Last modified on 15 March 2015, at 11:52

Commons:Undeletion requests


Other languages:
العربية • ‎Deutsch • ‎English • ‎español • ‎français • ‎magyar • ‎日本語 • ‎polski • ‎پښتو • ‎português • ‎русский • ‎中文

On this page, users can ask for a deleted page or file (hereafter, "file") to be restored. Users can comment on requests by leaving remarks such as keep deleted or undelete along with their reasoning.

This page is not part of Wikipedia. This page is about the content of Wikimedia Commons, a repository of free media files used by Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects. Wikimedia Commons does not host encyclopedia articles. To request undeletion of an article or other content which was deleted from the English Wikipedia edition, see the deletion review page on that project.

Finding out why a file was deleted

First, check the deletion log and find out why the file was deleted. Also use the What links here feature to see if there are any discussions linking to the deleted file. If you uploaded the file, see if there are any messages on your user talk page explaining the deletion. Secondly, please read the deletion policy, the project scope policy, and the licensing policy again to find out why the file might not be allowed on Commons.

If the reason given is not clear or you dispute it, you can contact the deleting administrator to ask them to explain or give them new evidence against the reason for deletion. You can also contact any other active administrator (perhaps one that speaks your native language)—most should be happy to help, and if a mistake had been made, rectify the situation.

Appealing a deletion

Deletions which are correct based on the current deletion, project scope and licensing policies will not be undone. Proposals to change the policies may be done on their talk pages.

If you believe the file in question was neither a copyright violation nor outside the current project scope:

  • You may want to discuss with the administrator who deleted the file. You can ask the administrator for a detailed explanation or show evidence to support undeletion.
  • If you do not wish to contact anyone directly, or if an individual administrator has declined undeletion, or if you want an opportunity for more people to participate in the discussion, you can request undeletion on this page.
  • If the file was deleted for missing evidence of licensing permission from the copyright holder, please follow the procedure for submitting permission evidence. If you have already done that, there is no need to request undeletion here. If the submitted permission is in order, the file will be restored when the permission is processed. Please be patient, as this may take several weeks depending on the current workload and available volunteers.

Temporary undeletion

Files may be temporarily undeleted either to assist an undeletion discussion of that file or to allow transfer to a project that permits fair use. Use the template {{Request temporary undeletion}} in the relevant undeletion request, and provide an explanation.

  1. if the temporary undeletion is to assist discussion, explain why it would be useful for the discussion to undelete the file temporarily, or
  2. if the temporary undeletion is to allow transfer to a fair use project, state which project you intend to transfer the file to and link to the project's fair use statement.

To assist discussion

Files may be temporarily undeleted to assist discussion if it is difficult for users to decide on whether an undeletion request should be granted without having access to the file. Where a description of the file or quotation from the file description page is sufficient, an administrator may provide this instead of granting the temporary undeletion request. Requests may be rejected if it is felt that the usefulness to the discussion is outweighed by other factors (such as restoring, even temporarily, files where there are substantial concerns relating to Commons:Photographs of identifiable people). Files temporarily undeleted to assist discussion will be deleted again after thirty days, or when the undeletion request is closed (whichever is sooner).

To allow transfer of fair use content to another project

Unlike English Wikipedia and a few other Wikimedia projects, Commons does not accept non-free content with reference to fair use provisions. If a deleted file meets the fair use requirements of another Wikimedia project, users can request temporary undeletion in order to transfer the file there. These requests can usually be handled speedily (without discussion). Files temporarily undeleted for transfer purposes will be deleted again after two days. When requesting temporary undeletion, please state which project you intend to transfer the file to and link to the project's fair use statement.

Adding a request

First, ensure that you have attempted to find out why the file was deleted. Next, please read these instructions for how to write the request before proceeding to add it:

  • In the Subject/headline: field, enter an appropriate subject. If you are requesting undeletion of a single file, a heading like [[:Image:DeletedFile.jpg]] is advisable. (Remember the initial colon in the link.)
  • Identify the file(s) for which you are requesting undeletion and provide image links (see above). If you don't know the exact name, give as much information as you can. Requests that fail to provide information about what is to be undeleted may be archived without further notice.
  • State the reason(s) for the requested undeletion.
  • Sign your request using four tilde characters (~~~~). If you have an account at Commons, log in first. If you were the one to upload the file in question, this can help administrators to identify it.

Add the request to the bottom of the page. Click here to open the page where you should add your request. Alternatively, you can click the "edit" link next to the current date below.


Closed undeletion debates are archived daily.

