Open main menu

Commons:Undeletion requests

(Redirected from Commons:UR)

Shortcut: COM:UNDEL · COM:UR · COM:UD · COM:DRV

Other languages:
Bahasa Indonesia • ‎Cymraeg • ‎Deutsch • ‎English • ‎Ripoarisch • ‎dansk • ‎español • ‎français • ‎galego • ‎italiano • ‎magyar • ‎polski • ‎português • ‎svenska • ‎русский • ‎українська • ‎العربية • ‎پښتو • ‎中文 • ‎日本語

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

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

Contents

Finding out why a file was deleted

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

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

Appealing a deletion

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

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

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

Temporary undeletion

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

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

To assist discussion

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

To allow transfer of fair use content to another project

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

Projects that accept fair use

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

Adding a request

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

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

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

Archives

Closed undeletion debates are archived daily.

Current requests

Watch View Edit

File:Ervaren lichaamsbeeld, naar geslacht en naar bmi, bevolking van 18 jaar en ouder, 2014 (in procenten).png

As Natuur12 indicated on Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2019-01#File:Ervaren lichaamsbeeld, naar geslacht en naar bmi, bevolking van 18 jaar en ouder, 2014 (in procenten).png, it was well sourced.

Considering this was a rather poor speedy deletion tag by ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 who doesn't understand Dutch and deletion by Jcb, I also request undeletion of everything else in the batch:

If needed, those can go through a regular DR process. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 06:24, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

  Oppose - I rechecked several and all of them miss vital source information. E.g. PDF documents with several images in them without any source/authorship information. Jcb (talk) 06:30, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
No offense but I'm not taking your word on this kind of thing. I've been burned a few too many times on that. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 07:24, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
I left some notes behind the file names. Most files if not all files have dubious own work claims. Natuur12 (talk) 20:23, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
@Natuur12: thanks! Files like File:Emigratie vroeger en nu.jpg seem like they are strictly educational, but the quality (hand-written text, no professional-looking illustrations, as far as I can tell from the Google thumbnail) makes it unlikely to be useful. I wonder where the obvious violations for the PDF documents were taken from? I can't see those at all. Knowing that may aid in finding sources for PD-simple files. File:Aandeel lezers en niet-lezers in een week, bevolking van 13 jaar en ouder, naar enkele achtergrondkenmerken.png was not claimed as own work either, but looking anything up is troublesome for deleted files, so a DR would help. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 22:26, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
@Alexis Jazz: I left more notes. Strakhov (talk) 03:23, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
@Strakhov: also thanks! I think it'll take one or more people who understand Dutch and Dutch culture to sort all of these out. I'm willing to go over them in a DR, I think Donald Trung also won't mind. The obvious copyvios Natuur12 identified and Homer could potentially remain deleted. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 06:23, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Well, most files are just plain garbage and undeleting them would be a waste of resources. The files seem to be part of some middle school project. The copyright violations are low quality teaching material. The non copyright violations are CBR graphs or self created drawings. While the deletion reason for most files is faulty there's little point in undeleting them. (CBS graps exlcuded). Natuur12 (talk) 15:24, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
@Natuur12: I'd be okay with undeletion of the CBS graphs and leaving everything else. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 07:46, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Reposição de ficheiros de João Justiceiro (3)

Dando prosseguimento aos pedidos de reposição por partes, solicito o restauro destes arquivos, sinalizados como "violação de direitos autorais":

Os quatro primeiros arquivos são desenhos vetoriais de minha autoria baseados em obras de mais de 20 anos que não estão mais registradas em propriedade industrial (pode ser consultado o site do INPI para mais detalhes). O quinto é feito a partir deste arquivo, e os dois últimos são formas textuais simples que não podem ser enquadradas em copyright ({{PD-textlogo}}).

