Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2023-05

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

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

File:Massachusetts.png

File:Massachusetts.png Was my own work and design! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarkActionytion (talk • contribs) 13:15, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

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

Oppose As noted in the deletion comment it is "wildly inaccurate" and has no educational purpose. The most glaring error is that New Bedford is not on Cape Cod. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:46, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Not done, per above. Also, a map should never be blurry. Thuresson (talk) 13:00, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Red Chittagong Bull.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

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

Reason: This picture not violating any thing of your rule, i have been promised upload this picture LivBD (talk) 11:28, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Image copied from Facebook. The copyright holder must send a permission via COM:VRT. Yann (talk) 11:36, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Not done: Per Yann. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:56, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:MohammadZaidMansoori.jpg

MohammadZaidMansoori.jpg Is Free content That are use to make wikidata page I want my File Back — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohammadzaidmansoori8 (talk • contribs) 08:46, 1 May 2023‎ (UTC)

Oppose Q117378253 deleted from Wikidata for not meeting the notability policy. Thuresson (talk) 09:46, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: Undeletion refused as out of scope a few days back: [1]. --Yann (talk) 15:08, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Ambrose Ebuka 002.jpg

kindly restore the image as it is my original image — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ambroseebukarw (talk • contribs) 13:55, 1 May 2023‎ (UTC)

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

Oppose First, since you are in the image and it does not appear to be a selfie, your claim to be the actual photographer is probably false. Second, the description

"This is a photo containing myself and someone else."

is useless. Finally, we do not keep images of unknown people. Commons is not Facebook. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:06, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 21:28, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Example.jpg

Hello! Please restore this photo, there are no violations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by A7767248 (talk • contribs) 18:23, 1 May 2023‎ (UTC)

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

Oppose You must tell us which of your deleted images you would like restored. I see that several of your images were deleted as out of scope personal images. Those will not be restored. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:24, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 21:28, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Roo Powell.JPEG

I have authorization from the owner of this photo to use it. --Ajknow (talk) 23:39, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

We use VRTS to verify and archive authorizations like that. Please read the linked page for instructions. --Geohakkeri (talk) 10:27, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: per Geohakkeri. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:13, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Kizuna AI - SCP Foundation 2.png

The video the image was taken from is licensed CC BY-SA 3.0--Trade (talk) 19:02, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Support That is correct. However, I cannot speak to the question of whether the copyright for this character is held by the YouTube poster or someone else. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:08, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

The channel literally have a verified icon. I dont know why copyright would be in question. Trade (talk) 21:18, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:58, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Ghadeerali.jpg

Hello,

I would like to have my picture back, please!. I am authorized and have full right to publish the photo. I don't know why these pictures were deleted!. I'm new to wikipedia and do my best to learn.

Thank you--MarkScoopit (talk) 01:26, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

~~Oppose~~ Personal images by non contributor. Please read COM:WEBHOST. Wikimedia Commons is not a social media. Yann (talk) 08:56, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Hmm. Yann, although this is his own puff page, it suggests that the subject may be notable enough to belong here. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:37, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

OK, fine. Yann (talk) 15:11, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Are you gonna undelete? Trade (talk) 21:21, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm neutral on the scope question, and Yann seems to be neutral also, so I think it should wait fro more opinions. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:38, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Oppose The subject does not have any Wikimedia article other than sandbox advertising (en:User:MarkScoopit/sandbox). Amateur level bodybuilder without any recorded wins. Thuresson (talk) 12:59, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 20:14, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:AbbotLibrary2020.png

Hi, I have permission from the owner/creator of this picture to use in my Wikipedia article Abbot Public Library. I can supply email proof. Thanks, Lisa Lisapaulinet (talk) 13:51, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose We do not accept forwarded licenses -- it is too easy to forge them. The actual photographer, Cassandra Sprague, must herself send a free license directly to VRT. Also note that "permission from the owner/creator of this picture to use in my Wikipedia article" is insufficient. Images on Commons must be free for any use anywhere by anybody. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:01, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 20:14, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Райтраун Артём.jpg

This file was provided personally for Wikipedia, for the press and was received by me personally from the personal archive of the person I wrote an article about in the Wikipedia incubator. And the site mentioned in the complaint when deleting the photo just received a copy of this photo from an unknown source, possibly from social networks. See the meta information about the file.

Plaxeen (talk) 08:44, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose I note that you claimed that you were the actual photographer when you uploaded the image (note that the named author, Shmeile, redirects to User:Plaxeen). Now you claim

"was received by me personally from the personal archive of the person"

Which should we believe? Your comment above does not say anything about copyright. Owning a paper or digital copy of an image does not give the owner or the subject the right to freely license it. That right is almost always held by the actual photographer. This cannot be restored without a free license from the actual photographer via VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:30, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 20:13, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Gerhard_Picot.jpg

Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren,

weshalb dieses Bild gelöscht wurde, obwohl alle Angaben über den Urheber (ein Fotograf) von Herrn Picot erfasst sind, ist mir ein Rätsel.

Herr Picot hat alle Rechte auf dieses Bild und verwendet es seit 2014 auch in zahlreichen seiner Bücher.

Bitte holen Sie das gelöschte Bild wieder zurück und erlauben es mir es in seinem Profil zu veröffentlichen.

Herzliche Grüße und vielen Dank Petar Puskaric — Preceding unsigned comment added by PUSPero (talk • contribs) 09:55, 3 May 2023‎ (UTC)

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

Oppose While it is common for photographers to give the subject a license to use a photo in publicity, it would be very unusual for the subject to have the right to freely license the image. In order for this image to be restored, either the photographer, Foto Sexauer, must send a free license using VRT or someone else must send a free license together with a copy of the written license from Foto Sexauer allowing that person to freely license the image. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:36, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 20:13, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Restoring photo and image erroring delete

I was told to write here but in my opinion it's not the most suitable place because only admin can see the system logs of deleted files and that's why I wrote directly to the admin's wall. After this [2] ignored me and not responding request, I ask a admin to restore those images that were obviously and blatantly deleted incorrectly, as they were all created through screenshot of YouTube "commons creative license". the beauty is that this information was already present in the files but whoever deleted it totally ignored this, trusting only those who (perhaps in bad faith) requested its cancellation without even giving reasons. Lapidary is the case of this image https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Peugeot_pulsion_125.png&action=edit&redlink=1 (for example see source 0:11 from 0:59 screenshot) where the video of origin is already indicated in the object log of creation field (sic!). I kindly and quickly request the restoration of all files with immediate effect, as they are all created from videos screenshot with Creative Commons 3.0 license. All the necessary information like guidelines about author, license, source of the files, etc... was already filled in correctly and present inside the files; unfortunately I don't remember exactly the video links but, I can do that all admin that have the permission to see the deleted file. I'm telling the truth and not a lie, do all the checks and analyzes of the case, you will discover that I am right and that the images should not have been deleted and were perfectly in compliance with both European and US legislation and the rules of Wikimedia Commons.37.159.115.1 15:01, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

I have looked at the deleted files and can confirm that the files contained a link to the source material—but the link did not display due to an error with template use. I've viewed the source for each file and can confirm that the screenshots appear to be taken from each respective source, which is licensed under a CC-BY license. I will restore these files and will fix the templates to provide attribution properly. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 18:50, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: All have been restored with proper attribution under {{YouTube CC-BY}}. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 19:23, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Mark Leiren-Young.jpg

The copyright holder has just given permission for the photo to be used via a written statement online:

https://www.skaana.org/media-images/

--CLStarlet (talk) 19:36, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose. While the website presently notes that [a]ll images below are available for press use with accreditation, that would place restrictions on non-press commercial use and does not grant a license to create derivative works. Per COM:L, both publication of derivative work and commercial use of the work must be allowed, so the license is insufficient for Commons. Additionally, it is unclear what "accreditation" process is required, but this seems to be a restriction that doesn't actually allow all people to use the material; suitable licenses must allow anyone to use the material for any purpose. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 19:47, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: Per RTH -- commons is not just "press". Also, it does not speak to the copyright for the mural behind the subject. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:29, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Shamsuddin Iliyas Shah.jpg

Dear wiki, The portrait i used named shamsuddin iliyas shah jpg is and modern illustration of haji ilyas using artificial intelligence;and i am the owner of it;it was also published in,গৌড় থেকে সাতগাঁও by আসিফ মজুমদার”;and this image is also used to identify Ilyas Shah;he’s a key figure of bangladeshi history;so a portrait of him is necessary for younger generation to idealise and glorify our culture and history; May I therefore hope that the authorities will bring back the image of him;

 ~Sajjatalisujal4 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sajjatalisujal4 (talk • contribs) 09:17, 5 May 2023‎ (UTC)

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

Oppose We do not keep imagined portraits of historical figures that are drawn by knowledgeable humans. I see no reason why we would keep an AI drawn portrait with no basis in reality. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:32, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose per what Jim has said above. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 12:45, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: per comments above. Commons is not for publishing own artwork (that is what this ultimately is). --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:51, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Marianapostol.jpg

Szanowni Państwo, proszę o umożliwienie umieszczenia zdjęcia Marianapostol.jpg, które zostało usunięte. W tej sprawie była wysłana korespondencja na adres permissions-commons@wikimedia.org przez Marian Apostoł - marian.apostol53@gmail.com, a także przez fotografa, który wykonał to zdjęcie - Piotr Rutkiewicz www.fabrykazdjec.pl, email: biuro@fabrykazdjec.pl email: fabrykazdjec@o2.pl FABRYKA ZDJĘĆ 30-303 Kraków ul. Madalińskiego 5 Załączam link do zdjęcia, które ostatecznie powinno pojawić się na tej stronie: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-WRKygXXiyEFMv29_-y7fwHzp8OulnpV/view?usp=share_link Przesyłam link, bo program nie pozwala wstawić tego zdjęcia na stronie. Z góry dziękuję --MarianApostolPolska (talk) 18:38, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose This image will be restored automatically without further action by the uploader if and when a free license is received, read, and approved at VRT. The current backlog at VRT is 11 days. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:34, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 15:50, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Paulo_freitas_do_amaral.jpg

Agradeço a reposição da minha fotografia no wikipedia Paulo Freitas do Amaral — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pauloamaral44 (talk • contribs) 07:08, 6 May 2023‎ (UTC)

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

Not done: No deleted file by that name. Wikimedia Commons is not a social media anyway, so we don't accept personal pictures of non notable people. Please read COM:SCOPE. Thanks,. --Yann (talk) 09:08, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Energia Solar.webp

Solar energy is a natural resource that can be used to generate electricity, both for own use and for sale. In Brazil, solar energy has been used in different ways over the years, from the generation of electricity for domestic use, to the use of photovoltaic panels for public lighting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luke Katte (talk • contribs) 11:34, 6 May 2023‎ (UTC)

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

Oppose None of that is a reason to restore this. It appears at https://superausec.com.br/energia-solar-em-jataizinho/ with "Copyright © 2023 Supermercado Super Ausec" . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:34, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: Obviously not, as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 13:11, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Devis Paganelli.jpg

The image was deleted for copyviol from here but, after a ticket on VRTS, the site-owner added a public disclaimer in this link (saying that the "photo is free from copyright and released into the public domain" and "Anyone is free to reproduce, distribute, communicate to the public, exhibit in public, represent, perform and recite this material by any means and in any format")! Thanks :) Superpes15 (talk) 00:07, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

~~Oppose~~ I see that. However, it also says

"La foto qui riportata è stata scattata da Devis Paganelli in autonomia, senza l’intervento di alcun professionista..."

"The photo shown here was taken by Devis Paganelli independently, without the intervention of any professional..." [Google translation]

The image is not a selfie, so the assertion above does not make sense. We cannot restore the image without a free license from the actual photographer. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:19, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Support The image contains full camera EXIF without mention of a different photographer. This could very well be a tripod selfie, and given that the subject is a casting director I think it is quite reasonable to assume they know how to operate a camera. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:55, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

That may well be true, but the uploader or the subject needs to say so. In the upload, the uploader claimed that they were the photographer. Now we are told that that is not true. That's where Assume Good Faith ends for me. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:50, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

First of all, we have no idea who RampolloWiki is; they may or may not be Devis Paganelli, so it's not a guaranteed contradiction. Even assuming they are not, I see no reason to use the uploader's false statements to impugn the honesty of a creative professional, especially when {{Own}} is a very weak claim which might have been selected by accident but "La foto qui riportata è stata scattata da Devis Paganelli in autonomia, senza l’intervento di alcun professionista" could only be false if they are maliciously lying. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:56, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

@Jameslwoodward: He (Devis Paganelli) confirmed he used the self-timer on VRTS and released the photo into the public domain at that link! I in fact already thought to add the ticket after the undeletion even if the photo was already released on the public domain! Superpes15 (talk) 21:38, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

I have withdrawn my opposition but am still uneasy about this. Contrary to the assertion immediately above, Paganelli has said not said anything about a self timer or how the image was created. As for KoH's "could only be false if they are maliciously lying", if I had a dollar for every liar I have encountered on Commons, I would be a rich man. I think this should go through the VRT process, but am willing to defer to the opinion of others. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:42, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

@Jameslwoodward: VRT is not a magic wand that you can just wave and resolve all doubt; ultimately, it just means one agent gave their seal of approval and slapped a {{PermissionTicket}} on the file description. People can lie on VRT just like they can lie on-wiki. For the most part, VRT serves three purposes: 1) as a proof of identity; 2) as an inbox for receiving releases from people who do not have and are unwilling to create a Wikimedia account; and 3) as a venue for holding sensitive private conversations. We already have a statement of authorship on an official website, so there's no better proof of identity that can come from VRT. If you think that they could be lying on the official website, well, in your mind, what kind of evidence would actually prove that someone did in fact take a self-portrait on a tripod? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:06, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

You are glossing over the fact that the uploader misrepresented his role in the creation of the image and has, above, said that the subject told us he used a self timer when in fact he did not say that. I think you underestimate the ability of VRT to detect problems -- it's one thing for for the subject to make a bland statement that he created the image on the website and quite a different thing to describe in detail how he did it to a VRT agent. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:54, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Yep I fully understand your point, it's one of those annoying situations, and honestly weird too... But I don't think I can do anything else! Superpes15 (talk) 22:17, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

@Jameslwoodward: Could be better if I ask them to upload it again? I wanted to do it before but, since the image is deleted, I thought it was better a classic procedure in this case! --Superpes15 (talk) 22:20, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

No, absolutely not. There is never any reason to upload an image twice. This discussion will resolve itself in the next day or two. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:37, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Agree :) Superpes15 (talk) 22:13, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Support as per KoH above. Yann (talk) 11:35, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: See above. --Yann (talk) 11:34, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Our Personal Space

The four images were deleted from Commons (Commons:Deletion requests/Images in Category:Our Personal Space) with reason that the files would have incorrect license. However, the deletion rationale was incorrect, as the detailed copyright information for game assets were defined licence.txt in github repository. ) This copyright information for specific screenshots from license.txt was also copied to the file description pages.

