Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2008-09

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

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

Commons: Country Flags Lists[edit]

I believe it was vandalized by a user in April 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.128.162.176 (talk • contribs) 00:18, 17 Aug 2008 (UTC)

I don't see that it ever existed. Do you have the right page name? Rocket000(talk) 00:21, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

 Not done , nothing to restore. →Christian 21:44, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

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

TheOnlineTicketExchange article[edit]

Dear Herby and Wikipedia Commons,

I contacted TheOnlineTicketExchange in regards to the serious allegations made in the articles that Herby sent me the links for. TheOnlineTicketExchange advised me that they are aware of the situation and are currently in talks with their lawyers to begin litigation against the companies who have accused them of links with the company that masterminded the Beijing ticket scam. These companies acted without any proof whatsoever when they accused TheOnlineTicketExchange of being linked to ticket fraud.

The old adage: “Don’t always believe what you read”, appears to be especially pertinent on this occasion. Making serious allegations like these is unfair and unfounded.

I hope that you will reconsider reinstating the article on TheOnlineTicketExchange.


Kind Regards,

Kerel Meijer —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kerel Meijer (talk • contribs) 11:17, 22 Aug 2008 (UTC)

OK - there is project scope (COM:PS) and the fact that the logo would needs licensing through OTRS.
There is the issue that the company is at present fairly non-notable in Wikipedia terms.
Equally despite the above comments anyone looking at this should probably check out this & this - both seem fairly legitimate sites. --Herby talk thyme 14:02, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

 Not done --O (висчвын) 20:47, 01 September 2008 (GMT)


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

Image:Weg-jrp1.PNG[edit]

This image was deleted, apparently because it was a duplicate of Image:Crystal 128 trashcan full.png. This is NOT true: the Image:Crystal 128 trashcan full.png was only uploaded today, so an older image should not be deleted because of that. Also, the Image:Weg-jrp1.PNG is widely used on wikipedia NL, and is very needed. A temporary image has already been uploaded, but the original and original text should be restored, because the size is different. --Tuvic (talk) 09:38, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Restored, but I don't understand why you want a poor-quality scaled-down image. It is the same. One's just smaller. And yes, it's my fault for forgetting to redirect the image (which you could have easily done). Rocket000(talk) 09:45, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Actually, I remember why I didn't redirect it or give CommonsDelinker a command... it's not used at all according to CheckUsage. And it's still saying it's not used... you guys have a local copy that you're using.[1] Rocket000(talk) 09:57, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Well, we want it back because the size is different: it's used now on a lot of talk pages and stuff in the normal size, without a size-parameter. Gigantic trash-boxes on a lot of pages, is the result when the image is just linked through. Also, it's used quite much in the nl-wiki and we don't like our images deleted. Also, the size is perfect and the image is good for use: we don't have to rely on varying results of the software thumbnailing the image.
About checkusage: you should use the tabs on the image page itself, not copying the image name to the tool: that way, you would have seen that CheckUsage.php?i=Weg-jrp1.png is NOT the same as CheckUsage.php?i=Weg-jrp1.PNG. (Note the capitals in png/PNG.) Different images, so different results. Looks like a simple mistake was at the cause of the deletion. --Tuvic (talk) 10:11, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Well, I did use the the CheckUsage straight from the image page.... but with the JavaScript gadget, which I always use. This a huge bug that no one has discovered until now (others that have it enabled can test it - it still shows 0 results). That really sucks. And I'm really sorry. I would never replace, let alone delete, any image like that. I hope someone can fix the script, but until then I'll let other admins know not to count on it. Rocket000(talk) 10:26, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
P.S. Do you still want Image:Weg-jrp1.png? Rocket000(talk) 10:30, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
I also hope this gets resolved. I use the checkusage-tab, and that leads to the right page. I hope it gets resolved and I'm happy to have found the reason for the deletion here.
About: Image:Weg-jrp1.png: no, it's not needed any more: it was uploaded by a wiki nl-user to try and fix the deleted image, but he also came across the capital-problem, apparently. --Tuvic (talk) 11:13, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, I guess I'll close this as resolved. Sorry again for all the trouble I caused. Rocket000(talk) 19:00, 31 August 2008 (UTC)


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

Image:SixHardDriveFormFactors.jpg[edit]

The image

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:SixHardDriveFormFactors.jpg

was deleted while I was on vacation this past week. I am the creator of this image and released it under a CC license.

