (talk)

@Mdaniels5757: see above. I believe all of the above are cases where the original license is valid, but it was later updated and the bot was unable to verify compliance.--DarTar (talk) 22:04, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
✓ Done per the archived page. Kaldari (talk) 22:31, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done: per above. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 22:58, 24 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Humulus scandens 24905628.jpg

As with the above example, I too received notification of a copyright violation for an image uploaded from iNaturalist. The license currently is indeed using a WM incompatible license, but this is only due to a recent license change. It was initially available under a compatible license (CC-BY-SA).

Since this is not the only case caused by the INaturalistReviewBot, I would appreciate it if there would be a less speedy deletion process. I am using the user script User:Kaldari/iNaturalist2Commons and since this script checks for compatibility upon upload to Wikimedia Commons, such steps might not even be needed. --Andrawaag (talk) 22:21, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 00:09, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

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

Restore following Marathi books in public domain

@Ankry: Many thanks for restoring the previous batch of files. I have checked following files for eligibility under free license/public domain. All these deleted books are in Marathi language. I have mentioned the publication year. The authors died more than 60 years ago. The license tags applicable are {{PD-India}} or {{PD-old-70-1923}}. Once restored, I shall correct the metadata for licenses and other mistakes as done for previous batch.

The file name followed by publication year and name of the author -

  1. File:अर्वाचीन महाराष्ट्र.pdf 1914 जगन्नाथ रावजी टूल्लू (Author data not available in web) copyright?? {{Temporarily undeleted}}
  2. File:महाराणा प्रतापसिंग.pdf 1922 लक्ष्मण महादेव जोशी (Author data not available in web) copyright?? {{Temporarily undeleted}}
  3. File:प्रवास पत्रे.pdf 1944 गोविंद चिमणाजी भाटे (1870-1946) See here. Copyrighted in US, see COM:URAA Category:Undelete in 2040
  4. File:चीनदेशाची संक्षिप्त माहिती.pdf 1914 वासुदेव दामोदर मुंडले (1880-1948) PD-India and PD-1923
  5. File:आर्य-स्त्री-रत्नें.pdf 1917 यशोदाबाई भट (Author data not available in web) copyright?? {{Temporarily undeleted}}
  6. File:शासन-संस्था.pdf 1928 श्रीधर नारायण हुद्दार (dob 1901 -??) copyright?? {{Temporarily undeleted}}
  7. File:छत्रपती संभाजी.pdf 1924 केशव मंगेश रांगणेकर (Born: Died:) {{Temporarily undeleted}}
  8. File:रशियाचा शेतकरी.pdf 1936 विनायक महादेव भुस्कुटे (Born:1889 Died:1954) PD-India but copyrighted in US Category:Undelete in 2032
  9. File:कौरवपांडवांचा इतिहास.pdf 1906 बळवंत त्र्यंबक द्रवीड (Born: Died:) {{Temporarily undeleted}}
  10. File:भारत खंडाचा प्राचीन इतिहास.pdf 1917 मनोहर विष्णु काथवटे (Born:1855 Died:1937) PD-India and PD-1923
  11. File:पदार्थपाठमाला.pdf 1905 नारायण विठ्ठल आपटे (Born: Died:) {{Temporarily undeleted}}
  12. File:वेदकालनिर्णय.pdf 1908 बाळ गंगाधर टिळक (1856-1920) Bal Gangadhar Tilak PD-India and PD-1923
  13. File:तीन तत्वज्ञानी.pdf 1921 गोंविद चिमणाजी भाटे (1870-1946) See here. PD-India and PD-1923
  14. File:भरत-भाव.pdf 1924 मोरेश्वर वासुदेव दोंदे (Born: Died:) {{Temporarily undeleted}}
  15. File:बालगीत.pdf 1923 नारायण गंगाधर लिमये (Born: Died:) {{Temporarily undeleted}}
  16. File:महाराष्ट्रकाव्य मकरंद.pdf 1896 शिवराम सीताराम वागळे (Born: Died:1928) PD-India and PD-1923
  17. File:नीतिज्ञानप्रभा.pdf 1896 बाबाराव जयराम भिशे (Born: Died:) PD-old-assumed
  18. File:हिमालयांत.pdf 1941 नारायण गोविंद चापेकर (Born: 1869 Died: 1968) status copyrighted Category:Undelete in 2037
  19. File:भावी हिंदी स्वराज्य.pdf 1924 कृष्णाजी विनायक वझे (Born:1871 Died:1929) PD-India and PD-1923
  20. File:आरोग्यशास्र.pdf 1917 भास्कर महादेव टेंबे (Born: Died:) {{Temporarily undeleted}}
  21. File:भारतीय चलनपद्धती.pdf 1921 शंकर गणेश खांडेकर (Born: Died:) {{Temporarily undeleted}}
  22. File:लोकहितवादी.pdf 1923 गणेश हरी केळकर (Born:1887 Died:1947) PD-India and PD-1923
  23. File:लहान मुलांचा महाराष्ट्र.pdf 1921 गोविंद अनंत मोडक (Born: Died:) {{Temporarily undeleted}}

