Commons:Undeletion requests

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
(Redirected from Commons:UNDEL)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Translate this page

Shortcuts: COM:UNDEL • COM:UR • COM:UND • COM:DRV

Other languages:

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

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

Commons deletion (policy)
v • d • e

Finding out why a file was deleted

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

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

Appealing a deletion

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

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

  • You may want to discuss with the administrator who deleted the file. You can ask the administrator for a detailed explanation or show evidence to support undeletion.
  • If you do not wish to contact anyone directly, or if an individual administrator has declined undeletion, or if you want an opportunity for more people to participate in the discussion, you can request undeletion on this page.
  • If the file was deleted for missing evidence of licensing permission from the copyright holder, please follow the procedure for submitting permission evidence. If you have already done that, there is no need to request undeletion here. If the submitted permission is in order, the file will be restored when the permission is processed. Please be patient, as this may take several weeks depending on the current workload and available volunteers.
  • If some information is missing in the deleted image description, you may be asked some questions. It is generally expected that such questions are responded in the following 24 hours.

Temporary undeletion

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

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

To assist discussion

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

To allow transfer of fair use content to another project

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

Projects that accept fair use
* Wikipedia: als | ar | bar | bn | be | be-tarask | ca | el | en | et | eo | fa | fi | fr | frr | he | hr | hy | id | is | it | ja | lb | lt | lv | mk | ms | pt | ro | ru | sl | sr | th | tr | tt | uk | vi | zh | +/−

Note: This list might be outdated. For a more complete list, see meta:Non-free content (this page was last updated: March 2014.) Note also: Multiple projects (such as the ml, sa, and si Wikipedias) are listed there as "yes" without policy links.

Adding a request

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

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

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

Closing discussions

In general, discussions should be closed only by administrators.

Archives

Closed undeletion debates are archived daily.

Current requests

File:Mojang Studios Logo.svg

Hi, This should be OK with {{PD-textlogo}}. See also File:Mojang Studios.jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Mojang logos. Yann (talk) 12:42, 20 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In US - obviously. But in Sweden? Pinging @Josve05a, Natuur12, and Fitindia: - users who participated in DR. Any comments? Ankry (talk) 21:43, 22 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No strong opinion in favor of undeleting or keeping the files deleted. A file such as File:Mojang Logo.png would be above the threshold of originality in various jurisdictions such as the UK and the Netherlands, but I'm not familiar enough with Swedish copyright law to state wherever this is or isn't the case in Sweden. Jeg stoler på dig Josve. Natuur12 (talk) 22:00, 22 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
FWIW, this is much simpler than the examples given on COM:Sweden, especially File:A6 logo.png. Yann (talk) 22:11, 22 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I converted the deletion of the file from a speedy tag to a "deletion discussion", given that I myself was unsure of the TOO status when I was patrolling the speedy category for clear copyvios. However, if I would have to give an opinion of this now, I'm leaning 50/50 on this, given the A6 logo mentioned above, however Swedish courts have historically acknowledged that even modest design choices can qualify for copyright protection, as long as they demonstrate a certain level of creative input. In the case of the Mojang logo, the deliberate arrangement and configuration of the notches (and clear distortion of the letters) appear to meet this criterion, thereby placing it above the threshold of originality as outlined by Swedish copyright law. The case of the "A6" logo, as described in the example, illustrates the determination that the specific design in question did not meet the threshold of originality for copyright protection. The decision was based on the logo's simplicity and lack of distinctive character, including the ordinary font and basic design elements that did not exhibit significant creative effort. Comparatively, the Mojang logo features specific design elements, namely the notches cut out from the letters, which are not typically found in standard fonts. This unique characteristic of the logo represents a deliberate creative decision, indicating a level of originality that surpasses the simplistic and common features of the "A6" logo. Additionally, the incorporation of distinctive design elements such as the notches contributes to the overall identity and branding of Mojang, serving as a recognizable and distinguishing feature of the company's visual representation (but that's touching more on Trademark than copyright, but still counts for something when it comes to "verkshöjd"). --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 22:05, 23 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Would you say that it would be wise to apply the COM:PCP in this case and keep the file deleted? Further, should this lead to the deletion of File:Mojang Studios.jpg (the same image, but JPEG) under both PCP and COM:G4? IceWelder [✉] 12:04, 29 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Both files should be treated the same. I am however very unsure personally on advocating for either deletion or undeletion in this case. However, PCP is a core policy which should always take precedence in case we can't reach a clear determination to keep a file. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 17:24, 29 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In that case, I would again advocate for the file's deletion, as I did with my original G4 tagging that led to this discussion in the first place. Thank you for your insight. IceWelder [✉] 15:57, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Natuur12: "Stoler" is Norwegian, you Austrian fool. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 22:06, 23 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:ROC Ministry of National Defense Seal.svg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This file had been deleted per this DR due to "Logos are not covered under {{PD-ROC-exempt}} or {{GWOIA}}" and then it was re-uploaded by User:人人生來平等.