User:Mardetanha claims that I did to properly attribute the image. That may be; it was my first attempt to provide an image and I am pretty certain that I filled out the attribution information in affect at the time I created it, but maybe I missed something. In any case I can't properly fix up the attribution unless it is undeleted.

Note that it is linked to by the Wikipedia article Hard Disk Drive. I created it specifically for that article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul R. Potts (talk • contribs) 16:35, 1 September 2008 (UTC)


✓ Restored, please add the missing information while logged in. →Christian 17:10, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

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

Image:Arcade video game buttons.jpg[edit]

Image:Arcade video game buttons.jpg - this image was copied from Wikipedia, and I believe I made an error in the process. The image was deleted on EN because it was copied here, even though it was not properly transferred. Hopefully it can be salvaged, as it was a unique and useful picture. ~ JohnnyMrNinja (talk / en) 09:11, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

  • ✓ Done The problem was that the bot doesn't know that {{PD-author}} without author parameter generates an "unknown source" template. It should have used {{PD-user-en}} instead. Fixed now. Lupo 09:24, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

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

Wojna w gruzji war in georgia.jpg[edit]

It seems Image:Wojna w gruzji war in georgia.jpg was removed due to alleged copyright violation ( http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=delete&page=Image:Wojna_w_gruzji_war_in_georgia.jpg ). This image was uploaded a moment ago by me and User:Kazbek. This is original work, first published in our portal kaukaz.pl, on this page: http://www.kaukaz.pl/dzial-agresja/agresja-rosji-na-gruzje.php I realize this image is of professional quality so it may well wake suspition it's been copied from some other source like a major newspaper but it hasn't. Is it possible to restore the image or let us upload it again? Regards,

Mkosmul (talk) 20:58, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

The website clearly state "© Copyright by kaukaz.pl" I can't see where it states it's a free image. --Kanonkas(talk) 21:02, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
OK, we'll send an e-mail to OTRS right away. Mkosmul (talk) 22:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

 Not done , will be restored after we've received a confirmation via COM:OTRS. →Christian 19:40, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


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

Image:Wiki Jobatlogo.jpg[edit]

If I remember well, this logo is merely the product name spelled in a simple font, wasn't it ? 5 characters in some specific color isn't much of an artwork ;-) In that case, the {{PD-textlogo}} simply applies. See Commons:Licensing#Simple_design and compare with e.g. Microsoft logo. --LimoWreck (talk) 12:10, 17 August 2008 (UTC)


✓ Restored.Christian 19:46, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


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


Image:Kaart-haarlem.JPG[edit]

I don't think this file should be deleted, neither do I feel that I have infringed on a copyright violation, because the picture I took is in the public space, attached to the side of a shower building for watersporters. Pedestrian traffic passes the building. I can upload a larger image which shows the building in its entirety, but the map itself I found interesting as it shows some major touristic attractions. In principle all works communicated to the public by or on behalf of the public authorities (government) are not copyright protected in the Netherlands, unless the copyright has been reserved explicitly, either in a general manner by law, decree or ordinance, or in a specific case by a notice on the work itself or at the communication to the public. I am also surprised that the file has been deleted without nomination. - Jane023

