Commons:Undeletion requests

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
(Redirected from Commons:Undeletion request)
Jump to: navigation, search

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

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

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

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

Commons deletion (policy)


Finding out why a file was deleted

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

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

Appealing a deletion

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

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

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

Temporary undeletion

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

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

To assist discussion

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

To allow transfer of fair use content to another project

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

Adding a request

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

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

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

Archives

Closed undeletion debates are archived daily.

Current requests

Watch View Edit

Files uploaded by VoidWanderer

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

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

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

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

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

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose

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

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

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

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

Jameslwoodward, I mean how would those photos be possibly restored, if I have no guarantee OTRS Ticket even have those exact pictures mentioned? I suppose there's only the author's permission to take pictures of his exhibition. So I doubt volunteer will be even notified there're deleted photos that require to be restored. --VoidWanderer (talk) 09:41, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Jim, if the permission is valid then the images will be automatically restored. When you take a photo of something then you own the copyright on your photo, that is true, but if the thing depicted is protected by copyright (which is the case as soon as there is creativity) then the copyright holder of the depicted thing has also some rights on the publication of your photo, and in such cases it is required that we have his permission to publish here the photos. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:05, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Ticket 2018040410013134 has permission for the Exhibition "Блокпост Пам'яті" from Pavel Netesov. It looks OK for me. But I do not know what pictures are from this exhibition.--Anatoliy (talk) 18:10, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
    @Ahonc: You can restore the files and add the template {{OTRS received}} while you check which files have been authorised. I've left you a note in the ticket, and we can continue the discussion there. Cheers --Ruthven (msg) 12:23, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Mass TechCrunch restore request

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


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

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose All we have in the OTRS correspondence is "Yes you may publish and credit TechCrunch". Nothing more. There is no explanation of how TechCrunch came to have a license that allows Tech Crunch to freely license Getty property and not even a signature. We have no evidence at all that whoever wrote the message had the authority to do so. I also note that the message was forwarded to OTRS, which we do not ordinarily accept, although since the forwarder is Yann, I'm OK with it. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:14, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure what you are looking for here. The question asked by Yann was "Could you please confirm that the copyright holder have allowed to publish the images under a free license". The response to that specific question was an unequivocal yes. The response came from an official TechCrunch account that is confirmed to belong to them via their website. The account is the "events" account that would deal with these events and therefore know the circumstances behind their photographers. The response is short, yes, but it answers the question posed in a way that indicates that the license on Flickr is correct. If you want something more perhaps Yann can unlock the ticket so you can get whatever working you want out of them. --Majora (talk) 15:29, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Technically it's not needed that the ticket owner unlock the ticket. If you press 'quick close', it will no longer be locked. Jcb (talk) 17:17, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - without some more explanation we cannot take their statement for granted. We do not even know whether the person responding has a proper understanding of copyright regulations. Any OTRS agent is expected to be aware that a lot of statements from customers are mistaken and that we have an active role in helping them sorting things out. Jcb (talk) 17:16, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

File:VSF - Jim Edgar - 1978-1.jpg

I request a review of this photo of Jim Edgar and others that I have added to both the Forests Commission Victoria and Victorian School of Forestry pages that have been deleted.

These photos form part of a large collection that have been donated over many years by members to the Forests Commission Retired Personnel Association (FCRPA)

They are on public display at the association museum at Beechworth or on their new webpage https://www.victoriasforestryheritage.org.au/

Many are out of copyright and in the common domain because of their age. Some are very old newspaper photos. I have identified the original donor where possible.

In many cases I edited the photos to improve their quality before I uploaded them.