Kindly restore these files. I am checking other files also. I will post the next requests soon. Thanks for cooperation,--सुबोध कुलकर्णी (talk) 12:36, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

@सुबोध कुलकर्णी: Please, provide author death dates for post-1925 books as {{PD-India}} should be ssociated with appropriate US copyright status template (likely {{PD-old-auto-1996|country=India|deathyear=...}}). Ankry (talk) 16:23, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
@सुबोध कुलकर्णी: Dear Subodh Ji, Please provide the authors data as requested by @Ankry: , it will help us to decide the copyright status of each book, especially published after 1925.Jayantanth (talk) 16:45, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
Sure. I am providing the authors data as I locate it from the book encyclopedias in Marathi like संक्षिप्त मराठी वाड्मयकोश. Meanwhile, could you please restore the books before 1925? Thanks, --सुबोध कुलकर्णी (talk) 14:12, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
@सुबोध कुलकर्णी: Books that are PD-India+PD-US or PD-old-assumed undeleted permanently. The others undeleted temporarily, hoping that this can help you to provide evidence of their copyright status in India. Ankry (talk) 19:33, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for your actions. Yes, It will surely help in further process. I am adding the data for authors after verification from reliable sources.--सुबोध कुलकर्णी (talk) 12:32, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
@सुबोध कुलकर्णी: Any progress? Files are not expected to be temporarily undeleted for more than a week. Ankry (talk) 12:37, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
Redeleting. Please request again when PD-old-expired or some evidence of Indian copyright expiration. Ankry (talk) 12:18, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Some ✓ Done, most  Not done Ankry (talk) 12:18, 26 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Peiter Zatko at DARPA.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: File was deleted as no source, but is obviously an official US Government portrait. The file metadata includes the VIRIN 110210-A-5590K-004, which indicates that this is a work of the US Department of Defense, more specifically an Army employee, produced on 2011-02-10. A few website redesigns and a change in DoD imagery policy between now and then mean that the Commons file, uploaded on 2012-04-14, is the oldest surviving public web source. I did find [11] and [12], of a similar vintage. https://twitter.com/dotMudge/status/1286836637847171073 also confirms the status. This is sufficient to meet COM:EVIDENCE. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 04:12, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Another source: [13]. I believe this image should be restored. Tony Tan (talk) 09:53, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done: Seems properly confirmed. --Platonides (talk) 22:32, 25 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Shawn Viktor Portmann.jpg

OTRS agent request. Once restored, I will fix the license tag. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:29, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Internal note: ticket:2020061710005745 --Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:29, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done: Restored. --Platonides (talk) 21:55, 25 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Stan Kroenke.png

It’s Creative Commons 3.0 fro youtube. Watch the video if you don’t believe me

Indeed. Originates from a video from the official YT channel od FOX Sports with clear CC-BY license declaration. I would suggest User:LuK3 to be more careful with their deletion nomination.

