Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2021-01

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

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

File:Prince Salani Sitting Lonely.jpg

(29 Dec 2020) —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 42.108.164.5 (talk) 14:57, 29 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Prince Salani D: Could you provide us a rationale as to why this file should be undeleted? --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 14:40, 30 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: No response and WikiData has been deleted, therefore, per COM:NOTUSED and COM:NOTHOST. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 03:17, 31 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:BalanRaj Self Photography.jpg

--Hanuman Rajoo (talk) 08:21, 30 December 2020 (UTC)Hanuman Rajoo 30122020Reply[reply]

@Hanuman Rajoo: Can you provide us a rationale for undeletion? --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 14:42, 30 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose - The uploader (Balan Raj) appears to purport to be the subject ("Balan raj"). Copyright initially vests in the author (photographer), not the mere subject. Accordingly, we require evidence of permission from the actual author (indeed, one can see a person, as opposed to a tripod, in the reflection) to be submitted using the COM:OTRS process. This is, however, moot, per COM:NOTHOST. This is not a notable person, particularly as evidenced by the deletion of every article the uploader has attempted to create on them (!!!); see w:User:Balan Raj/sandbox; w:Draft:BalanRaj; and rejection of w:BalanRaj. Эlcobbola _talk 16:20, 30 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per Elcobbola. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:35, 30 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Rabbi Hirschfield.jpg

Rabbi Brad Hirschfield, our copyright.

File:Rabbi Brad Hirschfield.jpg

Rabbi Brad Hirschfield, President, Clal - https://www.clal.org/team/brad/

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Shellipsm (talk • contribs) 17:06, 30 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:35, 30 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:ZPV_Depois3.jpeg

Hi,

I'm the owner of the rights for this photo, since I'm the person in the picture.

Regards, ZPV

Zpvmau2020 (talk) 18:55, 30 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Ownership or possession of a photo, proprietorship of the equipment used to take the photo, or being the subject of the photo does not equate holding the copyright. The copyright holder is the photographer (i.e. the person who took the photo), rather that the subject (the person who appears in the photo) or the person possessing the photo, unless transferred by operation of law (e.g. inheritance, etc.) or by contract (written and signed by the copyright holder, and explicitly transfers the copyright). For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:37, 30 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:ZPV Pegou.jpg

Hi,

I'm the owner of the rights for this photo, since I'm the person in the picture.

Regards, ZPV Zpvmau2020 (talk) 18:56, 30 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Ownership or possession of a photo, proprietorship of the equipment used to take the photo, or being the subject of the photo does not equate holding the copyright. The copyright holder is the photographer (i.e. the person who took the photo), rather that the subject (the person who appears in the photo) or the person possessing the photo, unless transferred by operation of law (e.g. inheritance, etc.) or by contract (written and signed by the copyright holder, and explicitly transfers the copyright). For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:37, 30 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:ZPV 5PMN.jpg

Hi,

I'm the owner of the rights for this photo, since one of the persons in the picture and host of the show where the photo was taken.

Regards, ZPV

Zpvmau2020 (talk) 18:58, 30 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Ownership or possession of a photo, proprietorship of the equipment used to take the photo, or being the subject of the photo does not equate holding the copyright. The copyright holder is the photographer (i.e. the person who took the photo), rather that the subject (the person who appears in the photo) or the person possessing the photo, unless transferred by operation of law (e.g. inheritance, etc.) or by contract (written and signed by the copyright holder, and explicitly transfers the copyright). For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:37, 30 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Category:Bonner zoologische Beiträge

The relevant deletion requests:

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Bonner zoologische Beiträge - Herausgeber- Zoologisches Forschungsinstitut und Museum Alexander Koenig, Bonn (1997) Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Bonner zoologische Beiträge - Herausgeber- Zoologisches Forschungsinstitut und Museum Alexander Koenig, Bonn (2007) Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:Bonner_zoologische_Monographien_(2011)

These were deleted as the journal was not based on the available information out of copyright, However, subsqeuently information has been found suggesting that the originating journal may in fact have re-licensed material as CC-BY-4.0. see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bonner zoologische Beiträge - Herausgeber- Zoologisches Forschungsinstitut und Museum Alexander Koenig, Bonn (1976) (20204767260).jpg

Which means that the journal is compatible with Commons licensing (At least for more recent content).

I am not sure how to check for content from this which was deleted under {{Copyvio}} or speedy tags. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:30, 29 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also affects -

And any subcats in between that were removed under speedy criteria. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:35, 29 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also - See back from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&logid=303631883 - which are files in subcats, deelted by Dmacks under speedy criteria. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:14, 29 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And many others :(.. Is there a fster way to find these then going through the deletion log manually? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:28, 29 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Authors who submit articles to the Bonn Zoological Bulletin are not even informed that the magazine requests all published articles to have any specific copyright license, see Instructions to authors. The only information regarding open access policy is "All published content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution". Regardless, it is the authors who license their articles, not the publisher. Thuresson (talk) 22:11, 29 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose Per Thuresson. Note also the comments made by Verbcatcher at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bonner zoologische Beiträge - Herausgeber- Zoologisches Forschungsinstitut und Museum Alexander Koenig, Bonn (1976) (20204767260).jpg]. De728631 (talk) 21:58, 31 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 02:18, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Example.jpg

Jangan delete dan edit kerja saya..thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Syed al habib shah (talk • contribs) 19:10, 31 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Google Translate: "Do not delete and edit my work") De728631 (talk) 21:53, 31 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please state which file you would like to have restored and why it should be done. You keep uploading images that are unlikely to be your own original photographs and do not seem to fit into the project scope of Commons. @JarrahTree: Can you explain this in Malay please? De728631 (talk) 21:53, 31 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: User has been indef blocked for abusing multiple accounts and no response will be forthcoming. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 03:52, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Juanminujín.jpg

The image was extracted from a video uploaded to YouTube in cc license by the program. — Preceding unsigned comment added by A4exocet (talk • contribs) 20:00, 31 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose There is no Creative Commons licence for this video in the archived version or in the current page. What you may have seen is the CC button in the archived video. This is, however, for turning on subtitles/closed captions (hover your mouse over the "CC" and you will see a popup notice). A Creative Commons licensing for YouTube videos would be found in the original description, but there is no such thing for this video. See also COM:WHERE. De728631 (talk) 21:38, 31 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per De728631. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 15:20, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:zhangyaoren.jpg

The image is from the owner Zhang Yao ren. He request me to uploads it. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Choosijia (talk • contribs) 21:32, 31 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose In such cases we need a permission by email coming directly from the copyright holder. Please note also that owning a copy of a photograph does not automatically mean owning the copyright. This is usually held by the original photographer. See COM:OTRS for instructions how to verify a licence by email. De728631 (talk) 21:41, 31 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per De728631. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 15:21, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

un domingo antes de mi muerte

la imagnen de propia autoria que fue pasdo de mi celualr a mi computadora, el contenido de lo relatado es solo un relato con el proposito de ser mas agradecido con la vida y tener mas consiencia de las cosas que nos rodean y nuestros seres amados. la foto no tiene viloncia, la imangen no muesntra temas sexuales, la imagen es de uan pesoan disfrutando un dia bonito — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darwingpazj (talk • contribs) 00:58, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose Regarding File:Ing,. Darwing Paz Justiniano.jpg Wikimedia Commons is not a free web host where non-contributors can upload photos of themselves. Thuresson (talk) 02:14, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 15:22, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Tupolev HQ on the Yauza, Moscow.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

File:Tupolev HQ on the Yauza, Moscow.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Reason: No FOP back then. Now there is FOP for buildings in Russia since late 2014. If this is the same image as w:File:Tupolev HQ on the Yauza, Moscow.jpg. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:59, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done: It is exactly the same image, so we can as well host it here. --De728631 (talk) 03:33, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Banksy Rat with baseball bat Kentish Town 2005-cropped.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

File:Banksy Rat with baseball bat Kentish Town 2005-cropped.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Reason: file was deleted because Commons:Deletion requests/File:Banksy Rat with baseball bat Kentish Town 2005-cropped.jpg (supposedly a copyrighted artwork). Yet this was kept in an older DR at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Banksy in London, which rules that Banksy's graffiti cannot be copyrighted as the anonymous artist "has a casual attitude to copyright" (see also Commons:Deletion requests/Banksy graffiti). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 05:41, 12 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose This is a poor argument indeed. There is a deletion policy which states that a file can be deleted after a deletion request has been started and all interested have had time to present arguments for and against deletion. There is nothing in the policy that says that a file can only be requested for deletion once. Thuresson (talk) 06:52, 12 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Thuresson: then why do you think {{Non-free graffiti}} cannot be applied here? There has been consensus that Banksy graffiti can be accepted here, per the two DR's I gave here. The affected files were kept. If this file is treated as unfree, then most or all of those kept may also need to be deleted and the consensus on Banksy be revisited. This is inconsistent, to have some images of Banksy graffiti deleted while most kept. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 07:12, 12 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: No consensus to undelete. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 04:02, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Banksy-rat-result-part.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

