كومنز:طلبات الاسترجاع

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page is a translated version of a page Commons:Undeletion requests and the translation is 91% complete. Changes to the translation template, respectively the source language can be submitted through Commons:Undeletion requests and have to be approved by a translation administrator.

Shortcuts: COM:UNDEL • COM:UR • COM:UND • COM:DRV

Other languages:

في هذه الصفحة، يمكن للمستخدمين طلب استرجاع صفحة أو ملف محذوف (في ما يلي "الملف")، يمكن للمستخدمين التعليق على الطلبات من خلال ترك الملاحظات مثل إبقاء الحذف أو الاسترجاع مع منطقهم.

هذه الصفحة ليست جزءا من ويكيبيديا، هذه الصفحة تدور حول محتوى ويكيميديا ​​كومنز، مستودع ملفات وسائط حرة تستخدمها ويكيبيديا ومشاريع ويكيميديا ​​أخرى، ويكيميديا ​​كومنز لا يستضيف مقالات موسوعة. لطلب استرجاع مقالة أو أي محتوى آخر تم حذفه من نسخة ويكيبيديا العربية; راجع صفحة مراجعة الحذف في هذا المشروع.

حذف (تعليمات الحذف)
(Missing: 1 timestamp • ٠ reasons • ٣ subpages) • ٢ malformed
غير حرّ • نسخة مطابقة • ٤ adverts • ٣ selfies • محذوفات سّريعة أخرى
ع • ن • ت

معرفة سبب حذف ملف

أولا، تحقق من سجل الحذف واكتشف سبب حذف الملف. استخدم أيضا ميزة ماذا يصل هنا لمعرفة ما إذا كانت هناك أية مناقشات مرتبطة بالملف المحذوف، إذا قمت برفع الملف، تحقق مما إذا كانت هناك أية رسائل في صفحة نقاش المستخدم الخاصة بك موضحة للحذف. ثانيا، تُرجَى قراءة سياسة الحذف وسياسة نطاق المشروع وسياسة الترخيص مرة أخرى لمعرفة سبب عدم السماح بالملف في كومنز.

إذا لم يكن السبب المقدم واضحا أو أنك تعارضه، فيمكنك الاتصال بالإداري الحاذف لتطلب منه توضيح أو تقديم أدلة جديدة ضد سبب الحذف. يمكنك أيضا الاتصال بأي إداري نشط آخر (ربما واحد يتحدث لغتك الأم)، يجب أن يسعد معظمهم بالمساعدة، وإذا حدث خطأ، فقم بتصحيح الموقف.

جاذبية الحذف

لا يمكن التراجع عن الحذف الصحيح استنادا إلى سياسات الحذف ونطاق المشروع والترخيص الحالية، يمكن إجراء المقترحات لتغيير السياسات في صفحات نقاشها.

إذا كنت تعتقد أن الملف المعني لم يكن انتهاكا لحقوق الطبع والنشر أو خارج نطاق المشروع الحالي:

  • قد ترغب في مناقشة الأمر مع الإداري الذي قام بحذف الملف، يمكنك أن تطلب من الإداري تقديم شرح مفصل أو عرض دليل لدعم الاسترجاع.
  • إذا كنت لا ترغب في الاتصال بأي شخص مباشرة، أو إذا قام إداري فردي برفض الاسترجاع، أو إذا كنت تريد فرصة لمزيد من الأشخاص للمشاركة في المناقشة، فيمكنك طلب الاسترجاع في هذه الصفحة.
  • إذا تم حذف الملف لعدم وجود دليل على إذن الترخيص من مالك حقوق الطبع والنشر، فيُرجَى اتباع إجراءات تقديم أدلة الإذن. إذا كنت قد فعلت ذلك بالفعل، فلا داعٍ لطلب الاسترجاع هنا، إذا كان الإذن المقدم بالترتيب، فستتم استعادة الملف عند معالجة الإذن، يُرجَى التحلي بالصبر; لأن هذا قد يستغرق عدة أسابيع حسب حجم العمل الحالي والمتطوعين المتاحين.
  • If some information is missing in the deleted image description, you may be asked some questions. It is generally expected that such questions are responded in the following 24 hours.

