Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2007-10

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

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

Columbus_Cutaway_2007_H.jpg[edit]

Description The Columbus laboratory is ESA's biggest contribution to the International Space Station (ISS). Delivered to ESA by EADS SPACE Transportation on 2 May 2006, this laboratory will provide internal payload accommodation for various scientific experiments. The Columbus laboratory is due to be flown on Space Shuttle Atlantis to the ISS in December 2007.
Date 2 May 2006
Source
This file is lacking source information.

Please edit this file's description and provide a source.

Author D. Ducros/ESA
Permission
(Reusing this file)

Copyright Notice The ESA Portal Multimedia Gallery contains images and videos used throughout the ESA Portal. The images are offered in the Gallery in the highest resolution available.

Most images have been released publicly from ESA. You may use ESA images or videos for educational or informational purposes. The publicly released ESA images may be reproduced without fee, on the following conditions:

Credit ESA as the source of the images: Examples: Photo: ESA; Photo: ESA/Cluster; Image: ESA/NASA - SOHO/LASCO ESA images may not be used to state or imply the endorsement by ESA or any ESA employee of a commercial product, process or service, or used in any other manner that might mislead. If an image includes an identifiable person, using that image for commercial purposes may infringe that person's right of privacy, and separate permission should be obtained from the individual. If these images are to be used in advertising or any commercial promotion, layout and copy must be submitted to ESA beforehand for approval (http://www.esa.int/ esaCP/ contact_us.html)

Some images contained in this Gallery have come from other sources, and this is indicated in the Copyright notice. For re-use of non-ESA images contact the designated authority.

http://www.esa.int/esa-mmg/mmgdownload.pl
We cannot accept media that does not explicitly allow commercial reuse and derivative works. As this does not follow Commons:Licensing, it is therefore out of project scope. Please get an explicit permission, forward it to permissions-commons at wikimedia dot org, and someone with OTRS access can confirm that permission (if it is valid). —O (说 • 喝) 22:52, 01 October 2007 (GMT)

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

Image:Carcassone (German).jpg[edit]

"The second part of the amendment states that “the design of a useful article * * * shall be considered a pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work only if, and only to the extent that, such design incorporates pictorial, graphic, or sculptural features that can be identified separately from, and are capable of existing independ­ently of, the utilitarian aspects of the article"

The game is copyrighted but is not a work of art, as such, picturals of the game are not subject to copyright. This is probably further enforced by the german Schöpfungshöhe.

Else we might as well forbid any pictures of any games or cars or...

This was never created. O2 (息 • 吹) 03:26, 07 October 2007 (GMT)


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

karakattam dance of tamilnadu-INDIA[edit]

DO NOT DELETE THE IMAGE

What image? O2 (息 • 吹) 03:24, 07 October 2007 (GMT)

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

before Islam[edit]

The Movie is Before Islam the name is Men Of The Cave .It is a story in the Quran if you are muslim .

What? O2 (息 • 吹) 03:23, 07 October 2007 (GMT)


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

Sophora toromiro[edit]

Image uploaded, [1] from my own work was recently deleted. There is not good picture of this theme, the available corresponds to Sophora cassioides. Source was indicated, but original work is my own. --Penarc 01:41, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please link to the image. I currently have no clue which image you want undeleted. —O (说 • 喝) 23:50, 05 October 2007 (GMT)

Image was never deleted. O2 (息 • 吹) 03:22, 07 October 2007 (GMT)

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

image:LH-Senator and Business Lounge.jpg[edit]

This image has been uploded or taken by myself. There was no AfD discussion. The deleting User:Szczepan1990 was asked to explain the reason on 2007-08-24 on his talk page but he didn't answer although he was active since. See also Commons:Forum/Archiv/2007/August#Warum_wurde_das_Bild_gel.C3.B6scht.3F. Please undelete, Thanks --Mattes 04:01, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently it was considered a derivative work because of the logo it included. I'm inclined to agree with Szczepan1990. Samulili 07:33, 28 August 2007 (UTC) Logos are not automatically be a reason for speedy deletion. --Mattes 19:54, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I would like to know
  1. Why was it speedily deleted and not discussed in public?
  2. Why does he ignore my request?
  3. What does dv stand for?
  4. What is the problem anyway?
  5. Is this the right or new way to act (no warning on my talk page, speedy delete instead of AfD, using a delete reason which is not common to the vast majority of users, no reaction to a request)?
This case and this behavior should really been discussed in detail. This makes me uncomfortable and slows down my motivation to upload any more media. I'm a little unhappy... First, it was about the deletion processs and now, this performance is the second issue which concerns me about the Commons. I believe in the commons idea very much but this case is just awful. As I would be a new user, I probably would say "Thanks for the very sensible performance, let them do whatever they want to do and I'm outta here"... I hope somebody is able to lighten up my mood. Best wishes --Mattes 19:54, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Mattes. It is not ideal to use the deletion summary "dv" and I don't know why Szczepan1990 ignores your request. If you want to discuss this admin's actions, you can make a post at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems describing your problems, to attract attention. Regards, Fred J 14:21, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry you feel bad about this issue and I can understand why you feel that way. I hope you will find my answers helpful.
  1. Images that clearly aren't free can be deleted without discussion. What is clear and what is not... this page exists so we can correct our humane erranous behaviour.
  2. I don't know, and I'm sorry that he doesn't. Rest assured, your issue will be noticed by many admins on this page. (One can assume that maybe Szczepan1990 is busy or away or maybe his English isn't that good - those would be some understandable reasons for not replying to a message.)
  3. "dv" probably stands for derivative work (sic). Please see, Commons:Derivative works.
  4. Please see my reply to question number 3.
  5. Some of Szczepan1990's actions have been within the policy, while a part of his behaviour is merely forgivable if not a habit.
Best regards, Samulili 14:19, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK thanks, well maybe if an undeletion is not possible, some nice admin can send it to me via e-mail because I have deleted the picture from my HDD. Greetings, Mattes 07:31, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Was the email sent? Was it received? Thanks!   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 00:26, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't received any yet. I would like to discuss about the future handling of logos at commons. We have hundreds and thousands of logos here, some are speedily deleted some are untouched for months and years... We should establish a clear scheme. -- Mattes 08:56, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I also think it would be nice with a clear guideline for logos. / Fred J 21:38, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Szczepan1990 seems to understand English quite well, look at his talk page for example. BTW: web.archive.org has not saved it... This is a bad example of bad admin performance. I hope it will be settled soon and at least I get my pic back. --Mattes 23:19, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't this just allowed under COM:FOP? -- Bryan (talk to me) 14:21, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Although this may be permissible under FOP at first glance, the main subject is a copyrighted logo of Lufthansa in (I think) the Frankfurt International Airport. German law states that the right to modify and use commercially still requires permission of the original copyright holder (Lufthansa). Unless someone forwards a valid permissions email to OTRS, this image stays deleted. O2 (息 • 吹) 01:59, 08 October 2007 (GMT)

