Commons:Undeletion requests

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

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

Other languages:

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

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

Commons deletion (policy)
v • d • e

Finding out why a file was deleted

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

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

Appealing a deletion

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

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

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

Temporary undeletion

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

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

To assist discussion

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

To allow transfer of fair use content to another project

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

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

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

Adding a request

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

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

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

Closing discussions

In general, discussions should be closed only by administrators.

Archives

Closed undeletion debates are archived daily.

Current requests

File:ROC Ministry of National Defense Seal.svg

Please restore the following pages:

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

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

@SCP-2000: If the emblem is made in accordance with the law, such law needs to be specified. In the email you quote, the national flag is defined in 中華民國國徽國旗法第4條, and the Taipei City's seal is defined in 臺北市市徽市旗設置自治條例第4條. A seal/emblem/logo is only in the PD if it is based on a law. Wcam (talk) 19:16, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, it is based on 《陸海空軍軍旗條例施行細則》第五條. Looks ok to keep. --Wcam (talk) 19:18, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Support. (And should recover all revision history altogether) —— Eric Liu（Talk） 23:38, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The revision history of File:Seal of the Ministry of National Defense of the Republic of China.svg should be merged with this file if the latter get restored. —— Eric Liu（Talk） 10:22, 19 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Only this file (to request restoration of all deleted revisions) or for all deleted files of that DR? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:03, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Only this file. Wcam (talk) 17:29, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Afghanistan-Spange.jpg

And also:

I created the picture myself. So please restore it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by User85521 (talk • contribs) 01:36, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Carlos-Meyer-Baldo.jpg

The image was taken during Baldó's military service during World War I, between 1914 and 1918, and Carlos Meyer Baldó died in 1933. The image's age means that it already is in the public domain per {{PD-old}}, and in the worst case scenario media enters in Venezuela's public domain after 60 years of its publication ({{PD-Venezuela}}). --NoonIcarus (talk) 00:10, 29 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@NoonIcarus: When was this photo first published in Venezuela? Thuresson (talk) 01:59, 29 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@NoonIcarus: Who is the photographer and has she or he been dead for 70 years? Thuresson (talk) 10:28, 29 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Comment If the above questions remain unresponded, {{PD-old-assumed}} can be applied in 2039. Ankry (talk) 15:39, 29 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The picture was first published in 1918, along with other pictures ([1]), during Baldó's service as an instructor (Fluglehrer) at the Fighter Squadron School Nr. II to train Jasta pilots. The copyright law in Venezuela does not consider the author's death for media such as photographs (unlike music, for instance), but rather its publication date. At any rate, {{PD-US-expired}} also applies given that the picture was published before 1928. Best wishes. --NoonIcarus (talk) 20:32, 30 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The deleted file appears to have a modern colorization, which could have its own copyright. Abzeronow (talk) 20:39, 30 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Abzeronow: Ah, I wasn't aware of that. Was it already in its original version or was it added by an user? In the case of the former, I can withdraw my request and ask for undeletion to be applied in the respective years (like 2039). --NoonIcarus (talk) 01:32, 31 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is only one version that we have (the colorized version). Abzeronow (talk) 16:34, 31 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Oppose The template "PD-Old" can not be used without knowing who the photographer is and when she or he died. "PD-Venezuela" can not be used without providing the authorship and publication details. If the photo was first published on Twitter, it may be undeleted in 2081. Thuresson (talk) 04:17, 31 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The image was not first published in Twitter (Twitter's version is black and white while the deleted one is colorized, for instance). It was simply provided for context about the other images it was first published with. --NoonIcarus (talk) 11:48, 31 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Support Per NoonIcarus --Wilfredor (talk) 13:11, 31 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Support:Per NoonIcarus, Venezuela license it's OK. AbchyZa22 (talk) 10:19, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@AbchyZa22: Could you, please, elaborate which 60 years old publication you mean? Ankry (talk) 01:25, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ankry:Buenas según Wikipedia (https://es.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Meyer_Bald%C3%B3) el murió en 1933, por eso es que según Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Venezuela son 60 años después de la publicación (osea después de la muerte del autor) por eso está OK. AbchyZa22 (talk) 11:31, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@AbchyZa22: But where is an evidence that the photo was published (available to the general public) during his life? Photo creation date is irrelevant for copyright (except US 120 year cut-off time). Ankry (talk) 11:36, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ankry:Look (https://www.meer.com/en/58066-carlos-meyer-baldo-a-venezuelan-fighter-pilot-of-the-wwi) in the photo number 5 (Carlos Meyer piloting his Fokker D.VII “Drooling boxer” in the summer of 1918 (photo Greg van Wyngarden)) (Google translator) AbchyZa22 (talk) 15:02, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@AbchyZa22: This page is dated 17 October 2019. This is not 60 years ago. Also the photo #5 is not the photo we are discussing here (the photo requested here is a colour portrait photo - or maybe a painting? - this one; claimed to be made personally by the uploader). Ankry (talk) 18:05, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We usually assume that old pictures were published at the time they were taken, but this is not photo #5 mentioned above. But that picture is available at File:Bóxer Babeante.jpg. Yann (talk) 11:26, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Greg vanWyngarden is a contemporary writer about fighter planes of WW1, he is not the photographer. Thuresson (talk) 18:02, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Dr Death 2002.jpg

