Open main menu

Wikimedia Commons β

Commons:Undeletion requests

Translate this page; This page contains changes which are not marked for translation.


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

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

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

Commons deletion (policy)

Finding out why a file was deleted

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

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

Appealing a deletion

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

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

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

Temporary undeletion

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

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

To assist discussion

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

To allow transfer of fair use content to another project

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

Adding a request

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

  • In the Subject: 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.


Closed undeletion debates are archived daily.

Current requests

Watch View Edit

File:Energir logo.png

The closing sysop, Ellin Beltz, ignored the discussion and did not produce any rationale accessible for the common people (few oracles not included). My argument, in short: there is no other English logo of Énergir on Wikimedia Commons. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 19:07, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Greetings: I didn't ignore the discussion, I saw several instances of blocked user contributions and no clear indication of permission. Image is available in SVG at I would not personally contest its restoration, but would prefer a higher quality version if restored. Cheers. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:28, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
I might miss a discourse about either “permission” or “quality” in relation to Energir_logo.png – where did it happen? Moreover, a burst of ©-paranoia wrt a {{PD-textlogo}} uploaded by Gasexpert, a Meterrs/ConsumersDistributingonline sock, prompted by a delreq made by Tikrest, another Meterrs/ConsumersDistributingonline sock, showcases Commons practices as ridiculous, at best. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 19:53, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
Please state your point without sarcasm or insult. The file was unused. There is a higher quality SVG. We don't usually waste time meanly debating the fine points of unused "own work" or on such low quality images. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:58, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
I never saw Wikimedia Commons deleting files because a replacement exists in English Wikipedia, never before. Does it become an accepted practice? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 20:07, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

  Comment I would ordinarily agree with IM -- we should not delete the only Commons version of a logo just because an SVG exists on WP:EN. In fact, we do not routinely delete preexisting raster versions even if the SVG is on Commons. That said, however, this is such poor quality that I agree that deletion is justified. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:58, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

@Incnis Mrsi, Ellin Beltz, Jameslwoodward: Would this PNG rendering of the enwiki SVG at its designated size be considered a suitable replacement as {{subst:PD-Trademark-Text-Logo}}?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 13:17, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
I am not an expert on logos. As as image expert I certify that Energir_logo.png is not identical to a rendered Énergir_logo.svg, and as a sock buster I certify than all three suspicious accs in the history grew on the same farm. And again, there can be good and poor replacements, but the reason behind Ellin’s deletion is still unclear to me and I am puzzled why certain high-ranking Commons member indirectly encourage ConsumersDistributingonline to bring his crap. My proposal to protect the file—as an item on which the community already spent some resources—and kick all puppets off without deliberation was ignored. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 13:37, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
@Incnis Mrsi: I share your concern, but can the SVG be fixed to make it render better?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 13:44, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Files uploaded by VoidWanderer

Several files of mine were deleted, and I have reasons why they should be restored.

1. I've received a permission by Pavel Netesov, the author of the Blokpost Pamyati exhibition {{PermissionOTRS|2018040410013134}}:

2. Large batch of files are exhibition plates, and are falling under {{PD-text}}, because simple geometrical shapes, logos and tiny pictures may not be considered as copyright violation:

“The depicted text is ineligible for copyright and therefore in the public domain, because it is not a “literary work” or other protected type in sense of the local copyright law. Facts, data, and unoriginal information which is common property without sufficiently creative authorship in a general typeface or basic handwriting, and simple geometric shapes are not protected by copyright.”

--VoidWanderer (talk) 18:56, 9 April 2018 (UTC)


1) These must wait their turn at OTRS. When they reach the head of the queue there in about 50 days, if the license is acceptable they will be automatically restored.
2) I looked at about half of these and all of the ones I looked at have photographs and/or drawings which have copyrights and all have far more text then is necessary for a copyright. I don't see how we can restore them without a free license from the copyright holders. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:11, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
Jameslwoodward, all of the photos in a nomination are taken by me personally. OTRS ticket was aquired for the exhibition as a whole, not the pictures whose author I am already. So no one will mark them on OTRS queue, they're literally not queued.
Are you really saying exhibition plates that I took photo of are violating the copyrights? --VoidWanderer (talk) 22:16, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

1) I understood your comment to mean that the creator(s) of the works portrayed had sent a free license to OTRS. I have now looked at them, and in every case that will be required. In some cases, there are photographs, text, and other copyrighted works in the images, so the copyrights for those will also have to be freely licensed.

I do not understand "So no one will mark them on OTRS queue, they're literally not queued." OTRS Ticket 2018040410013134, which you cite above, is in the OTRS queue. It will be read and acted on by an OTRS volunteer when it reaches the head of the queue, which will be around June 1.

2) Yes. All of the images that I examined infringe on the copyrights for the drawings, photographs, and the texts shown in them. While I did not look at all of them, I doubt very much that any of them can be kept on Commons. This should not surprise you. Sealle, Christian Ferrer, and I, all experienced Commons Admins, all reached the same conclusion -- that they are all far above the threshold of originality anywhere. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:11, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Jameslwoodward, I mean how would those photos be possibly restored, if I have no guarantee OTRS Ticket even have those exact pictures mentioned? I suppose there's only the author's permission to take pictures of his exhibition. So I doubt volunteer will be even notified there're deleted photos that require to be restored. --VoidWanderer (talk) 09:41, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Jim, if the permission is valid then the images will be automatically restored. When you take a photo of something then you own the copyright on your photo, that is true, but if the thing depicted is protected by copyright (which is the case as soon as there is creativity) then the copyright holder of the depicted thing has also some rights on the publication of your photo, and in such cases it is required that we have his permission to publish here the photos. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:05, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Ticket 2018040410013134 has permission for the Exhibition "Блокпост Пам'яті" from Pavel Netesov. It looks OK for me. But I do not know what pictures are from this exhibition.--Anatoliy (talk) 18:10, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Stuttgarter Kantorei.jpg

