Last modified on 23 August 2014, at 09:36

Commons:Undeletion requests


Other languages:
العربية • ‎Deutsch • ‎English • ‎español • ‎français • ‎magyar • ‎日本語 • ‎polski • ‎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

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

File:ARA Belgrano sinking.jpg

Hello, i found that the file File:ARA Belgrano sinking.jpg was deleted with the assumption it has copyright by AP wich is not true, since on 1984 the argentine autor of the photo (Martin F. Sgut) did take legal actions and a judge of a New York court ruled that the photos were stolen from him, the real autor. The photo was originally taken by "Capitán de fragata Martín F. Sgut" (Argentine Navy, Frigate captain, Martin F. Sgut) and was stolen and then published illegally at the US. and its under public domain on Argentina. because it was published on argentina (one of the many that punblished it on argentina) may 13, 1982 on the Argentine megazine "revista Gente" (numnero extraordinario/special edition) you can see the photo on the magazine cover at this website that collect covers from magazines here [1] buth even that you can find that photo published in argentina and since those US publications had it ilegaly, then they never had any copyright over that photo.

the same apply to any other photo of the Belgrano sinking, since he did take several photos and he was the only one taking pictures so there is no place for doubts.

you can read here (spanish), but the info its all over the web and if anyone know how to search through NY Court files it should not be that hard to find those records,

here you can see the photo used citing the true autor

is so obvious as you can see on this Daily Mail Australia news site that the photo is public domain, as you can see on the article i link bellow every photo is with a copyright on the bottom corner BUT the one taken from Martin Sgut.

the photo is this one File:ARA Belgrano sinking.jpg and where i foudn why it was deleted is this link here Commons:Deletion_requests/File:ARA_Belgrano_sinking.jpg

i hope that i did gather all needed info to futfill all it was needed to restore the photo and give proper recognition to the original autor even if it is under public domain and does not need to, will be great to let ppl know who did take the picture here at commons.

the licence should PD-AR-Photo

BTWː the autor, Argentine Navy, frigate captain, Martin F. Sgut, died on january 4, 2010 --WiZaRd SaiLoR (talk) 20:00, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support I've read the links provided by Wizard Sailor and seem to clarify that the copyright belongs to captain Sgut. Therefore, according to {{PD-AR-Photo}}, it's in the public domain in Argentina. As the picture was published in Argentina on 13 May 1982 and in the US on 8 May 1982, it can be covered by one of the exceptions of the URAA applicability (Works simultaneously published in the US and abroad (defined as publication in the US within 30 days) are not affected.). Best regards --Discasto talk | contr. | analysis 22:26, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
It's IMO worth pointing out for the record that if the publication in the US was 'pirated' (without the permission of the copyright owner), which is apparently the case, then it would not count... publication must be legal. Revent (talk) 23:06, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support I pointed this out during the original deletion request, AP couldn't have copyright. WCMemail 22:30, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Unfortunately, due to the age of the case and the vagueness of the description of the venue (just 'a New York court') it's probably not possible to locate the actual decision online... it was probably a federal court case, and predates the electronic archives by well over a decade. My attempts to find it, at least, were unsuccessful, but we can probably proceed on the basis of RS articles documenting the decision. Seems fairly clearcut, tbh. Revent (talk) 22:58, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
I also make some searches and only found Spanish-speaking references (mainly Argentinean and Uruguayan news papers). They're mainstream newspapers so that I think they're reliable references. My only concern relates to URAA. If the US edition is "pirate" (it was done without the consent of the copyright owner), URAA would bee applicable, wouldn't be? --Discasto talk | contr. | analysis 00:54, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment i dont know the judge name, but the info from the links i found, and already provided, state that on 1984 Captain Sgut, did start legal actions on "those NY courts" aganist The New York Times, Newsweek, Associated Press and an agency called Gamma-Liasson. maybe this may help to search--WiZaRd SaiLoR (talk) 03:06, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
@WiZaRd SaiLoR: The (presumably) relevant online archive only goes back to 1996 (unfortunately). To get the actual ruling would require a request for a search of paper archives, but we can 'presume' that the reporting in reliable sources of the judgement was accurate (i.e. that AP does not own the photo). Given that, the photo seems to be obviously PD in Argentina, the only real question is if it is not PD in the in the US because of the URAA. Revent (talk) 11:56, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Restored: {{PD-AR-Photo}}. Yann (talk) 09:34, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

This undeletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Russian FOP cases

Due to the generosity of the State Duma (they have cancelled and took away all the copyrights of all the architectors) we may undelete those masterpieces.

