Wikimedia Commons

Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2015-05

< Commons:Undeletion requests‎ | Archive


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

File:Die Zeit wird kommen, 2007, Uwe Schmidt.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: we have a permission via OTRS-ticket:2015032410003463. Emha (talk) 09:42, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Done -FASTILY 20:49, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Intel Pentium P6200

A bot deleted it and I don't know why. Can you restore it?

Thanks!

Ferferga (talk) 13:07, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

 Not done COM:NETCOPYRIGHT -FASTILY 20:49, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

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

File:IMG_0586_Warm.jpg / File:Douglas Pitt.jpg

Reason: Hi, I am working multiple freelance jobs and I was in contact with people who actually directed this personal session and am crediting all the rights to the owner which would happen to be the photographer. I have permission to use this file. You guys removed the picture which was titled File: IMG_0586_Warm.jpg. I am not claiming to own any ownership to this photo as the rights belong to the owner Attilio D'Agostino. If you could please restore the photo, it would be greatly appreciated. This was not some random photo I found on the internet, it was sourced through people that were directing the photography session. Thank you.

--Thekevinsmith (talk) 16:04, 30 April 2015 (UTC) Kevin Smith 4/30/15

Please send an email to OTRS and explain your situation to them. If all is found to be in order, they will restore the file for you -FASTILY 20:49, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

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

File:2005 World Championships in Athletics 4.jpg.JPG

Hi, I couldn't figure out the reason why the file File:2005 World Championships in Athletics 4.jpg.JPG was deleted. The deletion of that original somewhat breaks the continuity between it and the cropped version File:2005 World Championships in Athletics2.jpg. Commons:Deletion requests/File:2005 World Championships in Athletics 4.jpg.JPG doesn't seem to make much sense. I can't see the deleted file, so maybe there was a copyrighted element visible or something, but if no reason is found, could the file be undeleted? (Although perhaps the extra ".JPG" could be removed from the file name.) -- Asclepias (talk) 19:21, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Done, because I can't figure out why I deleted it either (not to mention, it was over 3 years ago!) -FASTILY 20:49, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

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

VSV Unihockey Logo.jpeg

Wiederherstellung des Bildes VSV Unihockey Logo

Das Logo wurde von mir als Vorstandsmitglied des VSV Unihockey im Jahr 2013 entworfen und ist das offizielle, vom Verein freigegebene Logo des VSV Unihockey. Es liegt somit keine Urheberrechtsverletzung vor. Bitte um Wiederherstellung des Bildes.

--Midi444 (talk) 07:45, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Please send an email to OTRS and explain your situation to them. If all is found to be in order, they will restore the file for you -FASTILY 09:26, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File=10_2014-12-15_0_78998_ac09e601_orig.jpg

This photo belongs to Voina group. I'm the redaktor of FREE VOINA supported site and have all permissions to use it. I'm kindly ask you to return this illustration back.

Please send an email to OTRS and explain your situation to them. If all is found to be in order, they will restore the file for you -FASTILY 09:26, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

To clarify the situation, user:Kozkino uploaded several images taken by different cameras and by different people, as obvious from EXIF and other data; most of them are also hosted on the web. OTRS permission is necessary. Materialscientist (talk) 09:51, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Idar Ulstein.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: File deleted even if there was a valid ticket. The tickets involved is 2015043010012172 (present/last), 2012050210001641 (start), and 2012062610004361 (valid ticket/missing follow up). The missing follow up is at ticket id 6597921#7722341. All tickets are in the info-no queue and in Norwegian. I assume this is a no brainer and adds back the reference to the fila at nowiki. [1] [2] Jeblad (talk) 09:27, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Done, but for the record, the file has never been tagged with {{PermissionOTRS}}. -FASTILY 09:35, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, the error is in the OTRS handling. A response was without any ticket number and got lost. Jeblad (talk) 09:39, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Professor Bashir Al-Hashimi.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Permission received via OTRS (Ticket:2015020510019556 ). --Mdann52talk to me! 12:39, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Mdann52: . Green Giant (talk) 12:47, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:McLord Magrao - LUNGS Faraway music video.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Permission received via OTRS (Ticket:2015021410000576). --Mdann52talk to me! 12:43, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Mdann52: Green Giant (talk) 12:49, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Bavaria S.A..png

Also:

The File does not meet the threshold of originality set by the Colombian government guidelines. See Commons:Threshold_of_originality#Colombia for more details about the threshold of originality of Colombia.

Yours sincerely, Andres Felipe Carrillo 17:49 01 MAY 2015 (EST)

 Not done Jim is right. These are more complex than required for PD-textlogo. Yann (talk) 07:47, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Suzy for Bean Pole accessories Summer 2015 collection 01.JPG, and two other files

The source of the photos is http://beanpoleblog.tistory.com/161. As you can see from the license icon at the end of the article, they are released under cc-by-4.0; also, the website is the official blog of the brand, and it's listed among the external links on Bean Pole website. --Chiyako92 (talk) 12:59, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

 Oppose I don't read Korean, so I may have missed something, but "CC" appears on the cited page only in the word "Accessory" and I don't see any Creative Commons icons. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:30, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

@-revi: . Perhaps you can take a look? Natuur12 (talk) 13:41, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Looks fine, but I'm phone now, so can someone execute the undeletion on behalf of me? It is official blog of a company and clearly has a CCL tag. (Howto find CC icon: refer to COM:VPC. (Maybe I must creae a guide for those who are not familiar with tistory.com...)) — regards, Revi 14:27, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Revi, sorry, but I'm lost. There doesn't seem to be anything at the cited VPC page that helps and neither the page itself or the Google translation have anything like "clearly has a CCL tag". .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:05, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
COM:VPC#Images from Wasabcon II discusses about tistory images. — regards, Revi 01:40, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
I find this HTML code at the source page (http://beanpoleblog.tistory.com/161):

<a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.ko" target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none"> <img id="ccl-icon-161-0" class="entry-ccl-by" src="http://i1.daumcdn.net/cfs.tistory/resource/548/static/admin/editor/ccl_black01.png" onmouseover="tistoryCcl.show(this, 3)" onmouseout="tistoryCcl.hide()" alt="저작자 표시"/>

I think "http://i1.daumcdn.net/cfs.tistory/resource/548/static/admin/editor/ccl_black01.png" is identical to CC-BY icon. --Puramyun31 (talk) 00:40, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done. It is clear that the work is licensed under CCL. — regards, Revi 01:40, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Sean Costello - 2006 Photo by Anthony Pepitone.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: In this upload the user makes clear that Anthony Pepitone is just the real name of User:Dxede5x ("author=user Dxede5x aka Anthony Pepitone - Photographer"). These are own work. 99of9 (talk) 04:07, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done No answer, so no objection. Yann (talk) 08:03, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Boeing RC-135 Model.jpg

This picture was made by my self, with my own camera from my own model of a RC-135 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hornet Driver (talk • contribs) 20:16, 1 May 2015‎ (UTC)

-Reopened -- Whoa -- this was open for exactly five minutes.

 Support, depending If I understand Hornet Driver correctly, it is a model that he made, so he may be perfectly free to photograph it and upload the image here. HD, is that correct? Was it from a kit or from scratch? .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:38, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello Jameslwoodward, sorry I had forgotten to put in my signature.
Jim, I have made (by myself) the picture with my own camera, from this model i own. I did not build it from zero,it is handmade and I bought it and finished it. The photo is not made in comercial motivation (to sell such models or so9 it is made to use it for any topics with B707, respective for allt opics of SIGINT /ELINT aircraft, rep. RC-135R on wikipedia). Asi see it it is no voilation of copyright in this case because it is not a copy of a real Boeing RC-135R. Hornet Driver (talk) 17:57, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 Oppose Sorry, Hornet Driver (and Fastily) -- I misunderstood. The model is a work of art and has a copyright as a sculpture. Note that a real Boeing airplane does not have a copyright because it is utilitarian, but the model does because it is not utilitarian. Transfer of a copyright requires a specific written agreement -- an ordinary bill of sale for the work will not do it, so it is very rare that the owner of an art work (other than the creator or his heirs) owns the copyright. Unless you can prove that the model maker transferred the copyright to you, your image infringes on the model maker's copyright and cannot be kept here. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:11, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

But I was the customer, without my order Währe this model has not been established (it is not a mass product but handmade).Hornet Driver (talk) 12:24, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

It doesn't matter whether it was mass produced or custom made to your order -- in any case it has a copyright which came into being when it was created. As I said above, unless the model maker gave you a formal written assignment of the copyright, separate from any bill of sale, the copyright still belongs to the model maker and the image infringes on his rights. In order to restore the image, the model maker himself must send a free license directly to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:12, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

OK, I understand. I withdraw my request.Hornet Driver (talk) 21:06, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Withdrawn by nom -FASTILY 05:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:REMODELACION ESTADIO GUILLERMO PLAZAS ALCID.png

quiero que porfavor no me borren la foto, ha sido casi imposible subir algun archivo.gracias — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huilamiguel (talk • contribs)

 Not done copyvio -FASTILY 05:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Matsui and Yu Takahashi.jpg

Please undelete this file.The permission from the copyright holder has been granted as well as the ticket# given by the Volunteer Response Team of Wiki Commons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RenRen070193 (talk • contribs)


Please undelete this file. The permission has been granted by the owner as well as the ticket# has been also given by the Volunteer Response Teams of Wiki Commons--RenRen070193 10:21, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

  • Message from RenRen070193 (talk · contribs) copied from my talk page. No idea why he/she wrote it there instead of here: "Hi!Jmabel.I sad to say that I can't remember the first two ticket no. I received because I deleted the confirmation of receipt together with the ticket no. in the subject. But first, I sent a message to OTRS twice.That is why I sent a message for a third time and finally I received another ticket no., which is [Ticket#2015050310002357] — Preceding unsigned comment added by RenRen070193 (talk • contribs) " - Jmabel ! talk 17:24, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
    • I don't normally handle OTRS, but I'll assume that is accurate and undelete. If I'm wrong, my apologies, and someone else can take over the situation. - Jmabel ! talk 17:27, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done OTRS will restore the file once they process the email you sent. @Jmabel: OTRS tags may only be applied by an OTRS member -FASTILY 05:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Estadio_fiscal_de_punta_arenas_2.jpg

Como autoridad del Concejo Municipal y en el cargo de concejal y estando subrogando al Alcalde del municipio subí esta foto que es de Propiedad del Municipio de Punta Arenas, Es decir yo, en el ejercicio de mi cargo coloque esta foto que es del archivo municipal, y sobre la cual puedo disponer plenamente, De hecho ustedes mismos me tienen en Wikipedia como representante de la comuna de Punta Arenas, y sin embargo borran las fotos que dentro de las facultades que me da la ley organica constitucional 18695 de Chile puedo ejercer este es el link de wikipedia donde consta mi cargo http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punta_Arenas esto demuestra mi subrogancia cuando subi la foto http://www.laprensaaustral.cl/cronica/en-bochornosa-sesin-concejo-municipal-aprob-reconocimiento-al-cl-49909 http://www.laprensaaustral.cl/cronica/proyectan-instalar-parque-elico-en-agua-fresca--48576 como pueden ver esta foto tiene en su costado superior derecho el logo de la Municipalidad de Punta Arenas, y fue tomado por un dron del equipo de comunicaciones de nuestro municipio y por ende puede usarse por las autoridades para difundir nuestras obras incluyendo nuestro estadio, el estadio municipal de la ciudad, POR SI ACASO: EN CHILE como en todo el mundo quien ejerce el cargo de alcalde, aunque sea subrogando, es quien representa al municipio. Por lo que le solicito reponer la foto de nuestro estadio https://www.google.cl/search?q=estadio+municipal+punta+arenas&espv=2&biw=1366&bih=659&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=viVGVcj5MoeYgwTtp4GgBQ&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAmoVChMIyNDM69mlxQIVB8yACh3tUwBU#imgrc=1xj1vcp-26YyfM%253A%3BIBpJII0gNd_QxM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi%252F2TljcQ67quM%252Fmaxresdefault.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.youtube.com%252Fwatch%253Fv%253D2TljcQ67quM%3B1920%3B1080

Cualquiera puede afirmar ser una autoridad. Para poder verificarlo, tenemos una forma de proporcionar las pruebas necesarias. Puede echarle un vistazo a Commons:OTRS y a Commons:Modelos de mensajes. Allí indican cuál es el procedimiento para proporcionarnos la autorización debida. Un cordial saludo --Discasto talk 14:25, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
 Comment La autorización debe referirse a todos los ficheros subidos (aquí). Saludos --Discasto talk 14:36, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Please send an email to OTRS and explain your situation to them. If all is found to be in order, they will restore the file for you -FASTILY 05:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Atlassian Logo - Extra Large.png

I posted an updated version of the Atlassian logo for usage on Atlassian's Wikipedia page and it was deleted due to a copyright violation. The deleted file was taken from Atlassian's Media page where the logo is published for media-use (https://www.atlassian.com/company/press). I believe this is sufficient to allow the file to be undeleted on Wikimedia Commons.