✓ Done per request and LR-ed. Ankry (talk) 12:39, 26 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Pavel Novotny - flaccid cock.JPG

Copyright violation. Other files uploaded by the same user have also been deleted for the same reason.

also;


--Bcasba (talk) 09:17, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@Bcasba: You are posting in the wrong place, You need to request deletion not undeletion Gbawden (talk) 09:48, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done nothing to undelete. Ankry (talk) 12:46, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Zygmunt Klemensiewicz polityk portret NAC.jpg, continued

According to archive:

  • I made only analogia iuris to file, that was not deleted, but had similar iuridical status. Let's see:
  1. the same information about date, there isn't information about publication:
    1. in my file, that we can see in source page (you can see source page of my file here): Data wydarzenia (date of the event): 1920 - 1939
    2. in mentioned photo: data powstania dokumentu (date of creation of the document, but not publication!): [przed 1939?] (before 1939?).
  2. no info about author, only photographic studio
    1. my file: Kuczyński, Zakład Artystyczno Fotograficzny, Kraków
  3. signature or seal of author/atelier on both photos
    1. mentioned file: Zakład Fotograficzny "Pro Arte" (Kraków) Fotografie
  4. Andrei Romanenko wrote:

According to Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Poland#Retroactive_changes (the copyright had expired in 10 years after the creation of the work and could not be reinstated as far as never belonged to a person; there is no year of the death for an atelier, right?)

Main question is: What makes the difference between these two photos?

And, that's interesting, there are many photos uploaded by institution, to what belongs many many photos, for example: File:Powitanie Józefa Piłsudskiego na Dworcu Wiedeńskim w Warszawie po przybyciu z Krakowa (22-204-5).jpg (anonymous, no date of publication, only date of event!). So they must be deleted too.

Matlin (talk) 17:35, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

@Matlin: As I noted in the previous UDR, Polish copyright is not a problem here. It is PD in Poland. The problem is US copyright, which depends on publication date. If the initial publication was the 2010s publication on the NAC website, then this image is copyrighted 120 years since creation (likely till 2060 as we do not know the exact creation date). And if the author's death date was known, it would be copyrighted 70 pma. And US copyright law grants copyright protection to foreign works if they were initially published after March 1, 1989. So an earlier publication evidence can warrant PD status in US. US copyright is a problem for most NAC photos. Ankry (talk) 04:33, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
If there is no evidence of pre-1989 publication not author death date, I see no difference between the photos: both are copyrighted in US. Ankry (talk) 11:19, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per Ankry. If pre-1989 publication can be proven, UD request can be resubmitted. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:40, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:BasePairing.svg

@Yuraily Lic: correclty marked the file as possible copyvio on 03:02, 23 July 2020 (UTC), I uploaded a new version without Copyright-violation (To be honest, I should have noticed in 2018 the Commons:License_laundering, before uploading in the Starwars-SVG-derivative). Because in general, requests can be closed by an administrator after seven days, therfore I did not imediatly delete the old versions (knowing it will be done), since it was uploaded already in 2018. However @Ellin Beltz: speedy deleted at 18:04, 23. Jul. 2020 (So 15hours after the DR) the file (instead of only the old versions). The file still uses a Star-Wars-Lightsabers-derivative, but I assume it is below COM:TOO, and can be discussed in a DR of the source-file, but that's another question not related to User:Yuraily Lic DR. (Leading to a removement of the non-free parts in File:BasePairing.svg.) Since I might be biased, I do not use my administrator privileges, and go the official way.  — Johannes Kalliauer - Talk | Contributions 07:57, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

@Ellin Beltz: Any comment? Ant detailed rationale why the top version is copyright violation? I see no clear reason. Ankry (talk) 13:01, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
 Support per above and per the deleting admin silence. Ankry (talk) 12:52, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done: The latest upload has been restored per above. --De728631 (talk) 19:44, 26 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Emilia_Clarke_Dior_Roses_des_Vents.png

This video, of which the deleted file was a screencapture, appears when sorting by CC BY license on Vimeo. See screenshot.

The Conde Nest Russia Vimeo page was accordingly linked as author, and the video as the source.

Furthermore, there is a file on Commons which is another screencapture from exactly the same video: File:Emilia_Clarke_Dior_Rose_des_Vents.jpg

Achtungpanzer44 (talk) 11:33, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

