Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2023-03
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
The pictures show the poster for an exhibition of the artist Hans-Peter Klie - i can not see a reason why it can not be shown on his wikipedia entry? Furthermore Hans-Peter Klie designed the poster, so he is the copyright owner. Obviously he agreed to the publication and wants his work to be shown in wikipedia. Can you please put the pictures back into Wiki? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blau-7 (talk • contribs) 20:35, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
Oppose First, we don't keep images as PDFs. Second, there are numerous images as part of the poster which are credited to third parties. I doubt very much that all of them are freely licensed. Third, "Obviously he agreed to the publication and wants his work to be shown" is not a free license. It is not at all obvious that an artist would want his work to be freely licensed so that others can create and sell copies of it. Some do, but many do not. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:45, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 18:39, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
The pictures shows a screen shot of a videoart film of the artist Hans-Peter Klie. Of course he agreed to the publication and wants his work to be shown in wikipedia. Can you please put the pictures back into Wiki? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blau-7 (talk • contribs)
"Of course he agreed to the publication and wants his work to be shown in wikipedia" is not a free license. It is not at all obvious that an artist would want his work to be freely licensed so that others can create and sell copies of it. Some do, but many do not. Also note that "to be shown in wikipedia" is too limited. We require that works be free for any use by anybody anywhere. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:49, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 21:26, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
I am requesting un-deletion of this file because a Wikimedia compatible license applies, and it should not have been deleted.
The applicable license for this file is https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/
This can be seen by clicking the license information at this link: https://www.flickr.com/photos/coreyoakley/22969586683/in/photostream/
- Oppose This is a non commercial license, and is not compatible with Wikimedia Commons. Yann (talk) 09:46, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per Yann; see Commons:Licensing. Ruthven (msg) 13:22, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
I am requesting un-deletion of this file because a Wikimedia compatible license applies, and it should not have been deleted.
The applicable license for this file is https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/
This can be seen by clicking the license information at this link: https://www.flickr.com/photos/coreyoakley/22968693754/in/photostream/
- Oppose This is a non commercial license, and is not compatible with Wikimedia Commons. Yann (talk) 09:46, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per Yann; see Commons:Licensing. Ruthven (msg) 13:22, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
I am requesting un-deletion of this file because a Wikimedia compatible license applies, and it should not have been deleted.
The applicable license for this file is https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/
This can be seen by clicking the license information at this link: https://www.flickr.com/photos/coreyoakley/23570701526/in/photostream/
- Oppose This is a non commercial license, and is not compatible with Wikimedia Commons. Yann (talk) 09:46, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per Yann; see Commons:Licensing. Ruthven (msg) 13:22, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
A proper agreement from author has been recieved in VTRS ticket:2023022410008491. The file needs to be renamed after undeletion to for example: Monika Maciewicz_by_Marlena Paniw.jpg ... Polimerek (talk) 10:41, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Done: per request. @Polimerek: FYI, please add VRT ticket etc. --Rosenzweig τ 12:29, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Per Section 65 of the Act on Copyright and Related Rights (Urheberrechtsgesetz – UrhG) copyright in cinematographic works expires 70 years after the death of the last surviving of the following persons: the principle film director, the author of the screenplay, the author of the dialogues, the composer of music specifically composed for use in the cinematographic work in question. This applies at the end of that calendar year per Section 69. The longest lived was Henrik Galeen who died in 1949, hence the movie and this screenshot are in the public domain in Germany, and they are also in the public domain in the US due to the publication date 1922. Hekerui (talk) 10:49, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
- Perplexingly, though the movie as a whole is now indeed in the public domain in Germany, per this recent discussion (in German), individual stills (frames) taken from the movie are probably still not free until 2029, as German courts apparently consider the cinematographer (Kameramann) as the creator of individual frames, and Fritz Arno Wagner died only in 1958. This creates the slightly absurd situation that, in German-language Wikipedia, we can embed a video with the whole movie in the article, but not single images from the movie. So, I also think that this image shouldn't be restored before 2029. Gestumblindi (talk) 11:22, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
- The linked discussion references a documentary movie that has no director but only two camera people so those are counted as copyright holders, no? ("Ich habe mir das von Syrco zitierte Urteil angeschaut und dort ging es offenbar um dokumentarische Aufnahmen, bei denen als Urheber eh nur zwei Kameramänner und sonst niemand in Frage kam"). Hekerui (talk) 12:38, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
- Per the contribution of Pajz in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Greta-Garbo-and-Jaro-Furth-in-the-film-Joyless-Street-1925-142462321702.jpg, still frames from the film itself do not not share in the protection of the film work as such, but can be protected either as simple photographs, for 50 years from creation, or as photographic works with 70 years pma, depending on the level of originality ("Die Einzelbilder eines Filmwerks sind nicht nach Abs. 1 Nr. 6 schutzfähig, können aber als Lichtbildwerke nach Abs. 1 Nr. 5 oder als Lichtbilder nach § 72 geschützt sein"). The author would indeed be the cameraman. This seems original enough for 70 years pma to me, so I oppose undeletion before 2029. --Rosenzweig τ 16:48, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
- That's also how I read Syrcro's reply to my question in the current German discussion ("ja, das meint es wohl"), i.e. that frames from a film can be considered individual works with the cameraman as the creator. As I said there, it's not very logical IMHO, especially if you have a video you can pause anytime and then view a single image, too... (but then, the law probably is from before the time of digital videos or widely available video at all). Gestumblindi (talk) 18:19, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
- Copyright laws may be somewhat logical when they are new, but after several decades of changes and amendments they have these inconsistencies. --Rosenzweig τ 07:06, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
- Hmm. So we have Category:Nosferatu and especially File:Nosferatu (1922, English titles 1947).webm, but we can't have this file? This doesn't hold much water... Yann (talk) 07:53, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
- It's not logical, as both Gestumblindi and I pointed out. But laws and court decisions are not always logical. --Rosenzweig τ 08:09, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
- I have to agree. Also by the additional quotes by Syrcro in the German discussion, though it is not logical to us, it is the law as the courts apply it. So we can have the whole movie here, but not single frames, until 2029. Gestumblindi (talk) 10:51, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
- PS: Except for the movie itself, and File:Wismar Markt Nosferatu 01.jpg which was taken under freedom of panorama as a plaque in a public space, there are no images directly from the movie in Category:Nosferatu (rightly so). One that might at first glance look like it, File:Gerbic as Nosferatu 2013.JPG, is a modern re-enactment/cosplay image. File:Gustav von Wangenheim 1922.jpg looks like Gustav von Wangenheim as Hutter in the movie, but it's apparently from a postcard and a separately taken still image. Gestumblindi (talk) 12:23, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
- How long a film cut would make it acceptable? 5 minutes? 1 mn? 10 s? It is quite clear that applying such a rule would create complete absurd situations. Yann (talk) 12:39, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- I think you misunderstand the legal argument. Any "film cut" that is still a film (moving images) would be acceptable, even if very short; the German courts just apply a different kind of protection to still frames taken from the film, the same as for photographs. It took some time to wrap my head around it, but ultimately, I think it's not even that illogical. And at least 2029 is not that far in the future ;-) Gestumblindi (talk) 20:24, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- I understand perfectly the argument, but it creates absurd situations. So we could have a two-frame film, but not one single still frame... Yann (talk) 21:02, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- Well, but that's what's established by the German courts, we can't change it. - For what it's worth, like Rosenzweig, I therefore (although I've already said as much) formally oppose undeletion before 2029, maybe another admin wants to close this request now, which has been open for quite a while? Gestumblindi (talk) 19:28, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- Well, but that's what's established by the German courts, we can't change it. - For what it's worth, like Rosenzweig, I therefore (although I've already said as much) formally
- I understand perfectly the argument, but it creates absurd situations. So we could have a two-frame film, but not one single still frame... Yann (talk) 21:02, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- I think you misunderstand the legal argument. Any "film cut" that is still a film (moving images) would be acceptable, even if very short; the German courts just apply a different kind of protection to still frames taken from the film, the same as for photographs. It took some time to wrap my head around it, but ultimately, I think it's not even that illogical. And at least 2029 is not that far in the future ;-) Gestumblindi (talk) 20:24, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- How long a film cut would make it acceptable? 5 minutes? 1 mn? 10 s? It is quite clear that applying such a rule would create complete absurd situations. Yann (talk) 12:39, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- It's not logical, as both Gestumblindi and I pointed out. But laws and court decisions are not always logical. --Rosenzweig τ 08:09, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
- Hmm. So we have Category:Nosferatu and especially File:Nosferatu (1922, English titles 1947).webm, but we can't have this file? This doesn't hold much water... Yann (talk) 07:53, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
- Copyright laws may be somewhat logical when they are new, but after several decades of changes and amendments they have these inconsistencies. --Rosenzweig τ 07:06, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
- That's also how I read Syrcro's reply to my question in the current German discussion ("ja, das meint es wohl"), i.e. that frames from a film can be considered individual works with the cameraman as the creator. As I said there, it's not very logical IMHO, especially if you have a video you can pause anytime and then view a single image, too... (but then, the law probably is from before the time of digital videos or widely available video at all). Gestumblindi (talk) 18:19, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Not done: As noted above, the case law reaches an absurd conclusion, but we must follow it. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:28, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Also
- File:IG Wiki-Commons Hub Description Translation Project.jpg
- File:WLA 2023 PNG Banner.png
- File:Test - WLA Newsletter page.png ==
The above files were originally tagged for incomplete licenses after which I provided all the appropriate and complete information. I think the deleting editor may have missed the added information. Kindly restore. Thanks Wilson (talk) 00:21, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
- @OtuNwachinemere: You say "This image was created using elements freely provided and already uploaded to Canva", but we cannot verify the free license of those elements with a generic statement like that. You must provide a link to every element that you used, whether it comes from Wikimedia Commons or some other free-licensed website. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:36, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
- Could you please share with me an example of what this particular license information should look like? Please thank you.
- Also, in File:WLA 2023 PNG Banner.png, i did correct the license to reflect the source of the original elements (which is a file on Commons) using the {{Own - based on template. Wilson (talk) 18:19, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
Oppose Also, unless you were the actual photographer and artist of all the graphic elements in the files, your claim of {{Own}} is incorrect and, unless all of those elements were PD, you are in violation of CC-BY licenses. Such violations can cost tens of thousands of dollars.
Finally, I note a misspelling ("tern" should be "term") in the first one and the last one tells us, "Contest images have been viewed 1,044,490,672 million times (as at June 2022)". That's a little more than one quadrillion (10^15) views, over 100,000 views by every person on Earth, which seems a little unlikely. So, those two are useless except, possibly as illustrations of carelessness. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:50, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
- What two are you referring to? @Jameslwoodward
- Also, the license was adjusted from Own to 'Own - based on' with links to the source file on Commons which i believe is the correct license for a derivative work. They were not deleted because of errors in spelling or text, kindly stick to the topic. Wilson (talk) 18:26, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
- In my comment I referred to "the first" and "the last" which, I think, sufficiently identifies them. As for finding problems not mentioned in the DR, it is our job here to decide whether the images are appropriate for Commons, taking into account both copyright and other factors.
- The first one has two photographs and four pieces of artwork, none of which have sources. It also has a spelling mistake.
- The second one has a photograph and at least one (maybe more) pieces of art, none of which have sources.
- The third has three or more photographs (the clouds are at least one, maybe more) and several pieces of art. One photographer is named but the file name and license are not not given.
- The fourth has a photograph, one piece of art, and copyrighted text, none of which are sourced. It also has a ridiculous number, a spelling mistake and several grammar errors.
- All of this can, of course, be corrected, but why are we even discussing the first and the last which obviously will never be used anywhere except, as I said above, as examples of carelessness? . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:00, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
- The "tern" issue refers to the left half of File:WLA 2023 Climate vs Weather.png. The slightly exaggerated viewer-number refers to File:Test - WLA Newsletter page.png. --Túrelio (talk) 19:29, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you @Túrelio, i will attempt to fix and re-upload the File:WLA 2023 Climate vs Weather.png as it is the most important of the set to me atm. The rest were created as test samples for pre-contest project pages. Can you please share an example of what the appropriate license should look like? I have taken note of the aforementioned by Jim and i'd like to avoid these errors going forward. Thanks Wilson (talk) 21:49, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
File:WLA 2023 Climate vs Weather.png has two photographs (possibly three if the tree is separate) and four pieces of art. The license for the image will need to be the most restrictive of the licenses on the underlying works. Thus if one of the photos is CC-BY-SA, you cannot license the whole image as CC-BY or CC-0. If one of the works has a permitted license other than CC, then life gets more complicated because some licenses are incompatible. Each of the six works except those that are your own work must be separately on Commons and must be listed separately in the file description, including any that are actually your own work. Each must be listed with its Commons file name, the Commons Username of the author, and the license under which you are using it. You may simply say "own work" for those that are. Thus:
- Photo of baked clay: File:Baked clay.jpg User:Smith CC-BY
- Photo of clouds : File Clouds User:Jones CC-BY-SA
- Sun: File:Sun User:JaneDoe CC-BY-SA
- Raincloud art: Own work
- Africa outline - as above
- Thermometer art - as above
- License (in this case) must be CC-BY-SA
. Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:07, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- Ok, thank you Jim. Will fix the issues for File:WLA 2023 Climate vs Weather.png Wilson (talk) 07:03, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Not done: Implicitly withdrawn by requestor. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:27, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
This is a work of a governmental entity of Florida, which places it within the public domain. It was mistakenly tagged with CC0 license, but should have been PD-FLGov. It was erroneously speedy'd as copyvio, but is ineligible for copyright protection. --dsprc (talk) 11:07, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
Oppose The file description is, "R. Kelly's June 5th, 2002 Chicago Mugshot". That tells me that the image was taken in Chicago, not Florida, and therefore is not PD. I also cannot find the image on the named site. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:00, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
.svg/15px-Pictogram_voting_comment_(orange).svg.png)
Comment - Most sources credit this to the Donaldson Collection at Getty, which is unhelpful. As Kelly was arrested in Florida on an Illinois warrant, however, and as sources that do not credit Getty instead generally credit Miami Dade Corrections (Time, the Sun, etc.), it seems likely this is the booking photo from the Florida arrest. Эlcobbola talk 20:24, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
Done: The Time article makes it clear that this must be the 2002 Florida Mug Shot. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:26, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Что касается изображения экскаватора ЭКГ-5А производства завода УРАЛГОРМАШ (File:ЭК-7.jpg), мною оформлено и передано официальное соглашение на его применение. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Хараим (talk • contribs) 10:50, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
Oppose The image appears at http://uzgm.ru/fotogalereya/ without a free license. In order to restore it here, the actual copyright holder, usually the photographer, must send a free license using VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:16, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 16:18, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Что касается изображения экскаватора ЭКГ-5А производства завода УРАЛГОРМАШ (File:ЭКГ-5А УРАЛГОРМАШ.jpg), мною оформлено и передано официальное соглашение на его применение. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Хараим (talk • contribs) 10:53, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
Oppose The image appears at https://kamensk-uralskiy.drom.ru/spec/uralmash/ekg-5a/excavator/mining/47397861.html with an explicit copyright notice. In order to restore it here, the actual copyright holder, usually the photographer, must send a free license using VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:11, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose, VRT release appears necessary. Please ask the copyright holder to send a release via COM:RELGEN. Best, ─ The Aafī (talk) 15:37, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per discussion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:19, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
hello, undelete my photo because i made it by myself and im first one who uploaded it, thanks--OldBoy1877 (talk) 18:52, 27 February 2023 (UTC)ameer--OldBoy1877 (talk) 18:52, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Apparently not useful in a Wikimedia context, see User talk:OldBoy1877. Thuresson (talk) 20:20, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Thuresson. --Yann (talk) 20:23, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
It is a legitimate PEGI icon regarding Violence, therefore, it should be undeleted.
--FireDragonValo (talk) 05:14, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Oppose As noted at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:PEGI classification by type), the logo comes from a site with, "The PEGI trademarks and logos used on this website are the exclusive property of PEGI and may not be used without PEGI’s explicit consent to do so". The logo cannot be kept on Commons without a free license from the copyright owner. Given the purpose of the logo, such permission seems highly unlikely, as it would defeat the purpose of the PEGI logos if anyone could use them on any game. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:38, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Jameslwoodward, is there anything missing? The link is red. ─ The Aafī (talk) 15:35, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- Aha -- sorry -- there is a right parenthesis there for some reason. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:42, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 13:28, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Hello, This is the logo of the brand. I don’t understand why it keep being delete… — Preceding unsigned comment added by LooptroopMN (talk • contribs) 11:25, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
Oppose It is a copyrighted logo and comes from a web site that has "Toute reproduction ( intégrale ou partielle ), modification, chargement informatique, dénaturation, pour un usage autre que privé et non commercial, sont interdits." It cannot be kept on Commons without a free license from an authorized official of the organization owning the copyright. see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Logo VVF 2022.png. Note also that this is the second time this was requested and you got the same answer ten days ago. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:29, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 13:27, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please restore. We have permission per Ticket:2023022710005844. Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 15:52, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Done: @Mussklprozz: FYI. --Yann (talk) 16:16, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
File:Charlotte Lindgren.jpg undeletion request
The copyright holder (Art Gallery of Nova Scotia) is going to refer to this image when using the Release Generator. Since it has already been uploaded, it needs to be available to complete the submission. Remembereric (talk) 20:02, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose There are two copyrights here -- one for the work of a living artist, Charlotte Lindgren, and one for the photograph. If the work is permanently in a public place as defined in Canadian law, then it is covered by FoP. That must be proven. If it is in a gallery awaiting sale, then we will need a license from Lindgren.