In addition, the file I am trying to replace (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Atlassian-logo.svg) was allowed and is (from a content perspective) identical and therefore my upload should be allowed for the same reasons.

The reference to the logo that has been deleted is: File:Atlassian Logo - Extra Large.png The previous logo (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Atlassian-logo.svg) is outdated and not the current Atlassian logo.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark9425 (talk • contribs)

 Not done per above -FASTILY 05:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Mi Sueño y Pesadilla Cover.jpg

Como esta imagen puede violar derechos de autor, si tiene la licencia adecuada de Flickr ????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by HipHopMexico (talk • contribs)

Flickrwashing involved, per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by HipHopMexico. Gunnex (talk) 10:33, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
 Oppose For those not familiar with our jargon, please see COM:License laundering. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:37, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done per above -FASTILY 05:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Suluq Council Logo.jpg

otrs reviced ticket:2015022310010557. Thanks in advanced. Vitor MazucoMsg 23:59, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Done -FASTILY 05:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

Makt_-_låt_2.ogg

Please, undelete

This file is our own work. It's a piece of music made by class Es13, Katedralskolan i Skara, meant to be used on Wikiversity as part of the course Makt och uppror. I can find no reason for the deletion in the log. Idunius (talk) 13:00, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

I wrote to Ylva Pettersson with a filled out permission form, and asked to get a copy back from each of the three. (Link: works only for agents ticket:2015050410012497 ) If that happens, I'll undelete, and add the permission tag. If someone else decides permission is not needed, please let me know show I can advise them. --Sphilbrick (talk) 21:22, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Could I just ask: In what cases is permission needed, even while uploading Own Work? Could you please give me a link to the guideline for giving permission for Own Work, so I can know how to avoid this problem in the future? I have never needed to add permission when I have uploaded images e.g.. It would be great to know. In the Upload-Wizard, when you state it's your own work, permission is never asked for. If it is needed, the Permission box should appear in the Wizard. Idunius (talk) 05:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Permission if a work was published previously outside Commons, unless the copy here is obviously the original. Regards, Yann (talk) 07:59, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done as per Jim. Yann (talk) 07:59, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

1985_BUENOS_DIAS_SR._ARIZTÍA.jpg

Não tinha ainda colocado a licença. Trata-se de uma pintura de meu marido, a quem estou a tentar fazer uma página na WIKIPEDIA. Licença - CC BY-SA 3.0 Noémia Simões de Ariztía, 4/Maio/2015

Please send an email to OTRS and explain your situation to them. If all is found to be in order, they will restore the file for you -FASTILY 05:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Aberdeen Proving Grounds Pilot Plant.png

I realize that I do not have the license to upload this image, but this chapter is for a class project. Would you mind allowing me to use it until the end of May? I can personally delete the image after the assignment has been graded if necessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sz2fw (talk • contribs) 19:02, 4 May 2015‎ (UTC)

 Oppose No. We have no provision for hosting copyright violations, no matter how good the cause. Suerely you cannot get a good mark on a class assignment if you are breaking the rules here? .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:02, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done per above -FASTILY 05:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Logo_fg2a.jpg

I thought I had written down the explanation as of why I believe the logo should be allowed. As a recap I mentioned on another discussion (that I can not seem to find) that I would try sending an email to FG2A in order to get their approval to use their logo on the wikipedia page I helped create.

Below is the response from FG2A allowing us to use their logo and saying how happy they are about our initiative.

Bonjour Michael,

Tout d’abord nous souhaitons vous remercier pour votre contribution Wikipédia, nous sommes très reconnaissant que vous nous ayez choisi afin de développer la présence Wikipedia des acteurs du monde de l’assurance. Comme vous nous l’avez demandé, vous trouverez ci-joint, notre logo officiel que vous pourrez utiliser avec notre accord sur la page Wikipédia. Merci encore pour cette aimable initiative qui se fait trop rare de nos jours.

Cordialement, Arnaud Hozatte Vice-Président FG2A

Please make sure to let me know if you need any other information.

Best,

Michael — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaeltetoux (talk • contribs) 19:11, 4 May 2015‎ (UTC)

 Oppose Both Commons and the WPs require that all images be free for any use by anybody, including commercial use. Permission such as this one, for WP only, is not acceptable. In order to restore this logo, the copyright holder must send a free license using the procedure at OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:00, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done per above -FASTILY 05:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Shaun Bonett.jpg

Please undelete the photo Shaun Bonett.jpg as full permission has been given to use this photo under Creative Commons licence at the following web page: http://www.precision.com.au/news-and-media/image-library

--JohBD (talk) 02:33, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

 Oppose In addition to its formal copyright notice, the cited page says:

"This page provides approved editorial photography and other images for use on any media platform under the creative commons licence."
There are many Creative Commons licenses, only some of which are acceptable on Commons. The fact that the sentence does not capitalize the words further confuses the issue. Restoring this image will require either that the cited page is changed to show a specific acceptable CC license or that the actual copyright holder send a free license to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:10, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done per above -FASTILY 05:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:MALLI MASTAN.png

the picture is not taken directly from any web.I created it with photoshop. he is dead ,so no copyright issue rise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Palagiri (talk • contribs) 03:59, 5 May 2015‎ (UTC)

  •  Oppose The photograph has a copyright. The fact that the subject is dead is irrelevant. The photograph will be under copyright until around 2075. Your image is a derivative work of the photograph and infringes on its copyright.
There is also the fact that the combination of the photograph and the flag makes an image that is not generally useful for educational purposes and is therefore out of scope for Commons. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:04, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done protected by copyright until 2075 -FASTILY 05:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Logo Wydawnictwa Skrzat.jpg

I am currently working for Wydawnictwo Skrzat (children book publisher) - uploaded logo to update polish Publisher wiki entry. It is a public logo of Publisher. I don't know of any copyright infringements that might apply. --Vanwartith (talk) 09:03, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

  •  Oppose With limited exceptions, none of which apply here, all created works, including logos, have copyrights until they expire. Therefore it is Commons policy that we must have a free license from the actual owner of the copyright. Since that is the publisher, not you personally, policy further requires that an authorized representative of the publisher must send a free license directly to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:52, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done per above -FASTILY 05:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

Deleted images from the article Попов, Иван Васильевич (политик) (1894-1952)

Hello, please undelete photos from the article Попов, Иван Васильевич (политик) (1894-1952):

These are anonymous images of 1920-1930s.

According to the rules of Wikipedia (Commons:Licensing): If the work is anonymous or a collaborative work (e.g. an encyclopedia), it is typically in the public domain 70 years after the date of the first publication. Yokki (обсуждение) Yokki (talk) 13:05, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

  •  Oppose Although your world-wide generalization is not correct, it is true that anonymous Russian works are PD 70 years after publication. However that leaves two things for you to prove with respect to these images. First, that they were actually anonymous -- the fact that you do not know who the photographer was does not make them "anonymous" as the law means it. Second, the copyright time begins with publication, not creation and, therefore, you must prove that they were, in fact, published more than 70 years ago. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:48, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Specification for Russia: In Russia works published prior to 1 January 1943, may also be in the public domain if: they were published anonymously or under a pseudonym before January 1, 1943, and the name of the author did not become known during 50 years starting from January 1 of the year following the year of its lawful disclosure. Yokki (talk) 16:40, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

True, but, as I said above, you must prove both that they were actually published (not merely kept in a photo album) and that the publication was anonymous (the fact that you don't know the name of the photographer does not make it an anonymous work). .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:59, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

+ Who is owns the photos taken in the photo studio? Yokki (talk) 17:02, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

The copyright to a formal portrait taken in a studio is almost always owned by the photographer or his heirs. The only major exception is the United Kingdom for much of the 20th century. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:59, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done per Jim -FASTILY 05:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Netroom 3 box fb.jpg

The original copyright to this image was abandoned by the owner in 1998. I was an officer of the copyright owner at the time and can attest to this fact. No copyright is on file. see: http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?Search_Arg=netroom&Search_Code=TALL&PID=ksRnCWoSQ_f7L-z6j-TVKuHH-5QC&SEQ=20150505113911&CNT=25&HIST=1 The trademark for the image has been abandoned and is considered "DEAD": see http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4809:41y7mr.3.4. The image submitted was an original I created from materials at hand. ScholarWarrior (talk) 15:43, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

 Oppose Copyrights, unlike trademarks, cannot be abandoned. The trademark status is irrelevant to the copyright. In the United States after 1989, no registration is necessary for there to be an effective copyright, so the fact that your search does not show one is also irrelevant. The copyright is probably owned by whoever succeeded to the rights of Helix Software, but even if the owner cannot be determined, that simply makes it an orphan copyright. Policy forbids Commons hosting orphans. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:53, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
I was an officer of Helix and it's successor McAfee and therefore I can attest to it's abandonment. In any event, copyrights can be considered abandoned. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abandonment_%28legal%29 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abandonware In the case of software it is generally considered abandoned when it will no longer operate on current hardware and when the company ceases support and development activity on the code. Thirdly, the image in question is descriptive and identifying and thus useable under fair use, just as if I were taking an image of the box to sell on e-bay.ScholarWarrior (talk) 16:02, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
You should read Abandonment_(legal)#Abandonment_of_copyright again. It makes it clear that abandonment of a copyright is very difficult and must be done explicitly. It does not happen automatically when a corporation is dissolved.
Also reread Abandonware. The second sentence explicitly says
"Although such software is usually still under copyright.."
That is precisely why you cannot upload it here -- it is still under copyright. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:06, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done per Jim. Also, fair use is forbidden on Commons -FASTILY 05:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Helix Software Co Logo.jpg

First, this is fair use of the logo, which can be used without permission to identify the company in question and to distinguish it from other "Helix" companies.