Convido a debater Ankry, Yann, Jmabel e Strakhov, envolvidos nas últimas discussões. João Justiceiro (talk) 23:58, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

  Agree. I believe these files are within the scope defined by {{PD-textlogo}}. Érico (talk) 00:22, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Restore. These seem to have been part of a mass deletion of perfectly OK files uploaded by João Justiceiro. I don't know what's going on here, but so far everything he has brought here to be restored has been valid, and these appear to be, too. We're now up to maybe 30 restorations, maybe more. - Jmabel ! talk 05:12, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Sim, ainda há mais. João Justiceiro (talk) 14:51, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Intendente Rodolfo Suarez.jpg

I nominated this image for deletion, but then I discovered that the image appears in the Radical Civic Union page (archived), whose contents are free to use and reproduce citing the source (copyleft). --Yilku1 (talk) 20:08, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

  Info The image at ucr.org.ar is cropped. So I doubt we can keep the full version basing on their copyleft permission. Or am I missing something? Ankry (talk) 06:00, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
I think is the same as case as this, where a small image in the source is the same a big image in Commons. --Yilku1 (talk) 03:07, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

  Done per above. Ankry (talk) 17:27, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Oliver Mark - Laura Bruce, Berlin 2012.jpg

Hi, this file has been deleted. On the deletion page I was asking, what kind of message the artist (Laura Bruce) should write in order to prevent a deletion. My question was not answered and the image was deleted a few days ago. My suggestion for an E-Mail to permissions-de@wikimedia.org was this (in German):

"Ich erkläre in Bezug auf das Bild Oliver Mark - Laura Bruce, Berlin 2012.jpg , dass ich die abgebildete Person und Urheberin der auf dem Foto abgebildeten Kunstwerke bin. Diese wurde zur Löschung vorgeschlagen, und ich erlaube, bzw. bestätige hiermit jedermann die Weiternutzung des Bildes unter der freien Lizenz „Creative Commons Namensnennung-Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen 4.0“ (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.de). Ich gewähre somit in urheberrechtlicher Hinsicht Dritten das Recht, das Bild (auch gewerblich) zu nutzen und zu verändern, sofern sie die Lizenzbedingungen wahren. Mir ist bekannt, dass ich diese Einwilligung üblicherweise nicht widerrufen kann. Mir ist bekannt, dass sich die Unterstellung unter eine freie Lizenz nur auf das Urheberrecht bezieht und es mir daher unbenommen ist, aufgrund anderer Gesetze (Persönlichkeitsrecht, Markenrecht usw.) gegen Dritte vorzugehen, die das Bild im Rahmen der freien Lizenz rechtmäßig, aufgrund der anderen Gesetze aber unrechtmäßig nutzen. Gleichwohl erwerbe ich keinen Anspruch darauf, dass das Bild dauerhaft auf der Wikipedia eingestellt wird. 28. Dezember 2018, Laura Bruce"

(sent from the artists E-Mail) What should I do now? The questioned artist, Laura Bruce is ready to send a Mail to the Wiki Commons moderators or admins. I just tried to re-upload the image, but it says, that the image was deleted and I should make an undeletion request. --OliverMarkPhotographer (talk) 21:28, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

  Oppose In any case when somebody contested exclusive copyright ownership by the anonymous uploader, we need a free license permission from exclusive copyright holder to be send directly to Wikimedia OTRS system following COM:OTRS instructions (from a trackable email address). In this case both permissions: from the photographer and from the painter are needed. Ankry (talk) 21:50, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
I know. The verification of the identity of the user account OliverMarkPhotographer has already been archived months ago in the Wikimedia OTRS system. Again, the questioned artist is ready to send the questioned mail with the permission. What can I do to get this image undeleted? Thanks for your help.--OliverMarkPhotographer (talk) 18:14, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
You can do nothing. The image may be undeleted after permission is sent and verified by an OTRS volunteer. But queue is long. Ankry (talk) 20:02, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
So the artist sends the e-mail to Wikimedia OTRS and then the picture will be online again, ok. Would have been easier if someone had answered this exact question on the deletion page. It was not answered for months... --OliverMarkPhotographer (talk) 04:52, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
It would be easier if we have more volunteers willing to help users in Commons and less copyvio uploads. The same problem is with OTRS, I am afraid. Ankry (talk) 13:26, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

  Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 17:37, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Locator maps of Latvian parishes

In deletion request original uploader (re)confirmed that they are the author of the following maps. Also evidence was provided that public source data of these maps is open data. Author has released their maps to public domain, they are a prolific mapmaker and administrator on Latvian Wikipedia. In response to my recent enquiry they say that they a professional cartographer. Years ago they have documented their mapmaking process here. So there seems to be more than enough reason to assume good faith that these maps are not copyright violations.

