Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests

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

Current requests[edit]

File:Ordinanza del Giudice per le indagini preliminari respingente le accuse di diffamazione verso Cécile Kyenge.pdf[edit]

This document was an Italian court judgement, that if I remember well, as any other judgement pronounced by a court in Italy, should have been released in the public domain. In fact, this same file can be obtained directly from the official website of the "Giudice per le indagini preliminari del Tribunale di Milano". Anyway, since it can't be directly linked (one can download it through a php form after inserting the judgement number) I have uploaded it here to link it through the special property related to Commons to its wikidata element. --Ogoorcs (talk) 23:24, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

@Ogoorcs: Commons:Copyright rules by territory#Italy seems to indicate that at least government documents may not be Public Domain. Do you have any source that judgements from Italian courts are in the Public Domain? I have tried to find the judgement in questions via this site, but had no luck neither with 28558/15 (R.G.N.R.) nor with 14428/16 (R.G.G.I.P.), the two numbers given at the top of the document. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 04:12, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The Italian Copyright Law, at Article 5 says:
"The provisions of this Law shall not apply to the texts of official acts of the State or of public administrations, whether Italian or foreign." (WIPO translation)
A court judgement is certainly an "official act of... public administration", so I think this is PD.
With that said, though, there remains the question of whether it is in scope. There are millions of court judgements available electronically and I can not, offhand, recall that Commons hosts any of them. Neither Roe v Wade nor Brown v Board of Education are hosted on Commons and they are arguably two of the most important cases in the last hundred years. Why is this judgement more important than Brown v Board? .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:22, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
@Jameslwoodward:(Jim), I'm sorry that I haven't provided all the needed details on my first post, I hope this second answer can remedy to that; although I can still be considered a novice to online interactions with wiki* community, I think I can still persuade you that this file can stay.
Symbol support vote.svg Support About the public domain status of the document, it should be made available on the page @Srittau: linked, as per court order, but unfortunately the retrieval tool, as many other PA (public administration) web tools in Italy, doesn't work at all for me. Anyway, as specified in my previously linked news, the document can be copied going directly to the tribunal, as the journalist of the national newspaper I took the file from, probably did.
As for the project scope, that is "making available public domain and freely-licensed media content providing instructional or informative knowledge to all", I think this document, as any other court sentence, perfectly complies with it.
Even if the argument you used (the fact that more important judgements are not hosted on this site) is logically inconsistent (no one has done this, so is forbidden), one can easily observe that the two cases you mentioned have their court judgement hosted officially by their state web infrastructure. This is obviously not the case here, since on the contrary we don't have the luck to have a government capable of keeping online his judgements, and that's the main reason I am trying to upload this file her, otherwise lacking the chance to use it for reference use in a wiki project.
Ogoorcs (talk) 21:00, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
You still have not explained the importance of this document -- most of us do not read Italian and therefore have no idea why it should be an exception to a long standing method of operation. Please give us a summary of the document. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:12, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
The black Italian MP Cécile Kyenge was called publicly orangutan by the racist Lega Nord MP Roberto Calderoli in 2013; the official party pressroom defended his "position"; Kyenge then published an article saying that the party is racist; after that, the party sued her for defame.
This is the judgement declaring that she didn't defame Lega Nord. In general I need this document to reference the wikidata entry about the sentence and eventually reference a statement affirming that Lega Nor is a racist party (in the future).
Ogoorcs (talk) 23:46, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Hmm. I don't know if there are any different rules on wikidata or WP:IT, but on WP:EN you would reference the document as you do any other source just as you have described in the first paragraph above. I still don't think we should be keeping court judgements that are otherwise easily available on line, but I don't feel strongly about it. What do others think? .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:12, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
The problem is in fact that it isn't easily available; I mean, we can't stay assured that the newspaper will keep this file online forever. Further you can't directly link it since you have to pass for this page. Another reason for the file to stay is that will serve to proof the need for a generic media type Commons property in Wikidata, which right now consider image (P18) as the only linkable media type.
It can be considered lame to say, but my alternative, if we can't reach an agreement on the usefulness of having a mirror of a court judgement here, is to upload it to the Internet Archive, which community doesn't pretend to judge the information value of the document their users upload (they just review license), appealing to the principle that any kind of original work in the public domain must have a value, otherwise why keep it? They don't care for storage and bandwidth since 1996; shouldn't wikimedia projects too?
Ogoorcs (talk) 01:38, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Why wouldn't we host them? The reason we don't have Brown v. Board is largely historical; if someone wanted to upload the appropriate official volume here, we should, and it wouldn't hurt the English Wikisource to do so and have scan-backed sources for those court cases.--Prosfilaes (talk) 02:16, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I fear that there is a copyright on the Italian court judgements, even if they are published on an official webpage (available, yes, but still copyrighted as for any other webpage; in fact, you have to pay to access to a written copy of a judgement). They are not "official acts" of the Republic, which are the laws, so they fall under the law 633/1941; see So, as the Ministry holds the copyright, requests have to be addressed to it. Certain information can be published, but only for information sake, and non commercial activities ("L'utilizzazione, la riproduzione, l'estrazione di copia, la distribuzione delle informazioni testuali, degli elementi multimediali e del patrimonio conoscitivo disponibile su questo sito sono autorizzate esclusivamente nei limiti in cui le stesse avvengano nel rispetto dell'interesse pubblico all'informazione, per finalità non commerciali, garantendo l'integrità degli elementi riprodotti e mediante indicazione della fonte. L’amministrazione individua le ipotesi di possibile utilizzo anche a fini commerciali"), which is not compatible with Commons' policy.

