Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive

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

Closed undeletion debates are archived here by SteinsplitterBot.

Recently archived requests

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

More deleted files by User:BMarGlines

Please also restore the following files as they are actually being used on air and/or on the stations' websites.

Mvcg66b3r (talk) 05:19, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

 Info Use outside Wikimedia wiki is out of scope. If they need to be used in Wikimedia, please point out the exact pages. Ankry (talk) 11:39, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Ankry. --Yann (talk) 07:56, 31 May 2024 (UTC)


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

File:Manuel Ambrogioni.jpg

Potreste ripristinare l'immagine? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AdWiki56 (talk • contribs) 08:17, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

 Info Deleted 10h earlier on uploader request. Ankry (talk) 11:33, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

 Not done The requester blocked per sochpuppetry: thay cannot provide an undeletion ratiuonale. Ankry (talk) 16:58, 31 May 2024 (UTC)


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

File:Halia Therapeutics, Inc. HQ.jpg

I am requesting to undelete this image because I took the picture personally for public use, description, and display of Halia Therapeutics Corporate Headquarters. Permission to use the image publically is given by me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HaliaTx (talk • contribs) 18:52, 28 May 2024‎ (UTC)

 Oppose Image size is 260 × 202 pixels. Submission rejected at en:Draft:Halia Therapeutics, Inc.. Thuresson (talk) 23:48, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Thuresson. --Yann (talk) 07:56, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Pakistan-5-reverse.jpg

This Pakistan 5-rupee banknote is part of the 2005 series. However, it was only released in 2008, alongside the new 50-rupee banknote, 3 years after the series' first banknote, the first version of the 20-rupee note was issued. It was then withdrawn in 2011 and ceased to be exchangeable a year later.

The fact that it is a 2005 series banknote despite being released three years after the year of the series doesn't justify its deletion, as it's still part of the same series. The rest of the series that doesn't include the 5-rupee note is still legal tender in Pakistan today.

Āčēģīķļņsūž (talk) 04:34, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 07:55, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Pakistan-5-obverse.jpg

This Pakistan 5-rupee banknote is part of the 2005 series. However, it was only released in 2008, alongside the new 50-rupee banknote, 3 years after the series' first banknote, the first version of the 20-rupee note was issued. It was then withdrawn in 2011 and ceased to be exchangeable a year later.

The fact that it is a 2005 series banknote despite being released three years after the year of the series doesn't justify its deletion, as it's still part of the same series. The rest of the series that doesn't include the 5-rupee note is still legal tender in Pakistan today.

Āčēģīķļņsūž (talk) 04:33, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

 Oppose Per COM:CUR Pakistan. —Tcr25 (talk) 17:48, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 07:54, 31 May 2024 (UTC)


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

File:Untitled-1968 surrealismo pintura simbolica.jpg

File:Untitled-1968 surrealismo pintura simbolica.jpg

Estimados Wikipedista, esta obra pertenece a el Pintor ivan tobar y se encuentra en WikiArt. Esta es toda la informacion de esa obra en cuestion que se encuentra en Internet a Dominio publico.

https://www.wikiart.org/en/ivan-tovar/untitled-1968.

Added: 18 Jun, 2014 by yigruzeltil last edit: 17 Jun, 2016 by xennex max resolution: 550x444px

--Shamalynr (talk) 03:14, 31 May 2024 (UTC)shamalynr

 Not done: Not currently deleted. Please see COM:VRT to confirm the license. --Yann (talk) 07:50, 31 May 2024 (UTC)


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

File:OSK-geschlossen.png

the permission if the owner Stefan Oßwald, CEO of Orbitec, exits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Growbility (talk • contribs) 10:37, 31 May 2024‎ (UTC)

Procedural close, file is not deleted. Thuresson (talk) 16:46, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

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

File:EdaEce1990.png

I noticed this image was deleted, but I think it should be undeleted. It was taken from an official distributor channel (FOX) as you can see here: [1] I see the nomination says "The director of this TV serie until March 2020 was Neslihan Yeşilyurt. Since this director didn't publish it on Youtube with CC, we don't use screenshot here with CC" but we can safely assume the official TV channel of the show has the necessary permissions from production crew/director before "distributing" it. I mean, when do you see a show or film release from director's own channels? The director works on the production and the production company/distributor/TV channel handles the release and the distributing part. So for this reason, "because it's not from director's youtube channel" is not really a good argument to delete, it's from official TV channel page after all.Tehonk (talk) 01:13, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