Hello Team, Regarding the next uploads from the user IchibanNOAH, I propose undeleting his first upload of Dr Death Steve Williams. --CoffeeEngineer (talk) 16:13, 1 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Oppose I see no evidence that the photographer has granted any free license. Moreover, low resolution raises a doubt about authorship. I think, this case needs to be resolved via VRT. Ankry (talk) 20:25, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done: as per Ankry. --Yann (talk) 11:17, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Flag of Caracas (2022).svg

Buenas, necesito que algún administrador restaure la imagen por que la Bandera del Municipio Libertador de Caracas, Venezuela es una invención por eso está en el Dominio Público según el Articulo 325 de la Ley Orgánica del Trabajo, Trabajadores y Trabajadoras en Venezuela. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AbchyZa22 (talk • contribs) 23:16, 1 January 2024‎ (UTC)Reply[reply]

Per Commons:Coats of arms, each rendering can have its own copyright. Was this a user-drawn version or copied from a copyrighted source? Carl Lindberg (talk) 06:07, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Clindberg:Buenas, pero en el artículo 325 dice:Invenciones, innovaciones y mejoras en el sector público
La producción intelectual generada bajo relación de trabajo en el sector público, o financiada a través de fondos públicos que origine derechos de propiedad intelectual, se considerará del dominio público, manteniéndose los derechos al reconocimiento público del autor o autora.
El {{PD-VenezuelaGov}} aplica directamente a los Logos, Banderas y escudos de Armas por que son invencionales (significa se basa en la imaginación de los autores osea personas.) AbchyZa22 (talk) 08:42, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As mentioned in the other discussions you started last week about art. 325 at HD and VP/C, that argument is not necessarily convincing without authoritative interpretation by courts or doctrine and without evidence that these artworks by independent artists meet the factual conditions. Even if hypothetically it applied, that would be for the Venezuelan copyright, not for the United States copyright. However, the concept of the flag designed in 2022 by María Jiménez and Víctor Rodríguez might be (or not) too simple for copyright, but even then, each particular artistic rendering of it can be copyrighted. -- Asclepias (talk) 17:04, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Clindberg:Aquí esta las fuentes https://elpais.com/internacional/2022-04-21/el-chavismo-entierra-el-legado-espanol-del-escudo-de-caracas-400-anos-despues.html AbchyZa22 (talk) 08:45, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That is the source for the escudo at File:Coat of arms of Caracas (2022).png. The question by Clindberg was what is the source of the particular rendering of the bandera in File:Flag of Caracas (2022).svg. -- Asclepias (talk) 17:04, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Asclepias:Buenas aquí esta la fuente:https://eldiario.com/2023/10/12/nuevos-simbolos-de-caracas-concejo-municipal/amp/ AbchyZa22 (talk) 18:12, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Of the particular svg rendering in File:Flag of Caracas (2022).svg? -- Asclepias (talk) 19:22, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The statement by the uploader in the original upload log was "own work". Pinging the uploader User:Salvadoroff. -- Asclepias (talk) 17:04, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Echando una mano: Buenas y Feliz Año, por favor una pregunta es posible restaurar la foto de la Bandera de Caracas (2022) con respecto a este tema??
AbchyZa22 (talk) 19:48, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@AbchyZa22: lo siento, no lo sé. Feliz año a usted también. Echando una mano 21:56, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If it's truly a vector version drawn by a contributor, I'd lean towards keeping it. If it was extracted from a PDF of a government source (or is an SVG wrapper around a bitmap taken from another unlicensed source), then I'd go the other way. I would treat each drawing as its own copyright (even the choice of vector points in an SVG can in theory have a copyright, if complex enough, beyond the rendered image). Carl Lindberg (talk) 01:52, 3 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Clindberg:Buenas, con respecto a la Bandera, aquí esta las