I would have clarified this during the deletion discussion if notified. However, I noticed the discussion when the photos was deleted. The images serve as sample images for w:Ren'Py game engine and w:visual novels and cannot be easily replaced as most of the Ren'Py games doesn't use open-licensed graphics or they doesn't declare source or copyright information for graphics.

--Zache (talk) 19:24, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Support Uploader should have been notified on user's talk page. Image description page linked to the full license text. Thuresson (talk) 21:16, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

I did notify the uploader. Just through pinging Trade (talk) 14:45, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Hmm. If I read the license pages correctly, the characters and the backgrounds are licensed separately. The characters seem to be OK, but the backgrounds are named individually. Rather than having us try to figure out which background is shown in each case, perhaps Zache would name them. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:48, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

@Jameslwoodward: Here is the list of background images used

File:Our Personal Space - action dialog.png
- background: Fields (fields.jpg) by Andrea Landaker (dual-licensed GPLv3 and CC-BY-SA-4.0)
File:Our Personal Space - Kelly and Jack.png
- background: RoscheiderHof-rathaus (coal stove) (farm-interior.jpg) by Andrea Landaker, derived from File:RoscheiderHof-rathaus-2008-8.jpg, by Dorothea Witter-Rieder. (CC-BY-SA-3.0)
File:Our Personal Space - Mayor Pavel Grayson.png
- background: Koreshan machine shop (machine-shop.jpg) by Andrea Landaker, derived from File:Koreshan_SHS_large_machine_shop_inside01.jpg, by Ebyabe. (CC-BY-SA-3.0)
File:Our Personal Space - status page.jpg
- status thumbnail image: Weather-Summer (weather-summer.jpg) by Andrea Landaker (dual-licensed GPLv3 and CC-BY-SA-4.0)

-- Zache (talk) 15:17, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Support . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:23, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose: I have reservations about their educational purpose. They seemed mostly promotional to me. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:48, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

@P199 In Spring 2022, I came across fake software screenshot images created by User:Midnight68. These drawings were used to spam panchira images onto Wikipedia articles and were also used in Visual Novel and Ren'Py articles. As part of cleanup , I searched through all visual novels on Github and Itch.io to find suitable replacement images. The selection criteria for these screenshots included use of open licences with clear copyright information and reasonable quality for artwork. As a result, I uploaded screenshots from Our Personal Space and File:Cameliagirls1 0.55a.png to Wikimedia Commons. Additionally, I reached out to the author and artist of category:Ollpheist High to inquire about uploading some screenshots. She nicely uploaded some and I also informed her about the importanse of VTRS permission due to unreliable license information on Itch.io. Currently, these Ren'Py images are the only ones sourced from actual games. Given the time and effort I invested in finding openly licensed example screenshots for Ren'Py and Visual Novels, I would like to understand how the Our Personal Space screenshots are considered to be more promotional than other images in Video game screenshots by game category? Zache (talk) 19:38, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Support That seems in scope, see also Our Personal Space (Q111906646) Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 10:03, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: See above. --Yann (talk) 11:33, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Ato de assinatura do Termo de Compromisso para a implantação do curso de Medicina - 21-03-2018.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

File:Ato de assinatura do Termo de Compromisso para a implantação do curso de Medicina - 21-03-2018.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Reason: Public Domain Mark 1.0 now are accepted on Commons, see also COM:PDM. A1Cafel (talk) 16:14, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose The PDM is acceptable only in cases where the person posting to Flickr is the actual photographer. The image is no longer on Flickr, so we cannot determine that and the Flickr review bot does not check it. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:41, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 11:32, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Retrato de Andrea Bayardo en la calle de Madrid.jpg

La imagen es relevante para el artículo y cumple con los criterios de contenido de Wikipedia. La imagen tiene una licencia adecuada y ha sido tomada por Vico Vang quien dio permiso para que sea publicada. La imagen fue eliminada por error o porque no se entendió su relevancia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gutierrezigq (talk • contribs) 14:25, 6 May 2023‎ (UTC)

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

Oppose The photographer, Vico Vang, must himself send a free license using VRT. This image will be restored automatically without further action by the uploader if and when a free license is received, read, and approved at VRT. The current backlog at VRT is 11 days. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:41, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 14:48, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Mónica Gutiérrez Artero.jpg

This file is a picture shared by the author directly from her cam. I have permission to use for this article in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pablomad Wiki08 (talk • contribs) 15:47, 6 May 2023 (UTC) (UTC)

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

Oppose Please ask the copyright holder to confirm the license by email. Thanks, Yann (talk) 15:47, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: Per Yann. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:10, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:La_Isla_Vertical_2022_portada.jpg

Please undelete. We have permission per Ticket:2023050410008316. Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 16:16, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: VRT permission. --Reinhard Kraasch (talk) 19:05, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Lemaitre (cropped).jpg

Please restore the following pages:

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

Reason: apparently the license has been found, if it is a cropped version of File:Lemaitre.jpg, as proven by this edit by the cropped version's uploader. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:03, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Undeleted. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 05:33, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: See above. --Yann (talk) 14:49, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Europa Tower Vilnius in October 2017.png

Should Have Been Transferred To Another Wikipedia Language — Preceding unsigned comment added by B18IDH (talk • contribs) 03:00, 1 May 2023‎ (UTC)

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

Oppose You can request temporary undeletion for that purpose, but you specify which WP you will move the image to. The target WP must accept Fair use. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:00, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

@Jameslwoodward: Except for Wikipedias which have chosen to adopt a FoP-US-only policy, like English Wikipedia. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:53, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

@B18IDH: A reminder to specify which Wikipedia you want this transferred to. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:02, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: No response for a week. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:12, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:GastonFrias.jpg

La razón por la que pido que devuelvan la foto es porque yo soy el fotógrafo y tengo los derechos de esa foto que quiero subir como libre de derechos para utilizarse. Tengo el archivo original tomado con una cámara Canon 6D junto a Gastón Frías, el retratado, y tengo los derechos de esa imagen. Siendo el autor con los derechos de esa foto, quiero darlos a libertad de uso en Wikipedia. Se utilizó un link como prueba de violación de derechos que no son los autores de la foto, de hecho ese mismo sitio web sacó la foto del instagram del retratado. La foto está libre de derechos y quiero que se vuelva a subir.

--Facusaldias23 (talk) 20:06, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: When an image is small, has no EXIF, and appears with a copyright notice elsewhere, policy requires that the actual photographer must send a free license using VRT. Alternately you could upload the image at full camera rewolution with full EXIF using the same file name. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:55, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Photo Ruben Alcantar R..jpg

Good evening,

I would like to ask why my photo was deleted from Wikipedia commons, as it was a photo that I took myself, in order to create my own biography, as I'm a pianist, so the objective of it is to show my face, as it is always needed in a biography.

So please reconsider the deletion of it.

Thanks in advance,

Rubén Alcántar.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Doctor Gradus Debussy (talk • contribs) 05:42, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Info

es:Rubén Alcántar is tagged for speedy deletion at Spanish Wikipedia. Thuresson (talk) 06:33, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: We do not keep photographs if people who are judged not notable. This could be restored if and when WP accepts an article. Also note that writing your own article is a violation on most WPs and the fact that no one else has written one is a strong indicator that the subject is not notable. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:52, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Michelle McGaw.jpg

File is from the public domain. https://www.rilegislature.gov/representatives/mcgaw/Pages/Biography.aspx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snowypie (talk • contribs) 13:26, 6 May 2023‎ (UTC)

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

Oppose There is no reason to believe it is PD -- the source site has "©2023 State of Rhode Island General Assembly" and Rhode Island is not one of the few states that makes all its works PD. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:35, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Rhode Island is not like Massachusetts where that would be public domain. https://copyright.lib.harvard.edu/states/rhode_island/ Abzeronow (talk) 16:35, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 16:09, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Andi Idjo Karaeng Lalolang c. 1957-1960.jpg

File:Andi Idjo Karaeng Lalolang c. 1957-1960.jpg Nurbaitita7y 7 May 2023

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nurbaititaru (talk • contribs) 00:20, 7 May 2023‎ (UTC)

Oppose No reason for undeletion provided. Most probably still under a copyright. Yann (talk) 11:31, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: per Yann. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:48, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:V. Silvestrov (film poster) EN.jpg

Fair use rationale for V.Silvestrov (film)

For an article about a film, the original poster is arguably one of the most important images that could be included.
No free or public domain images have been located for this film.
The image is of lower resolution than the original poster (copies made from it will be of inferior quality).
The poster is to suggest something of the film's genre and style.
The poster is being used for informational purposes only, and its use is not believed to detract from the original film in any way.
The poster is used on various websites, and its use on Wikipedia does not make it significantly more accessible than it already is.
The poster's use on Wikipedia is entirely encyclopedic in nature.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Spiridon Svidlov (talk • contribs) 14:52, 7 May 2023‎ (UTC)

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

If you want to use this photo under fair use conditions you have to upload it directly on Wikipedia and not to Commons where fair use content is not accepted. --GPSLeo (talk) 15:53, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Fair Use is not accepted on Commons--Trade (talk) 16:22, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: No fair use on Commons. --Yann (talk) 08:18, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:RAAAF_-_Bunker_599.jpg

Dear reader,

The image in the subject line was deleted together with two other images. However, the copyright holder gave persmission for these images to be published on Wikipedia in under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International. I link below the mail that was sent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org.

--

I hereby affirm that I, Ronald Rietveld, am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the following media work:

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.

Ronald Rietveld 2023-03-23

--

Could these images be undeleted so I can restore the wikipedia page? If not, could you tell me what procedure to follow in order to get the release of permission registered correctly? I thank you in advance for your response.

Best, FromAbilityToNeed (talk) 18:36, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Please follow the procedures at COM:VRT. Thuresson (talk) 06:13, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: This image will be restored automatically without further action by the uploader if and when a free license is received, read, and approved at VRT. The current backlog at VRT is 11 days. . . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:49, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Iranian pre-revolutionary film posters

The following files are film posters published in Iran before 1979, and they will fall in the public domain. The uploader had tagged them with wrong license.

HeminKurdistan (talk) 06:04, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

~~Oppose~~ Looking at the subject matter, it is pretty clear these are pre-revolutionary. COM:Iran is not as clear as it might be, but I think the 30 year term applies only to photographs and movies. As posters, I think these have a 50 year term from the death of the creator.

Also, if these movies were created outside of Iran, the posters were probably created in the country of origin of the movies and will have a copyright from that country. Even if that copyright has expired, the URAA would apply. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:18, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

@Jameslwoodward I think these posters are subject to the article 13 of Iranian law ("اثرهایی که در نتیجه سفارش پدید می‌آید", literally "works that are created as a result of an order"), whose rights belong to the one who orders ("سفارش‌دهنده") and not the creator ("پدیدآورنده"). The orderer is the film production company, a legal person, and the work falls in the public domain regardless of the medium, per article 16. HeminKurdistan (talk) 14:49, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

That's probably true of their status in Iran. However, it leaves open the question of whether they were created in Iran or elsewhere. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:50, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

In my opinion, there is no reason to think that the country of origin is not Iran and that would be an unreasonable doubt, especially when multiple Iran-based authors existed (including the company Khane-ye Agahi and contract illustrators such as Heddat or Bateni) and there are no known foreign creators for Iranian posters in the 1960s/1970s. HeminKurdistan (talk) 14:02, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

If the movies were created in Iran, then you are absolutely right. However, if the movies were created elsewhere, then it is very likely that the posters were created in the same country as the movies. There is no reason to believe that an American or British film company, releasing its films in many countries around the world would go to each country to create the posters. This can be easily answered by someone who reads Farsi. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:46, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Why these would not have been created in Iran? Yann (talk) 15:49, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Most of these are Filmfarsi and in Persian. Produced only to be screened in Iran. Hanooz 16:56, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Finally an answer to the fundamental question. I withdraw my opposition. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:12, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Support Posters not under copyright--Trade (talk) 16:24, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: See above. @HeminKurdistan: Please fix the date, source, and author. --Yann (talk) 20:06, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Files to Undelete: Images for Harvey Newquist II

File: Harvey Pope John Paul II.jpg

File: HPN II.jpg

File: HPN_2_Data_General.jpg

These files are promotional, used by a now defunct company, Data General. There does not appear to be any reason for a mass deletion.

