Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2021-07

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

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

File:Kudrinskaia001.JPG

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: deleted via Commons:Deletion requests/File:Kudrinskaia001.JPG. But {{FoP-Russia}} (buildings only) since 2014. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:29, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol support vote.svg Support per {{FoP-Russia}}. Ankry (talk) 19:53, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[]

✓ Done: Russian law has changed since the deletion. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:53, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Hand of epigyny.jpg

This file was deleted because there is no freedom of panorama in South Korea. (Per COM:FOP SK)

See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hand of Coexistence.jpg.

However, when I participated in this discussion, I confirmed that this image was applied DM.

This photo showed the shore with the hand-shaped sculpture.

So, if the file is renamed to "Shore of Pohang", the hand sculpture in this photo is DM, so it's allowed in Commons.

Ox1997cow (talk) 06:40, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose If the Hand were not in the image, it would be an image of a nondescript rocky shore with a town in the background and would not be kept on Commons. It is clear that the only reason this might be allowed on Commons is the presence of the copyrighted hand. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:14, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[]

@Jameslwoodward: Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I know that the photo is a photo of the rocky shore of Pohang, near New Millennium Park. The hand-shaped sculpture is incidental. Just write the description and file name correctly. Ox1997cow (talk) 15:56, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[]
Nonsense. The image has no educational value without the sculpture and if the sculpture were edited out, it would be deleted for that reason. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:46, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[]
If there is an encyclopedic article about the place, and it has no image, then I don't think a picture of seemingly bland scenery would be entirely "useless" there. I don't know how much of the scenery would remain in such an edited image, though. whym (talk) 13:32, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[]
  • @Ox1997cow: Did you consider uploading a new version that can be used on a Korean Wikipedia page (or any other Wikimedia site) without the sculpture? If scope is the only issue, we don't delete an image as long as other Wikimedia sites want to use the image (COM:INUSE). https://commons-delinquent.toolforge.org/index.php?image=Hand_of_Coexistence-edit.jpg shows that the related image was in use at multiple Wikimedia sites before deletion. Perhaps such a new edited version could be the replacement? This diff does not suggest that the sculpture was the reason for inclusion. I don't know how much of the scenery remains in the image after such editing, and if you are not the photographer, we might need a temporary undeletion for editing, though. whym (talk) 13:32, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[]
@Whym: Sorry, but I don't have any photos associated with it. Ox1997cow (talk) 14:33, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[]
@Whym and Ox1997cow: I have cropped the hand out, leaving as much of the imege as posible. If you find it useful, please fix the image description and name. If not, it will likely be deleted as out of scope. Ankry (talk) 18:19, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]
I edited the file description. Change the file name after deciding whether to keep it or not. Ox1997cow (talk) 23:45, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]

✓ Done at its current form, the photo does not violate artist copyright. Feel free to nominate for deletion if out-of-scope. Ankry (talk) 05:57, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Slavka Taskova Paoletti. Ritratto degli anni '70 . Fotografo Ruggero Tavanti.png

== Slavka Taskova portrait has permission ==

(File:Slavka Taskova Paoletti. Ritratto degli anni '70 . Fotografo Ruggero Tavanti.png)

The file was deleted in spite of a written document sent to prove its rightful origin.

The mentioned pic was taken by a professional photographer of a small town and he was paid . so he gave MRs Taskova the rights under payment but it was the 70's and in such small set up there was no written contract, So the heir of the photographer, who is now dead ,has written a declaration where he asserts Mrs Taskova has the rights of the pic.

--Ric1967 (talk) 19:24, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The permission seems to be processed under ticket:2021051010012937. When the permission is verified and accepted by OTRS volunteer, the image will be undeleted. Also, we cannot host images without a license and no licensing information has been provided. Ankry (talk) 23:23, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done OTRS action needed. Ankry (talk) 17:39, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Michał Woś.jpg

And also:

I am the owner of copyright of this photo session.--Krzemin28 (talk) 06:59, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[]

  • @Krzemin28: are you the photographer? Note that copyright ownership is different from physical possession/ownership. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:43, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[]
  • @JWilz12345: Yes, I am a photographer with proper rights. Nethertheless these people (from other uploaded photos as well) asked me to use these photos on their Wikipedia pages.--Krzemin28 (talk) 09:42, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[]
  • @Krzemin28: Then you need to follow COM:OTRS process as for any professional or published photo (if published initially without clear evidence of free license). Ankry (talk) 12:39, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done per above: OTRS needed. Ankry (talk) 17:41, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Christian Utz (2021).tif

Hello,

permission for unrestricted use of the file has been approved by the director of KUG (University of Music and Performing Arts Graz, Austria). Please find the message sent to Wikimedia Commons below:

Betreff: Wikimedia Lizenz_Foto Professor Utz

Von: "Rektor KUG" (Redacted) Datum: 16.06.2021, 07:19 An: (Redacted)

I hereby affirm that I represent Alexander Wenzel, the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the following media work:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Christian_Utz_(2021).tif

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.

Georg Schulz Rector of the University of music and performing arts

2021-06-15 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jo.ciconia (talk • contribs) 09:11, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose @Jo.ciconia: Permissions should be sent to email addresses providec in COM:OTRS, not quoted here, as we cannot verify their legitimacy on-wiki. Ankry (talk) 12:35, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done per above: OTRS needed. Ankry (talk) 17:37, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Yunomi Tomb of Jesus Christ.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

The mug only has a cross and the dialect of the region where the mug is sold. Therefore, it is not an infringement of copyright.--8joKeaton (talk) 09:57, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The image is not "only a cross", and is copyrighted, IMO. Ankry (talk) 12:31, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[]
Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question@Ankry: What's mean "IMO"?
IMO = In My Opinion Gbawden (talk) 15:41, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[]
Yes. Another admin can have a different opinion, so I do not take the final decision here. Ankry (talk) 17:37, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[]
@Gbawden: @Ankry: Oh,Thank you for telling me what that means.!--8joKeaton (talk) 19:19, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[]

Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question If this image is uploaded only on the Japanese version of Wikipedia and not on Commons, would there be no fear of deletion?--8joKeaton (talk) 19:19, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[]

@8joKeaton: This question should be asked there, not here. Ankry (talk) 17:35, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]
Sorry, but where's "there"? Is there a question page suitable for my question?--8joKeaton (talk) 20:35, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: Clearly copyrighted. Ask the question about WP:Japan on WP:JApan, not here as we do not know the rules for WP:Japan. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:37, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:3320House of Mercy - Tallest Jesus, I Trust in You Statue 60.jpg

To be reuploaded under fair use (for Divine Mercy Statue (Bulacan) since there it is assumed that there is no Freedom of Panorama in the Philippines.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 12:05, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[]

@Hariboneagle927: {{Temporarily undeleted}}, please, notify when finished. Ankry (talk) 17:47, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[]
✓ DoneHariboneagle927 (talk) 01:32, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]

Redeleted. Ankry (talk) 17:33, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Aishakhatun.jpg

Hi, this is my profile picture and I am unsure as to why it was deleted (cannot understand the copyright violation code given). I'd like to request it's undeletion. I use it in my profile page and is supposed to be linked in Outreach_programs/Success_stories soon. I'd also like to link it to my foundation profile page AKhatun_(WMF). Thanks! Aisha Khatun (talk) 14:39, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[]

@Aisha Khatun:
  1. This image originates from Facebook; Facebook license is not compatible with Commons requirements
  2. This image does not seem to be a selfie; and author = the photographer, not the photo subject
  3. We need an evidence that the declared license is from the photographer, if a photo is not made by the uploader
  4. We generally do not accept on-wiki self-licensing if a newly uploaded photo is low resolution, or without EXIF info. This one is low resolution and without EXIF info
  5. We do not manage WMF website and we cannot care or control image licenses declared there (if any). If the photo originated from WMF website and was initially published there under a Commons-compatible free license there, it would be OK. But the metadata says that it originates from Facebook...
The solution is: the photographer needs to follow COM:OTRS process. Ankry (talk) 18:01, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[]
Interesting, did not realise it was Facebook. Sorry about that. I will probably have to upload a new one. Thanks! Aisha Khatun (talk) 08:53, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: Facebook image. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:34, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:GUILDFORD CITY FOOTBALL CLUB Logo.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This is the Guildford City FC new 2021 Logo. I am the Social Media & Website Manager of Guildford City FC and require the change of logo. I have the copyright clearance to use this image. Junderwood31 (talk) 15:39, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[]

  • @Junderwood31: 1. Permission "to use" is not enough. We need a free license in order to host the logo in Wikimedia Commons; see COM:L. 2. You claimed at upload that you are the author of the logo and moral rights belong to you. How can you prove that? 3. If this was a false claim, how can we rely on what you say now? We need an evidence of your claims. See COM:OTRS for a procedure how to provide documents. Ankry (talk) 17:26, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done no free license. Ankry (talk) 17:31, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:2021 Kazakh election flyers.jpg

This file clearly wasn't violating any rules and in the end on 11 May 2021, it was decided to be kept yet it still got removed. --ShadZ01 (talk) 23:48, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[]

Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question @EugeneZelenko: Did you find the photo a DW of something else than the election posters being considered de minimis is the the recent DR or is there another reason to override a community decision with speedy process? Ankry (talk) 12:27, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[]
Obviously posters are main subject off this photo, so de minimis claims are bogus. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 13:53, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[]
@EugeneZelenko: But overriding a DR decision through speedy deletion is out of process, even if we disagree with it. I Symbol support vote.svg Support undeletion and reopenning the DR unless User:P199 has also changed their mind. Ankry (talk) 16:45, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[]
It's very reasonable to ask question why deletion request was closed that way, especially taking in account absence of freedom of panorama in Kazakhstan. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 17:08, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[]
The posters are DM in my opinion, low-res, no details visible. But it could be borderline. --P 1 9 9   17:41, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's a photo of a posting board that has twelve copyrighted posters on it. There is very little else in the image around the edges of the board. It obviously fails the DM test -- "Would a casual observer notice if the copyrighted work(s) were removed?" Several photos on the posters are recognizable and the poster headlines and most of the sub-heads are legible, although the body text is not. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:54, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done: per above. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:45, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[]


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

Files in Category:Interior of Taipei 101

According to TIPO, photographing merely interior decor is OK. The office also mention 拍攝"室內"裝潢的行為是將實施結果的實體物為拍攝,並不涉及著作權之侵害 (translate: The act of shooting "interior decoration is to take the actual object as a result of the implementation and does not involve copyright infringement) , so it is OK for Interior architecture photography/video. However, it still doesn't have any conclusion in Commons talk:Copyright rules by territory/Taiwan#Interior architecture, OK? and the above file cannot clearly see any artwork. I disagree with administrator Jameslwoodward say " Taiwan FoP does not cover interiors". If this happens, there have more than 10000 images about Taiwan will be deleted, including ALL the buildings interior photos.