Current requests

Watch Edit

File:Dzisna, Barysaŭ kamień. Дзісна, Барысаў камень (1882).jpg, File:Barysavy kamiani. Барысавы камяні (1890).jpg

The reason for deletion of these files is not true. Both of them aren't scaled-down duplicates of File:Book illustrations of Dvina or Boris stones - t.05.png and File:Book illustrations of Dvina or Boris stones - t.06.png respectively. Actually they had the same resolution. And initially they even had better resolution and were uploaded from other sources (not from "Сапунов А. П. Двинские или Борисовы камни. — Витебск: Тип. Витебского Губернского Правления, 1890 — таб. 06. — 31 с."). Moreover, because of using .jpg format instead of redundant .png they have the same quality and resolution with much less file size. I believe we should use the server space rationally. So if there is a need to delete some images it should be redundant File:Book illustrations of Dvina or Boris stones - t.05.png and File:Book illustrations of Dvina or Boris stones - t.06.png. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 19:29, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

In addition in my opinion such practice (uploading redundant file from the same source [1], [2] and then adding incorrect speedy deletion request [3]) have to be stopped. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 20:04, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Quran- Chapter 22 v 72. “When Our Clear Signs are rehearsed to them, Thou wilt notice a denial on the faces of the Unbelievers! They nearly attack with violence those who rehearse Our Signs to them. say, "Shall I Tell you of something (far) worse than these Signs? it is the Fire (of Hell)! Allah has promised it to the Unbelievers! and evil is that destination!" QURAN- CHAPTER 22-V 78. “VERILY WE HAVE BROUGHT THE TRUTH TO YOU: BUT MOST OF YOU HAVE A HATRED FOR TRUTH.” — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmed moosa (talk • contribs) 09:24, 17 May 2015‎ (UTC)

  • As a courtesy to other editors, it is a Commons guideline to sign your posts on talk pages, 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 the date will then automatically be added along with a timestamp 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. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:54, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Putting the two versions side by side, it is hard to choose between them. However, as a matter of policy, Commons prefers PNG over JPG for all images other than those originally created as JPG:
"If you have a choice of file formats in which to save a graphic, scan, or other such thing, save it as PNG..." (Commons:File_types#JPEG).
Therefore, the PNGs should be kept and the deletion of the JPGs was appropriate. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me)
No, but that same guideline does mention that JPG thumbnails are often better (and I think more performant to make), so having copies of both is not the worst idea. That is why we have {{JPEG version of PNG}} and related templates. Deletion does not save any disk space. So... particularly when the contributor wants it undeleted, I Symbol support vote.svg Support undeletion. It doesn't hurt anything. Carl Lindberg (talk) 21:02, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
For me this case looks like the following: "However, if the original file is in JPEG, it generally makes no sense to convert it to PNG: converting a lossy compression into a “lossless” format doesn't buy you anything since the “loss” already occurred in the original, and doing so will only increase the file size (any edits, however, should probably be saved as PNG as well as JPEG". The proof of my opinion is that there is no difference in quality between images. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 14:35, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Kazimier Lachnovič. From a technical point of view, saving a lossy image (jpg) into a lossless container does not make the resulting image lossless. -FASTILY 00:16, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
If the PNGs are not original lossless scans, but rather just JPGs converted to PNG, then yes the wrong duplicate was deleted in the first place. Carl Lindberg (talk) 00:40, 20 May 2015 (UTC)


File used with permission of Old Bell Museum.

I am web editor and IT officer for the Old Bell Museum and have full permission and control over this image. There is no copyright.

Please restore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick-in-montgomery (talk • contribs) 10:52, 20 May 2015‎ (UTC)

Permission is needed before restoration. Jianhui67 talkcontribs 09:32, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose With limited exceptions, none of which apply here, all recent creations have copyrights, so these images almost certainly do. In their file descriptions, you say that you were the photographer. In the comment above, you suggest that that is not the case. That needs to be clarified.
The images appear on the Web without free licenses. Policy therefore requires that the actual copyright holder send a free license to OTRS. That would usually be the actual photographer or, if the copyright has been formally transferred to the museum, a corporate officer of the museum.
The license should explicitly mention the two images above as well as
In all four cases, once the images are restored, please upload the original images at full camera resolution. These four downsampled versions may be useful on the Web, but are marginal for Commons. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:31, 21 May 2015 (UTC)


這張圖片已經超過版權保護期,所以屬於公有領域。 保護期:澳大利亞、歐盟和新加坡的70年版權保護期為準。中華民國(臺灣)、中華人民共和國(大陸)、香港和澳門 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pillow lin (talk • contribs) 13:01, 20 May 2015‎ (UTC)


I am the creator of this image and certify that it is authentic. I'm not sure what else to say. I rendered these solid models for my client and photoshopped the image of these devices to create the .gif that I uploaded to Wikimedia. It was deleted because of copyright issues, I don't know why. Andersmavis (talk) 17:01, 21 May 2015 (UTC)Anders Mavis 5/21/15

You have had nine files deleted from Commons for various reasons such as the uploader is not the named author or that they have appeared elsewhere on the web without a free license. The filename above is not among the nine. Rather than have one of us waste time researching all nine, it would be helpful if you give us the specific file you are asking about now. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:03, 22 May 2015 (UTC)


I'm not sure which file was meant, but high probably the file was the icon like this w:de:File:Blender.svg (and the first version of w:File:Blender.svg) then it's free, as you can see on under Desktop icon → Freedesktop – SVG. The Tango styled icon is created by "Jakub Steiner" (Tango artist), the license is there clear given as CC-by-sa/3.0/ (file metadata) and the old files (on DE and EN) had GPL/2.0/!? I mean the commercial restriction is only because it is a logo:

4. The logo is used unaltered, without fancy enhancements, in original colors, original typography, and always complete (logo + text blender).
So probably the desktop icon is here not concrete meant?
5. In case you use the logo on products you sell commercially, you always have to contact us with a picture of how it will be used, and ask for explicit permission.
So commercial use is possible, there are logos on Commons which are more restricted. Probably as {{Trademarked}}?
User: Perhelion (Commons: = crap?)  10:21, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Boombon

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: ticket:2015052110009291 Максим Підліснюк (talk) 10:55, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Mural con BTOY.jpg file undeletion

Buenas tardes, soy el Director del IES Cartima, José María Ruiz Palomo, y el mural que aparece en la imagen borrada está dentro de nuestro centro educativo. Es obra de la artista BTOY junto con el alumnado del instituto, y es de nuestra propiedad. Además la fotografía ha sido tomada por mí. Por tanto, no existe ninguna violación de ningún derecho de copyright ni ningún otro. Le ruego que anule el borrado de la imagen.

Un cordial saludo. José María Ruiz Palomo Director del IES Cartima. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmruizpalomo (talk • contribs) 12:26, 22 May 2015‎ (UTC)

  • As a courtesy to other editors, it is a Commons guideline to sign your posts on talk pages, 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 the date will then automatically be added along with a timestamp 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. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:39, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unless each of the artists (or their parents, if they are minors) has executed a formal transfer of copyright to the school, the copyright for the mural remains with the artists and only they can license it here.
The file does not say where the mural is. It is possible that it is covered by an FOP exemption, but we will have to know its exact location -- both the country and whether it is indoors or outside. I see an article at IES Cartima, which you have edited, which places an Institute of that name in Spain. (Incidentally, I know that only because you give a latitude and longitude -- the article did not link the city name or tell us what country it is in). If it is in Spain and is outside, visible from a public street, then it is OK. If it is indoors, it is not. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:39, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Young Euro Classic Logo 2015.jpg

PepermintBerlin ist der Urheber des Logos von Young Euro Classic und hat lediglich eine falsche Lizenz ausgewählt. Aus diesem Grund bitte ich um die Wiederherstellung der Datei, damit ich sie entsprechend lizensieren und markieren kann. Liebe Grüße und Danke Pepermintberlin (talk) 12:42, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Willard Hill profile.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: The photos licenses are consistent with Wiki policies. SoulSchool504 (talk) 16:56, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

  • No they are not. The files are released under a cc-by-nc-nd-2.0 license and those are forbidden at Commons as per com:L. Natuur12 (talk) 17:10, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I just looked and they are in fact under the proper license. Please advise. SoulSchool504 (talk) 17:16, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • For the time being the license seems to be cc-by-sa-2.0. Strange since the bot doesn't make mistakes. Did you ask for a relicense? Natuur12 (talk) 17:21, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I contacted the owner and they were cool to updated the license so I can use the pics.SoulSchool504 (talk) 17:52, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Ah, that explains it. In that case I Symbol support vote.svg Support undeletion. Natuur12 (talk) 17:54, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Restored Thanks for contacting the photographer! Face-smile.svg --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 20:33, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Hunnan-1.jpg, File:Agro.jpg, etc.

Hello, our school has sent a copyright email to, could you please do the necessary, especially undelete File:Hunnan-1.jpg and File:Agro.jpg? Thank you.--Neyc.alumni.france (talk) 18:43, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose OTRS, like Commons, is all volunteers and, also like Commons, is badly understaffed, so it often runs a backlog of weeks or even more than a month. Your e-mail will be processed when it reaches the head of the queue. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:05, 22 May 2015 (UTC)


この写真は、私の祖父を私の祖母が撮影した物で、著作権を受け継いでいます。 どちらも死亡しているため、著作権の提示は困難ですが、現物が手元にあります。 この写真を手に持った写真を送りましょうか? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaztima109 (talk • contribs) 08:20, 23 May 2015‎ (UTC)

This is a picture of my grandmother were taken grandfather. I inherited the copyright. Both also have died, It is difficult to presentation of copyright, This photo has been extant. Shall I send a photo with this photo in hand?

  • この写真は1930年代の松原神社が写った貴重な物です。
  • 著作権の侵害は絶対にありません!
  • 他に著作権を主張する人間は存在しません。
  • This photo is a valuable thing that reflected the Matsubara shrine of the 1930s.
  • Copyright infringement Absolutely not!
  • Man who claims the copyright of this photo does not exist, except for me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaztima109 (talk • contribs) 08:31, 23 May 2015‎ (UTC)

File:Shri Ram Group.gif

Dear Sir, We are the owner and promoter of shriram institute of technology and the described file exsit to us with copyright to us there fore we wanted to add the file to the wikipedia page. So, Please undelete the File

Ketan Kothari Software Engineer Shri Ram Institute of Technology Jabalpur — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sritgroupjabalpur (talk • contribs) 09:41, 23 May 2015‎ (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As noted in the deletion comment, the image appears at with "Copyright © 2015 SRIT. All Rights Reserved." Policy therefore requires that the actual copyright holder send a free license to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:33, 23 May 2015 (UTC)