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

vx(band)[edit]

not sure why this page was deleted- this is an active music group!

You may have been misdirected from the English Wikipedia. In any case, look at w:en:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/VX (band). O2 (息 • 吹) 01:36, 09 October 2007 (GMT)

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

please[edit]

this is a project for a class if you could keep it up until Friday, i would very much appreciate it. thanks, gstrproject

What media? O2 (息 • 吹) 00:44, 10 October 2007 (GMT)

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

JICOMS[edit]

Hi Admin, Jigawa Info-Com Students (JICOMS) was here only few hours after I uploaded it.

Now what shall I do to keep it unblocked/undeleted?

We're just students. You can verify @ www.jicoms.makes.it


thanks...

Wrong venue... O2 (息 • 吹) 04:04, 13 October 2007 (GMT)

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

Taric Alani[edit]

I has uploaded a these artistic photographs of myself under a valid permission logged with OTR (ticket #2007100810005154). The images are:

User:WJBscribe made a deletion request at Commons:Village pump#Explicit image uploads by User:Taric25‎, even though it clearly says at the top of the page, “Please do not make deletion requests here: use the relevant process for it instead.” In less than 24 hours, and without giving me a chance to participate in the discussion, the images were deleted by User:O, who claimed that the license was invalid, even though it was logged under ticket #2007100810005154. Both User:Lar and User:Krimpet verified the license is valid for use in Wikimedia commons. O argued that the license was not valid, because the license on the image description pages asked the downstream user to link to the photographer's website. I indicated that is not cause for removal, because the photographer is allowed to choose the method of attribution, including a link to a website, be it Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons, or a personal website. Nevertheless, the e-mail sent to OTRS did not indicate that a link was required, and I asked the downstream user to link to the photographer's website as a courtesy to the author. I offered to remove the requirement of linking to the photographer's website, but O indicated that the permission must meet requirements of derivative works and commercial use, which it does. This is the e-mail I received back from OTRS. (I have removed the e-mail addresses.) 