File:Banksy-rat-result-part.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Reason: file was deleted because Commons:Deletion requests/File:Banksy-rat-result-part.jpg (supposedly a copyrighted artwork). Yet this was kept in Commons:Deletion requests/Banksy graffiti, as this is a casual graffiti made by an anonymous artist who "has casual views on copyright." See also: Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Banksy in London. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 05:45, 12 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose This is a poor argument indeed. There is a deletion policy which states that a file can be deleted after a deletion request has been started and all interested have had time to present arguments for and against deletion. There is nothing in the policy that says that a file can only be requested for deletion once. Thuresson (talk) 06:51, 12 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thuresson (mirrored response) then why do you think {{Non-free graffiti}} cannot be applied here? There has been consensus that Banksy graffiti can be accepted here, per the two DR's I gave here. The affected files were kept. If this file is treated as unfree, then most or all of those kept may also need to be deleted and the consensus on Banksy be revisited. This is inconsistent, to have some images of Banksy graffiti deleted while most kept. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 07:14, 12 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: No consensus to undelete. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 04:03, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Second Gorton Ministry.jpg

The deletion nomination was made in early 2019, back when the image of the Second Gorton Ministry was not yet in the public domain. I re-uploaded the image at the beginning of this year, as the image was taken in October 1969, and as it was a government-owned photograph, it went into public domain this year as per the Australian 50-year rule on government images. --Thescrubbythug (talk) 11:24, 23 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm inclined to support undeletion of this. Abzeronow (talk) 18:17, 31 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 01:47, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Cellar Slug 01.jpg

This is my work and I would like it restored. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Therealcarmenj (talk • contribs) 22:49, 26 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose An unidentified species of a mollusc, taken from a distance. There are plenty of good quality photos of this species already at Category:Gastropoda. Thuresson (talk) 23:20, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:32, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Cellar Slug 02.jpg

This is my work and I would like it restored. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Therealcarmenj (talk • contribs) 22:51, 26 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose An unidentified species of a mollusc, taken from a distance. There are plenty of good quality photos of this species already at Category:Gastropoda. Thuresson (talk) 23:20, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:32, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Hong Kong Police Attack Kowloon Mosque.gif

Delete without meaningful reason, user shizhao dones't give any evidence to mention this file is no permission.--Wpcpey (talk) 06:54, 28 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose Burden to provide evidence does not lie with nominator of the deletion request, but with the uploader or those seeking to keep or restore the file in question. Additionally, the work was first published elsewhere with no evidence of an accepted free licence. Works first published elsewhere require that the copyright holder (i.e. in this case the videographer/still photographer) to send permission and a specific release under an accepted free licence to OTRS. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:50, 28 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- You still don't have any evidence to proof that the work was first published on that website, since the file is gif format with animation. The website is jpeg format.--Wpcpey (talk) 09:37, 29 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- Again the burden is on you, as a party seeking its restoration, to provide evidence -- not the other way around. Please see COM:EVID.
  The image is a still of the video and likely both the image and the gif are derivatives of that video.
  FYI, the image was uploaded to the UDN site on 21 October 2019 and the gif to Commons on the same date. But the assumption cannot be made that the gif on Commons was published before the image on UDN, and there is no evidence that 六四先生 is the copyright holder, seeing as the UDN site attributes the photo to the Hong Kong Islamic Youth Association. Enough significant doubt exist to warrant permission via OTRS. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 10:50, 29 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done, per Nat. Thuresson (talk) 23:15, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Ветеран постер4.png

File: Ветеран постер4.png was deleted from your website like the file with license problems. However, it is the official Russian poster of film Veteran 2020 - see Kinopoisk - https://www.kinopoisk.ru/film/1322967/ I am from Lucky Production company, the distributor of film Veteran. We have transfer of exclusive rights - here you can see it: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BvqQVvZj2dky4AQQovdZZraYcvVAqn9b/view?usp=sharing Could you, please, return the poster of Veteran to the Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Natalyluckypro (talk • contribs) 11:21, 28 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplished here. @Natalyluckypro: Previously published works require that the copyright holder (not just the mere distributor, which is a licensee -- and per the document, whose rights are geographically limited) send permission and a specific release under an accepted free licence using the OTRS process. Once OTRS has determined to have received sufficient permission and if there are no other rationales for deletion, an OTRS agent will perform or request undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:31, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

NasserTone

Please restore the following pages:

NasserTone

Reason: Important photos of the film director NasserTone with important figures from all around the world. The page's purpose is documentary & not self-promotion. Nassertone (talk) 09:29, 29 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose All photos are up for deletion at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Nassertone. Thuresson (talk) 23:00, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:33, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Comrade-yutyo -- Rationale #1

File:Red International of Labor Unions.svg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
The file was of vectorization an asset, which is more the 70 years old and surely non-copyrighted regarding US law. It needs to be undeleted as a result. --Comrade-yutyo (talk) 00:04, 30 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
File:Workers International Relief.svg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
The file was of vectorization an asset, which is more the 70 years old and surely non-copyrighted regarding US law. It needs to be undeleted as a result. --Comrade-yutyo (talk) 00:10, 30 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
File:Germanrightparty.svg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
The file was of vectorization an asset, which is more the 70 years old and surely non-copyrighted regarding US law. It needs to be undeleted as a result. --Comrade-yutyo (talk) 00:13, 30 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Comrade-yutyo: Being more than 70 years old does not mean that the work is in public domain, and especially in the United States. You would need to tell us where and when the work(s) were first published and created, who was the creator(s) and when they died, if the work(s) was published in the United States within 30 days of first publication if the work(s) were published first outside of the United States. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 14:33, 30 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Nat: Such information aren't very clear. If they were I would probably state them. What can be done in this case? Its also not possible to talk with the owners of them as they are more likely died a very long time ago nor someone inherited the copyright ownership cuz all of the stated organizations are abolished nearly a century ago. --Comrade-yutyo (talk) 14:53, 30 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Comrade-yutyo: Unfortunately we cannot proceed without clear evidence that such works are in the public domain. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 14:58, 30 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 09:25, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Orwell-Signature.svg

This signature is now public domain in the UK, when George Orwell died in 1950. --Frontman830 (talk) 11:24, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done: by Platonides. @Platonides: Please remember to add the appropriate US tag. Thank you. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 15:13, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You raise a good point, Nat. Orwell works are now PD in his home country (UK). However, most Orwell works will have been published in US with a notice (not sure if renewed, which would be needed), and won't be PD in US. I'm not sure how to categorize this sample of his signature wrt US law, though. PD-ineligible, maybe, although it's an odd combination. What do you think? Platonides (talk) 16:47, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Andrei Koniaev KuJi.png

This screenshot was taken from KuJi Podcust, which, if I'm not mistaken, is in the public domain and can be used accordingly.--Maratow (talk) 11:51, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, it's not [2]. Хоббит (talk) 12:58, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Unambigious COM:NETCOPYVIO as work is published under the Standard YouTube License and, therefore, considered non-free content. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:14, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Liz tung 2021a.jpg

i get a notice of impending speedy deletion because of copyright violation and found elsewhere on the web （https://liztung16.blogspot.com). I wish to appeal undelete this picture because i am the owner of the blog: https://liztung16.blogspot.com and i own the copyright of the photo, u can trace the IP address that i use in uploading this photo and the IP address of the web.

Really hope wikimedia commons can keep this picture, thank you.

Hweimeng (talk) 14:05, 1 January 2021 (UTC) 01/01/2021Reply[reply]

@Hweimeng: Oppose No evidence of accepted free licence at source. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:10, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplished here. @Hweimeng: Previously published works require that the copyright holder send permission and a specific release under an accepted free licence using the OTRS process. Once OTRS has determined to have received sufficient permission and if there are no other rationale for deletion, an OTRS agent will perform or request undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 03:54, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Liz tung 2021.jpg

received notice of impending speedy deletion because of F3. Derivative work of non-free content (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drWmOE6aqeY), but i am the owner of the youtube channel and own the copyright of the photo, really hope can undelete and keep the photo for me. thanks you.