However, according to the email response by the Taiwan Intellectual Property Office "故政府機關之部徽、署徽或局徽，如其形式係依法所制訂者，依著作權法第9條，不得為著作權之標的。" (English Machine Translation: "Therefore, the emblems of ministries, departments or bureaus of government agencies, if their forms are made in accordance with the law, shall not be the subject of copyright in accordance with Article 9 of the Copyright Law." ) Since this logo is the Seal of Ministry of National Defense, in my opinion, it is not copyrighted and is covered under {{PD-ROC-exempt}} . The previous delete decision should be overturned and the previous page history also need to be recovered. cc @Wcam, Mdaniels5757, and Ericliu1912: Thanks. SCP-2000 18:44, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@SCP-2000: If the emblem is made in accordance with the law, such law needs to be specified. In the email you quote, the national flag is defined in 中華民國國徽國旗法第4條, and the Taipei City's seal is defined in 臺北市市徽市旗設置自治條例第4條. A seal/emblem/logo is only in the PD if it is based on a law. Wcam (talk) 19:16, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, it is based on 《陸海空軍軍旗條例施行細則》第五條. Looks ok to keep. --Wcam (talk) 19:18, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Support. (And should recover all revision history altogether) —— Eric Liu（Talk） 23:38, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Portrait_de_Nicolas_&_Bruno.jpg

Bonjour, désolé je ne suis pas un spécialiste de wikipedia mais je ne comprends pas pourquoi la photo dont je suis l'auteur a été refusée sur la page de "Nicolas et Bruno" que j'actualise régulièrement.

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolas_et_Bruno

Je me suis sans doute trompé dans la définition de la licence. Je souhaite que cette photo soit libre de droit, dans le domaine public, sans restriction d'un quelconque copyright.

Parallèlement on m'a informé que ma photo a été utilisée sur le site Focus-cinema, mais à l'époque avec mon autorisation. >>>> Reason for the nomination: file under copyright (See https://www.focus-cinema.com/7741868/what-we-do-in-the-shadows-vampires-entre-toute-intimite-sortira-fin-octobre-en-france/)

Pouvez-vous m'aider et me donner la procédure pour que ma modification soit possible? Ou pouvez-vous le faire vous-même?

Merci d'avance pour votre aide! — Preceding unsigned comment added by FilmsChecker (talk • contribs) 15:40, 6 November 2023 (UTC) (UTC)Reply[reply]

@FilmsChecker: Bonjour,
Avez-vous l'image originale ? Si oui, vous pourriez l'importer pour prouver que vous êtes bien le photographe. Si non, il faudra confirmer la licence par email en suivant la procédure à COM:VRT/fr. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 15:40, 6 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Merci Yann pour votre réponse! Ça y est, je crois que ça a fonctionné!! Merci beaucoup. FilmsChecker (talk) 09:45, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Oppose The image as uploaded has a black border and appears in a number of places on the web. It is only 640px square. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:47, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Question Isn't this resolution a standard for this camera model? Ankry (talk) 17:00, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Australian Naturalisation Certificate (1955-1970).jpg

This file was challenged for missing permission information. Actually the source was a link to a webpage licensed under Creative Commons but now 6 years later the link leads to a 404. I updated the permission information to provide a Web Archive link so that the Creative Commons licence can be verified. However the file got deleted anyway. cc User:Cakelot1 and User:Krd. Thanks. Liguer (talk) 00:06, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Info The link that you added goes to the message: "Wayback Machine has not archived that URL." @Liguer: Which exactly archived web page you mean? Ankry (talk) 20:39, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Oppose per COM:PCP. I see no way to verify the license. Ankry (talk) 23:18, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ankry: The link I added should lead to a simple Wayback archive of the source URL - I guess I mangled the link somehow. Can you provide the source URL here (I don't remember what it is and don't have access to the image information any more) and I will try again. It will be a simple matter to verify the licence. Liguer (talk) 10:04, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Source listed was https://www.usi.gov.au/about/forms-id/citizenship-certificate/certificate-naturalization Abzeronow (talk) 16:01, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you. Please refer to https://web.archive.org/web/20170219113613/https://www.usi.gov.au/about/forms-id/citizenship-certificate/certificate-naturalization for an archived version of the source; a CC licence is given at the bottom of the page. Liguer (talk) 02:17, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Daft Punk - Random Access Memories.jpg