Second, the copyrights and trademarks fcr the ompany name, logo and related artwork were abandoned when the company was sold in 1998. I was an officer of both the original company and the successor and can attest to this. The trademark is considered DEAD by the USPTO see: http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4803:1hzpe7.2.1 I created the specific image in question directly. ScholarWarrior (talk) 15:54, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the information and the research. Commons can't accept Fair Use images. Please see COM:L. The copyright to the work is unaffected by dissolution and is owned by the creator unless it has been transferred in writing to another person or company. I wasn't able to access the USPTO link, but the status of the trademark is not relevant to this discussion. If you are the original creator, please follow the process of COM:OTRS. Upon verification, the image will be restored. --Walter Siegmund (talk) 16:49, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done per above -FASTILY 05:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:OR Chub delisted.JPG

File:OR Chub delisted.JPG My name is Camila Duarte. I am an internet at Northwest Habitat Institute. NHI want to created this page in-house I am acting as an extension of NHI as an intern. I have expressed consent to publish these images on Wikipedia by Kathleen O'Neill. She holds the rights of this images. Camila Duarte. May 5, 2015--CreateWikipg (talk) 16:53, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Please send an email to OTRS and explain your situation to them. If all is found to be in order, they will restore the file for you -FASTILY 05:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Abdulxair.jpg

Please, undelete this file. This PD-Art probably old enough --Xusinboy Bekchanov (talk) 17:18, 2 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Your upload claimed it as your "own work" and dated it as 2015. You are saying it is old enough to be public domain. I take it, then, that it is not your own work. What is the source? What is the approximate date? Etc. - Jmabel ! talk 05:22, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
@Xusinboy Bekchanov: Could you provide more information? What's the date of this work? What's the source? Who's the author? Thanks, Yann (talk) 08:07, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done Done. Thanks Эlcobbola. Yann (talk) 16:17, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Logo Tumbador.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: As mentioned before deletion, I, Hans Sterkendries, am the creator of this logo and have released it under CC-license. This is not a generic logo: it was made exclusively for Tumbador vzw Hanssterkendries (talk) 10:52, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Logo Tumbador version 2.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: As mentioned before deletion, I, Hans Sterkendries, am the creator of this logo and have released it under CC-license. This is not a generic logo: it was made exclusively for Tumbador vzw Hanssterkendries (talk) 10:54, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Amphithéâtre Cogeco - Vue Ouest - Marc Gibert.jpg

User:Basvb deleted this after a request from an anonymous IP user who claimed that the photographer wanted to have a smaller size here. I object first on the grounds that we don't ever react to claims made by IP users that a third party wants a deletion -- the actual copyright holder must send a notice to OTRS -- and second that the original license covered all sizes of the image and the photographer's changing his mind cannot be effective against the irrevocable license. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:46, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

I did however not delete the file based on the arguments of the IP-contributor but per "I think for this file OTRS-permission would be needed, the uploader might not have the rights to release this image". It is a high quality photo and from the earlier discussion the uploader does not seem to be the photographer. Basvb (talk) 18:49, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
  •  Oppose It is clear from the sourcing (adecom.ca) and the comment by the original uploader ("The photograph (who has the copyright) want us to diffuse a smaller image size than the one we put") that they are not the author. They may indeed be an agent of the author, but that is a circumstance for which we require OTRS permission. Basvb was exactly right that OTRS permission would be needed for this file. Yes, the size issue is not relevant and the license is irrevocable, but we do not yet have, and have never had, support for the license as required by COM:OTRS. Эlcobbola talk 18:55, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:LizSolari001.jpg

I am requesting the undeletion of this files as they are under the required Creative Commons license. See here: http://lizsolari.com/web/imageneswiki/

Thanks,

--Adyouteam (talk) 22:17, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done as per Jim. Please fix the source and add a {{LicenseReview}} tag. Yann (talk) 18:13, 7 May 2015 (UTC) ✓ Done Thanks, Yann. Adyouteam, they still need categories. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:10, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:RobertSRivkin.jpg

Please undelete.Ticket#2015050410020004.Willy Weazley 19:02, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

@Willy Weazley: Done. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 13:23, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:DPD logo-red 2015.png

Diese Grafik ist das neue Logo des Zustellunternehmenes "DPD". Warum sollte dieses nicht verwendet werden, wenn bereits das ältere hochgeladen werden durfte? Ich würde gerne das neue Logo in den Wikipedia-Eintrag einbinden.

This graphic is the new logo of "DPD". Why should I aren't allowed to upload that, when the previously (the old) logo of DPD already is uploaded? I would use te new logo for the wikipedia-site.

//EDIT Now there is the old logo of dpd. but i want to upload the new dpd logo but ever when i wanna do this, the upload telled me, that duplicate was found and refer to this file: but the file was already removed and deleted. Help! --Ambromen (talk) 09:22, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

:I don't understand what you want. We have:
Except for the format, they appear to be identical. I have just put a {{Delete}} tag on the recent upload because it is identical to the SVG and there is no reason to have a new PNG when an SVG already exists. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:49, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:johnhostettler.jpg

This is a picture of John Hostettler taken by me. It was subsequently used for the side panel of his book. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gkjoyce (talk • contribs) 09:46, 6 May 2015‎ (UTC)

  • Even though your username matches that of the copyright owner -- so I'm sure this is fine -- user accounts are basically anonymous and we have had cases of people naming accounts to make it appear they are the author, I'm pretty sure. COM:OTRS is a mechanism to send a private email to verify the license on the image, sent from an email address identifiable with the author. It is unfortunately not fast, but that is our policy when it comes to material easily available on the Internet -- all too often it's just someone copying it here without permission. If the image (I can't see the deleted image) is a higher resolution than is available on the web, that can work too. But otherwise OTRS is the best way. Carl Lindberg (talk) 23:13, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: Please send permission to COM:OTRS Steinsplitter (talk) 16:30, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:NagercoilMontage2.jpg

Please Dont't delete this image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akashantony (talk • contribs)

 Not done per Elcobbola. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 14:29, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Laura Amy Schlitz.jpg

I do believe the source was stated, so I'm not sure why it was deleted. Myriad Pro (talk) 19:36, 6 May 2015 (UTC) Branch 5/6/15 3:30, Eastern Time

 Oppose There was no other source than "last.fm". Taivo (talk) 20:36, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim Steinsplitter (talk) 16:04, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:maggiehallahan.jpg

Photo maggiehallahan.jpg is a publicly posted photo on a blog: http://mulita.com/blog/?p=41 Isawoods (talk) 22:22, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

  •  Oppose image is clearly marked "Photograph © George A. Jardine" and would need to be released with a free licence by him. The fact that it's "public" is neither here nor there. Rodhullandemu (talk) 17:12, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: See COM:L Steinsplitter (talk) 16:31, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:The HourGlass(Front cover).JPG

I would like to know how the user that deleted my picture thinks he knows me. This was a picture of me, taken by my publicist, that depicts me, uploaded to my Wikimedia account. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HUSTLONIAN (talk • contribs) 16:33, 8 May 2015‎ (UTC)

 OpposeSince we have no way of knowing who User:HUSTLONIAN actually is and identity theft, both by fans and by vandals, is common here, policy requires that images of books, album covers and similar materials be separately licensed. In this case the photographer, your publicist, must send a free license using the procedure at OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:12, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: please send permission to COM:OTRS --Steinsplitter (talk) 17:00, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Chiefminister.jpg

This is a freely licensed image of an Australian politician. It was taken by a member of the politician's media office at my own request, and accompanied by an email which detailed the photographer, date and location of the image, as well as releasing it under the Creative Commons license. Perhaps I did not upload the permission information correctly, or in the correct location, thus resulting in the image being incorrectly tagged as lacking permission. Please undelete the image so that I can place the permission information in the correct location. --Yeti Hunter (talk) 07:33, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Please send the permission to permissions-commons@gmail.com. See COM:OTRS for the procedure. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:23, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: Please send permission to COM:OTRS --Steinsplitter (talk) 17:05, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Renault FT17 French Army WWI model.jpg

The initial argument of Commons:Deletion requests/File:Renault FT17 French Army WWI model.jpg « {{PD-ineligible}} does definitly not apply here. » is right but it doesn't seem to me a sufficient reason to delete this file. If I'm not mistaken, it should be kept per Commons:Copyright_rules_by_subject_matter#Vehicles (and Commons:Non-copyright restrictions) (otherwise, we should be consistent and delete nearly all the files in Category:Renault FT and most of Category:Vehicles).

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 13:13, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

+ ping INeverCry (talk · contribs)

 Oppose This image is copied from [3] which has a mention "COPYRIGHT © 2015 RESIGNATION MEDIA, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.". No author is mentioned, and there is no permission. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:29, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Ok, that's a valid reason (sorry I missed it). I withdraw my request. Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 14:21, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Sur_les_prés_salés_d'Arès.JPG

Erreur--Massy Jezabel (talk) 16:25, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Bonjour Massy Jezabel,
Cette page sert à demande la dé-suppression d'un fichier. Or ce fichier n'a pas été supprimé. Souhaitiez-vous le supprimer ? Et si oui pourquoi précisément ?
Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 17:11, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Non ce n'est pas ce fichier ! J'ai demandé la supression d'un fichier qui est en double avec pour titre un chenal]] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Massy Jezabel (talk • contribs)
D'accord, je viens de comprendre, j'ai supprimé File:Un chenal sur les prés salés d'Arès.JPG, doublon de File:Prés salés.jpg. Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 21:07, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:RENZO2.jpg

Buen día Quería indicar que el archivo RENZO2.jpg es una foto real de un individuo que sufrió el síndrome de koro el cual a sido documentado y expresa toda su colaboración para aportar con imágenes reales del síndrome de koro. Por lo que solicito que la imagen RENZO2.jpg no sea eliminada.

Gracias.

 Not done out of scope -FASTILY 03:36, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

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

MatjazPerc.png is my own work.

MatjazPerc.png is my own work. I noted www.matjazperc.com as the source because it is there I have uploaded the figure first. I am sorry for my mistake. Please undo the deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sloedit (talk • contribs) 12:18, 8 May 2015‎ (UTC)

 Oppose Because the image appeared previously on the Web without a free license, policy requires that the actual copyright holder (which may be you) send a free license to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:18, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Please send an email to OTRS and explain your situation to them. If all is found to be in order, they will restore the file for you -FASTILY 03:36, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Bizerte Old Port Tunisia.jpg

The photo that i uploaded is definately taken by me, my own phone. i dont see why could it be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArijJouJou (talk • contribs) 23:21, 8 May 2015‎ (UTC)

 Oppose The image appears at https://www.flickr.com/photos/hc-pa/10089637234/ with an explicit copyright notice, belonging to Flickr user HC Pahlig. If you are HC Pahlig, then the easiest thing to do is for you to change the license on Flickr. If you are not HC Pahlig, then you need to explain here how the image you have taken appears on Flickr. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:00, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Please send an email to OTRS and explain your situation to them. If all is found to be in order, they will restore the file for you -FASTILY 03:36, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Nina-C-Young.jpg

This file is the headshot of composer Nina C. Young. I am the composer and the owner of the copyright to this image. I grant free license.