--Hweimeng (talk) 14:14, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Hweimeng: Oppose No evidence of accepted free licence at source. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:08, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplished here. @Hweimeng: Previously published works require that the copyright holder send permission and a specific release under an accepted free licence using the OTRS process. Once OTRS has determined to have received sufficient permission and if there are no other rationale for deletion, an OTRS agent will perform or request undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 03:55, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Capital Hill Washington D.C.jpg

Hey guys, undelete the photo. USA didnt take the pic and is wideley used on various platforms. Thanks... — Preceding unsigned comment added by DogRiverBrewing (talk • contribs) 21:18, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@DogRiverBrewing: Oppose Per USA Today, the photo was taken by a Nicole Gaudiano. Being "wideley [sic] used on various platforms" is not a valid rationale per COM:NETCOPYVIO and point #5 of COM:PCP. As you have stated above, it is "wideley [sic] used on various platforms" and as such was first published elsewhere. Works first published elsewhere require that the copyright holder (i.e. the photographer unless copyright was transferred by operation of law or by written contract) send permission using the OTRS process. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:20, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 03:56, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Example.jpg

Jangan delete kerja saya —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2402:1980:2F4:39E5:117D:B11D:F21:A08C (talk) 07:58, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplished here. File not named and request was submitted by IP user, and as such, we cannot determined the file(s) in question. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 08:51, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Images (7) 8.jpg

This is not mine but free to use — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haris Gustap Junior. (talk • contribs) 10:03, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose No verifiable source. Thuresson (talk) 14:02, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 14:33, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:154 La cala encantada (Mallorca), de Joaquim Mir.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

File:154 La cala encantada (Mallorca), de Joaquim Mir.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:154 La cala encantada (Mallorca), de Joaquim Mir.jpg

Author died in 1940, and became public domain in Spain in April. Abzeronow (talk) 23:23, 31 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Question @Abzeronow: Could you tell us if and when the work entered PD in the United States? --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:17, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- Nat, if this file is the same painting as https://www.museunacional.cat/en/colleccio/cala-encantada-majorca/joaquim-mir/010889-000 or w:File:Joaquim Mir - Cala Encantada (Majorca) - Google Art Project.jpg, it's a 1901 painting. Which would be public domain in the US. Abzeronow (talk) 16:42, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done: @Abzeronow: FYI. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 01:22, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Mariette M1839 twenty four barrel caplock revolver pepperbox.jpg

Greetings wikimedia

That specific old photograph is from an old encyclopaedia named Πρώτη (Proti) that was published in Greece in 1980s

The user with so called name Herbythyme that deleted the photograph what "evidence" does expect to be "offered" for "confirmation" if it is real? to cut a piece from the encyclopaedia and send it to him to "touch" and to "see" if it is real then or what? just wondering

And he doesn't own εγκυκλοπαίδεια Πρώτη after all

Thank you

Executioners (talk) 07:50, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose undeletion. @Executioners: Per policy, an uploader must provide appropriate evidence to demonstrate either that the file is in the public domain or that the copyright owner has released it under a suitable licence.
41 years is not a long time with regards to copyright and the work in question, if published in the 1980s, is not considered to be "old".
Under Greek copyright rules, Copyright lasts for the author’s life and for 70 years after his death, calculated from 1 January of the year after the author’s death.^{[2121/2018 Article 29(1)]}. As such, the work in question is assumed to be copyrighted. Furthermore, as it is unlikely that the copyright holder (i.e. the publisher) has granted a free licence, the usage of {{Cc-zero}} is incorrect.
The file is, therefore, undoubtedly a copyright violation.
Please note: Physically owning a copy of the encyclopaedia or a copy of the photograph does not equate holding the copyright, and being widely available does not equate the work does not mean that the work is in public domain. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 08:49, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Nat grusse

Nat are you Nuts or something and pretend that you "know" "everything" instead?

how ridiculous can you be, why you underestimate peoples intelligence?

"....an uploader must provide appropriate evidence to demonstrate either that the file is in the public domain or that the copyright owner has released it under a suitable licence." for your information the site forgot to send us any permission option so that we could be able to provide any appropriate evidence

"41 years is not a long time with regards to copyright and the work in question, if published in the 1980s, is not considered to be "old"." that applies to your country and not to our country

"Under Greek copyright rules,...." from your country you "know" "better" the copyright rules of our country? since you don't live there don't think so

for your information to our country there are five rules changed every day

"As such, the work in question is assumed to be copyrighted." of course it is copyrighted, what you expected it to be?

"....as it is unlikely that the copyright holder (i.e. the publisher) has granted a free licence,...." that's only to your imagination

"....the usage of Cc-zero is incorrect." you are the incorrect, not to your country but to our country that rare encyclopaedia is in public libraries and freely distributable to everyone for educational purposes

"The file is, therefore, undoubtedly a copyright violation." tell that to yourself "smarty" one

the copyright violation is you

"Physically owning a copy of the encyclopaedia or a copy of the photograph does not equate holding the copyright,...." are you looking with your eyes open? noone said that owning something "equates" holding a copyright

"....and being widely available does not equate the work...." are you looking with your eyes open again? noone said that something being widely available "equates" a work

"....does not mean that the work is in public domain." then why it is in public libraries and freely distributable to everyone for educational purposes?

and remember that haste conclusions make waste — Preceding unsigned comment added by Executioners (talk • contribs) 19:33, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

beifall

Executioners (talk) 17:44, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done. Free speech is not the same as free beer. See also Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Greece. Thuresson (talk) 18:29, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Category:2010s photographs of Denmark, Category:Stamps of Belarus, 1920, Category:1869 stamps of Brazil, Category:1913 stamps of Brazil

Either already not empty, or will be filled in within 24 hours (depending in when you read this). ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 19:07, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Gone Postal: , done. Thuresson (talk) 20:45, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Tondi Kooli peahoone.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

File:Tondi Kooli peahoone.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Reason: For review of OTRS Ticket:2021010210003586 ✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 04:52, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done: @Tiven2240: Undeleted. Please proceed with the file and add OTRS received in it. Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat ^{[ contribs | talk ]} 05:00, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Paramgoel

File:FerozShahKotlaTOP.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
The image above has been captured and saved on my own personal device. Hence there is no question for any sort of copyright claims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paramgoel (talk • contribs) 04:59, 29 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
File:FerozShahKotlaMontage.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
The image above has been captured and saved on my own personal device. Hence there is no question for any sort of copyright claims. This is entirely my own work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paramgoel (talk • contribs) 05:01, 29 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Paramgoel: It appears that the images are missing crucial EXIF metadata that would indicators that they are the original files. You can reupload the images with their full EXIF metadata intact, or use the OTRS process, as mentioned multiple times on your talk page. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 01:45, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 18:07, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Files from Rizarios

Please undelete the following files per ticket:2020122010003354. The owner had sent a valid email in 20 December but the ticket was closed without action (!?) and the files were deleted in 23 December.

-Geraki ^T_L^G 09:30, 29 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Κώστα στα σβήσανε όλα τα ψευτοδιαβασμένα λαμόγια! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Executioners (talk • contribs) 06:44, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done: restored per ticket:2020122010003354. @Geraki: FYI. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 18:03, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Resting Specimen Poster.jpg

File:Resting Specimen Poster.jpg Hello, my name is Declan Gale and I am the creator of the poster and all related images. I made this image back in October and have all the rights to it, it isn't even copyrighted. My image was deleted four times from Wikipedia Commons, and I was ignorant to the fact that I was just re-uploading it without explanation and I apologise. The reason for it being a violation was that it was "Film poster artwork", yes, that I made and own! Please may I request an undeletion because this is a false claim as it was my artwork to begin with.

Riwiwiwi (talk) 11:53, 31 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose @Riwiwiwi: Previously published works require that the copyright holder send permission and a specific release under an accepted free licence using the OTRS process. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 17:58, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per above. Once OTRS has determined to have received sufficient permission, an OTRS agent will perform or request undeletion. Thank you for you understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 00:04, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:picture of Arianna Rosenbluth.jpg

This is the graduation photo of my mother Arianna Rosenbluth. She owned the photo, but I only have a digital copy now. Her photos were digitally converted by the family. You deleted it saying it was a copyright violation, but she owned the photo, and now it belongs to the family. Also, we would appreciate it if her photo showed instead of Edward Teller's photo when she is googled.--Mrosenbluth (talk) 19:16, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Mary Rosenbluth 1/1/2021Reply[reply]

@Mrosenbluth: (1) Ownership or possession of a photo, proprietorship of the equipment used to take the photo, or being the subject of the photo does not equate holding the copyright. The copyright holder is the photographer (i.e. the person who took the photo), rather that the subject (the person who appears in the photo) or the person possessing the photo, unless transferred by operation of law (e.g. inheritance, etc.) or by contract (written and signed by the copyright holder, and explicitly transfers the copyright). Please note that in some jurisdictions, the law may not permit transfers or assignment of rights. Question Could you tell us who is the photographer and in which country the image was taken and first published? (2) We have no control or influence over what appears on web searches. You must take that up with the search engine in question. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:33, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: No response to query above. For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 17:54, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File: Momin Kavathekar.jpg

The referred photograph is sourced from the subject individual with permission to post on Wikipedia. Same or similar photograph has been used by Print & Digital Media as well. However, those media do not have copyright for this photograph and ownership still rest with Mr Momin. I am just a medium to post it here and even I am not claiming any copyright for these photos. So please re-instate these photograph and also advise how can I include /clarify that these photographs belong to Mr Momin. (Bindhast555 (talk) 17:34, 2 January 2021 (UTC))Reply[reply]

Oppose This was uploaded by you with the information that it is your own photo, that you are the photographer, that you wish to license the photo and that anybody who wish to use the photo must credit you. You need to explain how the copyright of this photo has been transferred from you to the subject and how your claim that you do not claim copyright can be squared with your Creative Commons CC-BY-SA license. You also need to explain what "permission to post on Wikipedia" means, since this is Wikicommons. Thuresson (talk) 00:51, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 17:49, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Momin Kavathekar in the role of Shri Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj.jpg

The referred photograph is originally available only in hard copy with Mr Momin and I had just made it digital using present digital technology. This is done with due permission of Mr Momin and thus this is sourced from the subject individual with permission to post on Wikipedia.