Meanwhile, in this law firm, it mentions As for whether the internal design of a building is protected, it should be judged by whether it is "original" and "creative." Corridors, ceilings, stairs, etc. are all structures common to buildings, and cannot be called "works". Chinese: 這裡「至於建築物內部的設計是否受到保護,應該以其有無「原創性」及「創作性」來判斷,像是走廊、天花板、樓梯等都是一般建築都具備的結構,不能稱為著作。」Those deleted photos only can see the structure of the interior, it is difficult to see and even NO artistic elements.--Wpcpey (talk) 14:30, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[]

Pictogram voting info.svg Info this is a repeat restoration request. The original request is at Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2021-06#Files in Category:Interior of Taipei 101. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:04, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 室內裝潢沒有侵害著作權,拍攝"室內"裝潢的行為是將實施結果的實體物為拍攝,並不涉及著作權之侵害。--葉又嘉 (talk) 13:48, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[]
  • 室內設計是圖形,不是建築https://topic.tipo.gov.tw/copyright-tw/cp-407-855226-6988a-301.html --葉又嘉 (talk) 19:05, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[]
Symbol support vote.svg Support No artworks shown for em IIRC, and I'd love to modify COM:FOP Taiwan again to reflect this. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:54, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: The images all show interiors that are clearly creative. Also note that the law very clearly states that the work must be outdoors. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:05, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Clark International Airport new terminal exterior.JPG

To be reuploaded in the English Wikipedia under fair use; for Clark International Airport since there it is assumed that there is no Freedom of Panorama in the Philippines.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 01:26, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]

✓ Done Photo was reuploaded at the English Wikipedia.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 06:50, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Press Photo Of Prince Salani.jpg

File:Press Photo Of Prince Salani.jpg

Reason: So I can resubmit my request in future by using this portrait or image.

(29 June 2021) —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 1.38.44.48 (talk) 05:34, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]

  • Please explain how this image is in COM:SCOPE? Gbawden (talk) 06:35, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using OTRS. Ankry (talk) 17:28, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: per ankry. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:54, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Robert Roberts, MD.jpg to undelete

Hello,

I would like to request to undelete this photo as my client owns all rights of the file. Please let me know if you need proof of identification/ownership.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by MC.Biotech (talk • contribs) 01:57, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[]

  • Signing your posts is required on talk pages and Commons:Signatures policy to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, deletion 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.
@MC.Biotech: Few questions:
  1. How did you disclose information required by Terms of Use (last subsection)?
  2. At upload you declared yourself to be the photographer and exclusive copyright holder. Now you say something else. How can we rely on your statements?
  3. You were notified that the COM:OTRS process is required. Did the copyright holder go through this? What is the ticket number?
Ankry (talk) 06:44, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done no response in 24h. Ankry (talk) 11:45, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Winery 042.JPG

No valid reason for deletion. As I mentioned on my talk page User:سندباد is inactive since 2011. Hanooz 04:37, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[]

While there are doubts about COM:SCOPE here, I see no copyright-related problems. The photo was self-licensed by the uploader on fawiki prior to transfer to Commons. The photo has complete EXIF info from Canon EOS 20D, with no copyright/author info. @Fitindia and Missvain: What copyright-related doubts have you found here that a permission is needed? Ankry (talk) 06:27, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[]
{{Temporarily undeleted}} Ankry (talk) 06:33, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol support vote.svg Support Uploader claims to be the author. As Ankry says, there is good EXIF and it is 3,504 × 2,336 pixels, certainly larger then Web size. I would Assume Good Faith. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:48, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Un-deletion. I should have kept the file in good faith. --- FitIndia Talk 10:09, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[]

✓ Done no objections. Ankry (talk) 11:39, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:TESVI logo transparentbg-06.png

Hello, please restore this file. This is a {{PD-textlogo}} logo and is below the threshold of originality. Thanks, Enjoyer of World (talk) 07:07, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[]


✓ Done: Creaotr is US company, no US copyright in pure text logos. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:43, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Senator Mark Wyland.jpg

I want to reupload the picture. I saw that someone did and it got deleted because at the time they didn't use PD-CAGov tag. I'm not sure if it's the same picture or not from the Archive Website. If it is, I'm requesting for it to be undeleted. Dillon251992 (talk) 21:50, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol support vote.svg Support As no photo author information is provided on the abovementioned page, we can consider that "Copyright © 2013 State of California" applies to it, IMO. And the photo seems to be public record as described in {{PD-CAGov}}. However, another opinion is welcome. Ankry (talk) 07:20, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As noted at {{PD-CAGov}}, works created by photographers or others who are not employees of California or one of its subdivisions have an enforceable copyright. I would guess it is 50/50 that this formal portrait was taken by an non-government photo studio. Politicians generally want the best image possible and that is more likely to come from an outsider than an government photographer. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:50, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done: As per Jim, {{PD-CAGov}} requires the work be "created by a government unit." It is not uncommon that government entities hire private photographers, and no evidence is on offer that this image was created by a government unit. As either is genuinely possible, COM:PRP applies. Mere hosting on a government website is not evidence of, and has nothing whatsoever to do with, authorship. This is especially so in the absence of a general site disclaimer that content is public domain, and "Copyright © 2013 State of California" directly contradicts, and is mutually exclusive of, public domain assertions (see also 17 U.S.C. § 105(a): copyright related to government authored works and works transfered to the government are very different notions.) As an example, contrast JPL terms which say "Unless otherwise noted, images and video on JPL public web sites (public sites ending with a jpl.nasa.gov address) may be used for any purpose without prior permission" with the terms of the legislature.ca.gov site which say "[s]ome of the information presented on this web site may be protected by copyright." Again, per COM:EVID, "In all cases, the burden of proof lies on the uploader or other person arguing for the file to be retained to demonstrate that as far as can reasonably be determined: the file is in the public domain." (underline added) This has not been done. --Эlcobbola talk 13:53, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Caio Vinícius Moura Luz.jpg

O arquivo foi autorizado pelo próprio dono da imagem e não viola nenhum copyright 23:15, 28 June 2021 (UTC)Tuany Bittencourt 28/06/2021 20:15 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tuany Bittencourt (talk • contribs) 23:15, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[]

  • Signing your posts is required on talk pages and Commons:Signatures policy to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, deletion 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.
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using OTRS. Ankry (talk) 17:30, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose When you uploaded the image, you claimed that you were the photographer. Now you say it was uploaded by "the owner of the image" (Google translation). The photographer needs to send a free license using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:58, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: As above. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:30, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

Files uploaded by RoundSquare

Files in Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by RoundSquare, as per the rationale in the deletion discussion. Zoozaz1 (talk) 01:56, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Wikimedia Commons hosted files are required to be free for any use, including commercial reuse and derivative work creation. CC0 allows them. I see no evidence that the CC0 license for these files has been granted. If you think that another community-accepted copyright template is applicable here, please advice. Ankry (talk) 11:27, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[]
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose All of the images appear on a page with "© 2021 Michigan Senate Republicans". The statement "Photos on the Senate PhotoWire are intended for media and public use and may be freely reproduced." does not overcome that as "freely reproduced" does not include making derivative works. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:46, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: As above. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:29, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Mark-divine-2020.jpg