--- Permissions - Wikimedia Commons <permissions-commons@wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Subject: Re: [Ticket#2007100810005154] Fwd: Re:
> Photos
> Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 09:59:28 +0000
> To: Taric Alani
> From: Permissions - Wikimedia Commons
> <permissions-commons@wikimedia.org>
> 
> Dear Taric Alani,
> 
> Thank you for your mail.
> 
> Taric Alani wrote:
> 
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "James W. Johnson" 
> > To:  "Taric Alani"
> > Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 8:10 PM
> > Subject: Re: Photos
> > 
> > Sure, Taric.
> > 
> > "I own the copyright to my images. I allow anyone
> to
> > use them for any purpose, provided that I am
> properly
> > attributed. Redistribution, derivative work,
> > commercial use, and all other use is permitted."
> > 
> > 
> > Take care,
> > 
> > James W. Johnson
> > J. W. Johnson Photography
> > 
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Taric Alani"
> > To: "James W. Johnson"
> > Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 7:08 AM
> > Subject: Photos
> > 
> > Hi James,
> > 
> > I am one of thousands of volunteer writers for
> > Wikimedia Commons. I was hoping you might be
> willing
> > to provide the images of me. If you desire, your
> > credit will be attached to the photo, along with a
> > link back to your site.
> > 
> > Wikimedia Commons accepts only freely-licensed
> > pictures; if you would like to contribute them,
> please
> > include the following statement in your e-mail:
> > 
> > "I own the copyright to my images. I allow anyone
> to
> > use them for any purpose, provided that I am
> properly
> > attributed. Redistribution, derivative work,
> > commercial use, and all other use is permitted."
> > 
> > Thank you for your time.
> > 
> > With respect,
> > Taric Alani
> > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Taric25
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Wikimedia Commons'
> image
> > use policy +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 
> > Wikimedia Commons (http://commons.wikimedia.org/)
> is a
> > free media repository that is collaboratively
> edited
> > by volunteers from around the world. Our goal is
> to
> > create a comprehensive knowledge base that may be
> > freely distributed and available at no charge.
> > 
> > I ask permission for material to be used under the
> > terms of Attribution. This means that although you
> > retain the copyright and authorship of your own
> work,
> > you are granting permission for all others (not
> just
> > Wikipedia) to to use it for any purpose -- and
> even
> > potentially use them commercially -- so long you
> are
> > properly attributed.
> > 
> > You can read about it at:
> >
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attribution_%28copyright%29
> > 
> > This expressly protects creators from being
> considered
> > responsible for modifications made by others,
> while
> > ensuring that creators are credited for their
> work.
> > There is more information on our copyright policy
> at:
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyrights
> > 
> > I choose the Attribution because I consider it the
> > best available tool for ensuring your work can
> remain
> > free for all to use, while providing you credit.
> This
> > may or may not be compatible with your goals in
> > creating the materials available on your website.
> > Please be assured that if permission is not
> granted,
> > your materials will not be used at Wikipedia -- we
> > have a very strict policy against copyright
> > violations.
> > 
> > We also accept licensing under other free-content
> > licenses.
> > 
> > With your permission, we will credit you for your
> work
> > in the image's permanent description page, noting
> that
> > it is your work and is used with your permission,
> and
> > we will provide a link back to your website.
> > 
> > We invite your collaboration in writing and
> editing
> > articles on this subject and any others that might
> > interest you. Please see the following article for
> > more information.
> >
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Welcome,_newcomers
> > 
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ End Wikimedia Commons'
> > image use policy ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 
> > 
> >        
> >
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> > Need a vacation? Get great deals
> > to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
> > http://travel.yahoo.com/
> > 
> > 
> 
> We have received the permission for the image(s) and
> have made the necessary
> modifications to the Image page(s).
> 
> Thank you for providing this to us, and for your
> contribution to the Wikimedia
> Commons.
> 
> Yours sincerely,
> Francine Rogers
> 
> -- 
> Wikimedia Commons - http://commons.wikimedia.org
> ---
> Disclaimer: all mail to this address is answered by
> volunteers, and responses
> are not to be considered an official statement of
> the Wikimedia Foundation.
> For official correspondence, you may contact the
> site operators at
> <http://www.wikimediafoundation.org>.
> 
>

The photographer clearly states, “I own the copyright to my images. I allow anyone to use them for any purpose, provided that I am properly attributed. Redistribution, derivative work, commercial use, and all other use is permitted.” Thus, Krimpet wrote, “I reviewed the permission sent to OTRS and I too can confirm that the licensing is sound; the permissions granted by the photographer were equivalent to CC-BY and consistent with our licensing guidelines (and did not require a link to the blog as O has suggested).” Therefore, not only did the deletion disobey process, the original reason for deletion was not valid.

Now, O argues that the photographs “will stay deleted because they are out of project scope. We already have an ample supply of nude males.” That is not entirely true. Wikimedia Commons is not censored, and while it is true there are many images of nude males on Wikimedia Commons, there is only one photgraph of autofellatio in Category:Autofellatio, and the other two are drawings. Furthermore, all of them are in the same position as the man bends down, whereas Category:Sex positions has photographs in nearly every concievable position, including Category:Anal sex, Category:Doggy style positions, Category:Intramammal sex, Category:Man-on-top positions, Category:Missionary positions, Category:Oral sex, Category:Rear-entry positions, Category:Sex positions 69, Category:Side-by-side positions,Category:Sitting sex positions, Category:Standing sex positions, Category:Tribadic positions, and Category:Woman-on-top positions. That is why I included images such as Image:Taric Alani Self sucker.jpg‎ and Image:Taric Alani Self suck tonguing it.jpg‎. We can use them in other Wikimedia projects, such as w:Autofellatio, which currently uses {{commons}} to link to Category:Autofellatio, in order to give the reader an idea of how it looks, and I clearly indicated on the image description that I use the images to depict the artwork in the form in which it takes place. Also, I consider photos like Image:Taric Alani Barn light.jpg‎ and Image:Taric Alani Innocence.jpg‎ acceptable for Category:Male nude in photography, because they are artistic photos that have no sexual context whatsoever. Plus, even if that were the case, we have plenty of sexually explicit images of Pornography, such as Image:Keeani Lei 6.jpg, in categories of Category:Nude photographs, including Image:Cosmos05.gif, and Category:Erotic art, including Image:Female artistic nude.jpg. The only difference is that overwhelmig majority of these photographs are of women, and the simple fact that there tend to be more phographic nude depictions of women does not necessarily mean that users are automatically excluded from uploading nude depictions of men. In fact, it disproves O's statement, “We already have an ample supply of nude males.” I agree that it is possible that we may not require all of the images, but it does not mean we should not keep some of them. Therefore, I suggest a compromise, and we keep only the following images.