Similar re-photographing might have been done by other Print & Digital Media as well. However, those media do not have copyright for this photograph and ownership still rest with Mr Momin. I am just a medium to post it here and even I am not claiming any copyright for these photos. So please re-instate these photograph and also advise how can I include /clarify that these photographs belong to Mr Momin. (Bindhast555 (talk) 17:35, 2 January 2021 (UTC))Reply[reply]

Oppose This was uploaded by you with the information that it is your own photo, that you are the photographer, that you wish to license the photo and that anybody who wish to use the photo must credit you. You need to explain how the copyright of this photo has been transferred from you to the subject and then back again and how your claim that you do not claim copyright can be squared with your Creative Commons CC-BY-SA license. You also need to explain what "permission to post on Wikipedia" means, since this is Wikicommons. Thuresson (talk) 00:53, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 17:50, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Vithabai Narayangaonkar Lifetime Achievement Award.jpg

The referred photograph is sourced from the subject individual with permission to post on Wikipedia.

These photographs are from a well known award ceremony and hence, many photographers/ media takes photograph from same position/ angle & time. Hence they appear to be similar. However, photos used herein are sourced from Mr Momin who himself has deployed personals for taking his photograph. And this photograph is obtained from him with permission to use on Wikipedia. Same or similar photos can be in use by print or degitial media. However, that do not make this photo sourced from subject as a copy violation. So please re-instate the photograph.

I am just a medium to post it here and even I am not claiming any copyright for these photos. So please re-instate these photograph and also advise how can I include /clarify that these photographs belong to Mr Momin. (Bindhast555 (talk) 17:35, 2 January 2021 (UTC))Reply[reply]

Oppose This was uploaded by you with the information that it is your own photo, that you are the photographer, that you wish to license the photo and that anybody who wish to use the photo must credit you. You need to explain how the copyright of this photo has been transferred from photographer (the subject's paid staff?) to you. You also need to explain what "permission to post on Wikipedia" means, since this is Wikicommons. Thuresson (talk) 00:57, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 17:50, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Black Magic Design

== File:BMD production.jpg * File:BMD Studio 4k.jpg * File:BMD 0007 poket 6k.jpg * File:BMD 0006 poket 4k.jpg.jpg * File:BMD ursa mini 4.6k.jpg * File:BMD mico cinema camera.jpg * File:BMD ursa mini.jpg * File:BMD poket cinema camera.jpg * File:BMD Ursa 4k.jpg * File:BMD Cinema Camera.jpg ==

Hi, I've spend the entire morning cutting out, scaling, photoshopping and size-optimazing all of this image just for making this page more claear, can I understand why do all of the file has been marked as a possible copyright violation?

Regards Guido Carenza--Guido Carenza (talk) 16:47, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose It appears that all photos were lifted from blackmagicdesign.com. These product photos are used at several shopping web sites, compare File:BMD production.jpg with [3]. Thuresson (talk) 17:55, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Question Sorry, I'm just here to help, what can I do to include all the image in the product category of the Blackmagic Design wiki? Can I reuse all the same image and indicate all the source before the manipulation? I was shure that with all the work involved in the editing I was doing the right thing. Regards Guido Carenza--Guido Carenza (talk) 10:10, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:49, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Works of Andrey Shishkin

Hey, I got permission from artist Andrey Shishkin to upload his works on CC-BY license to Commons. I sent it to permissions-ru@wikimedia.org at 25th November 2020 and to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org at 29th December 2020. I still don't receive respond from none of both messages, but today these files were deleted by @Fitindia: . Please restore them and check provided permission:

And I strongly recommended for future to CHECK MAILS and DON'T DELETE RANDOM FILES, because editing list above was very uncomfortable :) --Wojsław Brożyna (talk) 17:40, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Question Did you apply {{OTRS pending}} to the files? ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 19:09, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Of course. This is why I forwarded mail from Russian adress to this general – according to message, that was displayed in template month after upload. --Wojsław Brożyna (talk) 19:53, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, that is just wrong then. If the file is clearly marked as OTRS pending, it should not be deleted unless there is a reason to believe that the template is applied in error or maliciously. I vote to

restore and allow regular procedures to run their course, no reason for out of process deletions. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 20:16, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Gone Postal and Wojsław Brożyna: The deletion was very much in process as files marked with {{OP}} are subject to deletion after 30 days. Please note that OTRS has a backlog. Furthermore, undeletion cannot be processed here as the files are OTRS dependent. Once OTRS has determined to have received sufficient permission, an OTRS agent will perform or request undeletion. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 00:52, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Wojsław Brożyna: Do you have the ticket number? --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 00:54, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Nat: Unfortunatelly not, since I still do not received any respond from forwarded permission. I can forward it again if it's a question of problem with localize my mail. --Wojsław Brożyna (talk) 13:14, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Wojsław Brożyna: There should have been an automated reply with the ticket number. However, that being said, OTRS is unfortuantely unable to accept forwarded permissions for legal reasons. Permissions should be sent directly by the copyright holder to OTRS. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 17:39, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh, okay, it was changed since I was last time getting permission from creators. I will write to Shishkin for that he would send it directly to Commons. However, do you have any idea why I don't received respond with OTRS ticket number? --Wojsław Brożyna (talk) 19:18, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Wojsław Brożyna: Unfortunately, I do not. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 20:27, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Wojsław Brożyna: It seems to be Ticket:2018081110002054, however, as I previously stated the permission is insufficient as it is a forwarded permission. Please continue with your plans to write to the copyright holder to send us the permission directly (mentioning "Ticket#2018081110002054" in the subject heading. Thank you. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:39, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplished here. Once OTRS has determined to have received sufficient permission, an OTRS agent will perform or request undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. @Wojsław Brożyna: FYI. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:46, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Request Undeletion of File:Vikhe Patil KALAGAURAV Award.jpg

Moved from Commons:Village pump/Copyright: De728631 (talk) 17:51, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The comment while removing the subject file states that "While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear".

In this context, please note that original photograph is available in a hard copy with Mr Momin. Individual's permission has been taken to post this photograph on Wikipedia. So please un-delete it as there is no 'digital imprint/ track' which I can mention in the licensing template. And I had merely used present available digital technology so same can be used on Wikipedia. Hence, kindly re-instate this photograph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bindhast555 (talk • contribs) 17:45, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Bindhast555 (talk) 17:46, 2 January 2021 (UTC))Reply[reply]

Oppose @Bindhast555: In such cases we require a permision by email that needs to be sent directly from the copyright holder of the original work. Unfortunately we cannot accept forwarded permissions, so please ask Mr Momin to send an email as outlined in COM:OTRS. Once the mail has been processed and approved by our team of volunteers, the file will be undeleted automatically. De728631 (talk) 17:56, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PS: Please note also that a permission for use at Wikipedia alone is insufficient. All uploads at Commons need to be free for anyone to use for any purpose including commercial activities and the making of derivatives outside of a Wikimedia project. De728631 (talk) 17:58, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per De728631. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 17:48, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Oath of the Young Guard (Soviet resistance).jpg

Please restore the following pages:

File:Oath of the Young Guard (Soviet resistance).jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Oath of the Young Guard (Soviet resistance).jpg

The author, Ivan Zemnukhov, died in 1943. Public domain in Russia now. Abzeronow (talk) 17:58, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Question @Abzeronow: Could you tell us if and when the work entered PD in the United States? --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 20:26, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- I don't have an answer for that. The DR seems to indicate a 1942 publication. It appears that it would miss the URAA cutoff date by a few years. Abzeronow (talk) 22:58, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- @Abzeronow: In that case, undeletion may only be possible in 2037. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:32, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: While in the public domain in Russia and the former Soviet Union, the work may still be protected by copyrighted in the United States. If 1942 is the year of publication, the file may be undeleted in 2037. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 01:15, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:BCIX_CI_schwarz.svg

the copyright of this file is the same as for File:DE-CIX_201x_logo.svg. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwaehlisch (talk • contribs) 23:21, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support Undelete as PD-textlogo. De728631 (talk) 23:34, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 20:22, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Michèle Gavras kidnapped in 1971.png

Image was taken by an anonymous soldier from anarchist group OPR-33 in 1971. According to {{PD-Uruguay-anon}}, it enters public domain 50 years after publication. I believe this is now the case Luk (talk) 11:53, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Info This will presumably happen in 2022, according to Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Uruguay. Thuresson (talk) 15:13, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Barring any issues with US copyright, file may be undeleted in 2022 (1971+50+1). Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:48, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:1gyu111gyu1gyu11.PNG

Please restore the following pages:

File:1gyu111gyu1gyu11.PNG (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Reason: Request temporary undeletion

Reason: The file is still in use by page es:b:Electrónica de Potencia/Diodo de potencia/Problemas de diseño. Could you please temporary restore the file for inserting the TeX, list or table equivalent to the page as it has been done with several images on that page during the last days. Thanks in advance. W_I^KImaniac 18:06, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@WIKImaniac: The file is as follows

Problema 3 Caso a) tensión media = 400 V Tensión eficaz = 540 V I_O,AVG = 2 A

Cheers, --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 18:44, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: text from file left above and on WIKImaniac's talk page. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 20:20, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:The poet Stefan George in 1899.JPG