Nominator in their laconic remarks in turn did not provide any evidence that there are some other non-free maps that these maps might be derived from. Closing admin in their post-closure response doesn't seem to know either why should we doubt about the freedom of these maps. Hopefully this is a misunderstanding and these maps can be restored. Or, if not else, then hopefully now we can shed at least some light on why were these maps deleted, and why shouldn't we delete pretty much all other maps on Commons in similar manner (as we are never 100% sure that everything is alright copyright-wise).

--Pikne 07:25, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Ips-nscf-2018-laureates-2367.jpg

I ask to undelete the image at File:Ips-nscf-2018-laureates-2367.jpg. The image was deleted because it shows some portraits, and the state of the portraits was supposed to be unknown. My reason is, the portraits shown in this image are partly my images from Commons, partly images from this free site. --PereslavlFoto (talk) 14:30, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Deleted because unclear copyright status. We cannot hold images with unclear copyright status. Clear free license evidence or clear PD status rationale is needed in odred to restore the photo. So precise source is needed if they are freely licensed. Note also that CC-BY-SA requires attribution which you did not provide. Ankry (talk) 19:52, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
Can you give me a sample of image with such attribution? Having a sample, I will make the same attribution for this image. --PereslavlFoto (talk) 19:56, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
@PereslavlFoto: Atribution should be exactly the same as required by original portrait photo author(s). If they are not under CC-BY-SA-compatible license, you may not declare CC-BY-SA license to a photo that is DW. And it is up to you to prove that the photos are under a CC-BY-SA-compatible license. Ankry (talk) 10:41, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
@Ankry: Could you please show me the sample of making such attribution? Is there any order for this on Commons? The portraits in this images image are under CC-BY and CC-BY-SA licenses. The question is not about provenance. The question is, how to show that provenance in description templates? --PereslavlFoto (talk) 10:59, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
@PereslavlFoto: I do not say you should make such attribution from scratch. You should copy it from information about the images that you declare to be CC-licensed. If they are CC-licensed such attribution mast exist near the photos presented by you on your photo. If there is none, your photo is likely a copyright violation. We are talking about copyright status of the portraits from your photo. What their licenses are? They are definitely copyrighted. Ankry (talk) 11:23, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
@Ankry: As I mentioned, they are partly done by myself, partly licensed with CC-BY-4 (see the bottom of that site). --PereslavlFoto (talk) 11:32, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
@PereslavlFoto: Unless you point out clear evidence of free license for the oval photos, we cannot go on here. Nobody will search them over sites. Ankry (talk) 07:01, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
@Ankry: Two images taken from this page, license is stated in the bottom of the page, images are [1] and [2]. One image taken from this page. --PereslavlFoto (talk) 08:44, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
OK.   Support undeletion then. CC-BY 4.0 is IMO compatible with CC-BY-SA 3.0. Ankry (talk) 18:25, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Geologic Map of the Near Side of the Moon.jpg

File:Geologic Map of the Near Side of the Moon.jpg was deleted as copyvio, but it was published by the USGS: [3] Thus, it qualifies for {{PD-USGov-USGS}}. RockingGeo (talk) 23:59, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

  • @Jcb: as you deleted this image claiming this license invalid, could you please elaborate why? I cannot find any related discussion. Ankry (talk) 10:23, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
    • Please be aware that this was part of a mass deletion of mostly blatant copyright violations by this uploader. Another UDR for this batch was already closed as 'not done'. If it turns out that some of the files are fine, I have no problem with undeletion. Jcb (talk) 11:36, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support undeletion per {{PD-USGov-USGS}}. And noting that even if this rationale is contested, the map would likely be {{PD-US-no notice}} (1971 map). Ankry (talk) 21:47, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Geologic Map of Mars.pdf

This batch was deleted for copyvio, but it was published by the USGS: [4] Thus, it qualifies for {{PD-USGov-USGS}}.