File:Daft Punk - Random Access Memories.jpg was deleted due to it being an "Album cover", but another administrator had already confirmed it to be released under a CC license in https://www.mynewsdesk.com/se/sonybmg/images/daft-punk-random-access-memories-188026 Endof (talk) 03:54, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Info Previously undeleted after discussion here, Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2023-05#File:Daft Punk - Random Access Memories.jpg, File:Random Access Memories 10th Anniversary Edition.jpg. Thuresson (talk) 05:29, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In the interest of preventing a wheel war, pinging @EugeneZelenko: who deleted it recently, after it had been undeleted via that previous undeletion request. DMacks (talk) 05:50, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Text from https://www.mynewsdesk.com/se/sonybmg/images/daft-punk-albumomslag-260217: Innehållet får laddas ner, användas och delas i olika mediekanaler av t.ex. journalister, bloggare, krönikörer, opinionsbildare etc., i syftet att förmedla, redogöra för och kommentera ert pressmeddelande, inlägg eller information, så länge innehållet används oförändrat och i dess helhet. Upphovsmannen ska anges i den omfattning och på det sätt god sed kräver (vilket bl.a. innebär att fotografer till bilder nästan alltid måste anges). Google Translate's translation: The content may be downloaded, used and shared in various media channels by e.g. journalists, bloggers, columnists, opinion leaders, etc., for the purpose of conveying, explaining and commenting on your press release, post or information, as long as the content is used unchanged and in its entirety. The author must be stated to the extent and in the manner required by good practice (which, among other things, means that photographers for images must almost always be stated). Obviously, not {{Cc-by-4.0}}, more like regular fair use. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:27, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Support restoration. We already had evidence of a Creative Commons license. Abzeronow (talk) 16:41, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This clearly used to have a CC-by license: Version from May 14. The text (including the tooltip) says Licens: Creative Commons erkännande. Med en Creative Commons-licens, behåller du din upphovsrätt men tillåter andra människor att kopiera och distribuera ditt verk under förutsättning att de erkänner dig som upphovsman. Du tillåter andra att kopiera, distribuera, visa och framföra verket, samt att skapa bearbetningar av det., which translates to With a Creative Commons license, you retain your copyright but allow other people to copy and distribute your work provided they acknowledge you as the author. You permit others to copy, distribute, display and perform the work, and to create adaptations of it.. This is a CC-by license, even though the version is unclear.
I would still be wary of undeleting this, however. It looks to me like they didn't put the CC license there on purpose, this looks rather like a mistake of the mynewsdesk site, which is in no position to give a license to content that is copyrighted by Sony. --rimshottalk 16:58, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Oppose The website is from a startup company that does press releases and they cannot really re-license material that they don't hold the copyright. It is hard to believe that a multinational record company would release an album cover art with a CC-BY license. They might release a photo from an artist with CC-BY, but for example it is really hard to believe that Sony gave the OK to upload this tiff file (73MB) to a public server and under a CC-BY license. If one look at the other media they have from Sony it is clear that uploads before 26 October have a different license (press release). I would be on cautionary side and contact MyNewsDesk and get a confirmation the licenses are really OK. Günther Frager (talk) 17:40, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Led Zeppelin - Definitive Collection Mini LP Replica CD Boxset.jpg

This is just a plain black background with four simple geometric shapes that are not copyrighted or copyrightable. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:37, 10 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Oppose I haven't seen the deleted image, but I image they are the symbols from their fourth album. The resolution of Commons:Deletion requests/Logos of Led Zeppelin's fourth album is that Jimmy Page's symbol is not OK due to the low bar on COM:TOO UK. Günther Frager (talk) 12:45, 10 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Info Album cover is available at en:Led Zeppelin Definitive Collection. Thuresson (talk) 13:57, 10 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not done, per Günther Frager. Thuresson (talk) 09:48, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Ernst Krenkel 1938.jpg and others

15 image files were deleted here because there was no license. I would like to request undeletion for 8 of these. These are listed as public domain in the Alamy Stock Photo "History Collection".