Pawlusthecat (talk) 17:35, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Please send an email to OTRS and explain your situation to them. If all is found to be in order, they will restore the file for you -FASTILY 03:36, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Matsui and Yu Takahashi.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I sent a permission as Ticket#2015050310002357 .I revoke the deletion .I ask you to review and verify. RenRen070193 04:48, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Great, thanks for getting that done. OTRS will restore the file(s) once they process the email that was sent. -FASTILY 08:17, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

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

Files from Boston Public Library Flickr stream

Those 1910-1930 files have been deleted wihout any discussion because the sourse license is not allowed on Commons. It is true that the license given is foridden at Commons but those are US works created long before 1977 by Leslie Jones who died in 1967. I can't see a copyright notice at those images so perhaps {{PD-US-no notice}} fits. However, even if there is a notice they are created before 1966 and I can't find evidence that the copyright is renewed (someone with more skills than me should probably recheck this) so in that case {{PD-US-not renewed}} could be a match. This is not a clear to the cut case so they should not have been speedy deleted imho. Phtographs have been donated to the Boston Public Library in the early 70's. If anyone doubts that they have been published before 2008 (upload date at Flickr) than I would argue that the donation fits Commons:Publication#United_States and this was almost certainly without notice. Pinging @Fastily: (deleting admin), @1989: (nominated the files for deletion), @Metilsteiner: (uploader) and @Clindberg: (just want to hear his opinion). Natuur12 (talk) 15:37, 6 May 2015 (UTC)


I just looked at 1-2 files on Flickr and they appear to be the original negatives. No real reason they would ever have a copyright notice. It sounds like the negatives were kept private (i.e. not published) and given to the library in the 1970s. The page has a note that they are still copyrighted by Leslie Jones, which would indicate copyright was not transferred to the library. You would have to show that these negatives were distributed individually before 1989 to claim that copyright tag... I'm rather doubtful. If the entire collection was donated, that might conceivably have been considered publication, but you would just need one copyright notice on the entire collection. I doubt there is a requirement to then add a notice to the originals, particularly when you are trying to preserve the originals as much as possible. The odds are these are under copyright until the 2060s... or if not published until after 1978, then perhaps 2047. If not published before 2003, then probably 70pma, so 2037. If these photos were published back when they were taken, that might be a different matter (renewal etc.) but there is no evidence of that from just the library information. That just says his private photo collection (so perhaps never published) was donated to the library in the 1970s. Carl Lindberg (talk) 17:21, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Hmmm, I didn't know that one notice for the entire collection was enough. That changes things. Natuur12 (talk) 11:20, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
I think what Carl is saying is that either they are not published -- in which case the copyright will last a long time or that they were published by the act of donating them to the BPL. If the latter is true, then you have to consider the collection as a whole, just as you consider all the non-advertising content of a periodical as a whole, and, as with a periodical, one notice covers everything. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:06, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
 Comment can be closed as withdrawn. Natuur12 (talk) 14:45, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

See above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 16:36, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Hemlock Lake Winter HDR.jpg

This file was deleted because it was just a description page (i.e. no file attached), but according to the deletion log, the description identified it as being https://www.flickr.com/photos/21458522@N00/4272299887, which matches the filename and is licensed under CC-BY. Looks like the deleting admin could have just uploaded the image instead of deleting it. Nyttend (talk) 19:19, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

We get more than ten thousand new files every day, of which more than 1,400 must be deleted. 15 Admins do 90% of that work. If we had more active Admins, then we could afford to give special attention to situations like this, but as it is, the backlog is growing rapidly, in part because we have recently lost several very active Admins who got tired of snide remarks and complaints. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:32, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
Sounds like anyone could re-upload it, really. Carl Lindberg (talk) 20:52, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Re-uploaded the photo in about 30 seconds. Not that big of a deal >_> -FASTILY 01:47, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:konerzone.jpg to undelete

Hello,

I think I added enough information when uploading the image such as the below to not have anyone delete the picture.

- origin - when the picture was taken - the link where the picture is featured on the web, being konerzone.com (page BIO) - the fact that I am IN the picture and that I OWN the rights of this picture

I truly regret that people still find this info insufficient.

Thank you in advance for restoring the picture asap so that it's visible on the WIKI page I created yesterday: KONER.

Regards, Crazyniki

--Crazyniki (talk) 07:11, 11 May 2015 (UTC)


 Oppose First, you should read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest as it will directly affect your article on WP:EN.
I note that his image is small and very blurred. I'm not sure it is useful as I don't think anyone can recognize any of the people in it. The larger version at http://konerzone.com/contact/ is much better.
Since the image has appeared at http://konerzone.com/contact/ with an explicit copyright notice, policy requires that the copyright holder send a free license to OTRS. Since you claim to be the copyright holder, but are not the photographer, you will need to explain there how it is that you own the copyright -- as a general rule that remains with the photographer unless it is transferred with a written agreement. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:56, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: COM:OTRS permission needed. Steinsplitter (talk) 11:18, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Aberdeen Roughnecks AFC - New Logo (2015).png

I request that this image is undeleted. I was created by myself personally using an image software, is free to distribute and has no copyright attached (we are a community club that holds no marks etc).

 Not done: please send permission to COM:OTRS. Steinsplitter (talk) 17:35, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_People_(2015_film)#/media/File:Teaser_poster_for_%27Night_People%27._Designed_by_Paul_Barrett.jpg

I, Gerard Lough, am the copyright holder of the poster as I commissioned it to be created for my film NIGHT PEOPLE of which I am the director / producer.

Gerard Lough May 11th 2015

 Not done: Please send permission via mail to COM:OTRS --Steinsplitter (talk) 16:57, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Caricatura rafael núñez.jpg

Hello Miss Eugene. I am writing to request undeletion of the images I uploaded to Article Rafael Nunez (governor) because they are of my own making and is already the second time they are deleted. I am Argentine and I am the Governor Nunez great-grandson, so I uploaded the photos that are family property. I tried twice to enrich the article for the good of the whole community and honor of my great-grandfather, and I can not do it for the obstacles that makes me wikipedia. It has taken much time and labor to expand the product and place those images. I have done absolutely in good faith and following all the steps. I regret it so difficult for us, interested in building a better encyclopedia, upload information. I'm a great reader of wikipedia and I admire you and think every day you do an excellent job. But please let me upload these files at once, which has already frustrated me. I do not understand why that images are being deleted, but I hope this problem is solved. Thank you very much for your attention and sorry for bad English.Xwmjlwovp (talk) 03:07, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

  •  Oppose I doubt very much that "they are of my own making" is correct. Were you really the photographer for all of these images of your great-grandfather? The only politician I can find with that name is Rafael Núñez (politician), president of Colombia, who died in 1894, so if he is the subject, it is not possible that you were the photographer.
"family property" suggests that these images came from a family album and probably have never been published before. Because the laws are very different, we need to know -- is this the Colombian president? Or an Argentine? .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:35, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done Dubious/Unclear copyright status -FASTILY 07:16, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Hassan Sidqi Dajani Journalist, lawyer and politician from Jerusalem 1930s.jpg

This picture is not in copyright. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manjj (talk • contribs) 03:36, 11 May 2015‎ (UTC)

There has never been a file with that name on Commons. You have not uploaded any file with a similar name. Please give us the correct file name. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:41, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Did you mean File:Hassan Sidqi Dajani.jpg ? That file has not been deleted, nor even nominated for deletion, although the license tag is incorrect -- it should be {{PD-Israel}} instead as you say. Carl Lindberg (talk) 15:13, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Nothing to restore; no such file has ever existed on Commons -FASTILY 07:16, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

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

Request undeletion Martin_Doherty_(CHVRCHES).JPG

This photo was deleted despite me sending the required information via email on May 3. The photograph was taken by my friend Sarah Jeynes specifically for me last year, for my own use. There is no copyright, there is no license. Please restore this photo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rich viola (talk • contribs) 20:21, 11 May 2015‎ (UTC)

 Oppose With few exceptions which do not apply here, all recent works have copyrights. In this case, unless Sarah Jeynes licensed it to you in a written agreement, she is the copyright holder and the only person who can authorize its use on Commons. In order to restore the image, she must send a free license to OTRS. OTRS, like Commons is all volunteers and is badly understaffed, so once she has sent the license, it may be several weeks or a month before the image is restored. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:27, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done per Jim -FASTILY 07:16, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

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

AndreaJenkyns.jpg

Hi

I am acting on behalf of Andrea Jenkyns as part of her office and campaign team. We have provided this photo to represent Andrea. Please restore to page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrea_Jenkyns

Many thanks Andrew Palmer 12/May/2015

andrea4morley@gmail.com

 Not done: Please send your permissions to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and our agent will restore the file when it is complete. — regards, Revi 11:06, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Logo Konservativ Ungdom.png Undeletion

The logo was published in the 1930s - the copyright is outdated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TQFFE (talk • contribs) 08:56, 12 May 2015‎ (UTC)

 Oppose Copyright in Denmark lasts for 70 years after the death of the creator, so this is far too recent to assume that it is out of copyright. In order to restore it to Commons, an authorized official of Konservativ Ungdom must send a free license to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:05, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: See Jim's comment above Steinsplitter (talk) 15:34, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Virtuelles SRS Audiogerät.jpg Undeletion

I can't see any copyright violation by a screnshot of the outdated SRS-Software as SRS Inc. doesn't exist anymore, article under Sound Retrieval System. Then also the Screenshots of Windows would have all to be deleted e.g. in the article Microsoft Windows. Also the SRS-Software can be downloaded everywhere for everyone and for free. Does it make sence, to destroy the German Wikipedia? Please help me in undeleting the screenshots and restoring the article! --Uwe Martens (talk) 13:02, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Request temporary undeletion

  •  Oppose Nonsense request per COM:PRP#5 and the spirit of #1-4 (saying the company doesn't exist implies it will not find out/care/be able to enforce rights/etc.) These are screenshots of copyrighted software that is reasonably expected to have an owner; Sound Retrieval System was purchased by SRS Labs Inc. (SRS Labs) in 1993, and SRS Labs was acquired by DTS, Inc. in 2012. That new versions of the software are not being released does not impact copyright status. Similarly, OTHERSTUFF is not a valid argument for undeletion, and screenshots of Windows at the de.wiki article are hosted on de.wiki, not the Commons. Эlcobbola talk 14:42, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Not a valid reason to restore anything -FASTILY 01:54, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Quest Pistols Show.jpeg

ticket:2015012810011129 --Максим Підліснюк (talk) 17:13, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Done -FASTILY 01:54, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Lev Bonikowski.jpg

ticket:2015043010003628 --Максим Підліснюк (talk) 17:17, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Done -FASTILY 01:54, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Ерментау.JPG

ticket:2015050610018497 --Максим Підліснюк (talk) 17:20, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Done -FASTILY 01:54, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:JorgeHBrito.jpg

I work for the owner of that file and the rights of the photo are released in order to be available in Wikipedia and other places. There was a problem with the choice of the licence when it was uploaded. Thank --Superagente86 (talk) 18:52, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Please send an email to OTRS and explain your situation to them. If all is found to be in order, they will restore the file for you -FASTILY 01:55, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Parimal nathwani.jpg

this file was given by the owner he also uploaded on twitter to share with his fan he want his that picture should be there on wikipedia

@Pankajclub1: Please read this page about pictures found on the Internet. Anon124 (+2) (✉ ⚒) 20:03, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done COM:NETCOPYRIGHT -FASTILY 01:54, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Visit Java. Only 36 hours from Singapore (3530680241).jpg

Apparently ignored discussion on Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Boston Public Library collections - Vintage Travel Posters‎ (though link may not have been left) and deleted based on bogus Flickr license. Should be {{PD-Indonesia}} and {{PD-US-URAA}}. Carl Lindberg (talk) 14:09, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Kept: as per Carl. Yann (talk) 10:44, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Alyson Leigh Rosenfeld headshot.jpg

A permissions release was received and verified by me at OTRS. Ticket is 2015041710000816, chosen license is CC-BY-SA 4.0.