RockingGeo (talk) 00:04, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

@Jcb: same as above. A link to appropriate discussion would be welcome. Ankry (talk) 10:35, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
Please be aware that this was part of a mass deletion of mostly blatant copyright violations by this uploader. Another UDR for this batch was already closed as 'not done'. If it turns out that some of the files are fine, I have no problem with undeletion. Jcb (talk) 11:37, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Euamppid

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: These are images from euam-ukraine.eu web-site with relevant CC license RomcherChk (talk) 08:52, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Exact links to the source site with clear evidence of free license are needed here. User who declares not to be a single person, cannot grant a personal license. Ankry (talk) 09:00, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

The direct links are:

@RomcherChk: These are links to images, not to their licenses. Ankry (talk) 21:42, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
@RomcherChk: Any evidence that all content of the http://www.euam-ukraine.eu/ service is freely licensed? While I can find a link to CC-BY-SA 4.0 license in the http://www.euam-ukraine.eu/ page code, I cannot locate information what the license applies to (assuming it applies ONLY to the pege containing the link). And without clear information we cannot go on. Ankry (talk) 17:53, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

File:In Bed With...Sonia Ben Ammar - LOVE.webm

This file was deleted "per nomination", but in the discussion it is shown that the nomination reason is wrong. Please ping me in any reply. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 12:59, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Thats what {{Licensereview}} for. That was missing and now its hard to determine under which license it was published. --JuTa 20:14, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
It is not that hard. This link [5] was provided in the discussion. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 17:59, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Yoga Training In Rishikesh Akshi Yogashala (258662567).jpeg

The nomination was based in "metadata contains Facebook, as source" but clearly is the same author for both files, and it's possible by the law have different versions of the same file, under different licenses. Moreover, the author could always choose to latter publish a file in a more permissive license. So, the justification is not valid.

Gbawden it's not the first time that you do not check the votes and wrongly delete a file of mine. jeff g will always include "delete" in files that I upload, because he loves me and want hard my attention, so you need to pay more attention. ---- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 18:11, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

@Rodrigo.Argenton: Is there an OTRS ticket containing Wikimedia and Facebook users identity confirmation by a highly trusted independent user? We should be able to verify identity even when Facebook account disappears. Ankry (talk) 21:27, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
Ankry,
We have the CC-by version stored at archive.org (258662567), so we have a more powerful manner to prove than even OTRS. Check [6] and [7]. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 01:45, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

File:John Vignola al festival Musicultura, Macerata 2018.jpg

previous undeleting discussion closed. reopening to submit a license matching requested criteria as outlined by your editor (Ankry): https://drive.google.com/open?id=17nQYEAhbwxsa7LyYNCVuwYeAXqUlpBqI the photographer can be reached directly for any further inquiry/verification (contact info in the doc). --Kireru (talk) 08:12, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

@Kireru: Hi,
It is your responsibility to provide a license and a permission. So Massimo Zanconi, the author mentioned in the description, should send a permission via COM:OTRS. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:40, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

ok, done. thank you. regards --Kireru (talk) 09:49, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Здание компании «Калуга Астрал» в Калуге.jpg

Обычная фотография здания, которое стоит на улице - это нарушение авторских прав?
— Preceding unsigned comment added by NatalieKot (talk • contribs) 08:46, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  Info Google Translate: "An ordinary photo of a building that is on the street is a violation of copyright?" Thuresson (talk) 23:34, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  Comment This file is broken for me. Yann (talk) 11:36, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

  Not done: There are two issues with this file: 1. possible copyvio because it is marked as (C) ASTRAL KALUGA; 2. incomplete upload, file broken entitles it to speedy deletion. Ruthven (msg) 09:03, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Свято-Успенський храм Лютенька 2000 рік.jpg

Дозвіл (Permission) https://drive.google.com/open?id=1GtIC-9C0tLswlIw4jmYtYmZq3MZGVS_g  
Джерело (Оrigin) http://history-poltava.org.ua/?p=5345 --KievPope (talk) 14:53, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  Oppose No evidence of free license. No evidence that the permission is from the photographer (or their heirs). We need a permission to come directly from the copyright owner and be verifiable. Ankry (talk) 06:56, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Свято-Успенський храм Лютенька 2000 рік.jpg.

Permission https://drive.google.com/open?id=10pzVx-52V3WDTEDYeF_m58EhRrLBpoej Source http://history-poltava.org.ua/?p=5345 --KievPope (talk) 12:27, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Bi-directional Relevance Matching between Medical Corpora.pdf

At zenodo this file is tagged with CC-By-4.0 which is how it is licensed on Wikimedia Commons. It was deleted for lack of OTRS ticket. An OTRS ticket is possible but I think this is covered in the publication source.

