Jump to content

Commons:Undeletion requests

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Translate this page

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

Other languages:

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

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

Commons deletion (policy)
(Missing: 4 timestamps • 1 reason • 4 subpages) • 0 malformed
229 copyvios • 8 adverts • 77 selfies • 1 other
v • d • e

Finding out why a file was deleted

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

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

Appealing a deletion

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

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

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

Temporary undeletion

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

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

To assist discussion

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

To allow transfer of fair use content to another project

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

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

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

Adding a request

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

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

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

Closing discussions

In general, discussions should be closed only by administrators.

Archives

Closed undeletion debates are archived daily.

Current requests

File:Grubtheme sekiro.png File doesn't fulfil requirements for deletion

I believe that this file isn't eligible for deletion because it's author has released it on GitHub under a free license (MIT license) source and because this image doesn't contain any derivative work from the game Sekiro (also see: commons rule).

Thank you for participating in this discussion Kakučan (talk) 12:22, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose This is the only public repository of semimqmo on GitHub and they posted on Reddit that they just took this wallpaper from https://wallpapersden.com/sekiro-shadows-die-twice-art-wallpaper/2560x1440 where the author is not even credited. And maybe some people do not think of a software license applying to images  REAL 💬 ⬆   15:23, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose As noted in the deletion comment, there is no evidence that the creator of the image is the person who posted it with the {{Mit}} license at github. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:34, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see in this and this commit the final screenshot is composed of resources which automatically fulfill the commons rule of threshold of originality except this one (which is considered it to be not semimqmo's original work). I found this theory to be true but I couldn't find any license posted with this resource which leads me to think that John Devlin had given a permission to semimqmo to repost this resource under MIT license (otherwise semimqmo's repo on GitHub would've been taken down for copyright infringement). Thank you for your response Kakučan (talk) 18:54, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I say again -- there is no evidence that Devlin has given a free license. The fact that GitHub has not acted against this post proves nothing. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:17, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support This is free software. It would be very contrary to current practice that a non-free image would be distributed with it. So I think that the license applies to the whole package, which includes the code and the image. Yann (talk) 18:07, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is a logo for JS13K games. I am writing on behalf of the creators Andrzej and Ewa Mazur who wishes it to not be deleted. This image was being used on the wikipedia page for js13k also. Thank you for fixing! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slackluster (talk • contribs)

 Support If this is the logo shown at the top of https://js13kgames.com Andrzej Mazur uploaded this file under CC0 in 2018  REAL 💬 ⬆   21:12, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose Although Ewa Mazur is mentioned on the web site, Andrzej is not. This logo was uploaded by USER:Mypoint13k in 2021. The web site has "©2024 js13kGames & authors". If the owners of the site actually want the logo freely licensed here, they must do it with a message to VRT. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:24, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He is in https://github.com/orgs/js13kGames/people. He uploaded the logo on the website in a GitHub repository under CC0 in 2018  REAL 💬 ⬆   14:36, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support This is free software. It would be very contrary to current practice that a non-free image would be distributed with it. So I think that the license applies to the whole package, which includes the code and the image. Yann (talk) 15:19, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yann I don't think so. Aside from the explicit copyright notice which I cited above, the legal section of the web site has
"As a condition of submission, Entrant grants the Competition Organizer, its subsidiaries, agents and partner companies, a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to use, reproduce, adapt, modify, publish, distribute, publicly perform, create a derivative work from, and publicly display the Submission."
That is a free license only in the sense that no money changes hands. It does not include the right to freely license anything. Also, please remember that even in the case where the software may be freely licensed, the logo for it is often not. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:32, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That is an agreement for entrants who submit games to the competition, not anything to do with the website itself, which in fact has no license on GitHub at all. However, one of the staff of js13kGames uploaded this logo in a different repository under CC0. The license in a GitHub repository applies to all the files in it unless otherwise noted, which has not been done so there  REAL 💬 ⬆   15:50, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The license in a GitHub repository applies to all the files in it unless otherwise noted. Yes, I agree with that. Yann (talk) 16:49, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@999real: This is not the same logo. Feel free to upload it under CC0 providing that source. Ankry (talk) 08:00, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Old Sepahan Logo.png

با سلام لوگوی بارگذاری شده باز طراحی اینجانب میباشد و بنده لوگو را از روی یک ویدئو طراحی نمودم و کاملا اثر شخصی بنده میباشد.