If you undelete the file, please drop a note on my user talk page so I will be reminded to add the proper templates and such to the image page. Thanks! --FastLizard4 (talk) 01:55, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Done -FASTILY 07:20, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Olympique-gaulois.png

Olympique Gaulois Football Club in Singapore — Preceding unsigned comment added by Remitache (talk • contribs) 08:47, 13 May 2015‎ (UTC)

 Not done per Jim -FASTILY 18:04, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Bernd Ogan.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: We have a permission by the author via OTRS-ticket:2015040810006239. Emha (talk) 11:33, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Done -FASTILY 18:04, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Lev Bonikowski in Kaluga.JPG

ticket:2015042810009725 and {{PD-old-100}} --Максим Підліснюк (talk) 12:39, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Done -FASTILY 18:04, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Prince Nikolai of Denmark on an interview.jpg

Good day! I'm the user who uploaded the recent picture on concern of Prince Nikolai of Denmark. The file was "File:Prince Nikolai of Denmark on an interview.jpg." Thank you for deleting the file as I had made a mistake concerning references. I request temporary undeletion until further matters are resolved on the copyright violation of the said image. I want to apologize for being a beginner here and for matters I still really don't understand well. I hope criticizing me politely would be a great help for the next ones. As part of the description, I would like to clear up that the image was in fact just a screenshot of the same image reference via an Instagram user. As part of Wikimedia Commons' policy, I knew that the copyright was in fact existing and an error has been committed due to my own move. Secondly, the image reference has failed to be uploaded with the image due to internet connection issues (Please don't criticize me as I only use a free version access offered to our nation.) Lastly,the image itself is from Instagram and has been widely circulated over the Internet. There should be a copyright for such pictures like these, but I failed to attach it when it was uploaded. I was happy for the deletion of the failed upload, but an undeletion would help me to re-arrange the pieces for a more welcomed coming of my name here. Sorry for that. If you may, I would like to request temporary undeletion for a month(or any time but not less than a week, or as the administrators do so) until reference is fully updated, linked and under the policies. --Xandrenavarro (talk) 14:46, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Xandrenavarro. Unfortunately, providing a reference to the source is not sufficient. What we need is permission from the copyright owner (likely the Instagram user, if that user took the photo). More specifically, that permission needs to allow anyone in the world to share and use it for any purpose (including commercial purposes), with proper credit if desired.
If that user has a public e-mail address that we can associate with the Instagram account, that user can send us proper permission by e-mail according to these instructions.
If I am misunderstanding the situation, please accept my apologies. Anon126 (✉ ⚒) 00:22, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Anon126. Thank you for understanding my situation.

I would love to ask permission, but by this time, the Instagram user (@nikolaiofdenmark) has not provided me any contact for his account. And as I said earlier, the picture was of my screenshot of mine of the image. If the image's page still exists, the file history may help. Or if that does not help, my sincere apologies for the mistake.
Furthermore, a bad situation happened last night. The PC where the same file rests is in a failure and recovery of files is not possible. The undeletion request at first would go for the arrangement of matters for reference and permissions, but by this time, I need to recover that file as soon as possible. If you can bear with the situation, thank you.
Lastly, checking the Internet for the same picture has resulted in many similar ones that have been circulating widely on the web. If the Instagram user got it too the same way I did not know, well, I need to clarify permissions for more. If the request for undeletion is granted, I would like the link posted on the image page to be seen by me (as author) to review the website and permission contacts, just like how it was notified of a possible copyright infringement.
Thank you and may please accept my apologies if I misunderstood your case. :)

--Xandrenavarro (talk) 06:44, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done unfortunately. Derivatives of non-free content are forbidden on Commons. Also, see COM:NETCOPYRIGHT -FASTILY 18:04, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

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

Files from User:Mmzz42

Please undelete all these files (per ticket:2014102010020716):

Thank you --Melos (talk) 01:38, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Done -FASTILY 18:04, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

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

Several files

ticket:2015051310017733 --Максим Підліснюк (talk) 11:01, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Done -FASTILY 18:04, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:BCS Championship Media Day, Jan. 5, 2013.jpg

The Flickr CC license has been changed to a wikicommons-valid level. Please undelete. https://www.flickr.com/photos/91836378@N07/8351032882 Dolenath (talk) 03:05, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Restored by Túrelio -FASTILY 07:07, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Reopened and  Oppose. The file is a derivative of a copyrighted trophy and there is no FOP-provision for this work. Please stop closing undeletion requests within 24 hours Fastily unless it is a uncontroversial request from an OTRSs-agent. Natuur12 (talk) 08:52, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
It was restored by Túrelio and subsequently nominated for deletion by me. So no, I wouldn't say that I necessarily endorse the restoration and have amended the closing statement to reflect that. -FASTILY 09:44, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for modifying. Natuur12 (talk) 13:30, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Just for the record: After I had been notified about the change-of-license on Flickr by the uploader on my talkpage[4], I had restored the image, but mentioned the potential derivative-problem to the uploader. --Túrelio (talk) 09:56, 15 May 2015 (UTC)


I agree that it should be deleted. However, the original deletion was a {{Speedy}} based on the unacceptable license. Our practice is that deletions of derivative works must go to a DR, so I think this UnDR should be closed with the file remaining restored and then we can let Commons:Deletion requests/File:BCS Championship Media Day, Jan. 5, 2013.jpg run its course. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:32, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Johnhostettler.jpg

Thank you for the heads up regarding how to get a Creative Commons License. This file has been marked on http://hostettler.co.uk/author.php as being free to use, using a Creative Commons License --Gkjoyce (talk) 13:09, 13 May 2015 (UTC)Gkjoyce

 Support The source page now does show a CC-BY-4.0 license. Carl Lindberg (talk) 15:14, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Done -FASTILY 19:19, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Timsort-edited.png

No valid reason for deletion. According to the confirmation at the discussion of the DR, the image was put into the PD correctly by the creator, so the file should never have been deleted according to this DR. To cover a possible claim based on the program that formatted the data for the visualization: The program was sortvis, which is Free Software under the MIT license, so using this visualization is valid too. Please restore. --h-stt !? 09:33, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

 Support I see no reason why this was deleted. Fastily, could you please explain your closure of the DR..     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:27, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

 Support Yeah, I don't see a reason for deletion. Looks like it was a mistaken delete, though it did happen almost 3 years ago... Carl Lindberg (talk) 15:17, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Done -FASTILY 19:19, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Lev Bankowski MAI.jpg

ticket:2015051510010272 --Максим Підліснюк (talk) 12:59, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Done -FASTILY 19:19, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Алексей Сергеевич Пучнин.jpg

Это моя фотография, я соглашаюсь на ее использование по соответствующей лицензии.

Григорий Марголин 17/05/2015 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.175.1.4 (talk • contribs) 20:52, 17 May 2015‎ (UTC)

  •  Oppose It appears to be an image of a television screen, which means that while you may have taken the picture, you do not have the right to license it unless you get a license from the creator of the television show. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:40, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: see Jim's comment Steinsplitter (talk) 14:55, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

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

John Brogden portrait.jpg

Hi, John Brogden portrait.jpg is the image I would like restored. This image was incorrectly deleted, I own the rights to the image. The website cited in the reasons for deletion had copied the image from me. --GqAICD (talk) 23:26, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

 Oppose Since this image was only uploaded to Commons a few days ago, it seems very unlikely that two different sites have actually copied the image from Commons. That suggests that the image has appeared elsewhere on the Web and therefore that policy requires that the actual copyright holder send a free license to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:01, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim's comment -- Steinsplitter (talk) 06:22, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:LIFX Logo.png

The LIFX Logo is a company logo that should be placed on the LIFX Wikipedia article. Company logos are allowed on the Wikipedia Commons to my understanding. If they aren't, why are logos for companies like Microsoft and Samsung on here?

Daylenca (talk) 02:15, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Logos are only allowed if they are not under copyright (which is distinct from trademark), or the copyright is licensed. While most logos have enough creativity to qualify for copyright, there are a few that don't -- usually typeface-only logos do not (at least in the U.S.). Some logos may be old enough that copyright has expired, or (if U.S. logos) they did not follow the copyright formalities required in the U.S. before 1989. Each of the logos here should have a licensing tag indicating the reason why copyright is not a problem. In Microsoft and Samsung's case, I believe they are typeface-only logos, or only add a very simple, standard geometric shape to it. If the logo is the same as on the LIFX website, the graphic is probably enough to push that logo over the threshold of originality. While Commons has no problem hosting trademarked images (simply hosting them should not violate trademark), we cannot host any images where the copyright is valid and not licensed. The English Wikipedia (and some other Wikipedias) allow hosting images directly on that project under a fair use rationale, which is how most logos seen on Wikipedia are stored. Commons, however, is forbidden from hosting images under a fair use rationale -- all works must be "free", which is a term centered on copyright law specifically, and means either no copyright or a liberal license. See w:Wikipedia:Logos for their page on the subject, and upload instructions. Carl Lindberg (talk) 07:17, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done Non-free content is forbidden on Commons -FASTILY 00:12, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Samuel, Perla y Azi.jpg Restaurar por favor

Estimados Srs. les agradecería revisar el borrado de esta foto, es de propiedad del Sr. Azi y el me la autorizo mediante documento por correo electrónico el cual se envió también a permissions-commons-es@wikimedia.org

Esta es una foto de su familia, tomada por ellos, por favor reconsiderar el borrado. Gracias por su colaboracion, mil gracias por su atencion. --Edwinjcb (talk) 17:31, 18 May 2015 (UTC) edwinjcb

 Oppose This appears to be a formal studio portrait, taken in 1936. The copyright belongs to the photographer, not the owner of a copy of the photograph. It cannot be restored on Commons without a license from the photographer. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:34, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done per Jim -FASTILY 00:12, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Horse at Shogran.jpg

I am the rightful owner of this image and I clicked this image myself, so there is no copyright violation whatsoever. Kindly look into this and contact me if you have any questions — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamfaraz (talk • contribs) 12:45, 19 May 2015‎ (UTC)

Please send an email to OTRS and explain your situation to them. If all is found to be in order, they will restore the file for you -FASTILY 00:12, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Johnny Strange.jpg

I am requesting the undeletion of File:Johnny Strange.jpg, I am the photographer that took this image.