@Jcb: performed the delection on 10 June 2019.

Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:49, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

  Info There ae 2 files there: an article and a 39-slide presentation (overwritten by the same uploader for unknown reason). While CC-BY 4.0 likely applies to the first, no evidence that it applies also to the second. So   Support undeletion of the initial revision only. Ankry (talk) 06:49, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

File:溥仪书法“康德”十年(1944)写本.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:溥仪书法“康德”十年(1944)写本.jpg

Puyi died in 1967, his work has been public domain in China since 2018. Abzeronow (talk) 18:14, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

URAA restored copyright on January 1, 1996 (life+50 yrs for China), see "Important note" in {{PD-China}}. --Wcam (talk) 18:22, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

File:African-American Flag by David Hammons(37472936844).jpg

This artwork by David Hammons is a derivative design from the U.S. flag, which is in the public domain/can not be copyrighted. The colours used in the artwork from a public domain flag design - Pan-African flag. MassiveEartha (talk) 03:12, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Derivative of PD work is not automatically PD. No evidence that this one is. Ankry (talk) 06:35, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

File:laetitia_fourcade_02.jpg

Cette image est libre de droit, c'est pour cela que je l'ai postée à nouveau. Ce n'est pas parce qu'elle figure sur un site à qui ont la donné, qu'elle n'est pas à nous. Ce serait sympa de poser la question avant de supprimé.

Merci de faire le nécessaire pour qu'elle réapparaisse sur la page à la demande de l'intéressé soit Laetitia FOURCADE.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanglios (talk • contribs) 10:19, 13 June 2019‎ (UTC)
  1. @Sanglios: please sign your messages.
  2. Reuploading images is against Wikimedia Commons rules.
  3. As the image was already published elsewhere we need either (1) proper free license/authorship info at the initial publication site, or (2) a written free license permission from the actual copyright holder following COM:OTRS/it instructions. We cannot rely on on-wiki authorship/licensing declarations in such cases. Ankry (talk) 06:21, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Deportation of the Crimean Tatars montage.jpg

The image cited can be viewed here. If you look closely at the photo in the top left corner you will see the copyrighted bronze engraving was at a whopping (/s) 42x54 px. Another administrator, User:Yann, was against the deletion of the file on the grounds of it being de minimis, however, it appears that the deleting administrator beleives that Commons:De minimis does not apply to derivative works, no matter how low resolution - which is not true at all. I request undeletion on the grounds that this file is a textbook example of De minimis. The copyrighted portion is so low that it is not easily identifiable what it shows; it is part of a larger work; and certainly in insufficient detail.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 22:18, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

  Info I do not think de minimis can be applied to the monument. Ankry (talk) 06:13, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
@Ankry: The stone part of the monument (not the bronze carving) is clearly too simple geometry to be copyrighted, considering that literally thousands of monuments in former Soviet states consist of quadrilateral pillars.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 17:30, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
I do not judge whether it is copyrighted or not. I just disagree with using de minimis rationale here. Ankry (talk) 19:09, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

hydraulic features map

This map was generated by IJC, a treaty-based org created by Canada and the US governments. File:Figure 3 Location of communities and control structures on and around Lake St. Lawrence.jpg I can grant the rights through a Commons license. I guess I neglected to do that during uploading. Thanks.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffkart (talk • contribs) 18:25, 14 June 2019‎ (UTC)

  Info File:Figure 3 Location of communities and control structures on and around Lake St. Lawrence.jpg.

@Jeffkart: Please clarify why you believe that works by the "International Joint Commission" are published under a Creative Commons license. Thuresson (talk) 23:21, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Figure 1 Map of Lake St. Lawrence.jpg

This was created by a Canadian government agency affiliated with the IJC. File:Figure 1 Map of Lake St. Lawrence.jpg I can add the proper release rights if I neglected to do that in uploading. Thanks.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffkart (talk • contribs) 18:36, 14 June 2019‎ (UTC)

  Info File:Figure 1 Map of Lake St. Lawrence.jpg

@Jeffkart: Please clarify why you believe that 2019 documents by the government of Canada can be published under an acceptable copyright license. (See Commons:Licensing). Thuresson (talk) 23:27, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