I hope I have now added enough information on their source so they can be kept

Other photos are

Thanks DBHOB (talk) 00:24, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Well, why would a 1978 photo be public domain in Australia? Template:PD-Australia does not seem the obvious choice for a copyright license. Thuresson (talk) 00:48, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
@DBHOB: Were the copyrights to these photos originally given to FCV or VSF?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 00:56, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi there All these photos were freely donated to the Forests Commission Retired Personnel Association (FCRPA) over many years for their use They are all freely available from the FCRPA collection either online or at its museum. Some came from the Forest Commission and some came from Victorian school of Forestry The School of Forestry merged with the University of Melbourne in 1980 and everything was thrown out. The Forest Commission ceased to exist in 1983 and they had a big clean out too. The one of Jim Edgar was taken at the Victorian School of Forestry which was then managed by the FCV in 1980 Is there another form of release that I need to use I want to do the right thing with these photos. It means a lot to the FCRPA, Thanks for your help Cheers

DBHOB (talk) 01:25, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose There are two questions here. Did the people who donated the photos to FCRPA collection actually own the copyrights? Please remember that owning a paper copy of a photo does not give you any rights to the copyright -- that is almost always held by the actual photographer or his heirs. Second, even if they did, did the donation include a formal, written, transfer of copyright? I think the answer to the first question is "perhaps, in some cases". The answer to the second is almost certainly "No" and unless the FCRPA can produce copies of the relevant documents, that will be the end of it.

In order for the image to be restored, it will up to you to prove beyond a significant doubt (the Commons standard of proof, see COM:PRP) that the answer to both questions is "Yes". .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:56, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

hello again. Im sorry but maybe I didn't explain myself properly. Nearly all these photos belonged to the Forests Commission of Victoria or the Victorian School of Forestry. Both were Government organisations not private individuals. So the copyright was always owned by the Government of Victoria. Some are newspaper photos (Gerraty and Code). I understood they are available to use because the copyright has expired. is this not the case ? Cheers DBHOB (talk) 10:18, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

I have give an explanation of each photo below.

DBHOB (talk) 10:34, 21 April 2018 (UTC)


Again, ownership of a photo does not give ownership of the copyright. At the time a photograph is taken, the copyright belongs to the photographer. If the photographer has a work for hire agreement with an employer, then the copyright belongs to the employer. If that applies to any of these, it is up to you to prove it.
If a photograph was first published anonymously in Australia more than 50 years ago, then it is PD. However it is up to you to prove that it was actually published and that the publication was actually anonymous -- the fact that we do not know who the photographer was does not make it anonymous. Generally, you must show the published photo in situ without a by-line.
So, here are several groups:
Those that are clearly not PD:
Those that might be PD as government works, but both the date and place of publication and the fact that it is a government work requires further proof. Note that the Australian law requires publication for the clock to start, so the fact that a photo exists proves nothing unless you can prove it was published more than 50 years ago:
Those that might be PD if published anonymously, but where the anonymous publication must be proven (see above):

.     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:02, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello again

I can't do anything about the first group. They should be deleted. I agree with you. I miss understood the rules But I have added links to original newspaper sources from Trove for A.V Galbraith, W J Code and F G Geraty. They were all well before 1955. E J Semmens is a crop headshot from the 1946 school football team photo which is published in the University of Melbourne museum. https://omeka.cloud.unimelb.edu.au/cchc/items/show/5819. Im looking for a source for E J Semmens (2)-1 The photo for A V Galbraith comes from an obituary written about him in Australian Forestry journal. It shows him sitting at his desk as Forests Commission Chairman. Gailbriath retired in July 1969. So the photo is 50 years old. Cheers DBHOB (talk) 02:35, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Njimele and his wife Zafack.jpg

Just like other pictures, this picture were shot by me some time ago. This shot was taken when Njimele and his wife graced a graduation ceremony in his school, named Peacock Bilingual Nursery and Primary school Peterobioma (talk) 17:59, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't believe copyright is an issue here. These were deleted because they appear to be personal photos. They are not useful for educational purposes and therefore are outside the project scope. We can only undelete them if you can show they are educational. Guanaco (talk) 06:29, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Zafack Patience.jpg

This picture was created by me, when i took shot of Patience Zafack, wife of Njimele George some time ago in a conference. Thus, i have the copy right and i humbly asked that the picture be undeleted Peterobioma (talk) 18:00, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't believe copyright is an issue here. These were deleted because they appear to be personal photos. They are not useful for educational purposes and therefore are outside the project scope. We can only undelete them if you can show they are educational. Guanaco (talk) 06:29, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Njimele George Mbona.jpg