استرجاع مؤقت

قد يتم استرجاع الملفات مؤقتا إما للمساعدة في نقاش حول هذا الملف أو للسماح بنقله إلى مشروع يسمح بالاستخدام العادل، استخدم القالب {{Request temporary undeletion}} في طلب الاسترجاع ذي الصلة، وقدم تفسيرا.

  1. إذا كان الاسترجاع المؤقت للمساعدة في المناقشة، وشرح لماذا، فسيكون من المفيد للمناقشة استرجاع الملف مؤقتا، أو
  2. إذا كان الاسترجاع المؤقت للسماح بالنقل إلى مشروع استخدام عادل، حدد المشروع الذي تنوي نقل الملف إليه واربطه ببيان الاستخدام العادل للمشروع.

للمساعدة في النقاش

قد يتم استرجاع الملفات مؤقتا للمساعدة في المناقشة إذا كان من الصعب على المستخدمين تحديد ما إذا كان يجب منح طلب الاسترجاع دون الوصول إلى الملف، عندما يكون وصف الملف أو اقتباس من صفحة وصف الملف كافيا، قد يقوم الإداري بتوفير ذلك بدلا من منح طلب استرجاع مؤقت. قد يتم رفض الطلبات إذا تم الشعور بأن فائدتها للمناقشة تفوقها عوامل أخرى (مثل استعادة، ولو مؤقتا، الملفات التي توجد فيها مخاوف كبيرة تتعلق بـCommons:Photographs of identifiable people)، سيتم حذف الملفات التي تم استرجاعها مؤقتا للمساعدة في المناقشة مرة أخرى بعد ثلاثين يوما، أو عند إغلاق طلب الاسترجاع (أيهما أقرب).

للسماح بنقل محتوى الاستخدام العادل إلى مشروع آخر

على عكس ويكيبيديا الإنجليزية وعدد قليل من مشاريع ويكيميديا ​​الأخرى، لا يقبل كومنز محتوى غير حر بالإشارة إلى أحكام الاستخدام العادل. إذا كان الملف المحذوف يلبي متطلبات الاستخدام العادل لمشروع ويكيميديا آخر، يمكن للمستخدمين طلب استرجاع مؤقت من أجل نقل الملف هناك، يمكن عادة معالجة هذه الطلبات بسرعة (بدون مناقشة). سيتم حذف الملفات التي تم استرجاعها مؤقتا لأغراض النقل مرة أخرى بعد يومين، عند طلب استرجاع مؤقت، يُرجَى تحديد المشروع الذي تنوي نقل الملف إليه وربطه ببيان الاستخدام العادل للمشروع.

المشاريع التي تقبل الاستخدام العادل
* Wikipedia: als | ar | bar | bn | be | be-tarask | ca | el | en | et | eo | fa | fi | fr | frr | he | hr | hy | id | is | it | ja | lb | lt | lv | mk | ms | pt | ro | ru | sl | sr | th | tr | tt | uk | vi | zh | +/−

Note: This list might be outdated. For a more complete list, see meta:Non-free content (this page was last updated: March 2014.) Note also: Multiple projects (such as the ml, sa, and si Wikipedias) are listed there as "yes" without policy links.

إضافة طلب

أولا، تأكد من أنك حاولت اكتشاف سبب حذف الملف، بعد ذلك، تُرجَى قراءة هذه التعليمات لكيفية كتابة الطلب قبل المتابعة لإضافته:

  • Do not request undeletion of a file that has not been deleted.
  • Do not post e-mail or telephone numbers to yourself or others.
  • في الحقل Subject:، 'أدخل موضوعا مناسبا، إذا كنت تطلب استرجاع ملف واحد، فإن عنوان مثل [[:File:DeletedFile.jpg]] مستحسن. (تذكر النقطتين الرأسيتين الأولي في الرابط.)
  • حديد الملف(ات) الذي تطلب استرجاعه ووفر روابط الصورة (انظر أعلاه)، إذا كنت لا تعرف الاسم الدقيق، قم بتقديم أكبر قدر ممكن من المعلومات، قد تتم أرشفة الطلبات التي فشلت في تقديم معلومات حول ما يجب استرجاعه دون إشعار آخر.
  • اذكر السبب(الأسباب) للاسترجاع المطلوب.
  • قم بتوقيع طلبك باستخدام أربعة أحرف تيلدا (~~~~)، إذا كان لديك حساب في كومنز، سجل الدخول أولا، إذا كنت الشخص الذي رفع الملف المعني، فيمكن أن يساعد ذلك الإداريين على تحديده.