Alamy Ernst Krenkel 1938
Fedorov at the North Pole
Fedorov in 1937
North Pole station
North Pole-1 station
NorthPole1
Soviet airplane at the North Pole in 1937
Soviet airplanes at the North Pole in 1937

Please let me know if there is anything else you need, or if I made any mistakes. Thanks!

Xpda (talk) 21:56, 10 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Oppose While images from the 1930s may be PD in the country of origin, they almost certainly have a URAA copyright in the US. It is likely that Almy has not considered this. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:04, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Russian terms would have been 50 years from publication for anonymous works, which for 1930s photos would have expired before the URAA date. Carl Lindberg (talk) 14:58, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support {{PD-Russia-1996}} should be OK here. Yann (talk) 15:13, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose I agree with Jim that the photos most likely are copyrighted in US, but it is unrelated to URAA. We have no evidence that the photos were published before March 1989, so US copyright applies to them directly (95 years from publication or 120 years from creation for anonymous photos). They seem to originate from a non-public gallery (http://www.atexpo.ru/about/project/north/08/) located in an automotive(!) exhibition website. (Wayback Machine got info about access restriction while trying to archive the content.) They are way too recent for PD-old-assumed. I suggest to undelete them in 2058. Ankry (talk) 17:39, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Ivan Papanin died in 1986. I think we must assume that the photos in his book (cited above) were taken by him, so they are still under copyright in Russia as well as the USA. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:00, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • That's a good point. I withdraw my support unless someone check if the pictures in the book are credited to someone else. Yann (talk) 20:09, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Example.jpg

این تصویر متعلق به رضا آذرنیوشان است که من نماینده قانونی ایشان جهت انجام امور رسانه ای در فضای مجازی هستم که با رضایت ایشان تصویر را بارگزاری کرده ام

@Dornika ceo: Hi,
You didn't mention which file you want undeleted. Anyway, since it is not your own work, the copyright holder must send a permission for a free license via COM:VRT. Yann (talk) 12:42, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Multiple Files

Three image files were deleted because they were found to be unlicensed. However, I believe that these images should be undeleted. The reason is that they are screenshots of YouTube videos tagged with a "Creative Commons Attribution Reuse Allowed" license.

The files in question are as follows:

I would really appreciate it if you could consider undeleting these images.

Thank you. Princess of Ara (talk) 15:03, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Support There is indeed a free license at the sources. Yann (talk) 15:18, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Temo Svirely 2008.jpg

Please restore. We have permission per Ticket:2023111010008892. Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 19:07, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

✓ Done: @Mussklprozz: , FYI. --Abzeronow (talk) 19:47, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Ak Fusion Photo.jpg

This is the only current photo of me playing Professionally prior to the internet days and social media.

--Alenkozic (talk) 02:15, 12 November 2023 (UTC) ALen KozicReply[reply]

 Oppose Looks like somebody took a photo of a TV screen. Thuresson (talk) 09:46, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Ph2-r031201-1 (2).jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason:This file was previously deleted for the reason 'the portraits of the Imperial families are excluded from GJSTU-2.0.' However, both Section 7c of the 'Government of Japan Standard Terms of Use (Version 2.0)' (available at https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Government_of_Japan_Standard_Terms_of_Use_(Version_2.0)) and Section 6c of the Imperial Household Agency website's 'Notice on Copyright and Other Related Matters Regarding this Website' (available at https://www.kunaicho.go.jp/e-copyright/) explicitly state: 'The Terms of Use are compatible with the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (hereinafter referred to as the CC License). This means that content based on the Terms of Use may be used under the CC License in lieu of the Terms of Use.' To clarify for those who may not understand, this implies that content licensed under GJSTU-2.0 can be used under the CC BY 4.0 terms. According to 'CC BY 4.0 DEED' (available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), as long as the terms 'Attribution - You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use' are followed, there are 'No additional restrictions - You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.' Therefore, the previous deletion decision should be overturned, and the previous page history also needs to be recovered. cc @Wcam, Mdaniels5757, and Yann: Thanks. rockclimbingwii (talk) 08:25:40, 2023_11_12 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests&oldid=755577566"