  1. Image:Taric Alani Barn light.jpg‎ - Purely artistic depiction with no sexual context suitable for Category:Male nude in photography
  2. Image:Taric Alani Innocence.jpg‎ - Purely artistic depiction with no sexual context suitable for Category:Male nude in photography
  3. Image:Taric Alani Chaise ass.jpg‎ - Purely artistic depiction with no sexual context suitable for Category:Male nude in photography
  4. Image:Taric Alani Cum shot.jpg‎ - Depiction of edjaculate in mid flight showing it in spheres from the “weightless” phenomena. We have no such image in Category:Ejaculation, as all individual images are of such low resolution and shutter speed that they do not accurately depict edjaculate's shape.
  5. Image:Taric Alani Self sucker.jpg‎ - Depiction of autofellatio in a position on the back. We have no such image in Category:Autofellatio, as all images only depict one position.

Taric25 06:15, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2 undeleted. I still seek outside input for the other 3, since they were already categorized into Category:Male nude in photography; that category already has ample supply of those three images not undeleted yet. See also Commons:Nudity O2 (息 • 吹) 03:54, 13 October 2007 (GMT)
If you seek outside input for the other three, would you kindly temporarily undelete them please, so users may have an idea of how they look? Thanks. Taric25 06:07, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Male nude in photography does not in fact have many modern, professionally shot colour photographs. This particular model also provides some welcome ethnic diversity. William Avery 10:50, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done the other three O2 (息 • 吹) 20:58, 13 October 2007 (GMT)

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

Global Government of Ten Democratic States[edit]

Dear Sirs,

The paper that I have written was immediately mislabeled "Global Government of Ted Democratic States" and now appears on Google as such, if you Google my name. Because of the importance of the U.S. Patents I possess for monitored firearm storage systems ("Firearm Security Systems, U.S. Patent nos. 5,416,472 and 5,598,151), my name is often "googled" and it is part of my credibility and professional standing. I ask that you kindly remove the misprinted entry and make whatever corrections that are necessary to solve this problem. My paper about global governance was written to foster intellectual debate if not provide a real solution and I am offended that someone within your organization had it dismissed as something extrapolated or gleaned from the "Bible" or any other source. I understand it is your right to post what you wish, but I want you to understand that my intentions were to help the world with a plan to promote Life and Freedom. Sincerely, Dennis R. Torii, Jr. 718-491-3403 Monday, September 24, 2007

Are you sure that you are correct here at Commons? What is the name of the user account you uploaded it with because I can't find anything here. There was something with this name entered in the English Wikipedia, but it was deleted several days ago as POV essay. -- Cecil 02:27, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Closed No reply. Siebrand 22:56, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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

Image:Tjul07.jpg[edit]

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Tjul07.jpg

i upload twice, but the user Drini delete it, specifying "copyright violation". i put the all informations. the permission was given to me by a journalist of the own magazine, for i use in the article of it:
Português: http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revista_Trivela

i request the undeletion. --Wild rover 00:09, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Without a proof that the journalist allowed it, this picture can't be undeleted. Please forward this permission to the OTRS-Team, they will look into it and will act accordingly.-- Cecil 00:59, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: no reply O2 (息 • 吹) 23:05, 15 October 2007 (GMT)

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

Category:West Pomeranian Voivodeship[edit]

The logs for Category:West Pomeranian Voivodeship indicates that this category was deleted on 14:53, 22 August 2007.

The category has been recreated on 08:41, 26 September 2007, so I request the restoration of the history. --Juiced lemon 21:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why? This seems like nothing but busy work to me. We are not under any legal obligation to include the complete past history of any title. My understanding is that we need to only have the complete editorial history of what we publish. FloNight♥♥♥ 23:18, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Do you understand what you write? MY contribution is currently published, but another user has put his name instead of mine. Do you really think that is consistent with the GNU Free Documentation License, in particular chapter 4, point D? --Juiced lemon 23:57, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I do not think that characterizing this content as something that you published is entirely accurate. It is quite possible for two people to both write identical things if the content is a bare fact such as we are dealing with here. So unless the content was created by undeleting the article, I do not think restoring the entry's history is needed. Was this entry created by undeleting? FloNight♥♥♥ 00:47, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:54, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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

Image:REVISTA HUMOR JUNIO 1982.jpg[edit]

This file was deleted because it was in a unknown category. Now it's linked with an article.

Surprise: the unknown category is for files that are missing source, license, and/or permission information. Unless you can provide legitimate license information, the image stays deleted. O2 (息 • 吹) 01:58, 14 October 2007 (GMT)

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

"Image:Ig stantonioBW.jpg"[edit]

User Siebrand deleted the image "Image:Ig stantonioBW.jpg". This image was taken by the photographer Fares Zaguir. A written authorization from his family was e-mailed to OTRS a week ago with permission for all the pictures by Fares Zaguir to be on Wikipedia. Therefore, there was no reason for the picture to be deleted. DuqueVisconde 05:05, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can't find it on OTRS. -- Bryan (talk to me) 10:52, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The message sent to OTRS has the picture name as its tittle. DuqueVisconde 00:13, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just sent the message again. DuqueVisconde 01:06, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The permissions have been e-mailed to permissions-pt@wikimedia.org . Is there no one responsible for checking that? DuqueVisconde 05:40, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You got a reply for that e-mail (OTRS ticket) stating that more info was needed. Have you sent another with further information? I can't find anything else with this image name on OTRS either. PatríciaR msg 21:02, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done No reply. Siebrand 23:02, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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

Image:Meena-7.jpg[edit]

The photo belongs to www.rawa.org and they have granted permission so the photo could be released under GFDL.