The DR does seem to conflate the author with the copyright owner, which are not necessarily the same person or entity. If the director was employed by Fox, then Fox is the copyright owner. Article 10 of Turkey's law even states that for a joint work, the owner is the one who brings the collaborators together, and Article 18 is their work-for-hire clause. I don't know much about that television program. If there was production company, they probably own the rights. If Fox was just the distributor and not the copyright owner, they could not license it. But if Fox was the production company as well and as such owns the rights, it would seem to be fine. The question is if the YouTube account is the copyright owner of the material (which may be different than the author). Carl Lindberg (talk) 08:09, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
 Oppose The video cited as the source, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qG-9LDLj-4, returns "Video unavailable. This video is private." The uploader did not request and we did not do a {{License review}}, so we have no confirmation of the license status of the YouTube page. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:44, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
At least as of November 2021, that link had that license, per the Internet archive, which I think was a year and a half after the upload. Interesting that it has been taken down now, though. That often happens when Youtube gets a copyright complaint which is not defended. Carl Lindberg (talk) 14:05, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
Yes, there is confirmation of the license status from the archived link.
@Clindberg no, disappearance would be because of the recent rebranding from FOX to NOW, some old videos/channels were removed as part of it. Tehonk (talk) 18:21, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: Open for a long time -- unanswered questions. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:15, 1 June 2024 (UTC)


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

File:Mana5280-GxoCbiR9C1w-unsplash-detail.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Uploaded with Upload Assistant under CC BY-SA 4.0 Deed (not CC-Zero), both the name of the author and the source have been added, along with many more infos. Rectilinium (talk) 07:48, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

@Rectilinium: Please, provide the exact source of the files so that we can verify the CC BY-SA 4.0 license there. Ankry (talk) 00:44, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
I did Rectilinium (talk) 01:59, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
The source "Unsplash" is not sufficient, please try again. A url pointing to the file and its copyright statement would be typically what we seek.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:04, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Not done, no further response regarding source. Thuresson (talk) 01:24, 1 June 2024 (UTC)


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

File:Anatoly Berezin with his son, 1976.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I request to restore this file, because here on the website of the museum: https://mrkm.ru/novosti/k-90-letiyu-anatoliya-ivanovicha-berezina/?sphrase_id=8151. It says that all materials of the website are covered by Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. FlorianH76 (talk) 19:42, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

 Info In order to consider this declaration valid, we would need explanation how did the museum received copyright to the photo from the photographer or from the photographer's heirs. It is unlikely that the photo was made by an employee of the museum. Ankry (talk) 10:05, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
The museum has an exhibition dedicated to Mr. Berezin, probably they recieved these photos from his relatives. FlorianH76 (talk) 20:43, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: The museum may have received the photos in order to display them but that is very different from having the right to freely license them. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:18, 1 June 2024 (UTC)


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

Images of the Torre Branca

Hi everyone, I'm writing in order to ask for the undeletion of File:Milano Torre Parco Sempione.jpg (deleted after this DR in 2012), File:Torre Branca 2.JPG (deleted after this DR in 2012) and File:ParSemp S11.jpg (deleted after this DR in 2013). All these images depict the en:Torre Branca, a tower commissioned by the Municipality of Milan to en:Gio Ponti and finished in 1933 (see here). Therefore it fell under Template:PD-ItalyGov at least since 1954. It is a building built before 1990, so no issue with US copyright. The copyright warning that is now present in the Category:Torre_Branca_(Milan) should also therefore be removed.--Friniate (talk) 19:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Friniate: Please add the template. --Yann (talk) 20:54, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Paul John Schwendel II (1941-1996) portrait.jpg

I do not see an actual reason given for deletion, just a link to Commons:Licensing. --RAN (talk) 18:09, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