fuentes:https://eldiario.com/2023/10/12/nuevos-simbolos-de-caracas-concejo-municipal/amp/ AbchyZa22 (talk) 10:23, 3 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Clindberg: Given that any drawing must be derived from the original 2022 design by Jiménez and Rodríguez, do you evaluate that their work is below or above the threshold for copyrightability? The composition with the triangles of colour, the star and the mountain is not as simple as bands of colour, but it's not very complex either. -- Asclepias (talk) 19:48, 4 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Often the design is an idea, with each drawing a particular expression of that idea. That is more straightforward with seals with a written blazon -- a drawing cannot be derivative of the written description. But in general we seem to allow self-drawn images of flags too. Furthermore, as far as the design is part of law, that part would be {{PD-EdictGov}}. Any additions done by a private party (even particular vector points) may qualify for copyright though, so we often look at the history of the specific drawing. If it's the flag as seen here, the only part which may be copyrightable is the very specific outline of the mountain or hill or treetops or whatever that is, which likely differs a little between versions and so they may well not be derivative of each other. If that image was self-drawn without slavishly copying the outline, I would restore it. A lot of this gets into highly theoretical territory, as it would probably be near impossible for a country or city to sue over copyright infringement of a flag, where the scope of fair use and PD-edict is probably pretty wide. I think as such, we would respect any copyright of a privately-drawn version, but if self-drawn it's probably fine. (Individual government drawings may not be OK though; we tend to not copy those from websites.) Carl Lindberg (talk) 00:15, 5 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Asclepias:Buenas ,por favor lee el Artículo 2 del Derechos de Autor en Venezuela,en que está sometidos los derechos del Autor?? AbchyZa22 (talk) 15:30, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@AbchyZa22: Hi, What about it? If it's still about its scope, I already commented in your thread last month at Commons:Help desk/Archive/2023/12#Commons:Deletion requests/File:Coat of arms of Caracas (2022).png. -- Asclepias (talk) 15:59, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Asclepias:Buenas, una pregunta que pasaría si el Artículo 325 de la Ley Orgánica del Trabajo los Trabajadores y Trabajadoras en Venezuela es Constitucional, es posible restaurar la foto de la Bandera?? AbchyZa22 (talk) 23:24, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@AbchyZa22: A) Constitutionality is only one of several questions to which we do not have answers for now. Other questions, already mentioned above, are B) can the intended goal and scope of 325 include this type of artistic works and, if so, C) does the particular work meet its conditions of application? (Did the two authors get any money and, even then, would their flag proposal be considered "financiada" solely for winning the first prize in the contest?) Again, all that sounds like specialized matters of Venezuelan law. Getting reliable answers require research in court decisions and doctrinal texts or the help of jurists in Venezuelan law. However, and fortunately, we probably do not need to consider that at all here. From the above discussions, if the original flag is considered to be below the "Umbral de originalidad" ("threshold of originality"), both in Venezuela and in the United States, and if the subsequent svg drawing is considered to be the own work of the uploader, then this file with the flag could be undeleted under that rationale only. (It is different for the other file with the coat of arms, wich is above the threshold of originality and directly reproduced.) -- Asclepias (talk) 01:24, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Elcobbola:Hi, please can you close the UDR (Undeletion Request),the flag its a invention in 325 Article in Venezuela law (its a Public Domain) and the SVG its a valid? (Google translator) AbchyZa22 (talk) 13:24, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:The sims 4 moon sofa set.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This image represents a 3D sofa set modeled in the Blender program and its coverings adjusted. It is an example of 3D models created for video games in the Blender program.