 Oppose Complex logo, no permission. Yann (talk) 14:11, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If this is the same logo https://www.instagram.com/wearesepahan/p/DHI2zQEIFnj, that post says it is from the 70s, is Template:PD-Iran 30 years after publication of a work by a "legal person" mean government only or business entities?  REAL 💬 ⬆   14:37, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is the same logo. The logo might be from the 1970s, but is the blazon from the 1970s or more recent? Abzeronow (talk) 19:02, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand what you are talking about.. @Hanooz do you know anything about this?  REAL 💬 ⬆   20:52, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Edited "from there" to "from the 1970s" to make my meaning more clear. (And I mean to ask if the interpretation of the logo is from the 1970s or more recent) Abzeronow (talk) 21:16, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see now (I didnt know what "the blazon" was referring to). Now that I look more closely, I can't find this logo by reverse image search anywhere else than the Instagram account, so we definitely need to learn more from someone who knows about Iranian football clubs back then  REAL 💬 ⬆   22:01, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Muselk vs Ali-A (cropped).jpg

The file was speedily deleted for the reason "per COM:Speedy" without mentioning a specific reason as to why it was speedily deleted.

Presuming the reason being F1, the original source of the image was a thumbnail from a YouTube video that was listed under a CC license. The thumbnail does contain copyrighted Fortnite imagery, but was cropped to exclude any of it. There isn't a COM:NET issue as far as I'm aware because Ali-A does actually talk in that video. In other words, the subject of the file is affiliated with the uploader in that specific video. This isn't just some random upload of gameplay that put his face in the thumbnail for clickbait. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TansoShoshen (talk • contribs) 08:58, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Pinging @Yann: as the deleting admin. Ankry (talk) 10:48, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose without more information. Image included in a game video. Where does this image come from? Also what's the educational purpose of this? Yann (talk) 14:35, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Given that this was 2010-era YouTube, and that after scrolling across the videos of YouTube channel and checking with both Tineye and Google Reverse Image Search, this seems to be just a unique instance of Ali-A doing the "stereotypical clickbait face". The educational value is that the subject depicted, Ali-A is a notable subject with his own article on Wikipedia. TansoShoshen (talk) 19:58, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Portret van een prostituee met een glas whiskey, RP-F-F00149.jpg

Hi, This was certainly published at the time, so the reason for deletion is not valid: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Portret van een prostituee met een glas whiskey, RP-F-F00149.jpg. Yann (talk) 09:43, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, we already have a copy: File:StoryvilleRaleighRyeGal.JPG. Yann (talk) 09:46, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you think it was "certainly published" in 1912? Per the MOMA book, Bellocq took these photographs for himself (he apparently was friendly with the prostitutes, don't know if he was a customer there) and kept the glass negatives at home, where they were found in some piece of furniture after his death. His main occupation as a photographer was apparently working for a shipbuilding company, photographing ship parts and machinery. --Rosenzweig τ 10:05, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @Nosferattus: as the nominator. --Rosenzweig τ 10:07, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Oversimplification - Many of the now best known Bellocq nudes are from the chest of glass negatives rediscovered in the 1960s but Bellocq also printed some at the time, both for the prostitutes themselves and their customers. As a professional photographer during his life he was better publicly known for his industrial photography, photographs of Mardi Gras floats (seasonal but extensive work, was official photographer for some krewes), photographer for the Archdiocese of New Orleans, and also did portrait photography. While the "Storyville" red-light district was quasi-legal, association with it was not something which would publicized by someone doing respectable work outside of the demi-monde (even if it was an open secret in some circles). IMO there may be a case that Bellocq images known only from prints produced by Lee Friedlander, may still be under copyright, this is not one, being one of the long better known Storyville portraits. Some Storyville historians have even questioned the attribution of this one to Bellocq. (This is mostly off the top of my head as a long-time researcher in early New Orleans jazz, which is an adjacent topic to Storyville history with some crossover, knowing and interacting with some working in the latter field, but some details are likely covered in the late Al Rose's "Storyville" book.) -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:59, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Infrogmation and Yann: Do you have any evidence that this specific photo was published before 1970? Nosferattus (talk) 20:07, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is not much reason to doubt publication, as Infrogmation explains above. Speculations are not a valid reason deletion, and are much beyond significant doubt, which is required for deletion. Yann (talk) 18:54, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is definitely good reason to doubt publication. (1) I wasn't able to find any evidence that it was published prior to 1970 when I nominated the image for deletion. (2) The MOMA book about Bellocq's nudes doesn't mention any previous publications and seems to imply that Lee Friedlander was the first to publish them. But I don't know why I'm arguing with you anyway. You're just going to undelete it regardless of what I say. Nosferattus (talk) 04:48, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The MOMA book is not a holy publication. It is not surprising that it doesn't mention distribution of these portraits to the subjects and their customers, which counts as publication. Association with prostitutes was not something people publicized. Yann (talk) 09:05, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:CSOP Logo.png