Currently undergoing deletion request, see Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Kaart-haarlem.JPG. Jane023 (talk · contribs) is spamming above exact same text across multiple pages - and re-uploaded this image after seeing that it was deleted as copyvio. Cirt (talk) 21:45, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Cirt, I am not a spammer, but a history buff! Please stop trying to make me out as some sort of Internet creep. I am just trying to get my images undeleted. Who deleted them and why?? Jane023 (talk) 20:08, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I am going to take a break from this issue and defer to whatever is the outcome of Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Kaart-haarlem.JPG. Cirt (talk) 20:25, 2 September 2008 (UTC)


Please continue the discussion at the deletion request. --O (висчвын) 01:14, 03 September 2008 (GMT)


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


Image:Arundel Castle - motte and quadrangle, Kent, England (18 April 2006).JPG[edit]

The image was deleted because of a perceived license conflict between our copy and the one at Flick'r (here double licensed GFDL and CC, there "all rights reserved"). I believe that the Flick'r license is irrelevant, because the image was uploaded on en-WP by the phtographer himself, ten days before he uploaded it on Flick'r. He uploaded several more images on en-WP, all with valid licenses and there is no reason to assume, that he did not understand about the licenses: The photographer was an Australian law-student when taking and uploading the images and has graduated (with honours) since. It is perfectly OK to upload images on Wikipedia under a free license and upload the same at Flick'r with copyrights reserved.

The deleted image is high quality and very welcome to illustrate the individual castle and the early defense architecture of a Motte. The deleting admin did not accept my concerns and refused to restore the image. I tried to contact the uploader, but those kids change their e-mail-addresses like underwear and I did not find a valid address. I even wrote to his sister and asked her to forward the mail, but she did not answer in one week so I have to assume that she abandoned the only address I could find too.

So I come here with the formal undeletion request. Our license is valid, it comes from the photographer himself and he knows what he's doing. The different license on Flick'r ten days later is of no relevancy. --h-stt !? 06:54, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

  • Comment. IMO, if the image was freely uploaded on wikipedia before it was on flickr it should never have been deleted in the first place.--Celtus (talk) 09:02, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

OK. With the further info provided by the photographer here, this all seems to make sense. ✓ Done. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:36, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


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

Image:Open-air coffee shop on Noryo-yuka by MShades in Kyoto.jpg[edit]

The deletion debate was closed prematurely. As both sides had valid arguments, the discussion should continue for the seven days that Commons:Deletion_requests#Instructions_for_administrators prescribes, as it is not an obvious copyright violation. I therefore request that the image is undeleted and that Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Open-air coffee shop on Noryo-yuka by MShades in Kyoto.jpg is reopened. --Kjetil_r 19:17, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


Well, perhaps it should wait for the 7 days, even though I agree that deletion will be the right thing to do. I have re-opened the request and undeleted the image for now. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:41, 3 September 2008 (UTC)--MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:41, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

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

Szczepan1990 and derived work[edit]

I hereby request undeleting of all images deleted by Szczepan1990 (talk · contribs) with the summary "derivative work". (See the log. They are all images of beer bottles (I guess, can't see them anymore, however) that were deleted without proper deletion request. Totally without deletion request, that is. Since the images are not a clear copyvio, as is confirmed by the replies on the talk page of Szczepan1990, speedy deletion is not appropiate. The images were also deleted without looking at the image descriptions or any other argument. The images should be undeleted, roper deletion requests for each image should be created and uploaders should be warned.

For more info on this, see User talk:Szczepan1990 and Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#Szczepan1990__and_mass_deletions. I also expect this request to be handled by an admin not yet involved into the case. --Tuvic (talk) 16:12, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, please undelete the images. So a case to case analyses can be done. But until then the images should be restored and also all usages should be restored (if possible). --ALE! ¿…? 16:20, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. I have looked at a random sample of 10 or so of these images and they all show beer bottles having prominent copyright labels. ALE!, why don't you check yourself? You have the rights to do so. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 16:28, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Some images have already been undeleted, with one DR after the undeletion. --O (висчвын) 18:56, 23 July 2008 (GMT)
I have checked some of them and a lot of them might not pass the threshold of orginality or could be even PD because of their age. --ALE! ¿…? 11:55, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Stale --O (висчвын) 21:25, 06 September 2008 (GMT)