Moreover, the usage of private data from the judgements is strictly limited by Italian law 36/2006, and we don't exactly know the usage that can be done of these private data, even if it's not central in this case ("In particolare, i dati personali pubblicati sono «riutilizzabili solo alle condizioni previste dalla normativa vigente sul riuso dei dati pubblici (direttiva comunitaria 2003/98/CE e d.lgs. 36/2006 di recepimento della stessa), in termini compatibili con gli scopi per i quali sono stati raccolti e registrati, e nel rispetto della normativa in materia di protezione dei dati personali» [1]). --Ruthven (msg) 23:26, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

File:2015-05-24 Boulefestival Hannover, (311) Edeltraut-Inge Geschke.JPG[edit]

Symbol support vote.svg Support Finde vergleichbare Bilder auf Commons, da Bezirksbürgermeister auch immer politische Entscheidungen treffen und so in den Medien sind. -- Ra Boe watt?? 07:07, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Engagierte und beliebte Kommunalpolitikerin (Hannover Nord) [2][3][4][5]. --Stobaios (talk) 02:29, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

File:Volkswagen logo 2012.svg[edit]

a simple letter and geometric logo, no need for a deletion. its a typical Wdwd thing, he is well known in german wikipedia for deletions like this Norschweden (talk) 00:09, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - not below TOO - Jcb (talk) 11:37, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
of cause it is, the logo is made of two circles, a V a W a, two triangles, two rectangles, and 2 semicircles Norschweden (talk) 12:22, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
A close call. Probably below the ToO in the USA, but as I understand it, probably above the ToO in Germany. Ultimately everything is made up of simple components. The question is not the components, but whether they are creatively arranged. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:55, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
its also below ToO in germany Norschweden (talk) 16:01, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Why? Natuur12 (talk) 16:30, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
because its just gemetric stuff and two letters Norschweden (talk) 16:57, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Actually, Germany had a much (MUCH) higher threshold than the U.S. for logos, until recently -- logos had "clearly surpass the average design" to be copyrightable. A 2013 ruling overturned that though, with this: When assessing whether a work of applied art reaches the level of creativity necessary for copyright protection, it must be taken into consideration that the aesthetic effect of the design can only provide a basis for copyright protection to the extent that it is not due to its intended use, but is based on artistic creativity. It must further be considered that a level of creativity that, while providing grounds for copyright protection, is still only slight, results in a correspondingly narrow scope of protection for the work in question. That ruling does involve "aesthetic effect" where the U.S. does not, but does seem to limit it to artistic creativity -- and also mentions that the scope of protection is pretty narrow, so that uses in derivative works would presumably rarely be infringing. If the SVG has a lot of 3-D effects and that sort of thing, it probably is copyrightable in the U.S. anyways, though the basic letters and arrangement probably would not be. Carl Lindberg (talk) 16:57, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support I support because of the argument, but I would like to see the file anyway. Ogoorcs (talk) 01:49, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Google has a low-resolution snapshot of this file: [6]. De728631 (talk) 15:27, 22 February 2017 (UTC)