- As for the license for the image, the gallery can refer to the file with the name above in its VRT request. The file will be restored when and if a free license from the image's copyright holder is received, read, and approved at VRT and, if necessary, a free license is received from Lindgren. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:36, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- Done I didn't notice the open undeletion request. I restored the file because I received permission from the Image Rights Manager of the art gallery, who confirmed that the gallery owns the copyrights. Leaving this open in case someone wants to re-delete it. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:27, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry if this is irritatingly naive. May I proceed now to have this photo inserted? Remembereric (talk) 19:41, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: Per Mdaniels5757. Image is now available for any use. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:02, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
The picture is free to use and it is the recommended source by the owner as press kit: https://cemm.at/media/press-kit
--Ainglesprieto (talk) 13:30, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose No information about the free license at the source. Press photos can't be accepted on Commons without a formal written permission from the copyright holder. Please see COM:VRT for the procedure. Yann (talk) 13:32, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: THe web site doesn't even have an explicit license for press use and absolutely does not have a free license for general use. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:38, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please restore the following pages:
- File:Ave Lola Manaós.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Reason: Authorization received at ticket:2023013010014688 ━ ALBERTOLEONCIO Who, me? 18:08, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: @Albertoleoncio: FYI, please add ticket etc. --Rosenzweig τ 19:02, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please restore the following pages:
- File:Gereja Paulus 1948.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Gereja Paulus 1948.jpg
Per COM:INDONESIA, Photographs published before 1971 would not be restored by URAA. This is a 1948 photograph of a church in Indonesia, the architect died in 1947 so the architecture is public domain in Indonesia and pre-1990 architecture is not copyrighted in the US. The photograph can be found at http://p2k.unkris.ac.id/id3/2-3065-2962/Gereja-Paulus-Menteng_70276_p2k-unkris.html I think it's reasonable to presume publication before the 1970s. Abzeronow (talk) 16:14, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Done: See above. @Abzeronow: Please add the missing information. --Yann (talk) 10:43, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Hi, I'd like o get this picture back as it was my mom the one who took this and I have full permission to use it (I'm the one in the photo too). --Foolkyou (talk) 18:52, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Oppose See Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Foolkyou. Also note that claiming you were the photographer when you were not is a serious violation of Commons rules. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:49, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Also see Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Blocks_and_protections#Is_this_offensive_as_prohibited_by_COM:IU? . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:19, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 17:14, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
I ask you to please restore the image, Mexico has freedom of panorama, so this photo should not have been deleted, the user who nominated this image for its elimination @ A1Cafel is unaware of Mexico's freedom of panorama laws, including the user @Yann made it known to him in this nomination of Mexico's freedom of panorama laws.--Aurelio de Sandoval (Mensajes aquí please) 20:25, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Support Mexico doesn't require that art be permanently placed. Abzeronow (talk) 20:34, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose All but one of the posters visible here have been pixelated, which makes this close to useless. The original uploader should upload a clean version using the same file name. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:09, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- @ProtoplasmaKid: the uploader, yeah a clean version without the posters being pixelated would be better. Would that be a possibility? Abzeronow (talk) 16:19, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Done Reverted to the unpixelated version. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:12, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please restore the following pages:
- File:Noa Kirel by Moshe Nachumovich.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Reason: Based on this talk page discussion and the outcome of two earlier deletion requests (1; 2), it seems that the uploader has sent an e-mail to VRT to confirm that they are the author of this work. See ticket:2023011910004666. — Ætoms (talk) 22:11, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose The file will be restored when and if a free license from the image's copyright holder is received, read, and approved at VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:16, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose, VRT verification appears necessary as Jim has noted above. ─ The Aafī (talk) 11:47, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per The Aafī. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:08, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Я участник группы и все авторские права принадлежат мне. Моя официальная верифицированная страница https://vk.com/dmitriyb Моя верифицированная группа https://vk.com/indulpunk Сайт https://indulpunk.ru/
Можете написать мне на страницу или в группу и я полностью подтвержу факт загрузки фотографии лично мною. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Metanol38 (talk • contribs)
- This can be undeleted following a VRT verification. ─ The Aafī (talk) 11:46, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per The Aafī. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:08, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please undelete that sign? It goes through Singaporean standard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.150.196.156 (talk • contribs) 15:14, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
Oppose
- The sign is identical to File:Information road sign parking.svg.
- It displays incorrectly -- no file information, just the image at 2,147 x 2,147 px, so only a part of it shows.
- It has been uploaded four times out of process by various socks of a long time abuser.
. Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:36, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: DFTT-LTA nonsense. --Эlcobbola talk 16:06, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Although this file was uploaded by a LTA's sock, this work may be in the public domain. Its author died in 1938 and possibly would be free at the URAA date. Possibly is also a pre-1928 work as it depicts Emperor Meiji, who died in 1912. 83.61.231.21 16:51, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Uploads by LTA and their socks should only be restored when requested by an account in good standing. Yann (talk) 17:12, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Yann: I reviewed the file while it was still available and even edited the author section to add the creator template. 83.61.231.21 18:53, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support It would be public domain in Japan and the US. It might be from 1927 because http://kininaruart.com/artist/nihonga/matsuoka_eikyu_e.html lists a work by the author titled "The Emperor at the Grand Shrine of Ise" Abzeronow (talk) 19:39, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Done Requested by Abzeronow, a user in good standing. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:27, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
File:المروضون الشجعان الشعار العربي.jpg
لا يملك مخالفة حقوق نشر
--Raidonom (talk) 22:00, 2 March 2023 (UTC)raidonom
- Oppose @Raidonom: , the copyright holder needs to send a permissions release using COM:VRT. The files cannot be restored without having the adequate permissions received ─ The Aafī (talk) 05:23, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- However it is unclear to me that how these files are copyrighted? Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Raidonom doesn't give any explanation to that. Pinging @Karim185.3? ─ The Aafī (talk) 05:25, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- @TheAafi sorry for the late reply. The uploader told me that the real source is a screenshot of this YouTube video (at 8:32:16). No CC licence, so it is copyrighted. --Karim talk to me :)..! 14:56, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- However it is unclear to me that how these files are copyrighted? Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Raidonom doesn't give any explanation to that. Pinging @Karim185.3? ─ The Aafī (talk) 05:25, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per Karim. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:07, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
--TawhidulOfficial (talk) 22:04, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose, this is a F10 case and the uploader hasn't made any constructive contributions to the encyclopedia. ─ The Aafī (talk) 05:21, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per The Aafī -- this image is the only contribution from this user. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:11, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
This file is my own work it's a photo illustration made by me from 0 using adobe photoshop and I can prove it. I don't see any violations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riad Salih (talk • contribs) 09:47, 3 March 2023 (UTC) (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
Not done: Not currently deleted. --Yann (talk) 09:48, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
I spent 6 hours sizing up that Dracula image to make it big enough to be accepted please don't take that away.
- Oppose, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bela Lugosi as Count Dracula 1931.jpg. --Achim55 (talk) 22:29, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- It was made from a similar image but the size was different the way you described was 1440x1080px the one I made was 2880x2160px DarionGray (talk) 22:44, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- I hate to hear about a lot of well-intentioned work needing to be deleted, but if you took a frame from the copyrighted film (as opposed to the public domain trailer), then it's still a potential problem, and we can't keep it (for now). Well, it's just hidden from non-admin users really, not fully deleted. The film apparently becomes public domain in 2027, so it will come back eventually (a little under four years). So that work won't go to waste; we just have to wait a while to use it, once it qualifies as "free". Carl Lindberg (talk) 22:50, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per Carl. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:05, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please restore the following pages:
- File:16corpsinsignia.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Reason: Although GODL may not apply, there is still a possibility that this file is below TOO and is therefore {{PD-textlogo}}. --Matr1x-101Pinging me doesn't hurt! {user - talk? - useless contributions} 18:14, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Matr1x, it's not a textlogo but similar to the one in the background of this photograph. --Achim55 (talk) 19:52, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Looks to me to be above the ToO. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:03, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Jameslwoodward: what makes you think so? It's just a horse with some spikes, not that original. Besides, both Indian and US TOO are quite high. --Matr1x-101Pinging me doesn't hurt! {user - talk? - useless contributions} 22:20, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- ToO questions are entirely subjective so all I can say is that I base my opinion on my considerable experience here. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:36, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Jameslwoodward: what makes you think so? It's just a horse with some spikes, not that original. Besides, both Indian and US TOO are quite high. --Matr1x-101Pinging me doesn't hurt! {user - talk? - useless contributions} 22:20, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose per the same reason I gave at the DR. ─ The Aafī (talk) 11:50, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 17:26, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
This file is in the public domain in Indonesia, because it is published and distributed by the Government of Republic of Indonesia, casu quo Library and Archive Service of East Nusa Tenggara Province in their website Sistem Informasi Kearsipan Provinsi Nusa Tenggara Timur, according to Article 43 of Law 28 of 2014 on copyrights but it is my fault that I forget to make the sufficient description and licensing before so pelase undelete this file and I will make sure to fill the proper description and licensing. Thank you. Jordan Diwi (talk) 09:00, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Jordan Diwi Please sign your posts at the end by adding four tildes at the end (~ four times) and please share the link where Republic of Indonesia published this image? ─ The Aafī (talk) 08:35, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- This file is in the public domain in Indonesia, because it is published and distributed by the Government of Republic of Indonesia, casu quo Library and Archive Service of East Nusa Tenggara Province in their website Sistem Informasi Kearsipan Provinsi Nusa Tenggara Timur, according to Article 43 of Law 28 of 2014 on copyrights but it is my fault that I forget to make the sufficient description and licensing before so pelase undelete this file and I will make sure to fill the proper description and licensing. Thank you. Jordan Diwi (talk) 09:01, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- okay. I Support undeletion. ─ The Aafī (talk) 11:44, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- okay. I
- This file is in the public domain in Indonesia, because it is published and distributed by the Government of Republic of Indonesia, casu quo Library and Archive Service of East Nusa Tenggara Province in their website Sistem Informasi Kearsipan Provinsi Nusa Tenggara Timur, according to Article 43 of Law 28 of 2014 on copyrights but it is my fault that I forget to make the sufficient description and licensing before so pelase undelete this file and I will make sure to fill the proper description and licensing. Thank you. Jordan Diwi (talk) 09:01, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: PD-IDGov. @Jordan Diwi: Please add categories. --Yann (talk) 17:30, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
4 This picture was taken by the award recipient's wife at the award ceremony in 1983. I am not clear why it was deleted. (Roskilly (talk) 22:38, 2 March 2023 (UTC))
Oppose In the initial upload, you claimed that you were the actual photographer of the image. You say above that that was not true. Making false claims about authorship of images is a serious violation of Commons rules. If you do it again, you may be blocked from editing here.
In order for the image to be restored here, the actual photographer must send a free license using VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:32, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 09:56, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please restore the following pages:
- File:Theresa Feoderowna Ries.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Theresa Feoderowna Ries.jpg
An 1895 image would be old enough for PD-old-assumed now. Abzeronow (talk) 23:47, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Non-trivial COM:DW of the sculpture, whose sculptor died in 1956. "She is perhaps best known for photographing and creating a bust of Mark Twain during the time he resided in Vienna" - so I don't think it is a US work either. Undelete in 2027. (However, if you think a side-profile photo of her would be useful, we could undelete and crop.) -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:17, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- I withdraw my request since it was not apparent that the sculptor's Mark Twain bust was included. I'll put the DR for Undeletion in 2027. Abzeronow (talk) 15:58, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: Withdrawn. --Yann (talk) 09:57, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
File:وزارة الإتصال الجزائر.svg
The logo is free from copyright it's made from the National Emblem of Algeria + adding arabic text "name of the ministry" by me and 2 simple geometric shapes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riad Salih (talk • contribs) 13:10, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
Oppose The File:National_Emblem_of_Algeria.svg is not freely licensed, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:National_Emblem_of_Algeria.svg. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:54, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 14:57, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
I have permission from the company Scandinavian Photo to upload their logo for their wiki page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrsKallin (talk • contribs) 4:01, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you..
Oppose First, the permission stated above is insufficient. Commons and Wikipedia require that images be free for any use by anybody anywhere. Second, policy requires that an authorized official of the organization owning the copyright for a logo must send a free license using VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:04, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 14:52, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please restore the following pages:
- File:Tor-1901.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tor-1901.jpg
This 1901 Swiss photograph would be old enough for PD-old-assumed. Abzeronow (talk) 16:04, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: as per Abzeronow. @Abzeronow: Could you please find the source? --Yann (talk) 14:57, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
The ticket:2023021110003465 received and approved. Анастасия Львоваru/en 09:26, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: @Lvova: Please add the license. --Yann (talk) 10:00, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
file is made from this Emblem of the Arab League File:Emblem of the Arab League.svg + Algerian flag+ some text
Not done: Not currently deleted, but permission still missing. --Yann (talk) 13:21, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Files uploaded by PantheraLeo1359531
Please restore the following pages:
Reason: Due to a discussion it was decided to keep only the audio files and delete the video files on the podcast "Blaue Couch". I implemented this on 40 files and asked to delete the respective video files in the file versions. Unfortunately, however, the entire files (pages) were deleted, not just the individual video files in the file versions. I ask for undeletion of the sound files (the newest file version of each file) and file pages (without the video tracks). Thank you! (see for more information: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Graphic_Lab/Video_and_sound_workshop/Archive/2022#Convert_podcast_'videos'_with_non-free_still_images_into_sound_files) PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 11:58, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: @PantheraLeo1359531: Please remove Category:Blaue Couch, file version deletion from the file description pages. --Rosenzweig τ 01:31, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
I am the copyright owner of that screenshot as I was the one who did it. May I request for an undeletion? What proof do you need to show that it came from my PC? Yubinerd123 (talk) 17:20, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support Content is PD-ineligible. Yann (talk) 17:28, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support While there's a lot of text here, the actual human-written portions are minimal (PD-ineligible); it's mostly PD-algorithm. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:00, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Undeleted, tagged with {{PD-algorithm}}. Thuresson (talk) 16:25, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Hi, the first revision is licensed by a YouTube channel (the author) under the CC licence, so the file is not a copyright violation.----Karim talk to me :)..! 14:13, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
That appears to be correct. I Support restoration of the first image, but not the second. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:28, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: as per Jim. License reviewed. --Yann (talk) 20:02, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Hi, images coming from Udako Euskal Unibertsityatea (UEU, Basque Summer University) have licence CC-BY-SA 3.0 (see https://www.ueu.eus/ohar-legala, 2nd point in Section "Jabetza intelektual eta industriala"ː Creative Commons Aitortu-PartekatuBerdin 3.0 in Basque CC-BY-SA 3.0).
The sentence "Bestalde, Web gunetik deskargatu daitezkeen doako edukiak, testuak, artxiboak eta abar Creative Commons Aitortu-PartekatuBerdin 3.0 lizentziapean daude." translated into English means the followingː "On the other hand, free content, texts, archives, etc. that can be downloaded from the website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-BY-SA 3.0 license."