Permission available with OTRS ticket 2009050810019351, picture from the same verified source. -- Uwe Martens (talk) 14:39, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

  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 59 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. De728631 (talk) 15:27, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

The ticket is already from 2009! Several pics of the right owner are already online here. By the way - also the users account has been verified. -- Uwe Martens (talk) 18:53, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
Ok, I didn't know that the ticket is that old. On the other hand, the file page did not have any OTRS identifier and the uploader Stiftsmusik Stuttgart hasn't put any note on their Commons user page either. @Stepro, Steinsplitter:, could you please have a look at this ticket? The photo in question is credited to Christian Hass / Sandra Wolf. De728631 (talk) 13:34, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

@Stiftsmusik Stuttgart: Under German law, copyright cannot be held by an organisation but rests exclusively with the individual photographer, e.g. Woerz or Christian Hass / Sandra Wolf. You may have gotten a right of use from the photographers but that does not put you in a legal position to grant a Creative Commons license to anyone else. If you provided evidence during your email verification that your organisation was authorised by any photographer to upload their images at Commons, that will be checked and the images may be restored. Otherwise we need permissions coming directly from the photographers.

P. S. Wikimedia Commons ist mehrsprachig, also können wir dies bei Bedarf auch auf Deutsch erörtern. De728631 (talk) 15:48, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

I will discuss it with the user on Monday by phone. -- Uwe Martens (talk) 16:24, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

See also the duplicative File:Stuttgarter Kantorei.jpg 2 section already closed as not done.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 17:13, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

The uploader will organize a new OTRS ticket in time. -- Uwe Martens (talk) 20:17, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for taking care of this. Once the new ticket has been approved, the file will be restored. De728631 (talk) 21:01, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Florian Oßner 2017.jpg

Bitte um Wiederherstellung und Freigabe der Portraitaufnahme des Politikers Florian Oßners!

Die Nutzungsrechte befinden sich unter folgendem Link:

Nutzungsrechte für die Portraitaufnahme von Florian Oßner

--Manhart (talk) 21:04, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

  Oppose Das reicht leider nicht. Dateien auf Commons und auf Wikipedia müssen für jedermann und für alle Zwecke frei verwendbar sein, inklusive kommerzielle Verwendung und Bearbeitungen. Das ist mit dieser Genehmigung leider nicht abgedeckt, die ja nicht einmal Wikipedia oder ähnliches erwähnt. Selbst die "Veröffentlichung im Internet" bezieht sich nur auf die Online-Version von Das Parlament. De728631 (talk) 21:55, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

"für alle Zwecke frei verwendbar sein, inklusive kommerzielle Verwendung und Bearbeitungen" - stimmt so nicht und kommt ganz auf die Lizenz drauf an. Aber die gepostete Lizenz war tatsächlich unzureichend. --Saippuakauppias (talk) 20:40, 16 April 2018 (UTC)--Saippuakauppias (talk) 20:40, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
Siehe Commons:Lizenzen. Was das Urheberrecht angeht, akzeptieren wir nur Werke, "die keinen Urheberrechtsbeschränkungen unterworfen sind, die einer Nutzung von jedem, jederzeit und für jeden Zweck entgegenstehen." Das bedeutet sehr wohl, dass ausschließlich nichtkommerzielle Lizenzen und Bearbeitungsverbote nicht erlaubt sind. Einschränkungen, die sich aus Markenrechten, gesetzlichen Auflagen, usw. ergeben, sind allerdings nicht relevant, sondern müssen von den jeweiligen Nutzern beachtet werden. De728631 (talk) 17:38, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Inma Codina.jpg

Hi, I'm requesting the undeletion of said file. It was marked for deletion by an editor because I had not submitted the release of rights.

I submitted the release on 2018-02-24 and received the confirmation ticket number [Ticket#: 2018022410003611] from Permissions Commons on the same date, but as of today (2018-04-19) the file has not been restored.

--Dsthode (talk) 10:37, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

  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 59 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..     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:29, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Marco Enríquez-Ominami 2018.jpg

I have the proporty of the image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gpeirano (talk • contribs) 18:59, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

File:The-sunny-devils-band-group-photo.jpg and File:The-Sunny-Devils-Band-Photo.jpg




Both of these images were deleted due to copyright claims disputes due to them appearing on a facebook page. I am the owner of the original images and the page found on the facebook page 'The Sunny Devils' below:


How can I verify my ownership of these items? Or must they be deleted and reuploaded with the correct credits added, even though I am crediting myself?


Johnhowell00 (talk) 19:28, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

File:C Olivieri Munroe 8631 copy copy lowres.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I sent written permission Bossband (talk) 19:34, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Nina Kennedy.jpg

Please undelete the photo of Nina Kennedy at Lincoln Center. The photo is my own work and I give permission for it to be used freely. 4/19/18 Nina07011960 (talk)

This issue is being addressed at User talk:Nina07011960 due to a block.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 03:06, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Mass TechCrunch restore request

Please restore all images deleted in the following DRs and the following individual images:

I've pulled this request out of the archive since Yann received a response on Ticket:2018041510004936 that indicates that the images in question are indeed under a free license and that the copyright holder has agreed to put them under said license. I'd like to restart my request to undelete these images in light of the OTRS ticket. The original discussion is included above in the collapsed section for referral purposes. Also pinging Jameslwoodward as they opposed the original request. --Majora (talk) 01:08, 20 April 2018 (UTC)