I think speedy deletion was not appropriate for an early 1980s photograph of this kind but a DR would have been. Is this an American photograph? It also appears to be an unpublished photograph, RAN uploading it seems like first publication. Abzeronow (talk) 18:15, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Done. --RAN (talk) 22:47, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, as an unpublished photograph, it would enter the public domain in 2064. It is apparently licensed under a heirs license (which may need VRT since it appears to be extended family but I could be being overly cautious here). Abzeronow (talk) 22:58, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: needs VRT. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:20, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Agenti di polizia in piazza Nicosia.jpg

This is photograph related to an event of 3 May 1979 [2], so the file is PD for [ https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-Italy/it] --Bramfab (talk) 09:37, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

 Oppose While it is PD in Italy, this photograph is not public domain in the US. 1979 photos were still in copyright in Italy on January 1, 1996. Abzeronow (talk) 18:12, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: as per Abzeronow. --Yann (talk) 20:52, 31 May 2024 (UTC)


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

File:Artist Donald Renner.jpg

Requesting undeletion of photograph titled Artist Donald Renner. Photograph resides in the collection of the late artist's daughter, Gail Lynn Renner who gives her permission to publish the image on Wikipedia.

Also requesting undeletion of copies of artist Donald Renner's artwork samples. The late artist's daughter, Gail Lynn Renner, also gives her permission to publish these samples of his artwork on his Wikipedia page. The Lady in the Red Hat File:Lady in the Red Hat (Watercolor Portrait) by Donald Renner.JPG is an original watercolor in Renner's home collection. Chief James Billie File:Chief James Billie (Oil Portrait) by Donald Renner.JPG is an original oil painting likely in the possession of the Seminole Tribe, but the late artist's daughter has copies of the original in her personal collection.

Kate R. Farrell (talk) 20:02, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Permission must be submitted by whoever owns the copyright. Owning a paper copy of a photo does not make you the copyright owner. A permission from somebody who is not the copyright owner means nothing. Further instructions at Commons:VRT. Thuresson (talk) 01:17, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: per Thuresson -- the photo needs a license from the actual photographer. The artworks need a license from an heir via VRT. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:21, 1 June 2024 (UTC)


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

File:Maitreyi ramakrishnan.jpg Request of undeleting

Actress Maitreyi Ramakrishnan at the Vanity Fair's after Oscar's party, 2024

May the mentioned media be reconsidered on being deleted since it can be found on any sites that provide images of the actress in the picture due to it being pictures taken on an event made especially for the act of posting pictures of the celebrities in it, and it also can be found on the social medias of the actress, don't having any type of watermark from the fellow photografer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabfrajola (talk • contribs) 07:51, 31 May 2024 (UTC) (UTC)

 Oppose Copied from X or Instagram. We need a permission from the copyright holder. Fair use is not allowed on Commons. Please read COM:L. Yann (talk) 07:53, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
@Gabfrajola: In order to use Own work claim, you need to upload the original, high resolution, unpublished photo with coplete metadata as from your camera. Ankry (talk) 08:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: per discussion. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)


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

File:Logo SKBR.png

{{Rasional kegunaan bukan bebas<!-- BUANG templat ini JIKA anda menggunakan FAIL BEBAS  -->
| Pemerian = 
| Sumber =Facebook
| Rencana  = SK Bukit Rangin
| Bahagian  = image
| Tujuan  = Logo
| Peleraian rendah = Tidak
| Kebolehgantian = Tidak
| Maklumat lain = 
}}

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Anak Syurga11 (talk • contribs) 07:49, 31 May 2024 (UTC) (UTC)

 Oppose Complex logo. A formal written permission from the copyright holder is needed. Please see COM:VRT for the procedure. Fair use is not allowed on Commons. Yann (talk) 07:49, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

 Not done as per Yann. Ankry (talk) 08:46, 1 June 2024 (UTC)


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

File:The Haukers.jpg

The Haukers - a group of four dogs barking out the greatest hits — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.205.140.17 (talk • contribs) 09:22, 31 May 2024‎ (UTC)

 Oppose Previously published at youtube.com. Thuresson (talk) 16:43, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: per Thuresson. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:24, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Ruben Dattebayo Profile.jpg

--Ruben Dattebayo (talk) 09:29, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Ruben Dattebayo: Why the image should be undeleted? Images for use on userpages can be hosted here for significant Wikimedia contributors only. Ankry (talk) 09:43, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

 Not done no response. Ankry (talk) 12:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)