Please restore the following pages:

File:The poet Stefan George in 1899.JPG (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:The poet Stefan George in 1899.JPG

Would appear to be a photograph from 1899. Old enough to be PD-old-assumed. Abzeronow (talk) 00:59, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done: @Abzeronow: FYI. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 01:40, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Liu Yuxin, November 8th, 2020.png

Hello, first of all, happy new year! I am writing to you to request an undeletion of the image Liu Yuxin, November 8th, 2020.png. I received a notification stating this file is deleted due to a possible copyright violation. I have received a written response from the original author of this photo that they have granted permission for me to upload this picture on Wikipedia; I specifically followed instructions given by this flowchart https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bb/Licensing_tutorial_en.svg/750px-Licensing_tutorial_en.svg.png. I can provide the written response/exchange to the administrator if needed. If possible, I prefer emailing this information in a more private manner instead of posting the written copy on the Wikipedia discussion page due to privacy concerns. Thank you for your assistance and please let me know if this is an email address for me to provide information and evidence. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Natgleira1106 (talk • contribs) 03:19, 4 January 2021‎ (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Natgleira1106: At Commons:OTRS you will find information on how to deal with written permissions and how private information can be submitted. Thuresson (talk) 03:24, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Thuresson: Hi Thuresson, thank you so much for the update. English is not the original author's first language, is there a Chinese version of this email template:https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Email_templates? I'm asking because now I'm thinking whether it'd make more sense for the author themselves to create their account and to upload their own work? I noticed that while there is a Chinese version of the Commons and instructions, there is no Chinese version of the email template. I'm concerned whether I need to get a notary to have a Chinese translated version of this email template, which sounds quite complicated...The current written permission is a chat exchange between me and the author agreeing that I can use this information, do you think this image would suffice, or do I need to translate that as well？Sorry for the lengthy question, maybe I'm overthinking this...but thank you in advance for your help! :) --Natgleira1106 (talk) 06:27, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Natgleira1106: Yes, and there are in fact 4 different Chinese language versions of the template at Template:Email templates/Consent/zh, Template:Email templates/Consent/zh-hans, Template:Email templates/Consent/zh-hant, or Template:Email templates/Consent/zh-tw. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 06:36, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Procedural close. Undeletion may only occur when OTRS has determined to have received sufficient permission. Once that occurs, an OTRS agent will perform or request undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 06:39, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Pratyya Ghosh

I am requesting the undeletion of the files that were deleted long ago. Reasons are pretty simple.

The sculptures are of Hindu Goddesses. Hence the structures you see are written in the Hindu Texts which are in no sense copyrighted. So the sculptures are made under the structures stated in the Hindu Texts. So the maker of the sculptures cannot hold the copyright.
Then there come the folk arts. These religious festivals are part of the folk arts in Indian Sub-continent for around 300 years. In current law (often stated not compatible with recent issues) doesn't allow anyone to demand copyright of folk arts. You'll find clarification from the copyright authority regarding this under the recently controversial "সর্বত মঙ্গল রাধে" song copyright issue in mainstream media.

However, both fall under 15(a) (Link to copyright laws will be founded at the link used as heading) as these are not original work of them, but they are following some stated structure.

Then for because of unclear laws even if I think the sculptures are copyrighted works, then, the creators are not the owner of copyrights for these sculptures. These sculptures are completely made for business. So the sculptures are completely made under the direction and design of the paying authority. So the paying authority takes the copyright from them by the means of money. Now, that authority displays the sculptures for religious reasons and for the devotees to visit. Here is the question lies. These sculptures are not your regular sculpture. These sculptures are instated by doing religious rituals and it is thought as God resides in the sculpture. This is the belief of a whole lot community of 1.161 billion peoples. Also, the government permitted this to happen. So the question is whether God is copyrighted or not. As I already stated that everyone believes and also under the freedom of religious rituals in the constitution of Bangladesh these religious beliefs have been accepted. So under the constitution or religion, those sculptures are almighty GOD himself and not any of your regular sculpture. By this not anyhow you can call these copyrighted to anyone, nor the sculpture or nor the payer.
Now the fact even if I think they are copyrighted then you have to understand their cycles. They are created to complete rituals and then be immersed in water. So that cannot be permanent for sure and they are not being displayed. So in this special cycle, you cannot hold someone owner. When the main goal is to do as stated above for years.
Now still if I say these are copyrighted then, under 72(2) I had not made any infringement to copyrights as I took photographs of a current event by means of Photograph. Since Wikimedia Commons or Internet was not there the law was made, So I can easily assume this as a mass media. Hence these are not copyrighted.

Now the matter is if all of the above is nullified, then I have to say Commons should take necessary actions regarding a significant number of images at

Category:Hinduism,
Category:Hindu festivals,
Category:Hindu art and any of the event or occasion regarding photos in Bangladesh that show any part of pandals made, as they are also kind of artistic works under copyright.

--PratyyaG · Talk 08:38, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose I am not convinced that Bangladesh has FOP outside COM:FOP Bangladesh. Wikimedia is not massmedia. The concept of "paying authority" does not seem to exist in Bangladeshi copyright law. Also, the first eight files have never been deleted:

Thuresson (talk) 23:31, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And what about the religious status of these "sculptures" which makes it different than other sculptures by the constitution of Bangladesh?

Second of all, a law has exceptions, difference aspects and everything. So if you are trying to bind the laws just with COM:FOP Bangladesh then that will also be a kind of mistake.--PratyyaG · Talk 11:08, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose There is no religious exemption to copyright laws. The DR also seemed well reasoned that these did not fall under FOP. Abzeronow (talk) 20:03, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:30, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:CONMEBOL Sudamericana (2002-).png

Apenas uma ilustração do troféu Victoralves12 (talk) 01:34, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose per Commons:Deletion requests/Conmebol trophy files. @Victoralves12: Please read COM:DW. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 01:43, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Does not address issues in DR. Please read COM:DW. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 17:01, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Faísca. Revista de información municipal de O Pino.jpg

Esta obra é propia e, ademais, ten permiso do propio editor da revista (o Concello de O Pino) para seren reproducida do xeito en que se presenta. Antes de eliminar unha fotografía debería terse preguntado caso de ter algunha dúbida. Saúdos--Castelao (talk) 08:29, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplished here. For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder of the works depected must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Once OTRS has determined to have received sufficient permission, an OTRS agent will request or perform the undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 16:57, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Cyberne Tyczne 2000.jpg

Proszę o przywrócenie pliku "Cyberne Tyczne 2000" - autorka zdjęcia wyraziła zgodę na jego publikacje. 4.01.2021 Bartłomiej Nowowiejski--BartekNowowiejski (talk) 09:25, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Procedural close. This file is OTRS dependent and, therefore, there is nothing to be accomplished here. For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Once OTRS has determined to have received sufficient permission, an OTRS agent will request or perform the undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 16:55, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Værnes kirke Værnesstolen 2017 Hauglid.jpg

I request undeletion of File:Værnes kirke Værnesstolen 2017 Hauglid.jpg , File:Værnes kirke Nordportalen Hauglid.jpg and File:Værnes kirke Kortaket Hauglid.jpg .

These 3 are mentioned at my talk page. My request also includes

These image are parts of a larger project conserning documentation and new knowlegde about the medieval en:Værnes Church. There were a seminar in 2015, a book in 2016, and my contributions here on wp is a sequel. There is an (unfortunately delayed) OTRS statement on its way as we speak. Bw --Morten Haugen (talk) 09:29, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplished here. Once OTRS has determined to have received sufficient permission, an OTRS agent will request or perform the undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 16:53, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Hode fra Værnes kirke 005 Pettersson.jpg

Should be covered by {{PermissionOTRS}} (Ticket:2020110710012059)

@Nsaa and Gbawden: . Bw --Morten Haugen (talk) 09:36, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose Reason for deletion: "OTRS: Unaccepted or insufficient permission for use on Commons". Thuresson (talk) 15:12, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comment At the time of deletion this file was missing OTRS. Someone would need to confirm that the OTRS ticket you mention applies to this file but when I deleted the file it wasn't Gbawden (talk) 16:12, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplished here. Once OTRS has determined to have received sufficient permission, an OTRS agent will request or perform the undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 16:53, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Sarajevo SK 01.jpg

The following image is granted for publishing on Wikipedia by its own photographer and/or news organization as per the image posted below that is presented as proof: https://i.imgur.com/LLZmIce.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by Felky (talk • contribs) 13:42, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: @Felky: Insufficient permission per COM:L. For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Once OTRS has determined to have received sufficient permission, an OTRS agent will request or perform the undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 16:59, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Kong-Rey 2018-10-02T02 20 00Z.png

Satellite images from NASA or NOAA are in Public Domain —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 137.189.220.59 (talk) 14:12, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose Uploaded as "own work". U.S., Europe, India, China, Russia, and Japan operate weather satellites. Thuresson (talk) 15:14, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 16:59, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Grey hair vs Now.jpg

A User named "C1K98V" erroneously flagged my image "Grey hair vs Now.png", an image taken of myself by my self, to be removed from the image Commons because he claimed "Reason: Copyright violation, found elsewhere on the web and unlikely to be own work". If the User: C1K98V had done a few seconds of homework he would have found other images of me on Wiki which clearly demonstrate that the image I shared to Wiki Commons is in fact my own work and my own face. I own this image, it is an image of me and I have all copyright to share this image. Please "Undelete" my image "Grey hair vs Now.jpg" so it can be shared freely through wiki commons as it demonstrates clear and provable results of photobiomodulation reversing melanocyte depletion causing pigment loss in hair.