Personal headshot for main page [[1]] to be added to military infobox. Requesting undeletion to allow for upload and complete the recently accepted page.

```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arw29 (talk • contribs)

@Arw29: While the image is in scope, it still lacks the original camera settings info in EXIF. If you are the photographer as you claimed at upload, please upload the photo with original EXIF info from your camera. Alternatively, you can prove your authorship through COM:OTRS process. Ankry (talk) 11:31, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[]
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Aside from copyright, the WP:EN page on which it might be used reads like a puff piece. It's not clear that WP:EN will keep it. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:49, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: As above. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:28, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:IMO helping to mitigate the impacts of MV Wakashio oil spill in Mauritius - 50236896003.jpg - deleted as copyright violation but evidence of compatible license exists

Hi. File was deleted as a copyright violation. However, the file appears to be part of a set produced by w:International Maritime Organization: image in question, whole set and published under CC-BY 2.0. The first instance of this photo appears to be this tweet by a local journalist, but the tweet makes no attempt to claim the image as their own work or offer any attribution.
The image also appears to be part of a set, and 7 photos are on IMO's Flickr and only one is on the journalists Twitter.
The image is clearly taken from an airborne vehicle, likely a drone and possibly a helicopter; it seems unlikely that a private individual would get permission from the local government to flyover an active disaster site, but it seems more plausible that a UN agency did.

While it is possible that a UN agency is engaging in systemic copyright infringement on Flickr a more simple explanation seems to be that a local journalists got a copy of IMO's photo before IMO had a chance to publish it on their Flickr and rushed to Twitter with it.

Given that, on balance, this image appears to belongs to IMO and is published under a compatible license, could you please restore it? Thanks Melmann (talk) 23:01, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[]

@Melmann: The tweet is earlier than the IMO publication so it constitutes significant doubt who the author is. Especially, as the IMO publication is not helpful here (no EXIF, no author attribution as required). If IMO is the exclusive copyright holder of this photo, we need some evidence for this. (eg. an evidence that Guillaume Gouges, the tweet author, has got the photo from IMO, or that the photographer was an IMO employee). We assume that the earliest publication identifies the author unless we have evidence otherwise. Ankry (talk) 14:05, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[]
Greetings. There is talk page correspondence about this already. I give whym permission to incorporate and archive from my talk page. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:37, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[]
Given the uncertainty, I would like to see permission (or at least behind-the-scenes source information) for this from Guillaume Gouges or IMO on their websites or social media, or via OTRS/VRTS.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 00:38, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]
Preceding conversation between Ellin Beltz and Whym

Can you take a look at Commons:Deletion requests/File:WAKASHIO...oil spill in Mauritius.jpg again? You deleted a file that was not nominated for deletion - the target of a redirect created after the deletion nomination. (Perhaps I should have closed the DR.) I believe it was originally published at [2] with acceptable license. whym (talk) 11:19, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Whym: The image was clearly copyright violation https://www.3bmeteo.com/giornale-meteo/mauritius--aumenta-la-perdita-di-petrolio--la-petroliera-si-sta-spezzando-377914. The image at the file location you gave was identical to the image which was nominated for deletion. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:01, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Would you take a look at the file pages, not just the images again? The images were identical, but the file pages were not: the nominated file page contained no source, while the not-nominated file page contained a source which lead me to the Flickr URL I gave above. Do you think https://www.flickr.com/photos/62937028@N02/50236896003/ is not its original publication (or the Flickr image is different from the deleted one)? I believe it passed license review. Who was the reviewer? whym (talk) 23:15, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi Whym: If you look at the source above you will see the photo is credited, and not to the flickr account. Therefore the flickr account uploaded something that wasn't theirs, and we can't keep it. I have no idea who reviewed it, that's not really important. It could have been a bot. Flickr reviews are fairly regularly overturned when people take a serious look at the images. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:15, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Don't you think it's possible for www.3bmeteo.com to make a mistake in the credit line? Many web pages misattribute photographs. In this case, it's the International Maritime Organization, a well recognized organization whose specialty is ships, who owns the Flickr account and is (at least indirectly) claiming authorship here. Nikkei Asia attributes the same image to the International Maritime Organization. [3] Is there anything that makes 3BMeteo.com more trustworthy than Nikkei Asia and the IMO on this matter? whym (talk) 10:54, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi Whym: It's precisely that uncertainty which means we can't keep it. Notice that the actual source image is larger that the one which was uploaded here (1280x853 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Efd3u_FWkAE8u10?format=jpg&name=large & https://twitter.com/guillaumegouges/status/1294635129055444993/photo/1. Guillaume Gouges is a journalist. The original upload template reads: {{Information |description={{en|1=On top of the COVID situation, this tanker ran aground on the pristine lagoon of Mauritius spill out its black poison. The area is still reeling from the effects.}} {{fr|1=En sus de la situation delicate causee par le COVID, ce navire-citerne deversa son poison noir dans les lagons de l'ile Maurice. Les effets furent devastateurs.}}{{Wiki Loves Africa 2021 country|MU}} |date=2021-04-12|source={{own}}|author=[[User:MARCELSPES|MARCELSPES]]|permission=|other versions=}}=={{int:license-header}}=={{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}}
In no way is this possibly the own work of uploader. The source you propose: https://www.flickr.com/photos/62937028@N02/50236896003/ is the same size but two days after the one uploaded to Twitter by Guillaume Gouges. I really do not think we can accept the Flickr source as the original. See COM:PRP. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:11, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
I asked Guillaume Gouges whether it was his work in a reply to that tweet. Also, since it seems that the uploader (or rather the importer from Flickr) was never notified about the deletion, I'll ping them: @B2Belgium: . whym (talk) 11:07, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Copied from [4] --whym (talk) 12:09, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]

As written above, I asked Guillaume Gouges about it, and in a private response to me (he was okay with making it public), he recalled that it probably came from the Government information Service of Mauritius. There is indeed prior publication at a Facebook account associated with the government, [5] if I interpreted the timestamps correctly. So there is a third possibility, the most likely one in my opinion given the evidence so far, that both IMO and the journalist obtained it from the government, and the question is whether the government allows free use of the image. It looks like we have to assume the answer is no, unless we get specific permission from them. At the Facebook page I find nothing that suggests free license. GIS Mauritius's copyright policy seems pretty restrictive. [6] The government's open data initiative page does not contain anything associated with the keyword "Wakashio". [7] whym (talk) 13:10, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done per discussion. Extra documents may be needed and the right path is to go through COM:OTRS. Ankry (talk) 07:01, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Asom Barta Logo.png

Asom Barta is An Assamese weekly newspaper. This file was not uploaded my me. This image is important to us for creating a article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kalita bani (talk • contribs) 06:47, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[]

  • Signing your posts is required on talk pages and Commons:Signatures policy to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, deletion 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.
  • @Kalita bani: Does the newspaper attribute Tonay Borah as the author and copyright holder of their logo? If not, why anybody else should? Ankry (talk) 21:00, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info While this argument has not been raised by the requester, the logo may be {{PD-textlogo}} in my opinion. But unsure about TOO in India, so asking for more opinions. Ankry (talk) 11:44, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The UK has a copyright for typestting. It would not be surprising if the same applies in India. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:51, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done per Jim. Ankry (talk) 06:37, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Pooja Theatrical Poster.jpg

== [[Pooja.jpg]] Please Undelete Image ==

The poster for this film released in 1954 is a theatrical movie poster of an Indian-language films that was released more than about 60 years ago. I obtained this poster from the internet and my understanding was that these old posters are now in the public domain, and therefore out of copyright.

I note that the Copyright law of India (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_India) indicates that all cinematograph films fall in the public domain 60 years from the beginning of the calendar year next following the year in which the work is first published. I also note that Wikipedia has many articles with posters on movies that are over 60 years old.

It would be great if you restore this image back to Wikipedia Commons. Thank you. Scholar165 (talk) 20:58, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[]

A movie poster is not a cinematograph film. Isn't O. D. Nerdy the artist and when did he or she die? Thuresson (talk) 21:10, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - A poster is a separate work from the advertised film and is not a cinematograph work. The standard copyright duration in India is pma + 60, so when did D. D. Neroy (signature in lower left) die? Even if Neroy died immediately upon creation of the work (ca. 1954), the PD date in India (1954 + 60 + 1 = 01.01.2015) is well after the URAA date; per COM:HIRTLE, this would not be PD in the US until 01.01.2050 (1954 + 95 + 1). (Works must be PD in both the US and country of origin.) That "Wikipedia has many articles with posters on movies that are over 60 years old" is OTHERSTUFF. Эlcobbola talk 21:19, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agreed. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:28, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[]
Not done, per discussion. Thuresson (talk) 22:02, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Laadla.jpg Please Undelete Image

The poster for this film released in 1954 is a theatrical movie poster of an Indian-language films that was released more than about 60 years ago. I obtained this poster from the internet and my understanding was that these old posters are now in the public domain, and therefore out of copyright.

I note that the Copyright law of India (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_India) indicates that all cinematograph films fall in the public domain 60 years from the beginning of the calendar year next following the year in which the work is first published. I also note that Wikipedia has many articles with posters on movies that are over 60 years old.

It would be great if you restore this image back to Wikipedia Commons. Thank you. Scholar165 (talk) 21:01, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[]

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - A poster is a separate work from the advertised film and is not a cinematograph work. The standard copyright duration in India is pma + 60, so who is the author and when did they die? Even if they died immediately upon creation of the work (ca. 1954), the PD date in India (1954 + 60 + 1 = 01.01.2015) is well after the URAA date; per COM:HIRTLE, this would not be PD in the US until 01.01.2050 (1954 + 95 + 1). (Works must be PD in both the US and country of origin.) That "Wikipedia has many articles with posters on movies that are over 60 years old" is OTHERSTUFF. Эlcobbola talk 21:21, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agreed. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:26, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I do not see the poster author info on the poster itself nor around it, so the poster was likely published anonymouusly, but URAA still applies. Undelete in 2050. Ankry (talk) 06:33, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[]
Not done, per discussion. Thuresson (talk) 22:03, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Kaley Feel the forest.jpg

I have used the logo, since the article is about their tea. It was used with their permission. How can I fix this? Can I upload an image of tea containers instead? Kayzeec (talk) 09:11, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose To your question, no -- an image of a tea container would have the same problem, that it infringes on a copyright that you do not own.

In order for this logo to be restored to Commons, an authorized official of Kaley Tea must send a free license using OTRS..     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:37, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done As per Jim. Ankry (talk) 11:04, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Saint Luke's Global City (BGC, Taguig)(2018-06-04).jpg

There is presumably no freedom of panorama in the Philippines. For reuploading in the English Wikipedia instead here in Wikicommons.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 09:17, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Not necessary, since it is available for download here (source). Thuresson (talk) 11:48, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done The image can be undeleted in English Wikipedia directly, no need to reupload there. Ankry (talk) 11:09, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Minneapolis Gay Pride.jpg My personal Photograph

I myself took this photograph, and have 100% sole claim and ownership to it. Please remove any and all claims and/or restrictions placed upon it. Every single photograph, image, video, file, etc. that I post is my own, has been taken by me, with sole ownership and legal rights and authority. Under the United States Constitutions First Amendment I have the full legal right to create, produce, distribute, and/or upload this photograph.

Thank you.

Elyon127 (talk) 02:47, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done procedural close: not an undeletion request - image not deleted. Ankry (talk) 11:12, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:AJay_Rabha_Love_Bichitra_Rabha.jpg

I want this photo —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2409:4065:82:A127:BDAE:B8DA:555D:10B6 (talk) 08:28, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not a valid reason for undeletion. Ankry (talk) 11:46, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: per ankry. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:58, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

A series of photo about G.T. College