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

Category:Oral Parts of Matura[edit]

Why all photos were deleted? We shouldn't judge all category. The matura consists usually of two parts: oral nad writing. Why the oral parts is bad and the writing parts good? There in category were meny photos. The main problem was that some persons were against the fact that some photos were showing recognised people. Bat there were not only such photos. For egzample there on some of them people are taken at the back and without a clear view of faces. So we should consider each photo separately... And the next stuped deletation: the photo File:Matura2005 informatyka.jpg was not from this pool and yet was deleted because was laing nearby... It is the next prove that the deletetion all category without a while thinking is not a good idea. Thinking before deletation is always valuable. Regards Electron (talk) 08:02, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Here is the associated DR. --O (висчвын) 02:18, 01 August 2008 (GMT)
and? Electron (talk) 06:10, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

 Stale --O (висчвын) 21:26, 06 September 2008 (GMT)

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

Please restore bananasunpeeled.jpg...it is used with full permissions...[edit]

The file bananasunpeeled.jpg is used with full permissions of the Director of the film, Nick Shaw. No copyright is being violated. It is the cover of the original DVD. Please restore it to aid the film in becoming more widely known. The whole film will soon be uploaded to googlevideo and/or youtube, in order to further assist it's wider distribution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Initiatrix1 (talk • contribs) 17:00, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

There is no file named that which has been deleted. To be valid ppermission would have to be via OTRS. Equally Commons purpose is not to promote films so that they become "more widely known" I'm afraid. --Herby talk thyme 07:11, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Actually, Image:Bananasunpeeled.jpg did exist. There is an article on English Wikipedia (written by Initiatrix1) that used the image, so unless the English Wikipedia community feels that the article is outside their scope, the image is within our scope. It still needs proper evidence of its licensing, though. LX (talk, contribs) 09:27, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Oops - missed that. However it is a dvd cover so licensing would be an issue. --Herby talk thyme 08:26, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

 Not done --O (висчвын) 01:01, 07 September 2008 (GMT)


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

Ganesh Mylvaganam[edit]

Hi

Ganesh is an excellent cricket player. Played for UAE world cup in 1996, he bone in Sri Lanka, please insert his information back in the system.

Thank you very much.

The photo is taken by a Temple photographer who gave permission for us to use Dr. Giordano's photo since he is a professor at Temple University. It violates no rights or copyrights. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.55.210.63 (talk • contribs) 07:11, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Please provide a link to the image you would like to have restored. Regards, →Christian 20:12, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

 Not done --O (висчвын) 01:03, 07 September 2008 (GMT)


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

Image:Czeslawakwoka.jpg[edit]

This does not qualify for speedy deletion and should be submitted to the community instead. The deletion of this image is part of a cross-wiki campaign by NYScholar to remove images he admits are public domain based on an alleged copyright held by the person reproducing this image or the museum the photos are in, which completely ignores our new PD-art policy and plain common sense (you cannot invent copyright that does not exist). Evidence of his campaign[2][3][4][5][6]. Notice in particular the user's comment on his nomination of this image[7]: "a similar image from the YouTube video clip made without permission in Poland (purportedly) has already been deleted from Wikipedia Commons (about a week ago or earlier) due to "copyright violation" by an administrator." Sorry but if the original is in the public domain then according to the PD-art policy so is the reproduction. Also uploader claims he took the photograph at the museum this picture is on display in. This image should be restored and go to a normal deletion nomination. -Nard the Bard 03:23, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