File:JunepA Blockade Unterlüß 2017.jpg

Photo was taken at an demonstration and shows a scene of public interest, so there is no permission by the people on the photo needed. --GPSLeo (talk) 22:03, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

  Oppose Published previously at cellesche-zeitung.de and it appears that the photo was taken by local news reporter Christopher Menge. Thuresson (talk) 22:16, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Are you speaking about licensing or personality rights? The reason for deletion where the personality rights not the license. --GPSLeo (talk) 08:15, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
@GPSLeo: So now it is OK? I see no clear evidence of free license publication, at least not at the source page linked from the description. Ankry (talk) 18:51, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
I did not had a look at the license shown at the linked source, the reason pointed in the nomination for deletion where violation of personality rights, what is not happened on the picture. --GPSLeo (talk) 20:10, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Liberalism cs.jpg

The file in question is a book cover of a book published by my think tank (I am the current director). Before I made that edit, the book cover of our previous issue of the same book was used on Wikipedia. What can I do to certify that the book cover can be used on Wikipedia? Thank you.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmister (talk • contribs) 10:38, 15 June 2019‎ (UTC)
@Mmister: We need COM:OTRS permission from the book copyright owner or their authorized representative (or en evidence that the whole book was published under cc-by-sa-4.0 license, which I do not think is the case here). Ankry (talk) 18:58, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

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

File:Harold at the table.jpg Need this jpg for the featured image

I need this picture for his featured page.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by John J Morris (talk • contribs) 12:18, 15 June 2019‎ (UTC)
And we need a free license from the photographer (or their heirs) or an evidence that the photo copyright expired in order to restore it. Claiming that you are the photographer who made it in 1920s is not helpful. Ankry (talk) 19:02, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  Not done Copyright status must be made clear. Also, the submission Draft:Harold Baker has been declined. Thuresson (talk) 19:46, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Android 8.0 Oreo Pixel.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I blurred it, but JuTa deleted it anyway because "not enough".

Well, ask for more blur then. I can't overwrite deleted images. However, it seems I was already pretty thorough with my first blur. I could blur more, but it won't even make much of a difference. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 15:25, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

  Support Ankry (talk) 19:05, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
Well, because the original is allready some kind of blurred by the copyright holder it would need a black-out or similar. --JuTa 19:22, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
PS: here the sources for a possible reupload: Android Oreo: http://android.com/versions/oreo-8-0/ Wallpaper: https://developer.android.com/about/versions --JuTa 19:24, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
I kind of disagree. It needs to be blurred to the point where it either falls below COM:TOO or becomes COM:DM. Anyway, I have an even more blurred version ready if this gets undeleted. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 18:25, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Leonid Chubarov 1960.tif

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This is an image of Mr. Leonid Chubarov from my personal archive, free of any copyright restrictions, and it is not a derivative works of non-free works. It was deleted by mistake. Это изображение Леонида Чубарова из моего личного архива, не является производной или обработанной версией какого-либо изображения, для использования которого необходимо получить разрешение. Прошу восстановить файл. 4ubarrow (talk) 05:05, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

@4ubarrow: Why do you think that the photo is free of copyright? By default any photo is copyrighted. Who the photographer is/was? Ankry (talk) 15:43, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

File:IP057.jpg

This is the public domain photo belonging to Ivan Pili and can be visited on the www.ivanpili.com website. Or it is very present on Google (always in the public domain) with the title "waiting for the spring"

  Oppose Being available on web is not the same as being in Public Domain. By default, every photo is copyrighted unless there is some legal reason or written copyright holder decission to release rights. Ankry (talk) 15:53, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

File:amb-sukubo sara-igbe sukubo.jpg

The photo is the property of the NYCN President and he has no issue as to putting it on his profile anywhere online. --Cipherghost (talk) 07:59, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

  Question And any evidence that the copyright holder granted a free license for the photo? We cannot store images with unclear copyright status, see COM:PCP. Ankry (talk) 15:50, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Fidan aghayeva-edler.jpg

I took this picture myself. Though it is also used on the website of the artist I am fine with it under commons license to be used in Wikimedia. Please restore the file Dafil (talk) 08:28, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

  Oppose for already published images we need either (1) free license for the image to be granted at the initial publication site, or (2) free written license permission to be sent following COM:OTRS instructions. We cannot rely on anonymous uploader's declarations in such cases for legal reasons. Ankry (talk) 15:56, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

I created an OTRS Ticket: Ticket:2019061610002592 with email from myself, as well as Ticket:2019061610002627 with email from the website contact address as mentioned on https://www.aghayeva-edler.de/en/kontakt Please restore the original file. Dafil (talk) 17:50, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Lar Duggan.jpg

Please restore the photo of Lar Duggan. He emailed his written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org):


I hereby affirm that I, Lar Duggan, am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the media work https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lar_Duggan.jpg.