You can confirm by sending email to rawa(at)rawa.org

Wikireporter 20:29, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[2][3][reply]


Logs on Commons:


Logs on English Wikipedia (wikified for Commons):

  • 21:39, 23 April 2006 (UTC) w:Aenjanb (talk | contribs) uploaded "Image:Meena-7.jpg" ‎ (Meena, leader of RAWA killed by the fundamentalists on Feb.4, 1987. from www.rawa.org {{PD-release}})
  • 18:15, 14 April 2006 (UTC) w:Sherool (talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Meena-7.jpg" ‎ (WP:CSD#I4: Image with unknown source or copyright info, that has been tagged as such for at least 7 days.)
  • 18:15, 14 April 2006 (UTC) w:Sherool (talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Meena-7.jpg" ‎ (Deleted old revision 20060411214726!Meena-7.jpg.)
  • 21:47, 11 April 2006 (UTC) w:Aenjanb (talk | contribs) uploaded "Image:Meena-7.jpg" ‎ (Meena, RAWA's founder. http://www.rawa.org {{PD-release}})
  • 21:58, 24 March 2006 (UTC) w:Aenjanb (talk | contribs) uploaded "Image:Meena-7.jpg" ‎ (Meena, founder of RAWA. photos taken from the web site of RAWA at www.rawa.org with their permission.)


I notified Hariva (talk | contribs) in this edit 00:03, 20 August 2007 of the copyvio status, but I don't remember exactly why.


I have just sent a personalized copy of w:Wikipedia:Example requests for permission#Commons_1 to rawa(at)rawa.org. The image is actually located at http://www.rawa.org/meena-7.jpg, as linked by Photo album of martyred Meena founding leader of RAWA.


 Oppose undeletion until we have have clear indication of permission from rawa.org.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 07:10, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have also just tagged w:Image:Meena-7.jpg with w:template:db-unksource.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 07:33, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Following sourcing of the image to http://www.rawa.org/meena-7.jpg, I have retagged it with {{imagevio|url=http://www.rawa.org/meena-7.jpg - The entire website http://www.rawa.org is "Copyright © Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA) 1997- 2007" per the bottom of http://www.rawa.org/index.php .   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 00:39, 10 September 2007 (UTC)}} (relinked for Commons).   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 01:09, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Support I have written permission from Mrs. Friba of RAWA to post the photo here. If anyone have doubt, can contact rawa(at)rawa.org and confirm. Wikireporter 16:51, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did write to rawa(at)rawa.org and got no response (see above). Please put that written permission you got on OTRS. Thanks!   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 17:00, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done No reply. Siebrand 23:03, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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

Category:Naples National Archaeological Museum[edit]

Category:Naples National Archaeological Museum has been deleted on 18:45, 24 September 2007 for the reason: content was: '{{move|Category:Museo Archeologico Nazionale in Naples}}de:Archäologische Nationalmuseum Neapelen:Naples National Archaeological Museum[[...'.

This deletion is contrary to Commons policy. The move of the contents of Category:Naples National Archaeological Museum to a non-English category name was also contrary to Commons policy (English Wikipedia article: Naples National Archaeological Museum) and was not the result of any consensus.

Therefore, I request the undeletion of this category. --Juiced lemon 21:42, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please link the new category and the policy referred to when making requests of this nature. --SB_Johnny | PA! 22:05, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Closed, no reply Siebrand 22:57, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Image:Harvard Mayfair clown chalk 050501.jpg[edit]

This image was deleted for purported copyright violation. I'm the photographer and I uploaded the image originally. I freely license the image for use under the GFDL. There was no copyright violation.

Please undelete this image.

Pingswept 18:10, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, it is a derivative work. The copyrights lay with the author of the drawings. -- Bryan (talk to me) 18:22, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, fair enough. I hadn't looked at the image since I took it in 2005; I had forgotten it was a picture of a chalk drawing. Let's leave it deleted. Pingswept 22:00, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done per consensus. Siebrand 22:58, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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

Image:Dr Ignacio Alcocer.jpg[edit]

As I am new to this process and not very computer savy I would like to know how to restore the above image that was deleted .This image is of my husbands grandfather and although I ignore the exact date it is about 1916 and I ignore who the fotographer was what I can affirm is that we are in possesion of the original image it was scanned and uploaded by mefrom my computer not taken on the net so is it possible to get it restored please and how do I proceed

I have restored the image and added information to it.
Looks like the upload is Spanish speaker in case a Spanish speaker wants to chip in.
Fred J 09:33, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Siebrand 23:02, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Image:Columbus Cutaway 2007 H.jpg[edit]

This image has all the copyright licences requested. —the preceding unsigned comment was added by Patrick Rogel (talk • contribs)

The European Space Agency does not release hotos under a license compatible with commons. --SB_Johnny | PA! 10:05, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Siebrand 22:59, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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

Image:IranFars.png[edit]

The Deletion log states "no source". I'm quite sure that the map was the same like all others in Category:Province location maps of Iran, so the same source would apply. --S.K. 09:15, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

restored and completed file information. --Matt314 10:14, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Siebrand 22:59, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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

Category:Barometers[edit]

Category:Barometers was deleted on 11:56, 29 August 2005 for the reason: content was: '{{delete}}see Category:Measuring instruments (pressure) --Saperaud 14:12, 27 August 2005 (UTC)' (and the only contributor was 'Saperaud').