File:CSOP Logo.png 谢谢审核员审核，想请问为什么该logo图片会被快速删除，这张logo图片来自公开来源，并不违反任何方面的著作权及其他权利。我能保留这张图片并用在现存的维基百科词条中吗？感谢回复！ Thank you for reviewing. I would like to ask why the logo image was quickly deleted. This logo image comes from a public source and does not violate any copyright or other rights. Can I keep this image and use it in an existing Wikipedia article? Thank you for your response! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maggie JL (talk • contribs) 07:38, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose there is no CC-zero license at [1] as declared by the uploader. Ankry (talk) 07:53, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose Source site shows © 南方東英資產管理有限公司。版權所有 不得轉載 (Google tranlation:© CSOP Asset Management Co., Ltd. All rights reserved. No reproduction or republication allowed) .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:06, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: per Ankry and Jim. --Yann (talk) 20:09, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

已获得授权文件图片恢复申请

如果您在Commons有帐户，请确保您已登录 使用描述性主题/标题，例如：文件：要取消删除的文件的名称.jpg 如果你还没有在主题/标题中这样做，请确定有问题的文件 陈述请求的理由 点击“签名和时间戳”按钮（见右图）或键入四个波浪号字符（雪影惊鸿 (talk) 15:21, 9 June 2025 (UTC)），在您的请求上签名并注明日期[reply]

您好，在 5月28号上传的图片文件 File:茉莉白轻乳茶.png File:益禾堂益禾烤奶.png File:薄荷奶绿-益禾堂.png，已按照维基百科要求，建立釋出信，并有武汉熠汇饮科技有限公司/益禾堂官方杨烁由6月4号发送邮件至permissions-zh@wikimedia.org.但目前图片依然被删除，请核实邮箱permissions-zh@wikimedia.org.授权邮件，恢复图片，谢谢

 Oppose No license, and out of scope advertisements. Please read COM:L and COM:ADVERT. Yann (talk) 20:04, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
6月4号的时候，已经发送许可证邮件至permissions-zh@wikimedia.org，请查看6月4号的许可证邮件，谢谢 雪影惊鸿 (talk) 02:20, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
VRT permissions are verified by VRT team, not by us. Scope issues need to be addressesd as well in order to undelete. Ankry (talk) 10:45, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
您好，需要怎么恢复被删除的图片，这几个图片已获得授权，我发送邮件至permissions-zh@wikimedia.org，一直没有得到回复 雪影惊鸿 (talk) 10:50, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
你好，这几个图片均是已被授权的，授权邮件已6月4号的时候已经发送至permissions-zh@wikimedia.org，请查看授权信息，并恢复 雪影惊鸿 (talk) 07:56, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:The Consequences of Manifest Destiny.pdf

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: It contains an argumentative essay on some of the consequences of Manifest Destiny, there is no harm in keeping it. Soccer4LifeAA (talk) 19:17, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose Wikimedia user's school essay. Deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/File:The Consequences of Manifest Destiny.pdf. Thuresson (talk) 19:29, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: per Thuresson. --Yann (talk) 20:08, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Biserica parohială Sfântul Anton de Padova - Brezoi.jpg