--Corinna Kennedy (talk) 17:26, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A consent email has been sent by myself, the copyright holder, for the image "Grey hair vs Now.png" for full release using the links and forms provided through Wiki. --Corinna Kennedy (talk) 18:27, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose @Corinna Kennedy: Previously published works require that the copyright holder send permission and a specific release under an accepted free licence using the OTRS process. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 17:38, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplished here. Once OTRS has determined to have received sufficient permission, an OTRS agent will request or perform the undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 18:39, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Gears 5 Hivebuster Squad.png

Please restore the following pages:

File:Gears 5 Hivebuster Squad.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Reason: OTRS permission has arrived, please restore the page. Thank you! Bencemac (talk) 17:56, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done: @Bencemac: FYI. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 18:01, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Zoli Toth's HOME ALONE at Dakini festival (2019).jpg

I hereby affirm that I, Alex Boaca, am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of both the work depicted and the following media:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Zoli_Toth's_HOME_ALONE_at_Dakini_festival_(2019).jpg

I agree to publish the above-mentioned work under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International. I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work, even in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws. I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites. I am aware that the copyright holder always retains ownership of the copyright as well as the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by the copyright holder. I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

Alex Boaca 2021-01-04 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexboaca1 (talk • contribs) 20:55, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplished here. @Alexboaca1: As noted on your talk page, permissions should be sent to OTRS at permissions-commonswikimedia.org. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:22, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Movie TV Tech Geeks News Logo 512X512.png

This is actually the official logo of my news site Movie TV Tech Geeks that we created.

I'm confused on how this would be taken down or called a copyright violation as we own the logo and created it.

Please advise.

Curt Johnson Editor-in-Chief Movie TV Tech Geeks https://movietvtechgeeks.com/

File:Movie TV Tech Geeks News Logo 512X512.png Pay attention to copyright File:Movie TV Tech Geeks News Logo 512X512.png has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.

A1Cafel (talk) 04:51, 4 January 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gooma2 (talk • contribs) 22:01, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose From [4]: "You may not: License, sell, rent, lease, transfer, assign, distribute, host, or otherwise commercially exploit our Sites or our Content; Modify, make derivative works of, disassemble, reverse-compile, or reverse-engineer any part of the Sites or any of our Content;" COM:OTRS may be used to verify that the copyright owner has licensed this logo under an acceptable license. Thuresson (talk) 22:24, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Per Thuresson. @Gooma2: For the possibility of undeletion, the copyright holder must send permission and a specific release under a acceptable free licence using OTRS. Once OTRS has determined to have received sufficient permission, an OTRS agent will request or perform the undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:51, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Dominos falling.png

Creative Commons licenses cannot be revoked once applied. Derivative crop of File:Domino_effect.jpg, I am unsure if this crop is redundent to File:Domino_Cascade.JPG, but the deleting reason, and failing license review are both incorrect and should be sent to COM:Deletion requests if it is to be deleted for other reasons. Dylsss (talk) 08:45, 5 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Dylsss: File:Dominos falling.png is indeed a duplicate of File:Domino_Cascade.JPG. Both File:Domino_effect.jpg and File:Domino_Cascade.JPG were image reviewed at the time of upload and found to be licensed under an acceptable free licence. The current licensing status is more recent. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 15:34, 5 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If there's no other reason to keep File:Dominos falling.png due to it being a duplicate of File:Domino_Cascade.JPG, then I guess this can be closed. Dylsss (talk) 15:45, 5 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Procedural close. Request withdrawn. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 15:49, 5 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Bandera de Guerra de los Estados Unidos Peru-Bolivianos.png

Esta bandera no es un FanArt, esta realizada según la descripción del texto de tratados preliminares que establecieron los gobiernos de Perú y Bolivia en 1880 https://archive.org/details/basespreliminar00perugoog/page/n13/mode/2up https://repositorio.umsa.bo/xmlui/handle/123456789/24044 --Htz67 (talk) 18:58, 20 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Htz67 ¿Nos puedes decir como has realizado esta bandera? ¿Con cual programa, etc.? Gracias --Ruthven (msg) 15:14, 14 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ruthven lo realicé con photoshop --Htz67 (talk) 19:52, 5 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done: Reasonably own work. Ruthven (msg) 11:16, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File: Estado del Amazonas.png

Cual es el motivo de borrar este archivo? este mapa esta basado en mapas de Perú y Bolivia antiguos, https://www.geografiainfinita.com/2018/01/peru-a-traves-de-los-mapas-antiguos/ y en la descripción de tratados preliminares de Perú y Bolivia en 1880 que se encuentran en este libro https://archive.org/details/basespreliminar00perugoog/page/n13/mode/2up https://repositorio.umsa.bo/xmlui/handle/123456789/24044 Este mapa es necesario para poder ilustrar de que trataba el tratado, al igual que otros mapas que me borraron que consistía en dibujos de mapas de otros estados del Proyecto de los Estados Unidos de Perú y Bolivia, el cual no se llego a concretar por la cuestión de la guerra pero que ya había sido aprobada en el congreso de ambas repúblicas --Htz67 (talk) 19:10, 20 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done: The deletion request appears to be quite arbitrary: it's the classical kind of localisation map created for Commons. Ruthven (msg) 10:51, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:State flag of Bolivar Republic (1825-1826).png

Cual es el motivo de borrar la bandera? me la borraron por copyng, sin embargo es un dibujo propio y solo corregí el diseño pues la que se encontraba en wikipedia era errónea, como se puede apreciar en esta imagen sacada de una fotografía de un museo en Bolivia por un medio periodístico boliviano, la primera bandera de bolivia de 1825 tiene diseño vertical https://correodelsur.com/panorama/20160814_la-bandera-nacional.html tambien me borraron la bandera de uso civil File:Civil flag of Bolivar Republic (1825-1826).png Asimismo en el DECRETO SUPREMO del 17 de Agosto de 1825 hace mención de la Bandera Mayor (uso estatal) y la Bandera Menor (Uso Civil) https://www.derechoteca.com/gacetabolivia/decreto-supremo-17-08-1825-1-del-17-agosto-1825 --Htz67 (talk) 19:24, 20 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done: DR rationale wasn't supported by any proof, and quite arbitrary. Ruthven (msg) 10:49, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Sello_de_Bolivia_(1826).png

Solicito la restauración de este archivo, es un dibujo realizado por mi persona, además que es un escudo histórico de Bolivia, como se puede observar en esta imagenFile:Bolivia, from Flags of All Nations, Series 1 (N9) for Allen & Ginter Cigarettes Brands MET DP831931.jpg, dejó también de la ley que habla de dicho escudo, mencionado como Gran Sello de la República https://www.lexivox.org/norms/BO-L-18260726.xhtml --Htz67 (talk) 19:29, 21 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Htz67: What was the exact source that you used while making this image? The presented litography cannot be it as the seal there is too low quality. Ankry (talk) 12:48, 22 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ankry and Ankry: the description of the design is found in the Law of July 26, 1826; https://www.lexivox.org/norms/BO-L-18260726.xhtml; You can also notice the design on some coins of the time, http://www.hubert-herald.nl/Bolivia_bestanden/image018.jpg; or also in some stamps used in documentation http://www.hubert-herald.nl/Bolivia_bestanden/image013.jpg , but in the image of the flag you can see the colors File:Bolivia, from Flags of All Nations, Series 1 (N9) for Allen & Ginter Cigarettes Brands MET DP831931.jpg

Now that the shield is surrounded by branches, it is found in the Law of July 25, 1826: https://www.lexivox.org/norms/BO-L-18260725.html

--Htz67 (talk) 05:36, 24 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done: Made with photoshop. Several correction made by the user itself: very probably own work. Ruthven (msg) 11:20, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Функциональная блок - схема счета по фронту и спаду сигнала, со счетом на 12 (три точки отсчета), и фильтром на выходе.jpg

Hello, I am Skrynnikov Sergey Petrovich a Russian citizen who introduced himself here as Ssp 1.618, speak only Russian, basic knowledge of Boolean algebra and transformation of relay-contact and logic circuits. I have almost no experience editing here, and providing the necessary licenses as proof of authorship. I am the sole author and primary source of my creative works, from idea to development (this is my home hobby), and I submitted these works to Wikimedia Commons under a license

== {{int:license-header}} ==

which are listed below:

Please restore the file

File:Функциональная блок - схема счета по фронту и спаду сигнала, со счетом на 12 (три точки отсчета), и фильтром на выходе.jpg

by license:

== {{int:license-header}} ==

Ssp 1.618 (talk) 21:21, 5 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ssp 1.618: Could you tell us how this file is in project scope? --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 01:46, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Nat: To increase the speed and flexibility of data processing in the CPU and RAM, and reliability as in the Kalashnikov assault rifle.