--TheFruitSalad (talk) 20:15, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Please send an email to OTRS and explain your situation to them. If all is found to be in order, they will restore the file for you -FASTILY 00:12, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:RitrattoGianniPalminteri.png

Now under cc-by-sa-4.0 license per ticket:2014111310016813. Thank you --Melos (talk) 21:06, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Done -FASTILY 23:23, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Confronto_Kouroi_giganti.jpg

The image was created by me, by combining photos of the statues of the giants of Mount Prama, (uploaded by me on Wikicommons) and photos of the statues Kouroi, already used in the pages dedicated to Kouroi (also uploaded on Wikicommons). Therefore, I can not understand why the collage has been canceled. --DedaloNur (talk) 07:27, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

 Oppose When you create a montage, you must, at a bare minimum, credit the authors of all images in the montage that are not PD, and should, as a courtesy, credit all of the known authors. You must show the source of all of the images. The only exception to this would be if all of the images in the montage were your own work and, even then, it would be best to upload each of them separately to Commons and credit them in the montage.
In this case, that would require a four line entry in the description in this form:
Since you did not give credit to the author of the CC-BY licensed image, the montage was a copyright violation. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:47, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim's comment -- Steinsplitter (talk) 09:28, 21 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:Nikolai Nikolaevich Volgin 1907.JPG

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This is a picture of the person being discussed. Why was it deleted ? Ervolgin (talk) 19:38, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

  •  Oppose You claimed that it is "own work". Our colleagues who participated in the DR and I find that very unlikely -- did you actually take the original photograph? If not, then you have no right to license its use here -- in order to restore the image to Commons, you will have to either prove that the image is PD or get the original photographer or his heirs to send a free license to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:53, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim -- Steinsplitter (talk) 10:58, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Luis M. Rocha, 2004.jpg

This file was deleted because it said to be missing a permission. The permission url has been added to the file. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rionbr (talk • contribs) 20:53, 19 May 2015‎ (UTC)

 Oppose - I do not understand. The "Permission" section of the file description says:
"Evidence: The license statement can be found online at: http://www.informatics.indiana.edu/people/profile.html?profile_id=285"
The only relevant information there is
"Copyright © 2015 The Trustees of Indiana University"
which is, of course, not a free license. In order to restore the image to Commons, the actual copyright holder must send a free license to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:05, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim's comment -- Steinsplitter (talk) 09:28, 21 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:Ol-logo-400.png

I am the copyright holder, this is licensed to be used on Wikipedia freely--Alexfarrill (talk) 17:48, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

 Oppose It is not clear that the very young company whose logo this is is notable. The WP article is problematic for several reasons. Therefore this image may be out of scope.

I note that the image description says "author=Judd Schoenholtz". I would ordinarily expect that the copyright holder would be either the author or the organization for which the logo was made, not a third party.
"this is licensed to be used on Wikipedia freely" is not acceptable. Commons and WP:EN require that images be licensed for use by anyone, anywhere, including commercial use. It is hard to image that you want the corporate logo of a startup company freely licensed. In any case, in order to restore it here, the actual copyright holder must send a free license to OTRS. If that is the corporation, the e-mail should come from a corporate officer and from the corporation's domain. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:51, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim -- Steinsplitter (talk) 10:57, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Feuillet Yavanajātaka.png

This was deleted by JuTa (talk · contribs) stating 'Copyright violation: external source, no license, no permission.' A user has recreated the file information page, stating 'Hello, it's a picture of an ancient manuscript (around XII century). I thought there was no copyright. Isn't it a public propriety ? Thx'. If it is correct that the picture is from the 12th century, then the file should presumably be undeleted. --Stefan4 (talk) 17:49, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done Indeed, an old sanscrit manuscript. Yann (talk) 17:54, 20 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:Mattheldersarcticmonkeys.jpg

This is absolutely stupid, commercial use has been clearly allowed on this Flickr photo. (https://www.flickr.com/photos/mgmt_and_me/6946343142/) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎ Mr Serious Guy (talk • contribs) 19:41, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

It clearly states in the license that this may be used commercially --Mr Serious Guy (talk) 19:41, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

 Comment it is a non derivative license and those as well are forbidden at Commons per com:L. Natuur12 (talk) 19:42, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: see above -- Steinsplitter (talk) 10:57, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:0-Chris - sitting masturbating penis.webm

The following file was wrongfully deleted and held educational purposes. As such, it should be restored to Wikimedia Commons. RandiKL (talk) 22:35, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

@RandiKL: Please read Commons:Nudity#New uploads. In short, we're looking for high-quality material that is different from what we already have. Are you sure this material is different from what we have in Category:Male human anatomy (including subcategories) and Category:Male masturbation? Anon126 (✉ ⚒) 05:30, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Also, may I ask if you know the user C012b? Anon126 (✉ ⚒) 05:31, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done as per Anon126. Yann (talk) 11:29, 22 May 2015 (UTC)


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

the picture is my property

the picture is my property, I took it and I uploaded in other pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jlflores79 (talk • contribs) 2015-05-20T22:12:17 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim. -- Steinsplitter (talk) 10:01, 22 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:Gregory Ricks.jpg

Reasons: image of me that I own. No copyright issues.

--Ironlion27 (talk) 15:38, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

 Oppose As a rule, the copyright to images is held by the photographer, not the subject. Owning a copy of an image, even if it is the only copy, does not make you the copyright holder or give you the right to freely license it. Copyright must be transferred by a written agreement. Also, this image has appeared on the Web without a free license, and therefore policy requires sending a free license to OTRS.

If you have a written copyright transfer and are yourself the copyright holder, please send a free license to OTRS. If not, please have the photographer send one. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:18, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done as per Jim. Yann (talk) 11:31, 22 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:Dokiparru 1.jpg

Dear All,

It was a Photoshopped image of a temple which was constructed in a village by our parent company. Please undelete the image.

 Not done: File not deleted. -- Steinsplitter (talk) 10:25, 22 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:Vinicius Melão.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This photo boy is known on the internet. We have had a YouTube channel with over 10,000 subscribers. He is a professional player of Call of Duty and has more than 10,000 followers on twitter. Besides he said he owns a Brazilian humor site.

MLG - http://mlg.tv/helloimvinicius Twitter - http://twitter.com/helloimvinicius His new YouTube channel - http://youtube.com/helloimvinicius Humor Site - http://lesalvarcomo.com.br JoãoPaulo47 (talk) 17:05, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done Please read COM:SCOPE. Yann (talk) 11:34, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Aidin Davoudi at Ulikhanyan club.jpg

Also:

--Lilit.ino (talk) 12:30, 22 May 2015 (UTC)Khnkanosian--Lilit.ino (talk) 12:30, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

  •  Oppose You have not given any reason why these images should be restored. They all were taken from Facebook and there is no evidence that you have permission to freely license them here. They can be restored only if the actual copyright holder sends a free license to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:19, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: Please send permission to COM:OTRS -- Steinsplitter (talk) 16:22, 22 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:Gillum.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I work for the Mayor Gillum's Office; the file uploaded was his official picture which is used on the City of Tallahassee website. While I, individually, do not own the rights to the photo, I have permission to use it for his Wikipedia page. Additionally, the file I uploaded was converted to .png from a .jpg, so in a sense I have ownership over that individual file (though not the image rights).

I'm fairly new to contributing to Wikipedia and am in the process of trying to clean up they Mayor's page, which was edited fairly heavily by an intern. We understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and I am starting an effort to make Mayor Gillum's entry more encyclopedic rather than biographical/a narrative Michaelalfano (talk) 14:14, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

 Oppose "I have permission to use it for his Wikipedia page" is not sufficient -- Commons and WP:EN require that all uploads be free for use by anyone anywhere, including commercial use and derivative works. The fact that you are in government in Florida may make this easy. If the photograph was taken by an employee (not a contractor or other non-employee) of the state or any of its subdivisions (including Tallahassee), then it is PD. In order to restore it on that basis, you will need to tell us here the name and position of the photographer (ie "Jane Jones, City Photographer").
If not, then the copyright and the right to license it belongs to the photographer unless he or she has explicitly transferred it to the Mayor in a written agreement separate from any invoice for the image. Whoever owns the copyright -- the Mayor or the photographer -- must send a free license to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:13, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: see Jim's comment -- Steinsplitter (talk) 16:22, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

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

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)

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

Undeleted, after the license at the source has been updated. --rimshottalk 15:49, 23 May 2015 (UTC)


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

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

Hello, our school has sent a copyright email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, 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)

 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)

 Not done: see Jim's comment. -- Steinsplitter (talk) 15:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Oldbell1.jpg

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 talk★contribs 09:32, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
 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)

 Not done: no consensus to restore -- Steinsplitter (talk) 05:11, 24 May 2015 (UTC)


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

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)

 Not done: COM:OTRS permission needed. -- Steinsplitter (talk) 05:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Cinema bahman2.jpg

تصویر فوق را خود عکاسی نموده ام و هیچ گونه کپی یا برداشتی از هیچ سایتی ننموده ام

این عکس را از جلوی سینما بهمن گرفته ام

ویکی مدیا زمانی می تواند تصویری را حذف کند که بتواند ثابت کند یک تصویر متعلق به شخص دیگری است

از شما می خواهم به سرعت تصویر را برگردانید

درپیت (talk) 08:10, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

 Oppose The movie poster which is the principal subject of the image has a copyright which is not yours to license. The image cannot be restored without a free license from the creator of the poster. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:01, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: if you own the cropyright, please send permission to COM:OTRS -- Steinsplitter (talk) 19:13, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

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

Files uploaded by Boombon

Please restore the following pages:

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

Not sure if this PDF's are in COM:SCOPE. --Steinsplitter (talk) 05:14, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Over time, they can be transferred to Wikibooks. There really is value. --Максим Підліснюк (talk) 13:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Files used in anothe Wikimedia project are definitely in scope. @Steinsplitter: I suggest that you can start DR on the "out of scope" basis if they are unused eg. in a week. I am not closing this UDR for now. Ankry (talk) 11:44, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Restored. @Максим Підліснюк: you can continue with the ticket. Ankry (talk) 11:44, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done: per Ankry's commet. If in use on other projects then of course in scope. -- Steinsplitter (talk) 11:57, 26 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:ETC Superleague Logo.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: It's a public logo. It is made for those reasons. Hashanialbert (talk) 18:24, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

 Oppose That is true, but it still has a copyright and may not be kept on Commons unless the actual copyright holder sends a free license to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:43, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: see Jim's comment -- Steinsplitter (talk) 10:37, 26 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:Payson, Utah Temple.jpg

This is my photo and I took it personally. Why did you delete it?

kyle woodbury 5/25/2015--Kylecurtiswoodbury (talk) 03:24, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

It's listed at https://www.flickr.com/photos/28882702@N00/17384129790 as All Rights Reserved. INeverCry 05:06, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: If you are the copyright owner, please relicense it on Flickr. Ankry (talk) 11:26, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Payson Temple.jpg

The file: == File:Payson Temple.jpg == should not be deleted. I am the owner and original photographer of this photo. Why was it deleted?

--Kylecurtiswoodbury (talk) 03:31, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

It's listed at https://www.flickr.com/photos/28882702@N00/17545380536 as All Rights Reserved. INeverCry 05:08, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: If you are the copyright owner, please relicense it on Flickr. Ankry (talk) 11:27, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Ray McManus.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This image has the expressed permisison of Ray McManus. It was taken at an event in which he asked me to take and use for these purposes. In fact it was taken with his camera. There is no copyright violation because there is no copyright associated with the image. SoftlyandTenderly (talk) 05:15, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

All images have a copyright status. This image appears at http://www.raymcmanuspoetry.com/gallery.html. We need evidence of permission for a free license to be sent to OTRS. INeverCry 05:17, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. Working on that now SoftlyandTenderly (talk) 06:10, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done: by User:Sphilbrick -- Steinsplitter (talk) 10:38, 26 May 2015 (UTC)


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

keramika a kov, 130 x 38 cm, výška 35 cm, 2012

This file, that I uploaded, has been marked as a possible copyright violation and was deleted, although I have permission by the author that I can upload it on wikipedia - I have created a wiki page about the author of the sculpture on the blocked photo - Zdeněk Manina; so please would it be possible to reload back on wikimedia commons?

Permission from both: the sculpture author and the photographer are required in this case. If you have permissions satisfying COM:OTRS requirements, please follow instructions on this page to have the image restored. Ankry (talk) 11:20, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done Ankry (talk) 11:29, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Htc Desire Eye.png

The permission is listed on my Flickr Account. Please check.