The page Home at Brezoi is created by me and 90% of the photos posted there are taken by me. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=822656503228773&set=pb.100064532926044.-2207520000&type=3 I upset an admin, Pafsanias, who deleted a page while I was working on it (I admit it was my fault, I launched it without links because I am out of the country and I don't have enough time and roaming) to whom I politely drew attention that I was still working on the page, empirically, as I may need help... The reward... he allied himself with another admin, Ziv, who if he found two or three pictures uploaded by me, for which the own license is not justified, deleted almost all of them, even though I tried to explain to him that it was an error or meaningless revenge, destroying entire pages and hours of work. Honestly, I don't have the time and nerves to invest in these absurd conflicts, with people who don't collaborate but just crack the whip. If someone finds someone to restore the pages and correct my errors, fine, if not, that's it. Just as an idea to see how superficial Ziv's research was at the instigation of Pasfanias - her link leads to a photo posted by a group called Brezoi by admin Elena Badica on December 16, 2022...after I posted it on my page on December 2, 2022, being a processing of the original file posted on October 20, 2021...

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=4471342819596144&set=a.459257692901991 I think that as Ziv answered me...it is enough to demonstrate the bad faith of the two admins, who under the aegis of a "collaboration" vandalized several pages.

you also deleted the photo from the page dedicated to the city of Brezoi, taken by me in 2013 with an iPhone 4s, a photo of which I am very proud, because I climbed the mountain after undergoing a fairly serious operation... but you two heavenly admins of Wikipedia, full of unbeatable information, vandalized the three pipes three springs... https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=512522355478230&set=a.459257696235324... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Claudiupt (talk • contribs) 19:56, 9 June 2025 (UTC) (Claudiupt (talk) 21:24, 9 June 2025 (UTC))[reply]

Am adaugat tuturor fotografiilor postate de mine pe pagina mea de facebook mentiunea "Licenta free pentru Wikipedia CC0." Daca este suficient, as vrea sa trag linie aici si acum tuturor disputelor care nu duc la nimic constructiv. Wikipedia trebuie sa fie despre cunoastere si colaborare, nu despre aratatul muschilor si infatuare. Va multumesc tuturor celor care puneti umarul si va aduceti contributia, fiindca doar asa prin cunoastere putem combate rasismul, xenofobia, antisemitismul, islamofobia, creștinofobia, intoleranța religioasă
homofobia și transfobia, misoginia și sexismul, ableismul, clasismul, discriminarea economică, ageismul, naționalismul extremist, discriminarea digitală, neglijarea mediului, etc. Claudiupt (talk) 03:26, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Vârful Țurțudan 04.jpg

Pagina Acasa la Brezoi este creata de mine si 90% din fotografiile postate acolo sunt realizate de mine. Am suparat un admin, Pafsanias care mi-a sters o pagina in timp ce lucram la ea (recunosc ca a fost vina mea, am lansat-o fara linkuri fiindca sunt plecat din tara si nu am suficient timp si roaming) caruia i-am atras politicos atentia ca inca lucram la pagina, empiric, asa cum pot si ma duce mintea...si ca am nevoie de ajutor si de intelegere. Recompensa...s-a aliat cu alt admin, Ziv, care daca a gasit doua sau trei poze urcate de mine, la care nu se justifica licenta proprie, mi le-a sters aproape pe toate, chiar daca am incercat sa-i explic ca este o eroare sau o razbunare fara sens, distruge pagini intregi si ore de munca. Sincer, nu mai am timp si nervi de investit in aceste conflicte aiuristice, cu oameni care nu colaboreaza ci doar dau cu biciul. Daca se gaseste cineva sa restaureze paginile si sa corecteze erorile mele, bine, daca nu, asta este, adios Wikipedia, nu merita efortul.

Doar ca idee ca sa vedeti cat de superficiala a fost cercetarea lui Ziv la indemnul lui Pasfanias - linkul ei duce la o fotografie postata de un grup numit Brezoi de adminul Elena Badica in December 16, 2022...dupa ce eu am postat-o pe pagina mea in December 2, 2022, fiind o prelucrare a fisierului original postat in October 20, 2021... 