I agree to publish the above-mentioned work under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International.

I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work, even in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.

I am aware that the copyright holder always retains ownership of the copyright as well as the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by the copyright holder.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.


Lar Duggan

2019-03-09

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Alwayslearnedstuff (talk • contribs)

[generated using relgen]

  •   Oppose If a free license has been sent to OTRS, then the file will be restored automatically when and if the email is received, processed, and approved. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 181 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.

If the message was sent to the English language version of OTRS and the email has been properly received there the sender will receive an automatic reply with the ticket number. If the sender has not had a reply, please check that it was sent correctly and try again. Other language versions may or may not provide the automatic reply. Ankry (talk) 16:56, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Keven McDonald Basketball Action Photo.jpg

Hello,

My name is Keven McDonald. I am the subject, but not the creator, of the Keven McDonald wiki page. My user name for Wikipedia is kmacjdwiki. After several days of correcting inaccuracies and misstatements on the page, as well as updating some things I put MY OWN photo, Keven_McDonald.jpg on the site. This picture was taken by a relative of mine years ago when I played at Penn. This picture has been used not only by myself but by countless others over the years. The reason for this is when I played basketball at the University of Pennsylvania there were many times when I needed to use the photo for various publicity and basketball public relations events. Neither I nor my dearly departed Uncle Jimmy (who took the picture) ever denied the University or anyone else the right to use the picture.

Yesterday I went into the attic, took a picture of the photo on my phone and uploaded it to the wiki page of which I am the subject. I believe I went through all the proper steps and thought I made it clear that I owned the picture. Evidently I was wrong in this assumption. So, let me be clear, the photo belongs to me. It was taken by a relative (my Uncle Jimmy) more than 40 years ago. Yes, you will find it all over the 'net because it's been used by many others after I let Penn use it for some publicity purposes when I played there. I've never objected to others using it over the years and dear old Uncle Jimmy is long dead.

Please put MY PICTURE back on the page in the upper left corner where I put it yesterday with the same caption I created or give me specific reasons why I can't put my own picture on a site about me...a picture that is directly relevant to the subject matter of the site, basketball!

Thank you,

Keven McDonald

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kmacjdwiki (talk • contribs)
@Kmacjdwiki: According to copyright law, copyright to the photo belongs to the photographer unless somebody has a copyright transfer contract with the photographer. And only the exclusive copyright holder is authorized to grant free license required in Wikimedia Commons. Due to legal reasons, we cannot accept permissions from third parties. Also, publishing a photo without clear copyright information might trigger a doubt that prevents granting a verifiable free license that is required here. This page suggests that copyright to the photo belongs to Penn Athletics and we may need an official confirmation from Penn Athletics that they do not hold copyright before accepting permission from anyone else. Alternative is to wait until copyright expires (70 years after photographer death or 95 years after the initial photo publication if the photographer cannot be identified). Ankry (talk) 17:16, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
@Kmacjdwiki: when an original photo is inherited from the photographer/copyright owner, the ‎{{Cc-by-sa-4.0-heirs}}‎ license would normally be accepted. However, because Penn Athletics apparently asserts copyright, I agree with Ankry that we need official confirmation from Penn Athletics that they do not hold copyright. This statement should be emailed by Penn Athletics on their letterhead to: permissions-commons@wikimedia.org.  JGHowes  talk 19:23, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

THAT PICTURE DOES NOT BELONG TO PENN, IT BELONGS TO ME!! I let them use that photo over the years, first when I played there and over the years since. Copyright issues never occurred to me and they (and everyone else all over the internet) has always been able to use it. Over the years I've seen this photo on blog posts, newspapers etc. and I've never required anyone to ask my permission. The photographer, my Uncle Jimmy, is dead and Penn is in no position to grant a free license because THE PICTURE BELONGS TO ME! Decades ago I let them use the photo for some long forgotten program or event and over the years they and others have used it. Last year I was inducted as an Ivy League Legend and they chose to use my picture again. And again, I never sought or required them to ask my permission. This has now reached the level of absurdity. I'm sure my uncle, in whatever realm he now resides, is laughing at this nonsensical bullshit over a meaningless picture he took at one of my games in the seventies.