This file was created by me as I personally took this shot. This shot was taken during a mini Conference held in Bonaberi, Douala, Cameroon, in which Njimele George Mbona gave a speechPeterobioma (talk) 18:07, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't believe copyright is an issue here. These were deleted because they appear to be personal photos. They are not useful for educational purposes and therefore are outside the project scope. We can only undelete them if you can show they are educational. Guanaco (talk) 06:29, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support On this & other photos of him: I have no first-hand knowledge here, but appears from a Google search on "Njimele George" to be a writer, in a part of the world where establishing notability via the Internet may be difficult. I'd be inclined to restore these. He may or may not be Wikipedia-level notable, but anyone with several published books and plays, especially in a country where that is unusual, is probably notable enough for Commons. - 07:35, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
    • This in particular suggests above the threshold. - Jmabel ! talk 07:37, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

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

File:Stuttgarter Kantorei.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Ticket:2018041910010378 alleges permission for this file. Request temporary undeletion to assess the validity of that allegation, mark as {{subst:OR}} or otherwise appropriately, and ping me.   Arthur Crbz (talk) 08:32, 22 April 2018 (UTC)


✓ Done: @Arthur Crbz: Please complete the permission. --Yann (talk) 12:46, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

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

File:Nina Kennedy, conductor.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Ticket:2018042110007654 alleges permission for this file. Request temporary undeletion to assess the validity of that allegation, mark as {{subst:OR}} or otherwise appropriately, and ping me.   Arthur Crbz (talk) 08:37, 22 April 2018 (UTC)


✓ Done: @Arthur Crbz: Please complete the permission. --Yann (talk) 12:46, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

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

File:Timothy B. Sailors.jpg

Please undo the deletion of my file. I am both the creator and subject of the photograph. No other human being was directly involved in the production of this image. My mere use of this self-produced photograph of myself on my own websites does not mean that I do not have the right to make it freely licensed, as I have chosen to do. Many thanks, TBSailors (talk) 10:44, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Therefore, policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using OTRS.  — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 11:26, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done: a link to a free license have been provided. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:05, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

File:John Wiebe.jpg

Undeletion of John Wiebe file. Source: https://www.johnwiebemusic.com/about — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnWiebeMusic (talk • contribs) 16:42, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Therefore, policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using OTRS. @JohnWiebeMusic: Also, please note that it is a serious violation of Commons rules to upload an image a second time after deletion as you did here. It wastes your time and that of other Commons editors. If you do it again, you may be blocked from editing on Commons. This same picture was also uploaded as File:JohnWiebeStudio-2.jpg. In addition, your website is "© JOHN WIEBE MUSIC 2018". Finally, you had your chance to contest deletion at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by JohnWiebeMusic.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 16:52, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Макаревич Константин.jpg

Dear Sir or Madam,

I would like to request a file recovery, since I am the photographer and sole owner of the picture. The original picture stored in my family album. What kind of evidence I could provide you in case to prove my rights for this picture?

Thanks in advance Уваров Данила (talk) 09:22, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Therefore, policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using OTRS. @Уваров Данила: Also, please note that it is a serious violation of Commons rules to upload an image a second time after deletion as you did here. It wastes your time and that of other Commons editors. If you do it again, you may be blocked from editing on Commons. This same picture was also uploaded as File:Makarevich Konstantin.jpg.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 13:07, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: Requires a free license from the actual photographer via OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:57, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Ok, I agree, but I was not familiar with such a strict rules of the autor's rights. What can I do in this case? The picture is made by me but now, because I downloaded it twice, you will ban it every time when I try to upload it without a serious reason regarding autor's rights, but violation due to repeated upload? Thanks --Уваров Данила (talk) 14:17, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
@Уваров Данила: You can send permission via OTRS or OTRS/ru.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 16:44, 22 April 2018 (UTC)