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

File:Chandragupta Maurya with Selucid Princess bride Helena.jpg

@Túrelio: User Túrelio deleted this image claiming it to be a "copyright violation" saying "Claimed as own work but can be found on the internet before upload date.". He deleted it without even notifying me about a possible deletion. This image is a colorization of an image from a book that is already out of copyright status "https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Chandra_Gupta_Maurya_entertains_his_bride_from_Babylon.jpg". This deletion was unjustified, and needs to be undone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aearthrise (talk • contribs)

@Aearthrise: Note that both claiming Own work for images already published or made by someone else as well as reupload of deleted images are serious violations of Wikimedia Commons policies. You may be blocked if you do so again. Ankry (talk) 09:50, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
@Ankry: Don't play this pompous attitude with me as you are incorrect in your thought process; this colorization is my own work, adapted from another work with no color, and it was deleted unjustly from faulty logic unchecked by the reviewer Turelio. He claimed it can be found on the internet before upload date, which is a complete lie. Aearthrise (talk) 11:22, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
@Aearthrise, Using things like the {{Derived from}} template or including more information with the uploaded file, including noting the source file's copyright status, can make it clearer why you're making an own work claim when you're uploading something that is clearly not 100% your own work. —Tcr25 (talk) 13:20, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
Thank you Tcr25, i'll implement that template. Aearthrise (talk) 14:14, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
Anyway, reuploading the deleted file is against policy. Even if the deletion was out-of-process. You should wait for undeletion decision here. Ankry (talk) 16:43, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: The original from this was made is under copyright, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Chandra Gupta Maurya entertains his bride from Babylon.jpg. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:32, 1 June 2024 (UTC)


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

Files deleted by Krd

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: There appears to be FoP in Palestine, based on the 1911 Copyright Act. The "private copyring provision" at Ordinance 1924 only targets different sections of the 1911 law, not the FoP provision at Section 2, so FoP is still applicable in Palestine. See COM:FOP State of Palestine (which I just corrected now). See also my input at VPC. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:58, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per JWilz12345. No opposition. --Yann (talk) 15:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)


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

Files deleted by Krd

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: There appears to be FoP in Palestine, based on the 1911 Copyright Act. The "private copyring provision" at Ordinance 1924 only targets different sections of the 1911 law, not the FoP provision at Section 2, so FoP is still applicable in Palestine. See COM:FOP State of Palestine (which I corrected just now). See also my input at VPC. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:01, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per JWilz12345. No opposition. --Yann (talk) 15:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Mariaratkova.jpg

Ciao a tutti, ho richiesto l'autorizzazione al legittimo proprietario della foto. La foto è stata presa da Pinterest ed era in formato open e scaricabile liberamente. Ho richiesto alla diretta interessata di caricare la foto su wikipedia e mi ha detto di sì. Allego foto della comunicazione:

File:Autorizzazione.png

Chiedo cortesemente il ripristino della foto. Saluti

Hi everyone, I requested authorization from the legitimate owner of the photo. The photo was taken from Pinterest and was in open format and freely downloadable. I asked the person concerned to upload the photo to Wikipedia and she said yes. I attach photos of the communication:

File:Autorizzazione.png

I kindly ask for the photo to be restored. Greetings

--Anubi1984 (talk) 17:07, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Anubi1984: The permission has to be sent by email via COM:VRT. Yann (talk) 19:47, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
@Anubi1984: The standard Pinterest license is not compatible with Wikimedia Commons. The copyright holder needs to grant a free license via email. Ankry (talk) 08:45, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
ok tks.. Anubi1984 (talk) 13:02, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: per discussion. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:33, 1 June 2024 (UTC)


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

en:File:Panditani.jpg

The file is in public domain now. The creator Fred Bremner died in 1941. That was more than 50 years ago. Please see the article on Fred Bremner. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Malaiya (talk • contribs) 23:50, 31 May 2024‎ (UTC)

It looks it was never deleted. My assumption that it was deleted appears to be incorrect. I willl go ahead and upload it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Malaiya (talk • contribs) 23:54, 31 May 2024‎ (UTC)

Procedural close. No file with that name deleted from Commons. Uploaded as File:Kashmiri Pandit lady in 1900.jpg. Thuresson (talk) 01:04, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Placa_Simón_del_Desierto_-_Filmoteca_UNAM.jpg