I am writing to request the recovery of the above photos. I am the representative of G.T. College(Owner of https://main.gtschool.hk/) and the one who upload the photos. All photos I upload belong to G.T College, and we are willing to share them to public so as to enrich the information in Wikipedia.Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Citizenctz (talk • contribs)

@Citizenctz: Per policy, it is up to the uploader to provide an evidence that the appropriate license has been granted by the actual copyright holder. On-wiki declaration by an anonymous user is not an evidence. Please, provide a link to the site where the appropriate license is granted of follow COM:OTRS instructions as suggested on your talk page multiple times. Ankry (talk) 11:22, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: Needs license from authorized official of the college via OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:06, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Lincoln Townley Portrait.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Per Ticket:2015021110014871 A1Cafel (talk) 06:59, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by DeanoJD. Ankry (talk) 11:38, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination--A1Cafel (talk) 08:54, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Chillin' at home.jpg

This File is my own work: I JJxFile, the copyright holder of this work, irrevocably grant anyone the right to use this work under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 4.0 license (legal code).

it's on facebook even with credits

Thanks

@JJxFile: If the file was published elsewhere prior to its upload to Commons, we need an evidence for free license (eg. free license declaration at the initial publication site - Facebook in this case) or COM:OTRS process. Moreover, COM:SCOPE issues may need to be addressed also. Ankry (talk) 12:49, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: per Ankry. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:17, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

Deleted files

File:Adele-Bloch-Bauer bw - (1881-1925).jpg, File:Adele Bloch Bauer vers 1910.jpg (english version below)

Bonjour, cette photographie a été prise en 1910. Le photographe n'a pas pu être identifié et est donc réputé être inconnu. @Jameslwoodward: supprime le fichier avec la raison suivante : "1910 is too recent to assume that the photographer has been dead for 70 years". Les règles applicables en matière de définition du domaine public ne disent pas cela. En revanche, si l'auteur d'une photographie n'est pas connu, la plupart des pays européen applique la règle des 70 ans après la première publication. Le cliché a été pris en 1910. Adele Bloch-Bauer est morte en 1925. Il y a 96 ans. La photographie est donc du domaine public. La règle qui voudrait qu'on ait a penser raisonnablement que le photographe est mort depuis septante ans n'existe nulle part. A restaurer donc. --Madelgarius (talk) 07:45, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Hello, this photograph was taken in 1910. The photographer could not be identified and is therefore deemed to be unknown. @Jameslwoodward: removes the file with the following reason: "1910 is too recent to assume that the photographer has been dead for 70 years". The rules for defining the public domain do not say that. On the other hand, if the author of a photograph is not known, most European countries apply the 70 years after first publication rule. The picture was taken in 1910. Adele Bloch-Bauer died in 1925. That's 96 years ago. The photograph is therefore in the public domain. The rule that one should reasonably assume that the photographer has been dead for 70 years does not exist anywhere. To restore therefore. --Madelgarius (talk) 07:45, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[]

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - "[I]f the author of a photograph is not known, most European countries apply the 70 years after first publication rule" That applies only for truly anonymous works, which is an entirely different concept from being merely unknown to you personally ("The photographer could not be identified and is therefore deemed to be unknown.") The Commons has proprietary evidence requirements ("The rules for defining the public domain do not say that") and consensus has determined that we use 120 years from date of creation in pma countries when the author is unknown--see {{PD-old-assumed}}. Jim is thus entirely correct that 1910 is too recent to assume that the photographer has been dead for 70 years. (1910 + 120 + 1 = 01.01.2031) Эlcobbola talk 09:29, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose "Anonymous" and "Unknown" are two very different things. The former requires that the work was originally published without credit and with the creator deliberately not named. The latter simply says that we do not know who the creator was -- the name was lost over time.
Note also that the rule cited by User:Madelgarius and the status of "anonymous" requires publication. There is no evidence that that this image was published in 1910 or any other date before 1952. In order to rely on the rule cited above, publication, not just creation, before 1952 must be proven. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:16, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[]
  • @Elcobbola: , @Jameslwoodward: Commons:Anonymous works:"An anonymous work refers to a work where the author is unknown, undisclosed, or has been deliberately attributed as anonymous. " first sentence. I'm confident, you will catch it. Things reported here without foundation will never create a rule. --Madelgarius (talk) 16:02, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[]
    • Is there any particular reason you've cited only the superficial lede and ignored the entire section, Commons:Anonymous_works#No_author_information, that explains precisely the issue Jim and I have noted? Эlcobbola talk 16:12, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[]
      • @Elcobbola: Not automatically, of course. But, thank you for respecting my good faith, I have NEVER seen an author associated with this photograph that I have seen THOUSANDS of times... and for which I have done a lot of research: Author unknown. Unless you tell me that you know who the author is. No? -> Public domain. --Madelgarius (talk) 17:08, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[]
Madelgarius, Have you had in your hands a paper print of the photograph made from the original negative? If so your experience is relevant, but not conclusive. However, if your "THOUSANDS of times" were digital copies or in books and periodicals, the experience has little meaning. Also, you have not addressed the issue of publication. Even if we accept that work is anonymous (which I am not inclined to do), you must still prove publication before 1952. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:45, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[]
@Jameslwoodward: So you change your argument along the way. When you say that an anonymous work applies when "the creator deliberately not named", you are stating an untruth. Now you ask me to prove that the work was public before 1952. Adele Bloch-Bauer was Klimt's muse, she died in 1925. Klimt had died in 1918. It is obvious that this photograph was made public before 1952. If only in Ferdinand Bloch-Bauer's "salon", where Klimt's paintings were on public display in a room that had been transformed into a memorial for his wife. All of Vienna knew this photograph. Sometimes you have to stop trying to be right and bow to the evidence. This picture IS in the public domain. You have deleted the picture saying: "1910 is too recent to assume that the photographer has been dead for 70 years". Another untruth. Now you argue otherwise but you still see no way out. I'll give a tip: the way out is undeletion. --Madelgarius (talk) 21:24, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Our standard of proof for publication is that you must cite the place where it appeared. The version of the image we are arguing about is not a halftone. It was apparently digitized from a print or the original negative. Your assumption that "it is obvious that this photograph was made public" is not at all obvious. Given the woman's status, there were probably many photographs of her in existence during her lifetime. You must show that this particular one was published before 1952 and that that publication was anonymous -- without naming the photographer. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:19, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Therefore,
1. You intervene on a discussion page in which my opponents have nothing more to answer me. The page stagnates.
2. You use your tools without taking into account the discussion by deleting the file on the grounds that there is no proof that the photographer has been dead for 70 years.
3. I point out that this clause does not exist and is not required to establish that a photograph is in the public domain.
4 should have been: oops, sorry, I may have acted a little too quickly, I'll restore.
Yours was the next one: No, actually I was right to delete anyway because you have to prove publication before 1952.
I hope that the dispute between us (you proposed, a few years ago, to delete all my contributions on commons) does not interfere with this.
For someone who uses his tools without discussion, I am quite surprised at your approximate knowledge of copyright laws and regulations.
I suggest that you step aside and leave it to others to deal with this request on the understanding that you are both judge and jury and that you are trying to justify after the fact a deletion that I heavily question. --Madelgarius (talk) 07:16, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No evidence of publication. No evidence that the photographer is anonymous.
{{Anonymous-EU}} requires that it was published more than 70 years ago, or not published within 70 years from creation. We don't have evidence of either of those.
If it was not published within 70 years from creation, then we need evidence that it was published more than 25 years ago, per Article 4 of Directive 93/98/EEC.
If it was published within 70 years from creation, then we need evidence that the photographer's name wasn't disclosed when it was published. We don't have that evidence.
Commons policy also requires that it is in the public domain in the United States. If it wasn't published at all, then {{PD-US-unpublished}} requires evidence that it was created more than 120 years ago. If it was published at some point, then United States copyright status is more complex. --Stefan2 (talk) 08:11, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[]

This has gone on long enough, but I will not close it. You have shown no proof of publication or that any publication was actually anonymous, both of which are required to use the EEC "70 years after anonymous publication" rule. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:55, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[]

The neue gallery : author unknown. Your request to proove a publication before 1952 is procedural. How many contributors who have submitted an image in the Category:Unidentified photographers have been asked to provide such proof. Are you going to delete all those where this has not been demonstrated? I have been in contact with Randol Schoenberg about a photograph of Gustav Bloch-Bauer to make sure it can be placed in the public domain. Here it is established that the author is unknown, that the photograph was taken around 1910 and that Adele Bloch-Bauer died in 1925. More than enough to establish the PD. You are now nitpicking by invoking a rule that you did not mention at the beginning of the proceedings. It would be a stretch to think that you are overplaying. --Madelgarius (talk) 07:02, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[]
@Madelgarius: If you think that other images violate Commons policies, feel free to ask uploaders to fix information or request for deletion of the images. Policies being violated elsewhere is not a valid reason for undeletion. Ankry (talk) 11:03, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[]
Most of them are probably there for the right reasons. They just haven't been asked to demonstrate the obvious. As for me, I prefer to build an encyclopedia rather than to nitpick with the contributors. --Madelgarius (talk) 12:42, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[]


Not done, per Jim, Stefan2 and Эlcobbola. Thuresson (talk) 20:10, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:SCP-173 artwork.png

This file was deleted because it apparently infringed on the copyright of a sculpture. However, I believe that the file was allowed under Commons:Fan art. It was a two-dimensional anime-style chibi drawing of a three-dimensional statue that was not originally in the chibi style. I think that this file is not a copyright violation and should be allowed on Commons in the same manner as, for example, File:Batman Clipart.svg, which is another heavily stylized cartoonish representation of a character. Di (they-them) (talk) 00:16, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[]

The deletion reason contradicts the source license, which explicitely allows derivative works. @組曲師 and Jameslwoodward: for explanation of their rationale in the DR. Ankry (talk) 13:15, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[]
The issue here, as it is with all fan art, is whether (a) it is useful for an educational purpose and (b) whether it infringes on the copyright of the original. I compared this image with the original and it seems to me that it is clearly derivative, more so even than the cited file File:Batman Clipart.svg, which is itself borderline. There is, therefore a substantial doubt over whether it can be freely used. I also wonder what its educational value is. Fan art, as noted in the cited guideline, is not automatically useful here -- there must be a good reason why we break our rule against keeping personal art from non notable artists. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:48, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: no consensus for undeletion. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 14:45, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Cryptocurrency & Blockchain in Virtual Reality.jpg

This image has been deleted on the grounds of the presence of a Bitcoin medallion in the image. However, the Bitcoin medallion and logo is not subject to copyright unless modified, which it hasn't been. There are a number of images currently published on Wikimedia Commons that also use cryptocurrency, and specifically Bitcoin, medallions, so it's difficult to understand why this image is any different. For example: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bitcoin_.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bitcoin_(38461156010).jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bitcoin_(33540791008).jpg

CC 30/06/2021 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dealdropimages (talk • contribs) 12:16, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg OpposeActually, the bitcoin was not mentioned in the DR -- the deletion was of a group of photos taken from Flickr that appeared to be Flickr washing. Also, it is not clear why you think the Bitcoin does not have a copyright -- it certainly does. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:33, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done per Jim. Ankry (talk) 11:50, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Justina Vail Evans MCC CHt.png

I am the person the page is about and I can tell you that the image I uploaded is mine. Please restore it or allow the new one I uploaded to be kept in place. The image that someone keeps switching back to is 20 years old and is not allowed use by me anymore and is also my own image. --Bellwon (talk) 17:44, 4 July 2021 (UTC)Justina Vail Evans[]

@Bellwon: Does nit seem to be a selfie of the anonymous uploader. We need an evidence of free license directly form the actual copyright holder and an evidence of copyright transfer if the copyright holder is not the author. COM:OTRS is the process for providing non-public data. On-wiki licensing can be used here only for original, non-published amateur images, where the real author is not identifiable or their identification do not differ to uploader username. See COM:EVID for anything else. Ankry (talk) 06:59, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Also, note that the image appears at https://www.justinavail.com/justina/ with "COPYRIGHT Justina Vail Evans 2014-2021". The easiest way to have this image restored is to change that to, "COPYRIGHT Justina Vail Evans 2014-2021 except that the image of Justina Vail Evans on this page is CC BY SA 4.0". Alternately, the actual photographer can send a free license using OTRS.