  • Might as well add Image:Czeslawa-Kwoka.jpg to this list since the user has since marked it for speedy deletion as well, even though it is not a copyvio. -Nard the Bard 10:13, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
    • Yep it got deleted! -Nard the Bard 20:50, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Object to speedy delete. Not a single copyright breach has occured in this instance. The image, made by an unknown prisoner (wild guess: Wilhelm Brasse from Poland) is in public domain according to Polish copyright law regardless of where it was obtained from. Schutzstaffel was the slave-labour employer of the author (for further guidance see: Forced labor in Germany during World War II) who remains unidentified. The photographer was recompensed for his physical labour by being kept alive. Technically speaking, image is owned by the SS. It was made not by a German photographer, but by a foreign prisoner, and it does not fall under Berne Convention as an intellectual creation. Please reinstate the image, and relist it for further discussion. --Poeticbent talk 20:43, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Process was not followed when this was deleted. Objections to Speedy Delete were clearly stated on the Image talk page. This should have been taken to Deletion Requests in view of the many objections and the doubt that this is truly a copyvio. JGHowes talk - 22:53, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Enjoy your meal. --O (висчвын) 21:01, 07 September 2008 (GMT)

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


Image:Postens logo.png[edit]

Please undelete this image. It was tagged & deleted as copyvio, but the design of the logo is way too simple for it to be copyrightable – it simply consists of two circles cut in two by a line. It is trademarked, yes, but it cannot be copyrighted. It should be tagged with {{PD-shape}} (I wasn't aware of that template when uploading the image.) Jon Harald Søby (talk) 20:36, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

✓ Done --O (висчвын) 20:48, 07 September 2008 (GMT)

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

Image:Barnstar-atom3.png[edit]

I cannot find it in the deletion log, but it is possible I am searching incorrectly. At any rate, it is linked over 100 times on en; and I can find no reason why it is gone. KillerChihuahua (talk) 00:13, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

plase return this file as soon as possible. thanking you.

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

Image:Spoorspatting.jpg[edit]

This image was deleted today, with the argument that it has no license. However, I am 99% sure that I clearly added the appropriate information, including the licence (GFDL I remember), to this image. This image has been used for months on Dutch wikipedia and I am actually stunned that it is deleted without any notice (except a bot that posted a corrupt notification on my talk page). Please undelete this asap (and/or indicate what is wrong with the copyright-tagging), to avoid unnecessary extra work restoring the image on Dutch Wikipedia. KKoolstra (talk) 20:40, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

The deleting admin meant to say "copyvio", not "no license" as there was a GFDL tag on there. However, It appears it comes from www.railpedia.nl. Is there possibly a direct link to the source where it indicates this is in fact the license? Rocket000(talk) 23:20, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
It indeed was first posted on www.railpedia.nl. By the time I copied it, railpedia used Mediawiki software and used the GFDL license (at least, I verified that the image had a GFDL licence). However, recently railpedia switched to a different platform and unfortunately they do not show the licenses anymore on railpedia. I can ask them about this issue, but the principle as I understand it is that once an image has been released under GFDL, it remains GFDL. I must say that I am very disappointed that the image was deleted, without just asking first about the doubts about the license. KKoolstra (talk) 08:20, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Update: as is explained here [8], railpedia still uses the GFDL licence. KKoolstra (talk) 09:26, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Just like with Wikipedia (and Commons), the site's GFDL license only applies to text not images. Now, I do not speak Dutch so there might be something I missed. Maybe someone else can take a look. Rocket000(talk) 23:36, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
The text states that 'everything published on Railpedia' is published under the GFDL-license. In the previous version, this was confirmed in the information behind the images. Unfortunately, when the migrated from Wikimedia to the new platform, this information seems to be lost. But wouldn't it be better to discuss these doubts first and then remove the image, instead of the other way around? KKoolstra (talk) 08:49, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
In the case of copyright violations, it best to remove then discuss. Is there any way to contact the copyright holder? Rocket000(talk) 17:17, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Maybe there is a way to contact the origial copyright holder, but in this case there is no need. The image has been released under GFDL, so there was absolutely no reason to remove the image. The whole idea of GFDL and CC licenses is that it allows immages to be used for other purposes under the same licence.... KKoolstra (talk) 21:02, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Well, yeah, GFDL stays GFDL, but how do we know that's what it is? Rocket000(talk) 12:34, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Well, if GFDL content not uploaded by the copyright holder is not allowed anymore (but needs a direct confirmation by the copyright holder), please thell me with reference to where on commons that was written. Furhtermore, please give me the name of the copyright holder. The information was included with the file, but since I don't have admin rights on commons, I can't look that up myself. Otherwise: please tell me if a reasonable suspicion was given in the nomination for speedy deletion.