As soon as the Russian architect cannot claim any rights anymore, these images appear to be free. --PereslavlFoto (talk) 23:36, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

@PereslavlFoto: For the sake of non-admin watchers (who cannot see the images) can you possibly give a bit more context please? (like the name of the architect, or a link to the Duma ruling?) Thanks in advance. Revent (talk) 23:44, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support architecture, Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sculpture. While I know that Russia has recently revised its copyright law to allow FOP for architecture, that is as far as it went, I think. As in the USA, sculpture is not covered by FOP, so some of these -- the buildings -- should be restored, but not the sculpture and other non-architectural works.
    • As a practical matter, I would close this as not done and ask that PereslavlFoto submit a new list that does not include sculptures. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 00:43, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
      • Sorry, Jim, I removed Rimskaya sculptures. AFAIK, now there are only buildings here. Years ago I asked to delete those files because of the previous law conditions. Last spring State Duma changed the 1276 article of Civil code, see the actual text. --PereslavlFoto (talk) 01:19, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
        • I've restored the images from this list that comply with {{FoP-Russia}}, and left notes next to the ones that don't. File:Kostyushko hospital4.JPG doesn't exist, and I don't see any other images of that building in the uploader's deleted contribs. INeverCry 02:22, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done: All files that qualify under {{FoP-Russia}} have been restored. INeverCry 19:39, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Saint Takla Haymanot.JPG

Why this high quality image was deleted when it was used to illustrate article in wikipedia? Its my drawing and I gave permission to publish it on commons. Its the only modern drawing of this saint on commons! Pls restore. --Zakharii 01:31, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As noted at the DR, Commons does not keep personal art from artists who are not notable. The usual test of notability is an article on one of the WPs, although Google hits showing independent gallery or museum shows of the artist's work will also suffice.
I note that the sig above links to a non-existent username (User:Roman Zacharij), which redirects to User:Roman Z. Please change your sig so that it links to your actual name as the way it is now is misleading and violates Commons rules against using multiple names. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:32, 2 March 2015 (UTC)


It appears AndyTheGrump disagrees with my viewpoint and is trying to censor while citing copyright infringement.

He does not recognize the author's permission to use work given here [[2]], which was provided with the photo.

If there is any action you can take to help protect my work from AndyTheGrump, I would appreciate it.

Dcrsmama (talk) 11:42, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The cited page says:
"All the information is presented free of charge as a public service so there are no fees or charges of any type."
This far from being freely licensed, which is required for Commons. It is clear that the cited site does not check copyrights and that users are free to post material from other sources that may or may not have a copyright. The first article on the site that I clicked on was lifted in its entirety from a copyrighted newspaper web site without even a credit on the summary page. There is no reason to believe that the same is not true of the deleted image. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:06, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

This undeletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Files uploaded by Timseman

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Ticket:2015011410005868 confirms that User:Timseman is the copyright owner of above images and content associated with Wacky Bones and related books and images. Jee 12:00, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Jkadavoor: Please add the ticket. INeverCry 19:49, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Bild hält sich an die gesetzlichen Bestimmungen eines Bildzitates

Das Bild ist ein Bildzitat aus einem Youtube-Video von de:Ken Jebsen und ist entsprechend für diesen Artikel gedacht. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neodraccir (talk • contribs) 15:17, 2 March 2015‎ (UTC)

Sorry, Neodraccir, Bildzitate sind derzeit weder auf Commons noch lokal in der deutssprachigen Wikipedia erlaubt. Siehe dazu auch de:Wikipedia:Umfragen/Bildzitat. --El Grafo (talk) 15:25, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Files deleted by JuTa

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: The image is taken from a document that is freely available on the web. This image is taken form a manuscript found at : Igargurevich (talk) 21:28, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment 'Freely available' does not mean compatible with free commons licensing system. Can you provide further information about the document? On the other hand, what does the document you point out have to do with your request? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Discasto (talk • contribs)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment, same question, I don't recall controversional "JuTa deleted something" cases, and I'd try user talk before COM:UNDEL. –Be..anyone (talk) 00:21, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

This undeletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Daniel Peddle 2014. jpg

File:Daniel Peddle 2014. jpg This file is self owned. I was not able to get the source correct with the editing tools. I would like to use {{own}} as the source and {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} as liscensing. This was first time uploading a picture and am not sure of correct formats. Agpingle (talk) 23:43, 2 March 2015 (UTC)March 2, 2015

No undeletion discussion before a successful upload followed by an also successful deletion, please. I've switched your templates to code examples, looks good so far, for further questions check out the Help desk, Upload help, VPCopyright, or similar until something actually was deleted here. –Be..anyone (talk) 00:46, 3 March 2015 (UTC)