You can also see a list of images with more than 20 bookcovers published by UEU hereː https://w.wiki/6QQQ
Thanks, Ksarasola (talk) 23:58, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- This has been undeleted per ticket:2023013110005892 by @KingOfHearts. ─ The Aafī (talk) 13:06, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
File:ELGETAazal.jpg
Hi, the author of this image, Dani Fano, on 2023-01-31 sent the email permission to the address permissions-es@wikimedia.org. ticket #2023013110005892. Please, could you undelete it. Thanks Ksarasola (talk) 00:14, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Ksarasola: There is an issue with the permission email. In one of the emails, the sender includes the text of the URL https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ELGETAazal.jpg but it actually links to https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gerezi-garaia-txalaparta-eus.jpg. In a subsequent email, the text of the URL is https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Robotika-azala.jpg but it links to https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gerezi-garaia-txalaparta-eus.jpg again. Please ask them to resend the mail, clarifying which image they actually intended to release. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:09, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, @King of Hearts, for your answer, it was my fault because I reused an older email but I did not adapt the link. Now I will ask the author to send the email again, but with the correct links. I hope you could undelete the image. Thanks Ksarasola (talk) 09:34, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- Done, the timer has been restarted on these. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:26, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, @King of Hearts, for your answer, it was my fault because I reused an older email but I did not adapt the link. Now I will ask the author to send the email again, but with the correct links. I hope you could undelete the image. Thanks Ksarasola (talk) 09:34, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
The first instance of this photo anywhere online seems to be from here, well at least from what I can see on Tineye. In addition, this photo of Monivong looks to lapse copyright, as Monivong died in 1941, more than 70 years ago. --TansoShoshen (talk) 02:37, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose The subject, Sisowath Monivong, died in 1941. The uploader, Ravivaddhana, claims that he was the actual photographer of the image. While not technically impossible -- the image was at least 72 years old at the time of the upload, that is extremely unlikely, so we should treat it as an anonymous work. Cambodia's law is that anonymous works are protected for 75 years from publication. The URAA date for Cambodia is 13 October 2004, so if the work were first published after 1929, it still has a US copyright under the URAA. The photograph here shows him in 1938, looking very much the same as in the subject image, so I think we must assume that the subject image is from around the same date. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:39, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- Apologies, but I'm new to this whole thing. How can an image of Cambodian origin be in the public domain in Cambodia but not in the US? TansoShoshen (talk) 14:27, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- In the United States, we have a law called the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA) that restored U.S. copyrights for many works in 1996. In Cambodia's case, the date for restoration as noted above was 2004 so a 1938 work would still be under U.S. copyright. The United States has a 95 year copyright term for published anonymous works that are still in copyright. Abzeronow (talk) 16:58, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: Per Abzeronow. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:24, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Files uploaded by User:Kivokii
- File:Battle of Timur and egypt.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Detail of Imam Ali searching of Doldol from Khavaran Nameh.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:83 Imam Ali searching of Doldol from Khavaran Nameh.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
I guess these are old enough to be in the public domain. please temporarily undelete so that I can check. Hanooz 20:29, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Support The file descriptions tell us that all three are from The Museum of Contemporary Art in Tehran. That is not hopeful, as "Contemporary" certainly implies that they are very much too recent to be PD.
However the first one is "Attributed to Kamaluddin Behzad". Kamāl ud-Dīn Behzād lived c1455-1535, so that is safely PD. The other two are by "Farhad Shirazi" who lived in the sixteenth century, see https://ionarts.blogspot.com/2005/06/iranian-manuscript-painting-in-tehran.html. That's also safely PD.
Note that the file descriptions are in Farsi (I think) and the information above relies on a Google translation. I have temporarily restored them, as requested, so Hanooz can confirm that what I have read via Google is correct. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:48, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- Fixed the source and the license. The Museum of Contemporary Art in Tehran refers to the publisher of the source (a book). The book was published during or after the "Masterpieces of the Persian Painting" exhibition at the Tehran Museum of Contemporary Art. Hanooz 00:17, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: Per Hanooz. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:14, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
This file is an image of a logo for the Aesculapian Club. the logo has been in use for over 100 years. The photograph of the logo was taken with permission of the Club who is happy for it to be published on Wikipedia. I am the honorary secretary for the Club and was the photographer.
Mark Strachan 2/27/23 15:30
( Markstrachan (talk) 15:31, 27 February 2023 (UTC) )
Oppose The logo appears at File:Aesculapian Club Member List 1895 version 2.png which clearly shows that it is PD. However, we do not keep images as TIFFs, "...TIFF files are not supported by most Internet browsers. They are an archival format, and should never be used for images intended to be displayed." (COM:TIFF).
The image should be reloaded as a PNG with the name of the club spelled correctly. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:02, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Not done as per Jim. Ankry (talk) 02:07, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Hello, I would like to request the undeletion of this file because it represents the “Flag Of Tawheed” (Islamic banner with proclamation of faith) with the Shi’ite Shahada (Shi'ite Islamic proclamation of faith that includes "علي ولي الله"; "Ali is the Guardian Of Allah").
Sincerely, --Christophervincent01 (talk) 12:40, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Christophervincent01, I cannot view the deleted version but it is apparent that the file was deleted for permission issues. Who made this? It was uploaded by User:Hassan123123123 in 2020, who has no good global contributions and this makes me believe a formal VRT permission is necessary. ─ The Aafī (talk) 19:33, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done VRT permission or an evidence of free copyright status needed. Ankry (talk) 02:12, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Good day for you all. On February 14, was deleted the image Telar_antiguo_para_confeccionar_espolines.jpg that I had uploaded from my user on Wikimedia Commons and that was linked to an article (Espolín) in the Spanish edition of Wikipedia. Apparently, it was included by mistake in a ticket (Ticket:2022120110007731) that was managed with a photographer to acknowledge that I owned the full rights to several images uploaded by me, and he did. But that particular picture was not from any photographer (that is why I do not know the reason why it was included in that ticket). I did not get to see the deletion notice on my upload page nor do I know who posted it, so I was not aware it was going to be deleted. If it is still possible, I would like to know what happened to it, what was the problem and if there is something that can be done. As I have already informed by email and to other users, it is a family picture of a XVIII century loom. Thank you very much.MorenaClara (talk) 18:02, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- @MorenaClara, this image can be undeleted after successful VRT verification. I do not know the language in which the ticket is written and thus cannot help but I feel there are some confusions and those should be clarified only through that email. As such I Oppose undeletion of this image before successful VRT verification. ─ The Aafī (talk) 18:09, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for your prompt reply. The original repport was writen in Spanish. I already wrote to VTR by email but I had no answer. Any other channel I may use? That was really my question as I am in a dead point. Thank you again. MorenaClara (talk) 18:44, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- You can ask about ticket processing in COM:VRTN. But note, that the tickets are processed by voluntters and 1-2 week delay is not unusual. Ankry (talk) 01:58, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for your prompt reply. The original repport was writen in Spanish. I already wrote to VTR by email but I had no answer. Any other channel I may use? That was really my question as I am in a dead point. Thank you again. MorenaClara (talk) 18:44, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: Per discussion -- will be restored if and when the free license is received, read, and approved. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:41, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Manu Ramesan's picture deletion
Hello,
I am Manu Ramesan. I was trying to add a picture to my wiki page and it got deleted. It is my picture and there is no copyright infringement.
Kindly look into the matter.
--Manuramesan (talk) 18:03, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Probably about File:Manu Ramesan.jpg. Previously published photos requires processing through Commons:VRT. You should ask the photographer to verify the license and license requirements by following the instructions at Commons:VRT. Thuresson (talk) 19:32, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: Per Thuresson needs VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:40, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Hello hope all is going well. I have a tired recovery of the photo.--Nimarto (talk) 13:50, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Nimarto has no substantial global contributions. ─ The Aafī (talk) 13:54, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Hmm. If you Google nima keshtkar you come up with a number of solid hits, including shows of his works in several places. There is no WP article, but I'm not sure we should dismiss him as not notable. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:00, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Jameslwoodward, I did search on Google but I am not satisfied if these hits would help in establishing notability on any local Wikipedia. If this is not promotion and undisclosed COI editing, then what it is? That's what makes me stand with two admins who deleted it as F10. I'd a bit however incline it being deleted under G10, because of the linked Wikidata entry that has been created for advertisement only given the nature of the "username" Nimarto. ─ The Aafī (talk) 15:43, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- He's an artist. He has had several gallery shows. Gallery shows are hard to get, so his works must have some traction in the art world. Any entry for an artist is naturally an advertisement of his work, so I don't see that as a negative. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:48, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Well, you have a point but neither is Wikidata a place of "self-promotion" nor is the "Wikimedia Commons" its hub. I would gladly approve of any images of this or any other artists which are genuinely uploaded by constructive editors but if every other artist begins using Wikimedia Commons for "self-promotions", we lose our educational goal. As such, I oppose restoring this image. ─ The Aafī (talk) 17:03, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- The related Wikidata item appears to have been deleted. ─ The Aafī (talk) 10:25, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- Well, you have a point but neither is Wikidata a place of "self-promotion" nor is the "Wikimedia Commons" its hub. I would gladly approve of any images of this or any other artists which are genuinely uploaded by constructive editors but if every other artist begins using Wikimedia Commons for "self-promotions", we lose our educational goal. As such, I oppose restoring this image. ─ The Aafī (talk) 17:03, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- He's an artist. He has had several gallery shows. Gallery shows are hard to get, so his works must have some traction in the art world. Any entry for an artist is naturally an advertisement of his work, so I don't see that as a negative. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:48, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done for now, lack of evidence that the image is in scope. Ankry (talk) 12:15, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Picture was published in a draft and I was working on getting full permission by the copyright holder. Since I got full permission now and only failed to communicate it clearly to Wikimedia I would like to have it reuploaded in order to be able to finsih the process in the Wikimedia VRTS release generator. Thanks in advance!--Akropolis17 (talk) 12:42, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose I see that when you uploaded the photo, you claimed that you were the actual photographer. Now, above, you say that that is not true. Please understand that making false claims of authorship is a serious violation of Commons rules. If you do it again, you may be blocked from editing here.
The actual photographer can send a free license using the file name above. The file will be restored if and when they do that and the license is read and approved at VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:42, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose per Jim. Can be undeleted if adequate permissions are received. Please ask the copyright holder to send a VRT release, much easily using COM:RELGEN. Best, ─ The Aafī (talk) 19:38, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 17:24, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please restore the following pages:
- File:Paul Hermann Fritz Hennig mit dem Kegeleverein 01.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Paul Hermann Fritz Hennig mit dem Kegeleverein 01.jpg
As a previous UDR demonstrated, the uploader was unreliable as far as dates so this may not be a 1900 photograph, but I'd like to get a better idea on the actual date of this photograph. Abzeronow (talk) 16:18, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose Paul Hennig, July 16, 1874 in Frankfurt (Oder) ; † June 28, 1930 in Munich. He could be 26 in this image. He might even be 46, so maybe this is a little premature. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:28, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support 1900 seems quite plausible, based of the clothing. Yann (talk) 20:04, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: If he was aged in this photo, it is very plausible that he's below 30 in the present photograph. It corresponds to the period, before 1904, when he was in Munich. Ruthven (msg) 11:30, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Files uploaded by CerroFerro
Please restore the following pages:
- File:Underworld (film) 1927. Josef von Sternberg, director. George Bancroft.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Underworld (film) 1927. Josef von Sternberg, director. L to R Evelyn Brent, Clive Brook.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:The Exquisite Sinner (film) 1925. Josef von Sternberg director. L to R Conrad Nagle, Renee Adoree.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Children of Divorce (film) 1927. Frank Lloyd, director. L-R, Clara Bow, Gary Cooper.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by CerroFerro
The 1927 films would be public domain in the US now. I also forgot to include one from 1925 in a previous UDR request. Abzeronow (talk) 16:43, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support Should be PD-US-expired regardless if they are frames of the actual film or accompanying still photographs. --Rosenzweig τ 13:25, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Done as {{PD-US-expired}}. Ankry (talk) 11:21, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
It does accurately reflect current US because 36 CFR § 261.22 and 16 U.S. Code § 580p are still in effect. Gemink (talk) 23:03, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose This is a useless template as it can be properly used only on files that must be deleted. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:17, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 08:39, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
I'm Simon Bettencourt, President of Academica SC and owner of the logo. We'd like to undelete it to add it to our page.
--Simonbett04 (talk) 20:10, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose Since we do not know who User:Simonbett04 actually is and imposters are common here, policy requires that an authorized official of the organization owning the copyright send a free license using VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:40, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 08:38, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please undelete File:NCT GordyMelJessSharon.jpg
Hi:
We are requesting to undelete the file: NCT GordyMelJessSharon.jpg on our page for National Comedy Theatre
This is our own promotional photo, it was taken by us directly, and there is no copyright on it, other than our own organization (National Comedy Theatre).
Thank you very much- Gary Kramer Artistic Director — Preceding unsigned comment added by SD3717 (talk • contribs) 20:35, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
Oppose The image appears without a free license in the San Diego Reader and other places at much higher resolution than here. Restoration will require that the actual copyright holder, usually the photographer, send a free license using VRT.
Note also that in the File Description, you claimed that you were the actual photographer. "Own promotional photo", above, suggests something different. Please understand that making false claims of authorship is a serious violation of Commons rules and may lead to be being blocked from editing here. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:50, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 08:38, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
.jpg){kind=link}
![37 File:Пресс-подход 04.jpg & File:Репетиция фестиваля "Спасская башня".jpg](#File:Пресс-подход_04.jpg_&_File:Репетиция_фестиваля_"Спасская_башня".jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![67 File:"La porteuse deau", quartier de Katajanokka (Helsinki) (2769251264).jpg](#File:"La_porteuse_deau",_quartier_de_Katajanokka_(Helsinki)_(2769251264).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg_and_File:TRIBBS_Polish_music_producer_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._George_Bancroft.jpg){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._George_Bancroft.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._George_Bancroft.jpg&diff=0){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._George_Bancroft.jpg&action=history){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._George_Bancroft.jpg&action=watch){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._George_Bancroft.jpg&action=unwatch){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._George_Bancroft.jpg){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._George_Bancroft.jpg&action=purge){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._George_Bancroft.jpg){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._George_Bancroft.jpg){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._George_Bancroft.jpg){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._George_Bancroft.jpg&action=edit&preload=Commons:Deletion_requests/preload){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._George_Bancroft.jpg&action=delete){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._George_Bancroft.jpg){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._George_Bancroft.jpg){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._L_to_R_Evelyn_Brent,_Clive_Brook.jpg){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._L_to_R_Evelyn_Brent,_Clive_Brook.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._L_to_R_Evelyn_Brent,_Clive_Brook.jpg&diff=0){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._L_to_R_Evelyn_Brent,_Clive_Brook.jpg&action=history){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._L_to_R_Evelyn_Brent,_Clive_Brook.jpg&action=watch){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._L_to_R_Evelyn_Brent,_Clive_Brook.jpg&action=unwatch){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._L_to_R_Evelyn_Brent,_Clive_Brook.jpg){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._L_to_R_Evelyn_Brent,_Clive_Brook.jpg&action=purge){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._L_to_R_Evelyn_Brent,_Clive_Brook.jpg){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._L_to_R_Evelyn_Brent,_Clive_Brook.jpg){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._L_to_R_Evelyn_Brent,_Clive_Brook.jpg){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._L_to_R_Evelyn_Brent,_Clive_Brook.jpg&action=edit&preload=Commons:Deletion_requests/preload){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._L_to_R_Evelyn_Brent,_Clive_Brook.jpg&action=delete){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._L_to_R_Evelyn_Brent,_Clive_Brook.jpg){kind=link}
_1927._Josef_von_Sternberg,_director._L_to_R_Evelyn_Brent,_Clive_Brook.jpg){kind=link}
_1925._Josef_von_Sternberg_director._L_to_R_Conrad_Nagle,_Renee_Adoree.jpg){kind=link}
_1925._Josef_von_Sternberg_director._L_to_R_Conrad_Nagle,_Renee_Adoree.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_1925._Josef_von_Sternberg_director._L_to_R_Conrad_Nagle,_Renee_Adoree.jpg&diff=0){kind=link}
_1925._Josef_von_Sternberg_director._L_to_R_Conrad_Nagle,_Renee_Adoree.jpg&action=history){kind=link}
_1925._Josef_von_Sternberg_director._L_to_R_Conrad_Nagle,_Renee_Adoree.jpg&action=watch){kind=link}
_1925._Josef_von_Sternberg_director._L_to_R_Conrad_Nagle,_Renee_Adoree.jpg&action=unwatch){kind=link}
_1925._Josef_von_Sternberg_director._L_to_R_Conrad_Nagle,_Renee_Adoree.jpg){kind=link}
_1925._Josef_von_Sternberg_director._L_to_R_Conrad_Nagle,_Renee_Adoree.jpg&action=purge){kind=link}
_1925._Josef_von_Sternberg_director._L_to_R_Conrad_Nagle,_Renee_Adoree.jpg){kind=link}
_1925._Josef_von_Sternberg_director._L_to_R_Conrad_Nagle,_Renee_Adoree.jpg){kind=link}
_1925._Josef_von_Sternberg_director._L_to_R_Conrad_Nagle,_Renee_Adoree.jpg){kind=link}
_1925._Josef_von_Sternberg_director._L_to_R_Conrad_Nagle,_Renee_Adoree.jpg&action=edit&preload=Commons:Deletion_requests/preload){kind=link}
_1925._Josef_von_Sternberg_director._L_to_R_Conrad_Nagle,_Renee_Adoree.jpg&action=delete){kind=link}
_1925._Josef_von_Sternberg_director._L_to_R_Conrad_Nagle,_Renee_Adoree.jpg){kind=link}
_1925._Josef_von_Sternberg_director._L_to_R_Conrad_Nagle,_Renee_Adoree.jpg){kind=link}
_1927._Frank_Lloyd,_director._L-R,_Clara_Bow,_Gary_Cooper.jpg){kind=link}
_1927._Frank_Lloyd,_director._L-R,_Clara_Bow,_Gary_Cooper.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_1927._Frank_Lloyd,_director._L-R,_Clara_Bow,_Gary_Cooper.jpg&diff=0){kind=link}
_1927._Frank_Lloyd,_director._L-R,_Clara_Bow,_Gary_Cooper.jpg&action=history){kind=link}
_1927._Frank_Lloyd,_director._L-R,_Clara_Bow,_Gary_Cooper.jpg&action=watch){kind=link}
_1927._Frank_Lloyd,_director._L-R,_Clara_Bow,_Gary_Cooper.jpg&action=unwatch){kind=link}
_1927._Frank_Lloyd,_director._L-R,_Clara_Bow,_Gary_Cooper.jpg){kind=link}
_1927._Frank_Lloyd,_director._L-R,_Clara_Bow,_Gary_Cooper.jpg&action=purge){kind=link}
_1927._Frank_Lloyd,_director._L-R,_Clara_Bow,_Gary_Cooper.jpg){kind=link}
_1927._Frank_Lloyd,_director._L-R,_Clara_Bow,_Gary_Cooper.jpg){kind=link}
_1927._Frank_Lloyd,_director._L-R,_Clara_Bow,_Gary_Cooper.jpg){kind=link}
_1927._Frank_Lloyd,_director._L-R,_Clara_Bow,_Gary_Cooper.jpg&action=edit&preload=Commons:Deletion_requests/preload){kind=link}
_1927._Frank_Lloyd,_director._L-R,_Clara_Bow,_Gary_Cooper.jpg&action=delete){kind=link}
_1927._Frank_Lloyd,_director._L-R,_Clara_Bow,_Gary_Cooper.jpg){kind=link}
_1927._Frank_Lloyd,_director._L-R,_Clara_Bow,_Gary_Cooper.jpg){kind=link}
I am the author of this image
(Sadhu Burlington D (talk) 04:53, 7 March 2023 (UTC))
Oppose It was deleted because we do not keep personal images of non-contributors. Commons is not Facebook. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:39, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done as per Jim. Ankry (talk) 14:39, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Liebes Wikipedia-Team,
hiermit beantrage ich die Wiederherstellung der im Betreff genannten Datei. Bei der Bilddatei handelt sich um eine eigene Arbeit, die ich bei Wikipedia veröffentlichen möchte.