Hi, i think that the rationale of this deletion request is completely wrong. I've no doubt, that Ph.D. Cesar D. Fermin is the copyright owner of his microscopic images. We need this PDF with it's licence as source of the extracted version. Regards --Ras67 (talk) 15:59, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Irrespective of the licence, this appears to have been a single image stored as PDF. Photographic images at Commons should be stored as JPG but not as PDF. De728631 (talk) 18:59, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Sure, nobody needs the PDF, but i can not put the licence to the new JPG version. An admin or trusted user may prove, that the licence is correct. Thanks --Ras67 (talk) 21:52, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
  • That is also why you should not have uploaded the JPG. Unless we have written evidence that Cesar D. Fermin is the scientist of the same name, we cannot host this image. De728631 (talk) 19:53, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment About storing images at Commons with PDF, the image (P18) property on Wikidata assert that PDF is an acceptable format for Commons, so to me if we can't convert to other format due to license problems, I think we can of course host a PDF. Ogoorcs (talk) 02:07, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
  • PDF is perfectly acceptable but for text files only. For images we should only use common graphical file formats. E. g. one disadvantage of PDF is that you will almost always need a separate viewer to view the file while image files are supported by all browsers. And the format has absolutely nothing to do with copyright or licenses. De728631 (talk) 16:12, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

File:Brasão de Itatira.jpg[edit]

Gostaria que o arquivo "Brasão de Itatira.jpg" fosse restaurado. Não existem direitos autorais sobre esse arquivo, o mesmo é de uso público pois pertence ao Município de Itatira, como poderá ser verificado no site

--Valberto Silva (talk) 15:58, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

21/02/2016, 12:57 hs.

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The source given in the file description is, which has an explicit copyright notice: © 2010 - 2017. The page you cite above,, also has an explicit copyright notice: © Copyright© . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 00:34, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

I agree with Jim. One could argue that the file is {{PD-BrazilGov}} but there is no evidence that this particular rendition of the coat of arms was commisioned before 1983. De728631 (talk) 13:59, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

File:Sir N R Chatterjee.jpg[edit]

Request to undelete the above image as source is Own work — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ichatt4957 (talk • contribs) 05:06, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Are you the painter? Thuresson (talk) 06:43, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It doesn't seem that the uploader is the painter. A permission from the painter (the copyright holder) is needed. To do so, they must send an email to the OTRS. Ichatt4957, please don't reupload images that were deleted per community consensus. If you continue to do this, you may lose your editing privileges here on Commons. Consider this as a final warning. Thanks, Poké95 10:23, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose While it is certainly possible that this painting is PD-Old, that is not at all certain as the subject was active in the 1920s and died in 1942. In order to restore it we will need either proof that the artist died before 1957 (India is PMA 60) or a free license from the artist's heirs. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:07, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

File:Jeff Schwartz TransAm.jpg[edit]


I signed in to check the page for Jeffrey E Schwartz and saw notifications regarding copyright issues for my photos. These are indeed my photos, however it seems that I have missed the opportunity to participate is this discussion.

This picture of the white trans am was taken at the Milwaukee auto show by me.

Other pictures including the main photo of Jeff Schwartz were also taken by me and have also been deleted. The photos of Schwartz's ultima and cadillac were sent to me by Jeff Schwartz himself with permission to use his photos on the page.

I did check the copy right policies and to the best of my knowledge met the necessary requirements.

Could you please advise on the best way to document ownership these photos and any others that I upload to a file? Any assistance is appreciated.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cdevlin67 (talk • contribs) 05:20, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

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

Gelöschte Bilder von Bernd Schwabe aus Hannover[edit]

Moin zusammen, wäre es möglich mir die Bilder zu senden, damit ich sie mir heute Abend anschauen und darüber mit den Fotograf sprechen kann. Wünschenswert wäre die Cloud mit einer Mail mit der Adresse. Sorry für die Arbeit, aber ich möchte es gerne weg haben.
Des weiteren würde ich mich freuen wenn die oben aufgezählten Bilder wieder hochgeladen werden, denn sie sind in meinen Augen relevant. Tschüß -- Ra Boe watt?? 12:18, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Diese Bilder oben wurde zurecht gelöscht, sie zeigen in Großaufnahme andere Bilder von Personen. -- Ra Boe watt?? 15:45, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Diese Logo ist sicher geschützt. -- Ra Boe watt?? 15:45, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