Barometers are particular pressure gauges, and a particular category is needed. So, I request the undeletion of this category. --Juiced lemon 11:49, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Siebrand 23:00, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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

Category:BMW 318[edit]

User:Samulili have deleted today Category:BMW 318 for the reason: empty. This is not a valid reason because it is well known that some users remove correct categorization, therefore categories can be temporarily empty.

This deletion is contrary to Commons policy Commons:Deletion guidelines#Categories and contrary to the expressed consensus in Commons:Deletion requests/Category:BMW 318.

Therefore, I request the undeletion of this category. --Juiced lemon 10:53, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Siebrand 22:53, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Nuremberg Trials[edit]

This category was deleted on 18:02, 23 May 2005 for the reason: abandoned in favor of Nuremberg Trials. This reason is contrary to our current policy to not delete categories grounds to an existing gallery.

More Category:Nuremberg trials was created on 11:10, 31 August 2005. So, I request the undeletion of Category:Nuremberg Trials: either Category:Nuremberg trials will be renamed, either Category:Nuremberg Trials will be a redirection (Nuremberg Trials). --Juiced lemon 22:02, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category was moved. O2 (息 • 吹) 03:20, 17 October 2007 (GMT)

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

Image:Image-UN_Swords_into_Plowshares_Statue.JPG[edit]

Hello there. I just want to know why this image was deleted by User:Polarlys. It is my own work. I photographed it myself, therefore I am the copyrightholder and contributor of this image. I would like you to please undelete it. If you can't, kindly let me know on my talk page so I could upload it from my camera again. I was even requested by editor/s at Wikipedia to move this image to commons. I believe deletion was unnecessary. And please note that this image is definitely NOT A DERIVATIVE WORK. I took the image myself! But I was told that I "didn't create the statue by myself by User:Flominator. I sought advise/comments at English Wikipedia and the reply is: Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#USA only applies to "publication of an image of a copyrighted artwork". It doesn't say "publication of an image that also include a copyrighted artwork." Commons:Derivative works only applies to a picture of a sculpture. That photo is a panorama image that includes much more than the copyrighted artwork statute. It is much more than a picture of a sculpture. I don't think delete is appropriate, at least not without discussion and consensus. -- Jreferee (Talk) 18:44, 7 September 2007 (UTC) I don't think I recommended moving the image to commons. ("Image moved/uploaded there as requested by Sfan00 IMG via my talk page on August 4, 2007.") However, if it is a copyrighted artwork statute, then Wikipedia fair use may apply since the image cannot be replaced by a free image. -- Jreferee (Talk) 18:54, 7 September 2007 (UTC) I restored Image:UN Swords into Plowshares Statue.JPG. Please review the licensing and fair use. -- User:Jreferee (Talk) 19:15, 7 September 2007 (UTC) (Quoted/retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rodsan18"). I am placing this request for undeletion here still because I believe the deletion of the image at commons was still unnecessary because the image is panoramic. It is currently restored as Image:UN Swords into Plowshares Statue.JPG at English Wikipedia. Thank you and regards. - Dragonbite 09:13, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the sculpture is the main subject of the image and that the image is as such a derivative work of the sculpture. However, the sculpture was published in 1959 and created by Soviet Union citizen w:Yevgeny Vuchetich. Maybe it is Template:PD-US-no notice? Or it may have been first published in the Soviet Union and as such the 50 years pma applies. I don't know. -- Bryan (talk to me) 09:23, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Closed. / Fred J 16:52, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Undeleted as {{PD-US-no-notice}} O2 (息 • 吹) 18:32, 20 October 2007 (GMT)

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

Photoreportage[edit]