  •  Support It seems like the video was CC-BY-3.0 (note, the commons file stated version 4.0) Although it doesn't seem to appear on the interface of [14], only in that search and inside a page header:
               <link about="https://i.vimeocdn.com/filter/overlay?src0=https%3A%2F%2Fi.vimeocdn.com%2Fvideo%2F542669399_1280x720.jpg&src1=https%3A%2F%2Ff.vimeocdn.com%2Fimages_v6%2Fshare%2Fplay_icon_overlay.png" rel="license" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/">
ping @Herbythyme:
Platonides (talk) 22:06, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
Don't disagree with this and thanks for the research. Seeing Conde Nast and knowing that Vimeo material is copyright too I felt this image was likely to be. However seems like I'm probably wrong. I'm not the deleting admin though so maybe they should restore it? If not I'll do so later. --Herby talk thyme 08:01, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done: per above and licencereview added @Herbythyme, Platonides, and Achtungpanzer44: FYI. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:47, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

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

incorrect blocking

I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the user who blocked my image due to copyright infringement did so with racist views and intentions. My image was not copyrighted at all and did not violate Wikipedia's rules. I am against discrimination and oppression of our African-American friends and wanted to help eliminate it by explaining how it is wrong, but unfortunately my ad was blocked by one of the fascists oppressing colored people. if you are against this fascism in relation to our African-American friends, I would like to ask you to vote for the restoration of this publication — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maksim 1993 (talk • contribs) 18:15, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

 Oppose If this concerns File:Пропагандистский плакат ку клукс клана .webp you did not create it and you should not lay claim to the public domain; besides it is already available at File:The Union as It Was.jpg. Thuresson (talk) 19:48, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Thuresson. There is no need to upload a duplicate under another name. --De728631 (talk) 19:52, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:The Wire logo (3rd, Jul 86 – Dec 91).svg

Only this British old logo from The Wire with serifs. Perhaps, which font design were classified as 'Didone' typeface (e.g. Bodoni, Didot, etc.), but instead of sans-serif logotypes, for older logos with a threshold specific design, what is so-called "sweat of the brow" doctrine. --ZmeytheDragon16 (talk) 02:07, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

As this was a self-nomination by the uploader, I would rather suggest somebody to upload it under another user name. Or ask @Brandt Luke Zorn: for opinion. We generally support uploaders if they are afraid of copyright-related problems. Ankry (talk) 12:45, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
@Ankry: Thanks for the ping. I don't have any issue with undeletion of this logo, as long as others give it a look and think it would be OK. For reference, this logo is currently uploaded to English Wikipedia here, and other past logos for The Wire can be seen at . I requested deletion of those logos after I became aware of the Edge logo case and the UK's lower standard for threshold of originality. I am not an expert in typography, so I wouldn't be able to look at a finished logo and recognize the kinds of subtle changes that may qualify as "sweat of the brow". I erred on the side of caution. If others with knowledge of typography believe that any of these logos don't meet the UK threshold of originality, that's great. I'm not quite sure I follow ZmeytheDragon16's analysis, but I believe he's saying that this particular logo is a generic "Didone"-style typeface without "sweat of the brow" modifications like the ones the court found in the Edge logo case (see paragraph 10). At a glance, that strikes me as probably true, but I wouldn't really know and I'd defer to others' judgment. Brandt Luke Zorn (talk) 23:03, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Doneas nobody opposed. Ankry (talk) 08:07, 27 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Law Kwun Chung2.jpg

I asked Nathan Law Kwun Chung to authorise me to use this photo. Please provide me a way to prove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jason940728 (talk • contribs) 05:47, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

 Oppose Per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Law Kwun Chung2.jpg. Thuresson (talk) 07:44, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
@Jason940728: We cannot rely on your declarations any longer. Maybe, COM:OTRS is a way for you if you are indeed the photographer and you can prove this. Ankry (talk) 12:49, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:51, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

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

This photo is used in Atanas Slavov's Bulgarian-language autobiographical photo-book, "Ima I Stari Slivenci", which has been sourced in the main article on Atanas Slavov. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evs108 (talk • contribs) 01:41, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@Evs108: How does it help to determine copyright status? Who is the photographer? Did they die more than 70 years ago? Was the photo published more than 70 years ago? Was it published under a free license? Ankry (talk) 12:27, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
 Oppose As the photo has been published elsewhere prior to its upload to Commons, an evidence of free license or copyright expiration is needed. If the book was not published under a free license, the actual copyright holder (who is presumably the photographer or their heirs) needs to send a free license permission following COM:OTRS instructions. Ankry (talk) 08:35, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
 Not done Was deleted after deletion request at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Evs108. Thuresson (talk) 21:14, 27 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Corona-05.jpg

File:Name of the file to undelete.jpg

Als Urheber des Fotos :File:Corona-05.jpg beantrage ich die Wiederherstellung der Datei.