A proof that the presented sofrware is under a free license is required or a permission from the software manufacturer. Please follow the COM:OTRS instructions. Ankry (talk) 11:23, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done Ankry (talk) 11:28, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Ed Burns Bugsy Siegel.jpg

This picture DOES NOT violate any copyright laws at all. Especially I didn't say that it was my work, I gave the source, the author, and the darn website. So, I request that it be undeleted especially since Krdbot's claims are non realistic.--Ellis.Donnie (talk) 20:59, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

  •  Oppose Simply naming the source and author is not sufficient here -- you must prove that either the image is no longer under copyright or that you have the right to freely license it, see COM:Licensing. This image will be under copyright until at least 2110 (and probably much longer) and there is no evidence that you have the right to license it. It can be restored only if the photographer, Doug Hyun, sends a free license to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:09, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: see Jim's comment -- Steinsplitter (talk) 14:31, 26 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:DSF-face.jpg

This image was supplied and authorised by Deborah Smith Ford herself PaulShotan (talk) 23:32, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

  •  Oppose You said in the file description that this was "own work" -- that you were the photographer. Above you say that it was supplied by the subject. Therefore, apparently you are not the photographer and since it is not a selfie, neither is Ms. Ford. Unless the photographer has transferred the copyright to Ms. Ford in a formal written agreement, he or she is the copyright holder. In any case, the actual copyright holder must send a free license to OTRS. When that is received and reviewed, the image will be restored. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:00, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: see Jim's comment -- Steinsplitter (talk) 14:31, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Miranda Rumina.jpg

I have the author's permission to use this file, actually it was her request that we change a picture on her wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_Rumina). In what form do you need permission? We would really like to change the picture on wikipedia page. It seems a lot of hassle to do any changes on Wikipedia, can you please help us? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matejukmar (talk • contribs) 06:19, 26 May 2015‎ (UTC)

 Oppose The actual copyright holder, which is usually the photographer, must send a free license to OTRS. Note that a license to use the image on Wikipedia is not sufficient -- the license must allow use by anyone anywhere for any purpose, including commercial use.
It surprises me that you think that paying careful attention to copyright is a hassle. I doubt very much that Miranda Rumina would be happy if people reproduced her work without permission. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:40, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: see Jim's comment -- Steinsplitter (talk) 14:30, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Kitchee SC crest.svg

The crest was designed more than 50 years ago in Hong Kong, see File:Kitchee_1959.jpg.--Hang9417 (talk) 07:34, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

 Oppose Because crests and coats of arms are drawn from blazons according to the rules of heraldry, each creation of a crest or coat of arms has a copyright. According to its description, this SVG was extracted from a PDF and is, therefore, a derivative work of the PDF. I do not see a free license on the PDF, so in order to restore this image, policy requires a free license from its creator sent to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:22, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: see Jim's comment -- Steinsplitter (talk) 14:30, 26 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:Die Band.jpg

Please undelete the foto, I've already sent the permission of the photograper (again^^).--LawAngTee (talk) 10:36, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

 Oppose The image will be restored if and when the actual copyright holder sends a free license to OTRS. Because identity theft is common here, that licenses sent by a third party (you, for example) will generally not be accepted. Note also that OTRS, like Commons, is all volunteers, and, also like Commons, is badly understaffed, so that the backlog there is often several weeks or more. The restoration will take place only when the license reaches the front of the queue. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:32, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: see Jim's comment -- Steinsplitter (talk) 14:30, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:BenSiegelInCustody.jpg

I request that Krdbot's deletion be undeleted. This is because his/her/its claims that the picture is well within the copyright laws, especially since I sited the website, source, and the author too. I mean its not like I created the source and everything so many years ago just so I could add it on wiki today.--Ellis.Donnie (talk) 20:59, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Also this has happened before, although the reason why I labeled it as my own work the first time was because I had saved the picture a few years ago and could not remember which website I used, but this time I had to find the same/almost same exact picture and use the website. So, therefore I fixed the "copyright violation", but still my picture is still somehow violating copyright laws and this needs to be fixed especially since this time its definitely baseless.--Ellis.Donnie (talk) 21:04, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

 Oppose Simply naming the source and author is not sufficient here -- you must prove that either the image is no longer under copyright (is in the Public Domain) or that you have the right to freely license it, see COM:Licensing. This image may or may not be under copyright -- it could well be PD under US law, but it is up to the uploader to prove that. There is nothing in the file description that speaks to that issue at all. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:54, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done per User:Jameslwoodward: no license info provided. Ankry (talk) 19:11, 26 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:Betty-lane-in-studio.jpg

This file was nominated for deletion May 14 2015 and deleted recently. The copyright holder Nicolas Noxon <nnoxon@verizon.net> has emailed permissions-commons@wikimedia.org with an appropriate permission statement. Please undelete the file because appropriate permission has been supplied. Thank you --1offby (talk) 18:41, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done Please wait until the permission is processed by an OTRS agent. Ankry (talk) 19:18, 26 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:Betty-lane-retired-liberation-mps-1966.jpg

This file was nominated for deletion May 14 and deleted recently. The copyright holder Nicolas Noxon <nnoxon@verizon.net> has emailed permissions-commons@wikimedia.org with an appropriate permission statement. Please undelete the file because appropriate permission has been supplied. Thank you --1offby (talk) 18:42, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done Please wait until the permission is processed by an OTRS agent. Ankry (talk) 19:19, 26 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:Betty-lane-theory-on-tv-1973.jpg

This file was nominated for deletion May 14 and deleted recently. The copyright holder Nicolas Noxon <nnoxon@verizon.net> has emailed permissions-commons@wikimedia.org with an appropriate permission statement. Please undelete the file because appropriate permission has been supplied. Thank you --1offby (talk) 18:43, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done Please wait until the permission is processed by an OTRS agent. Ankry (talk) 19:20, 26 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:Betty-lane-june-morning-1980s.jpg

This file was nominated for deletion May 14 and deleted recently. The copyright holder Nicolas Noxon <nnoxon@verizon.net> has emailed permissions-commons@wikimedia.org with an appropriate permission statement. Please undelete the file because appropriate permission has been supplied. Thank you --1offby (talk) 18:43, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done Please wait until the permission is processed by an OTRS agent. Ankry (talk) 19:19, 26 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:Betty-lane-snow-hill-boston-1940s.jpg

This file was nominated for deletion May 14 and deleted recently. The copyright holder Nicolas Noxon <nnoxon@verizon.net> has emailed permissions-commons@wikimedia.org with an appropriate permission statement. Please undelete the file because appropriate permission has been supplied. Thank you --1offby (talk) 18:44, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done Please wait until the permission is processed by an OTRS agent. Ankry (talk) 19:21, 26 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:Betty-lane-you-cant-trust-kruschev-1964.jpg

This file was nominated for deletion May 14 and deleted recently. The copyright holder Nicolas Noxon <nnoxon@verizon.net> has emailed permissions-commons@wikimedia.org with an appropriate permission statement. Please undelete the file because appropriate permission has been supplied. Thank you --1offby (talk) 18:45, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done Please wait until the permission is processed by an OTRS agent. Ankry (talk) 19:20, 26 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:Betty-lane-the-sunflower-1937.jpg

This file was nominated for deletion May 14 and deleted recently. The copyright holder Nicolas Noxon <nnoxon@verizon.net> has emailed permissions-commons@wikimedia.org with an appropriate permission statement. Please undelete the file because appropriate permission has been supplied. Thank you --1offby (talk) 18:47, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done Please wait until the permission is processed by an OTRS agent. Note: you can use {{OTRS pending}} template if a permission is sent while uploading an image. Ankry (talk) 19:23, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Jana Semerádová 01.jpg and File:Jana Semerádová 02.jpg

Please undelete those two files per ticket:2015052310012442. OTRS permission OK. Thank you. --Mates (talk) 20:01, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Mates: Thibaut120094 (talk) 20:08, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

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

GEN3.gif

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)

 Not done: Invalid undeletion request - no deleted file specified. INeverCry 06:48, 28 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:Daniel Tosh.jpg

Permission granted in ticket:2015030410028082 to upload file under a CC-BY-SA-4.0 license. Bobamnertiopsis (talk) 03:41, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done: Restored. INeverCry 06:53, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:JohnWesleyPowellSculpture.jpg

This file does have the permission of the artist to be posted on Wikipedia. Sorry I did not see the objection sooner. 'Hunakai' (me) is the artist's partner - so of course the image looks like it came from the artist's website. Same image was used for both. Appreciate someone's wanting to protect our copyright - but we give permission to use the image. --Hunakai (talk) 20:54, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

 Oppose "permission of the artist to be posted on Wikipedia" is not sufficient. Images on Commons and WP:EN must be free for any use by anyone, including commercial use. In order for the image to be restored, the artist must send a free license to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:44, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim's comment -- Steinsplitter (talk) 19:47, 28 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:Atelier Interaction.jpg

I gave evidence of ownership. + It was deleted before I had time to see the nomination. MaudeG3 (talk) 15:23, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

 Oppose Commons:Deletion requests/File:Atelier Interaction.jpg was open for a full week, as required. As noted there, the image was previously published without a free license at http://actproject.ca/act/interaction/. Therefore, policy requires that the photographer send a free license to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:49, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim's comment -- Steinsplitter (talk) 19:47, 28 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:Hunnan-1.jpg and File:Agro.jpg

Hello, our school has sent a copyright email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, could you please do the necessary, especially undelete File:Hunnan-1.jpg and File:Agro.jpg? Do you have already a ticket number?--Neyc.alumni.france (talk) 10:42, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

 Oppose OTRS, like Commons, is all volunteers, and, also like Commons, is badly understaffed. Its backlog often runs several weeks or even more than a month. Your e-mail will be dealt with when it reaches the front of the queue. In the mean time, please be patient. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:41, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim's comment -- Steinsplitter (talk) 19:47, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Returner EARL GREY TEA LIQUEUR.png

開発者（著作権者）により許諾された画像のため削除の撤回を求める。

 Not done: per Jim's comment -- Steinsplitter (talk) 19:47, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Михаил Смирнов.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: ticket:2015052510018068 Максим Підліснюк (talk) 18:13, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done: Latest version restored. INeverCry 20:23, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Selwyn College Logo.gif - undelete

I request an undelete of this file as I am an employee of the school to whom the logo belongs and I have the express permission to use the logo in this way (published on the wikipedia page for the school). Linzeyc (talk) 19:34, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Description This is a logo owned by Selwyn College, Auckland New Zealand for Selwyn COllege. Source Selwyn College Article Selwyn College Portion used The entire logo is used to convey the meaning intended and avoid tarnishing or misrepresenting the intended image. Low resolution? This image has been specifically sized for Wikipedia. Purpose of use The image is used to identify the following notable public facility: Selwyn College. The significance of the logo is to help the reader identify a facility (such as a road, airport, station, city, neighborhood, or the like), and assure the readers that they have reached the right article containing critical commentary about the facility. Replaceable? Because it is a non-free logo, there is almost certainly no free representation. Any substitute that is not a derivative work would fail to convey the meaning intended, would tarnish or misrepresent its image, or would fail its purpose of identification or commentary. Other information Use of the logo in the article complies with Wikipedia non-free content policy, logo guidelines, and fair use under United States copyright law as described above. Linzeyc (talk) 21:39, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