TrainTracking1 (talk) 06:38, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Certainly not the uploader's own works, so a permission from the copyright holder is needed. Yann (talk) 11:27, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose DG's intellectual property, including its copyrights, were almost certainly sold as part of winding up the company. Whether or not that is the case, the images are still under copyright and cannot be kept on Commons. See Orphan work. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:30, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 18:21, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Khanzada Khan Utmanzai

Khanzada khan lived in Dhindha Haripur Hazara. He is Utmanzai Pathan by cast. He passed matric from Government No1 School Haripur then he completed F.Sc (Pre-Engineering) from Punjab Group of College Haripur. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khanzada Utmanzai (talk • contribs) 07:46, 7 May 2023‎ (UTC)

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

Oppose We do not keep personal photos of non-contributors. See Scope. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:18, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 18:21, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Bimlesh.jpg

This is my picture for the my self purpose. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaishartistx (talk • contribs) 11:22, 7 May 2023 (UTC) (UTC)

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

Oppose We do not keep personal photos of non-contributors. See Scope. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:19, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 18:21, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Zebra-Nha-san-xuat-may-quet-ma-vach-uy-tin-tren-the-gioi-1024x683.png

It's free content from NGO - Barcode technology. Also these images is exist and free to use. I Asked the source already, i understand and well agree with the rule. If you need proofs of asking for use image on Wikipedia, i can give it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pnthai88vn (talk • contribs) 08:33, 8 May 2023 (UTC) (UTC)

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

@Pnthai88vn:

Oppose We need a formal written permission from the copyright holder for a free license. Please see COM:VRT for the procedure. Thanks, Yann (talk) 08:36, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 08:45, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Samson & Marie (logo).jpg

Want to see it back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editoraabelgium (talk • contribs) 16:59, 8 May 2023‎ (UTC)

Oppose No reason provided. This is a video screenshot, so it is under a copyright. Yann (talk) 18:23, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: Needs a free license from the copyright holder. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:23, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Ethan Klein 2023.jpg

It is entirely free to use, as stated by Klein. In early January he stated “… I am opening our [H3 Podcasts’] IP (intellectual property) to the world… If you want to [use]… anything with me in it… go for it man. Monetize it. I will not claim, I will not remove, I will not do anything.” Klein clearly has given his explicit permission to utilize this in the way that has been. Evidence of this can be seen in this clip from an episode of the podcast which predates the screengrab: https://youtube.com/q2GGi9hbrZo Kdog5454 (talk) 18:40, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

It’s frankly quite generous an assessment to call that an explicit permission. Please read [3]: “If a license is vaguely worded, it may not behave as we would like in a court of law.” --Geohakkeri (talk) 19:45, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Respectfully, I don’t think there was anything remotely vague about the wording there and it clearly states consent to use the content. What part about it concerns you as far as vagueness?? Kdog5454 (talk) 18:40, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

On the face of it, seems probably OK, but custom random one-off licenses can have various pitfalls that may need examining. Some are OK (see {{WTFPL}} for example, though even that actually got a second version to clarify some stuff. For one example, we need licenses to be irrevocable, and the explicit wording may need to be parsed to see about situations like that. Additionally, if he is in the photo, did he take it? If not, how does he own the copyright? Maybe he is waiving publicity rights, but he would need to actually own the copyright in order to waive those rights. Carl Lindberg (talk) 20:07, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Ethan Klein unequivocally owns the copyright to the show he produces and owns the rights to, therefore the copyright being waived is infact applicable to the image AND his publicity rights. Regarding the concern about custom random one-off licenses having pitfalls I feel that Klein's statement regarding the use of his intellectual property was clear and unambiguous. He has waived his copyright entirely, so there is no ambiguity about the terms of use. Once again, please correct me if I’m wrong on any of this or missing any points. Kdog5454 (talk) 20:18, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Support Seems pretty obvious there is no copyright--Trade (talk) 20:45, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

OK. Where is the license statement? The link above doesn't work for me. Carl Lindberg (talk) 21:05, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Approx 10:42 https://youtube.com/live/y19qnDm2tDs?feature=share Kdog5454 (talk) 21:13, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

"If you are uploading full VODs, that you cannot do." Seems like he gave permission for highlight clips, and some uses in that area, even if monetizing them. That should allow for photo captures too, but the danger area is whether they allow all sorts of derivative uses, or just the types explicitly mentioned. That is probably where any arguments would be. We would probably need the video clip with the licensing statement uploaded too, just for verification's sake, if we think it's OK. Well-meaning licenses can sometimes go off the rails if there was something they did not intend to allow, and the permission can be argued to not allow it. Or they change their mind, and it can be argued to be revocable (though not sure that one could be, given the statement). The license wording should be verbatim, and not try to interpret what was said. Carl Lindberg (talk) 21:52, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ethan Klein 2023.jpg. Not a speedy for sure, converting to DR for discussion. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:58, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:ছোট জামছড়ি বালুবাসা আদর্শ দাখিল মাদ্রাসা.jpg

It's my own work. It's our Madrasah Logo.This Logo Does not have 2nd Owner without me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrightFuture23 (talk • contribs) 08:43, 9 May 2023 (UTC) (UTC)

Not done: Not currently deleted, but a permission is needed. Please see COM:VRT for the procedure. --Yann (talk) 08:44, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:The Kerala Story poster.jpg

This file is uploaded at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Kerala_Story#/media/File:The_Kerala_Story_poster.jpg. which is a english wikipedia page. It should be at the commons wikimedia page so it can be used for any language wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GSSSKatawar (talk • contribs) 03:54, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

It is uploaded under the English Wikipedia under a claim of fair use, but such "fair use" images are not permitted on Commons in line with the global licensing policy. If your language edition of Wikipedia allows local uploads and has a non-free content policy that allows fair use, it would be wise to locally upload it there. If you local language edition of Wikipedia does not allow this, then the file cannot be uploaded for use on that project.

Cheers! — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 04:20, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: Fair Use is not possible on Commons. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:59, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Logo Chianti.pdf

This deletion is not correct. It does not matter if you want to double check the identity of the uploader. A VTRS is not needed in this case. I know because I read the template inserted and it was correct sending to the right explanation. Take for example File:Logo of AC Milan.svg, it's the same case. The logo is not original per se, it can have a trademark but not a copyright. In this case the shape is even more simplified, it's just a string. It's not necessary to specify, but the font is not original as well, it was in use since centuries on wine barreland wooden boxes. So please restore. Thanks.--Alexmar983 (talk) 10:50, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Comment PD-textlogo, however this is the wrong format. PDF is for text documents. It should be reuploaded as PNG. Yann (talk) 11:02, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

So that should have the reply, not a deletion (I still have my doubt but whatever)... they will upload again but this deletion is IMHO dysfunctional. is it clear they do not need a VTRS for this? I can probably upload myself....--Alexmar983 (talk) 13:20, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Yes, the rationale for the deletion was wrong, but there is no reason to keep a logo in PDF format. Yann (talk) 16:09, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

I am not in their mind, I just saw the deletion of a file that I knew was there since many months... but I could guess why. Pdf is both flexible for many uses AND open to vectorialization. There was no reason not to give as a pdf instead of another format for them. I mean, are we going to delete it even if it's a svg? And why? it's free in any case and it's more useful for everybody. They were probably trying to help more future reuse, keeping a pdf format.--Alexmar983 (talk) 17:28, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: Restored, as the tagging and subsequent deletion were obviously wrong, and reasonable arguments were made for the restoration on this specific format - and the file was actually in use as it is when it was wrongly deleted.. -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 19:33, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Statue-of-Date-Masamune-in-Aobayama-Park-Sendai-2016.jpg

This file is a photograph of a statue placed in a public place in the public domain of Japan. I asked the following questions in order to proceed with the discussion in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Statue-of-Date-Masamune-in-Aobayama-Park-Sendai-2016.jpg 20230413.

"We can upload regardless of URAA in countries with Freedom of panorama such as Germany. But photos of bronze statues that have become public domain can be used freely in Japan, but they are affected by URAA. Is there a difference between the two? Please let me know if this has been discussed elsewhere.

It's been a few days and no one has replied. I reiterate point out the following the problem. Is there a difference in legal status between photos uploaded as Freedom of panorama and photos uploaded as public domain? Although both are photos that can be used freely by law in their home countries, they are affected by URAA. However, while the former can be uploaded regardless of URAA, the latter has been requested to be deleted because of URAA. If there is no difference in the legal status of both photos, it is very inexplicable that public domain images in the home country are deleted by URAA, and if only URAA is respected, Freedom of panorama should not be accepted. How you do you feel about it? Those who vote for deletion should explain this inconsistency properly."

However, before the reply was written, the image was deleted and the request was closed solely reason because of URAA. I questioned the administrator but he refused to interact. (When I was an administrator, I answered all questions and corrected any errors.) Therefore, I have to point out the problem again here. A statue that is public domain in its home country meets all requirements of Commons:Freedom of panorama. Also, there is no difference between the two that are affected by URAA. And Commons:URAA-restored copyrights clearly states that URAA is not the only reason for deletion. Due to the above, this image meets the policy of commons and there is no legitimate reason for deletion, so I request withdrawal of deletion.--Y.haruo (talk) 13:07, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose The difference between Germany and Japan is that Germany has FoP for sculpture permanently placed outdoors. Japan's FoP applies only to architecture, so if a sculpture is under copyright in Japan or the USA, a photo of it infringes on that copyright.

In this case, the sculptor died in 1953, so the work was under copyright in Japan until ~~2013~~ 2003. That is well after the URAA date, so the work will be under copyright in the USA until 95 years after publication. The assertion that the URAA does not apply is incorrect. Confusion arises because Commons allowed works covered by the URAA during the period before 2012 when the US Supreme Court decided that the URAA was constitutional. We decided then not to do a mass deletion of URAA affected images, but images uploaded after 2012 must be free of URAA copyright. This is not free, so it cannot be kept without a free license from the sculptor's heir. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:55, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

How did you calculate? This statue became public domain in Japan at the end of 2003. Y.haruo (talk) 14:28, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

~~That's correct, thank you for the correction. However, the URAA date is 1996, so it does not change anything. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:44, 9 May 2023 (UTC)~~

I do not claim to be immune to URAA. As above, "there is no difference between the two that are affected by URAA." Despite this, images uploaded as Freedom of panorama have not been subject to delete since 2012. I'm asking why one is deleted and the other can be uploaded regardless, even though the images are in the same position. Y.haruo (talk) 15:26, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

I am not sure we apply URAA for sculpture if the picture is free. Yann (talk) 16:11, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

I've definitely seen restoration of files of sculptures be denied on URAA grounds in countries with no FOP for sculpture with freely licensed photographs. I wouldn't be surprised to be URAA deletion of sculptures with freely licensed photographs either. Abzeronow (talk) 16:40, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Support We allow photos of modern sculptures in Germany even if they are copyrighted in both Germany and the US, and a photo of the sculpture might be copyrighted in the US per lex loci protectionis. This is of course an inconsistency, but essentially it means that there is a de facto Commons policy that images allowed under FOP in the source country do not have to be free in the US. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:01, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Support Thank you KoH -- I took me a while, but I now understand the inconsistency here. If we have a copyrighted sculpture in Germany that qualifies for FoP, we permit a photograph of it on Commons even though the sculpture has a US copyright and there is no US FoP for it.

On the other hand, I argued above that because it has a US copyright, we should not allow a photograph of a sculpture in Japan that is free of copyright in Japan.

On reflection, that's backwards. The sculpture in Japan is free of copyright. The work in Germany is copyrighted. The Japanese work is, therefore, freer (in a sense) than the German work, so why don't we keep it?

I think we should consider a new policy -- that Commons will keep photographs that are derivative of works that may have a US copyright but that are free of copyright in the country of origin where the derivative photograph was taken.

I would appreciate it if Carl and others comment. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:50, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: See above. --Yann (talk) 11:59, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:The Penguin (TV series) logo.jpg

Assuming it is the same as in English Wikipedia: [4] it is below the US threshold of originality. Only text and one circle. See precedent for stylized letters and circle(s) [5]. Best, CandyScythe (talk) 17:15, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: Probably PD-textlogo, and was deleted out of process. If there is any issue, please create a DR. --Yann (talk) 21:52, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:د طلعت مرزوق.jpg

برجاء معرفة سبب الحذف واسترجاع المقالة مع معرفة كيفية الحماية من الحذف مجددا وشكرا — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aisha Talaat (talk • contribs) 22:09, 9 May 2023‎ (UTC)

Google Translate: Talaat Marzouk. Please know the reason for deletion and retrieve the article, knowing how to protect against deletion again, thank you
Thuresson (talk) 22:35, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: No reason provided. Wikimedia Commons is not a social media. We do not accept personal from non contributors. Please read COM:SCOPE, and the message on your talk page. --Yann (talk) 21:49, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Page for Brian_Kennedy (Record Producer)

I am writing to request the undeletion of the Wikipedia page for Brian Kennedy (record producer), which was deleted on March 27, 2023 following an Articles for Deletion discussion. Here is the link: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Brian_Kennedy_(record_producer). It is my understanding that there may have been some potential false claims or incorrect credits on the page. But rather than remove the items in question, the whole page was flagged and deleted. I believe that the page was wrongly deleted, as Brian Kennedy is a notable figure in the music industry with a long list of notable accomplishments and accolades.

As evidence of Brian Kennedy's notability, I have attached several reliable sources that discuss his career and contributions to the music industry, including:

- Billboard article mentions: https://www.billboard.com/music/music-news/listen-kelly-clarksons-country-version-of-mr-know-it-all-debuts-499387/, https://www.billboard.com/music/music-news/chris-brown-gets-personal-with-rihanna-on-leaked-graffiti-tracks-266515/, https://www.billboard.com/music/pop/lady-gaga-studio-tour-dates-7655301/
- AllMusic verified catalog for Brian Kennedy, most of which the RIAA has issued Gold and Platinum Certifications for: https://www.allmusic.com/artist/brian-kennedy-mn0002090944/credits
- Verified Grammy nominations: https://www.grammy.com/artists/brian-kennedy/11663

These sources clearly demonstrate Brian Kennedy's significant contributions to the music industry and his impact on popular culture.

I request that the Wikipedia page for Brian Kennedy (record producer) be restored to its original location on Wikipedia so that it can continue to serve as a valuable resource for those interested in learning about his career and contributions to the music industry. If there was, in fact, incorrect information on the original page, I agree that those specific items should be removed from the page, and the verifiable information should continue to live on the page. Wb1251 (talk) 18:32, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: Not a request for undeletion of a file on Commons. You are on the wrong page and project. Please ask on Wikipedia. --Yann (talk) 18:53, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:村上啓介1994ギター.jpg

著作権侵害疑いのため — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roozone (talk • contribs) 17:13, 10 May 2023‎ (UTC)

Due to alleged copyright infringement

translator: Google Translate via — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 21:32, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

@Roozone: それは意味がありません。

That makes no sense. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 21:32, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

削除したいのですが。。。 Roozone (talk) 21:44, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: Not currently deleted, but will probably be deleted soon, as there is no license and no permission. --Yann (talk) 21:47, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Isabella_3.jpg

I uploaded this file yesterday as I have permission from Isabella Giovinazzo, owner of this image, to use freely and in perpetuity.