As the creator of the photo :File:Corona-05.jpg I kindly ask for the file to be undeleted

Mit besten Grüßen Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Octagon (talk • contribs) 20:12, 27 July 2020 (UTC) Octagon (talk) 20:03, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Octagon: Please add a license to prevent it from deletion again. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:59, 28 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Passport - Klaus Doldinger.jpeg

File:Name of the file to undelete.jpg

Als Urheber des Fotos :File:Passport - Klaus Doldinger.jpeg beantrage ich die Wiederherstellung der Datei

As the creator of the photo File:Passport - Klaus Doldinger.jpeg I kindly ask for the file to be undeleted

Mit besten Grüßen Cheers Octagon (talk) 20:10, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Octagon: Please add a license to prevent it from deletion again. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:01, 28 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Atomium window.jpg

Bitte die Datei Atomium window.jpg wieder herstellen, da sich die rechtlichen Bedingungen bezüglich der Panoramafreiheit in Belgien inzwischen geändert haben. Danke und Gruß Kmtextor (talk) 08:07, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done Atomium has been overturned. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:20, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

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

Files uploaded by CraftyCaedus

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: All the photos I've uploaded are my own work and have all been uploaded by me to Flickr (https://www.flickr.com/photos/brendankeenan) with a CC-BY licence. CraftyCaedus (talk) 17:44, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

  •  Support Looks pretty clear-cut to me. @A1Cafel: Please don't tag Flickr files which are clearly marked with a CC-BY license for speedy deletion (and no it wasn't changed recently). If a Commons user is only uploading photos from one Flickr photostream, then they are probably the same person and you should make an effort to contact them or bring them up for discussion on COM:AN/U if you have any suspicions of plagiarism instead of marking their files for deletion. Also, you should give a URL when you do mark files for speedy, so that the patrolling admin can verify the copyright status at the external site. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:21, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
    • The user didn't clarify the relations with Brendan Keenan on the file, or on the user page. It appears to be a new user. Also, not all the files are with the credit "Brendan Keenan". So I perform the speedy nomination. As the uploader, he should bear the responsibility of making clear authorship so as to avoid any misunderstanding. --A1Cafel (talk) 02:24, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
      • @A1Cafel: The uploads are from 2016; having relatively few uploads does not mean that he is a new user. And even if it is a genuine case of plagiarism, there is no need to delete the files; we would simply need to correct the attribution. You should pretty much never speedy-tag a file if you find it on another website under a free license. Also, speedy deletion is primarily for new uploads; if a file is from several years ago and you suspect it might be a copyright violation, file a COM:DR instead, as there might be a good explanation for whatever is causing you suspicion. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:42, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 15:32, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Thrawn.jpg

