From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
OTRS Noticeboard
Welcome to the OTRS noticeboard

This page is where users can communicate with Commons OTRS volunteers, or OTRS volunteers with one another. You can request permissions verification here, or anything else that needs an agent's assistance. This page is multilingual — when discussing tickets in languages other than English, please make a note of this and consider asking your question in the same language.

Please read the Frequently Asked Questions before posting your question here.

The current backlog of the (English) permissions-commons queue is: 53 days  update

Start a new discussion

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015
OTRS Noticeboard
Main OTRS-related pages
Commons discussion pages (index)

Shortcut: COM:ON

Filing cabinet icon.svg
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 2 days.
Translate this header

Russian reviewer needed[edit]

I need a Russian-speaking reviewer familiar with OTRS to {{subst:LRW}} these files: Special:ListFiles/Vmdubovoi. It looks like they are good, but I can't read the Russian permission message. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 15:02, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

File:Flag of UNASUR.svg[edit]

I am trying to find out the content or description of this email, especially pertaining to any design of this flag. I ask because this Logo Manual Document from UNASUR and it shows a flag different from the ticket (and some Google image searches show many variants, and does this ticket cover those as well)? User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 06:33, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

@Zscout370: there are two inline images in the message from UNASUR in the OTRS ticket, but the links to the files are broken and the images are not displayed. The image for which UNASUR gave permission is File:Logo_UNASUR.png. --Rrburke (talk) 10:40, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Files from[edit]

Can someone check this File:Bosanska Dubica Center.jpg and ticket number stated there (2006050810011015). If it's ok can someone add template and check if can it be applied also for this File:Bosanska dubica-center.jpg. --Smooth_O (talk) 17:50, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

@Smooth O: the ticket shows what appers to be a discussion (tldr) but, no permission release on OTRS ticket 2006050810011015 A second opinion would be helpful. Mlpearc (open channel) 18:54, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Removing a file: File:Ben and Lucy The Hike Premier.jpg[edit]

Please could someone remove the below file from the database...

The owner of the picture has requested this..

File:Ben and Lucy The Hike Premier.jpg

Thanks Sarah

@Sphilbrick: your ticket... normally I would say "licenses are irrevocable", but the ticket mentions only that the uploader has been "given permission" by the copyright holder, so I'm not sure the ticket was valid in the first place. Storkk (talk) 15:14, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
The permission statement filed does “acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement”. However, I do note that the photo has not been used except to create individual photos of each person and neither of those are used. However, we have to be concerned about precedent what is a valid reason for honoring this request?--Sphilbrick (talk) 11:26, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
@Storkk: Sorry, I just now understand the import of your comment. I do see two derivative photos created by @Ukexpat:. There’s not much point in removing the original unless the derivatives are removed so I want feedback from Ukexpat.--Sphilbrick (talk) 11:30, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Files from Indian Navy not longer available at but at other Indian Navy websites like[edit]

According to the OTRS ticket 2013090610005872, I found two files from the Indian Navy: File:Basketball court at the Indian Naval Academy, Ezhimala.jpg and File:Swimming pool at the Indian Naval Academy, Ezhimala.jpg. Assuming that these files was available at at the moment of uploading, now aren't available at that website but at (that is also part of the Indian Navy).

  • Is the OTRS permission valid for in addition of
  • The new source is fine in order to pass the License Review?

Thanks in advance. --Amitie 10g (talk) 04:17, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

@Amitie 10g: the forwarded ticket appears to simply refer to the "Indian Navy Website ... in accordance with the existing definition (as on 05 Sep 13)". I'm not crystal clear on what that means. It came from the Webmaster, who was deemed at the time to be sufficiently authorized to license the files, but it seems pretty borderline to me. Yann may have further insight as he dealt with the ticket at the time. Storkk (talk) 15:23, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Well, there are still uncertainty about these files. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:57, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Markus+Tom.jpg[edit]

For this image with OTRS-ticket today an IP, which calls herself the photographer, requests deletion for "missing authorization". Could one of you check this out, especially who gave the permission for the ticket. Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 11:10, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Might be a good idea for a German-speaking agent to request clarification in the ticket as to how the ticket submitter came to hold the copyright, which isn't clearly stated as far as I can see. It is not inconceivable that the IP should be believed. Storkk (talk) 15:37, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

OTRS 2008122810014342 (again)[edit]