أضف الطلب إلى أسفل الصفحة، انقر هنا لفتح الصفحة حيث تجب عليك إضافة طلبك، بدلا من ذلك، يمكنك النقر فوق الرابط "تعديل" بجوار التاريخ الحالي أدناه، راقب قسم طلبك للتحديثات.

Closing discussions

In general, discussions should be closed only by administrators.

الأرشيفات

المناقشات المغلقة حول الاسترجاع تُؤرشَف يوميا.

الطلبات الحالية

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Photographs by Pavel Troshkin

Images were published after 2015, expiration of posthumous copyright protection of photographer after death, or before 1954. Overly hypothetical doubts by now-banned user who made many overzealous deletion requests. Kges1901 (talk) 18:16, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose As I noted in the DR, these are either under URAA copyright, as are all Russian images published after 1942, or, if unpublished until recently, are under copyright in Russia. In either case we cannot keep them. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:16, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We usually assume that old works were published at the time of creation, unless evidence says otherwise. If I understood correctly, the author was a reporter for RIAN, so I see no reason to assume that these pictures were not published at the time. The first file in the list, File:Сессия Верховного Совета СССР первого созыва (2).jpg, is dated 1938. That may not be sufficient for all images, but it seems OK for this one. Yann (talk) 20:10, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Troshkin was a reporter for the newspaper Izvestiya, and his photographs were published at the time in Izvestiya, Krasnaya Zvezda, and other papers. --Kges1901 (talk) 20:19, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Carl Lindberg also made an interesting argument about the country of origin. If these newspapers were distributed in the Soviet Union, they were simultaneously published in all successor nations, and that under the Berne Convention, the shorter term applies. Yann (talk) 20:23, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These newspapers were distributed across the entire Soviet Union, not just on the territory of the RSFSR. In any case, the definition of publication under Russian copyright law is that the back of the photograph was marked by the artist in the appropriate way, which for war photographs implies that it passed through censorship processes and could be published. Since most of these photographs are not taken from the photographer's negatives, it is reasonable to assume that they were marked on the back, and recently digitized images appeared on the internet after 2014, when the posthumous publication copyright term expired. Kges1901 (talk) 20:32, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Carl Lindberg is not sole in such assumption. But this is just assumption so far, it is not supported by court decisions (of 12-15 post-Soviet states) or jurisprudential literature (as I have known on today, I continue to seek it, to confirm or refute it). As I see such questions in court decisions (of several post-Soviet states) or jurisprudential literature - the concrete Soviet republic is place of publishing (because, the civil legislation was on republican level) or the RF is place of publishing, even if work was published outside of the RSFSR (as USSR-successor on union level). Alex Spade (talk) 10:29, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure there is any test case over the Berne definition of "country of origin". The question would not come up internally for Russian law or that of the old republics, most likely. It would only matter in a country outside those which implement the rule of the shorter term, and over a work which that question may be involved. Not sure I know of any, anywhere. But, the Berne Convention is pretty specific in its definition when it comes to works simultaneously published in multiple countries, and that is the definition that Commons follows. Of course, the Soviet Union was not a member, though most all subsequent countries are now. One complication is the U.S. status -- the definition of "source country" for the URAA would follow different logic than Berne, the country of "greatest contacts with the work", which would be Russia. Russia was 50pma on the URAA date, but I think had some wartime extensions, which I think push these over the line, such that only ones published before 1929 (or created before 1904, if unpublished) would be PD in the U.S., regardless of current status in Russia, or the country of origin (if different). Carl Lindberg (talk) 19:09, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do not know such cases (on the Berne definition) too, but in the Russian copyright legislation there are 3 criterions of copyrightability - (1) the Russian territory (the territory of the Russian Federation (the RSFSR previously, not the USSR) since Nov.7, 1917 to today) in the borders on the date of publication, (2) the Russian citizenship on the date of publication, and (3) international treaties.