It was reported that the reason for deleting the image was because the products sold on the website were spam.

The sofa set in the image is a mod made for The Sims 4. And these mods are offered for free on the website. The image uploaded here is not taken from the game. They were made in the open source blender program.

The purpose of the images here is not advertising. It is an example of 3D objects made by fans for games. Pentapixel (talk) 18:41, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Oppose The terms of service at the source site are far from our requirements. They are explicitly revocable and explicitly forbid commercial use. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:08, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jameslwoodward There is a statement saying "Do not use without a license", but the necessary permissions have been given to Wikipedia in writing. Still, I informed the site that they should update that section to be more clear. You can check again. Pentapixel (talk) 01:41, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
While they show a CC license for the images, the site explicitly states that they may change anything on the site at any time. Such a specific statement overrules the fact that CC licenses are ordinarily irrevocable. Specific always overrules general. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:05, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jameslwoodward Yes, I didn't realize that. I talked to the site management and they admitted that there was a discrepancy and said they would update it. Pentapixel (talk) 20:11, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello @Jameslwoodward You can check again. Pentapixel (talk) 23:33, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The ToS still says, "Customcontent.net reserves the right to change or modify any of the terms and conditions contained in these Site Terms, or any policy or guideline of the Site, at any time and in its sole discretion." which, as I noted above, is unacceptable on Commons. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:29, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jameslwoodward Can you check again. I think it was showing you the old version because the site caches were not updated. I checked from different browsers and now that part seems to have been removed. Pentapixel (talk) 18:44, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Various professional wrestling logos

As with File:Women Superstars United logo, 2019.png, all of these files were marked as for speedy deletion instead of nominated for deletion, which allowed no room nor time for discussion. I object in particular to the deletion of File:World Woman Pro-Wrestling Diana logo.png (consisting strictly only of text and geometric shapes), File:Pure-J wrestling logo.png (a variety of colours does not mean this is anything more than text and geometric shapes, as was discussed in the recent undelete for File:PCW-Ultra.jpg), File:Wrestling Society X logo.png (the "complexity" is minimal, and still geometric. Certainly not more complex than anything featured in File:Cyberpunk 2077 logo.svg) and File:Association les Professionnels du Catch 2019 logo.png (this is text on a circle + stars which are also geometrical) and File:Insane Championship Wrestling logo.png, which is simply the lettering I C W with some minimal red outlining. File:House of Glory wrestling logo.png may be the most egregious deletion of the batch; it's lettering only.

If someone wants to make an argument that the crown featured in File:All Japan Women's Pro-Wrestling logo.png precludes that, I can at least understand that argument, but for the rest these are very simple text + shapes. File:Pro Wrestling NOAH 2021 logo.svg is simply text + straight lines; the "ring" featured on top is not a "complex" shape and is formed via straight, geometric lines.

To help this process; the majority of these logos are American, some are Japanese. If users need help differentiating which are American and which are Japanese because of a threshold discussion, please don't hesitate to ping me.