  •  Oppose Most of the note above sounds like a fair use rationale. That's irrelevant here since Commons can not accept fair use. In order for the logo to be restored to Commons, an officer of the college must send a free license to OTRS. Note that "express permission to use the logo in this way (published on the wikipedia page for the school)" is not sufficient for Commons or WP:EN -- both require a license that allows use by anyone anywhere, including commercial use.
Also note that Commons much prefers images as large as possible. The Wikimedia software resizes on the fly for different users' requirements and this tiny logo (50x49 px) is essentially unusable. I will oppose restoration of this version even if the College offers a free license. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:24, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: see Jim's comment -- Steinsplitter (talk) 05:32, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Morro de Pernambuco Ilhéus Bahia.JPG

Por essa imagem pertencer a um lugar que muitos turistas visitam, as imagens ficam parecidas com outras da web contudo eu retirei essa foto do Centro de Ilhéus que fica bem a frente do Morro de Pernambuco e peço a compreensão do administrador que eliminou página e peço aos demais para me ajudar com a autoria da página segundo o regulamento da commons.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Max Muller Dos Santos Bispo (talk • contribs) 20:55, 28 May 2015‎ (UTC)

 Not done: se Jim's comment -- Steinsplitter (talk) 05:31, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

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

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)

  •  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)

 Not done: see Jim's comment. -- Steinsplitter (talk) 10:45, 30 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:BenSiegelInCustody.jpg

Before I thought that it was just that I had to label the author and the source in order for this picture to not violate copyright laws, but now I realize that I should have labelled it as Public Domain too since it was. I would very much like the chance to redo the licensing if that is possible so that goes well into the laws.--Ellis.Donnie (talk) 17:16, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

What makes this photograph public domain? --rimshottalk 18:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
 Oppose This is the second request for this image. Rimshot's question is right on the mark -- you cannot simply claim that it is PD, you must prove it beyond a significant doubt. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:29, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: see Jim's comment -- Steinsplitter (talk) 10:44, 30 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:BHKW (4).jpg

Diese Bild ist auf der Homepage des Flughafens Stuttgart verfügbar und wird dort unter "Pressebilder" der Öffentlichkeit zur Verfügung gestellt.

This file is available for the press on the internet page of the Airport Stuttgart and therefore, everyone is allowed to use it for public purposes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaxM02 (talk • contribs) 09:07, 29 May 2015‎ (UTC)

  •  Oppose nope, the image being publicly available is not enough for us. We need an explicit permission/Free License that allows anyone to use the file for any purpose, including commercial applications. --El Grafo (talk) 14:28, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: see COM:L -- Steinsplitter (talk) 10:43, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Fuelcell 2.jpg

This file is available for the press on the following page and can be used according to the statement of the Airport Stuttgart.

http://www.fuel-cell-e-mobility.info/fehlende-artikel/f-cell-zeigt-flugzeugen/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaxM02 (talk • contribs) 09:25, 29 May 2015‎ (UTC)

  •  Oppose nope, the image being publicly available is not enough for us. We need an explicit permission/Free License that allows anyone to use the file for any purpose, including commercial applications. --El Grafo (talk) 14:28, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: see COM:L -- Steinsplitter (talk) 10:43, 30 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:Atmosfair-Station - Kopie.jpg

This picture is publicly available in the "Umweltbericht 2010" and if the source is given correctly, it is allowed to use this picture for Wikipedia.

http://www.flughafen-stuttgart.de/media/447255/Umweltbericht-2013.pdf (Page 21) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaxM02 (talk • contribs) 09:30, 29 May 2015‎ (UTC)

  •  Oppose nope, the image being publicly available is not enough for us. We need an explicit permission/Free License that allows anyone to use the file for any purpose, including commercial applications. While it might be legal to use the image on Wikipedia itself, it is our policy that every media uploaded to Commons must be usable by anyone else as well. --El Grafo (talk) 14:36, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: see COM:L -- Steinsplitter (talk) 10:43, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Der Beste - Movieposter.jpg

I, Rasmus Borowski together with Arne Jysch, own the copyright of this movie poster picture. We made it ourselves to promote our short film Der Beste. We would like to present the poster on the Der Beste-Wikipedia entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Minni (talk • contribs) 15:06, 29 May 2015‎ (UTC)

  •  Oppose I see that Rasmus Borowksi is one of the producers of the subject film. There are two problems here. First, we have no way of knowing that User:John Minni is actually Rasmus Borowski. And second, the film was almost certainly made by a corporation and, therefore, the copyright is owned by the corporation, not an individual. In any case, Commons policy requires that the actual copyright holder send a free license to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:41, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done: by Krd, otrs permission recieved. -- Steinsplitter (talk) 10:42, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

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

No subject

What is the reason my entry "kids of mountains" is requested for deletion? This picture is taken by me and I have all the rights to use it on any media. If there is any issue let me know thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nomiawan (talk • contribs) 11:29, 30 May 2015‎ (UTC)

 Not done: The file has only just been nominated at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Kids of Mountains.JPG. Please wait for the discussion to conclude. Green Giant (talk) 14:56, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:孫中山先生.jpg

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)

 Oppose The image in question was a duplication of File:Sun Yat Sen's maturity.png. --Wcam (talk) 15:40, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
 Support not exact duplicate; may be stored as another version of the photo. Ankry (talk) 11:33, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
 Support Although the subject image is smaller, it is a better copy and more usable for most purposes. If we were to keep only one, I would think it would be the subject image, not the older one. However, there is no reason that we must keep only one in these circumstances. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:34, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done: Per Ankry & Jim. INeverCry 21:53, 30 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:出征兵士を見送る松原神社.jpg

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)
  • If the photographer died before 1.1.1946 the photo is PD, but we need a proof.
  • If he photographer died 1.1.1946 or later, we need free license permission from their heir(s).
In both cases, please follow Commons:OTRS/ja instructions. Ankry (talk) 19:38, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: per Ankry. INeverCry 21:54, 30 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:K2_from_Concordia.JPG

This image is free from all licensing as i have personally taken this photograph during my K2 basecamp trek in year 2011 and have never sold this image to any one/ institutions. You are therefore requested to un-delete this image and include this in the competition.--Aapkamajid (talk) 23:00, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

The image has been published before, e.g. here, though not in full resolution. @User:Túrelio: did you find a full resolution copy? --rimshottalk 06:27, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
@Rimshot, no, I found only the cited copy, which is credited to Majid Hussain. Though I wonder how tribune.com.pk were able to obtain this image, when it has never been sold. Anyway, considering the resemblance between the uploader's username and the credited name, undeletion seems to be justified. --Túrelio (talk) 21:09, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done: Restored by Túrelio. INeverCry 21:57, 30 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:TutorialAgeing.webm

It says "Derivative works from non-free software screenshots." This is not true. There's absolutely nothing in Commons:Derivative works about softwares. With all the time put into this it would've been nice to be warned before it was actually deleted... MaudeG3 (talk) 15:30, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

 Oppose You were warned by User_talk:MaudeG3#File:TutorialAgeing.webm on May 7. The file was actually deleted on May 23, so Commons:Deletion requests/File:TutorialAgeing.webm was open more than twice the required seven days. I'm not sure what warning you expect, but "it would've been nice to be warned before it was actually deleted" doesn't seem to fit the facts.
COM:DW leads with
""A 'derivative work' is a work based upon one or more pre-existing works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted." emphasis added
"Any other form" is very broad and certainly includes software. Your upload infringed on the Google copyright as well as the copyright in all of the WP images you show. You cannot claim "own work" when your work is simply an assemblage of other peoples' work -- you must give credit, even where much of the video came from WP:EN. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:03, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Jim. INeverCry 21:59, 30 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:Returner bottle image.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This does not infringe the copyright 210.136.105.244 01:32, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

This is package of this liqueur. Developer, Bottler, Copyright holder = Toshiaki Aizu allowed to use this photo on Wikipedia. What point is not good for Wikipedia commons? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 佐治秀政 (talk • contribs) 01:54, 28 May 2015‎ (UTC)

 Oppose "allowed to use this photo on Wikipedia" is not sufficient. Both Commons and WP:EN require that images be free for use by anyone anywhere for any reason, including commercial use. The image appears on the manufacturer's web site, http://returner.jp/, with a clear copyright notice, "©Retuener Japan Corporation". The fact that the company's name is misspelled in the notice does not change its effectiveness. Policy therefore requires that an officer of the corporation send a free license to OTRS.

I note that this image was reloaded as File:Returner EARL GREY TEA LIQUEUR.png. Recreating a deleted image is a violations of Commons rules and I have deleted it. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:35, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

And still again, at File:Returner bottle.jpg. If you do this again, you will be blocked from editing on Commons. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:44, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

This product made and sale by Returner Japan. and I am member of it. Why other guy delete? I cannot understand. What kind of case do you want? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 佐治秀政 (talk • contribs) 13:19, 28 May 2015‎ (UTC)

The copyright is owned by a corporation. You are an individual and obviously not the corporation. In fact, we have no way of knowing anything at all about you. Therefore, as I said above, "Policy therefore requires that an officer of the corporation send a free license to OTRS."
Also, as I have noted twice above, it is required that you sign your posts and that you stop uploading the image under different names. If you cannot follow our rules, you will not be allowed to edit here. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:29, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: OTRS permission required. INeverCry 22:00, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

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

File:Vitsebsk Uspenski sabor.JPG

This church was originally built in 1743-1785. It was completely destroyed in the 1930's, then rebuild identically in 2000-2011 (see this article for more details). In my opinion, the restoration work does not generate copyright, since its aim was to rebuild the church identically, so this image could be restored. BrightRaven (talk) 10:28, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

  •  Oppose First, the cited article does not say that the new church is an exact replica -- only that it was built on exactly the same place. Second, since the original church was built in the 18th century, it is certain that a great deal of creative work went into the new building. Even if it was meant to be an exact replica, new architectural drawings would have been required. They would have to have been created from photographs and other information available about the building that was destroyed in 1936. The new building could not be an exact replica -- building codes and methods have changed substantially since the 18th century. Therefore, the new building has a new copyright. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:20, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: see Jim's comment. -- Steinsplitter (talk) 07:48, 31 May 2015 (UTC)


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

File:BartDeWever.jpg Licenced with CC BYSA, how then a Copyright violation?

I did my very best to do everything right when uploading this file, including coordinating with the original photographer (Miel Pieters) to get the photograph onto Flickr with the right kind of license. I suggested Attribution-ShareAlike to him, which I believe should be perfectly fine. That's what he selected, so as soon as I saw that was in order on Flickr, I referenced the photo, his name, and uploaded the file here.

Where did I go wrong?... Sygmoral (talk) 09:39, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

 Support I think the problem is that the bot that did the Flickrreview objected to the fact that you uploaded a different size from the one on Flickr. That is not a legal problem, as the license covers all sizes, but it did create a problem for the bot. I think we can restore this promptly. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:37, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
 Comment 30 May 2015 . . Stemoc (talk | contribs | block) (569 bytes) (Marking as possible copyvio because Only image on the now deleted flickrstream, more likely flickrwashing .) --Steinsplitter (talk) 10:40, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
 Comment I do have an additional question/comment: I made some minor changes to the photograph before uploading, in particular I reduced some of the blurred 'light smudges'. That's one reason I had the photographer select BY-SA, so that - if required - I could 'publish' my (tiny) change with the same license. I did not manage to select this as an option when I was using the Upload Wizard though, and I'm not sure whether I need to do anything special about that. In any case I don't "need" any credit for that tiny change: as far as I'm concerned, it's completely Miel Pieter's work. Sygmoral (talk) 13:49, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: likely COM:LL. COM:OTRS permission needed. per COM:PCP -- Steinsplitter (talk) 07:47, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/Archive/2015-05&oldid=162215957"