Giovinazzo commissioned Danielle Castano to take this photograph and therefore owns the copyright to this image.--LachlanPat (talk) 21:28, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

@LachlanPat: In what country was the commission executed? Please have Danielle Castano send permission via VRT. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 21:36, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: This image will be restored automatically without further action by the uploader if and when a free license is received, read, and approved at VRT. The current backlog at VRT is 11 days. . . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:35, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:AbdurRahman.jpg

this picture for a additional page please restore it . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 360REVENGER (talk • contribs) 11 May 2023‎ (UTC)

Oppose en:Draft:Abdur Rahman Sagor has been deleted anyway. Thuresson (talk) 03:03, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose. See Special:Undelete/File:AbdurRahman.jpg. Wutsje 03:25, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: Sock, out of scope. --Yann (talk) 11:57, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Hathras Case judgment.pdf

This is Indian Judiciary judgment file which is copyright free. Please Undelete it. I will add proper link where it is available on court official website. अनिरुद्ध कुमार (talk) 17:05, 7 May 2023 (UTC) Oppose ~~Why is this in scope? We do not generally keep court decisions on Commons -- even for important cases.~~ . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:15, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Support Obviously in scope. This is could be used to transcribe the text on Wikisource. Yann (talk) 20:16, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Why is this in scope? What is the importance of this case? And, by the way, here is the entire file description:

== Summary ==

indian judiciary judgement2023

|Description=

|Source=

|Date=

|Author=

|Permission=

|other_versions=

}}

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

Without categories and description, this file is lost in our almost 100 million files. Also note that the uploader is certainly not the author as claimed. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:39, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

It obviously needs a better description, but I assume all info that is needed is included in the document itself. Do we have an abundance of documents from Indian courts? If not, then I assume that we should be glad to have it as an example, regardless of the importance of the case. If the case is important, then Wikisource might want to have access to it. –LPfi (talk) 18:10, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Support Please retrieve the file as its a court judgement which might fall under ({{PD-EdictGov}}). In fact Supreme Court of India has clearly stated that Court judgement is not only EdictGov, it is also public domain as per its judgement. I will update the license of the file once you retrieve it. Additionally it has a great scope and importance on concerned language Wikisource. Thanks. --अजीत कुमार तिवारी (talk) 12:43, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

The issue here is not copyright -- it is almost certainly PD. The issue is, Is it important enough to be kept on Commons -- is it in scope? So far there is nothing here about whether this is a decision on an important subject or two neighbors arguing about a property line. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:40, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

As said by @Yann, it is important for Wikisource to transcribe the text. On Hindi Wikisource we were proofreading it. What else scope are you searching for? अजीत कुमार तिवारी (talk) 16:35, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Support per potential use on Hindi Wikisource. Abzeronow (talk) 17:18, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

अजीत कुमार तिवारी, again, we keep only things that are important, notable, see COM:SCOPE. Please explain the significance of this paper so that we can judge whether it should be kept on Commons or not. Your reluctance to tell us what it is about suggests to me that it does not qualify. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:03, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

I think that there is indeed an educational use in seeing what an Indian Judiciary judgment looks like. The individual case may or may not be important, but we want examples of such documents. If the case is important enough for Hindi Wikisource to want it, then it is in scope as an individual document, but unless we have similar documents, it is in scope as an example regardless. –LPfi (talk) 14:10, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

@Jameslwoodward: -- Please see COM:INUSE for scope. As the file is in use or usable in Hindi Wikisource as stated above, it is automatically in scope. No further justification is necessary. There is no requirement for showing its importance here at Commons, usability in another Wiki project is sufficient for scope. Hrishikes (talk) 15:01, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

It is a deleted file -- it cannot be in use. Asking what the file is about is a reasonable question, given that there is nothing at all in the file description. The ongoing reluctance to tell us what it is makes me very suspicious that this is a trivial matter. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:51, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

It was deleted as missing permission, so it might have been in use at that time. Hard to check now, unless you know from what page it was linked. Anyway, I think it can be restored as in scope as example of such a document, and if it promptly gets used, only the better. I don't think we need to discuss the content here, just add it to the description once the file is restored. –LPfi (talk) 16:11, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

@Jameslwoodward: -- You are wrong there. The file is in use there. There is an index for it: hi:s:विषयसूची:Hathras_Case_judgment.pdf. Irrespective of your views on what is trivial, as per the rule I cited, It should be stressed that Commons does not overrule other projects about what is in scope. If an image is in use on another project (aside from use on talk pages or user pages), that is enough for it to be within scope. Moreover, the name of the file is in English. If you really wanted to know what it is about, a simple Google search would be sufficient, like https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/why-hathras-judgment-comes-as-a-serious-blow-to-justice/articleshow/98473616.cms. -- Hrishikes (talk) 16:09, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I think I recognise the case as one reported on even here. There should be no doubt it is notable. –LPfi (talk) 16:14, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Support Finally, an answer to a simple question. I do wonder what took you so long. The Admin who restores it will need a full file description, so I suggest you use the template above and fill in all the blanks. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:46, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Support Questioning the in-scope status of files in use at wikisource is a bad precedent IMHO. I hope this file is undeleted without much further ado.--Nahum (talk) 08:30, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: See above. Actually this case is significant. See the source. --Yann (talk) 09:53, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Ola_Bamgboye-Documenta.jpg

Sebastian Kusenberg has sent the required email for licensing to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org

for file: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ola_Bamgboye-Documenta.jpg

--FellNuisance (talk) 15:47, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: This image will be restored automatically without further action by the uploader if and when a free license is received, read, and approved at VRT. The current backlog at VRT is 11 days. . . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:47, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:La grande mosquée hassan II.jpg

Request temporary undeletion To allow transfer of fair use content to Arabic Wikipedia. --Flaspec (talk) 19:31, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Done per https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Non-free_content

Flaspec, please confirm when you are done here. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:06, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Closing request, available at ar:ملف:La grande mosquée hassan II arwiki.jpg. Thuresson (talk) 20:47, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Rosa Lilia Torres.png

Please restore the following pages:

File:Rosa Lilia Torres.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Reason: The file is my propiety M3CS1C4NO (talk) 18:07, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Really? If that's the case, please contact COM:VRT. Yann (talk) 11:42, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: This image will be restored automatically without further action by the uploader if and when a free license is received, read, and approved at VRT. The current backlog at VRT is 11 days. . . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:34, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Flag of Kitscoty.png

File:Kitscoty-Village.jpg I cropped an image but why did someone removed the license anthen deleted? I was not active after a few days. Alexphangia Talk 08:18, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: No reason to delete this. --Yann (talk) 10:29, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:1041X000.jpg

Hi,

I do not understand why this image has been deleted by one of your advisers. I am the editor in chief of our teachers' association journal. This is why I regularly post updated version of our journal's cover on our Wikipedia page.

Although our journal is fully available to subscribers only, our cover and table of contents can be accessed freely on our website as shown here: https://bupdoc.udppc.asso.fr/consultation/sommaires-an.php More specifically concerning this image: https://bupdoc.udppc.asso.fr/textes/fichierjoint/1041/1041X000.tif

Please let me know if I need to tick a box or send a letter (and to whom) to avoid such deletions in the future.

   Sincerely,
   Vincent Parbelle
   Honorary president of UdPPC
   Editor in chief of Le Bup Physique-Chimie

Vincent Parbelle (talk) 09:40, 12 May 2023 (UTC)Vincent Parbelle

@Vincent Parbelle: Bonjour,

Il faut confirmer la licence par email. Voyez COM:VRT/fr pour la procédure. Ou il faut ajouter une licence libre sur votre site web.

Hi, The license should be confirmed by email. Please see COM:VRT for the procedure. Or a free license should be mentioned on your website. Yann (talk) 09:45, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

"our cover and table of contents can be accessed freely on our website" -- "Accessed freely" does not mean freely licensed -- it means only that people may read it freely. In order to make the web site freely available for Commons, you must put an explicit license on it, preferably CC-BY. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:36, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: File would be undeleted if and when a permission is received and validated. --Yann (talk) 16:34, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Chad Price on red carpet at 2023 JUNO Awards in Edmonton.jpg

This file belongs to Inthisdream. It was gifted to the person depicted in the image, Chad Price, by the photographer of the image, CARAS. I am Chad's manager attempting to add to his wiki page as it is now our property. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Inthisdream (talk • contribs) 19:35, 12 May 2023‎ (UTC)

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

Oppose When you uploaded the file you claimed that you were the actual photographer. Now you say that is not true. Such false claims are a violation of Commons rules and may lead to your being blocked from editing here.

In order for the image to be restored, the actual photographer must send a free license using VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:46, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Info

Photograher is Dale MacMillan, according to Getty Images. Thuresson (talk) 20:42, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose per Jameslwoodward; needs free license from the photographer. Glrx (talk) 00:27, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: A formal written permission from the copyright holder is needed. Please see COM:VRT for the procedure. --Yann (talk) 16:38, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Meghan, Duchess of Sussex in 2018

This deletion was wrong. See Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with Photo by Mark Tantrum for a complete and detailed argument. See also COM:AB#A1Cafel and email from photographer. Yann (talk) 19:38, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Can someone comment on this please? Yann (talk) 06:37, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Done Closed the current DR and restored the similar previously deleted images. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:14, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Photos from Parlamentul Republicii Moldova Flickr stream

Another wrong deletion. The photographer is an employee of the Moldovan Parliament, and these are therefore in the public domain as works for hire. Yann (talk) 11:54, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

I don't understand. The list of works not protected in Moldova is very short:

legal acts, other administrative, political or judicial acts (laws, court decisions), or to the official translations thereof;
state emblems and official signs (flags, armorial bearings, decorations, monetary signs, etc.);
folklore expressions;
daily news and facts of simple informational nature. Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Moldova/en#Not_protected

There doesn't seem to be anything like the US rule that all works created by a Federal employee in the course of his duties is PD. I also note that we have 73 photographs in the series

File:01.02.2021 Ceremonia de înmânare a Diplomelor Parlamentului primarilor localităților din municipiul Chișinău (50897495948).jpg

Since the people are all Covid masked, I see little need for more than one. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:06, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Per our guidelines, Moldovan law does not put anything produced by a state employee in the course of their duties automatically in the public domain. Unlike the US (federal level). Also, work for hire is a US term. The parliament may hold full rights because of the photographer's employment contract, but there are doubts as explained in the DR. --Rosenzweig τ 06:29, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 07:59, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Viber image 2021-09-21 10-51-51-101.jpg

The photos were made on analog photo camera in corresponding years in 20th century. All the photos are in my family album, or some of the files were sent to me by my father via Viber. All the files are related to the page and the person described in that page https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%97%D0%B0%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%8F%D0%BD,_%D0%A0%D1%83%D0%B4%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%84_%D0%9E%D0%B3%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87. The person is my grandfather, and I can assure that I own the permission to upload and relate the files to the page as I and my father own the photos! Please undo deletion as soon as possible, as that page we need for annual birthday celebration of the person described in the page. Regards, Nerses Nzakoyan (talk) 15:27, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Owning a paper or digital copy of a photograph does not give you the right to freely license its use as we require. That right is almost always held by the original photographer or his heir. In order for us to restore these, you must find the original photographer of each photograph or his heir and have them send a free license using VRT.

I also note that when you uploaded the images, you claimed that you yourself were the actual photographer. Such false claims are a serious violation of Commons rules and may lead to your being blocked from editing here.

Finally, I note that you have made many edits to Закоян, Рудольф Оганесович. I do not know about WP:RU, but most of the Wikipedias have strict rules about conflict of interest. If WP:RU has such a rule, you should not be editing the article without at the very least, disclosing the fact that the subject was your grandfather. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:10, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 07:52, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File: South Padre Island Skyline.jpg

This image is available for free, as expressed by the author on Shutterstock, meaning it can be used by anybody, which is allowed on Wikimedia (COM:POL)-Theunderratedtaco — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theunderratedtaco (talk • contribs) 21:04, 14 May 2023‎ (UTC)

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

Theunderratedtaco, where on Shutterstock is it stated that this image is freely licensed? The button "Download for free" in no way means that the image is automatically freely licensed. — Huntster (t @ c) 21:46, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Agreed. Almost everything on the Web is "free" to look at, but almost everything on the Web has a copyright and cannot be kept on Commons unless it is explicitly freely licensed. The Shutterstock licensing terms are quite liberal, but they do not allow much of what is required for images on Commons. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:49, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 07:51, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Example.jpg

Ufabet casino file i want it back because the logo is for my business panel please help me to undelete it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marvelprw (talk • contribs) 11:59, 15 May 2023‎ (UTC)

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

Oppose Probably refers to File:Ufabet.png which was deleted as out of scope. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:11, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Info

OP has just been permanently blocked from English Wikipedia, see en:User:Marvelprw. It may be so that the same image is uploaded again by en:User:Ertakc 0nder. Thuresson (talk) 19:05, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: Obviously not. Advertisement, out of scope. --Yann (talk) 07:48, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Halle Bailey performing Baby Girl live, December 2020.png

The file was recently deleted as "Possible copyvio, taken from a video that doesn't have a clear free license". However, the video on Vimeo has a clear CC BY 3.0 license, you just have to click on "More" to see it. The uploader on Vimeo is Alfred Marroquin, a director, so it does not seem to be a case of license laundering. If the deletion is confirmed, there are at least 3 more screenshots from the same videos that should be deleted: File:Chloe x Halle performing Baby Girl live, December 2020 (1).png, File:Chloe x Halle performing Baby Girl live, December 2020 (2).png, File:Chloe Bailey performing Baby Girl live, December 2020.png. @Günther Frager and Infrogmation: --Jaqen (talk) 13:19, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

I checked it again and you are right. I missed the license in the More section. I'm sorry for the false positive, I will take it into account when reviewing screenshots from Vimeo. Günther Frager (talk) 13:53, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

On a second look, I still think there is a problem with the license. He seems to be the director of the video, but I don't think he has the copyright of the video. After all, it is unlikely he holds the rights from the song that is included in the video. On his profile he also has advertisements that he did for Spotify and Nike with CC-BY license, but I don't think he holds the copyright. Günther Frager (talk) 14:11, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: per Gunther. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:49, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Example.jpg Eng Jaime Filipe

Não percebo porque apagaram a fotografia do Eng.ª Jaime Filipe. Este ano celebra-se o centenário do seu nascimento e é importante que não a retirem. Obrigado, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fbgodinho (talk • contribs) 13:21, 15 May 2023‎ (UTC)

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

Not done: No file name provided. --Yann (talk) 21:45, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Ticket#2023040810002521

Hi, please undelete the following files:

Release is available in ticket:2023040810002521.