Hi! I need further information about Ticket:2008122810014342 (seems to be in Arabic). A related issue was already discussed via Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard/archive/2015#OTRS ticket on File:Ni lin-34342.jpg with no reaction by ticket ownwer @Tarawneh:, who created also {{PalestineRemembered}}. Related is Commons:Deletion requests/File:Gaza Port.png, with multiple authors and files taken from which is "© 1999-2013 all rights reserved. All pictures & Oral History Podcast are copyright of their respective owners."
How they could obtain all the individual permissions from (guessing) thousands of users and photo contributors? See also here: +/- 56.000 photos and +/- 24.000 members Affected files at Commons, using this ticket (or WhatLinksHere). Typical example: ("Posted by Nafiz Alqasem Uploaded on May 2, 2009"). Gunnex (talk) 15:20, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Pinging @Tarawneh: again (as he was active on Commons on 15.04.2016). Gunnex (talk) 21:12, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
I have taken a look with Google translate. I see a simple permission from a site owner to take whatever from their website and release it into GFDL. However, for all the contributors to that site, there is no way to know that they are releasing whatever they upload into GFDL, based on some 2008 conversation that the site owner probably even doesn't remember. So unless @Tarawneh: comes up with something spectacular, I'm affraid we will have to delete all {{PalestineRemembered}} files as 'missing permission'. Jcb (talk) 23:46, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Augusto Ferrer-Dalmau (artist)[edit]

Some of Augusto Ferrer-Dalmau's work has OTRS ticket #2013032610005631. The image of El milagro de Empel does not have a tag. Was this an oversight by the uploader (if it is the artist)?--Godot13 (talk) 05:50, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

We need a Spanish OTRS-volunteer to check this. A quick check however learns that all the files seem to be separately mentioned (tens of files over tens of emails), searching on this specific title holds no results. However it seems that the uploader is the painter himself, and that this has been verified (given the other OTRS permissions) and as such the own work claim is valid and there is no reason to doubt the release of this file. But to be sure it would also be a good idea to ask for permission for this file explicitly. Basvb (talk) 15:41, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
I reviewed that specific file between all of his other files uploaded, and even is found at the source provided. And yes, the permission is valid; Augusto Ferrer-Dalmau agree to release his works under the CC-BY-SA-4.0 license, and covers all of his uploads, most of them available in his magazzine (he is the painter). --Amitie 10g (talk) 01:42, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Contents of Category:Images from the Turkish Naval Forces[edit]


Following a pending DR concerning contents from the Turkish Land Forces, I found the Category:Images from the Turkish Naval Forces where the most of the contents seems to be under the OTRS permission ticket:2012061210008721.

This permission follows the DR Commons:Deletion requests/File:DzKK BG (87).jpg, which led to a kept.

But the contents of the Turkish Naval Forces, such as the Land Forces, are copyrighted ad defined in the law n°4982 (pdf), wich says in its article 29:

Bu Kanunla erişilen bilgi ve belgeler ticarî amaçla çoğaltılamaz ve kullanılamaz.

The contents and documents concerned by this law shall not be republished and used with a commercial purpose.

This law concerns all the "public institutions" (kamu kurum ve kuruluşları) (Article 2) and by "publications" (belge) is meant photographs or contents of any kind (Article 3d).

Then, we have some reservations about this permission and the deletion of the contents of this category is questionable.

Ping Fry1989, Taysin, Jbarta, Takabeg, BurakOtto

Kumkum (talk) 14:16, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Ow dear, this seems to be a Wikipedia-only permission. (Though I used google translate to read the ticket.) Natuur12 (talk) 14:47, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
User:Bermanya was found in the application to Turkish Navy for license terms. The answer came by e-mail. E-mail was forwarded for otrs permissions. The answer can not be use commercially (or be republish) on the law, does not talk about use of the pictures on navy website. Kullanıcı:Bermanya Türk Deniz Kuvvetlerine başvuruda bulundu, lisans koşulları için. E-posta ile cevap geldi. OTRS izni için eposta yönlendirildi. Yasaya göre cevaplar ticari olarak kullanılamaz, donanmanın internet sitesindeki resimlerden bahsetmiyor. --taysin (message) 19:10, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Okay and you are the agent who accepted the ticket. Do you realise that a non commercial claue is a violation of com:L? Based on the current info all files relying on this ticket should be deleted. Natuur12 (talk) 19:36, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for checking this OTRS ticket. We're now discussing the issue on Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Attribution-TRGov-Military-Navy. --Dereckson (talk) 02:30, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Natuur12, Dereckson: Is a new DR necessary concerning Category:Images from the Turkish Coast Guard (ticket:2012071710010976) ? Kumkum (talk) 19:22, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, a DR is required in such context. --Dereckson (talk) 19:32, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Natuur12 (or another OTRS volunteer) before a DR it seems necessary to check this OTRS ; even it would be a mere formality. Kumkum (talk) 09:18, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Please remind me to check the ticket if I haven't done so tomorrow. Natuur12 (talk) 20:56, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
@Kumkum: I indeed forgot. While I still have to use google translate there is no mentioning of a free license as defined in our licensing policy. It seems to be a Wikipedia only permission and at this stage I believe we should start checking all @Taysin: his tickets. Mistakes happen but those are beyond stupidity. His most recent ticket (ticket:2016011410016112) is also suspect and I wouldn't have accepted it. Natuur12 (talk) 20:58, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Natuur12 thank you, here it is Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Attribution-TRGov-Military-Coast Guard. Kumkum (talk) 13:43, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