von links: Oliver Kucklinski vom Bürgerbüro Stadtentwicklung Hannover, Matthias Görn (Vorstand vom Niedersächsisches Landesmuseum Hannover sowie Vorstand vom Freundeskreis Hannover), Rapper Spax sowie ein Gast. --Bernd Schwabe in Hannover (talk) 19:04, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Matthias Görn ist seit 2012 Betriebswirtschaftlicher Leiter des Niedersächsischen Landesmuseums Hannover. Er bildet zusammen mit der Museumsleiterin Katja Lembke den Vorstand dieses Museums [7].--Klaaschwotzer (talk) 19:03, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Sozialistische Jugend Deutschlands – Die Falken --Bernd Schwabe in Hannover (talk) 18:56, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Vertreterin und Vertreter des hannoverschen Zweigs der Sozialistischen Jugend Deutschlands – Die Falken beim Neujahrsempfang des hannoverschen Oberbürgermeisters im Rathaus Hannover. Auf Einladung des Oberbürgermeisters hatten sie einen Informationsstand aufgebaut.--Klaaschwotzer (talk) 19:09, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Wie auf dem Bild genau zu lesen: Jugendaktion Natur- und Umweltschutz (JANUN) ...

Vertreterin und Vertreter des hannoverschen Zweigs der Jugendaktion Natur- und Umweltschutz (JANUN), die beim Neujahrsempfang des hannoverschen Oberbürgermeisters auf dessen Einladung einen Informationsstand betrieben.--Klaaschwotzer (talk) 19:21, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Türkische Jugend Niedersachsen, offizieller Aussteller im Neuen Rathaus von Hannover. --Bernd Schwabe in Hannover (talk) 18:56, 22 February 2017 (UTC) Über diese Bilder kann man geteilter Meinung sein, ich sehe darin Vertreter verschiedener Vereine; JARUM e.V, rote Taube auf blauen Grund??, Türkische Jungend Niedersachsen

von links: Reinhold Fahlbusch, Bürgermeisterin Regine Kramarek sowie eine Bürgerin zur Bürgersprechstunde während des Neujahrsempfangs im Neuen Rathaus von Hannover. --Bernd Schwabe in Hannover (talk) 19:24, 22 February 2017 (UTC) Bürgermeisterin Regine Kramarek von der Seite, wer ist der Herr? -- Ra Boe watt?? 16:03, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Die Herrschaften auf diesem Foto sind relevant, da bin ich mir fast sicher. Tschüß -- Ra Boe watt?? 16:03, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Der Abgebildete ist Hannovers Oberbürgermeister Stefan Schostok, der beim Neujahrsempfang der Stadt Hannover für die Bürgerinnen und Bürger Hannovers es sich nicht nehmen ließ, einige der Eingeladenen mit seinem Cellular-Telefon zu fotografieren.--Klaaschwotzer (talk) 19:29, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Die Herrschaften auf diesem Foto sind relevant, da bin ich mir sehr sicher. Tschüß -- Ra Boe watt?? 16:03, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

keine Ahnung ob Relevant -- Ra Boe watt?? 17:27, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

keine Ahnung ob Relevant -- Ra Boe watt?? 17:27, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

keine Ahnung ob Relevant -- Ra Boe watt?? 17:27, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Personen bei der Kunstpreisverleihung, Kleine Ahnung ob sie relevant sind. -- Ra Boe watt?? 17:19, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Künstlerin, tja was soll ich jetzt dazu sagen. Ärgerlich wenn sie mal relevant wird und wir habe das Bild gelöscht ;) -- Ra Boe watt?? 17:19, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Matthias Miersch, SPD, MdB. --Bernd Schwabe in Hannover (talk) 19:32, 22 February 2017 (UTC) Redner auf der Anti-TTIP-Demonstration, ich halte sie für Relevant. -- Ra Boe watt?? 17:10, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Designerin und Museumsleiterin -- Ra Boe watt?? 17:27, 22 February 2017 (UTC) ---

Finde keine Filme -- Ra Boe watt?? 17:27, 22 February 2017 (UTC) ---

Bürgermeisterin des Stadtteils. -- Ra Boe watt?? 17:27, 22 February 2017 (UTC) ---