 Not done --O (висчвын) 22:33, 12 September 2008 (GMT)


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

I own the copyrights to my images. Why should they be deleted?[edit]

My images have been wrongly flagged. I demand that they be undeleted. My name is Steve Shapiro, and I was the drummer for a band Berman. I produced many CDs and their artwork and the artwork has been flagged.

It may be relevant to know which, if any, record label your band may be signed to. I imagine the administrator's concern was related to the assumption a label owned the images. Sherurcij (talk) 02:51, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

 Not done --O (висчвын) 22:34, 12 September 2008 (GMT)


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

Image:SacredCharge.jpg[edit]

i request for the restoration of the deleted picture titled SacredCharge.jpg. as per RF online's copyright policy, i wish it to be applied to the picture but by any means, i hope it won't be deleted. thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Winningedge (talk • contribs) 04:56, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

RF Online's website states "Copyright © Level Up! Inc. 2008. All Rights Reserved". Though you claimed authorship on the description page you need to confirm that you are the copyright holder of the game via COM:OTRS. Afterwards the screenshot will be restored. Thanks, →Christian 20:06, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

 Not done --O (висчвын) 22:35, 12 September 2008 (GMT)


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

Image:giordano.jpg[edit]

Image taken by Ryan Brandenberg, Temple University photgrapher who gave us permission to use this as Dr. Giordano is a Temple University Professor. There is no problem with copyright at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mice30 (talk • contribs) 17:23, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, please confirm that sending an email to COM:OTRS. →Christian 20:16, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

 Not done --O (висчвын) 22:36, 12 September 2008 (GMT)


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

Miss Tarah Lee ' The Empress ' image[edit]

Although I don't know how to fill out your box's that is not a reason to delete my image , I have full rights to use this image on the web and or any other place I choose.

Can you prove that you have the rights? --rimshottalk 06:05, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

 Not done --O (висчвын) 22:37, 12 September 2008 (GMT)

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

Ffestiniog PDold 1.jpg & Ffestiniog PDold 2.jpg[edit]

Both these files were put on threat of deletion yesterday, and have now disappeared.

As a representative of the organisation that originated the photos, the Festiniog Railway Society, I can state they are both covered under Public domain by aged condition. The originals are held by our archivist.

There is also Ffestiniog PDold 4.jpg which is under similar threat!

--Keith (talk) 17:02, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Who ever did it, restore I mean, thank you - now correctly credited to FR company, and permission from its Archivist --Keith (talk) 17:46, 12 August 2008 (UTC)


Those images were never deleted; archiving --O (висчвын) 19:17, 13 September 2008 (GMT)


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

Image:Nude records.jpg[edit]

PD-ineligible text properly licensed. There's no reason this should have been deleted. -Nard the Bard 18:18, 13 September 2008 (UTC)


✓ Restored.Christian 18:20, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

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

Image:Het-geheim-van-holland.JPG[edit]

I don't think this file should be deleted, neither do I feel that I have infringed on a copyright violation, because the picture I took is in the public space, attached to the side of a shower building for watersporters. Pedestrian traffic passes the building. I can upload a larger image which shows the building in its entirety, but the map itself I found interesting as it shows some major touristic attractions. In principle all works communicated to the public by or on behalf of the public authorities (government) are not copyright protected in the Netherlands, unless the copyright has been reserved explicitly, either in a general manner by law, decree or ordinance, or in a specific case by a notice on the work itself or at the communication to the public. I am also surprised that the file has been deleted without nomination. - Jane023