Thanks! --Martin Urbanec (talk) 18:23, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: @Martin Urbanec: FYI. --Yann (talk) 21:51, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:KeszthelyiErik55318.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

File:KeszthelyiErik55318.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Reason: permission arrived in ticket:2023051210004313. Thanks! Bencemac (talk) 06:06, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: @Bencemac: Please add tags etc. --Rosenzweig τ 06:44, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:B2SpiritGuamCrash.webm

This was deleted in 2018 for reasons which are bewildering to me. Administrator, who is no longer active, stated that the license (PD-GOV) was missing evidence of permission, but it is obvious that the video (captured from a surveillance camera pointed at a runway on a U.S. Air Force base) is public domain. Schierbecker (talk) 00:48, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Support Should have gone through a regular Deletion request instead of speedy deletion, a year and a half after upload. Thuresson (talk) 01:04, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

~~Oppose~~ Perhaps. However, the uploader initially claimed that he was the photographer. Then he changed that to its being a tower video. In view of the uncertainty as to which to believe, I think that PRP requires us to assume that it might be PD-USAF and might be copyrighted to someone else. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:17, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

User:Jameslwoodward, was I not the uploader? I'm assuming I accidentally applied the default {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}}. I was definitely not the videographer and the default tag was obviously placed in error. PD-USAF is the correct tag. Schierbecker (talk) 01:34, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Support If it's the one I see on YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZCp5h1gK2Q ) then I fail to see how it's not PD-USGov -- pretty obviously a video from the control tower or something like that. That source says "security camera" which would make it official. Carl Lindberg (talk) 08:43, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

I'm confused by the "Security Camera" label. On the one hand, the image has "Sector 6" at the top, which does suggest a security camera, but on the other hand the camera is following the takeoff of the first plane and then the crash of the second -- I don't think that security cameras do that. The source is a private YouTube, not the USAF, so I still think we need some sort of proof that the photographer was employed as a photographer by the USAF. If this is an official USAF film, then why isn't the source the USAF? Do we know that this was actually released by the USAF? . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:49, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

It's a camera under control of someone obviously -- maybe remotely operated. I'm sure they video all takeoffs just in case of situations like this. There are more copies from YouTube. When the Air Force releases a video like this, there will be a ton of derivative works / repostings; this is just one. Another is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9hb-OutGAY which says it's Air Force video (actually that one has two videos, including another from the ground). You are claiming there is a significant doubt that someone other than the Air Force videod this... I really don't see it. Carl Lindberg (talk) 17:22, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

User:Jameslwoodward, you voted keep on an image of the same aircraft that I nominated for deletion in 2010. There was zero evidence that the image was PD-USAF, as claimed. No author, not even a source. It could easily have been a publicity photo or media photo. Why is your burden of proof so different in this case? Schierbecker (talk) 00:48, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

That was 13 years and several hundred thousand Commons actions ago, so I can't speak to the one then. This one's history -- claim of authorship, then change -- raised my suspicions of the provenance a little. Note, however, while I have expressed my reservations about the image, I canceled my opposition. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:16, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: See above. --Yann (talk) 11:43, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Daft Punk - Random Access Memories.jpg, File:Random Access Memories 10th Anniversary Edition.jpg

Sony Music Entertainment Sweden has released this under a Creative Commons license. See "Licens: Creative Commons erkännande" under the image in the links below: https://www.mynewsdesk.com/se/sonybmg/images/daft-punk-random-access-memories-188026 https://www.mynewsdesk.com/se/sonybmg/images/daft-punk-random-access-memories-10-aar-2710096 FromtheEndofElo (talk) 11:03, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

As there are many different Creative Commons licenses, this declaration that a Creative Commons applies without stating which one is insufficient. GPSLeo (talk) 18:57, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Hmm. The caption reads "Creative Commons erkännande". Google translates "erkännande" as "recognition" which says to me that it is a CC-BY license. I think we can accept that. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:32, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Support In fact, see [6] -- that is the word that Creative Commons uses. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:30, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Support--Trade (talk) 17:01, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: License reviewed. --Yann (talk) 11:36, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Maria_Knilli_2018_01

Hello, I want to ask for the undeletion of the implementation of this photo in the wikipedia article on Maria Knilli https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_Knilli The photo was published with the explicit consent of the copyright owner, Volker Tittel, Maria Knilli's husband. I am the personal assistant of Maria Knilli and updating the article on her by her request.

Please get in touch with me! Thank you, best regards Gary Vanisian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bertmorane87! (talk • contribs) 08:31, 15 May 2023‎ (UTC)

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

?? There has never been a file named File:Maria_Knilli_2018_01. Your file File:Maria Knilli (2018).jpg was deleted for lack of a license from the photographer. However, you uploaded the same image as File:Maria Knilli 2018.jpg and it has a VRT tag on it, presumably from the actual photographer. Therefore I see no reason to restore the similar file.

You should also be aware that most WPs have strict rules about Conflict of Interest. Paid editing is generally prohibited and at the very least you must disclose your relationship with the subject on your WP:DE user page. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:05, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 20:52, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:SMPTE color bars with tone.ogg

Hi! Please undelete this file because I want a new version of the SMPTE color bars with tone:

File:SMPTE color bars with tone.ogg

Undelete under my name!

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MihaiUpload (talk • contribs) 12:22, 16 May 2023‎ (UTC)

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

Also, don't use comment marks as your edit was lost.. Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:16, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: Nothing to do here -- the file is not deleted. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:16, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Schaltgespräch am Weißen Haus.jpg

Dear Sir or Madam,

the rightholder of the picture, Benjamin Daniel, sent a an email to photosubmission@wikimedia.org and agreed to publish it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International.

Therefore, I would ask, if you could kindly undelete the picture again.

Please excuse the inconveniniences and Kind regards,

Martin Kessler

--Martinjokessler (talk) 15:46, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: This image will be restored automatically without further action by the uploader if and when a free license is received, read, and approved at VRT. The current backlog at VRT is 11 days. . . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:07, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Kazimierz Stepien 2023.png

There is a proper agreement from author sent to VTRS: ticket:2023051010006557 Polimerek (talk) 09:36, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: @Polimerek: Please add the license. --Yann (talk) 11:30, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Litkenhous Ratings Championship trophy.jpg

Permission should have been forthcoming, so I'm surprised it was not emailed.

However, I believe this simple photograph/scan of a plaque created/published in the United States in 1932 without a copyright notice should be permissible via:

Mere mechanical scans or photocopies, made by somebody else, of an object or design old enough to be in the public domain

Photographs, taken either by yourself or someone else, that are faithful reproductions of 2D public domain works of art.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Copyright_rules_by_subject_matter

If someone could check my work on that, this file should be able to be undeleted without the emailed permission of the modern photographer.

Thanks, PK-WIKI (talk) 19:00, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

I'm looking at the deleted file. I agree that if that is a 2D work of art, that can simply be a {{PD-art}}. But I'm a bit less sure of this point: are those sorts of metal sculptures/engravings that have substantial depth and are placed on awards generally considered to be 2D works of art for purposes of copyright law in the United States? — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 19:41, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Only truly flat works fall under Bridgeman; not even coins qualify. There is no license for the photograph. The file description says, "Uploaded a work by Langston Rogers, Special Assistant to the Athletics Director, Ole Miss Rebels". Mr. Rogers must send a free license using VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:46, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Well if it's a work for hire, than someone with copyright authority for the employer. The photographer themselves may not have that authority. The award itself is probably PD, but not sure that's a photo that amounts to a copy, if the one I see in Google cache is the correct one. It's close to the borderline, but the framing isn't exactly on the award itself, and there could be lighting stuff, so not sure we can call that a PD-Art situation. It does not take much, at all, to generate a copyright. Even a photo of a painting which includes the painting's frame may have a copyright, and this is more akin to that (if I'm seeing the right photo). Carl Lindberg (talk) 20:00, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Yes, Google has it in cache. It's a high relief plaque. We don't allow Bridgeman for coins, so I can't see how it could apply to this. The Commons image shows the plaque, a brass plate of names below it, all on a wood background, perfectly framed. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:37, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 18:43, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Гагарин Юрий значок.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

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

Reason: @Ras67 have nominated multiple files, which I have uploaded, for deletion and did not responded to my answers regarding it.

For example, @Ras67 have deleted: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Гагарин Юрий значок.jpg and discussion has been closed, without even your response to my answer, though with a note about:

Copyrighted photo, saying "a pin button makes not a state symbol therefrom! Ras67 (talk) 22:50, 3 May 2023 (UTC)", but that particular photo, you have displayed has water mark of IZOGIZ (or Visual arts publishing house), their products were published with the image of Yuri Gagarin in Moscow in 1961 and later. In 1963-1969 IZOGIZ was part of the publishing house "Soviet Artist" and it was part of the USSR State Committee for Publishing.

That particular pin was purchased by my family during Soviet period, it is one of the first badges dedicated to Yu. A. Gagarin in 1961, I found similar in electronic catalog and provided link to it, where you can find full info with description, also you can see similar pin from publication from January 15, 2015 opened an exhibition of Nizhny Novgorod falerist Vladimir Viktorovich Zharinov "SPACE AGE - ICONS AND SIGNS" at the House of Scientists VNIIEF. I believe all of aforementioned information provide you with my reason to licensed my own photo of this pin under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license as well as under Category:PD-exUSSR-exempt license tags

So I whould like to ask for File:Гагарин Юрий значок.jpg to be undeleted. EgorovaSvetlana (talk) 17:35, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose This looks to me like a copyrighted photograph. I see no basis for the claim that {{PD-RU-exempt}} applies. It is also a very poor reproduction of the pin -- far out of focus, so I don't think it is useful for any educational purpose. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:40, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

@Jameslwoodward my own picture of my own pin, which has been produced in 1961 in former USSR and purchased at that time of exiting historical event which united and inspired people around world deserves to be displayed along with other historical artifacts, sure plenty newer and better souvenir products appeared shortly afterwards, but nowadays unfortunately young people do not recognize Gagarin, you can try to make an experiment, how many young people will recognize him and recall his name, I did and that's is why I am quite persistent to share it with public.

Regarding the quality of picture I made myself, that can be improved and newer better version of the file can be uploaded instead, but that should not be the reason to delete picture of pin displaying Yury Gagarin, I used it on Yuri Gagarin in culture and art page and as you can see similar pictures were used in stamps Soviet space exploration history on Soviet stamps and they are PD-RU-exempt using the same photo as in this first pin. EgorovaSvetlana (talk) 15:22, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

There are many things that it would be nice to have on Commons, but our rules are strict -- we cannot keep an images that infringe on copyrights. In order for the pin to be restored, you must prove that the image is in the public domain or freely licensed. Note also that stamps are a special case which do not have copyrights, see Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Soviet_Union/en#Stamps. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:39, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

@Jameslwoodward & @Ras67 documentary badge/pin of USSR from my own family collection, which I photographed myself, similar you can find in electronic catalog displays image of Yu. A. Gagarin which was highly published:

- Evening Moscow (Evening Moscow) Issue dated April 12, 1961

The national newspapers published news only the next day:

- Soviet Union newspaper Krasnaya Zvezda (Red Star) №88 April 13, 1961

As well as postcards with with a black and white photograph of Yuri Alekseevich Gagarin on the front side:

- postcard The world's first Soviet pilot-cosmonaut Hero of the Soviet Union Yuri Alekseevich Gagarin with information about it IZOGIZ publishing house, 1st offset printing factory of the Leningrad Union of National Economy, 1961. The price is 1 penny. Circulation - 1100000 copies, IZOGIZ was merged into Soviet Artist publishing house of the Union of Artists of the USSR and then State Committee of the Council of Ministers of the USSR for Publishing, Printing and Book Trade , there is detailed story describing this particular Postcard with a photograph of Yuri Gagarin. THE USSR. 1961 (Thanks for the link to Little Stories)

- postcard GLORY TO THE PIONEER OF SPACE EXPLORATION! APRIL 12, 1961. Yu. A. GAGARIN with information about it Rostov-on-Don: Photographic Combinat, 1961. 1 postcard: photo printing, black and white. 8 kop. Circulation 100,000 copies.

Also I have asked if anybody in community has more information about documentary pin/badge on wiki page in Russian Гагарин, Юрий Алексеевич as well as on wiki page in Russian Юрий Гагарин в культуре и искусстве.

As well as asked if any information exists at Memorial Museum of Cosmonautics https://kosmo-museum.ru/contacts

So I would like to ask for File:Гагарин Юрий значок.jpg to be undeleted and any necessary links to information can be added into description of it EgorovaSvetlana (talk) 16:02, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Again, there are many images available for viewing on the web but only those that are PD or freely licensed can be kept on Commons. It is very common for people to take copyrighted images and use them for profit as certainly happened in this case. The sources you mention above have clear copyright notices, but even the absence of a notice does not make an image free. That can happen only by the passage of time or by the copyright holder explicitly giving a free license. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:42, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 18:45, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:BIF Titelblatt 192x.jpg

This has been deleted as part of the deletions in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Die BIF. While I got the reasoning for the deletion of the complete files, the deletion of the picture of the title page was wrong. Magazines as "Die BIF" have been printed at the time in Germany in a way, which has been called "Akzidenzdruck". It means that the printer himself uses a selection from a large set of standard elements (fonts, pageframes, decorative elements for front pages and the like) to produce a simple "layout" along standard rules. This includes illustrations, where a customer could choose from a selection of given illustrations. Neither these layout elements nor their simple recombination makes them eligible for copyright.

Thus I would ask for the undeletion of this file.