I have speedy deleted Justina Vail Evans hs 2019 1.jpg. It is a Facebook image, which we cannot keep on Commons. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:18, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[]

I also note that User:Bellwon has made many edits to the WP:EN page Justina Vail Evans. That is a serious violation of WP:EN rules and must stop. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:11, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 14:39, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Dronerep.jpg

Hi, I had seeked permission from Scott Marsden himself to use his images for this project. Have I uploaded the Donerep image incorrectly? if so how do I go about doing so right? Thankyou FlowerMoon593 (talk) 07:00, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This requires a free license from the publisher of the album or the person holding the copyright for the cover via OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:17, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done as per Jim: OTRS needed. Ankry (talk) 11:51, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Los Papas y la Astronomía.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: An artwork in the 17th century, obviously in PD A1Cafel (talk) 08:55, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Eight out of the nine images are old, but you must have overlooked the lower right image of John Paul II. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:21, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done No response and no evidence of free license. Ankry (talk) 11:47, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Schloss Meerholz Luftbild.jpg

Die Einwilligung des Urhebers liegt mittlerweile vor.--Landaulet (talk) 11:32, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In order to restore the image, an authorized representative of the photographer or other copyright holder must send a free license using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:11, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done as per Jim: OTRS needed. Ankry (talk) 10:31, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Raül Romeva al Parlament de Catalunya.jpg

Hi! Can anyone restore File:Raül Romeva al Parlament de Catalunya.jpg? This is the specific source. --Davidpar (talk) 16:19, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Yes, that's the source. It has "©2021 Generalitat de Catalunya" and no evidence of a free license. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:24, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 14:36, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Foto_de_perfil_Clemilda_Thomé_2021.jpeg

The photo is owned by Clemilda Thomé. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ssmars (talk • contribs) 17:07, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[]

  • @Ssmars: your blanket statement is not enough. Proof of copyright ownership by Thomé must be sent from her via COM:OTRS correspondence. And also, does she really hold the copyright and not the photographer who photographed her? The proof of copyright transfer between the photographer and her must also be accompanied in that OTRS correspondence that will be sent from her. Note that in most cases copyright is held by the photographer and not the person who owns the photo or the person depicted in the photo, unless there is solid proof of copyright transfer documents. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:54, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: per JWilz12345. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:09, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Tulsi Kumar Indie Hain Hum.jpg

Hi,

Kindly undelete the file above as there are no copyright violation. The link that you shared says the copyright is with PR of Tulsi Kumar. I am the one who submitted that article and the image as I'm handling TUlsi Kumar's Digital and PR.

Thanks & Regards, Sauravjit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sauravjit (talk • contribs) 01:35, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[]

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Since this has been published before without a free licence, we need a permission by email coming directly from the copyright holder. Please see COM:OTRS for details. De728631 (talk) 21:38, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: per above. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:09, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Alimansour.jpg

Return image for Egyptian actor to add it in article [8] --Leonleader (talk) 03:19, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[]

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose @Leonleader: what article? The link you gave is just a link to the Flickr image. Unless you clearly state what article (and is the article passing notability requirements of Wikipedia?), the image will remain deleted as out of scope. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:56, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[]
  • @JWilz12345: Yes, The link to the Flickr image is public domain.--Leonleader (talk) 05:13, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[]
    @Leonleader: I mean, what article will this image be used? If there is no article provided, then this image fails COM:EDUSE and may remain deleted. The deletion log statesthat it was originally deleted as "Personal photo by non-contributors." How will you address that and how will you proof that it has educational scope that warrants its restoration here? JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 05:19, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[]
  • @JWilz12345: here [9] --Leonleader (talk) 05:25, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[]
    @Leonleader: the article is under some sort of deletion request. Is the subject of that article notable or not? If it is under an AfD process, it implies the subject is not notable. Then the image cannot be restored due to that. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 05:54, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[]

✓ Done undeleted as in scope. But it is likely Flickrwashing (DR). Ankry (talk) 11:19, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Nidhi Kumar.png

1. This picture was clicked at a public event and is available free for anyone to use.--ArjunWhorra (talk) 22:13, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Fair Use is not accepted in Wikimedia Commons. Ankry (talk) 10:48, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: per Ankry. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 14:34, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Phật A Di Đà giáo chủ Tây phương Cực Lạc.jpg

the images you just removed (recently)from the wiki don't have any copyright, they are widely used and if someone tries to claim copyright it is extremely fake, that Buddha image cannot be copyrighted and the content Its content is free for everyone. for whatever reason you always like to remove the images of gods, fairies, saints, Buddhas of the east. if you don't know exactly then you don't have the right to remove and you have abused your authority and images like some jesus god img have copyright etc then please do your good Lolvatveo (talk) 02:21, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]

@Lolvatveo: The image was not deleted due to someone's copyright claims, but due to lack of evidence that it is not copyrighted (evidence of pre 1960 publication, or evidence of author's death more than 50 years ago - assuming that the country of origin is Vietnam + evidence of PD status in US, which may be more complicated) or under the declared free license granted by the image author. Note also, that modern images of Jesus are obviously copyrighted as any other modern work. Ankry (talk) 12:28, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unless the copyright has expired, the work has a copyright, so it is incorrect to say that it does not. In order for it to be restored, you must prove that the copyright has expired. Since the work is undated and the author is unknown, that may be impossible. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:07, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 14:34, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:A Chinese Panda eating noodles with Black motorcycle.jpg

This is about the motorcycle, please give it back —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 182.239.90.124 (talk) 06:43, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Commons:Deletion requests/File:A Chinese Panda eating noodles with Black motorcycle.jpg: the painting is not COM:DM here. Ankry (talk) 10:50, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]
Can we crop out the mural, and just left the motorcycle? —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 182.239.85.8 (talk) 13:13, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It could be done, but it would be several hours of work to eliminate the mural behind the motorcycle. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:01, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 14:33, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Walter Russell Mead and Jake Sullivan.jpg

This file was deleted because of licensing issues; I just sent an email to the permissions-commons address which contains a rights release for the image. Am hoping that it can be restored once these licensing issues are sorted. Thanks! --Nedbless (talk) 18:55, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Problem was just resolved. --Nedbless (talk) 20:25, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done: Nominator withdrawn.(non-admin closure) --A1Cafel (talk) 02:32, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Supremmedeluxe.jpg

I am Social Media Manager for SUPREMME DE LUXE and We have all the license for the picture from his photographer--Antoral (talk) 10:18, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]

@Antoral: We need to receive a free license directly from the actual copyright holder through their official service or in COM:OTRS process. We cannot accept mere declarations by a third party. Ankry (talk) 18:05, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: per Ankry. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:56, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Aliki (1958) 1 C.jpg File:Aliki (1958) 2 C.jpg File:Aliki (1958) 3 C.jpg File:Aliki (1989) 5 C.jpg File:Aliki (1958) 4 C.jpg File:Aliki-Heiligtum C.jpg

Haubi (talk) 10:21, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Pictogram voting info.svg Info unclear request: the files are not deleted. Ankry (talk) 18:14, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]
@Haubi: Das sind deine eigenen Bilder. Das hier ist die Seite für eine Löschprüfung. Da die Bilder aber nicht gelöscht sind, ist unklar, was du erreichen willst. Wolltest du stattdessen einen Löschantrag stellen? --PaterMcFly (talk) 05:39, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: Nothing to do here. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:55, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:I'll_See_You_In_My_Dreams-Beachcomber-tenorsax.ogg

This file was deleted because at that time the song was not yet in public domain. It is now (since 2020) J.G.G. (talk) 12:40, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support: Composition published before January 1, 1926, recording freely licensed. I'll note that the original rationale for deletion, that the author died less than 70 years ago, is invalid because this is a U.S. work.  Mysterymanblue  19:26, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]

✓ Done: PD-US. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:54, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Example.jpg Tengo permisos para subir la imagen, por eso pido la cancelación

Hola buenas tardes! Hable con los mamadera de franco Bertello y me dieron permiso de subir sus imágenes, me parece que antes de que eliminen tienen que preguntar, no tienen que eliminar de una. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mathi ayd (talk • contribs) 15:31, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]

  • Signing your posts is required on talk pages and Commons:Signatures policy to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, deletion 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.
  • @Mathi ayd: Do you mean File:Franco bertello.png? File:Example.jpg is not deeted.
  • Free license permissions for third-party works need to be in a written form and they need to come to us directly from the actual copyright holders (either via their official webpage or in COM:OTRS process). Ankry (talk) 17:58, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: needs permission via OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:46, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Feng Tang's calligraphy works.jpg

Reasons for the request: this picture is belonged to me and I have the right to use it at any place for any purpose. Please do not delete it. Thanks.

--2001:56A:7304:DF00:D511:8137:B52A:921C 16:03, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. @2001:56A:7304:DF00:D511:8137:B52A:921C: / @CherryChan2020: you may own your photo, but you just took an image of a copyrighted Chinese calligraphic artwork and published it here under a commercial license without the author's permission. You must obtain permission first from the person behind this calligraphic work, if they agree to have your image of their work licensed under commercial Creative Commons license. If they do not agree, then sorry. Commons does not accept images of artistic works that are not meant to be reused for commercial purposes. Even simple Chinese calligraphy can be copyrighted: see COM:TOO China. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 17:18, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: Needs permission from Feng Tang. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:44, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Vivienda_Emiliano_Blasco.jpg File:Pabellonmunicipaltorres.jpg File:Edificiotorresol2020.jpg File:Ayuntamiento_de_Badules.jpg

Hi, i just want to request the undeletion of the following images, File:Vivienda_Emiliano_Blasco.jpg File:Pabellonmunicipaltorres.jpg File:Edificiotorresol2020.jpg File:Ayuntamiento_de_Badules.jpg they were taken from the website https://wwww.lorentearquitectos.com, I have talked with the website owner, in fact he is the creator of the images, and he has send several mails accepting the use of all images on wikipedia projects. The images have the following references: File:Vivienda_Emiliano_Blasco.jpg -> https://www.lorentearquitectos.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/emilianoblasco0.jpg [[:File:Pabellonmunicipaltorres.jpg]} -> https://www.lorentearquitectos.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/municipalberrellen0.jpg File:Edificiotorresol2020.jpg -> https://www.lorentearquitectos.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/20200609_175831brr-1.jpg File:Ayuntamiento_de_Badules.jpg -> https://www.lorentearquitectos.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/badules-aytob-1.jpg

Thanks for the review.

Julian Barroso (talk) 16:51, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The permissions for the images need to be processed and accepted by VRT/OTRS team. You cannot bypass the procedure requesting here. Ankry (talk) 17:30, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: needs otrs action. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:42, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Movie Poster Final.jpg

Hello, I was attempting to update the movie poster for a movie that I am part owner of, Break Every Chain. I was uploading the file Movie_ Poster_Final.jpg to try to update the infobox template on the film page with the new poster. The new poster has nicer graphics and lighting.

Thank you so much

Jonathan Hickory Break Every Chain Movie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hickory79 (talk • contribs) 17:05, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]

  • Signing your posts is required on talk pages and Commons:Signatures policy to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, deletion 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.