As you can see here, this picture shows a plaque in a monument located in a public place so, is protected by Mexico's freedom of panorama. So, I gently request for undeletion. Thanks in advance. --Salvador alc (talk) 02:29, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

  •  Comment The plaque part, ok - except the inclusion of a large photo from the Luis Buñuel film Simon del Desierto (en:w:Simon of the Desert). As COM:DW, this photo retains the same copyright status as the film. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:16, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
    • This is not contradicting: FoP is a copyright law exception that allows free use of certain copyrighted works. As the film is Mexican (the same country of origin as for the photo), I think, we can apply Mexican FoP here. We generally perit FoP-based works even if they are copyrighted in US and non compatible with US FoP, so  Support undeletion. Ankry (talk) 08:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done: per request and Ankry. --Abzeronow (talk) 17:12, 2 June 2024 (UTC)


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

File:جلد نمایشنامه همین امشب.jpg

This photo was photographed and uploaded by me!!Boghlat (talk) 04:04, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

@Boghlat: This work is not a photo, it is a book cover. Making a 2D copy of a 2D work does not make you its author. Not providing info about the original author is serious violation of the declared license. Not providing an evidence that the cover copyright holder did grant the free license for their work is serious violation of Wikimedia Commons policy. If the license was not granted by them, your upload is blatant copyright violation. Ankry (talk) 08:39, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: per Ankry. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC)


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

File:جلد نمایشنامه همه چیز می‌گذرد، تو نمی‌گذری.jpg

This photo was photographed and uploaded by me! Boghlat (talk) 04:05, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

See above. Ankry (talk) 08:39, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: per Ankry. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC)


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

File:Pendatang.jpg

The source of this file is screenshoted from this link, which they give CC licence for their works. - Zahirulnukman (talk) 13:19, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

 Support The specific license is not named, but the intention is clear. The source appears to be the official site of the production company. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:41, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

We would need an actual license though Bedivere (talk) 16:33, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
Isn't "License: Creative Commons Attribution license (reuse allowed)" enough? While the version is not named, as I said above, the intention is clear. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:45, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done: per request and discussion. --Abzeronow (talk) 17:17, 2 June 2024 (UTC)


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

File:Peugeot logo (1991-1998).png

I apologize, I don't see any intention of uploading images without permission, it was a misunderstanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flexingflex1224 (talk • contribs) 10:23, 2 June 2024‎ (UTC)

Procedural close. Please do not ask for undeletion of files that have not been deleted. Thuresson (talk) 12:25, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

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

Undeletion files Request

Undeletion files Request

We need a reason why you want these files undeleted. Abzeronow (talk) 20:23, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: No answer. No evidence of a free license, and advertisement. --Yann (talk) 19:35, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Lake Effect Snow Dumps on the Great Lakes Region (49592585943).jpg

The licence is Template:PD-USGov-NOAA, see https://www.nesdis.noaa.gov/news/lake-effect-snow-dumps-the-great-lakes-region — Preceding unsigned comment added by Don-vip (talk • contribs) 11:51, 2 June 2024‎ (UTC)

 Support It has a NOAA icon in the lower left corner. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:42, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Replaced by Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#NASA_and_NOAA_files_deleted_on_2020-12-14 I didn't realize the amount of NASA/NOAA files deleted on that day. vip (talk) 00:38, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done: per request. Added license and FlickrReview. --Abzeronow (talk) 17:21, 3 June 2024 (UTC)


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

Images of Palazzo delle Poste (Massa)

Hi everyone, I'm writing in order to ask for the undeletion of File:Massa-palazzo delle poste1.jpg, File:Massa-palazzo delle poste2.jpg, File:Massa-palazzo delle poste3.jpg, all depicting it:Palazzo delle Poste (Massa) and all deleted after this DR in 2013. As already pointed out in the two previous UDRs (here and here), this was one of the general post offices designed by Angiolo Mazzoni in his capacity as engineer at the Ministry for Communications (see here and here for more informations). It is therefore a work for hire for the Italian State Administration and it fell under Template:PD-ItalyGov in 1954. It is a building built before 1990 so no issue with US copyright.--Friniate (talk) 12:10, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done: per previous UDRs. --Abzeronow (talk) 17:37, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