Furthermore I never got a reply on my offer to redact the files by making copyrighted elements invisible by blurring them. I would appreciate to know if this is a way to make the contents of it at least partially available again and thus allow the reader to get a basic impression of the contents of the BIF. Your help is appreciated, Denis Barthel (talk) 15:45, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose This may be PD because of its age, but your argument that it is too simple for copyright cannot be correct. The page includes a large photograph which certainly has or had a copyright even if it was picked from a stock file. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:51, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

@Denis Barthel: Is the photographer credited in the journal? Yann (talk) 10:28, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
@Jameslwoodward - @Yann - this is not a photo. This is an illustration, used as part of the set of elements I have just mentioned. Denis Barthel (talk) 10:58, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
@Denis Barthel: OK, but who is the artist then? Yann (talk) 11:07, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
There is no artist mentioned, as the elements in these sets are anonymous. Denis Barthel (talk) 12:04, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

I think we have a language problem here. A photograph is an illustration. So is a drawing, an oil painting, and any other graphic work used in this way. However, it doesn't matter what we call it, what we have is a large work that has or had a copyright in the middle of the page. In order for the file to be restored, in order to avoid the URAA, you must prove that the work was published before 1928 or that it is old and its creator died before 1926. Since you say the work is anonymous, the latter seems unlikely. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:32, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Well, it was published in 1927. At least there is no doubt about this. But if Selli Engler (died 1972) was the copyright holder, it is still under under a copyright in the source country. Yann (talk) 16:36, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

No, Selli Engler did not hold the copyright on the title page illustration. Denis Barthel (talk) 23:40, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Question There are two files here. Which one is this request about? The first, uploaded on 2019-05-01, is apparently ~~the upper portion of the title page~~ the first (not numbered) page of Nr. 1 of this magazine, in black and white. It includes a short story named Die blonde Frau und die Blumen ("Skizze", very short) by Selli Engler and some ornaments (likely the standard elements you described). The other one, uploaded on 2019-07-07, is apparently the full title page of Nr. 2 of this magazine, in color (printed with red ink). It includes the title and some ornaments, an extract from the table of contents, two announcements and what has been described as a photograph (but what might also be some kind of drawing) of a woman with long hair, shown from the left side, kneeling with her head in her hands obscuring her face, wearing some kind of loose pants, apparently topless but with her arm covering her breast. The same illustration is also included on a separate sheet between pages 2 and 3 of this issue (per the PDF which was also deleted). Is this a photograph or some kind of drawing / engraving? This makes a difference in the old version of German Urheberrecht which is still applicable here. --Rosenzweig τ 18:04, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

@Denis Barthel: If it's just the masthead of the magazine (plus the ornaments) you want, we could restore the black and white image and blur the text by Selli Engler. I don't see any copyright problem there. --Rosenzweig τ 18:18, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

I would like to see the full title page of No 2 restored, if possible. Denis Barthel (talk) 22:35, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Since the image I described appears to be a drawing/engraving or similar (so a Werk der bildenden Kunst per the terms of the still applicable older version of German Urheberrecht), we cannot treat it as an anonymous work (Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Germany#Anonymous and pseudonymous works). Which means we can only restore it after 120 years, in 2048, with {{PD-old-assumed-expired}}, unless an artist is named who died over 70 years ago. So I oppose such a restoration. --Rosenzweig τ 06:17, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 18:41, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Data:Ncei.noaa.gov/weather/Montpelier.tab

Obvious wrong deletion. The data comes from NOAA and is in the public domain, and it is important that both are state capitals. --Fumikas Sagisavas (talk) 21:58, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

@Jameslwoodward: It seems you did not provide a reason why you deleted these. Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with Data:Ncei.noaa.gov/weather has not yet been closed. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:38, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

I ran out of time -- none of the fast deletion methods work, so I had to call up each page one at a time and delete it. As Yann said, "Tables, out of scope for Commons." Such things should be set in Wikitables when needed. Much more useful that way. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:04, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: Out of scope for Commons. --Yann (talk) 11:30, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Data:Ncei.noaa.gov/weather/Juneau.tab

Obvious wrong deletion. The data comes from NOAA and is in the public domain, and it is important that both are state capitals. --Fumikas Sagisavas (talk) 21:58, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: Out of scope for Commons. --Yann (talk) 11:30, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Front of ALS.jpg As well as others deleted, request for undeletion.

It was removed and I don't know why, I got in touch with the copyright owner and they gave permission and filled out the email template to send in which has them giving permission to use the images.

The list of all the images that we're taken down that should be reuploaded are:

They were all used on the page: A Love Supreme (Fanzine)

--AdrianThompson1973 (talk) 13:09, 15 May 2023 (UTC) Adrian Thompson

Oppose This image will be restored automatically without further action by the uploader if and when a free license is received, read, and approved at VRT. The current backlog at VRT is 11 days. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:16, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

That email was sent to them a long time ago, they received an email asking to confirm permission and they did so, a lot of the photos were used to give references to points made in the page. AdrianThompson1973 (talk) 13:20, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

That may all be true, but a problem at VRT is not something we can solve here. The actual photographer must satisfy VRT that they are the actual photographer and that they freely license the images. It is certainly possible that the VRT volunteer is being particularly careful because when uploading the images AdrianThompson1973 made the incorrect claim that they were the actual photographer. That makes it harder to believe anyone involved. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:10, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

So what is the next thing I should do to eventually get the images back on the Wiki? AdrianThompson1973 (talk) 10:49, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Can I just reupload them? AdrianThompson1973 (talk) 10:55, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

@AdrianThompson1973: No. Do not reupload deleted files. You can ask on the VRT board what's the status of the ticket. Yann (talk) 11:06, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

VRT agent (verify): Oppose insufficient permissions on VRT. No clear answers. Nothing clear. Please don't restore without a request from a VRT agent. If anyone else with VRT access wants to review the correspondence, it is available in ticket:2023032710010041.─ The Aafī (^talk) 16:12, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 18:40, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Pernille Vermund på valgaftenen 2022.jpg

I am the owner.--Marginataen (talk) 16:39, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose You say "I am the owner." You do not say what you claimed with the upload -- that you are the actual photographer.

Although a Google search doesn't find it, there is no EXIF and the image is relatively small. Please either upload the image at full camera resolution with full EXIF or communicate with VRT and convince the volunteer there that you were actually the photographer. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:48, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Hello (Jameslwoodward). General question: is EXIF a requirement for uploading images on Commons or is it just because I previously have made questionable ownership claims?

Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 18:40, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Lars Boje Mathiesen, 2023.jpg

I am the owner.--Marginataen (talk) 16:41, 15 May 2023 (UTC) They have probably been deleted because in the in past have hurt my credibility by uploading images which I was not the owner of. That doesn’t change that I am the owner of these.

Oppose You say "I am the owner." You do not say what you claimed with the upload -- that you are the actual photographer.

Although a Google search doesn't find it, there is no EXIF and the image is relatively small. Please either upload the image at full camera resolution with full EXIF or communicate with VRT and convince the volunteer there that you were actually the photographer. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:40, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

We should really consider just naming the field "Photographer" rather than owner at this point Trade (talk) 16:15, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Actually, the field is "Author", which is appropriate since not every file is a photograph. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:18, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

@Marginataen: Who is the photographer? Can you upload the original picture with EXIF data? Yann (talk) 18:49, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Let me specify. I am the photographer. As I have stated elsewhere, I have in the past uploaded files which I did not actually own and whereby damaged my credibility. As my camara was later compromised, I did not recover the the EXIF but still had the image itself from a correspondence. That doesn’t change the fact that I am the author and that I never have published the file anywhere else but here on Wikimedia. Marginataen (talk) 11:15, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

If you no longer have the original photo with complete EXIF data, you may have a problem to prove your authorship. But you can try to do this through VRT. As you have history of copyvio uploads, we cannot rely just on your declarations; an evidence of your authorship is needed in order to host the photo in Wikimedia Commons. It's easy to lose confidence and very hard to regain it. Ankry (talk) 12:54, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: As Ankry says, the uploader should communicate with VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:02, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:2015-German-Police-C7-Stingray-3.jpg

I'm new to this and I was trying to figure out why the picture wasn't showing.--Wiki Editor ZR2 (talk) 18:30, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Your only deleted image is File:2016 Chevrolet Corvette C7 Stingray (German Police).webp which appears several places on the Web with explicit copyright notices. If, in fact, you are the actual photographer, as you claimed in the upload, please communicate with VRT or upload the image at full camera resolution with full EXIF using the same name. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:13, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 20:49, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Files uploaded by User:Ukworktops

User:Achim55 deleted these as advertisements. It seems to me the problem was entirely in the descriptions, which we can edit. The images are all good images of contemporary home interiors, something we actually don't have a lot of. - Jmabel ! talk 17:52, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose - Their source site says "Copyright @www.work-tops.com © 2023 | All rights reserved" and there is no evidence the uploader is genuinely affiliated with the company or, even if so, has authority to license works on its behalf. COM:VRT is needed for previously published images. Эlcobbola _talk 17:58, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

The files had been tagged G10 by someone else and a file desc Start designing your home with these versatile surface. Shop now!!! Contact (redacted) or Call us at (redacted) is spam. However, Joe is right, if the descs are cleaned up and VRT is done we could keep them. --Achim55 (talk) 18:37, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Is there a reason why we don't clean up all images tagged with G10 rather than deleting them? Trade (talk) 20:36, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

@Trade: sometimes they are out of scope. Sometimes the advertising aspect is inherent in the image itself. - Jmabel ! talk 22:35, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

There isn't really any other way to tag images as being promotional other than SD unfortunately Trade (talk) 22:39, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: per discussion --User:trade "s there a reason why we don't clean up all images tagged with G10 rather than deleting them? Trade" -- We have a backlog of thousands of DRs. Who is the "we" in your question?. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:09, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:ZahidulIslamMahim1.jpg

--Rushingheartofficial (talk) 18:34, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose No reason provided. Commons is not a social media. We do not accept personal images unless people really contribute to Wikimedia projects. Yann (talk) 18:38, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: per Yann. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:06, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Los Zetas logo.png deleted and reuploaded by someone claiming it is his work

I would like to express my concerns regarding the deletion decision made by EugeneZelenko, as I believe it was unjustified.

Firstly, I would like to clarify that the aforementioned file was a reproduction of the Los Zetas Mexican cartel's logo. I personally created this reproduction, along with several others. However, EugeneZelenko questioned whether I was the original designer of the logo. Frankly, I find it perplexing that one needs to be the creator of a criminal organization's logo in order to reproduce it and share it on Commons. Allow me to present an example to support my point: File:Movimiento templario.png. As you can see, reproductions of similar logos have been uploaded without issue.

In addition, I have discovered that another user, Marcelo667755, has re-uploaded my work under the same name and has even claimed authorship of it. It is evident that this upload occurred after the initial deletion, indicating a clear violation.

Let me know if it can be restored as it was before deletion.

Thank you. --BaptisteGrandGrand (talk) 14:43, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I deleted it again. Yann (talk) 14:46, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: Not a request for undeletion. Such logos might be OK or not depending of various reasons. Even if the original design may be in the public domain, specific renderings wouldn't be. --Yann (talk) 14:46, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:NLC511-023031103090224-57257_文教月刊_第13卷.pdf

The journal is published by Q117436818 (Ministry of Culture and Education of Manchukuo (Q30623)) in the first year of Kangde era (Q11063844) (1934), as noted by its inner page. {{PD-Manchukuo}} or {{PD-China-1996}} applies here. 虹易 (talk) 23:43, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: @虹易: Please fix the description, the template is broken. --Yann (talk) 13:53, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Khalif isse mudan.jpg

Please re-upload back thanks --QalasQalas (talk) 02:37, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Photo from Twitter. Thuresson (talk) 05:47, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: per Thuresson. --Yann (talk) 13:53, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:ExpressopégasoBRT.jpg

Querido Wiki

Com base legal venho argumentar que não feri as regras e licença de uso da imagem referida.

Deixo somente a sua observação que se for procurar os dados, deixei o nome da autora/ empresa a qual prestava serviços claros, tanto quanto a matéria ORIGINAL de onde eu tirei a foto.

A matéria que vocês usaram Todavia não tem nem o nome da autora da foto e muito menos a data que a foto foi tirada, que foi em 2012 pela Fotográfa Mariana Gil / EMBARQ Brasil

A matéria que eu retirei a foto segue logo depois de meu comentário: https://www.thecityfixbrasil.org/2012/06/07/rio-de-janeiro-inaugura-seu-primeiro-corredor-brt/

Matéria datada do dia 07/06/2012, 10 anos depois da matéria utilizada por vocês para excluirem a minha imagem.

A matéria utilizada como justificativa segue após o texto:

https://g1.globo.com/rj/rio-de-janeiro/noticia/2022/05/27/prefeitura-do-rio-compra-mais-100-onibus-para-o-brt-e-fecha-291-novos-veiculos-adquiridos.ghtml

Espero poder ter explicado e que revejam a exclusão da foto. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samuelrocha2608 (talk • contribs) 02:57, 18 May 2023‎ (UTC)

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

Oppose NO CC-BY-SA 4.0 license at source site. CC-BY-NC-ND 3.0 is incompatible with Wikimedia Commons licensing requirements. Ankry (talk) 12:42, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: per Ankry. --Yann (talk) 13:55, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

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

ExpressoPégasologo.jpg

Boa noite

A requerida foto está creditáda pelo autor na sua descrição , mais uma vez o boot ele excluiu a foto arbitrariamente. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samuelrocha2608 (talk • contribs)

Likely about File:Expressopegasologo.jpg.