When I questioned the name of the author to photoreportage.gr (Emmashapplin-freeuse.jpg), i wrote that I hope for use it on Wikipedia (I let clear for Wikipedia use). I questioned if he can give me permission too. Then i received the email with the name, but nothing he say about of this image is only for press (prohibited for Wikipedia, etc). "Οι φωτογραφίες διατίθενται δωρεάν από τον φωτογράφο για χρήση και δημοσίευση". I only speak in spanish, sorry for my english. Anders-H 23:43, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Commons:Sobre las licencias and Commons:Modelos de mensajes for what is required of permissions. --Para 19:18, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I will writing again to the author; with the standard declaration of consent. Anders-H 00:12, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was wrote to the author again; waiting for the reply. I understand that "All permission messages must confirm all the points, or the images will be deleted". But where do you saw that's "press use only"?. Anders-H 23:54, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It is in the OTRS database, ticket id=909410. If you want to know what the OTRS said, you have to ask someone with access (I don't). / Fred J 23:00, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I questioned about this ticket in OTRS: “It is an old message from May stored on Commons:OTRS/es. The message does not confirm everything mentioned in Commons:Modelos de mensajes. All permission messages must confirm all the points, or the images will be deleted.” I understand it; but it is not the same that “press use only”. Anders-H 20:12, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok to close and archive this request? ([4])
Fred J 09:46, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, do you can close. But the image is deleted because the message does not confirm all the points; it is not the same that: "press use only". OK? or where can I see that it is for press use only? Anders-H 00:30, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, nothing says press use literally, but the terms of use of the site are the equivalent of the kind of editorial use only: "Οι φωτογραφίες διατίθενται δωρεάν από τον φωτογράφο για χρήση και δημοσίευση. Οι φωτογραφίες βρίσκονται στο site σε μικρά μεγέθη για να τις βλέπετε, αλλά και σε μεγάλο μέγεθος κατάλληλο για εκτύπωση ή δημοσίευση." --Para 00:51, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I questioned to the site before, and I wrote if can give me permission for the Wikipedia use, and he reply me and he sent his name, but nothing he say about it is not for Wikipedia use or press use only, editorial use only. I wrote on May 23 2007 to info(at)photoreportage.gr and the form on the site Anders-H 01:39, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, do you can close. Thanks. Anders-H 00:29, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Where I can see about: "All permission messages must confirm all the points, or the images will be deleted"?. Another page? Commons:Modelos de mensajes Anders-H 22:31, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good example of a permission request. See Commons:Sobre las licencias#Licencias aceptables for the criteria the request is to confirm. A permission is not sufficient if it doesn't mention the listed criteria or a license that has already been deemed free enough. --Para 22:52, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Closed. / Fred J 16:51, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herm%C3%A8s_%28navette_spatiale%29[edit]

I've already requested an undelation request for Columbus Cutaway 2007 H.jpg, which reply to all copyright licences, without response from Commons. I've later try to add to my article one other pictures (Image:Hermes shuttle.jpg) which is at this time watchable at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermes_%28shuttle%29. What's the mess with it? —the preceding unsigned comment was added by Patrick Rogel (talk • contribs) 10:21, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You did receive a response. Images which do not allow commercial use are not permitted on Commons. Please read Commons:Licensing/Commons:À propos des licences. —LX (talk, contribs) 19:26, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, you received another one as well. —LX (talk, contribs) 19:30, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Closed. / Fred J 16:51, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Image:MT8450Scale.JPG[edit]

This photo of a simple electronic scale was uploaded by User:Alx 91 in August with clear assertions of authorship and dual-licensed with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-2.5-mx}}. It was tagged with {{Derivative}} by User:189.175.202.224 with no further explanation and deleted by User:Zirland giving "In category Derivatives of copyrighted works; no license" as the deletion reason. As far as I can see, it's a freely licensed original photograph of an uncopyrightable utilitarian object. I don't see what copyrighted work this is supposed to be a derivative of. —LX (talk, contribs) 17:48, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also concerned about the similar fate of Image:MTSelfScale.jpg (also by User:Alx 91) and Image:Supermarket produce scale.JPG by User:Piotrus. —LX (talk, contribs) 17:54, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Undeleted --Zirland 18:25, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like a form of IP vandalism.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 20:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possible but unlikely in this case. The IP address made some constructive edits earlier the same day, notified the uploaders of the tagging, and didn't give any other signs of intending to disrupt. Unless I'm missing something, I would guess that the anonymous user was simply confused about the copyrightability of utilitarian objects. —LX (talk, contribs) 09:30, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, you are probably right. Did somebody leave him a note? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 05:16, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I left a link to this discussion on the IP address' talk page, but the chances of establishing a reliable line of communication with users who are not logged in are usually slim. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:05, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Close. -- Bryan (talk to me)


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

Special:DeletedContributions/Cadenamado1[edit]

Hi! I'm the brother of Cadenamado1, he have many pictures of Gwen Stefani, he try to upload to wikipedia much times... he upload all images to flickr in this page: Dacadenamado1. when he try to upload to wikipedia, any user eraeser him pictures, this pictures have a lincense? mmm I don't think. all pictures are of these license: Some rights reserved CC-BY-SA. Please accept the pictures, becouse all pictures is in order. all —the preceding unsigned comment was added by Fernando12 (talk • contribs) 18:19, 18 October 2007