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=4471342819596144&set=a.459257692901991

Cred ca asa cum mi-a raspuns Ziv...este suficient ca sa demonstrez reaua credinta a celor doi admini, care sub egida unei "colaborari" au vandalizat cateva pagini.

ati sters si fotografia de pe pagina dedicata orasului Brezoi, facuta de mine in 2013 cu un iphone 4s, fotografie de care sunt tare mandru, fiindca am escaadat muntele dupa ce suferisem o operatie destul de serioasa...dar voi doi adminii celesti ai Wikipediei pline de informatii imbatabile, ati vandalizat trei lulele trei surcele... https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=512522355478230&set=a.459257696235324... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Claudiupt (talk • contribs) 20:01, 9 June 2025 (UTC) (Claudiupt (talk) 21:25, 9 June 2025 (UTC))[reply]

 Not done Image not deleted, yet. Deel free to convert speedy deletion to a DR and provide there an evidence that FB image is under the declared license or that a free license permission by the FB uploader has been sent to VRT. Ankry (talk) 05:53, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Orașul Brezoi.jpg

Personal am facut aceasta fotografie cu un iphone 4s, gresiti daca o stergeti, este postata pe pagina mea Acasa la Brezoi https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=580490214112071&set=a.459257696235324 (Claudiupt (talk) 21:25, 9 June 2025 (UTC))[reply]

 Oppose No free license in Facebook. See below. Ankry (talk) 10:41, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The page Acasa la Brezoi where I first posted the photos belongs to me and the photos posted here, taken from the page, are taken by me with an iPhone 4s and a Canon Eos1ooD. Claudiupt (talk) 14:04, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
as adauga si filmarea facuta atunci in 2014, puteti compara si decide. Nu mint, nu am motive sa o fac, doar ca am inregistrat fotografia gresit. Asta nu inseamna ca trebuie stearsa...sau daca da, nu aveti decat sa o faceti...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6_zpoVdT2M Claudiupt (talk) 20:28, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This video is not freely licensed as well. For legal reasons, we do not accept on-wiki licensing for media published earlier without a free license. A free license permission sent via email using VRT is required for them. Ankry (talk) 05:48, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Vârful Țurțudan 01.jpg

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=761840170546446&set=a.459257692901991 este pagina mea, fotografii realizate de mine, nu va aliati cu Pafsanias, este o vandalizare ceea ce faceti — Preceding unsigned comment added by Claudiupt (talk • contribs) 20:13, 9 June 2025 (UTC) (Claudiupt (talk) 21:25, 9 June 2025 (UTC))[reply]

 Oppose @Claudiupt: Previously published images cannot be licensed on-wiki. Provide the free license information inside the Facenook post, or prove your authorship using VRT. Ankry (talk) 10:38, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The page Acasa la Brezoi where I first posted the photos belongs to me and the photos posted here, taken from the page, are taken by me with an iPhone 4s and a Canon Eos1ooD. I wrote in the description that it is a free license for Wikipedia, is that ok? Claudiupt (talk) 14:11, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Claudiupt: Could you change that to a more explicit "CC0" license (matching what you put on the file description)? It needs to be more specific than "Licenta free pentru Wikipedia" (which does not refer to any particular license). -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:44, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I wrote, but I don't think it will solve anything. Thank you! Claudiupt (talk) 20:22, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done: LicenseReviewed. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:43, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mississippi's CW 2024.svg

Could be in use on-air Mvcg66b3r (talk) 02:18, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Need something stronger than "could". If you have evidence of real life use, please present it. Abzeronow (talk) 02:45, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:JPG LOGO.jpg

削除された画像[JPG LOGO.jpg]なのですが、私が作った画像であり、同名の当該ホームページで使用しております。削除の撤回をお願いします。--Rissei Mihara (talk) 06:48, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Support as PD-textlogo. Ankry (talk) 10:30, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:JPG Outside.jpg

削除された画像[JPG Outside.jpg]なのですが、私が作った画像であり、理由となっている https://www.tokyoartbeat.com/venues/-/jam-photo-gallery に提出したのは私です。削除の撤回をお願いします。--Rissei Mihara (talk) 06:53, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose Images published elsewhere cannot be licensed on-wiki, using Own work. License from the original publication site should be used, or VRT permission is needed. Ankry (talk) 10:27, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:JPG Interior.jpg

削除された画像[JPG Interior.jpg]なのですが、私が作った画像であり、削除理由となっている https://photoandculture-tokyo.com/gallerydet.php?i=59　 に提出したのは私です。削除の撤回をお願いします。--Rissei Mihara (talk) 06:56, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose Images published elsewhere cannot be licensed on-wiki, using Own work. License from the original publication site should be used, or VRT permission is needed. Also, painter's copyright needs to be addressed: de minimis does not apply here. Ankry (talk) 10:29, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:JPG Interior2.jpg