Oppose Licenses for images from external source need to be granted at source sites or following VRT instructions. I also doubt if the logo is in scope as the Wikipedia article where the logo can be used, is nominated for deletion. Ankry (talk) 12:36, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: per Ankry. --Yann (talk) 13:55, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Files with CC YT licence deleted for no reason

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_ToprakM See also this discussion https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump/Copyright#Files_deleted_despite_archive_org_CC_licence_proof and acrd this page 4 Archive org is a valid source https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:License_review#Uploaders Shadow4dark (talk) 19:50, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Support per my comments there. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:08, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
undelete per King. Bedivere (talk) 15:45, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: License reviewed. --Yann (talk) 12:01, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Strise Logo Registered RGB.png

Former logo of a company with a Wikidata entry; see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Strise Logo Registered RGB.png and Commons talk:Deletion requests#Logos have no educational value, take 2 (or is it 3?) for background and discussion. You'll see that my argument in the deletion request thread was "I think the solution here would be to keep it, with the caption that this used to be Strise's logo and was changed because of the request of [Name of Company, if you'd like to provide it], which claimed it was too similar to their logo." Please discuss. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:15, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Support COM:INUSE at d:Q28792275; vandalism by an IP doesn't change that. Yes, Wikidata counts as in use, and whoever doesn't think this company deserves a Wikidata entry should nominate it for deletion there. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:01, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
Support per KoH; a spurious deletion, IMO. --SHB2000 (talk) 12:28, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
Support per above. Bedivere (talk) 15:17, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
Support Would suggest adding it to the Wikidata page immediately upon undeletion. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:47, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: See above. --Yann (talk) 11:43, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Migración en México, un paso para la multiculturalidad y solidaridad.pdf

I want the document to be reuploaded because it's my personal job and I don´t see why It was deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sofiamgo (talk • contribs) 16:39, 19 May 2023‎ (UTC)

Procedural close, please discuss this at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Migración en México, un paso para la multiculturalidad y solidaridad.pdf. Thuresson (talk) 18:11, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:EmirKosif.jpg

His page has been restored, could you please undelete his picture. Thank you. --Pazarlamamuhendisi (talk) 18:55, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Out of scope for Commons. Please read COM:SCOPE. Yann (talk) 18:59, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose - This is a poorly photoshopped derivative of this image. Эlcobbola _talk 19:13, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: Obviously not, as per Эlcobbola. --Yann (talk) 11:48, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:H.M. King George V in Coronation robes.png

I am requesting the following print made by Samuel Begg in 1911. the author died in 1936--Stvg10 (talk) 01:26, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: Deleted without valid rationale, and out of process. --Yann (talk) 11:49, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Please undelete. We have permission per Ticket:2023051910012159. Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 05:44, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: @Mussklprozz: FYI. --Yann (talk) 11:42, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Buste de Saint Louis, oeuvre de Catherine Cairn (2005), cathédrale Saint-Louis de Versailles (France).JPG

My own work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phidelorme (talk • contribs) 10:20, 21 May 2023 (UTC) (UTC)

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

@Phidelorme: Avez-vous l'autorisation de l'artiste pour publier ces photos sous une licence libre ?

Do you have the artist's permission to publish these pictures on Commons under a free license? Yann (talk) 10:21, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Oui, l'artiste est mon épouse.phidelorme (talk) 12:23, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: These should not have been speedy deleted. See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Buste de Saint Louis, oeuvre de Catherine Cairn (2005), cathédrale Saint-Louis de Versailles (France).JPG. --Yann (talk) 10:34, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Irudiz eta euskaraz.jpeg

Dear reviewrs, I would like to ask you to undelete this image as images published by Udako Euskal Unibertsitatea (UEU, Basque Summer University) have licence CC-BY-SA 3.0

Please, see https://www.ueu.eus/ohar-legala, The 2nd point in Section "Jabetza intelektual eta industriala" is the following textː "Creative Commons Aitortu-PartekatuBerdin 3.0". That is the equivalent in Basque for CC-BY-SA 3.0.

The sentence "Bestalde, Web gunetik deskargatu daitezkeen doako edukiak, testuak, artxiboak eta abar Creative Commons Aitortu-PartekatuBerdin 3.0 lizentziapean daude." translated into English is the followingː "On the other hand, free content, texts, archives, etc. that can be downloaded from the website are licensed under the Creative Commons BY-SA 3.0 licence."

This image is a bookcover published in the webpage of the book. That bookcover can be freely downloaded from that page, so, taking into account what have been explained in the previous paragraph, it has licence CC-BY-SA 3.0.

That licence has been used to upload more than 20 bookcovers of this publisher, you can see them here.

Please let me know if you want me to ask UEU to send you an email confirming all that.

I hope you can undelete this image, please. Thanks Ksarasola (talk) 13:16, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose The full legal section from which you quote above reads [Google Translation]:

Intellectual and industrial property

1.- The intellectual property rights, graphic design and codes of the web pages belong to the Basque University of Summer. Therefore, it is forbidden to copy, distribute, publicly display, transform or do anything that can be done with the content of the web pages, even if the sources are mentioned, without the written permission of the Basque University of Summer. All commercial names, brands or signs of any kind on the company's web pages belong to their owners and are protected by law.

2.- On the other hand, the free content, texts, archives, etc. that can be downloaded from the web site are under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 license. With this license, you will be able to copy, distribute and show derivative works of the content, subject to the following conditions: - You must mention the original author of the content. - If you make any changes to the content, or create a derivative work, in order to sell or distribute it, you will have to do so under the same conditions as this license.

3.- In the case of texts with the copyright symbol, all rights belong to the authors.

4.- Finally, the users of Uda He has the permission of the Basque University to view, print, copy and store protected intellectual creations, content and assets (with or without exclusive rights) on a hard disk or other medium, provided that the purpose is personal and private, with no intention of distribution or marketing; however, said rights and content cannot be modified or decompiled. This personal use is fair if the copyrights and industrial property rights mentioned here are respected; in this respect, the user receives no license.

You assert that paragraph 2 applies here. That's not clear. The book has a copyright, so it is not "free content". The book cover is not "texts, archives, etc.". I think paragraph 1 probably applies. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:18, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, @Jameslwoodward, for your answer. So, if Basque Summer University modified paragraph 2 by adding "bookcovers", then it would be clear. I can propose them to replace the first sentence with the following one ː "On the other hand, the free content, texts, archives, BOOKCOVERS, etc. that can be downloaded from the web site are under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 license." Would it be enough? Else, please, could you send me an alternative sentence? Thank you very much. ̴̴̴̴ Ksarasola (talk) 15:44, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

@Ksarasola: Bookcovers have a copyright unless being very simple. So the University can't just add a CC-BY-SA notice as they are not the copyright owners. Only the publisher can do that. Yann (talk) 07:58, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

@Yannː In this book the publisher is the same Udako Euskal Unibertsitatea (UEU, Basque Summer University). You can confirm it hereː [7]https://www.ueu.eus/argitaletxea/liburuak/irudiz-eta-euskaraz-gure-hizkuntzaren-zinema-gure-zinemaren-hizkuntza , where "Argitaletxea/ Liburuak" means "Publisher / books", It is a book published by UEU, UEU is the copyright owner. ̴̴̴̴ Ksarasola (talk) 08:25, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Support I agree with @Ksarasola here. For me, the bookcover is as a free content downloadable from the web, so the point n.2 applies to it. If the sentence is modified it would be even clearer, of course. And since the publisher, and therefore the copyright owner is the UEU, the change would apply to it. Supro23 (talk) 09:38, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

@Ksarasola: In this case, yes, a mention from the UEU that the book covers are published under a free license would be OK for Commons. Yann (talk) 10:08, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

They have a confirmation about that in their website. They are the publisher AND the university. Theklan (talk) 13:41, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Support The legal advice is clear to me and I should think the automatic translator got it right, also in the legal advice of each web page related to a book in particular as added above by Ksarasola. Books or contents that do not show explicitly a copyright (point 3) enjoy a CC-BY-SA 3.0 free-license (point 2). I think it is clear from the phrase "doako edukiak, testuak, artxiboak eta abar", but adding also "bookcovers" may shed further light to administrators who check this and other files. As far as I know, the university UEU is the publisher of the books they feature in their website. Regards Iñaki LL (talk) 16:09, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

@Yann, Last week, I asked Basque Summer University (Udako Euskal Unibertsitatea, UEU) to modify the text in their licence, and now I see that the modification has been done. The 2nd point in Section "Jabetza intelektual eta industriala" now includes "liburu-azalak" ("book covers"); its translation into English is the followingː "On the other hand, the free content, texts, archives, BOOKCOVERS, etc. that can be downloaded from the web site are under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 license."

So, please, could you undelete this image? Thank you very much. Ksarasola (talk) 10:44, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: See above. License reviewed. @Ksarasola: Could you please add a description in English (and other languages, Spanish, French, etc.): what this book is about... --Yann (talk) 11:15, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:MN Fashion Logo.jpg

Dear Wikipedia Team,

I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to bring your attention to a matter regarding the logo file on a Wikipedia page. I kindly request that you refrain from deleting the MN Fashions Logo file associated with the page.

The logo holds significant value and relevance to the page's content, contributing to the overall authenticity and representation of the subject. Its presence aids in providing a comprehensive understanding of the topic for Wikipedia readers. Removing the logo file would result in a diminished user experience and potentially incomplete information.

I understand that Wikipedia has strict guidelines and policies to maintain the integrity and accuracy of its content. However, in this particular case, the logo file is crucial in conveying visual information and enhancing the article's credibility. It aligns with the purpose of Wikipedia, which is to provide reliable and comprehensive knowledge to its readers.

I kindly request your consideration in preserving the logo file on the page. If there are any concerns or issues regarding the usage of the logo, I am open to discussing and addressing them in a collaborative manner. I firmly believe that retaining the logo file will greatly benefit the readers and contribute positively to the article.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I appreciate your ongoing efforts in maintaining the quality and reliability of Wikipedia's content. Please feel free to reach out to me if you require any further information or if I can be of assistance in any way.

With sincere regards, --Abhi2781 (talk) 09:00, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Per Commons:Deletion requests/File:MN Fashion Logo.jpg. Thuresson (talk) 09:27, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Comment The problem is that we have no right to make the logo available to the public. To host your logo we need a licence, and according to our policy that must be a free licence, such as {{Cc-by-sa 4.0}} (our default for uploaders' own works). If you wish us to host the logo, somebody authorised to make such decisions must license the logo in a suitable way and either indicate that at an appropriate web page or email VRT to confirm the decision. Some Wikipedias also allow fair use of non-licensed media, if certain conditions are met (for the rules on Wikipedia in English, see en:WP:EDP). In such use, Wikimedia Commons is not involved. –LPfi (talk) 15:49, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: per discussion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:03, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Friedrich Dürrenmatt, Die Astronomen, 1952.jpg etc.

resp. Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Paintings by Friedrich Dürrenmatt please check Ticket:2023040310011137 for permission. Thanks. --Elya (talk) 15:44, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

@Elya: Could you explain what you mean please? Yann (talk) 11:47, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

@Yann, sorry if it wasn't clear. The above mentioned deletion request was executed without discussion. The uploader mentioned, unnoticed on their talk page, a permission via VTRS, so I kindly ask you to check the existing permission and check if the files can be undeleted. The above mentioned ticket no. should lead to the permission. I hope it's more understandable now. Elya (talk) 13:39, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

@Elya: Then a RT volunteer should look at it. Of no one answers here, you can ask on COM:VRTN. Yann (talk) 09:19, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

@Yann thanks, I'll wait a bit, shouldn't be the first time a permission is late for the deletion request. Elya (talk) 15:15, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

@Elya All files restored, a valid ticket was added to the images 3 minutes after the deletion request. Raymond (talk) 08:01, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: See above. --Yann (talk) 08:43, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Dare_Band_shot_2_HIGH_RES.jpg

Just wondering if this could be undeleted.

Please bear with me regarding this request as I'm not really that computer literate, and am very much learning as I go here. My ex-partner and I used to work on Wikipedia 'jointly' and while I did the words and similar, he looked after the images. I'm OK with words and stuff, but not so with images.

He uploaded the image in question when we were still together, but it was deleted, and apparently because it did have a permissions email from the copyright holder. But it did. He, my partner, sent this through. So I cannot understand why the image was deleted. I have been meaning to pursue this for some time, but life has very much got in the way... Anyway, I'm on it now. He has sent the original email to me, and I paste it below. I have removed the email address of the copyright holder from it, and their home address, for the obvious reasons. I'm assuming there is a way of getting these to you non-publicly to verify what I am saying?

EMAIL: From: redacted legend-records.co.uk <redacted@legend-records.co.uk> Sent: Saturday, December 24, 2022 10:25 PM To: Gray <redacted@straydogdesign.co.uk> Subject: RE: Wiki band picture

Hi Gray, thanks for the email.

Please see below.

Merry Christmas Darren/DARE/Thin Lizzy

I hereby affirm that I Darren Warton, represent Legend Records the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the media work as shown here:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dare_Band_shot_2_HIGH_RES.jpg

I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the following free license: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 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.

Darren Wharton Redacted Redacted. North Wales. Redacted

DATE 24/12/2023

Look forward to hearing back from you soon.

--SurfaceAgentX2Zero (talk) 14:49, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

You need to send the permission to permissions-commonswikimedia.org Trade (talk) 15:01, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

I will do that promptly. The original was sent to 'permissions' I believe, but was still deleted. Thanks for the swift response. SurfaceAgentX2Zero (talk) 15:13, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Hello Trade I was wondering how I will find out if this works out OK. Does the image just get put back up, or do I then do that? It's all a bit new to me, sorry. SurfaceAgentX2Zero (talk) 09:11, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

SurfaceAgentX2Zero

Not done: This image will be restored automatically without further action by the uploader if and when a free license is received, read, and approved at VRT. The current backlog at VRT is 11 days. . . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:57, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:2001NYEmpirePlate.jpg

Please verify this was copyrighted. Shim119 (talk) 20:41, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Procedural close. Not a request to undelete anything. Thuresson (talk) 22:02, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Also, it absolutely was copyrighted. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:05, 22 May 2023 (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:

File:The Rizal Park.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
File:The Rizal Monument in Naga City, Camarines Sur.JPG (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
File:The Plaza Rizal.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
File:Rizal Monument in Naga City.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
File:Rizal Monument in Naga City 2.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
File:Rizal Monument in Naga City 3.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
File:Rizal Monument in Naga City 4.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Reason: deleted via Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Rizal Monument, Naga City. However, Wikivoyage article on Naga City claims it is the oldest monument. This is supported by w:bcl:Quince Martires#Mga linobngan kan 15 martir, which states the Rizal Monument in Naga dates to at least 1918. So {{PD-Philippines-FoP work}} already. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:05, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Support Abzeronow (talk) 16:13, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: See above. --Yann (talk) 21:35, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Mia foto Wikipedia.jpg

Dear Wikipedia Team,

I hope this message finds you well. I am writing this message to restore the avatar photo Mia foto Wikipedia.jpg for entry Marcello Musto. The photographer and copyright holder of the photo permitted me to use this photo in an email. If necessary I can upload or shows the Email receipt in order to prove the evidence. Thank you very much for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wangantding (talk • contribs) 03:02, 22 May 2023‎ (UTC)

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

Oppose I notet hat you claimed that you were the actual photographer when you uploaded the photo. Now you claim that someone else was. In order for the photo to be restored to Commons, the actual photographer must send a free license using VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:57, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 19:35, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Michael Peña and Eva Longoria in 2019.jpg

I don't know why this file was deleted, it was taken from YouTube with a Creative Commons license, it comes from a YouTube account that has posted interviews with actors about their movies, so, it was speedy deleted, so I think is better make a deletion request instead of put on speedy deletion --RevengerTime (talk) 13:24, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose The source site's owner says

"Description Sou Renata Boldrini e abri esse canal do youtube pra deixar minhas sugestões de filmes pra você assistir no cinema ou em casa! Assim, consigo atender de uma só vez os muitos amigos que vivem me pedindo dicas... Bem vindo!"