Moreover, there is similar situation with reports of telegraph agencies or press-releases- they are reported/released worldwide formally, but the country indicated in report/release is the country of origin (some reports/releases have two of more indicated countries). Alex Spade (talk) 22:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Right -- the Berne country of origin pretty much never applies to internal works, or even most situations involving foreign works. The specific definition in Berne pretty much only matters if a country is applying the rule of the shorter term for a foreign work to have lesser protection than their own works normally do; the Berne definition would have to be used in that case to determine the country, since that is in the treaty. In pretty much any other situation, more sensical definitions can be used (which even the US did, with the URAA -- the "source country" there is pretty much the same thing, but differs quite a bit once it comes to simultaneous publication). But however nonsensical it seems, Commons uses the Berne definition, since that should control when works expire in many countries (even if that virtually never comes up in a court case to test it). Carl Lindberg (talk) 01:15, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another aspect to consider is how publication is defined. For example, in this academic article about Russian copyright law, it is stated that an author, transferring a work to another by agreement, gives consent to publication, and thus the work can be considered published. This means that if Troshkin transferred his negatives to his employer (Izvestiya), the works would be legally considered published. Since all photos in question are of a professional nature, there is no reason to assume that Troshkin kept any of these photographs in his personal possession and did not transfer them to his employer. Considering this, then all of his photos would have been legally published when he transferred them to his employer, that is, definitely before his death in 1944, and all these photographs would be firmly public domain. Kges1901 (talk) 08:13, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Term publication (обнародование or опубликование in Russian, and these are two different term in the Russian copyright) is defined in the paragraph one and two of part 1 of article 1268 of the Civil Code. Consent to publication is not publication (right for exercise of some action is not action). And mentioned resent discussion on the Ru-Wiki for orphan works (where I was the main speaker) does not matter for Troshkin's works - author of photos (Troshkin) is known. Alex Spade (talk) 09:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    At the same time if there is a source for original of photo and its reverse side, and such original (reverse side) is marked by author name and a year, then this year can be considered as year of publication according to the last paragraph of article 475 of the Soviet Russian Civil Code. Alex Spade (talk) 09:22, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • In terms of copyright I am specifically discussing the nuances of обнародование because the term contains a broader meaning than simply опубликование, and the expiration of copyright (if work is posthumously published) is calculated from обнародование and not опубликование of a work – regarding photographs, that public display of a work counts as обнародование while not опубликование in the strict sense, therefore opening broader possibilities for the release of a work during Troshkin's lifetime.
Regarding originals, another aspect is that at least some of Troshkin's photographs were sent into TASS and copyright thus transferred to TASS, falling under PD-Russia under the TASS aspect. For example this photograph was marked on the back with TASS copyright stamp even though Troshkin was an Izvestiya correspondent.
In any case presence of markings on the back is the most hopeful approach to this problem of posthumous copyright since any photograph/negative with a description had to have been marked on the back with a caption and name of the author, since Troshkin's photographs presumably entered into a centralized group of photographs cleared for publication, as his photographs were not just published in Izvestiya, but in Krasnaya Zvezda, Vechernyaya Moskva, other newspapers, and books (for example a large quantity of his photographs taken during the Battle of Khalkhin Gol appeared in this 1940 book without mention of his name. Secondly finding an exact date for negatives such as this example would have been impossible if there was no marking on the back. The fact that exact dates taken are available for negatives indicates that they were also marked in some way with captions, dates and names of author. Examples of such author name and year markings on the back of a Troshkin photograph include [١], [٢], [٣], [٤], [٥], [٦], [٧]. Kges1901 (talk) 13:35, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, обнародование is wider than опубликование, but the fact (and the date) of обнародование must be proved (for example for some painting "This painting was created in 1923 and was shown on ZYX-art exhibition in 1925, see reference link").
  • Yes, if photowork is marked by TASS (no matter by TASS only or by TASS+name_of_real_photograph), this photowork is TASS-work. Alex Spade (talk) 14:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Undeletion of individual photographs

Russian department awards

Please, restore deleted Russian department awards and close (as keep) similar current DR. Alex Spade (talk) 09:59, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closed DR discussions