Thank you for your time, CeltBrowne (talk) 12:39, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Upon doing further research, I believe that the spherical shape in File:World Woman Pro-Wrestling Diana logo.png is literally File:Globe icon.svg merely rotated a number of degrees. CeltBrowne (talk) 13:33, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't want to sound impatient, but almost all these files are the primary image/infobox image for different individual articles. 11 articles are without a primary image until they are (hopefully) restored, therefore I'm eager to see this matter resolved fairly quickly if possible. If you have the time to look into these files, I'd appreciate it. As with File:Women Superstars United logo, 2019.png, they were all marked as Template:PD-textlogo and Template:Trademark. CeltBrowne (talk) 13:11, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@The Squirrel Conspiracy: as deleting admin. Yann (talk) 11:50, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I disagree with the undeletion of File:Women Superstars United logo, 2019.png and with your assessment of all of the logos you linked, with the possible exception of File:World Woman Pro-Wrestling Diana logo.png. That said, if another admin feels comfortable undeleting any of them, I'm fine with that as well. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 00:28, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I also disagree with undeleting File:Women Superstars United logo, 2019.png. The text is OK, but the tear in the middle is not a simple geometric shape. We could make a similar image with our own tear, but the author has a copyright on his drawing of the tear. I cannot view the deleted files, so I will not comment on them. Glrx (talk) 17:38, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, I renominated this file: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Women Superstars United logo, 2019.png. Yann (talk) 11:44, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ruthven: @TheAafi: @Ankry: @Jameslwoodward:
Sorry to bother you, but as you were all involved in undeleting either File:Women Superstars United logo, 2019.png or File:PCW-Ultra.jpg, I'd really appreciate the insight of someone familiar with Template:PD-textlogo. I'd really like to get this resolved as it's been going on for many days now.
Even if you disagree with undeleting some of these files, your input will still be valued. I would find it difficult to believe all 11 of these files do not qualify as PD-textlogo. I feel very strongly, for example, that File:World Woman Pro-Wrestling Diana logo.png and File:House of Glory wrestling logo.png should be a very straight-forward cases of PD-textlogo.
Just to remind me people, the term "Geometric" covers w:Hypotrochoid and w:Epitrochoid shapes, so a logo containing a curve can still be geometric in nature. Also, as File:HypotrochoidOutThreeFifths.gif demonstrates, many stars (even "non-angular" one) are geometric in nature. So for example the 4 point star in File:Pure-J wrestling logo.png is still geometric in nature. In fact, File:Astroid2.gif in w:Hypocycloid literally demonstrates as much.
File:Wrestling Society X logo.png is clearly a vectorised image despite being in .png format. The point of "vectorising" shapes is (besides smoothing edges) to make them more angular, sharp and otherwise geometric. At least that's the case in this particular example. File:Wrestling Society X logo.png is an entirely text+geometric entity.

Can we restore the files in this batch that are clearly PD-textlogo, and any of them that are considered borderline cases, I'm happy to discuss any issues with those. Thanks, CeltBrowne (talk) 11:35, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm unsure why I have been pinged. I haven't undeleted either of the two files? ─ The Aafī (talk) 12:56, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I was under the impression you supported the undelete for File:Women Superstars United logo, 2019.png? If I'm mistaken I apologise, there was a user who didn't sign their comment and an Template:unsigned was used to attribute the comment to you CeltBrowne (talk) 13:07, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I hardly leave my comments unsigned. I'd be glad if you can show that diff, so that I can help fix. ─ The Aafī (talk) 13:10, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry, looking at [2] and [3] this, it was Ankry who forgot to sign their comment. CeltBrowne (talk) 13:33, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:ALHENA 2023 JCH.jpg

Deleted by me, challenged by Quantor. I deleted because the conflicting license statements don't give me a feeling of comfort. Quantor pointed me to a CC statement at https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=729317442538206&set=a.122354146567875 but at the same time is also (c) They also pointed me to https://alhenaband.com/download/?lang=en where the image is contained in a press pack claiming to be Freeware and (c) at the bottom of the page. I oppose deletion as these claims are contradicatory and not expressively CC. IMO they need an explicit release, preferably via VRT Gbawden (talk) 18:16, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done: as per Gbawden. --Yann (talk) 11:16, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files deleted by Jameslwoodward

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: the Template:PD-US-patent was changed recently after an argumented edit request at the talk page.
Between 2013 and this change, the template erroneously stated that US patents were not in the public domain if they were published after 1989 (without any source to support this claim). Now, the template has been revised to correctly state US patents are generally in public domain. Veverve (talk) 07:50, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As noted in the template, the applicant may claim copyright in the body of the patent application. In the second case, we have the whole patent and there is no such claim there, so I  Support restoration of File:Magpul Magazine Patent No20100212653A1.pdf. In all of the other cases we have only a part of the application, so until someone reads each of the patents to determine if there is a copyright claim, we should not restore them. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:20, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jameslwoodward: until someone reads each of the patents to determine if there is a copyright claim, we should not restore them: but most users are not admins, and thus they have no way to know the references needed to check the patent's contents. Indeed, most of the titles of those files do not contain the references needed to know what patent the file is taken from. Are you implying you are awaiting for another admin to check? Veverve (talk) 19:36, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Support If the default is public domain, we should at least check the copyright status. Yann (talk) 16:52, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

파일:하다인 배우 프로필.jpg

이미 전체 공개가 되어있는 사진입니다.