削除された画像[JPG Interior2.jpg]なのですが、私が作った画像であり、削除理由となっている https://photoandculture-tokyo.com/gallerydet.php?i=59　 に提出したのは私です。削除の撤回をお願いします。--Rissei Mihara (talk) 06:57, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose COM:DW. See also above. Ankry (talk) 10:29, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Example.jpg

Джерело фото : https://www.instagram.com/p/C3nzCFQIFn8/ (особисте фото користувача на платформі Instagram). Користувач вікіпедії Kharkivyan ціленаправлено намагається "знести" сторінку Гаврилишина Юрія, проте через невдачу в обговоренні, він зніс фото. Його дії не є об'єктивними та благими для вікіпедії. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivan Halenko (talk • contribs) 11:03, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rough translation: Photo source: *link* (personal photo of the user on Instagram). Wikipedia user Kharkivyan is purposefully trying to "destroy" the page of Yuriy Hawrylyshyn, but due to failure in the discussion, he took down the photo. His actions are not objective and beneficial for Wikipedia.
For @Ivan Halenko: speak English and link the deleted photo properly. Dabmasterars (talk) 14:07, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently, one can speak languages other than English here. This is my first time in the undeletion thread, sorry for misunderstanding. The photo should still be properly linked, though. Dabmasterars (talk) 14:10, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ivan canic baja.jpg

Poštovani, molim Vas da se vrati datoteka "Ivan canic baja.jpg" --Oluja481995 (talk) 12:10, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose No reason given. File has been uploaded out of process twice after first deletion. Search shows © Lički leksikon per https://www.licke-novine.hr/vremeplov/vremeplov.htm. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:51, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aphex Twin logo.svg Threshold of originality and invalid deletion reason

The logo is most likely in public domain due to threshold of originality. The deletion log simply states "logo" without any adequate reason for deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dabmasterars (talk • contribs) 14:01, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose The source is fi:Tiedosto:Aphex Twinin logo.svg where the file is used as a fair use logo, "Tämä on tekijänoikeudella suojattu yrityksen, yhteisön, tuotteen tai tapahtuman logo.". Thuresson (talk) 14:48, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Taipei MRT New IC Token 01.jpg

Requesting temporary undeletion to move to zhwiki as non-free use. Wcam (talk) 14:02, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose Google "Taipei Metro Token" and you will get many images, including many without the finger holding it. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:22, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jameslwoodward: This photograph itself is freely licensed and would be preferred to those Google images (see en:WP:FREER). Wcam (talk) 15:41, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw this request--Wcam (talk) 15:45, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: withdrawn. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:20, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:عمر عبد الرزاق.jpg

Undelete Request

File:عمر حبيب عبدالرزاق.jpg

please if you can undelete this picture because it belongs to عمر حبيب عبدالرزاق--Zaiinulabdeen (talk) 16:30, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose The upload gives us only the name Omar Habib Abdul Razzaq and nothing else. He does not appear on Google. Why should we keep his image? .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:05, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Verulam School badge.png

File in question: Named in subject. Reason for undeletion: This image is a logo of an academic institution and there is no other updated version of this logo on wikimedia.

--Beeboidman2 (talk) 16:43, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That reason sounds like a fair-use rationale. If to be used on :en, upload it locally and claim fair-use. --Túrelio (talk) 18:46, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thats not an argument for undeletion Trade (talk) 19:55, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

File talk:Schoolgirls in Dorking, London (6258299657) (cropped).jpg

The talk page itself adds useful context as to why the photo was so controversial for us to host. I do not agree on it being deleted--Trade (talk) 18:38, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, as the image itself is already deleted. Isn't this information contained in the DR-discussion Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dorking Schoolgirls Patiently Waiting For Mum (6258299657) (cropped).jpg ? --Túrelio (talk) 18:43, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's all there, and that very lengthy DR was closed as Kept. It seems to me this a perfect image to illustrate articles on school uniforms, which it was doing until its uncropped version was deleted after a much shorter discussion. We have two schoolgirls in uniform, completely unidentifiable. It is unfortunate that the original uploader made a comment in poor taste, but it is a quality image. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:19, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Weak oppose I stand by my comments in the original DR. Abzeronow (talk) 19:28, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What does this have to do with the talk page? Trade (talk) 19:54, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Talk Page is usually not useful without the file. I suppose I could copy the contents to the DR talk page if you think we need a historical record of the comments. Abzeronow (talk) 20:00, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good Trade (talk) 20:03, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done: Talk page comments moved to DR talk page to give historical context. --Abzeronow (talk) 20:23, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Motecuzoma isabelel.png