Current DR discussions

Yes, they are not state awards, but they are state symbols ({{PD-RU-exempt}}) indeed - symbols, which are established by state authorities, which design (including both text description and visual representation) are established (which design are integral part of) in respective official documents of state government agencies (the Russian official documents are not just texts), which are subjects of the en:State Heraldic Register of the Russian Federation (point 3 subpoint 4). Alex Spade (talk) 09:59, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Question Any opinion about this? Yann (talk) 18:50, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion it would be crucial here to know if the documents granting awards and awards themsetves are official (i.e. if they have legal basis).  Support if yes,  Oppose if not (unless we have knowledge that Russian courts interpret the word official differently), and COM:PCP if unsure. Without extra information it is the third option. If they are issued and granted just basing on an internal decision of the organization, then they are not official (IMO). Ankry (talk) 15:30, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, department order for decoration of someone(s) by department award(s), наградной лист (award paper), and наградная книжка (award card) for department awards are official documents of administrative characters. Same as for state awards. Alex Spade (talk) 09:15, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:UG-GE Photowalk (March, 2018)

those files deleted as no FoP in Georgia but they are just graffiti. I think that COM:GRAFFITI applies. Template {{Non-free graffiti}} should be added as well. We have a lot's of them in Category:Non-free graffiti. -- Geagea (talk) 13:52, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment Documentation of Template:Non-free graffiti states: "Note that this template doesn't have enough help on the undeletion requests, deleted files are unlikely to be restored just because of the potential application of this tag.". Günther Frager (talk) 18:18, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
that's not just because the template. The template is only for information. The deletion rational was no FoP in Georgia. But it is not FoP issue. I linked COM:GRAFFITI and we have a lots of files in Category:Non-free graffiti. -- Geagea (talk) 18:28, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose But Georgia does not have FOP anyway. Also, these are murals by unknown artists, not just text or tags. Thuresson (talk) 18:09, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So graffiti is a FoP case? If FoP in Georgia will be ok than the graffiti also ok? Aren't they in temporarily exhibition by definition. If they just a case of FoP it's not very clear in COM:GRAFFITI. -- Geagea (talk) 20:47, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For better or worse, we have allowed photos of illegal graffiti by policy regardless of FoP laws -- but we prefer using the FoP tags, or PD tags, if those apply rather than relying on that rationale. If this looks like "legal graffiti", i.e. murals, then we should not allow it. Carl Lindberg (talk) 23:59, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the above. However, I have doubts about legal status of some of the images form this DR, eg. Tbilisi street art 18 (UG-GE, 2018).jpg. They may be created legally. Ankry (talk) 07:57, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mola_Ali.jpg

Request temporary undeletion

It seems to have been deleted because it was considered a derivative work. But actually, checking it from the Archive, it does not appear to be a derivative of any particular depiction of Ali. There are many similar illustrations of him with many variations, which are ubiquitous. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 00:33, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For instance, see this image, which is in the public domain. It is also quite similar to the deleted image, so I think these kinds of depictions of Ali are too generic to be considered derivatives of one another. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 01:35, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Request: Could we have it undeleted temporarily for the discussion since the Internet Archive is down? TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 00:13, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose The argument above certainly has some force, but side by side the deleted image and the one cited at Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Mola_Ali.jpg look very similar. Compare the folds in the shirt and the creases in the face. The position of the eyes is also identical. The image cited above does not have the same similarities. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:45, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jameslwoodward: This quote from page 39-40 of the referenced book implies that some of those features you mention are very common in his contemporary portraits:

Contemporary portraits of Imam Ali also give importance to the face. The viewer’s attention is drawn to the Imam’s face by a light illuminating the upper part of his face, that is, the forehead, nasal bone and cheekbones. However, the iconographic detailing of the face often differs between images to present a variety of physiognomic traits all held to represent Imam Ali. The most commonly produced and distributed portraits, which I call the ‘conventional’ facial type, are illustrated in Figures 2, 3, 12 and 14. Imam Ali is shown in part profile with lofty forehead and wide, a little oversized, eyes with large pupils. The high eyebrows accentuate the size of the eye. Ali avoids eye contact with the viewer and the gaze seems to be directed slightly upwards with the look of a far-sighted visionary, creating an almost dream-like appearance. The face is oval, and the cheekbones round. The lips are full rather than thin. Cheekbones and lips are partly covered by a dark, thick, well-trimmed beard.