Lennart Wiechell vom Münchner Architekturbüro Schmidhuber, entwarf den deutschen Expo-Pavillon für die Expo 2016 in Milano. --Bernd Schwabe in Hannover (talk) 20:00, 22 February 2017 (UTC) Lennart Wiechell, da muss ich länger im Netz suchen. -- Ra Boe watt?? 17:27, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Wilfried Lorenz (Politiker), MdB. --Bernd Schwabe in Hannover (talk) 19:54, 22 February 2017 (UTC) keine Ahnung. -- Ra Boe watt?? 17:19, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Stefan Wenzel, Niedersachsens Umweltminister--Klaaschwotzer (talk) 19:52, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Stefan Wenzel, Niedersachsens Umweltminister--Klaaschwotzer (talk) 19:52, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Hannovers Stadtsuperintendent Hans-Martin Heinemann--Klaaschwotzer (talk) 19:49, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Hannovers Oberbürgermeister Stefan Schostock--Klaaschwotzer (talk) 19:46, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Bernd Busemann, Präsident des Niedersächsischen Landtags.--Klaaschwotzer (talk) 19:42, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Alle relevant, Politiker & Würdenträger des Landes. ;) -- Ra Boe watt?? 17:19, 22 February 2017 (UTC) ---

@Raboe001: Warum sollen wir diese Dateien jetzt einzeln aus dem Cache der Wikimedia pulen? Hat Bernd Schwabe die Bilder nicht mehr auf seinem Rechner, oder geht es darum, die Dateinamen zuzuordnen? Von Clouds habe ich keine Ahnung, aber ich könnte dir die Dateien als Archiv mailen (zip, tar, 7z). Das wird dann nur entsprechend groß, und passt wahrscheinlich nicht in dein Postfach. De728631 (talk) 14:33, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Moin @De728631:, hat super funktioniert. vielen Dank warte auf den nächsten Schub und die ersten Bilder sind zu recht gelöscht, aber weiter oben die Bilder der Schauspielerin ist jetzt nicht wirklich war oder? Wie und wo kann ich da widersprechen? ;) Tschüß -- Ra Boe watt?? 15:45, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Not an undeletion request as such but a request for copies of the images for individual review with the photographer/uploader. I'm handling this by email with Raboe001. De728631 (talk) 15:49, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Adam C. Earnheardt NCA.jpg[edit]

I own the copyright to this image: Please note that I have applied the proper release (CCA4.0). If you need additional information, please let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TeamEKSO (talk • contribs) 15:33, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

File:Nalini Ranjan Chatterjee with Ashutosh Mukherjee.png[edit]

The following can be seen in the photo graph - left of center front row - Sir Asutosh Mookerjee, center is the Chief justice Sir lancelot Sanderson, and right of center - Sir Nalini Ranjan Chatterjee - this is a photograph of the sitting judges of the Calcutta High Court. As per the reference page number 133 - bottom left - Asutosh Mookerjee (also spelled as Asutosh Mukherjee) resigned in 1924 and Nalini Ranjan Chatterjee resigned in 1926 (page 134) - so this picture is clearly 80+ years old and free from any copyright in India — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ichatt4957 (talk • contribs) 15:49, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

File:3D Medical Illustration of Ebola.webm[edit]

As Taivo stated in the relevant DR, the source website indicates clearly that the video is under the CC-BY license. @Billinghurst, you deleted the file and closed the malformed DR. --Amitie 10g (talk) 23:54, 22 February 2017 (UTC)


こちらのファイルはSHO-NO本人に確認し、パブリックドメインにしてもらったものであるため、ファイルを復活してください。 問題があるようでしたら、「」にコンタクトを取り、再度そちらで確認してください。

2017年2月22日 17:08 Shono 810 <>: > おおおおかっくい~~~ > 嬉しい!ありがとうございまっす! > > 2017/02/22 16:39 "XXX" <XXXX@XXXX>: >> >> SHO-NOさん >> >> お疲れ様です、XXX(Masoranosora)です。 >> >> SHO-NOさんのウィキペディアページを作るにあたって、 >> SHO-NOさんがTwitterに流した写真(添付)の掲載許可をしているか否かを証明するように言われています。 >> >> 問題ないようであれば改めて問題ないことを返信していただけると幸いです。 >> >> 以上、お手数ですが宜しくお願い致します。 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masoranosora (talk • contribs) 02:24, 23 February 2017 (UTC)