--Wirtschaftswunder (talk) 12:02, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Wirtschaftswunder: The author is mentioned in the photo metadata and the name is not "Wirtschaftswunder". Please, follow VRT instructions to grant the license and prove your authorship. Ankry (talk) 11:14, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per Ankry -- needs VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:02, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Hi, please undelete this. We have permission at ticket:2023020110007122. (I am a VRT agent for that queue.) Jon Harald Søby (talk) 14:30, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: @Jon Harald Søby: FYI. --Yann (talk) 17:21, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
File:LoveRadioCebu new logo.jpg
Please cancel the deletion request for File:LoveRadioCebu new logo.jpg because this is the official logo for DYBU-FM (Love Radio Cebu) from Manila Broadcasting Company. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CAAPDVO (talk • contribs) 00:19, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Procedural close, file is not deleted. Comment this at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Love Radio. Thuresson (talk) 01:28, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please restore the following pages:
- File:Microsoft Office 2021.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Reason: It is an official version of Microsoft Office 2021 BIGBOSSPRO (talk) 12:42, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose It was deleted because it violates Microsoft's copyright and therefore cannot be kept on Commons. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:37, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 20:22, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
This is my.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.167.200.42 (talk • contribs) 14:53, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Procedural close, file is not deleted. Thuresson (talk) 16:59, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
8 Files
- File:Man Who Wears His Hat Aslant movie poster (p2).png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Man Who Wears His Hat Aslant movie poster (p3).png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Man Who Wears His Hat Aslant movie poster (p4).png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Man Who Wears His Hat Aslant movie poster (p5).png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Man Who Wears His Hat Aslant movie poster (p6).png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:The Neighbour's Hen movie poster (p2).png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:The Neighbour's Hen movie poster (p3).png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:The Neighbour's Hen movie poster (p4).png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit){kind=link}
.png&diff=0){kind=link}
.png&action=history){kind=link}
.png&action=watch){kind=link}
.png&action=unwatch){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=purge){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&preload=Commons:Deletion_requests/preload){kind=link}
.png&action=delete){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit){kind=link}
.png&diff=0){kind=link}
.png&action=history){kind=link}
.png&action=watch){kind=link}
.png&action=unwatch){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=purge){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&preload=Commons:Deletion_requests/preload){kind=link}
.png&action=delete){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit){kind=link}
.png&diff=0){kind=link}
.png&action=history){kind=link}
.png&action=watch){kind=link}
.png&action=unwatch){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=purge){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&preload=Commons:Deletion_requests/preload){kind=link}
.png&action=delete){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit){kind=link}
.png&diff=0){kind=link}
.png&action=history){kind=link}
.png&action=watch){kind=link}
.png&action=unwatch){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=purge){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&preload=Commons:Deletion_requests/preload){kind=link}
.png&action=delete){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit){kind=link}
.png&diff=0){kind=link}
.png&action=history){kind=link}
.png&action=watch){kind=link}
.png&action=unwatch){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=purge){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&preload=Commons:Deletion_requests/preload){kind=link}
.png&action=delete){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit){kind=link}
.png&diff=0){kind=link}
.png&action=history){kind=link}
.png&action=watch){kind=link}
.png&action=unwatch){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=purge){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&preload=Commons:Deletion_requests/preload){kind=link}
.png&action=delete){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit){kind=link}
.png&diff=0){kind=link}
.png&action=history){kind=link}
.png&action=watch){kind=link}
.png&action=unwatch){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=purge){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&preload=Commons:Deletion_requests/preload){kind=link}
.png&action=delete){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit){kind=link}
.png&diff=0){kind=link}
.png&action=history){kind=link}
.png&action=watch){kind=link}
.png&action=unwatch){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=purge){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&preload=Commons:Deletion_requests/preload){kind=link}
.png&action=delete){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
These are in the public domain as per the copyright law of Iran. Hanooz 09:19, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Hanooz: Could you, please, elaborate why they are PD while the images they are derived from are not? Ankry (talk) 11:33, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Can you please temporarily undelete them? Hanooz 11:41, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- First two undeleted. And the poster they originate from was deleted by you as copyright violation. Ankry (talk) 12:22, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. I thought these were screenshots from the movie and therefore in the public domain 30 years after the publication which wasn't true. Hanooz 19:55, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- First two undeleted. And the poster they originate from was deleted by you as copyright violation. Ankry (talk) 12:22, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Can you please temporarily undelete them? Hanooz 11:41, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Not done: Implicitly withdrawn by requester. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:38, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Request from Грустный Кофе
- File:Калдж Марпосадский район.jpg
- File:Улица Николаева Мариинский посад.jpg
- File:Колаж Мариинский Посад.jpg
- File:Официальный портрет Галины Данильченко.jpg
- File:Официальное фото Антона Кольцова.png
Я привел разрешения на использование вышеперечисленных файлов. Прошу их восстановить. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Грустный Кофе (talk • contribs) 17:23, 7 March 2023 (UTC) (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
- @Грустный Кофе: We need an evidence of free license from the photographer, not from the uploader. Either through the source website, or following VRT instructions. https://m.vk.com/marposad_21ru is not a CC-BY-SA 4.0-licensed website as you claimed. Ankry (talk) 19:41, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Файлы о Мариинском Посаде и Районе, разрешения я представил. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Грустный Кофе (talk • contribs) 18:53, 8 March 2023 (UTC) -- Again, please sign your comments. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:33, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Where exactly? Copyright law requires a written form here. And we need an evidence that the permission is indeed granted by the copyright holder (the photographer in most cases). If the written permission is not available to the public, then VRT is the right procedure do provide it. Ankry (talk) 14:20, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per Ankry -- no free license at named source. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:37, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Please restore the following pages:
- File:Les hordes « barbares » de Crocus pillent le Languedoc (Gravure de Ferdinand Pertus, XIXe siècle).jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
.jpg&diff=0){kind=link}
.jpg&action=history){kind=link}
.jpg&action=watch){kind=link}
.jpg&action=unwatch){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=purge){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&preload=Commons:Deletion_requests/preload){kind=link}
.jpg&action=delete){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Author died in 1948 so this became public domain in France on 2019. File name says it's a 19th Century work so it should be public domain in the US. Abzeronow (talk) 17:05, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment It's basically this image except without the frame, in worse quality and without a proper source (file mirrored here). It's most likely not from the 19th century (Pertus was born in November 1883 and would have been 17 at the end of the year 1900). This page suggests it is one of a series of images created in the period from 1925 to 1940. --Rosenzweig τ 08:35, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Apparently these were created in the style of book illustrations, but were commissioned by the mayor of Nîmes with the purpose of decorating the wedding room in the city hall. --Rosenzweig τ 08:42, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the correction. Yes, it would appear this was made sometime between 1925 and 1940. Which might mean in worst case scenario, restoration or uploading the better version might have to wait until 2036. Abzeronow (talk) 16:00, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Not done: Implicitly withdrawn by requester. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:03, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please restore the following pages:
- File:Lucie Machackova.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Reason: It is a photo taken by me. I have RAW files to prove that. Evadoskova (talk) 19:44, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Evadoskova: Please upload the image as a JPEG with EXIF metadata. So long as such version of the image (full-resolution with EXIF) has not appeared previously on the Internet, we will accept that as sufficient proof of your authorship. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:54, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per KoH. --Yann (talk) 11:36, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
File:Kelechukwu Oriaku James.jpg Kelechukwu Oriaku at the premiere of Dark October, 2023.
This file has been unnecessarily deleted. Requesting for it to be undeleted
--Manetta4 (talk) 09:53, 9 March 2023 (UTC) 9/03/2023
- Not true. If was deleted as copyright violation (DW of a copyrighted poster). Deleting copyright violations is necessary. Ankry (talk) 12:52, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done DW of copyrighted works, no valid reason for undeletion. Ankry (talk) 14:22, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
_(2769251264).jpg){kind=link}
Please restore the following pages:
- File:"La porteuse deau", quartier de Katajanokka (Helsinki) (2769251264).jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
_(2769251264).jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_(2769251264).jpg&diff=0){kind=link}
_(2769251264).jpg&action=history){kind=link}
_(2769251264).jpg&action=watch){kind=link}
_(2769251264).jpg&action=unwatch){kind=link}
_(2769251264).jpg){kind=link}
_(2769251264).jpg&action=purge){kind=link}
_(2769251264).jpg){kind=link}
_(2769251264).jpg){kind=link}
_(2769251264).jpg){kind=link}
_(2769251264).jpg&action=edit&preload=Commons:Deletion_requests/preload){kind=link}
_(2769251264).jpg&action=delete){kind=link}
_(2769251264).jpg){kind=link}
_(2769251264).jpg){kind=link}
Reason: The sculpture is now in public domain. Geohakkeri (talk) 15:23, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
![15:23, 9 March 2023 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Undeletion_requests/Archive/2023-03#c-Geohakkeri-20230309152300-File:"La_porteuse_deau",_quartier_de_Katajanokka_(Helsinki)_(2769251264).jpg){kind=link}
Support The sculptor was Viktor Malmberg (1867-1936). Therefore the work became PD in Finland in 2006. It is a 1924 work, so its URAA copyright has expired. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:55, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
![15:55, 9 March 2023 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Undeletion_requests/Archive/2023-03#c-Jameslwoodward-20230309155500-File:"La_porteuse_deau",_quartier_de_Katajanokka_(Helsinki)_(2769251264).jpg){kind=link}
Done: Undeleted as per Jim. --rimshottalk 22:29, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
![22:29, 9 March 2023 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Undeletion_requests/Archive/2023-03#c-Rimshot-20230309222900-File:"La_porteuse_deau",_quartier_de_Katajanokka_(Helsinki)_(2769251264).jpg){kind=link}
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please restore the following pages:
- File:Parc Montsouris statue 6.JPG (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Parc Montsouris statue 8.JPG (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Parc Montsouris statue 6.JPG
The sculptor died in 1948 so this became public domain in France in 2019. The work itself is from 1921 so it's public domain in the US. Abzeronow (talk) 16:26, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Support We have 12 images of this work in Category:Un premier frisson by René Baucour, so these should be OK. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:24, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: Undeleted as per nomination. I'll add the corresponding license tags. --rimshottalk 22:11, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
The photo is genuine and no copyright is applied. It is the picture of Birajit Sinha . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjs619 (talk • contribs) 22:50, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
- Oppose Almost every photo made by a human is copyrighted. @Rjs619: You provided no explanation why this one would not be. Moreover, while uploading you claimed that you are the photo author and copyright holder: this contradicts your current declaration. Ankry (talk) 14:09, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per ankry. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:53, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please restore the following pages:
- File:SylvainDornon.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:SylvainDornon.jpg
The subject died in 1900 so if this is a photograph of him this would be PD-old-assumed. Abzeronow (talk) 16:59, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support XIX-century photo of unknown author. Ankry (talk) 22:32, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: per discussion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:50, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please restore the following pages:
- File:Ayala avenue street scene.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Wiki ayala.JPG (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Reason: deleted via both Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ayala avenue street scene.jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/Files of Ninjakeg. However, the buildings seem incidental and unavoidable as part of the road scene and COM:DM can be applied. See also COM:VP/C#Ayala Avenue photos. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 19:21, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Neutral Carl's arguments at least have softened by previous leanings towards deletion. The decision regarding all of the affected files should be consistent. Abzeronow (talk) 19:29, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: per discussion. Ruthven (msg) 14:39, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
I WANT TO CHANGE CREDIT/PUBLISHER AND COPYRIGHT DETAILS — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki97828 (talk • contribs) 11:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC) (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
- Oppose Not own work, no permission from copyright holder. Yann (talk) 11:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Image appears on Instagram. Uploader claims to be both the subject and the photographer (|author=Wiki97828, Vineet Kumar), which seems to be unlikely -- the image is probably not a selfie. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:41, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 12:43, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please restore the following pages:
- File:Kevony.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Kevony Martins e Rafael Sants.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Reason: Os links utilizados para comprovar violação de copyright (https://www.instagram.com/p/Cg4ea0TLa2e/ e https://www.apuandesign.com/imprensa), são da minha conta no instagram e do site da minha empresa, o qual sou sócio. Eu publiquei as imagens livres de diretos autorais aqui na Wikimedia e permito o uso delas, não vejo motivos para que sejam excluídas se eu que sou o dono permiti o uso delas, peço que revejam a decisão e que retornem às páginas das imagens publicadas. Se houver algo mais que eu possa fazer para provar que sou o dono das imagens e que permito seu uso, estou aberto! Okevony (talk) 17:26, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: duplicate. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:58, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please restore the following pages:
- File:Kevony.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Kevony Martins e Rafael Sants.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Reason: Olá me chamo Kevony Martins, sou o dono das imagens excluídas da wikimedia, File:Kevony Martins e Rafael Sants.png e Kevony.jpg, eu publiquei estas imagens e permiti o uso livre de direitos autorais e gostaria que permanecessem assim. Vocês poderiam recuperá-las e deixá-las disponíveis novamente na wikimedia e wikipedia?
Hello, my name is Kevony Martins, I am the owner of the images deleted from wikimedia, File:Kevony Martins e Rafael Sants.png and Kevony.jpg, I published these images and allowed the free use of copyrights and I would like it to stay that way. Could you retrieve them and make them available again on wikimedia and wikipedia? Okevony (talk) 15:53, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose In both cases, you claimed in the file descriptions that you were the actual photographer of both images. Above you say that you are the owner. If you were not the actual photographer, please understand that making false claims of authorship may get you blocked from editing here.
The first image appears at https://www.instagram.com/p/Cg4ea0TLa2e/. The other appears at https://www.apuandesign.com/imprensa. Neither has a free license. Therefore, the actual photographer must send a free license using VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:02, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- I changed my website and the caption of this post on my instagram allowing the use of images based on CC BY-NC 4.0. Would there be any other changes needed? Okevony (talk) 17:56, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- We don't allow licenses with non-commercial restrictions on Commons. Abzeronow (talk) 18:02, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- I made a new change to the site and my account to CC BY 4.0, allowing unrestricted use Okevony (talk) 18:05, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- We don't allow licenses with non-commercial restrictions on Commons. Abzeronow (talk) 18:02, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Copyright holder is Marco Torelli. We need a written formal permission from him via COM:VRT. Yann (talk) 19:04, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- It's me in the images, they are on my website, on my social networks and in articles that mention me, Marco Torelli is not the owner, it makes no sense for him to have to allow the use of an image that never belonged to him! Okevony (talk) 19:16, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- The copyright owner is the photographer, not the person on the picture, unless a written contract was signed between them. Yann (talk) 20:01, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- I am the owner in the photo, I did the shoot at home with my personal camera with the help of my boyfriend. The photos are like mine and nowhere else does it appear to be someone else's, so the arguments are not valid because there is no other owner. Okevony (talk) 20:14, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- The copyright owner is the photographer, not the person on the picture, unless a written contract was signed between them. Yann (talk) 20:01, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- It's me in the images, they are on my website, on my social networks and in articles that mention me, Marco Torelli is not the owner, it makes no sense for him to have to allow the use of an image that never belonged to him! Okevony (talk) 19:16, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
It is difficult to believe anything you say. That is particularly the case since, except for the false claim in the file descriptions, you have not said who the actual photographers were.