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

File:William Francis Norton (1857-1939) memoir.pdf

In use public domain document. A grandchild of the author does not want it in the public domain, but that isn't how United States copyright law works or how Wikimedia Commons rules work. Nothing would enter the public domain if a single person could have veto power over the expiration of copyrights. The rational for the deletion was per User:Consigned, but their argument was that it is "not in scope", but our rule is: "A media file that is in use on one of the other projects of the Wikimedia Foundation is considered automatically to be useful for an educational purpose". The rational for the deletion was per User:Ankry: "not published prior to its upload to Commons". We host over 1,000 documents and images under the {{PD-US-unpublished}} license. There was an argument that the 1970 introductory paragraph and addendum had limited distribution, even though it it did not comply with a copyright symbol or copyright registration, as a compromise the 1970 annotations were removed. --RAN (talk) 16:15, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

  •  Oppose It seems the closing admin deleted it due to unadressed or acknowledged COM:SCOPE issues, not anything to do with copyright. Although the claim it was PD was (and is) still questionable anyway, but at least a couple of people made good arguements for the file not being in scope. Your whole "but its in use on other projects" thing is just a circular self justification in the meantime. One that at least IMO goes against the "usage done in good faith is in scope" part of the guideline. --Adamant1 (talk) 16:31, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 Oppose The file was in use on a Wikidata item that you created. As Consigned clearly exposed there is a problem in both projects policies when they can be exploited this way. A non notable memoir, linked on Wikidata, cannot be automatically in scope here. Likewise a non notable memoir should not have a Wikidata item just because it is linked internally. Bedivere (talk) 16:31, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
"A media file that is in use on one of the other projects of the Wikimedia Foundation is considered automatically to be useful for an educational purpose ... 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." I don't see any exceptions to the rule. Perhaps the rule should be changed to give people veto power first. I do not see the exception to the rule you are claiming. --RAN (talk) 16:35, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
Common sense still applies. You have not addressed and never said clearly that you created the Wikidata items yourself and that you're using that rule to artificially trying to keep the files here. Where is the good faith in that? Can you please elaborate that without deliberately avoiding the whole point in discussion? Bedivere (talk) 16:38, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) will you respond or continue to avoid the point? Bedivere (talk) 17:33, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
People use the phrase: "Common sense" to mean something an individual believes to be true that another individual does not believe to be true. It is just an empty phrase. --RAN (talk) 17:36, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
You still haven't answered anything Bedivere (talk) 18:04, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 Oppose I read through the document rapidly. It's a family memoir from a non-notable person. The claim made in the DR that it sheds light on railroad building and early telephones is nonsense -- he mentions working on several railroads, but gives no interesting details. He describes an early railroad telephone conversation -- so what? I agree that our policy that "in use is in scope" does not have to be applied when the uploader creates the use. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:40, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
  • "No interesting details" is subjective, we house over 1,000,000 books of fiction pre 1929 that I will never read, perhaps no one will ever read. --RAN (talk) 17:38, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
Sounds like the absolute "[not] overrule other projects" is now "except when I disagree". --RAN (talk) 16:42, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
COM:EDUSE "any use that is not made in good faith does not count." How exactly does that make "[not] overrule other projects" an absolute? --Adamant1 (talk) 16:49, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
How is it in bad faith? There is no Commons description of "bad faith", it seems you can overrule an absolute by just claiming bad faith, without defining it. Can we now set up a bot delete every entry that links to another project by the uploader? --RAN (talk) 17:12, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
You didn't answer the question. How does "any use that is not made in good faith does not count" make usage on other projects an absolute? You can't just claim the exception can't ever be applied or that "usage on other projects" is an absolute just because words have no ultimate, universally agreed on meaning. --Adamant1 (talk) 17:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
I already said you are just using the phrase to give yourself veto power. All you have to do is use the phrase "bad faith" without defining it. It seems that you are defining bad faith as "uploading a document to Commons and creating a Wikidata entry by the same person". Can we now set up a bot to delete every entry that links to another project by the uploader? --RAN (talk) 17:32, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
I don't really see how I'm unilaterally doing anything when I wasn't the one who deleted the image and like 5 other people agree with that being the outcome, but then comments like that are exactly why I think this whole thing is bad faithed on your part. We'll have to agree to disagree though. But it does seem like your beating a dead horse regardless. Maybe try getting the point to start with next time. --Adamant1 (talk) 17:51, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
That just makes my point. You are moving the goalpost, now "bad faith" is citing policy: "comments like that ... I think this whole thing is bad faithed on your part". Unless you are willing to apply this new rule universally by having a bot scour Commons for entries that linked to Wikidata by the same uploader, you are just making up rules and applying them ad hoc with bias. --RAN (talk) 18:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
"any use that is not made in good faith does not count." Uploading this file, then creating a Wikidata item for it to be kept on Commons under the illusion it is in scope because "A media file that is in use on one of the other projects of the Wikimedia Foundation is considered automatically to be useful for an educational purpose" is bad faith. Period. Bedivere (talk) 18:31, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
The problem is you are just shouting "bad faith" then coming up with a unique one-time-only definition. Now for the third or fourth time: Are we going to create a bot to scour Commons for entries that are linked to Wikidata by the same uploader and have them all deleted? If not, then it isn't a real Wiki-rule, rules get applied universally. --RAN (talk) 20:50, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
The problem is that you have failed to explain how is the file in scope without resorting to that argument nobody is buying that these are in scope because an item you created on Wikidata is using them. Stop the fallacies and running around without responding the valid questions we've made. Your relentlessness is only showing you would do the exact thing again. --Bedivere (talk) 21:02, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
You just keep shouting "scope" over and over. Here we go again: "A media file that is in use on one of the other projects of the Wikimedia Foundation is considered automatically to be useful for an educational purpose ... 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." There is no rule demanding deletion if you also create the Wikidata entry. As I now point out for probably the fifth time: If this rule is a real rule, then we must delete every entry in Commons where the uploader also created the Wikidata entry, otherwise it is just selective enforcement of a real rule, or just a pretend rule to be used when you want to veto something you do not like. --RAN (talk) 01:07, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Here we go again too: "any use that is not made in good faith does not count." Your off-track suggestion on creating a bot to delete files is unrealistic and shows you're missing the point. --Bedivere (talk) 01:42, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
I'd probably be down for creating a bot that deletes any usage that wasn't made in good faith. In a perfect world a lot of this stuff probably could (or should) be more automated. Your just deflecting by acting like this has anything to do with "every entry in Commons where the uploader also created the Wikidata entry" though. --Adamant1 (talk) 04:12, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: out of scope on Commons. --Abzeronow (talk) 17:23, 3 June 2024 (UTC)