기사, 배우 이름 검색시 삭제취소 부탁드립니다. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chamg4495 (talk • contribs) 12:13, 18 January 2024 (UTC) (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Comment I blocked Chamg4495 for reuploading File:하다인 배우 프로필.jpg as File:하다인 배우 프로필11.jpg from Instagram. Yann (talk) 12:19, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 11:16, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Sonntagskind-Helga Schubert.jpg

Es handelt sich um eine Aufnahme aus dem Dokumentarfilm. Die Quelle ist angegeben und der Regisseur hat die Freigabe erteilt. Letzteres allerdings nur per Mail. Was muss ich tun, um eine Löschung der Datei abzuwenden? This is a shot from the documentary film. The source is indicated and the director has given his approval. The latter, however, only by e-mail. What do I have to do for an undeletion? --Artessa (exDottoressa2) (talk) 15:39, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Artessa: Der Rechteinhaber (womöglich ist das der genannte Regisseur) müsste die Genehmigung selbst direkt an Wikimedia Commons schicken (keine weitergeleiteten E-Mails). Details, Wortlaut der Genehmigung und Adresse, an die das geschickt werden soll, siehe COM:VRT/de. Wenn diese Genehmigung akzeptiert wird, beantragt der zuständige Mitarbeiter des Support-Teams die Wiederherstellung der gelöschten Datei. Das kann einige Tage dauern. --Rosenzweig τ 20:10, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Rosenzweig: Die Datei kann gelöscht bleiben. Ich war wohl zu ungeduldig und habe sie vor der Antwort unter neuem Namen erneut hochgeladen, sorry. Da ich die Vorgaben nun kenne, ist die Genehmigungsprozedur bereits in die Wege geleitet. Die Lizenz betrifft alle 4 Bilder der Category:Helga Schubert.--Artessa (exDottoressa2) (talk) 12:39, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done: per discussion, user withdraws undeletion request and will have permission sent for already re-uploaded files. --Rosenzweig τ 13:11, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Sonntagskind-Familienalbum.jpg

Es handelt sich um eine Aufnahme aus dem Dokumentarfilm. Die Quelle ist angegeben und der Regisseur hat die Freigabe erteilt. Letzteres allerdings nur per Mail. Was muss ich tun, um eine Löschung der Datei abzuwenden? / This is a shot from the documentary film. The source is indicated and the director has given his approval. The latter, however, only by e-mail. What do I have to do for an undeletion? --Artessa (exDottoressa2) (talk) 15:42, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Artessa: Der Rechteinhaber (womöglich ist das der genannte Regisseur) müsste die Genehmigung selbst direkt an Wikimedia Commons schicken (keine weitergeleiteten E-Mails). Details, Wortlaut der Genehmigung und Adresse, an die das geschickt werden soll, siehe COM:VRT/de. Wenn diese Genehmigung akzeptiert wird, beantragt der zuständige Mitarbeiter des Support-Teams die Wiederherstellung der gelöschten Datei. Das kann einige Tage dauern. --Rosenzweig τ 20:10, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Rosenzweig: Die Datei kann gelöscht bleiben. Ich war wohl zu ungeduldig und habe sie vor der Antwort unter neuem Namen erneut hochgeladen, sorry. Da ich die Vorgaben nun kenne, ist die Genehmigungsprozedur bereits in die Wege geleitet. Die Lizenz betrifft alle 4 Bilder der Category:Helga Schubert. --Artessa (exDottoressa2) (talk) 12:40, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done: per discussion, user withdraws undeletion request and will have permission sent for already re-uploaded files. --Rosenzweig τ 13:12, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Hold Anything.jpg