  • @Hickory79: As we have found no evidence that Wikimedia user Hickory79 is the exclusive copyright holder of the poster basing on public records, the COM:OTRS permission is needed. The exclusive copyright holder of the poster or their official representative needs to sent the permission to us directly. Ankry (talk) 17:35, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Notwithstanding that this rationale is utterly irrelevant to the reason for deletion, this is a movie poster. This is not en.wiki; we do not allow fair use. Эlcobbola talk 17:59, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: no permission. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:41, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Internatszimmer LSH Wiesentheid.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: License and permission given in ticket:2021070810007051 — JJMC89(T·C) 17:14, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]


✓ Done @JJMC89: Please note, that license templates are missing. Ankry (talk) 17:43, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Science-atom-news-2020.jpg

I make changes in this picture to add source which i forget to add when i upload. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prashantkumar544 (talk • contribs) 19:33, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done: Stated source has "Copyright © 2021 | Theme designed by Science Atom ". .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:39, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Mike Sievert.jpg

Hi! This was deleted due to a lack of OTRS confirmation that release permission was provided. I have copies of an email exchange dated 26 May through 8 June in which both a representative of T-Mobile and the photographer explicitly confirm the copyright release in the format provided by the release generator. Not sure why the permission was never confirmed on here. Thanks for your help! MaryGaulke (talk) 20:14, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]

This is not the forum to ask questions about tickets or present any documents. Please make a request at Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard instead. Thuresson (talk) 21:31, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: Awaiting OTRS action. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:37, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Badgato1.jpg

== [[File:Badgato1.jpg|thumb|Badgato durante el lanzamiento de su primer single en Paris]] ==

I don't understand why is deleted my picture. I have all the rights because is my picture and I took it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Badgato (talk • contribs) 21:11, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Previously published images require additional evidence of permission. Further, as copyright initially vests in the author (photographer), not the mere subject (uploader Badgato purports to be subject Badgato, and image is clearly not a selfie), the aforementioned permission needs to be in the form of direct (not forwarded) contact from the actual author or a copy of the document that transferred copyright; either can be provided using the process at COM:OTRS. That is all likely moot as well, as this appears a COM:NOTHOST issue. Эlcobbola talk 21:29, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: Needs free license via OTRS and some evidence that the subject is notable. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:02, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Walter Russell Mead.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Permission given in ticket:2021070810009317 — JJMC89(T·C) 18:04, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]


✓ Done by DarwIn. Ankry (talk) 18:50, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Save The Duck Logo.jpg

Hello, I would like to request that this file File:Save The Duck Logo.jpg be released and undeleted.

Tarrytally1829 (talk) 20:21, 8 July 2021 (UTC)Tarrytally1829, July 8 2021[]

Pictogram voting info.svg Info No file with this file name has been uploaded to Commons; hence there is nothing to undelete. Thuresson (talk) 21:29, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg OpposeThe file is actually named "File:Save The Duck Logo .jpg". (note the space between "Logo" and ".jpg". It was uploaded by User:SVDUSA. User:Tarrytally1829 is a sock of SVDUSA and has been blocked for misusing multiple accounts. While it is perfectly all right to request restoration of your own upload, it is a violation to do so deceptively.

No reason for undeletion is given above. The logo appears at https://savetheduckusa.com/ with "© 2021 Save The Duck USA. All rights reserved" so the deletion appears to be correct. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:36, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 18:51, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Yuu (2).png

File:Yuu (2).png — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahadhassan143 (talk • contribs) 14:58, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done Procedural close: duplicated request. Ankry (talk) 11:21, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Yuu (2).png

Mahadhassan143 (talk) 15:05, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done Procedural close: duplicated request. Ankry (talk) 11:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Yuu (2).png

15:06, 9 July 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahadhassan143 (talk • contribs) 15:06, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]

This is not the original file from your camera. An evidence is needed that you are the original photographer, or that the original photographer granted a compatible license and does not wish to be attributed. Ankry (talk) 19:00, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done No authorship evidence provided. COM:OTRS needed. Ankry (talk) 11:19, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Abdalrahemalghefari.pnj.jpg

لا اريد حذف هذه الصورة — Preceding unsigned comment added by باسل مدحت السويركي (talk • contribs) 15:55, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Google Translate: "I don't want to delete this photo".

Procedural close. No rationale for undeletion. Thuresson (talk) 16:12, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Feng Tang 2019.jpg

Reasons for undeletion: This picture is provided by Mr. Feng Tang and he has authorized me to use the picture at any place for any purpose. So please restore the picture. Thanks.

--CherryChan2020 (talk) 02:18, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[]

@CherryChan2020: then Feng Tang must submit a correspondence via COM:OTRS process (see Commons:OTRS#Declaration of consent for all enquiries. There is nothing to be made here. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:46, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[]
@CherryChan2020: We need an evidence that (a) Feng Tang owns copyright to the image (which belongs to the photographer by default) and (b) that he indeed granted a free license, not just a permission to use by YOU. Ankry (talk) 11:17, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Not done, unlikely that the copyright owner meant for Wikimedia user CherryChan2020 to relicense the photo or to claim to own the copyright. Thuresson (talk) 08:48, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

Cases in Category:Chinese_FOP_cases_(indoor)

System-search.svgSee also: Template:FoP-China.

The new copyright law of China which took effect in June 2021 removed the "outdoor" limitation:

In the following cases, a work may be exploited without the permission from, and without payment of remuneration to, the copyright owner, provided that the name of the author and the title of the work are mentioned and the other rights enjoyed by the copyright owner by virtue of this Law are not infringed upon: (10) copying, drawing, photographing, or video recording of an artistic work located or on display in an outdoor public place;...
+
In the following cases, a work may be exploited without the permission from, and without payment of remuneration to, the copyright owner, provided that the name of the author and the title of the work are mentioned and the other rights enjoyed by the copyright owner by virtue of this Law are not infringed upon: (10) copying, drawing, photographing, or video recording of an artistic work located or on display in a public place;...

This mean now indoor works in a public place have freedom of panorama, so files in Category:Chinese_FOP_cases_(indoor) should be undeleted.--Njzjz (talk) 04:20, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[]

The requirement that the author and title of the work be given means that this is limited to those cases where both are known. That, in turn, means that these will have to be handled on a case by case basis. There is nothing to be done here. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:15, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[]

BA candidate.svg Weak oppose as per Jameslwoodward. Also, some of the depicted indoor works might already be gone by the time the amendment went into effect last month. Is the amendment retroactive to indoor works that were intended to be permanently-placed but were suddenly removed or destroyed? JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:24, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[]
ping @GZWDer and Wcam: who created this category. Njzjz (talk) 20:36, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:39, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:श्रीरामरक्षास्तोत्रम्.jpg

It was all my own work including photographs. I have original photos with me. Therefore it was not fair on me that this file is deleted where I have already declared my own work. Thank youkatyare (talk) 10:24, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[]

@Katyare: If you are the author of original works, you may need to upload them under a compatible free license or provide as evidence following COM:OTRS process. Note, that only original, unpublished works can be licensed here as Own work. Ankry (talk) 10:46, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Are these dolls or humans? If they are dolls, then they are probably copyrighted and images of them cannot be kept without permission from the manufacturer or designer. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:01, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done: per above. not response to query. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:38, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:На Солунском фронту 1917. године .jpg

This is an image published in 1917, {{PD-anon-expired}} can be applied. --219.78.190.8 14:34, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The image is a halftone, so the assertion that it has been published is probably correct. However, there is no evidence that it was published anonymously and 1917 is too recent to assume that the photographer has been dead for 70 years. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:51, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done: per Jim. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:37, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Dominic MacGregor.jpg

Hello, the file Dominic McGregor is own work, not copyrighted material, the panel was created and claimed by Dominic McGregor himself and all the information from Wikipedia common are own work uploaded with no any third party material and is not violate any copyright policy.

Please undelete this panel it has been claimed already by the owner no violation of copyright. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Earnestclark (talk • contribs) 09:54, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]

  • Signing your posts is required on talk pages and Commons:Signatures policy to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, deletion 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.

There has never been a file named "File:Dominic MacGregor.jpg". I note that you spelled the name as "McGregor" in your request, but there has never been a file named "File:Dominic McGregor.jpg" either. None of your own uploads is anything like that.

Note that "not copyrighted material" is incorrect. All created works have a copyright from the moment of creation until it expires many years later unless they are very simple, utilitarian, or fit in other categories which are unlikely to apply here. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:00, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done: No valid rationale for undeletion. No such file exists. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:36, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Atiqur_Rahman_Fahad.jpg

This photo is a work of mine, RHS 02 or otherwise known as RIYADH HASNAT SARKER. The file in question is also used in Atiqur Rahman Fahad's facebook page (facebook.com/121.121.AtiqurFahad) which is taken from me. I would like to request undeletion of the file. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RHS02 (talk • contribs) 15:51, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]

  • Signing your posts is required on talk pages and Commons:Signatures policy to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, deletion 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.
  • @RHS02: How can we verify (basing on public records) that:
    1. YOU (Wikimedia user RHS02) are the autor, and
    2. The license you granted to the FB user is non-exclusive?
If these cannot be verified basing on public records, COM:OTRS is the only path. Ankry (talk) 18:45, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: per Ankry. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:35, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Badgato1 durante su primer lanzamiento en paris.jpg

I tried to upload my image again (I repeat, my picture that I took and I edited. I can send u the original and the edited one) for my page of wikipedia of music artist, so I don't understand why is block. I want the picture as a profile picture of my wikipedia.

--Badgato (talk) 16:57, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done: per Elcobbola. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:34, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:SARANG.jpg

Added information — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr bond. .isaahmad (talk • contribs) 16:54, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[]

  • Signing your posts is required on talk pages and Commons:Signatures policy to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, deletion 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.
  • @Mr bond. .isaahmad: Which information and where added should be considered an undeletion reason? The Hindu still claims Copyright© 2021, THG PUBLISHING PVT LTD. on their website and author is PTI, not Wikimedia user Mr bond. .isaahmad. Ankry (talk) 18:29, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: no valid rationale for undeletion. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:31, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Example.jpg

hrithik 407 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hrithik 407 (talk • contribs) 17:26, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose File:Example.jpg is not deleted and no evidence provided that any deleted upload of the requested is in COM:SCOPE. Ankry (talk) 18:26, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: Nothing to do here. Please create a new request with the actual name of the file you would like to be undeleted. --De728631 (talk) 17:23, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Pianist Olga Rotari.jpg

I own the subject file's copyrights — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tamer A.Al-Monim (talk • contribs) 22:34, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose From deletion log: "Non free image from youtube failed VTRS test ticket:2021062510010491. Thuresson (talk) 06:54, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: per Thuresson. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:30, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Mast cell tumors treated with oncolytic Sendai virus .jpg

The file is from my open access paper, which is under the Creative Commons Attribution License https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fvets.2018.00116/full https://www.frontiersin.org/about/open-access Olgamatveeva (talk) 01:06, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol support vote.svg Support per CC-BY 4.0 license at https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fvets.2018.00116/full ; source information needs fixing. Ankry (talk) 10:47, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]

How I can fix source information if the file is deleted?Olgamatveeva (talk) 16:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]