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

File:未行之路.jpg

為什麼會被刪除？ --GoogleRitz (talk) 19:13, 2 June 2024 (UTC)（留言・原神工作組）2024/6/3

 Not done: Copyrighted manga, no permission. --Yann (talk) 19:31, 2 June 2024 (UTC)


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

File:GOES East Captures SpaceX Falcon Heavy Launch (32651783097).jpg

Another NOAA picture. Same as above, licence is Template:PD-USGov-NOAA, see https://www.nesdis.noaa.gov/news/goes-east-catches-glimpse-of-spacex-launch . Thank you. vip (talk) 23:31, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Replaced by Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#NASA_and_NOAA_files_deleted_on_2020-12-14 I didn't realize the amount of NASA/NOAA files deleted on that day. vip (talk) 00:38, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Procedural close: withdrawn. Ankry (talk) 10:11, 3 June 2024 (UTC)


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

File:Nishida-2.JPG

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: permission confirmed in ticket:2024052810002338 and ticket:2016041710002116. whym (talk) 03:46, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done @Whym: FYI. Ankry (talk) 08:15, 3 June 2024 (UTC)


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

File:Török Máté.jpg

File:Name of the file to Török Máté.jpg

Tisztelt Illetékes!

Szeretnék érdeklődni, miért lett törölve az általam készített és korábban feltöltött fotó? {{Kettős-GFDL-cc-by-sa-3.0}}

Üdvözlettel, Török Máté Matetorok78 (talk) 13:16, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

@Matetorok78: Because the permission in ticket 2024043010002791 has not yet been accepted by a VRT volunteer. Questions about VRT ticket processing can be asked at VRT noticeboard. Ankry (talk) 13:36, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Procedural close: not an undeletion request. Ankry (talk) 13:36, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Lion and sun Emblem2.svg There was no reason to delete it.