File:Временные диаграммы кольцевых счетчиков последовательного и последовательно - параллельного счета.jpg

Ssp 1.618 (talk) 03:29, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ssp 1.618: Thank you for responding. However, your response does not answer my query. How does this file comply with our policy on project scope? --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 04:17, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Nat: I read the project scope policy - policy on project scope, and realized that all the files I provided do not meet the criteria that meet these policies. Thank you for your diplomatic explanation. I will no longer insist on restoring these files.

Ssp 1.618 (talk) 11:55, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Request withdrawn. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:38, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:OpenPilot on Comma Two.jpg

== [[:File:OpenPilot_on_Comma_Two.jpg]] is from our open source project... https://github.com/commaai/openpilot/ ==

I've been working with the Comma team on this open source project for over 3 years. The image is based on a pic seen in our readme... https://github.com/commaai/openpilot/blob/master/README.md

The source code points to... https://i.imgur.com/UelUjKAh.png

The team was pleased when I used it in the Comma wiki, so it was disappointing when your team deleted the free-to-use image. Please restore it.

-Erich Moraga — Preceding unsigned comment added by ErichMoraga (talk • contribs) 15:18, 28 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@ErichMoraga: Which copyright license is correct for this file? If the license requires the copyright owner to be named, then who? Thuresson (talk) 23:04, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose Uploader do not respond with vital information about copyright license and copyright owner. Thuresson (talk) 18:10, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:43, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Deleted Atomium images

No FOP in Belgium back then. Now there's FOP in that country since July 2016.

File:Het Atomium in Brussel.jpg

— deleted because Commons:Deletion requests/File:Het Atomium in Brussel.jpg

File:Symbol of Brussels.jpg
File:Brüssel - Atomium von Nordwest - panoramio.jpg
File:Brüssel - Atomium - panoramio.jpg
File:Atomium 2.jpg (also please split the two different images of the same subject. If possible the earlier one will go under file name "File:Atomium.jpg" which is now a redirect)
File:Atomium, Bruxelles.JPG
File:Atomium de Bruxelles.JPG

— deleted because: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Atomium - Brussels, Belgium - panoramio.jpg

File:L'Atomium.jpeg

— Commons:Deletion requests/File:L'Atomium.jpeg

File:Widok z Atomium 04.jpg

— Commons:Deletion requests/File:Widok z Atomium 04.jpg

File:Brussels Atomium.jpg

— the earlier version by a different uploader: please see its log

_ JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 00:54, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done: {{FoP-Belgium}}. --Yann (talk) 23:00, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Sborrisgr.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Sborrisgr.jpg From http://www.siegfriedborris.de/download.html: "Die Rechte der Bilder sind frei. Sie können sie gerne z.B. für Ihr Programmheft oder einen Artikel benutzen." (The rights of the images are free. You are welcome to use them, e.g. for your program or an article.) Grimes2 (talk) 09:38, 5 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose Siegfried Borris (the subject) and his heirs are, assumingly, not the copyright holders of the image(s) in question, and have no right to grant a licence for the work(s) in question. Under the German federal copyright law, the photographer is the copyright holder and the copyright cannot be transferred. The subject and their heirs would, assumingly, have an right-of-use, implied or explicit, but that is insufficient to host the work on Wikimedia Commons. Under the German federal copyright law, the duration of copyright is the life of the author (i.e. the photographer) plus 70 years after their death. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 15:44, 5 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done This is a studio portrait and there is no information about the photographer or why Mrs Borris believes that the photos are free to use. Thuresson (talk) 18:03, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Echoes-Cairo-Middle East Times - 22-28.11.1987.jpg

Этот файл содержит распечатку газеты Middle East Times от 1987 года, на текущий момент мне не понятно решение об удалении с указанием на отсутствие "источника" и "разрешения"; к сожалению источник прекратил свою деятельность и я не в состоянии получить разрешение, данная распечатка газеты была загружена на сайт www.images.squarespace-cdn.com и размещена на www.caracallatheatre.com, я считаю данная картинка может быть размещена в связи с тем, что связатся каким либо образом с источником невозможно --TopGar (talk) 10:05, 5 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose Impossibility to contact the source or to seek permission is not a valid rationale to host the work in question or for undeletion. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 15:46, 5 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done Since you have edited the article about Middle East Times on ru: and de: you should have at least some idea of where to start looking for a copyright owner. Thuresson (talk) 18:05, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Boris Cherniak - motivational speaker, comedian, author, hypnotist.jpg

Official publicity photo available for distribution with proper copyright and fair usage -available at official site [[5]] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Comedywood (talk • contribs) 14:23, 5 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.

Oppose No evidence of an accepted free licence at source and Fair use is not permitted on Wikimedia Commons and non-free content under such a rationale is subject to immediate deletion. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 15:48, 5 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done "for Press and Print Media" will exclude use by anybody for any purpose. Thuresson (talk) 18:07, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:After Lunch atop a Skyscraper 1932 ph Charles C. Ebbets.jpg

Buonasera,

La mia immagine è stata eliminata con la motivazione che è un atto di valdalismo. Leggendo i termini e le condizioni di wikimedia commons, mi è sembrato di capire che ogni file che istruisce o educa su un determinato argomento sia ben accetta. Il mio scopo era quello di inserirmi dentro le immagini storiche e non cambiavo nient'altro, nessuno guarda le persone che sono nello sfondo delle immagini anche se queste sono molto importanti e fanno parte del nostro immaginario comune. Io non ho cambiato nulla dell'immagini e non mi sembra di aver fatto un atto vandalico, le immagini avevano sempre il loro scopo e la loro storia, nulla cambiava se non questo piccolo insegnamento nel prestare maggior attenzione alle persone catturate nelle immagini storiche che sono rimaste e rimarranno nel tempo. Le immagini che ho utilizzato sono di pubblico dominio, quindi libere di esser utilizzate. Diverse immagini mi sono state tolte come quella che ho messo nell'oggetto.

Cordiali Saluti --Tommasoremondini (talk) 17:25, 5 January 2021 (UTC)Tommaso Remondini 05/01/2021Reply[reply]

Oppose (1) Inserting yourself into an image and trying to pass it off as the genuine article is vandalism, and (2) such a file would be out of scope in any case. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 03:58, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done This is not the place to host your art project and there is no educational use for historical photos where the face of a Wikimedia user has been pasted. Thuresson (talk) 18:09, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Lucky Ali at a concert in Goa.jpg

The photographer has changed the license to Attribution: https://www.flickr.com/photos/krpics/50806131756/in/dateposted-public/ Kindly undelete this file.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skulblock (talk • contribs) 07:32, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: File is not under consideration for deletion. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 00:38, 7 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

laura cruz serrano

efgrt ryewydeteyfd —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 47.17.76.22 (talk) 12:47, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: No file name provided. Please log in and ask again. --Yann (talk) 23:12, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:CDR grey vest.jpg

== Photo of Ritchie in Grey Vest was fair use; not a copyright violation ==

There was a claim that the image of Ms. Ritchie wearing a grey vest was a copyright violation, and the following link was shared to support that claim:

https://urdu.news18.com/photogallery/international/pakistan-pm-imran-khan-wanted-to-have-sex-with-cynthia-ritchie-snm-305728.html

The image is fair use, on Ritchie's social media, and has been used a number of times before. Please undelete.

--Pakistan2020 (talk) 13:37, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose Per Commons:Fair use. Also, you uploaded this claiming that it is your own work and that you must be credited if somebody wants to use this photo, how can that not be a copyright violation? Thuresson (talk) 16:30, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 00:36, 7 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Heydar Aliyev Center 2.jpg

The website https://masimovasif.net/ is operated by the uploader Asif Masimov a.k.a. User:Alumni.aserbaidschan —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 101.78.190.130 (talk) 01:39, 7 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: No rationale for undeletion. No evidence of accepted free licence at source. Previously published works require that the copyright holder (e.g. designer, architect, etc) send permission and a specific release under an accepted free licence using the OTRS process. Once OTRS has determined to have received sufficient permission and there is no other rationale for deletion, an OTRS agent will perform or request undeletion. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 03:24, 7 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:He Jiong.png

This image has been deleted. However, the image has not violated any copyright in any form.

Reason: This image was originally published on Weibo at 12th December 2020, 10 PM by the official account Hunan Satellite Television Station to advertise their special event that night (here is the link: https://weibo.com/7421743984/JyarMCLFJ?type=comment#_rnd1609987854557). The account did not state that no one should use any of the images they post during or before or after the day. This means that the image can be used as the collection or any forms other than commercial purpose. Hence, the image does not violate any copyright in any form.--Infinite Prophet (talk) 03:00, 7 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Unambigious copyright violation per the statement in the request. No evidence of an accepted free licence at source. Furthermore, non-commercial restrictions are not permitted on Wikimedia Commons. Please read Commons' licensing policy. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 03:18, 7 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Sa Beining.png

This image has been deleted. However, the image has not violated any copyright in any form.