✓ Done: I have undeleted the file and adjusted the source. I also changed the licence since the original paper is not "share-alike". --De728631 (talk) 17:01, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Telemundo Kids website.jpg

It does own Telemundo's owner of the copyright, I will not being a copyright, so I was just put on image on Telemundo Kids, which is defunct in 2006.

The copyright has been removed last afternoon, because they won't be do removed as of copyright false.

Dora is owned by Nickelodeon, if having a does a copyright false, in defunct 2006. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angel Arreguin Hernandez (talk • contribs) 02:56, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]

  • Signing your posts is required on talk pages and Commons:Signatures policy to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, deletion 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.

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose While Telemundo Kids is gone, the copyright is still in force. We cannot keep these on Commons without a free license from Telemundo. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:36, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done: per Jim. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:28, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Queens logo.jpg

The file is a picture of the logo of an upcoming tv series on ABC. Would be so that the page could have a picture since it doesnt have one as of now. --4everbranfan (talk) 04:46, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose We cannot host copyrightable logos without a free license from the logo copyright holder. Fair Use logos may be hosted in some Wikipedies, but not in Commons. Ankry (talk) 10:28, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Source page has "© 2021 ABC Entertainment". Restoration requires a free license from ABC. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:30, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:28, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:MCqasim (Qasim Khalaf) 2021.jpg

The File is from press and I write in the Description — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcqasim (talk • contribs) 19:52, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]

  • Signing your posts is required on talk pages and Commons:Signatures policy to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, deletion 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.

The file has not been deleted. so there is nothing to do here. However, on inspection, I created Commons:Deletion requests/File:MCqasim (Qasim Khalaf) 2021.jpg.


 Not done procedural close: image not deleted. Ankry (talk) 06:12, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Forcefire ao vivo em Mangaratiba, Brasil.jpg

Hi, File:Forcefire ao vivo em Mangaratiba, Brasil.jpg was deleted at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Forcefire ao vivo em Mangaratiba, Brasil.jpg by Taivo who believed the file was a copyvio and of low res. They've since realised it wasn't a copyvio but have still refused to undelete it (They've been on since my reply),
Whilst the image is low res that in itself isn't a reason to delete as we have tons of low res images here and the image was taken in 2008 and was categorised accordingly - The image was still of use and was in SCOPE, Thanks. –Davey2010Talk 19:52, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol support vote.svg Support undeletion. Ankry (talk) 21:04, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[]
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Apparently I was not enough clear. I wanted to say: while Davey says a lot of right things, I am convinced, that my decision was right. The file is copyvio not because it is small photo without metadata, but because uploader is himself depicted and the photo is not a selfie. Also the deletion is uploader's request. Taivo (talk) 08:19, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done per Taivo. The license should be from the photographer, not from subject. If the subject owns copyright, we need OTRS. If the uploader's claims are not reliable, we also need OTRS. Ankry (talk) 10:09, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

Files uploaded by ArtificeBoy

See the link in the permission field, he gave his permission and uploaded the pictures himself, he just forgot to change the metadata. In case you have any doubt, he's aware that one of his pictures is on Commons and he's aware of the CC BY-SA license. I sent him a tweet asking to confirm that the account belongs to him. --Thibaut (talk) 06:39, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[]

I see that there was a previous request by Fugitron. Hopefully the author will reply to my tweet. I think he was quite upset by the deletion request, that would explain why he didn't follow the OTRS procedure (I'm not even sure if it's really needed here). --Thibaut (talk) 07:27, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[]
He replied. --Thibaut (talk) 16:28, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]
Hello? --Thibaut (talk) 14:12, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support The restoration should be done. NC was not wished by the author: He is ok to use CC-By-SA. --Benoît (d) 14:11, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Support. The situation was well explained by User:Fugitron in C:UDR/A/2021-04#Files uploaded by ArtificeBoy. The request was declined supposedly for doubt. IMHO, that refusal was not justified, because there was actually no doubt. Nothing concrete was presented in terms of doubt. The files were uploaded by their author. And the archive of the twitter discussion, linked in that previous UDR, allows a full understanding of the situation. It confirms that the author offers the files under CC BY-SA 4.0. His explicit decision to upgrade them to CC BY-SA 4.0 obviously prevails over the former CC BY-NC mention that remains in the EXIF. -- Asclepias (talk) 23:32, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[]

✓ Done: Per discussion. @Thibaut120094, Benoît Prieur, and Asclepias: can one of you kindly fix the license ?. — Racconish💬 14:34, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Done. --Thibaut (talk) 14:35, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Charles Robert Jenkins.jpg

I'm asking that the photo be undeleted because it's the only known photo of Charles Robert Jenkins in the US Army before his defection to North Korea in 1966. It's also his last photo taken by the west until his return to Japan in 2004. Since Jenkins is now deceased, I think the photo should be undelete so it can be used again on Wikipedia. Angelgreat (talk) 15:42, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose All of that my be true, but it is not relevant. The copyright status of the image is completely unknown. Unless it can be proven that (a) it was taken by a US Government employee as part of their official duties, (b) it was published (in the technical copyright sense of the word) before 1989 without a copyright notice, or (c) for some other reason it was PD, then it cannot be restored. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:11, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[]

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Per Jim. The image was not deleted for scope reasons; the rationale here is entirely irrelevant. Эlcobbola talk 17:20, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Chocolate.jpg

please inform about publishing it —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 49.205.249.205 (talk) 08:17, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[]


✓ Done: Procedural close, nothing to undelete. — Racconish💬 14:37, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Чокър.jpg

Моя снимка е от моя фотоапарат, както съм го посочил. Илиев2010 (talk) 18:25, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol support vote.svg Support Ankry (talk) 20:20, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[]

✓ Done - Undeted, I am convinced this photo is made by Илиев2010. Metadata show the same date as date of original upload. Elly (talk) 23:17, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Raül Romeva al Parlament de Catalunya.jpg

Hi! Can anyone restore File:Raül Romeva al Parlament de Catalunya.jpg? This is the specific source. Images from Generalitat de Catalunya websites can be used in Commons. Please, look at Template:Attribution-gencat: The copyright holder of this file, Generalitat de Catalunya, allows anyone to use it for any purpose, provided that the copyright holder is properly attributed. Redistribution, derivative work, commercial use, and all other use is permitted. Note that "Legal notice" from https://govern.cat/ links to https://web.gencat.cat/en/menu-ajuda/ajuda/avis_legal/index.html, which says: "The Government of Catalonia authorises the reuse of content and data worldwide, with no time limit or restriction, in the terms established by Creative Commons CC0". https://govern.cat/ is part of "gencat.cat" as you can see in the site map of the site. --Davidpar (talk) 15:34, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]

@Davidpar: https://govern.cat/salapremsa/notes-premsa/290306/romeva-la-diversitat-lessencia-deuropa-mes-necessaria-que-mai This] is not the source page of the image on Commons: this is a cropped version of the deleted image. Ankry (talk) 21:23, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]
@Ankry: Please, look at the "Imatges" section in the page. There is a link to download full image: http://www.gencat.cat/big/img/675/BIG_675320017012516_02.jpg --Davidpar (talk) 21:34, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[]
Symbol support vote.svg Support then. Ankry (talk) 16:54, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[]

✓ Done Undeleted, no objections, Elly (talk) 00:10, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:World Press Photo 1962, eerste prijs in de categorie Sport, Gouden medaille winn, Bestanddeelnr 914-5550.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This file is under {{Nationaal Archief}} with {{Cc-zero}} A1Cafel (talk) 14:50, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Josef Pillmann is a living person; no evidence that he ever granted {{Cc-zero}} license for this photo or transferred his copyright to the Nationaal Archief. Evidence needed; likely through COM:OTRS process. Ankry (talk) 06:03, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[]
@A1Cafel: Please note that the terms of use of Nationaal Archief specify that the public domain dedication "only applies to images that feature a download button and are marked as Public Domain or CC0". They also specify "Images not available as download: [...] photos for which the National Archives is not the copyright holder". This photo is marked "Copyright owner unknown", is not marked for PD and is marked "Not available for download". Also please note that this file could not have been validly on Commons under the template Nationaal Archief, which is reserved specifically for files uploaded by the NationaalArchiefBot and included in the set of the 2010 donation. -- Asclepias (talk) 13:07, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done Not a CC0 licensed image. Ankry (talk) 17:10, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Валери Стефанова - Мис България Вселена 2020.jpg

I want to add copyright info for this picture are re-upload it to the wikipage I want to create. --MinerHQ (talk) 08:22, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose You need to provide an evidence that it is free, first, as required for any previously published image. Ankry (talk) 10:03, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 17:09, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:John Behan 02.jpg

This photo was posted on a public website and did not constitute an infringement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schinhu (talk • contribs) 14:05, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Just because an image is publicitely available does not mean it is not copyrighted. See Gratis versus libre and COM:NETCOPYVIO. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:08, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[]
Not done, "© 2021 THE IRISH TIMES". Thuresson (talk) 16:09, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Wave-Esports Logo.png

Hello,

I am working at Wave-Esports and have to do their Wikipedia Entry. The Logo is obtained from their website on the media package, which is free for everyone to see. You can find it directly here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1W9n60hM4SMsei7F2DGp30HkXWzkZBCDC Or go to their page https://wave-esports.gg/ Go to "MORE" and then "Media Kit" I also have a Licence Number from the logo - I just don't know where to put it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tessisch (talk • contribs) 08:44, 14 July 2021‎ (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose "Copyright © Wave Esports 2020". "Free for everyone to see" is not an acceptable license. Thuresson (talk) 09:32, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Where can I put the Licence Number for it to get accepted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tessisch (talk • contribs) 10:56, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[]

@Tessisch: files on Wikimedia Commons must be free for anyone to use, even commercially. See COM:Licensing. "Free for everyone to see" is not enough - files must be freelt reusable for commercial reuses by anyone in the world. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:38, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[]
@Tessisch: COM:OTRS is likely the appropriate procedure. But this is not you who needs to follow it. And be aware of section 4 of TOU (last subsection). Ankry (talk) 06:06, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done nothing to do: non-free logo. Ankry (talk) 06:07, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

Restore files from Mateo Chaves H Vimeo account

Hello, I recent notice that some files that I have upload ago 3 days were deleted with Speed deletion request, so, I was absent when they were deleted and I request that the following files will be undeleted as they came from videos from a Vimeo account of Mateo Chaves H that is the director of these shorts films where came the screenshots:

So, that videos were published on Vimeo under the CC-BY-3.0 licensed, so I Made this request yo restore these files, If anyone consider that is copyright violation, so can made a Deletion request for them, so, I would grateful If restore these files, thanks RevengerTime (talk) 18:34, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question This is the link to Vimeo listed on one of the images: https://vimeo.com/mateochavesh . Can you indicate where you found that the films are published with CC-BY-3.0 licence? Elly (talk) 23:45, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[]
Vimeo hides the license of their videos under the section "more", if you click there, yo can see the license --RevengerTime (talk) 00:01, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[]
Symbol support vote.svg Support per CC-BY 3.0 license at source. And pinging @Racconish: Ankry (talk) 05:57, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[]

✓ Done: My bad. — Racconish💬 06:24, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

The set of files to undelete

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Olgamatveeva (talk • contribs) 02:21, 11 July 2021 (UTC) These files were created using some elements of the figures from my open access paper, which is under the Creative Commons Attribution License https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6694/12/12/3659 Olgamatveeva (talk) 02:08, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I can confirm that all these deleted images are based on graphics published in said free paper (CC by 4.0) where Olga Matveeva is the primary author. De728631 (talk) 17:21, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[]

✓ Done per De728631. Ankry (talk) 08:48, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:WestVerkehr1421 2021-03-11.jpg

I request the undeletion of File:WestVerkehr1421 2021-03-11.jpg. I have made this image with my phone. I used the same phone to make the following photo: File:Schoorsteen NIFA Chemelot.jpg. Felixschiffler (talk) 01:01, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[]

@Felixschiffler: And what about three other cameras mentioned in this DR? Unless this is also resolved, we cannot rely on your {{Own}} declarations per COM:AGF and COM:OTRS is needed. Ankry (talk) 06:44, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[]