I've painted the image, to illustrate the articles of Isabel Moctezuma (C.XVI aztec historic character). Because there are no known images available from her. It's based on the general information available from the character, meaning ethnicity and approximate age in te times that make her relevant. Just like any other representation of Isabel Moctezuma.

For ideological reasons, I prefered to declare the author anonymous. So apparently it was the reason for de deletion, because Commons has no way to be sure that I have the legal capacity to donate the copyright.

So I uploaded again, declaring myself as the author and contacted permission-commons@wikimedia.org (Andrzej Kamil Rybicki) explaining the situation.

Please let me know what sort of evidence of my authorship you need me to provide.

There are lots of images like that in Commons, representing historic characters, not all of them from famous or notable artists:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Villarroel1.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:COM_V2_D180_The_Prince_Ixtlilxochitl.png

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

Whats the difference with my contributions?

Sincerely, Ingo y gonga

The given license on the file requires attribution. I suppose COM:VRT could attribute it under a pseudonym of your choosing if they would approve permission on the file. CC-zero would solve the anonymity issue. There is also the scope issue, are you a notable artist or is this a personal artwork? Abzeronow (talk) 20:34, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Abzeronow, I have read this scope argument a few times, but cannot really follow it. In cases like this, a portrait serves a documentary purpose. A drawing can help if a photo is or was not possible under the given circumstances.
Furthermore, a very good photo is also a personal artwork. If a non-notable someone makes a good portrait photo of a person, it is considered as in scope. If that same someone draws that person, we discard the drawing as out of scope. IMO we make a distinction which is not waterproof.
Cheers, Mussklprozz (talk) 07:28, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:Die_Partei_(Reutlingen)

About 30 files deleted as of arbitrary accusations, with no understandable comment Dulliman (talk) 02:51, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just because you disagree with them doesn't make them arbitrary. And I understood the comments and close. Jim concluded these were out of scope posters. Abzeronow (talk) 03:23, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Dulliman Das Argument out of scope verstehst Du? Die Löschung ist begründet. Wikipedia ist kein Ort für politische Kampagnen. – Do you understand the argument ‘out of scope’? The deletion is justified. Wikipedia is not a place for political campaigns. Mussklprozz (talk) 07:06, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Harry Topham.jpg

These appear to be cropped images from an anonymous UK group shot from 1895 and the another group shot circa 1900 when these players were on the team. The consensus was to keep, they were deleted, then restored, then apparently deleted again. They should be restored. --RAN (talk) 04:16, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose Hosting them here with false authorship / licensing is pointless. As nobody wanted to fix this information, their undeletion is also pointless. Following the recent restoration, neither the user requesting the restoration nor any of the users supporting the action did so for several months. Ankry (talk) 05:37, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Portada de Último Reino.jpg

Please restore. We have permission per Ticket:2025060910007099. Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 06:59, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done: please add the appropriate tags etc. --Rosenzweig τ 07:10, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Barcas-Rio-logo.svg

Hi there, sorry I did not react in time for the file deletion. It needs to have the license {{TOO-Brazil}}, as is the case for other brands logos in the country (here's another example: [2]). --ArlindoPereira (talk) 08:11, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Arafatrahim17.jpg Please undelete this photo

Iam the photographer I have full right to use this photo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ranimita (talk • contribs) 08:39, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:2022 Dow Jones Industrial Average and S&P 500.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Per my reasoning in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Inflation rate, United States and eurozone, January 2018 through October 2023.png. It is clearly {{PD-chart}} regardless of what it's creator thinks about the underlying data's copyright. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 08:48, 11 June 2025 (UTC) @Ymblanter, Abzeronow, and WeatherWriter: Ping. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 08:49, 11 June 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests&oldid=969879230"