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This should be covered under FOP. And yes I would like to see the original uploaded as well. -Nard the Bard 14:44, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
    Sorry but I don't know what FOP is. I uploaded the larger picture here for you to see. The two blue signs are where I cut the other pictures down from. This is the file - Image:Douche-gravenstenebrug-haarlem.JPG - Jane023 (talk) 21:26, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
    FOP means freedom of panorama. --O (висчвын) 01:13, 03 September 2008 (GMT)
  • This map was indeed interesting but not allowed to be reproduced without permission. This map is not published by the public authorities, but by the VVV (see http://www.geheimvanholland.nl which uses the same logo as shown on this map). The VVV is a normal company (not part of the government) and therefore article 15b of the copyright law in the Netherlands does not apply to this image. - Mcke 19:15, 3 September 2008 (UTC).

 Not done --O (висчвын) 22:05, 27 September 2008 (GMT)


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

Deletion Character Training cover book image of Vera Barclay[edit]

Deleted image

{{Informazioni file |Descrizione = Copertina di Character Training in Wolf-Cub Pack |Fonte = Esperienze e Progetti |Data = 1921 |Autore = Vera Barclay |Licenza = {{GFDL}} |Detentore copyright = |OTRS = |EDP = |Registro = |Numero registrazione = |Altre versioni = }}

Descrizione=Copertina di Character Training in Wolf-Cub Pack

Fonte=Esperienze e Progetti

Data=1921

Autore=Vera Barclay

Licenza d’uso= È permesso copiare, distribuire e/o modificare questo documento in base ai termini della GNU Free Documentation License, Versione 1.2 o successive pubblicata dalla Free Software Foundation; senza alcuna sezione non modificabile, senza testo di copertina e senza testo di quarta di copertina. Una copia della licenza è inclusa nella sezione intitolata "Testo della GNU Free Documentation License".

Un file con questa licenza può essere reso disponibile a Wikipedia in altre lingue e agli altri progetti Wikimedia se caricato su Wikimedia Commons. Qualunque utente può effettuare il trasferimento. Lista delle immagini trasferibili Puoi farti aiutare dal CommonsHelper. Una volta trasferito il file, inserisci in questa pagina: Template:NowCommons

Some image at italian WikiCommons

See the deletion comment. The artist of the cover illustration died 1946. Lupo 11:08, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Therefore  Not done . →Christian 06:42, 27 September 2008 (UTC)


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

User Page[edit]

My User Page was deleted because it did not follow scope. On none of the other 15 or so Wikimedia projects on which I am a member, do they view User Pages are being required to follow the scope of the project. Wiktionary User Pages are not just a list of dictionary terms they describe the user. Wikipedia User Pages are not a list of articles, they describe the user. Wikisource User Pages are not a list of books, they describe the user. Every Wiki User Page describes the person not the project. Is Commons different? Wjhonson (talk) 07:09, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Responded here --Herby talk thyme 07:14, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

✓ Dealt with some time ago. --O (висчвын) 22:09, 27 September 2008 (GMT)


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

Image:Brain met.jpg[edit]

image deleted, while Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Brain met.jpg cleary states "kept" ? Come on, who is being fooled here ? --LimoWreck (talk) 22:32, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I think that was a typo on Forrester's part and he meant to say "deleted". I've contacted him. Giggy (talk) 23:53, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


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


Undelete Page 123ldsgirl[edit]

Please undelete this page for me. It is imparative for a project that i am working on.


 Not done , this user page was clearly out of scope. Commons is not an advertising platform. Regards, →Christian 06:29, 27 September 2008 (UTC)