Also note, as Yann said above, that owning a digital or paper copy of a photograph means nothing. The actual photographer is the only person who can freely license a photograph unless he has given a written free license to someone else. Although professional photographers routinely give limited licenses for their work that allow the subject to use the image for publicity, they very rarely give a license that would allow the subject to freely license the image to others as required here.
As I noted above, the one image has EXIF saying that Marco Torelli is the photographer. Torelli is a professional photographer (see https://www.marcotorelli.com/) and it is unlikely that his name would be in the EXIF unless he actually took the photo. That means that in order for the image to be restored to Commons, Torelli himself must send a free license from marcotorelli.com using VRT. The other image appears on a web site with an explicit copyright notice.Therefore, in that case also the actual photographer must send a free license. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:53, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 20:58, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Hi, I would like to present this restoration request concerning the following photographic portrait taken on 22 June 1911. since in the source the author would appear to be unknown, is the PD-100 license ok for an unknown author or should it decrease to 80-90 after the artist's death? --46.249.58.134 22:44, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: Uploaded by an LTA. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:15, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
I believe this logo is no copyrighted because curved lines have not any originally. Thank you. Cobalt 1031 (talk) 00:03, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Although it is a simple logo, Per COM:TOO UK, in regards to logos; originality required for copyright protection in the United Kingdom is very low. It's hosted here at Wikipedia, as its free in the USA, but not the UK. PascalHD (talk) 04:04, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 10:39, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
This picture is the picture of my own father, taken into its office in the appartment I grew. I really need to understand what I did wrong here and what I should do to have the picture of my own father on its Wikipedia page. Thanks a lot. Paul BELAVAL — Preceding unsigned comment added by POLOPAVLOS (talk • contribs) 08:44, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Info Please contact the photographer and ask him or her to follow the instructions at COM:VRT. Thuresson (talk) 10:47, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per Thuresson -- needs a free license from the actual photographer via VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:38, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
pls the mall image is bad remove a https://www.google.com/maps/place/SM+City+Sorsogon/@12.9763704,124.0171336,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x33a0ef2d6fd4ddcb:0x55c2e52ec6118c21!8m2!3d12.9763652!4d124.0193223 a Copyright violation 112.209.3.101 06:57, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: This is only copy of the deletion comment -- no new information. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:53, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
I contacted the author John Clayton today on Linked-In and he authorized the publication of this file on this Wikipedia page.
Donna Hay 11 March 2023 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haygenealogist (talk • contribs) 03:20, 12 March 2023 (UTC) (UTC)
- @Haygenealogist: Per Commons policy, Wikipedia-only permission is not enough for a file to be hosted on Commons. Please have him send permission via COM:VRT. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 04:12, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose It's not that simple. The pdf includes a page header from the Union Leader, a photo of John Clayton, and a photo from the Miss America pageant. In order to restore it to Commons, we will need proof that all three of those are either PD or freely licensed. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:19, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. We don't text file here anyway, unless they have some historical value. --Yann (talk) 15:35, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Deleted two Kuwaiti photos because of without FoP
File:Kuwait Alhamra Tower (37472150).jpeg -> This photo shows the skyline of Kuwait City, not just Al Hamra Tower and Arraya Tower, so De minimis can be applied.
.jpeg){kind=link}
File:All major buildings in kuwait in one shot by irvin calicut.jpg -> See also similar case: File:Dubai Marina Skyline (3to4).jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dubai Marina Skyline (3to4).jpg
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
--Ox1997cow (talk) 14:36, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support General skylines in both cases. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:46, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose The first image. It has a prominent photographer's watermark and came from a site that is no longer available. The image was uploaded by Darwin, who is an experienced Admin, but no license review was done, so our rules don't let us keep it.
Neutral The second image is OK from a copyright point of view, but was taken with the camera angled up, so the buildings are falling toward the center. I don't think it does us any credit. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:21, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Jameslwoodward Thanks for the ping. The image I uploaded came from 500px, where it was licensed under CC-BY-SA-3 by the photographer, as can be seen here. There are no copyright issues with the photo itself, it can be restored if it's considered to be De minimis. Darwin Ahoy! 09:45, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks -- the file description gives a longer URL at 500px which doesn't come up. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:37, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support as general skylines, no specific building is the focus of the photo. IMO both photos have obvious educative value, notably on the subject of Kuwait City.-- Darwin Ahoy! 09:49, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: See above. --Yann (talk) 15:36, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
I own the rights to this image. I think it was marked for deletion because it's used on my Facebook page? I would like it undeleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elliotnadeau (talk • contribs) 17:36, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
Oppose First, without categories and with a very commons name, this image is useless. Unless this Craig Thomas is significant, the image is out of scope.
Second, when you uploaded the image, you claimed that you were the actual photographer. Now you say, "I own the rights to this image". If you were the actual photographer that would, of course, be true, but saying it as you did suggests that you were not the actual photographer. What is the case? . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:15, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Jim - responding here as well since I figured out how to edit this section:
I'm sorry I didn't include categories - I would be happy to add those (this is my first time uploading media). Craig Thomas is the noteworthy creator of How I Met Your Mother, a famous American television show.
I took the photograph and consequently, own the rights to the image.
Thanks so much for your help! Elliotnadeau (talk) 21:15, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Done Has a Wikipedia article: w:Craig Thomas (screenwriter). Granting a 7-day grace period given the good-faith claim of authorship. Will follow up on user talk. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:10, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Forgot to sign my previous undeletion request. I own the rights to this image and am hoping it will be undeleted
Elliotnadeau (talk) 20:06, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: duplicate request. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:15, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Hi Jim - sorry to start a new thread. For some reason I can't "reply" to your comment on my previous thread (even though I can use the reply function for other comments).
I'm sorry I didn't include categories - I would be happy to add those (this is my first time uploading media). Craig Thomas is the noteworthy creator of How I Met Your Mother, a famous American television show.
I took the photograph and consequently, own the rights to the image.
Thanks so much for your help! Elliotnadeau (talk) 21:14, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
I can't help because I don't use the Reply feature. Just click on "Edit" immediately after the file name in the header. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:53, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: Third copy of the same request. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:54, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Hi, Palash Ahmed.jpg is my own image. I upload it but i dont know why you remove this. I request to undelete this. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Palashahmed68 (talk • contribs) 21:36, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
Not done: The file has not been deleted, but probably will be. We do not keep personal images of non-contributors. Commons is not Facebook. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:51, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
User Rsuvnaarrt uses a absolutely wrong argument, to delete my file. He claimed my work as his own, to affirm the delete request. This picture is my own work, i have the original and first picture in my own camera roll. This ist absolutely wrong. You should rename into Deletepedia.
"Its my upload and I don't want to have the picture up here anymore. Rsuvnaarrt (talk) 23:13, 4 January 2012 (UTC)" <- that is ansolutely wrong!
- — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:|]] ([[User talk:|talk]] • contribs) 08:33, 14 March 2023 MD-medical-solutions (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
Not done: Not currently deleted. --Yann (talk) 08:59, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Also note that the DR made by Rsuvnaarrt 11 years ago was closed then. The current open DR has a different, non copyright, reason for deletion of the new image. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:39, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
This is our own work , i want to undelate it . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Parwiz ahmadi (talk • contribs) 12:19, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
Not done: File not deleted, It does not have a DR or other problem tag. I have no idea why this request was made. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:51, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Hello,
This file has been deleted with the following motive: (Media uploaded without a license as of 2023-03)
However, I do not understand since this file has been handed over to me from the photograph herself.
Screenshot of conversation with the photographer to allow usage on Wikipedia
I'd like to request this photo to be brought back to the Wikimedia Commons.
Thanks,
--LBaisson (talk) 11:01, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Oppose First, a license "to allow usage on Wikipedia" is not sufficient. Commons and Wikipedia require that images are licensed for any use by anybody anywhere, including derivatives and commercial use.
Second, since LBaisson is not the photographer, policy requires that the actual photographer must send a free license using VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:52, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Ok, thank you for these explainations.
- Would it solved the two issues that you raised if the photographer send a free license using VRT? Or would it still be needed afterwards that she present a license for Commons use somehow?
- Thank you LBaisson (talk) 18:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- When she sends the license to VRT she may say either that she gives the license for File:Portrait de Roxane Bret by India Lange (2021).jpg or she may name more works as well. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:44, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Great! Thank you Jim, I'll inform you when the licenses have been granted. LBaisson (talk) 12:50, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- LBaisson, if and when India Lange sends a free license using VRT and it is read and approved, the image will be automatically restored without further action on your part. VRT usually has a backlog, so it may be weeks before that happens. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:28, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Great! Thank you Jim, I'll inform you when the licenses have been granted. LBaisson (talk) 12:50, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- When she sends the license to VRT she may say either that she gives the license for File:Portrait de Roxane Bret by India Lange (2021).jpg or she may name more works as well. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:44, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 12:16, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
This image was removed because it said it had no license. The image belongs to me by request of my professor who wanted the photo in the public domain. I tried to fix this when it was originally uploaded, but the image was removed anyway. --EmiBell (talk) 18:31, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose In order for the image to be restored, Christian Sidor himself must send a free license using VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:41, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 12:15, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
This file is in the public domain in Indonesia, because it is published and distributed by the Government of Republic of Indonesia, casu quo Government of Sabu Raijua Regency in their website Profil Bupati Sabu Raijua, according to Article 43 of Law 28 of 2014 on copyrights but it is my fault that I forget to make the sufficient description and licensing before so pelase undelete this file and I will make sure to fill the proper description and licensing. Thank you. Jordan Diwi (talk) 04:16, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose {{PD-IDGov}} says:
- There shall be no infringement of Copyright for:
- a, Publication, Distribution, Communication, and/or Reproduction of State emblems and national anthem in accordance with their original nature;
- b. Any Publication, Distribution, Communication, and/or Reproduction executed by or on behalf of the government, unless stated to be protected by laws and regulations.
- [emphasis added]
The cited source page has:
- © Dinas Komunikasi dan Informatika Kabupaten Sabu Raijua © All rights reserved.
. Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:58, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- thank you for your explanation Jordan Diwi (talk) 02:49, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 12:15, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
This file is in the public domain in Indonesia, because it is published and distributed by the Government of Republic of Indonesia, casu quo Government of Sabu Raijua Regency in their website Profil Wakil Bupati, according to Article 43 of Law 28 of 2014 on copyrights but it is my fault that I forget to make the sufficient description and licensing before so pelase undelete this file and I will make sure to fill the proper description and licensing. Thank you. Jordan Diwi (talk) 04:35, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose {{PD-IDGov}} says:
- There shall be no infringement of Copyright for:
- a, Publication, Distribution, Communication, and/or Reproduction of State emblems and national anthem in accordance with their original nature;
- b. Any Publication, Distribution, Communication, and/or Reproduction executed by or on behalf of the government, unless stated to be protected by laws and regulations.
- [emphasis added]
The cited source page has:
- © Dinas Komunikasi dan Informatika Kabupaten Sabu Raijua © All rights reserved. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:01, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for your explanation Jordan Diwi (talk) 02:50, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 12:15, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
File:Jonathan Arenas El Yoni Chanteur Musicien Flamenco pop.jpg File:Nom du fichier à restaurer.jpg-- Jonathan el Yoni arenas (talk) 08:39, 14 March 2023 (UTC) arenas
- Oppose Self-promo, not a selfie, no evidence of a free license anyway. Yann (talk) 08:59, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 12:15, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
The pictures shows a screen shot of a videoart film of the artist Hans-Peter Klie. Of course he agreed to the publication and wants his work to be shown in wikipedia. What makes you think it is "not own work"? --Blau-7 (talk) 20:15, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Can you please put the pictures back into Wiki?--Blau-7 (talk) 20:15, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Permission to post on Wikipedia is not enough. The artist himself has to contact COM:VRT using a free license. Abzeronow (talk) 20:17, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose When you uploaded this image 11 years ago, you claimed that you were the actual photographer. Since that appears not to be the case, you have answered your own question. In order for this to be restored, the actual photographer must send a free license using VRT.
There is also the question of whether this is in scope. I can't see any educational value in this image. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:33, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 16:18, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
This is my picture. I work with the band White Sun and this is why I was able to get this work taken. The picture shown in Rolling Stones India is in fact my work and I gave it to the band to use for this interview. I have been trying to let the person that took it down about their mistake, but they have very little to no communication with me. Thank you. Ana Maria Munoz --Ana Maria Muñoz Photograper (talk) 21:08, 14 March 2023 (UTC) March 14th 2023
Oppose Policy requires that when an image has been previously published elsewhere that the actual photographer must send a free license using VRT. The image will be restored without further action by you when and if the license is received, read, and approved. VRT has a backlog, so that could be several weeks from now. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:11, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 16:54, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
This file is in the public domain in Indonesia, because it is published and distributed by the Government of Republic of Indonesia, casu quo Library and Archive Service of East Nusa Tenggara Province in their website Sistem Informasi Kearsipan Provinsi Nusa Tenggara Timur, according to Article 43 of Law 28 of 2014 on copyrights but it is my fault that I forget to make the sufficient description and licensing before so pelase undelete this file and I will make sure to fill the proper description and licensing. Thank you. Jordan Diwi (talk) 07:35, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose Both Firefox and MS Edge report that the source site has a serious security certificate problem, so it is impossible to check to see what license is on the site.
When you upload an image that is not your own work, it is always wise to add {{the License Review Template}}, so that its status can be confirmed while it is still fresh. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:23, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 16:54, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please restore the following pages:
- File:Folies Bergere Tropicana Matchbook front closeup.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Reason: From a misplaced post to ANU. "Folies Bergere Tropicana Matchbook front closeup.jpg was recently bot deleted. I believe this copyright issue should fall under PD-US-no notice advertisement, however I could not figure out how to modify the file. The image was a scan from a physical matchbook advertisment probably from 1960. How can I get the image reactivated and assign the proper copyright information?"
@Gumballhead1of2: who made the request Abzeronow (talk) 17:21, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
Support There are a number of these on eBay and Etsy. None of them have any notice, so I think it is safe to restore this. BTW, the deletion was manual, by Krd, not a bot. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:07, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- I would appreciate any suggestions to move this forward. As a newbie, simple is better. Thanks in advance. Gumballhead1of2 (talk) 23:55, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- We have an informal rule that requests remain open for 24 hours so that editors around the world have an opportunity to comment. Since I commented above, I should not be the one to restore the image, but I am sure that one of our colleagues will do it soon. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:07, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: as per Jim. @Gumballhead1of2: Please add categories. --Yann (talk) 11:04, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Remove — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2402:3a80:4171:cdac:0:22:541:2301 (talk • contribs) 10:29, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
Not done: Nothing to do here. Image is not deleted and "remove" is not clear. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:04, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment The uploader's account is globally locked, so I deleted this (not used except of user page) and other files as abuse of COM:WEBHOST. This looks like an old picture, and probably not the uploader's own work anyway. Yann (talk) 16:51, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
The file was uploaded years ago, was useful and legitim,this is a mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.173.117.192 (talk • contribs) 20:16, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mario Naranjo politico en campaña 2021.jpg. Thuresson (talk) 21:30, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per Thuresson. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:01, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Files deleted by Krd
Please restore the following pages:
- File:Cosul de dispersie Baia Mare (2).JPG (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Cosul de dispersie Baia Mare (3).JPG (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Cosul de dispersie Baia Mare (4).JPG (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Cosul de dispersie Baia Mare.JPG (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Phoenix copper smelter.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit){kind=link}
.JPG&diff=0){kind=link}
.JPG&action=history){kind=link}
.JPG&action=watch){kind=link}
.JPG&action=unwatch){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG&action=purge){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&preload=Commons:Deletion_requests/preload){kind=link}
.JPG&action=delete){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit){kind=link}
.JPG&diff=0){kind=link}
.JPG&action=history){kind=link}
.JPG&action=watch){kind=link}
.JPG&action=unwatch){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG&action=purge){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&preload=Commons:Deletion_requests/preload){kind=link}
.JPG&action=delete){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit){kind=link}
.JPG&diff=0){kind=link}
.JPG&action=history){kind=link}
.JPG&action=watch){kind=link}
.JPG&action=unwatch){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG&action=purge){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&preload=Commons:Deletion_requests/preload){kind=link}
.JPG&action=delete){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
Reason: deleted via Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Coșul de dispersie al Combinatului metalurgic Baia Mare. But this is just an industrial chimney, and I remember it has no artistic touch from architects. Plain industrial structure. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 19:29, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose Actually its shape, like an inverted golf tee, is unusual and it has decorative bands at intervals. We have no knowledge of the ToO for architecture and engineering works in Romania, but this would certainly have a copyright in France and in the United States, so I think that PRP requires that we not restore it. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:11, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support I agree with JWilz12345. Yann (talk) 15:40, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support I think the bands are not decorative, but functional (for improving visibility). Uncreative shape. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:26, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support I've looked through the images of industrial chimneys like this one that we have, and I've found both these bands and the broadened base in several other chimneys as well. My conclusion is they're not decorative, but functional. The broadened base is more pronounced here than in other chimneys, but that's not enough to be above any TOO in my opinion, not even in the UK with its notoriously low TOO. --Rosenzweig τ 08:56, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: The arguments brought forward by JWilz12345, King of Hearts, and Rosenzweig are convincing. The broadened base as well as the bands most likely have a merely practical/functional purpose; this is a pretty standard industrial chimney surely not built for its aesthetics and quite far away from any potential protection. --Gestumblindi (talk) 13:11, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
This picture doesn't indicate copyright violation. I have already had a permission (copyright) to upload it by the owner.