The file is useful. It's the best version of the Lion and Sun PNG, it's accurate the version that's on the flag of en:Pahlavi Iran.

Ironzombie39 (talk) 15:08, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

I tend to  Support undeletion: the file was used. @Trade and Kadı: Any comment why did you find this image to be suitable for deletion? Ankry (talk) 10:14, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
@Ankry, and @Ironzombie39: I undeleted the image. Best wishes. Kadı Message 16:22, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done: See above. --Yann (talk) 19:01, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

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

French national archives files deleted on 2020-12-15

Given that I found two NOAA files deleted on 2020-12-14 while the NOAA logo was clearly visible, I'm looking at public domain files deleted by mistake around this date. I found a bunch of files that appear to clearly be Template:PD-France given their source (French national archives) and their date (18th/19th century).

One of these files has already been undeleted: File:Billet de congé imprimé de François Noisot - Archives nationales - Y-18724-B.jpg

All these files should be undeleted as well:

Archives Nationales told themselves they were only importing public domain works in the frame of their partnership with Wikimedia France. They just chose the wrong licence, sadly the files were not undeleted yet.

vip (talk) 00:05, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

The deletion reasons that I checked said these were a derivative work situation. What are the images showing? Carl Lindberg (talk) 18:39, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Given the titles (I didn't check all of them), it should be scans of written works, papers, letters, official documents, architectural diagrams and maps from the 18th/19th century. vip (talk) 18:45, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
File:Copie de Henri Bergson au concours général de mathématiques – Archives nationales – AJ-16-799 page 1.jpg is a scan of a document from 1877. Was licensed as cc-zero. Abzeronow (talk) 19:02, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
 Support The license was wrong (these files can't be under a CC0 license), but they are certainly in the public domain. Yann (talk) 19:04, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done: per request, public domain files. --Abzeronow (talk) 16:57, 4 June 2024 (UTC)


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

Photographs of Paris by Olive Titus deleted on 2020-12-15

Another case of a large number of files deleted on 2020-12-15. Photographs of Paris taken by Olive Titus and released on Flickr using PD-mark. Many of them, if not all, were deleted on 2020-12-15.

Two of them have been since undeleted:

The other ones whould be undeleted as well:

193 files
* File:Vitraux, église Saint-Pierre-de-Chaillot, 16e arr., Paris (21892217509).jpg

vip (talk) 00:22, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

 Oppose I agree that the PDM was used by the photographer and therefore the images are all PD. However, it appears that many of them are images of the church Saint-Pierre-de-Chaillot, which was built in the 1930s. It and all of its details have at least a URAA copyright, and both its paintings and its sculpture have French copyrights as well. Therefore this UnDR should be closed as Not Done and a new one posted that does not include derivative works from the church and elsewhere. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:06, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim. --Abzeronow (talk) 16:59, 4 June 2024 (UTC)


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

File:Amb.Joanne Ou.jpg

Authorization from the public domain source:

https://roc-taiwan.org/uploads/sites/70/2023/01/230504-Amb_Joanne_Ou_CV.pdf

  • You declared that the image was published in US before 1929. I see no evidence for this in the abovementioned document, nor any free license from the photo copyright holder (nete that if the copyright holder is not the photographer, we also need an evidence of copyright transfer). Ankry (talk) 08:20, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

 Not done No evidence of free license or public domain status provided. Ankry (talk) 08:19, 4 June 2024 (UTC)


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

File:HaydenW-Wiki.png

The photo is of an individual who is a British Politician and it is to be apart of an existing article.

 Not done: Nonsense request. Teenager's selfie, out of scope. --Yann (talk) 18:58, 3 June 2024 (UTC)


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

File:Mám ještě spousty přání.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Please undelete per ticket 2024053010008882. Thank you, janbery (talk) 11:34, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Janbery: FYI. --Abzeronow (talk) 17:28, 4 June 2024 (UTC)


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

File:Prof. Marek Gosztyła.jpg

There is a proper agreement from author. See ticket:2024052710002992. Polimerek (talk) 14:05, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Polimerek: Please correct the file info accordingly. --Bedivere (talk) 17:51, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/Archive&oldid=837992578"