In any event, all I wanted to do was edit and update a page full of inaccuracies, terrible grammar, poorly constructed sentences and to finally put up a picture that I own that is completely consistent with the theme of the page. I had no idea this simple task would lead me down this insane rabbit hole. The bottom line is this, if you won't put MY picture on the site then please have someone send me instructions on how to delete the entire page since the original author didn't have my "permission" to create it.

Keven McDonald

Thank you

Please sign your messages with four tildes (~~~~) if you wish them to be responded.
Penn claims that the page with this image is copyrighted by Penn, not by you. No information about your copyright there. How can you prove that it is not true? Will you sue them and wait for a court decision? Note also, that any wiki user is considered anonymous. If you wish to claim anything as a non-anonymous, identifiable person, you must contact COM:OTRS via email. Ankry (talk) 11:43, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Files uploaded by TOBELO

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by TOBELO

Since I originally hadn't intended to go through this whole DR, I wound up adding a few extra to the initial UDR. Might as well try to undelete what else I can (paintings that have dates) although others in that DR can be undeleted if the admin thinks it should be. Artist died in 1944 so they're now public domain in Brazil. Abzeronow (talk) 16:56, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Non-GMO Himalayan Salt.jpg Undeletion request

Non-GMO Himalyan Salt.jpg was deleted because "Wikimedia Commons does not accept derivative works of non-free works." This photo is a picture of a salt-shaker taken by me in a grocery store. I'm willing to drop it into the public domain, and thought I already did.

"Reproductions of copyrighted works are also subject to the same copyright, and therefore this file must unfortunately be considered non-free." The packaging depicted in this picture isn't copyright, its trademarked, as can be seen by the (R) symbols next to the mountain logos.

According to Commons Derivative works: "On the other hand, ordinary alarm clocks, dinner plates, gaming consoles— as well as actual, full-scale planes— are not generally copyrightable" Since this is a picture of a salt shaker, which isn't copyright infringement. If this is getting deleted because it is "infringing" on The Non-GMO project's or Himalayan Chef's copyright, then we should also delete 15-09-26-RalfR-WLC-0098.jpg, a picture of a coke bottle because it infringes on Coca-Cola's copyright.

Sincerely,

Morris_of_Orange

--Morris of Orange (talk) 17:42, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

@Morris of Orange: The salt is free, but the images on the label are not free. So if you remove the label, the photo will be ok... See COM:PACKAGING. Ankry (talk) 11:36, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Milton morrison.jpg

[[File:Milton morrison.jpg|thumb|Portrait of Milton Teófilo Morrison Ramirez, president of Partido Pais Posible]]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcastillo1978 (talk • contribs) 23:24, 16 June 2019‎ (UTC)
@Mcastillo1978: any evidence that the image is free? Facebook is not. Ankry (talk) 11:22, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

File:華南高商 觀光事業科 科徽.png

廣告設計科[8]同樣也有放上科徽,為何觀光事業科無法放科徽上去實在令人難以理解,雖然刪除理由是違反著作權,但廣告設計科的科徽就沒有侵犯著作權嗎?若真要刪除能不能給個更能信服的回應? 十二夜影 (talk) 09:18, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Aja Naomi King as Ifrah Ahmed in A Girl from Mogadishu.jpg

OTRS agent (verify): request: we've received Ticket:2018122010007757 regarding File:Aja Naomi King as Ifrah Ahmed in A Girl from Mogadishu.jpg. Please restore in order to verified veracity and finish the process. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 12:54, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Ticket:2018122710005942

OTRS agent (verify): request: we've received Ticket:2018122710005942 regarding two files. Apparently there ir a problem: The file with permission is File:Anton Vezuv photo 2018.jpg, so is needed to restore this file, and delete: File:Anton Vezuv photo 2018.jpg, tagged by mistake. Thanks. --Ganímedes (talk) 12:58, 17 June 2019 (UTC)