--Fery Adrianto (talk) 01:20, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose "This picture doesn't indicate copyright violation" is backwards. Almost all created works, including this image, have a copyright until it expires. In order for an image to be kept on Commons, there must be an explicit valid free license. This is a Facebook image which is not freely licensed. In order for it to be restored, the actual photographer must send a free license using VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:57, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 20:08, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please restore the following pages:
- File:Betriebsausweis Hans-Georg Sumpf.pdf (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Personalbogen Hans-Georg Sumpf Seite 1.pdf (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Reason: The mentioned two and File:Personalbogen Hans-Georg Sumpf Seite 2.pdf and File:Personalbogen_Hans-Georg_Sumpf_Seite_3.pdf are all used on de:Hans-Georg Sumpf#Einzelnachweise, but they are used like an unexperianced user does as a weblink and not as a wikilink. This caused the "not INUSE" argument for the deletion. On the other hand, according to the filenames all 4 seem to refer to different pages on the same document, so if one violates anything, the others should too or none should.
So maybe these two can be restored again. Wurgl (talk) 13:09, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose We do not keep PDFs of images, so these cannot be restored in any case. More important, however, is that they were uploaded by a long term abuser. We cannot rely on anything said in the upload and do not encourage such people by restoring their work. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:39, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
On hold The cases are currently discussed among experts in de.wikipedia, because German legislation is of relevance here. --Leyo 09:05, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- That may be, in which case someone who is not a long term abuser can upload the files as PNGs. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:02, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 20:08, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please restore the following file: File:S._E._M._de_Peralta_-_1924.jpg
Reason: Hi, the present file depicts Manuel María de Peralta y Alfaro, who died in 1930. In c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:G. L. Manuel frères they say that any artwork made in france falls in PD after 70 years. Even if they had taken the photo the day of his dead it would still be in PD since nearly 23 years.
Thanks in advance
--Mito0504 (talk) 13:31, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose per Rosenzweig's rationale in the DR. We know both of the Manuel brothers lived beyond 1952, this was not a collective work and it can't be restored to Commons until 2042. And also COM:France tells us that photographs are protected by the life of the author plus 70 years unless the author "died for France" which would fall under wartime extensions. Abzeronow (talk) 15:50, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I would support the idea that the author is the studio, so it became PD 70 years after publication. Yann (talk) 19:27, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- AFAIK there are no corporate authors in French copyright law (while companies etc. may own copyrights, they are not authors). Some argued in the DR that the photographs were collective works (which would result in the "PD 70 years after publication" you mentioned), I and others argued against it. The deletion request was just decided for deletion per the precautionary principle because there was enough doubt if these are truly in the public domain. Are there any compelling new facts since that decision was made yesterday? --Rosenzweig τ 19:54, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- I definitely don't agree with the "collective works" aspect -- photos would virtually never fall under that (that's more for things like encyclopedias I think). The only argument to me is the anonymous one -- if credited to the company, then it's not credited to a particular individual. On the other hand, if it was a one or two man company, then that pretty much tells you who the author is anyways, and could be considered a pseudonym where the author become known (thus 70pma). In this case, the principals of the company all lived long enough that 70pma is definitely not satisfied. I know nothing of the company -- if they employed a bunch of other photographers, then the corporate credit does not necessarily mean one of those brothers took the photo, and I'd say it's anonymous. But if it was pretty much just the brothers who took all the photos for the company, I can understand the caution. Carl Lindberg (talk) 20:04, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- There's a lot of discussion about various aspects of the case in the deletion request. Specifically, one French court actually did declare photos to be collective works in two decisions from 2014 and 2017, but in such narrowly defined and precisely explored cases that one cannot IMO transfer these decisions to other cases if one is not a court. Even if some users here clearly would like to. As to what precisely went on at G. L. Manuel frères, we don't really know. We do know however that we have the credits of the photos to these two owners G. L. Manuel frères (the brothers G. L. Manuel), not usually to the studio as such. --Rosenzweig τ 20:28, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- OK, yeah. If they were credited to the brothers specifically, there is likely no way out, as they are probably considered joint works. And yes, there are probably extreme situations that a photo could be considered "collective", but that's not at all the same thing as a work for hire. Carl Lindberg (talk) 21:04, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- There's a lot of discussion about various aspects of the case in the deletion request. Specifically, one French court actually did declare photos to be collective works in two decisions from 2014 and 2017, but in such narrowly defined and precisely explored cases that one cannot IMO transfer these decisions to other cases if one is not a court. Even if some users here clearly would like to. As to what precisely went on at G. L. Manuel frères, we don't really know. We do know however that we have the credits of the photos to these two owners G. L. Manuel frères (the brothers G. L. Manuel), not usually to the studio as such. --Rosenzweig τ 20:28, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- I definitely don't agree with the "collective works" aspect -- photos would virtually never fall under that (that's more for things like encyclopedias I think). The only argument to me is the anonymous one -- if credited to the company, then it's not credited to a particular individual. On the other hand, if it was a one or two man company, then that pretty much tells you who the author is anyways, and could be considered a pseudonym where the author become known (thus 70pma). In this case, the principals of the company all lived long enough that 70pma is definitely not satisfied. I know nothing of the company -- if they employed a bunch of other photographers, then the corporate credit does not necessarily mean one of those brothers took the photo, and I'd say it's anonymous. But if it was pretty much just the brothers who took all the photos for the company, I can understand the caution. Carl Lindberg (talk) 20:04, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per above discussion. --Yann (talk) 20:09, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
I found this image from https://omiyakadomachi.com/. So this decision is not appropriate. Ramsal18 (talk) 13:35, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- SupportI agree with the author's opinion because author's suggested website is an official website of Omiya kadomachi. I think the real estate compay which a deleter suggested doesn't have copyright for those images.
- Cobalt 1031 (talk) 13:46, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose You must have missed this: ©︎OMIYA KADOMACHI which is a clear copyright notice, and even if it wasn't there, anything from this decade in Japan is automatically copyrighted because Japan is a signer of the Berne Convention. The Nominator and the Admin both correctly saw that the source wasn't licensed by Creative Commons (and the default CC license CC-BY-SA 4.0 still means a work is copyrighted). Please read COM:L before you make other uploads. Abzeronow (talk) 16:40, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose @Ramsal18 and Cobalt 1031: second in motion to Abzeronow's reply. The site does not license their content under a commercial Creative Commons license, which means their content is not allowed here. Per COM:L, unfree content cannot be hosted here. Copyright in modern times exists from the moment of content creation, not from registration. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 19:04, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: Clear copyright notice at source site. Also note that Cobalt 1031 is a sock of the requester.. Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:50, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
--File:Mohammadmahdi Zulqader.jpg
(Please cancel the deletion)
(2023/03/18)
- Oppose We don't keep photographs of non-notable people that haven't substantially contributed to Wikimedia projects. COM:WEBHOST Abzeronow (talk) 19:37, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose: Commons is not your personal free web host. Your only contributions to wm projects were a lot of trash on wikidata. --Achim55 (talk) 20:35, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: Obviously not, as per above. --Yann (talk) 21:04, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
We possibly have a permission per Ticket:2023031510006453, but I need to see the image to check it. Can it please be temporarily restored? Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 07:56, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: @Mussklprozz: IMHO this is too small to be useful. --Yann (talk) 09:34, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please restore the following pages:
- File:Alan Wilder at Szikra 2010 132.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Reason: This image comes from a photo album of a music event, which has been licensed under a CC 4.0 license by the website admin. At the site here, you can clearly see the Creative commons tag, which indicates it applies to all contents of the site (as well as here at the bottom left). Perhaps there was some confusion, as you have to click on the first photo to be taken to the full album. PascalHD (talk) 01:43, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Krd and Red-tailed hawk: Any comments? Ankry (talk) 14:15, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Ankry: I'm not able to view the deleted photo. What was the exact source given? — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 20:44, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- The album/landing page is visible here, (with the CC 4.0 notice) and if you click the first photo it will take you to the full album. The specific photo I uploaded is this one. I had these pages linked on the photo as the authorship/sources. PascalHD (talk) 19:09, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Ankry: I'm not able to view the deleted photo. What was the exact source given? — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 20:44, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Note -- File:Alan Wilder at Szikra 2010 048.jpg is a file from the same website which went through license review a few years ago. Carl Lindberg (talk) 20:54, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- I can't see the deleted image, in order to verify it's on that website, but if it is then Support. Carl Lindberg (talk) 20:05, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support per Carl. Abzeronow (talk) 16:42, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: See above. License reviewed. --Yann (talk) 10:29, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Kindly refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sitting_judges_of_the_Supreme_Court_of_India. Clearly, all the justices have images on their Wikipedia pages which are from main.sci.gov.in The GODL-India tag is unreviewed in all of them. If Commons believes that GODL-India is not a fit tag for these portraits of government figures, then a new tag must be formulated. I, personally believe that there is no harm in using these images from a government website, nor do I think that these images used in such a fair manner would pose any objection by the government, hence we can consider them free to use. But, if, by the wisdom of Admins of Commons, such files are not free to use and must not be used on the platform, then the files must be removed from the pages of the sitting and retired judges of the Supreme Court of India which may well be over a 100. I rest my case. @Jameslwoodward: @Achim55: @Túrelio: @Ninetynine134: — Preceding unsigned comment added by MildGovernor (talk • contribs) 18:24, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose The source page for this image, https://sci.gov.in/chief-justice-judges, isn't working right now, so I cannot look at the licensing on it. However, I know from experience that some Indian Government web sites are {{GODL-India}} while others have explicit All Rights Reserved copyright notices. Therefore, all of the generalizations made above are invalid -- we must take the images one at a time and it is entirely possible that some of them can not be kept on Commons.
Note please that "nor do I think that these images used in such a fair manner would pose any objection by the government, hence we can consider them free to use" is a Fair Use argument which might be valid on WP:EN but Fair Use is never possible on Commons because it is site specific. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:39, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Try https://main.sci.gov.in/chief-justice-judges MildGovernor (talk) 04:44, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- That works but there is no indication of any free license there and the subject, Prafulla Chandra Pant, does not appear there. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:02, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- The subject's image is available at the website. At the given link, click on Former Chief Justice & Judges → No. 209
- And as for the free license, you are right that the Supreme Court's main website does not list any copyright policy. The closest we can find is the website of e-Committee of the Supreme Court, that is, https://ecommitteesci.gov.in/website-policies/ which too states that we must ask for permission in uploading any of its media files on this platform. I believe that Commons is very strict on its free use policy and any restrictions are not appreciated. Hence, you can delete images used from that site. But please also see to that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sitting_judges_of_the_Supreme_Court_of_India has all the judges' files uploaded from the Court's website on commons and nobody has ever taken any issue with that.
- By all means, you can delete the images, but for once and for all please decide on a policy as it is tough to determine from which government website, we may upload content on Commons. This Deletion/Undeletion case is of the Court's website, first please decide for this and then for other websites as well or a clear policy. MildGovernor (talk) 16:27, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- As I noted above,there does not seem to be any consistent policy on Indian government sites, so it is not possible to generalize. As far as knowing what can be uploaded, it's fairly simple -- unless there is an explicit free license, you can't upload it. And as for all the images that you mention, we have almost 100 million images on Commons. I'm sure that at least 1% of them -- around a million images -- should not be here. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:45, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- I just found that a similar discussion was already made on commons about the exact same topic and the administrator decided that it is completely alright to use the GODL-India tag which is valid here and the images can be used. https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Yann&direction=next&oldid=324336724#Clarification_on_the_extent_of_free_use_of_Images
- As I noted above,there does not seem to be any consistent policy on Indian government sites, so it is not possible to generalize. As far as knowing what can be uploaded, it's fairly simple -- unless there is an explicit free license, you can't upload it. And as for all the images that you mention, we have almost 100 million images on Commons. I'm sure that at least 1% of them -- around a million images -- should not be here. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:45, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- That works but there is no indication of any free license there and the subject, Prafulla Chandra Pant, does not appear there. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:02, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
I found the mentioned link on https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Adithya_harish_pergade MildGovernor (talk) 19:19, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment The image now, also under a DR, is a different one that the one deleted. Yann (talk) 16:56, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah, I uploaded the image with the same name, as that of the deleted file. Please close this undeletion request, as I am no longer motivated to get the image back on the platform. MildGovernor (talk) 12:40, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: Withdrawn. --Yann (talk) 19:00, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Recuperación Perfil Alan Morales
- Perfil informativo para organizaciones virtuales
- Perfil dirigido a literatos, escritores y lectores
- No es un perfil en orden a redes sociales.
- Se solicita recuperación por lo antes mencionadoAcmorales (talk) 13:10, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
No, porque Commons no es un web host para tus proyectos personales, ni menos autopromocionales. Bedivere (talk) 14:01, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: Obviously not, as per Bedivere. --Yann (talk) 14:02, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
I work at Didomi and this is our logo which I want to use instead of using a poorly made logo. Please approve. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarah Reveillard (talk • contribs) 14:52, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Info Used for en:Draft:Didomi. OP has declared a conflict of interest at enwiki. Thuresson (talk) 18:09, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Approval from an official representative should go through COM:VRT. Thuresson (talk) 14:21, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I've likewise deleted File:Didomi Logo.webp from this same uploader. If it's a viable image to host, we'd host a single copy. Uploading again to circumvent a previous deletion is not a good look. DMacks (talk) 21:56, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: Per remarks above. If the draft article is published on EN WP please follow the procedure on VRT to show you have permission for publication from the copyright holders. After that, the image might be in scope and can be undeleted. --Ellywa (talk) 11:38, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
File:קטיה-רמניק.jpg File:יובל_הרינג.jpg to undelete
Hi, This photo is free to use by the copyright owner. --Jonaloewen (talk) 14:09, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Jonaloewen, the filename appears incorrect, as this file does not exist on Commons. Can you provide the correct name please? Ellywa (talk) 11:41, 21 March 2023 (UTC)- Hi Jonaloewen, I think I found the file and corrected it the title of this request. The photo was made by צילום: קטיה רמניק . Please closely follow the procedure on VRT to show you have permission from the copyright holder/photographer to publish the image or media file on Commons with a free license. If successful, the image or media file may perhaps be undeleted, it depends whether it is considered in Scope, per COM:SCOPE. Ellywa (talk) 11:46, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Ellywa. --Yann (talk) 11:58, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
The file contains the EXIF data of the official photographer of the portrait. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riad Salih (talk • contribs) 18:23, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Riad Salih: , the photo appears to be an official photo, made by a professional photographer. Please closely follow the procedure on VRT to show you have permission from the copyright holder/photographer to publish the image on Commons with a free license. If successful, the image or media file can be undeleted. Ellywa (talk) 11:30, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Ellywa. --Yann (talk) 11:58, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Deleted in 2013 with the rationale that mosaics are not covered by UK FoP. However, a more recent decision contends that mosaics are works of artistic craftsmanship, which are covered, rather than graphic works. Felix QW (talk) 20:11, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- agree to undelete. Also, the church can be considered a public place per COM:FOP UK. Ellywa (talk) 08:32, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: as per Ellywa. --Yann (talk) 11:56, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Permissions shared via email and also under the photo posted by the person in the photo. https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=752818249547161&set=pcb.752834419545544
TheMillenialMediaTaiwan on March 16th, 2023.
--Brightsummer (talk) 04:33, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- For keeping the image on Commons, the photographer should directly mail to the VRT. Please ask them to follow VRT. If succesful the phote will be undeleted. This permission on Facebook is insufficient imho as it is not directly given by the photographer. Ellywa (talk) 08:38, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Ellywa. --Yann (talk) 11:55, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
File:Emma Rigby.jpg undelete
Hi,
Please undelete the photo above. I have purchased this photo with an website standard license for £35.99, to why I have the image without any Alamy watermark. Without this license, there would be a watermark.