EU National ID cards copyright[edit]


I am asking for some help in confirming OTRS permission for the following images:

Front of the Lithuanian identity card (first issued on 1 January 2009).gif (file) Swiss national ID card - Reverse.jpg (file) Swiss national ID card - Front.jpg (file) Slovenia national ID card - Reverse.png (file) Slovenia national ID card - Front.png (file) Swedish national id Card (Biometric) - Reverse.png (file) Swedish national id Card (Biometric) - Front.png (file) New biometric Maltese national ID card - reverse.jpg (file) New biometric Maltese national ID card - front.jpg (file) New biometric Spanish National ID Card - DNI (Front).jpg (file) New biometric Spanish National ID Card - DNI (Back).jpg (file) New biometroc dutch ID cards, European part of the Netherlands - (Back).png (file) New biometroc dutch ID cards, European part of the Netherlands - (Front).png (file) New biometric Gibraltar national ID card (Document which proves British nationality) (FRONT).jpg (file) Luxembourg National ID card (Back).jpg (file) Luxembourg National ID card (Front).jpg (file) Bhutanese national ID card (Citizenship card).PNG (file) New DNI, Spanish national Identity card issued since 2016.jpg (file) French national ID card (CNI Securisée) - French government Specimen model (Front).jpg (file) Irish Passport card (Back).jpg (file) Irish Passport Card.jpg (file)

Those images are from the EU website:, and can be found in the EU national Identity cards Wikipedia page: Can someone please search for a ticket? I would really apreciate that! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gregori-luxair (talk • contribs) 17:59, 13 April 2016‎ (UTC)

Ticket applied by the uploader[edit]

Can someone please check File:Un valencià al Congo.jpg where a ticket was applied by the uploader, an editor with just 300+ edits. If the ticket is good can you give it a good review. Thanks Ww2censor (talk) 14:11, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Ticket is not in a queue I have access to (permissions/photosubmissions/info-en). Storkk (talk) 14:18, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Music Room[edit]

I have posted a photo of a painting by Cham Hendon. The photo has been nominated for deletion because it doesn't have proper copyright verification. When Cham Hendon died, I inherited all his work. Did I inherit the copyright rights as well? Thank you for your help. If the photo is deleted before you're able to respond, will I be able to add it again? I'd really like to be able to include an example of his work with the article. Thank you for your help.Shelleycaldwell (talk) 12:25, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, @Shelleycaldwell: you likely did, unless he sold them or they were otherwise transferred prior to his death. In what country was the will executed? If you don't feel comfortable revealing that information here, you can email me at here. Better yet, start an OTRS ticket by emailing with an explanation of the situation. Once you've emailed OTRS, you can add the tag {{subst:OP}} to the file page to show you've contacted OTRS. --Rrburke (talk) 10:23, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

File:TS Madison Hinton.jpg[edit]

Given that Getty Images typically does not agree to publish their content under licenses allowing anyone to use it for any purpose including commercial purposes, and given that the uploader seems to believe that the subject of a photo is the copyright holder, I'm wondering if we could expedite the verification of the permission that has supposedly been sent in, so that we don't needlessly leave a likely copyright violation up. LX (talk, contribs) 17:13, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Pictogram voting info.svg Information for agents: ticket:2015111610021596 --Josve05a (talk) 02:15, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
@LX: Obvious copyright violation. @Josve05a: No, the ticket you quoted was for File:TSMadisonHinton.jpg, not this Getty image. Storkk (talk) 10:01, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
See message 11-13 Josve05a (talk) 11:54, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
There is indeed a link to this image in message 11, I did not initially interpret that as an attempt to grant permission... perhaps I was wrong. Storkk (talk) 12:11, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

File:JNR LA Opening.jpg[edit]

In the spirit of the previous request, given that Getty Images typically makes money by not giving their content away and doesn't like to allow anyone to use it for any purpose, could this check be expedited too? Thanks, LX (talk, contribs) 17:26, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Obvious copyright violation. Despite that, I searched for filename and putative photographer and was unsurprised to find nothing relevant. Storkk (talk) 10:06, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

request permissions verification image of Cameron Townsend[edit]