@Ankry: Those other photos were taken with different cameras, yes. As you can see two of them are from 2009 and 2012, the other one is even older if I remember correctly. I hope you understand I switch phones or cameras regularly. Felixschiffler (talk) 08:52, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[]
GA candidate.svg Weak support, but pinging @Gbawden and Didym: for an opinion whether we can apply AGF here. Ankry (talk) 07:24, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[]
GA candidate.svg Weak support - the uploader admitted that the others they uploaded were taken by others, so I think we can AGF here. Lets hope the uploader has learnt something Gbawden (talk) 08:33, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[]

✓ Done per discussion. Ankry (talk) 08:37, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:UA032.09(1).jpg

Also:

This file is the postage stamp. It is published under the license {{PD-UA-exempt}}. Why was it deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djboz (talk • contribs) 10:32, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[]

  • Signing your posts is required on talk pages and Commons:Signatures policy to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, deletion 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.

Symbol support vote.svg Support They were deleted because you used {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}} instead of {{PD-UA-exempt}}. That should be corrected when they are restored. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:21, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[]


✓ Done per Jim. Ankry (talk) 08:27, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Samsung Galaxy S Duos-2.jpg

Imagem do Samsung Galaxy S Duos 2, Telefone Celular, Preto, Imagem de trás e frente Quero pedir para recuperarem este arquivo, pois ele não tem nada de ilegal, é apenas uma imagem representativa do aparelho. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jherehmias (talk • contribs) 18:29, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Fair Use images cannot be hosted in Wikimedia Commons per COM:L. You need to provide information about license granted by the photo author and Google (the copyright holder of the presented Android interface) and point out where exactly this can be verified basing on public records. Ankry (talk) 07:12, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done per above. Ankry (talk) 08:23, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Schloss Meerholz Luftbild.jpg

Please undelete. We have permission with Ticket:2021052210004905. Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 07:09, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[]

@Mussklprozz: ✓ Done Gbawden (talk) 12:45, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Katrina Kaif IIFA 2019.jpg

I want to oppose the nomination for speedy deletion for a photo that I have created. It's my own work and I have waivered all licenses. Please allow the photo for uploading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siddharth Keswani (talk • contribs) 12:32, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Found on insta and very low quality. plus I see what looks like a text watermark Gbawden (talk) 12:46, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[]
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The watermark on the photograph says "(C) Gaurang Inamdar" who first published this photo at a much higher quality on his Instagram on September 18, 2019. Gaurang Inamdar is a professional photographer working out of Mumbai. It is not surprising that a photo from a professional photographer is available all over the web. Thuresson (talk) 20:18, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: per above. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:46, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:A Short Writing Guide.pdf

I wrote the guide to help students with their work. I do not understand why it was deleted. Since I wanted this to be free to everyone, I listed it here and Barnes and Noble's website. If there are any questions about the guide or who wrote it, contact me directly. (Redacted). Jesus Beltran II 07/15/2021 —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 208.84.209.4 (talk) 17:30, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Commons:Deletion requests/File:A Short Writing Guide.pdf. Thuresson (talk) 19:48, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done: Violates COM:ADVERT, problematic image. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:45, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

Photos by Juan Carlos Lorente Castillo

Please undelete

We have permission with Ticket:2021052010009726.

Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 19:11, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[]


✓ Done @Mussklprozz: FYI. Ankry (talk) 08:13, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

Files deleted by Explicit

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Apologies to Esad58, ZLEA, and Stefan2. These coin images were deleted on the basis of their designer being an Artistic Infusion Program (AIP) contractor. For reasons explained at Commons:Determining if U.S. coins are free to use, AIP coin designs are not freely usable. While true that these coins' mint webpages ([11][12]) did (and still do) have "Donna Weaver, Artistic Infusion Program" written in the design credit line, she was employed (not contracted) by the mint when she designed the coins. According to her artist page, she worked at the mint from 2000 to 2006 before becoming an AIP contractor, and designed these coins as part of her employment. They are therefore PD.  Mysterymanblue  00:27, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol support vote.svg Support Good catch. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:18, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[]


✓ Done per Jim. Ankry (talk) 11:44, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Luis Barra y Pablo Silva Amaya 1.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Per Ticket:2018061610004501 A1Cafel (talk) 07:10, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[]

@A1Cafel: Is the painting visible here PD? COM:DM cannot be applied for the requested image. Ankry (talk) 11:44, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done unresponded. Ankry (talk) 11:49, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Adler Arena 2013.JPG

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: deleted via Commons:Deletion requests/File:Adler Arena 2013.JPG. However, there is now commercial FOP in Russia since 2014. {{FoP-Russia}}. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:03, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]

✓ Done rubin16 (talk) 05:12, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Отделение Олимпийский проспект.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: deleted via Commons:Deletion requests/File:Отделение Олимпийский проспект.jpg. However, there is FOP for architecture since 2014. {{FoP-Russia}}. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:22, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]

✓ Done rubin16 (talk) 05:20, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]
Oh no, I just found that this file was involved at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Crediteuropebank. @Rubin16: , please redelete the file as it seems the photo itself is problematic. My apologies, Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 06:02, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]
okay, thanks for info rubin16 (talk) 08:12, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done withdrawn. Ankry (talk) 11:59, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Калининград Kaliningrad roof of the House of Soviets. (7410452686).jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: {{FoP-Russia}}. Also it may have educational scope as showing the roof of the building (therefore I dispute the claim of lack of scope. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:27, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I disagree with the above. Out of scope, IMO. Ankry (talk) 07:35, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree. There is nothing educational or even of any interest here. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:36, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done per discussion. Ankry (talk) 11:23, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Institut d'art et d'archéologie 2009.JPG

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: architect of this French building has been dead for more than 70 years (the DR indicates he died in 1942), thus this is acceptable here since 2013. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:02, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]


Well, 8 years late, but ✓ Done. Ankry (talk) 10:57, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:R142 6 train at 33 street (2).jpg

This picture is not violation, fake, or claim is just original picture there's no evidence for violation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saturn planet 42 (talk • contribs) 2021-07-16T17:46:08‎ (UTC)


Procedural closure. Please discuss at Commons:Deletion requests/File:R142 6 train at 33 street (2).jpg instead. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:56, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Philippine 4.jpg

J'ai les droits d'auteurs --Tomato2003 (talk) 17:57, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done per elcobbola; requester is blocked - no need to wait 24h. Ankry (talk) 11:03, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Univision TDN 2019.svg

Por favor no lo borren — Preceding unsigned comment added by OscarWongLara1999 (talk • contribs) 18:25, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done: Procedural close, not deleted. Please discuss at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by OscarWongLara1999. — Racconish💬 18:31, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Univision TDN 2012.svg

Tampoco borre el logo porfavor.


 Not done: Procedural close, not deleted. Please discuss at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by OscarWongLara1999.— Racconish💬 18:32, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:TDN 2010-2011.svg

Quite mi nombre y puse el de Televisa Así que no lo borren.

OscarWongLara1999 (talk) (contribs) 18:41, 16 July 2021 (UTC) --OscarWongLara1999 (talk) 18:55, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done: Procedural close, not deleted. Please discuss at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by OscarWongLara1999. --Эlcobbola talk 18:56, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Tdn-logo 2009.svg

Mejore tambien ese logo y ni siquiera lo piensen borrarlo por favor.

OscarWongLara1999 (talk) (contribs) 18:45, 16 July 2021 (UTC) --OscarWongLara1999 (talk) 18:55, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done: Procedural close, not deleted. Please discuss at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by OscarWongLara1999. --Эlcobbola talk 18:57, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:TV Azteca logo 1994-1996.svg

Tampoco borren este y quiten mi nombre y pongan el de TV Azteca

OscarWongLara1999 (talk) (contribs) 18:48, 16 July 2021 (UTC) --OscarWongLara1999 (talk) 18:56, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done: Procedural close, not deleted. Please discuss at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by OscarWongLara1999. --Эlcobbola talk 18:57, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:TV Azteca logo 1993-1994.svg

Por favor no borren este logo

OscarWongLara1999 (talk) (contribs) 18:50, 16 July 2021 (UTC) --OscarWongLara1999 (talk) 18:55, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done: Procedural close, not deleted. Please discuss at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by OscarWongLara1999. --Эlcobbola talk 18:57, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

File:Televisión Azteca 1992-1993.svg

Tampoco borren este.

OscarWongLara1999 (talk) (contribs) 18:53, 16 July 2021 (UTC) --OscarWongLara1999 (talk) 18:54, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]


 Not done: Procedural close, not deleted. Please discuss at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by OscarWongLara1999. --Эlcobbola talk 18:57, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:কুংফু পান্ডা লিজেন্ডস অফ অসামনেস.png

This is the logo of kung fu panda in Bengali, exact transliteration of this one [13] which is an allowed non-free picture. It is by a legal distributor. --Greatder (talk) 12:58, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Note that the file hasn't been deleted yet. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:28, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[]
Now deleted by User:EugeneZelenko. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:34, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[]

 Not done Non-free logos are incompatible with COM:L. Ankry (talk) 23:32, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Laolu Senbanjo.jpg

I was granted permission by the Artist to use all the files deleted from his page. Some of them are also free on his website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ljiljana16 (talk • contribs) 23:47, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose You need to ensure that the license either has been granted on the image source page or sent by the actual copyright holder to OTRS/VRTS; see COM:OTRS. Reuploading deleted images is against policy. Ankry (talk) 07:53, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]
Not done, nothing to be done here without verified information about the copyright status. Thuresson (talk) 22:00, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[]


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

Files deleted by Fastily

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Images of Russian architecture. The 4th, 5th, and 7th files were determined via their upload logs. {{FoP-Russia}} applies to these four files. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:55, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]

@JWilz12345: files where FOP seem to be the only issue undeleted. The remaining one was (C) on Flickr. They still may need some information to be aded. Ankry (talk) 10:24, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[]
@Ankry: I'm ✓ Done adding FOP-Russia tags and relevant information for those with incomplete information. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:04, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[]

✓ Done per FOP-Russia. Ankry (talk) 11:17, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Kontinental.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: possibly {{FoP-Russia}} applies, if both show architecture. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:00, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol support vote.svg Support for File:WorobioweGory1.jpg, Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the others: they are likely promotional photos, uploaded mostly by SPAs, unlikely {{Own}}. Ankry (talk) 07:45, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree. The first three look very much as if they are professional promotional photos. They have a variety of named authors, including User:Radisson Royal Hotel, Moscow which account does not exist. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:41, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]

✓ Done one image and  Not done the rest. Ankry (talk) 23:28, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Villa Natacha.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: the last-involved architect died in 1950, which means this French building is already in public domain since January 1, 2021 (70+1 years p.m.a.). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 06:57, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]

Symbol support vote.svg Support per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Villa Natacha.jpg. Ankry (talk) 07:33, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[]

✓ Done By Ankry, close this section, Elly (talk) 21:35, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[]

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

File:Afb9 Streekbord - Roosdaal.jpg

Normally this picture should fall under freedom of panaroma as it is permanetly placed in public space (it's a street sign). Hilke Arijs (talk) 16:17, 16 July 2021 (UTC)