Actually the drawing is based on a character described in the Thrawn trilogy which are books. So this fan art is acceptable. --Cody escouade delta (d) 18:10, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Original deletion reason seems wrong, if it's just based on a written description (they would be independent expressions of the same idea). Looking at various depictions on the character on Google, doesn't seem like this is derivative of others. While it's possible it was based on a photograph, I don't think we have enough evidence to delete based on that -- I wasn't able to find one. Maybe it started with a 3-D model, or maybe it was a PD-old photo. There is also a point where the lines were changed enough from a photograph to no longer be derivative. It was uploaded in January 2012, and I can't find a version on the net which predated that. I'm probably more suspicious on those grounds -- the uploader seemed more like their habit was to upload photos found elsewhere rather than draw things themselves, though by the looks of things was pretty good about finding licensed Flickr images or older ones. Was there a source/author mentioned on the original upload? Tentative  Support unless there are source questions. Carl Lindberg (talk) 15:45, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
I knew the author of the picture on french wikipedia, I asked him but his last contribution was in 2018. I think he used a photograph of himself to make this fan art (he knew the rules about copyrighted photograph). --Cody escouade delta (d) 15:47, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
@Cody escouade delta: While I agree with Carl concerning that there is likely no DW & copyright issues, the deletion reason were scope doubts. Why this image is on scope? Ankry (talk) 19:24, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
See Grand Admiral Thrawn and its interwiki versions. The image is in scope. De728631 (talk) 19:35, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment To answer Clindberg's query about source and author, the uploader Dark Attsios claimed {{Own}} and {{Self}}. The file description itself contains the following text in French: Illustration du Grand Amiral Thrawn, personnage de l'univers étendu de Star Wars. Il est créé par Timothy Zahn et apparaît pour la première fois dans le roman L'Héritier de l'Empire paru en 1991. (Illustration [or drawing] of the Grand Admiral Thrawn, character from the Star War expanded universe. He was created by Timothy Zahn and appeared for the first time in the 1991 novel Heir to the Empire). I will say that I have similar concerns as Elcobbola. While Cody escouade delta could very well be correct that Dark Attsios may have used a photo of themselves, the question becomes who was the photographer, and by which reason did Dark Attsios become the holder of the full and exclusive copyright. If it was self-photographed--ok--but we'll need an explanation of how the shutter was triggered. If someone else pushed the shutter button, then that person would be in part or in whole the copyright holder, and we would need their permission and a specific release under an acceptable free licence via OTRS. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 01:22, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
    • I don't know how any reasonable person could represent that an author with the skill to render the top portion of that head would need to resort to the amateurish and poor quality photoshoping of the jaw line and reddening of the eyes. I opined this was an unambiguous derivative and, sure enough, Cody escouade delta acknowledged the same (!!!) ("I knew the author of the picture on french wikipedia") Cody escouade delta has also acknowledged not actually knowing the source of the underlying image (!!!)("I think he used a photograph of himself to make this fan art") As always, COM:EVID requires "In all cases the uploader must provide appropriate evidence to demonstrate either that the file is in the public domain or that the copyright owner has released it under a suitable licence," (underline added) not the perennial "maybes". Эlcobbola talk 01:45, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: per Elcobbola. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 03:32, 30 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File:Qamar Raza Markazi.jpg

File:QamarRaza Markazi.jpg (This is my pic i have copyright deleted by mistake please restore) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qamarkhan92 (talk • contribs) 03:29, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per KoH. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:30, 29 July 2020 (UTC)


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

File: Qamar Raza Markazi profile.jpg

File:Qamar raza markazi profile.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qamarkhan92 (talk • contribs) 10:24, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: No rationale for undeletion. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:31, 29 July 2020 (UTC)


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

Please undelete these two images

@King of Hearts: It is still useful for hair articles on Wikipedia. Alex Neman (talk) 14:06, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Elcobbola. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:31, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:DionneSmithHeadshot.jpg

File:DionneSmithHeadshot.jpg to undelete

The file has been provided by Dionne Smith for us to use on Wikipedia. We have her express permission to use this content and can be freely used. This content is already within the public domain via social media platforms too.

--RPullingSPR (talk) 15:51, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

  •  Oppose - This is the work of Sean Whitty. In addition to requiring evidence of permission to be submitted using the process at COM:OTRS by virtue of previous publication, copyright initially vests in the author (photographer - Sean Whitty), not the subject (Dionne Smith). The latter would hold the copyright only if transferred by written conference. Evidence (a copy of) the same, or direct (i.e., not forwarded) correspondence from Whitty can be provided the aforementioned OTRS process. Эlcobbola talk 16:03, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
 Info en:Draft:Dionne Smith was speedily deleted in 24 hours.
 Not done Per elcobbola. Thuresson (talk) 16:07, 29 July 2020 (UTC)


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

https://www.facebook.com/الكاتب-والروائى-محمد-قبارى-407819376741560/

رواية رمال حمراء — Preceding unsigned comment added by محمد قبارى نصار (talk • contribs) 16:28, 28 July 2020 (UTC)


Please clarify if this concerns File:رواية رمال حمراء.jpg, which is a book cover. Thuresson (talk) 17:45, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
 Oppose Incomplete request. Thuresson (talk) 17:32, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:31, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

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

File:Iran gov power structure Fa.svg

I don't know if I didn't add the creative commons license to the picture. The source of image is File:Iran_gov_power_structure.svg with CC3 License. --Sefid par (talk) 08:07, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done Even if the derivative is not the uploader's own work as claimed, the act of flipping the image around and translating simple words does not meet COM:TOO. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:58, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/Archive/2020-07&oldid=444601161"