Please, may I see the permissions verification for the image located at Also curious if the image that is Pub Domain Dedicated is only the cropped image on or the original image located at which is listed as fully copyrighted still. Thanks for help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bell567 (talk • contribs) 19:38, 19 April 2016‎ (UTC)

@Bell567: To start with, the ticket (ticket:2013030310005101) does not specify a license, just a statement that any and all images already on the internet can be used without permission. That statement does not allow for adoptations, which thereby fails our licensing policy.
This also applies for the following files:
Josve05a (talk) 02:30, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
I opened a DR; Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Temp. cat for 2013030310005101. Josve05a (talk) 02:52, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Inconsistent instructions[edit]

Commons:OTRS#If you are not the copyright holder instructs users to "ask the author to forward the email with their clear statement of permission" whereas the Catalan version, Commons:OTRS/ca#Si no sou el titular dels drets, tells them to "reenvieu el correu electrònic amb la declaració explícita d'autorització de l'autor a" -- that is, forward the author's permission themselves. First, which is right? I ask for the statement of permission to come directly from the copyright holder, but I've experienced pushback from users who think a forwarded permission is sufficient. Second, shouldn't the instructions be consistent across all translations? It makes me wonder what other discrepancies there might be in other translations. --Rrburke (talk) 15:06, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

I think our position has changed over time, and we now view direct permission as much preferable. I think we absolutely require the contact information of the copyright holder (so a screenshot of an unidentified forum is not OK), but if it's an extremely straightforward ticket and there is nothing else to suggest it isn't kosher, I don't think the ticket should necessarily be invalidated. That said, if you're processing a forwarded ticket, it's relatively easy to hit the "reply" button, move the original sender to a CC field, put the copyright holder's email in the TO field and just ask whether they can confirm by direct reply that they sent the below email. I do think we need to make sure all languages have consistent instructions, I think some even still tell agents to ask the uploader to insert {{OTRS permission}} on the file page themselves (!). Standardizing the instructions is an important task, but will likely need a concerted and coordinated effort. Storkk (talk) 15:36, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

ticket #2014042910017985 File:Stuart_Styron.jpg[edit]

Hi, who gave permission? Stuart Styron or the Author Holger Winkler? 22:14, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Both. Storkk (talk) 23:14, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

ticket #2014042910017985 File:Stuart_Styron.jpg

Both persons send email or only stuart styron?

Regards 06:52, 22 April 2016 (UTC) Moved from my talk page. Storkk (talk) 09:57, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

If you have specific reason to doubt the authenticity, please let me know. I would not have stated that both gave permission if the ticket did not contain permission from both of them. It does. Storkk (talk) 15:08, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Beyonce Knowles with necklaces.jpg[edit]

Would it be possible to get someone to review the OTRS ticket behind this image - ticket:2012010810006633? There's a DR open for this image - Commons:Deletion requests/File:Beyonce Knowles with necklaces.jpg - and while the DR doesn't give any reasons why it is a copyright violation, I'd like to make sure things are properly set-up at our end while we're waiting for the nominator to provide more details. Tabercil (talk) 12:44, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Was a forwarded permission, which seems ok by first glance. (However, I would have sent an email to the original emailer to confirm the forwarded mail, but seems ok anyways). See also Commons:Undeletion_requests/Archive/2012-01#File:Beyonce_Knowles_with_necklaces.jpg. Josve05a (talk) 12:54, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
However, I can't really tell if they are the owners or not. While the emailed permission seems ok, I don't know if they own the copyright to begin with. (See the file talk page: "The photograph was taken by Tony Duran. Tony Duran transferred the copyright and all rights in the photograph to Beyonce, Inc. (an entity controlled by Beyonce Knowles). Time Magazine does not own the copyright in the photograph." Parkwood is a subcompany of Beyoncé Knowles. Josve05a (talk) 12:59, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. Good to know that. Now we just need to wait for the nominator to further explain his actions... Tabercil (talk) 03:26, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Peter D. Hancock.jpg[edit]

This file was deleted relatively recently after I was unable to procure the proper release before the temporary reprieve expired. The rights holder has since released the image under a CC license, and filed a new ticket. I wanted to ensure that the two tickets (ticket:2015072210023983, ticket:2016032310024931) were identified as relevant to each other. I'm also relatively new to the process (I know you are all volunteers, so thank you) but I was curious as to how long this might take to resolve?--FacultiesIntact (talk) 22:23, 28 April 2016 (UTC)


We have a number of photos from Naturspektrum, but the site doesn't say anything about Creative Commons licensing. I was going to make a template for this, but when I went to verify the ticket:2006051810006075, the email doesn't exist. Anyone know what happened? Do we need to confirm this license with the author? czar 23:21, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

One related ticket: ticket:2007011810022241. 00:11, 30 April 2016 (UTC)