Reason: This image was originally published on Weibo on 22nd January 2020 at 12:30 PM. The image is the stage photo of the character to promote the upcoming show, the image was published for fans and other people who have followed the account (The original post's link can be accessed from here:https://weibo.com/5862147128/IqEd1xxpM?filter=hot&root_comment_id=0&type=comment#_rnd1609988602205). The account did not state that no one should use any of the images they post during or before or after the day. This means that the image can be used as the collection or any forms other than commercial purpose. Hence, the image does not violate any copyright in any form. --Infinite Prophet (talk) 03:06, 7 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Unambigious copyright violation per the statement in the request. No evidence of an accepted free licence at source. Furthermore, non-commercial restrictions are not permitted on Wikimedia Commons. Please read Commons' licensing policy. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 03:19, 7 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

More Belgian FOP-reliant images found

The following image files depict FOP-reliant objects in Belgium that were deleted before (prior to the introduction of FOP in the country in 2016):

File:Wevelgem gedenkmonument verongelukte kinderen -2.JPG

— Commons:Deletion requests/File:Wevelgem gedenkmonument verongelukte kinderen -2.JPG

File:Jeanneke Pis.JPG

— https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=File:Jeanneke_Pis.JPG (four different files, on different dates, of the same subject under the same file name, but hopefully they: still exist and not corrupted, under free licensing, and own work or from free files of Flickr etc.)

File:Brussels 2005.jpg

— deleted because of Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Gaston Lagaffe statue.jpg

File:Woluwe-Saint-Lambert - 262 rue de la Cambre (2).jpg

— Commons:Deletion requests/File:Woluwe-Saint-Lambert - 262 rue de la Cambre (2).jpg

File:Musée_des_instruments_de_musique_de_Bruxelles.jpg

— Commons:Deletion requests/File:Musée des instruments de musique de Bruxelles.jpg

File:Justus Lipsius tout le nord-est 689 MOD.jpg

— Commons:Deletion requests/File:Justus Lipsius tout le nord-est 689 MOD.jpg

File:JB Van Helmont monument in Brussells.jpg

— Commons:Deletion requests/File:JB Van Helmont monument in Brussells.jpg

File:2005 jeanneke pis01.jpeg and File:Bruxelles-JeannekePis.JPG

— Commons:Deletion requests/Image:2005 jeanneke pis02.jpeg

File:Liege_ambiance_5_Luc_Viatour.jpg.jpg

— Commons:Deletion requests/File:Liege ambiance 5 Luc Viatour.jpg.jpg

_ JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:04, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done: {{FoP-Belgium}}. --Yann (talk) 19:40, 7 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Stefan Ruscan cu cimpoiul.jpg

The picture have more than 70 years, unknown author. Have been used before in those books: Țăranu, Petru (2000). Memoria Dornelor. IV. Biblioteca Bucovinei. Adăniloaie, Nichita; Țăranu, Petru (2003). Școala Șaru Dornei- repere istorice. p. 194

Ana Ruscanu (talk) 14:20, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ana Ruscanu: You uploaded this as your own photo, please clarify. Thuresson (talk) 16:33, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, I'm begginer so I make lot of mistakes. If you are nice to help me... So... like I have said before (don't ask me where because I'm lost in Wikipediahood) about the picture Stefan Ruscan cu cimpoiul the artist familly gave it to me to use it, in the same way they gave it to Petru Taranu and have been published in 2000. Nobody know who take the shoot in 1936. I didn't pay attention to details but is a Fairy use, in 20 years nobody complained about author rights. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ana Ruscanu (talk • contribs) 15:19, 7 January 2021 (UTC) Ana Ruscanu (talk) 15:15, 7 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose No information about photographer. If this was first published in Romania in 2000 it will be protected by copyright until 2026, per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Romania. Thuresson (talk) 06:53, 8 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 07:17, 8 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Greg Reynoso.jpg I am the photographer of this photo. Please allow me to prove.

I would like to prove that I am the taking photographer of the deleted photo to reinstate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Verdesaint (talk • contribs) 20:56, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose @Verdesaint: No evidence of accepted free licence at [6]. Previously published works require that the copyright holder send permission and a specific release under an accepted free licence using the OTRS process. Once OTRS has determined that they have received sufficient permission and there is no other rationale for deletion, an OTRS agent will perform or request undeletion on behalf of the copyright holder. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:22, 7 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:22, 7 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Reset test 6 low 1x.gif

Bonjour, Je ne comprends pas pourquoi mes vidéo File:Reset test 6 low 1x.gif, File:Start test 6 low 1x.gif et File:Stop test 6 low 1x.gif ont été supprimées. Je suis l'auteur (Damien Prongué) de ces vidéos et je publie sous le pseudo Scharf82. 7 janvier 2021 --Scharf82 (talk) 08:29, 7 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bonjour, bonsoir @Scharf82: Vous pouvez confirmer votre identité et la lier avec votre pseudo en envoyant un courriel à permissions-commonswikimedia.org ou permissions-frwikimedia.org et nous transmettre, par courriel, toute documentation nous permettant d'attester de votre identité comme carte de bibliothèque, carte de sport, etc… (mais surtout pas de documents officiels : CI, passeport). Merci. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:32, 7 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 02:32, 8 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:NT Handy II.png

Bonjour, La société Witschi Electronic AG qui produit le "New Tech Handy II" m'a fourni l'image File:NT Handy II.png comme elle m'avait fourni l'image File:Chronoscope-S1-G2 FR.png (voir message ci-dessous).

--Scharf82 (talk) 08:49, 7 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bonjour Monsieur Grass,

Un grand merci pour votre aide. Cordialement Damien

De : Gass Sébastien (Redacted) Envoyé : mardi, 20 août 2019 13:58 À : Prongue Damien (Redacted) Cc : Hessler Thierry (Redacted) Objet : RE: release of Chronoscope-S1-G2 FR.png

Bonjour Monsieur Prongué,

Merci pour votre requête.

Vous trouverez ci-joint l’image demandée ainsi que notre accord par ce mail pour votre publication.

Bien à vous S.Gass

De : Prongue Damien (Redacted) Envoyé : lundi, 19 août 2019 15:50 À : Gass Sébastien (Redacted) Cc : Hessler Thierry (Redacted) Objet : RE: release of Chronoscope-S1-G2 FR.png

Bonjour Monsieur Gass,

Nous aimerions ajouter dans un article Wikipedia, une image d'un appareil de mesure des montres à quartz de type "New Tech Handy II) Serait-il possible d'obtenir l'image d'un tel appareil ?

Pour information, vous nous aviez fourni une image pour le Chronoscope-S1(voir attaché) et vous nous aviez accordé les droits. Nous aimerions donc la même chose pour le Handy.

Nous vous remercions sincèrement pour votre aide. Cordialement

Prof. Damien Prongué Filière Microtechniques Groupe Horlogerie

Haute Ecole Arc Ingénierie (HES-SO) Tél. direct (Redacted) Rue de l'Hôtel-de-Ville 7 Tél. mobile (Redacted) CH-2400 Le Locle Internet www.he-arc.ch/ingenierie

 Pensez à l'environnement avant d'imprimer ce message

De : Prongue Damien Envoyé : samedi, 25 août 2018 17:31 À : Gass Sébastien (Redacted) Objet : RE: release of Chronoscope-S1-G2 FR.png

Bonjour Monsieur Gass,

Je vous remercie pour votre confirmation. L’image est actuellement en accès libre sur Wikipedia.

Très bon week-end Damien

De : Gass Sébastien (Redacted) Envoyé : jeudi, 23 août 2018 16:05 À : Prongue Damien (Redacted) Objet : RE: release of Chronoscope-S1-G2 FR.png

Bonjour Monsieur Prongué,

Sur le principe ok mais je contrôle encore rapidement en interne et reviens vers vous.

Belle soirée à vous S.Gass

De : Prongue Damien (Redacted) Envoyé : jeudi, 23 août 2018 15:59 À : Gass Sébastien (Redacted) Objet : release of Chronoscope-S1-G2 FR.png

Bonjour Monsieur Gass,

Seriez-vous d'accord d'envoyer à permissions-commons@wikimedia.org , avec votre adresse mail professionnelle (Redacted), le text vert ci-dessous. Wikimedia doit contrôler que vous avez bien donné les droits pour ajouter l'image du Chronocope (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Chronoscope-S1-G2_FR.png )

D'avance un grand merci pour votre aide Damien Prongué

________________________________________ I hereby affirm that I represent Witschi Electronic AG, Sébatien Gass, the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of both the work depicted and the media https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Chronoscope-S1-G2_FR.png. I agree to publish the above-mentioned work under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International. I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work, even in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws. I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites. I am aware that the copyright holder always retains ownership of the copyright as well as the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by the copyright holder. I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

Sébatien Gass Marketing & Product Manager of Witschi Electronic AG 2018-08-23

[generated using relgen]

--Scharf82 (talk) 08:49, 7 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Procedural close. Nothing to be accomplished here. @Scharf82: Permissions should be sent by the copyright holder directly to OTRS at permissions-commonswikimedia.org or permissions-frwikimedia.org, not here. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 18:36, 7 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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