Here is my purchase receipt below so I can use the photo without any copyright issues:
Image ID: PEB6MC
Purchased: 28 Feb 2023
Duration: In perpetuity
License: Website
--Movieman83 (talk) 22:26, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose - The Alamy "Website" license is limited to "[u]se in a single website, app, social media or blog (excludes advertising), worldwide". This is not the {{Cc-by-4.0}} license you erroneously purported and is not acceptable here. From just the summary, it is limited to "a single website" and precludes commercial use ("excludes advertising"). The expanded terms are more problematic still, as, for example, "you must not incorporate any Content (or any part of it) into a logo, trademark or service mark" is also a restriction on derivatives. Эlcobbola talk 22:42, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as explained. cannot be used freely everywhere. --Ellywa (talk) 07:53, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
This buddha seems to be an architecture instead of a sculpture according to the Chinese Wikipedia introduction, which says, 由莲花座到佛顶共分六层，底层为小佛堂，二至五层设有塑像及文字解说关于佛陀一生事迹。拾级盘旋而上可达顶层。/There are six floors from the lotus seat to the top of the Buddha. The bottom floor is a small Buddha hall, and the second to fifth floors are equipped with statues and text explanations about the life of the Buddha. Go up the stairs and circle up to the top floor. (Translated by Google). COM:FOP Taiwan allows architecture. Teetrition (talk) 14:21, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- Not Only one photo deleted. Here are more photos of Great Buddha Statue of Baguashan.--祥龍 (talk) 14:38, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- Actually there were 2 images under that name. For the latest, it is quite a stretch to call this "not a statue", even if it is hollow. But the former is a general view, and it may be OK, depending of the wording of the law, and local court cases. Yann (talk) 15:13, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- How do you think that a statue or a building need a window on it? Reke (talk) 15:23, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, it is a statue with a window, but it is still a work of art, not a building. Yann (talk) 15:26, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- It is a historical building. Reke (talk) 15:32, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, it is a statue with a window, but it is still a work of art, not a building. Yann (talk) 15:26, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- How do you think that a statue or a building need a window on it? Reke (talk) 15:23, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- As far as Japan's FoP law, which Taiwan's is very closely related to, some buildings can be considered "artistic works" rather than architectural. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Freedom_of_panorama/Archive_1#Hideyuki_Murata @JWilz12345: @Clindberg: Abzeronow (talk) 17:01, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Abzeronow: I won't comment on the matter as I am heavily involved on Taiwanese FOP ruckus made by the latest Taiwan Intellectual Property Office (TIPO) reply of December 2022. I won't oppose this UNDEL request, but I won't support either. See also w:zh:Wikipedia:互助客栈/其他#有关维基共享资源台湾全景自由问题一事. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 17:45, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- As far as Japan's FoP law, which Taiwan's is very closely related to, some buildings can be considered "artistic works" rather than architectural. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Freedom_of_panorama/Archive_1#Hideyuki_Murata @JWilz12345: @Clindberg: Abzeronow (talk) 17:01, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Hmm. I think there is a fine line here. I would hesitate to call the Statue of Liberty "architecture", even though people can go inside and climb the staircase to the crown. However the description above sounds like this is a Buddha museum, with five floors and exhibits inside. I think the divider has to be the purpose to which it is put, not the exterior shape, so I think this is architecture. The US Copyright office would agree,
- "The Copyright Office may register a claim to copyright in an architectural work if the work is a humanly habitable structure that is intended to be both permanent and stationary. Examples of works that satisfy this requirement include houses, office buildings, churches, and museums. By contrast, the Office will refuse to register bridges, cloverleaves, dams, walkways, tents, recreational vehicles, or boats...." [USCO Circular 41, emphasis added]
Note that other countries, notably France, include bridges as architecture. The subject work is not, of course, in the USA, but I doubt that other copyright offices would see it differently. Support . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:12, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
- Striked my oppose per comments by you and JWilz. Although as noted above, Japan (whose laws on this are similar to Taiwan) considered Tower of the Sun as an artistic work not a work of architecture but since our servers are in the US, we could go with The Copyright Office guidance in this case. Abzeronow (talk) 15:42, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
- I am a bit surprised that this would qualify for architecture in USA, but I won't oppose undeletion. Yann (talk) 19:12, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
- By only this file, I Support, but by that batch? Then some files may involve public interiors, are Taiwanese FOP rules allowing em? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:48, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
- If those public interiors can be considered as artistic works, then Taiwanese FOP rules does not allow them because the rule requires "outdoor". See [1]. Teetrition (talk) 04:11, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Taiwan Intellectual Property Office ("TIPO"), the Copyright authority in Taiwan, thinks that Taiwanese FOP provision on artistic works can be applied to a work of both architectural and artistic nature. See 智著字第11260001910號. If this work is qualified for architecture in USA, I won't oppose my own request. But as per precautionary principle, it seems like the withdrawal of the request may be more secure. Teetrition (talk) 11:13, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Teetrition: are you sure? When I translated the second paragraph of the reply via Google Translate, it seems TIPO replied in negative (in exact GTranslate translation): According to Article 4 of the Construction Law, the so-called "building" refers to "a structure or miscellaneous work fixed on the land or under the ground with a roof, beams, or walls for personal or public use." The inquired works of both architecture and art, if they belong to both "architectural works" and "art works" according to the aforementioned provisions, are still subject to the restrictions of Article 58, Paragraph 4 of this Act. It may not be reproduced specifically for the purpose of selling its reproductions (For example: use it as the subject of photography or take key photos, make postcards for sale).
- As a consequence of this latest TIPO reply, as well as the copyright agency's affirmation of their stricter December 2022 input overturning the 2018 and 2020 lenient inputs, I'd say Oppose this restoration, as a "building" having both architectural and artistic embodiments, subject to non-commercial restriction at number 4 of Arricle 58. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 19:53, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Perhaps this rule is an imitation of Japanese FOP rules? Japanese FOP also disallows commercial uses for buildings "that are artistic works", like the w:en:Tower of the Sun. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 00:09, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- @JWilz12345: Maybe I should clarify my position. I said Taiwanese FOP provision on artistic works can be applied to a work of both architectural and artistic nature. It means FOP provision on artistic works (instead of FOP provisions on architectural works), namely one cannot sell the copy of it, should be applied to works of both architectural and artistic nature. My apology for ambiguity and my poor English. Teetrition (talk) 00:57, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Teetrition: it is ok. At least things got clarified. By the way, I incorporated the important points of the new TIPO reply in COM:FOP Taiwan. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:59, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- @JWilz12345: Maybe I should clarify my position. I said Taiwanese FOP provision on artistic works can be applied to a work of both architectural and artistic nature. It means FOP provision on artistic works (instead of FOP provisions on architectural works), namely one cannot sell the copy of it, should be applied to works of both architectural and artistic nature. My apology for ambiguity and my poor English. Teetrition (talk) 00:57, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per discussion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:27, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Rcsprinter123
This user drew a couple of railway network maps for Northern and ScotRail by hand and they were deleted claiming that they were derivatives. Trigenibinion (talk) 00:31, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Info This may refer to File:Northern network.svg and File:ScotRail network.svg. The first was deleted for being derivative of northernrailway.co.uk, the second was deleted for containing a UK trademark. Thuresson (talk) 14:46, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: Per Thuresson. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:52, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
hello, this file is original visual work from artist Norma De Saint Picman showing works within virtual Gallery and showing a sustainable concept Noravisionsolarmetaverse, which contains ceramics, paiontings on solar panels and Gesamtkunstwerk videos so I am asking for non-deleation
- Dear uploader, User:Eleonorahon? the photo was deleted because it was created as advertisements, and is therefore considered out of COM:SCOPE of Commons. Perhaps, if there exists an article about the artist on one of the Wikipedia languages, the photo can be undeleted. So please ask again if such an article has been published and kept for a few months. Ellywa (talk) 11:33, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
- Dear Ellywa, it is original file from Noravisionsolarmetaverse virtual space created by arrtist Norma De Saint Picman. Even if the posters for old cinema are published, there is stil a title, so why it should not be there, actually , metaverses are quite new and there is no much published about that subject. It is not advertissement rather information, 3 d virtual galleries are not advertising but informing and gathering people. Eleonorahon (talk). 14:10, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: Per Ellywa, advertisement, out of scope. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:21, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Undelete File:Murr Live.png
Hi, Please undelete. Photo was taken by Jack Morgan, James Murray's nephew. Photo is free use with permission granted by Jack — Preceding unsigned comment added by Impracticalproductions (talk • contribs) 13:54, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
- Oppose If you, User:Impracticalproductions, are Jack Morgan, then please reload this very small image at full camera resolution with full EXIF.
- If not, please note that:
- falsely claiming that you were the actual photographer is a serious violation of Commons rules.
- it is also a serious violation to reload the image out of process as you did with James Murray at his Murr Live show in Cleveland.png.
- If you continue breaking Commons rules, you will probably be blocked from editing here.
- In order for this image to be restored, Jack Morgan must send a free license using VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:23, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Jim,
Sorry, I am new to Wiki editing. I had Jack create a Flickr acct and upload the photo so I can use it here, proving he gave permission. Based on your response, he needs to email permissions-commons@wikimedia.org the photo then, is that correct?
Impracticalproductions (talk) 18:00, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Impracticalproductions
- @Impracticalproductions: , yes, please ask him to closely follow VRT. If successful, the photo can be undeleted. Ellywa (talk) 18:44, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
- And, by the way, we would much prefer to have a much larger image. The easy way is for Jack Morgan to establish an account here and upload the image at full camera resolution using the same file name. Won't take him much longer than sending the email. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:05, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Jack emailed and included the original photo. Hopefully it's done correctly and can be undeleted. Thanks for your time
Impracticalproductions (talk) 22:55, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Impracticalproductions
Not done: This image will be restored automatically, without further action by the uploader, if and when a free license is received, read, and approved at VRT. The current backlog at VRT is 7 days.
. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:18, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
This photo of art piece (a pen sketch) was made for a project "A4" with granting all the rights to the project itself. In his turn a representative of the project has given the rights to CC-BY on behalf of the project. Please, undelete this photo. --Brunei (talk) 15:58, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose We do not generally keep personal art from non-notable artists, Therefore, in order to restore the image, we will need (a) an explanation of why this sketch is in scope and (b) a free license from the artist who drew the sketch via VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:09, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
- (a) This is a notable artist, see d:Q4124852. (b) The author already died, but the project has all the rights for this exact sketch. It is important to save it for Wikipedia articles as other works will be in PD only 65 years later. --Brunei (talk) 16:32, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
- OK, this is in scope, as there are 2 articles about him. But we need a confirmation of the license from the copyright holder via email. Thanks, Yann (talk) 16:52, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: Per Yann. The heir of the artist must send a free license using VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:17, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please restore both files. We have permission per Ticket:2023031410017023. Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 21:51, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: @Mussklprozz: FYI. --Yann (talk) 15:33, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
The companion image was determined to fall under a legal exemption of copyright regulationse File:Folies Bergere Tropicana Matchbook front closeup.jpg, and was undeleted / reactivated. Request same. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gumballhead1of2 (talk • contribs) 13:51, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
Support The whole matchbook cover is {{PD-US-no notice}}. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:00, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support Abzeronow (talk) 16:28, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
=={{int:filedesc}}== {{Information |description={{en|1=Embossed graphics representing the Folies Bergere at the Tropicana Hotel in Las Vegas, NV.}} |date=1960-01-01 |source=scan from actual matchbook |author={{unknown|author}} |permission= |other versions= }} =={{int:license-header}}== {{PD-US-no notice}} [[Category:Folies Bergère]] [[Category:Logos]] Gumballhead1of2 (talk) 18:23, 22 March 2023 (UTC)--Gumballhead1of2 (talk) 18:23, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: per discussion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:59, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
I am writing to request the undeletion of a photo that was previously deleted from the platform. The photo in question is an original work that I created and uploaded myself. I believe that the photo was deleted in error or due to a misunderstanding of the licensing and usage terms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hyperai.in (talk • contribs) 16:09, 22 March 2023 (UTC) (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
- @Hyperai.in: Oppose You wrote yourself that the author is St Joseph Public School, and it was copied from https://www.stjpublicschoolpattanakad.in/. So the copyright holder needs to send a formal written permission for a free license via email. Yann (talk) 16:09, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per Yann. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:52, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
This deleted logo is my company logo (Grande Loge Nationale Française), please undelete this file to be able to update our company page.
--RandomGLNF (talk) 16:20, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
- You have to license it with a valid free licence, and confirm that decision by the COM:VRT procedure. And I assume you mean the Wikipedia page about your company, as for your own pages you could use a locally stored image, no need to involve Wikimedia Commons. –LPfi (talk) 16:24, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: Per LPfi. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:51, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Please undelete. We have permission per Ticket:2023020910005941. Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 10:00, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: @Mussklprozz: Please add ticket etc. --Rosenzweig τ 17:08, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Hello, I am working on project of USA stock brokers research. I have published many articles on my blog (Reddit) before and have decided to move forward with wikipedia. This photo of Ryan Dawson was taken by me back in October 2022 when I interviewed him and I am planning of publishing more information about him as well as about other famous brokers. Please do not delete the photo as it is fully safe and secure for me to upload one.
Procedural close; image is not deleted. @Daniel Foster Antonio: Please go to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mr Dawsos1.png to explain why Ryan Dawson is sufficiently notable to be in scope for Commons. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:08, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
The author of these paintings died more than 70 years ago, so these are public domain. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 21:58, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
- Giuseppe Viggiani (Q76293707) died in 1962, please explain. Thuresson (talk) 00:07, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah, my math is clearly wrong. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 03:02, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: Bad math -- and the URAA would apply. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:06, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Permission was received in VRTS as ticket:2023032210009535. Please undelete the file -- I'll add the necessary permission tags. Thanks! --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:37, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: @Martin Urbanec: , please link the current ticket to ticket:2022010510003891. Ruthven (msg) 13:21, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Hi, I gave my permission for this picture. It has never been published on the web before. I asked for an undeletion :
Je confirme par la présente être l'auteur et le titulaire unique et exclusif de l'œuvre : https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:IMG_Portrait_Olivier_Bodart.jpg
Je donne mon autorisation pour publier cette œuvre sous la licence : CC BY-SA 4.0
Je comprends qu'en faisant cela je permets à quiconque d'utiliser mon œuvre dans un but commercial, et de la modifier dans la mesure des exigences imposées par la licence.
Je suis conscient de toujours jouir des droits extra-patrimoniaux sur mon œuvre, et garder le droit d'être cité pour celle-ci selon les termes de la licence retenue. Les modifications que d'autres pourront faire ne me seront pas attribuées.
Je suis conscient qu'une licence libre concerne seulement les droits patrimoniaux de l'auteur, et je garde la capacité d'agir envers quiconque n'emploierait pas ce travail d'une manière autorisée, ou dans la violation des droits de la personne, des restrictions de marque déposée, etc.
Je comprends que je ne peux pas retirer cette licence, et que l'image est susceptible d'être conservée de manière permanente par n'importe quel projet de la fondation Wikimedia.
Le 13 mars 2023, Kirsten Fenton — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucioleverte (talk • contribs) 12:13, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
Oppose This is probably referring to File:IMG Portrait Olivier Bodart.jpg and File:Auteur et artiste visuel.jpg which are identical. I note that the two files were uploaded by Lucioleverte and Lacgelé , both of whom claimed the file was {{Own}}. I ran a CU and they are the same person. Given the sock behavior (a total of four accounts), I don't think we can Assume Good Faith. Therefore in order to restore one of these, we need a free license from the actual photographer. THere is no reason to restore them both. The second of the two has no useful information in the file description. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:55, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done The requester is blocked and cannot respond. Ankry (talk) 04:18, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Good afternoon. This file is the property of our family that we want to share. It does not violate anyone's copyright. Please undelete it. I really appreciate any help you can provide.--Мария Автономова (talk) 01:55, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose In the file description you said both that you were the photographer (that's what {{Own}} means) and "This picture is from our personal family collection". They cannot both be true. Making false claims of being the author is a serious violation of Commons rules and may lead to your being blocked from editing here.
The file description says that the image is from 1980. Since the Ukraine law is 70 years pma (after the death of the creator), it will be under copyright until at least 2050 and longer if the photographer died after 1980. Note that owning a paper or digital copy of a photograph does not give you the right to freely license it. That right is held by the actual photographer or his heirs. In order to restore the image to Commons, the actual photographer or his heir must send a free license using VRT.
I note that you have uploaded the image to WP:UK. That may be the best place for it. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:50, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done As per Jim. Ankry (talk) 04:15, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
File:Consuelo Jiménez de Cisneros.jpg Restauración del archivo
Buenas tardes: solicito la restauración del documento indicado ya que se trata de un documento aportado y autorizado por la propia Consuelo Jiménez de Cisneros para su uso final en el artículo de wikipedia. La fotografía es original y posee una autorización que fue enviada por dos vías:
En primer lugar, la envié yo y así consta en el nº de ticket: [Ticket#2023020110007097] y recibí una respuesta automática.
Posteriormente, la abogada de Consuelo Jiménez, también envió la autorización siguiendo las pautas que ustedes indican. El correo se envió el día 2 de febrero de 2023. Esta señora es mayor y no se maneja bien en la redes. Por esa razón envió la autorización por medio de su representante legal.
La respuesta automática que le enviaron contaba con el nº de ticket: [Ticket#2023020210018047]
Esta es la respuesta que le remitieron:"Gracias por su mensaje. Me temo que las instrucciones que le han dado no son correctas. El permiso debe venir del fotógrafo en persona, o debe mostrarnos el contrato por el cual el fotógrafo le ha transferido la totalidad de los derechos de autor a usted. Solo el poseedor de los derechos de autor puede liberar una imagen con licencia libre.