The consensus at Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Cadenamado1 was that the Flickr account was used to upload images whose copyright did not belong to the Flickr user. This is evidenced by the fact that images uploaded by the Flickr user were taken in Canada[5], Colombia[6] and possibly other locations using cameras including a Panasonic DMC-TZ1[7], a Sony DSC-P72[8], a Fujifilm FinePix 2650[9], a Canon PowerShot Pro1[10], and a Sony DSC-S40[11]. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:43, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, this is a great point, but my brother have a good friend who live in Canadá but Ok, we live in Colombia, (yo hablo español de naturaleza! psss vivo en colombia y nací allí). my question is this: I can Upload only the pictures of Colombia?? for don't have problems. Yes? look the new page flickr of the pictures. all pictures in this pages was in colombia. --Fernando12 01:40, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Since this is a request to undelete files on Commons, it might be good to match the files on Flickr to the deleted files here.
The other Flickr images do not seem to match any images previously uploaded by User:Cadenamado1. None of these images have any exif data to confirm that they came from the same camera. Frankly, I am more than a little apprehensive about trusting the unverifiable authorship claims of someone who's made confirmed fraudulent authorship claims in the past and used sockpuppets to evade blocks to continue to upload copyright violations (see the discussion on ANB), but if another administrator wishes to give you the benefit of the doubt, I won't object. —LX (talk, contribs) 17:06, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Edit: I just found out by looking at the deleted images of one of your sockpuppets that The Sweet Escape 2[12], The Sweet Escape[13], Yummy Colombia 3[14], yummy colombia[15], and Yummy Colombia 4[16] were taken from http://www.estereofonica.com/mod.php?mod=gallery&op=gallery&gallery_id=13&album_id=52, where they are credited to someone named "Tatiana". With that in mind, I would object to undeletion. —LX (talk, contribs) 17:30, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Mr. LX. I have a permission of any pictures ( in my mail ) to distribuited in wikipedia and flickr. how i show to you this mails? I have autorization of "tatiana" of esterofonica. she live in the next house of me. the autorization is in my mail. A! in my facebook too. --Fernando12 17:27, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Frankly, I'm afraid you've already spent all of your credibility capital around here. If you're going to lie, at least stick to a single story. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:19, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done O2 (息 • 吹) 21:10, 26 October 2007 (GMT)


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

Next[edit]

I'm not lie! becouse... mmmmm the mail tomorrow will be in internet! the mail is in Spanish, i think that you have a diccionary. tomorrow, I'm going to give you the permission, ok? this think is more important than if she live next to me. the important here is the prmission, in this moment I have, but isn't in english. when I send to you the link, i'm going to tal to you. bye. page in flickr, image of facebook of me but is in Spanish.... permission of tatiana but is in Spanish, i talk this to tatiana and she make the message in english. ok? in this page, in the end, is the english mod. i wait your answer --Fernando12 21:11, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See above. O2 (息 • 吹) 21:17, 26 October 2007 (GMT)


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

Wacken-images[edit]

Hi User:Samulili has today deleted a bunch of images from the www.wacken.com gallery. Among them are

  • Image:Roope Children of Bodom.jpg
  • Image:Laiho_Children_of_Bodom.jpg
  • Image:Henkka_Children_of_Bodom.jpg
  • Image:Henkka2_Children_of_Bodom.jpg
    • There are more, but I don't know how to find them.

The explanation was "no permission", but THERE WAS A PERMISSION! There is currently a deletion request up for some other images from the same site/same permission at Commons:Deletion requests/Image:MikaelÅkerfeldtWOA2006.jpg, so will you PLEASE undelete these images and start reading the discussion, please? --Lhademmor 09:06, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The files were used with this permission which is not sufficient. I can undelete these four images and others once we have a new permission which, if I understand correctly, might be on its way. Samulili 09:27, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose commenting on the discussion (as I thought was Commons procedure?) was not a possibility...? --Pred 16:14, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ridiculous, indeed... --Pred 16:12, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kept at the deletion request because [new] permission sent in was sufficient O2 (息 • 吹) 01:18, 26 October 2007 (GMT)


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

Why[edit]

This picture must be in the media because is important to the wiki proyect

constantly someone is removing images from spanish cities (villages) especialy from Ocana in Toledo and Noblejas, i give up no more postings no more contributions, im absolutelly disapointed because of some people good luck, empisd

What?
 Info Two IPs have posted to this thread, both of which have no edits except for this page. O2 (息 • 吹) 21:16, 26 October 2007 (GMT)


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

This Taric Alani[edit]

Well, as you see.. this photograph could be a very good lesson for someone that even doesn't even this photograph a little "disgusting"...i think.... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by L4dl104 (talk • contribs) at 00:17, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unclear what image you are talking about here. Your contributions (deleted included) show that you have uploaded zero images. O2 (息 • 吹) 21:13, 26 October 2007 (GMT)

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

neisseria cieneria[edit]

[[Media:]]

No. O2 (息 • 吹) 22:27, 28 October 2007 (GMT)


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

i wish for this photo to be re added[edit]

this is not possible porn. if some one like myself is concerned about there child's wellbeing we should have the right to discern from a photo whether or not they need medical attintion!!

What photo? Your only edit is to this page. O2 (息 • 吹) 22:28, 28 October 2007 (GMT)

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

Foto ROMEO.JPG[edit]

Dear Sirs, I would like to ask You to undelete the foto of operasinger Francisco Araiza in the role of Romeo which I had put on his Wikipedia site. I took this foto myself and it has already been published on many occasions. I cannot understand why it had been removed by user Cecil who also did not answer my request about his reasons. With kind regards, fretabla —the preceding unsigned comment was added by Fretabla (talk • contribs) 10:09, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:ROMEO.JPG was not deleted by User:Cecil but by User:Siebrand, who did so because you failed to choose a licence for the image, even after you were notified of this, which meant you hadn't given us the legal right to display it. (Looking at your contributions, you've never left a message on User talk:Cecil or User:Siebrand.)
You've already recreated the image (which you shouldn't have done), so I don't know what the purpose of filing the undeletion request is, since there is nothing to undelete. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:53, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Closed. Nothing to undelete. —LX (talk, contribs) 22:38, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/Archive/2007-10&oldid=113103924"