"Description I'm Renata Boldrini and I opened this YouTube channel to leave my movie suggestions for you to watch at the cinema or at home! This way, I manage to answer at once the many friends who keep asking me for tips... Welcome! [google translation]

That sounds to me like a fan site, which makes any license on the site COM:license laundering. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:52, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Are there any wellknown Commons users of Brazil who know of Renata Boldrini and whou would like to weigh in? Ping @Érico: . Thuresson (talk) 20:22, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose I'd seem no evidence of Creative Commons license that is found. --Hookmeupabit (talk) 05:16, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 08:57, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Ny2001historical.jpg

While this file was very briefly tagged on at the end of the most recent deletion request at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:License plates of New York (state), the only copyrightable element of that plate's design (the depiction of the Statue of Liberty) was first published in 1986 on the Liberty plate (e.x. File:NY liberty 2.JPG). As the depiction of the statue was published in 1986 without a copyright notice and without subsequent registration, that design of the Statue of Liberty (a work incorporated into the published plate) is in the public domain per COM:HIRTLE. As such, File:Ny2001historical.jpg is composed entirely of common property arranged in a plainly unoriginal manner; the only difference between that plate and the plate in File:NY liberty 2.jpg is the location of the statue, and that does not appear anywhere near creative enough for copyright protection to arise. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 02:25, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Support undeletion (as deleting admin); thank you for spotting this and sorry for being wrong in the first place. :) —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:52, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Actually,

I withdraw my nomination; I have been informed by a knowledgeable source off-wiki about this registration, which appears to apply to the same plate. It's odd that the registration is from 1984 (and part of why I missed it), but it's enough to generate significant doubt about the plate's freedom, so it should not be undeleted. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 04:08, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Comment The copyright could only cover the drawing of the Statue of Liberty (similar to File:New York license plate, 1986.png). Otherwise, I don't see how a simple license plate could get a copyright. Yann (talk) 09:08, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done Withdrawn. Ankry (talk) 20:58, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Wedd36-311x295.jpg and other images by Fkhuong

Sir/Madame,
Please restore these photographs uploaded by Fkhuong:

These photographs was uploaded by Fkhuong, and was deleted later due to a deletion request from an IP user. After checking the information of the uploader of these photos and the related information, I found that the deletion of these photos was hasty and probably incorrect:
As implied by the its username, he is probably a member of the Khuong family from Vietnam and a relative of Khương Hữu Bá (see Khương Hữu Bá) and others. And Mr. Lộc is the son of Mr. Bá.
Included in these photographs are Mr. Bá, an officer of the Republic of Vietnam Navy, Mrs. Bá, the sister of a famous Vietnamese lawyer and government minister (Trần Ngọc Liễng), and there children. These photographs demonstrate the life of a former Republic of Vietnam naval officer in the United States and can be used in the corresponding Wikipedia articles. Therefore these are not just personal photographs, but educational and historical photographs, so I would ask that they be undeleted. --源義信 (talk) 03:24, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Very small images without EXIF data. I doubt these are the uploader's own works. So either upload the original images with EXIF data, or send a permission via COM:VRT. Yann (talk) 21:39, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 07:35, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Dr Khuong Huu Long Health Minister.jpg

Dear Sir/Madam,
I request that this portrait be restored for the following reasons:

The uploader of the photograph (FKhuong) claims to be the owner of the photograph. According to his username and edits, he is a member of the family and seems to be a grandson of Mr. Long, so I think we can assume that his claim is valid.
According to the information on this page (Image), the photo was taken in 1947, so it is already in the public domain in Vietnam (and the USA) so PD-Vietnam applies to this document.
This is an educational photograph, a portrait photo of a government minister of Vietnam.

--源義信 (talk) 03:44, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Support The fact that the uploader appears to own a copy of the photograph is irrelevant. Owning a paper or digital copy of a photograph does not give one the right to freely license it, as required here. However, if the image is from 1947 and is anonymous, the Vietnam copyright lasted until 1/1/1997. The URAA date for Vietnam is 12/23/1998, so it does not have a URAA copyright and is therefore PD in both places. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:04, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 16:57, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Lwtech inf amelioree.png

content was not obsolete, and was my own personal work — Preceding unsigned comment added by BP-Aegirsson (talk • contribs) 12:51, 23 May 2023‎ (UTC)

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

Oppose It is not clear that the image is in scope. However, that is moot since it appears here with "© Low-tech Lab Montréal". It cam be restored to Commons only if (a) that is changed to ""CC-BY" or another acceptable license or (b) an authorized official of the organization sends a free license using VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:54, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 16:56, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:AFF-ITALIA-LE-FEU-LA-CENDRE-2-768x1024.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

File:AFF-ITALIA-LE-FEU-LA-CENDRE-2-768x1024.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Reason: This movie poster is the property of Nocturnes Productions, of which I am the co-owner MarieC394 (talk) 18:05, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Policy requires that an authorized official of the copyright holder must send a free license using VRT. This image will be restored automatically without further action by the uploader if and when a free license is received, read, and approved at VRT. The current backlog at VRT is 11 days. . . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:30, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 07:34, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Olivier Bohler.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

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

Reason: This is a picture of myself, Olivier Bohler, owned by Nocturnes Productions, which website mubi.com has permission to use MarieC394 (talk) 18:09, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose The image has appeared elsewhere on the Web, therefore policy requires that the actual photographer send a free license using VRT. I note that you claim to be the actual photographer, but the image does not look like a selfie. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:33, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
@MarieC394: Please ask Nocturnes Productions to send a permission via COM:VRT. Beside if you are Olivier Bohler, why did you create an account with the name of MarieC394? Thus is confusing. Yann (talk) 19:34, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 07:34, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Heike Kloss 04-2023.jpg

The file Heike Kloss 04-2023.jpg is my own work. The same file has also been published on instagram and facebook by Heike Kloss herself. She changed the posts on both social media platforms and added the copyright to the picture. Therefore I request to undelete the file. Beabengel (talk) 10:00, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

@Beabengel: I don't see any free license on Instagram, and I don't see the picture of Facebook. Yann (talk) 10:09, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 15:19, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Rajmund Dybczynski.jpg

- its is our own family picture that was also shared for other articles outside of wikipedia -Thario (talk) 06:23, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Question Are you, Thario, the actual photographer? . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:20, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

yes, I can upload the original photo file, but I guess the cut portrait version is better suited for its purpose here Thario (talk) 20:45, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

@Thario: We should have both on Commons, the original and the cropped versions. Yann (talk) 11:31, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done no response. Can be requested again after the original photo is also uploaded. Ankry (talk) 22:27, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:1-5 vendée.jpg

The photo in question is strictly personal. EIt It was taken by myself, developed by myself and framed by myself. It has never been published anywhere and is not subject to any copyright. I would therefore like it to be admitted so that I can use it in my wikipedia page

--Vietto84 (talk) 16:17, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose I combined five requests for convenience. The request shown above was the same for all five. The subject of the photographs is Jean Vuillemot (1932-2022) who is the subject of Utilisateur:Vietto84/Brouillon. The last image appeared in that article until it was deleted by me.

While what is said above may be strictly true, I don't think it is the whole truth. I think the images are all copy photographs of images of General Vuillemot taken by five different photographers. In order for any of them to be free of URAA copyrights, they would have to have been taken when the subject was age 14, so the original images certainly have at least a US copyright and probably a French copyright as well. We know from the cited draft article that he became a two star general in 1984, so the last image (which shows him in uniform with two stars) must still be under copyright in France and the USA. It is a formal portrait, so it probably has a photographer's mark on it. We cannot restore the images without a free license from the actual photographers.

If my assumption above is correct, Vietto84 should note that being deliberately misleading as was done above, is a serious violation of Commons rules and will make it very difficult for us to believe anything said by them in the future. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:56, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

@Vietto84: To help substantiate your claim, since you assert that you developed the images yourself, could you upload the negatives for one or more of these photos? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:24, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: as per Jim, and no answer to KoH's request. --Yann (talk) 08:08, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Blas Duran Jr.jpg

Estimado Wutsje,

Agradezco su respuesta y su explicación sobre la eliminación de la foto de Blas Duran JR en Wikimedia Commons. Entiendo que Wikimedia Commons tiene como objetivo principal proporcionar imágenes y medios educativos e informativos, y estoy de acuerdo en que las autofotografías o fotografías de familiares y amigos pueden considerarse fuera del alcance del proyecto.

Sin embargo, me gustaría resaltar que Blas Duran JR es un artista dominicano de renombre y su foto no es de uso personal, sino que es de interés público. Como figura destacada en la industria de la música, la foto de Blas Duran JR es relevante y cumple con el propósito de ofrecer información sobre su carrera y contribuciones artísticas.

Por favor, considere la importancia de mantener la foto de Blas Duran JR en Wikimedia Commons, ya que proporciona una representación visual adecuada de este artista y complementa la información biográfica que se ha incluido en Wikipedia. Creo firmemente que la foto contribuye a la comprensión y apreciación del legado artístico de Blas Duran JR.

Agradezco su atención y le ruego que se reconsidere la eliminación de la foto de Blas Duran JR en Wikimedia Commons. Si es necesario, estoy dispuesto a proporcionar más detalles o evidencia para respaldar la relevancia de la foto en relación con el alcance de Wikimedia Commons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blasduranjr (talk • contribs) 16:47, 24 May 2023‎ (UTC)

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

Oppose I think that the subject is probably sufficiently notable to have images on Commons. He has half a dozen entries on Amazon and several at IMDB. However, this image appears as the cover of one of the Amazon entries, so we cannot restore it to Commons without a free license from the actual photographer using VRT. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:25, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 19:35, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Adolfo Alvarado Velloso.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

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

Reason: La creación del perfil esta autorizada por el mismo Adolfo Alvarado Velloso, quien además posee los derechos de los libros en versión PDF, y de los links a videos que fueron subidos en esta página. Por esta razón pido que por favor devuelvan la página de Wikipedia de Adolfo Alvarado Velloso, ya que no esta infringiendo ninguna norma. Marianopazalvarado 2004 (talk) 17:50, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose When you uploaded the image, you claimed that you were the actual photographer. Your statement above strongly suggests that that was not true. The subject of a photograph rarely has the right to freely license the photograph. That right almost always belongs to the actual photographer. In order for this image to be restored to Commons, either (a) the actual photographer must send a free license using VRT, or (b) another person must send a free license including a written agreement from the actual photographer giving that person the right to freely license the image. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:15, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 19:34, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Houston Dash vs. Chicago Red Stars pregame 2015-07-12.jpg

The given deletion reason in 2016 is no longer applicable as of 26 August 2020 (COM:PDM) or October 2022 (COM:F). The image is of a notable event and would be used as a title image for w:2015 Houston Dash season.

The given deletion reason:

COM:F as of today, emphasis mine:

"Flickr allows its users to select the license of their choice and to change it at any time, but it is easy to verify that a photograph was freely licensed in the past as Flickr now shows license history as of October 25, 2022."

COM:PDM as of today:

"the consensus on Commons is that while Public Domain Mark is not intended to be used as a license, it is reasonable to conclude that when an author applies PDM to their own work, they are declaring their work to be in the public domain."

The image on Flickr remains licensed there as PDM.

The table on COM:F suggests the image would use the {{PDMark-owner}} copyright template on Commons as the Flickr uploader is the copyright holder.

Mentioning here the user who deleted the file, Jameslwoodward, for notification. -Socccc (talk) 18:58, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Neutral. On the one hand, the Flickr account shows a lot of images taken from other places which makes me wonder if this is license laundering. On the other hand, the Flickr account holder is said to be a journalist, so it is entirely possible he took this image. If we accept that, then restoration is appropriate. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:12, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: as per Socccc. I don't see any reason to doubt the license here. --Yann (talk) 08:12, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:2021-12-3 海水温.png

JMA files are under GJSTU version 2, which is capable on Commons. --A1Cafel (talk) 03:38, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Done: No opposition. --Yann (talk) 09:23, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Карл.png

This image is an image of a game character from a computer game, the link to the page I gave.

Not done: per Yann. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:57, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Emile.jpg

This image is an image of a game character from a computer game, the link to the page I gave.

Not done: Not currently deleted. --Yann (talk) 17:51, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Фредди.jpg

This image is an image of a game character from a computer game, the link to the page I gave.

Not done: per Yann. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:56, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Anna.jpg

This image is an image of a game character from a computer game, the link to the page I gave.

Not done: Not currently deleted. --Yann (talk) 17:51, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Карл.jpg

This image is an image of a game character from a computer game, the link to the page I gave.

Not done: Not currently deleted. --Yann (talk) 17:51, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Nathalie Pohl in 2020.jpg

Can it please be restored temporarily? We have a permission per Ticket:2023052510005753, but I have to see the picture to judge about it. Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 07:32, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:35, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2023-05

Roo Powell.JPEG

Restoring photo and image erroring delete

Paulo_freitas_do_amaral.jpg

Our Personal Space

Iranian pre-revolutionary film posters

Files to Undelete: Images for Harvey Newquist II

Khanzada Khan Utmanzai

Page for Brian_Kennedy (Record Producer)

File:Example.jpg Eng Jaime Filipe

Ticket#2023040810002521

File:Daft Punk - Random Access Memories.jpg, File:Random Access Memories 10th Anniversary Edition.jpg

File:Front of ALS.jpg As well as others deleted, request for undeletion.

Files uploaded by User:Ukworktops

File:Los Zetas logo.png deleted and reuploaded by someone claiming it is his work

Files with CC YT licence deleted for no reason

File:Friedrich Dürrenmatt, Die Astronomen, 1952.jpg etc.

Files deleted by Explicit

File:Wedd36-311x295.jpg and other images by Fkhuong

Navigation menu