Also, actually, I can't entirely agree that the public domain image I shared does not have these similarities. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 01:30, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pas van Robby.jpg/File:Lachen is gezond.jpg/File:Wij hebben schik.jpg/File:Een mooi stukje op de Malediven.jpg/File:Robby Roeplall.jpg

Dear madam, sir,

My photo’s are for educational reasons updated to you without any ristrictions and copyright on it. Can you please put the pasphoto back? The photo’s can use worldwide and in the i.g. YouTube and radio Awaaz in the Netherlands (The Hague). It’s all ready for Wikipedia. Thank you for your trustful cooperation.

Have a nice day.

Yours sincerely,

Robby Roeplall (Rproeplall (talk) 14:51, 13 October 2024 (UTC))[reply]

File:Pas van Robby.jpg has copyright issues that cannot be resolved in on-wiki discussion. For other photos: where exactly in Wikimedia they were used / intended to be used? Ankry (talk) 07:36, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Equality March 2022 in Kraków - Among Us.jpg

Protected by Freedom of Panorama in Poland--Trade (talk) 15:09, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The sign is not permanently exhibited as required by Polish FoP. Abzeronow (talk) 18:03, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose Polish FoP, as is the case with most, maybe all, other countries, requires that the work be permanently displayed. A sign held up by a person is clearly not permanent. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:03, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some signatures

These files deleted with the reason: "Although the signatures themselves are likely to be public domain, we have no source to confirm the accuracy of the images. They are not used anywhere; therefore, they were deleted." I wasn't very active during that time, but now I would like to source each file. Please restore them:

FYI: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Owais Al Qarni. Regards, Aafi (talk) 11:13, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gloria Morena.jpg

== [[:File:Bild 15.10.24 um12.31.jpg]] Urheberrecht liegt bei mir Gloria Morena ==

Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren,

das Urheberrecht des Bildes und aller weiteren Bilder die ich hochladen werde, liegt bei mir. Da mir das sensible Thema durchaus vertraut ist, achte ich sehr darauf. Daher bitte ich sie, das von mir Hochgeladene Bild wieder freizugeben.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen,

Gloria Morena. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GloriaMorena (talk • contribs) 18:09, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@GloriaMorena: Photos uploaded to Commons must be in COM:SCOPE so I would like to ask you to explain why this photo is useful, other than for your autobiography at de:Benutzer:GloriaMorena/Gloria Morena. Thuresson (talk) 00:44, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Logos de la Alcaldías venezolanas

Hi,please restored these images:

These logos are in the public domain according to the last paragraph of the license in Venezuela (logos created by public sector) {{PD-VenezuelaGov}} (google translator) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AbchyZa22 (talk • contribs) 19:13, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cheyenne Hotel.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: deleted via Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Cheyenne_Hotel.jpg. However, if it shows one of the files kept at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Disney's Cheyenne hotel, then it may be OK to host here, whether it is a simple work of architecture or acceptable image courtesy of relatively-lenient French de minimis. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 00:05, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Info The photo is also available here. Thuresson (talk) 00:30, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Thuresson it's a confirmed COM:DM France. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 00:32, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Manisa_Basket.png

That picture officialy belongs to Turkish Basketball Federation. Their copyrights are open sources. I mean anyone able to use that logo. And i have contact with the director of team. He said Federation approve the logo using actions too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ErenKrcgl (talk • contribs) 06:34, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Images of the Scuola di Guerra Aerea

Hi everyone, I'm writing here in order to ask for the undeletion of the following images:

All these images depict the it:Scuola di guerra aerea and were deleted in 2013 after 4 DRs: 1, 2, 3 and 4. As we can read here (p. 182) the complex was commissioned by the Ministry of the Air Force to en:Raffaello Fagnoni, and it was completed in 1938. Therefore, it fell under Template:PD-ItalyGov in 1959, way before 1990, so no issue with US copyright.--Friniate (talk) 20:26, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/ar&oldid=764784603"