Pueden hacer el seguimiento de esta información con el número de ticket: [Ticket#2023020210008156]
Esa fotografía está hecha con el móvil de la propia retratada, no la ha hecho ningún fotógrafo. Desconozco a qué fotógrafo debemos solicitar permiso. La fotografía esta autorizada por la representada en la misma a sí que les ruego restauren la fotografía.
Gracias.
Saludos cordiales
Womeninart (talk) 17:43, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose The photographer and owner of the copyright is the person who actually pushed the button on the phone. The ownership of the phone is irrelevant. Therefore that person, the one who pushed the button, must send the free license using VRT. This image will be restored automatically, without further action by the uploader, if and when a free license is received, read, and approved at VRT. The current backlog at VRT is 7 days.
.
Note also that permission for use on Wikipedia is not enough -- images on Commons must be free for any use anywhere by anybody. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:48, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per remarks of Jim. --Ellywa (talk) 00:12, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
El archivo Escudo Gurrea de Gallego.png es el escudo oficial del Ayuntamiento de Gurrea de Gállego. La descarga y utilización de este escudo está autorizada por el Ayuntamiento de Gurrea de Gállego, adjunto enlace de la pagina web y sede electrónica donde lo podéis comprobar que está permitida su descarga y uso.
https://www.gurreadegállego.es/el-escudo-y-la-bandera
https://gurreadegallego.sedipualba.es/default.aspx
La utilización de este Escudo fué autorizada por la Diputación General de Aragón al Ayuntamiento de Gurrea de Gállegocomo se puede comprobar en el siguiente decreto.
Solicito que se restituya esta imagen y que se elimine cualquier otra, ya que está ocasionando problemas y confusiones.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayuntamiento Gurrea de Gallego (talk • contribs) 07:24, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
Oppose The website https://www.gurreadegállego.es/el-escudo-y-la-bandera has a clear statement of Intellectual Property Rights at https://www.gurreadegállego.es/aviso-legal which prohibits any use without permission. The image can be restored only if an authorized official of the municipal government. Note that the Username User:Ayuntamiento Gurrea de Gallego suggests that the user is the municipal government, but we never make that assumption because imposters are frequent here. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:43, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per remarks of Jim. --Ellywa (talk) 00:13, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
The File:Carles Azagra - litografia Bombers.jpg was sended to me by email by Josep Barjuan Sanz, the author, and he also send me (in catalan) his autorisation to publish it. I d'ont kmow how to attach the mail he send to me, but here is the content:
RE: Carles Azagra BARJUAN SANZ, Josep <jbarjuan@bcn.cat> 22 de febrer de 2023, a les 18:27 Per a: Joan Andrés Vélez <joanandresv@gmail.com>, "BARJUAN SANZ, Josep" <jbarjuan@bcn.cat> Josep Barjuan i Sanz amb DNI 46027149D, manifesto que sóc la persona que ha realitzat les fotografies i únic propietari dels drets d'autor del fitxer: Carles Azagra - litografia Bombers.jpg Accepto publicar el meu treball sota la llicència lliure Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International Admeto que concedeixo el dret a qualsevol per utilitzar el treball en un producte comercial, i modificar-lo segons les seves necessitats. Sóc conscient que sempre mantindré els drets d'autor del meu treball, i mantindré el dret d'atribució d'acord amb la llicència escollida. No se m'atribuiran modificacions que altres puguin fer. Sóc conscient que la llicència lliure només concerneix els drets d'autor, i em reservo l'opció de prendre accions contra qualsevol que utilitzi aquest treball violant altres drets com restriccions de marca registrada, difamació, o restriccions geogràficament específiques. Admeto que no em puc desdir d'aquest acord, i que el treball podrà guardar-se permanentment, o no, en un projecte Wikimedia. Josep Barjuan DNI 46027149D 22 de febrer de 2023
Thank you Joan Andrés — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joandrés (talk • contribs) 10:24, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
Oppose There are two copyrights here, one for the photograph and one for the painting that is the center of the image. Therefore the actual photographer and the artist must both send free licenses using VRT. You may not forward the permission shown above -- VRT does not accept forwarded permissions because it is too easy to forge one. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:16, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per remarks of Jim. --Ellywa (talk) 00:14, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Hello, I am talking regarding the photo that you deleted. The photographer who did the photo its my close friend. We work on the same company. He gave me the permit to publish it whenever I want. Hopefully you can upload it another gain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArtemKazar21 (talk • contribs) 15:00, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose. Your friend needs to contact COM:VRT to verify that they are the photographer and that they want the photograph released under a free license. Abzeronow (talk) 15:53, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose @ArtemKazar21: A permission to publish the image does not meet Wikimedia Commons licensing requirements. A permission to grant a license requires a written form which needs to be provided as an evidence. Moreover, at upload you claimed that you are the author, not your friend and you declared that you grant a free license. Providing false or incorrect information means that we have to verify carefully everything that you say basing on public records or documents provided to VRT. Ankry (talk) 04:10, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: Please follow the procedure described by Ankry and Abzeronow. If successfull the photo can be undeleted, but not on the current moment. --Ellywa (talk) 00:16, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
We request to undelition, because Companions Opera is the owner of the rights of her logo. We might have made a mistake by not adding the original designer, which we will correct as soon the deletion is undone. The designer is Carlo Grift, from Dakota Design in Amsterdam. As a company we have bought all copyrights from this designer and from all photographers we have added to Commons earlier on. We apologise for any mistake made, but we are new to this.
The logo serves as the primary means of visual identification at the top of the article dedicated to the entity in question.
We hope to have due-fully fulfilled the undelition request and Look forward to hear from you. Regards,
peter kroone Companions Opera / 360Opera 25-03-2023 360Opera (talk) 13:43, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose This is a matter that should be done through COM:VRT where you can show Grift's copyrights were transferred and that you are indeed the copyright holder. This would also be helpful for future uploads you may want to do. Abzeronow (talk) 15:35, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per Abzeronow -- needs VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:48, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Kindly undelete, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prince Folorunsho Adegoke (talk • contribs) 15:38, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose No reason given for undeletion plus we don't keep personal photographs of non-notable people that haven't substantially contributed to Wikimedia projects. Abzeronow (talk) 15:59, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
- سكس سكس بنات 5.45.130.9 03:35, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per Abzeronow. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:35, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Hi, following the recent news of Jacqueline Gold's passing, I visited her Wikipedia page and noticed it had a very old image.
I reached out to Ann Summers who had used a much more recent image of her on their website and requested permission to update this on Wikipedia, which was granted. Which included information of who owned the image and who originally took the image.
Following the flag that this may violate copyright rules, I then reached out to a representative at Ann Summers to send confirmation that this image was free to use, which I believe was emailed on Friday.
Is there anything else required to undelete this image?
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plestan (talk • contribs) 07:43, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
- Please contact the photographer and ask her or him to verify the Creative Commons license by following the instructions at COM:VRT. Thuresson (talk) 15:34, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: This image will be restored automatically, without further action by the uploader, if and when a free license is received, read, and approved at VRT. The current backlog at VRT is 7 days.
. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:15, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
This file is in the public domain in Indonesia, because it is published and distributed by the Government of Republic of Indonesia, casu quo Library and Archive Service of East Nusa Tenggara Province in their website Sistem Informasi Kearsipan Provinsi Nusa Tenggara Timur, according to Article 43 of Law 28 of 2014 on copyrights but it is my fault that I forget to make the sufficient description and licensing before so pelase undelete this file and I will make sure to fill the proper description and licensing. Thank you. Jordan Diwi (talk) 17:17, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: Identical to previous declined UDR. --Эlcobbola talk 17:21, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Kindly remove this deletion on my image because there is nothing to deletion this page and not given a valid reason
--Parth12234567 (talk) 17:23, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Knpsmusic COM:WEBHOST. Abzeronow (talk) 17:26, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: LTA nonsense. --Эlcobbola talk 17:28, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
This is photo of my client which is required for his wiki page — Preceding unsigned comment added by KC110776 (talk • contribs) 17:50, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose - We are not a host for promotion of "your client". Эlcobbola talk 17:55, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
Please note that recreating a deleted image without permission is a violation of Commons rules. If you do it again, you may be blocked from editing here. Also note that paid editing on Wikipedia is prohibited and may lead to all of your work being deleted. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:38, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: Commons is not Facebook. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:39, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
- The photo is taken by myself, should I just send a letter of attorney, then could undelete it? thanks.--Tombus20032000 (talk) 00:23, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Done per clear evidence in EXIF. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:42, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Hi requesting undeletion. I believe this was flagged for copyright violation because the same image was uploaded to IMDb. However the image on IMDb was taken from Wikipedia and not the other way around. I own the license and have earlier provided permission for use of this image to Wikipedia
--Earthyan (talk) 19:47, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Earthyan: When and how have you "provided permission for use of this image to Wikipedia"? --Rosenzweig τ 21:16, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- Upon uploading the image I was asked to provide permission under a general license; I had filled out that form them Earthyan (talk) 22:52, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose You uploaded this on March 16, 2023 and described it as own work from January 7, 2023. Reverse image search however shows that the image was already present on the Internet in 2021 and is apparently an Instagram photo from that year (compare [2] for instance). So I'm having a slight problem with the veracity of your statements. --Rosenzweig τ 23:10, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per Rosenzweig. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:52, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
I do not agree with the deletion of my artwork, as I've created the artwork of my OC Pod, and it is actually used as a placeholder without actually using it publicly, and rather used for Wikipedia's sandbox without publishing.
--TheMariosonic15 (talk) 09:11, 28 March 2023 (UTC)TheMariosonic15, 3/28/2023
- Oppose per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Internal Pod.png. Commons is not a personal blog. COM:WEBHOST Abzeronow (talk) 15:51, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per Abzeronow. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:51, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
The photo was taken by the municipality of La Paz on its same Facebook and news page, which is free to use since it is a state agency and the laws in Argentina allow it if you are only an Argentine citizen. thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andindal (talk • contribs) 18:57, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Andindal: Which law is that (law, section, paragraph) that allows you to take a Facebook photo, relicense it and claim to be the copyright owner? Thuresson (talk) 00:02, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
- English:
- Argentine Copyright Law, Law No. 11,723
- The article that mentions the works of the State is Article 5. The law is not divided into sections and paragraphs as you request, but here is the complete quote:
- Copyright Law (Law No. 11,723), Article 5:
- "Art. 5. - The works, acts and documents of the State Administration, of the provinces and of the municipalities, are not subject to intellectual property, but when they are published by official disposition, the editors will not have the exclusive right of publication ."
- Spanish, as it appears in writing:
- Ley de Derecho de Autor de Argentina, Ley N° 11.723
- El artículo que menciona las obras del Estado es el Artículo 5. La ley no se divide en secciones y párrafos como lo solicitas, pero aquí tienes la cita completa:
- Ley de Derecho de Autor (Ley N° 11.723), Artículo 5:
- "Art. 5. - Las obras, actos y documentos de la Administración del Estado, de las provincias y de los municipios, no son objeto de propiedad intelectual, pero cuando se las publique por disposición oficial, los editores no tendrán derecho exclusivo de publicación." Andindal (talk) 05:11, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I cannot find that article in the 2020 version of this law on the WIPO web site. There is an article 5 there, but it's about something else. --Rosenzweig τ 06:25, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose The text of the 2020 law is at https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text/584401. A global search on "Las obras, actos " yields no results. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:32, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: per discussion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:18, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
The photo was taken by the municipality of La Paz on its same Facebook and news page, which is free to use since it is a state agency and the laws in Argentina allow it if you are only an Argentine citizen you can use the images to your liking
- Changed to Support per Jim. No human author so no copyright. Abzeronow (talk) 15:48, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- Changed to
- Support Images from security cameras have no human input and therefore do not have copyrights. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:20, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose for now. They may have no copyrights in the US. In Germany and Austria they would be protected for 50 years from publication (or creation if not published within 50 years) as a simple photograph. What does the Argentine law say? --Rosenzweig τ 20:00, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: as per Jim and Abzeronow. --Yann (talk) 12:52, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Its is My Personal Work — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohammadzaidmansoori8 (talk • contribs) 12:14, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
This is probably about File:MohammadZaidMAnsoori.jpg. Note that capitalization matters in file names.
Oppose We do not keep images of non-contributors who are not notable people. Commons is not Facebook. Also, it appears very unlikely that this is a selfie, so the claim of {{Own}} is probably not correct. Making false claims of authorship is a serious violation of Commons rules and may lead to your being blocked from editing here. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:47, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 12:55, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Sorry, It seemed to me that the images in the tweets were free. Those tweets are free and won a science outreach competition. It was good to put all of the tweet winners together in a unique image. But if the inside images are not free I understand that of deleting the image. Sorry, I didn't know about it. One final question: If I created another image by putting those interior images in black... I could upload that image on the CC.BY-SA license, right? Thanks Ksarasola (talk) 12:36, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
Parkatu, txioen barruan zeuden irudiak libreak izan zirela uste nuen. Txioak libreak dira, eta zientzia-dibulgazioko txapelketa bateko irabazleak izan ziren. Egokia zen txio guztiak elkarrekin jartzea, saridun izan ziren txio guztiak irudi bakar batean ikusi ahal izateko. Barruko irudiak ez badira libre, ulertzen dut irudia ezabatzearena. Parkatu ez nekien horretaz. Azken galdera bat: beste irudi bat sortzen badut barruko irudi horiek beltzez eztalita... Irudi hori jar nezake CC.BY-SA lizentziarekin, ez da? Eskerrik asko. Ksarasola (talk) 12:36, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose I see nothing at the named source that indicates that these are freely licensed. I see no educational use for a collection of images of links to tweets. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:54, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 12:55, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Na email permissions-commons@wikimedia.org bylo dnes zasláno povolení autora fotografie k jejímu použití na stránce wikipedie https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/V%C3%ADt%C4%9Bzslav_Welsch
Žádám Vás tedy o opětovné zveřejnění fotografie. Pro úplnost kopíruji celé znění výše zmíněného mailu:
| Forwarded Message |
|---|
| ---------- Forwarded message ---------
Od: Robert Tichy (Redacted) Date: po 27. 3. 2023 v 21:39 Subject: FW: dotaz - fotografie Vítězslav Welsch To: (Redacted)
z vydavatelství VLM mi přeposlali Váš dotaz ohledně užití fotografie pana Vítězslava Welsche, kterého jsem fotografoval. Nejprve upřímnou soustrast, je mi to líto. Co se týká užití této fotografie na Wikipedii, s tím problém nemám, když uvedete mé jméno, budu rád.
Děkuji Vám a přeji hezký večer, Robert Tichý Fotograf 604205454 www.roberttichy.com From: Eliška Welschová (Redacted) Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2023 9:35 PM To: Bendová Veronika (Redacted) Subject: dotaz - fotografie Vítězslav Welsch
Dobrý den,
tento měsíc jste nám zaslali fotografii našeho tatínka Vítězslava Welsche s kterým proběhl rozhovor v Kondici z prosince 2013/ leden 2014 a náhle tento měsíc bohužel zemřel.
Taťka byl spisovatel a fotografie pořízená vaším fotografem je skvělá a my bychom jí rády na wikipedii použily - https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/V%C3%ADt%C4%9Bzslav_Welsch
Dali byste nám prosím svolení k užití jeho fotografie na wikipedii ( foto viz. příloha)? Bohužel bez Vašeho souhlasu nemůžeme fotografii na wiki vložit. Samozřejmě bychom uvedli autora fotografie (prosím napište nám jméno fotografa) a zdroj.
Děkuji za Vaši pomoc
Hezký den |
Eliška Welschová
--Agarwaenis (talk) 18:32, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- Dobrý den, @Agarwaenis, bylo by možné od fotografa získat prosím svolení autora e-mailem na permissions-cs@wikimedia.org? Jakmile dorazí, fotografie určitě bude obnovena. Vzor je k dispozici na cs:Help:Svolení_autora#Doporučený text svolení. Kdybyste k textu měla nějaké otázky, můžete mi napsat, rád poradím. S pozdravem, Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:45, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Not done: needs VRT per Martin. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:13, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
There is a proper agreement from author in VTRS: ticket:2023032610003721. Polimerek (talk) 08:18, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: @Polimerek: Please add ticket etc. --Rosenzweig τ 08:56, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Release came as ticket:2023032910007408. Can you please undelete the logo file? Thanks! --Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:43, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: @Martin Urbanec: Please add ticket etc. --Rosenzweig τ 08:57, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Kira Henson is my real name. I took this photo myself. It's a picture of MY own cats, and I can upload it if I want to. Most people have anonymous usernames on Wikimedia. That doesn't mean we don't have permission to upload our own pictures, if our real names are listed as the author. The only reason a user wanted it deleted is because he/she didn't want it entered into the Wiki Loves Folklore contest, and that's not fair. So please, restore it as quickly as possible, and don't let this happen again. --Most Helpful (talk) 03:33, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- Already done by Krd per VRT ticket. @Herbythyme and Polarlys: A gentle reminder that having a named author in the EXIF which does not match the username (especially if the username is a pseudonym) is not a valid reason for speedy deletion; at best, you can tag as {{subst:npd}}. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:12, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Done: by krd. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:12, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