I still hold the original DR was closed incorrectly. However, in the time that has passed, the original ink drawing of Bosko that may or may not have been renewed has clearly gone into the public domain, so it's about time to reevaluate this file. As per User:Prosfilaes/Bosko, I have searched and found no evidence that any of Bosko's works through 1931 have been renewed, so this file, and the rest of early Bosko should be public domain.--Prosfilaes (talk) 20:14, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Support per research by requestor. Abzeronow (talk) 17:08, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Would you also undelete File:Bosko in Bosko the Doughboy title card.jpg while at it? Both "Hold Anything" and "Bosko the Doughboy" are in public domain according to this article. Grey ghost (talk) 17:08, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Support this too. Abzeronow (talk) 18:00, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Support Carl Lindberg (talk) 18:04, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Support Grey ghost (talk) 19:30, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

✓ Done: See above. @Prosfilaes: Please fix the missing/wrong data. --Yann (talk) 20:25, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Sculptures by Vera Mukhina

Files to undelete:

Reason of undeletion: VeraMukhina died oveer 70 years ago, so in this year copyright for her sculptures expired. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michalg95 (talk • contribs) 16:03, 19 January 2024‎ (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Oppose Mukhina (who died in 1953) worked during World War II, and thus her works are still under copyright in Russia until 2028. Also the Tchaikovsky statue wasn't published until after her death in 1954. https://russianlandmarks.wordpress.com/2016/01/08/tchaikovsky-monument-moscow/ Abzeronow (talk) 17:03, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done: per Abzeronow. --Rosenzweig τ 02:12, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Deletion

Why was my page deleted? This is a band from Portland, this is facts and truths of history in our music community. What files are in question?

--Johnblake77 (talk) 23:37, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Commons just has images and media, not articles. I assume this is about File:The UpKeeps.jpg, which is nominated for deletion but is not yet deleted. We need photos licensed directly from the photographers (or copyright owners if different); we can't copy images off the web. Since accounts here are basically anonymous, we have a rule that anything which exists on the web needs verification from the photographer via email using the process outlined at COM:VRT. Now, I see you have since uploaded File:Sye Viles.jpg which is obviously a different photo from the same session, but this one with full EXIF and seemingly not available elsewhere, given a quick search. That one may be OK, though looks like it has been nominated for deletion as well, but under a rationale I don't quite understand (missing license, when the license is given). If you are likely to upload images you took that also appear elsewhere on the web (without a licensing statement at those places), then it may be good to go through the VRT process, even if just to verify the account such that future uploads won't be questioned as much (and also to make sure the photographers know the scope of what they are licensing; the license cannot be limited to Wikipedia). If you did not take these photographs, then we would need the photographers to give the copyright license via that mechanism. Carl Lindberg (talk) 00:56, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done: as per Carl above. --Yann (talk) 14:04, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Logo Liceo Franco-Costarricense.png

Hi, looking in the web i have found that the file in question was published under CC BY-SA 4.0 DEED in Google Maps and in linkedin.

The description published by the school is the following: "El Benemérito Liceo Franco-Costarricense es un centro educativo público en Costa Rica, fundado en 1968 mediante un acuerdo bilateral entre las Repúblicas de Costa Rica y Francia, brinda servicios educativos desde preescolar, hasta la educación secundaria. Siendo el único liceo francés del país, es también el único en brindar la opción de obtener el bachillerato internacional francés, el "Baccalauréat". Declarado como Institución Benemérita de la Educación y la Cultura Costarricense mediante la ley 10355, es una de las instituciones educativas más insignes del país, se mantiene año tras año en los primeros puestos de los rankings nacionales de centros educativos con mejores resultados. Información e imágenes sujetas a: CC BY-SA 4.0 DEED"

Please undelete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mito0504 (talk • contribs) 03:40, 20 January 2024‎ (UTC)Reply[reply]

✓ Done: License reviewed. --Yann (talk) 14:20, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:LOGO COMISSION PASSY.jpg

Bonjour,

Vous avez récemment supprimer mon fichier de Wikipedia pour cause de problème de copyright, or, je suis le propriétaire de ce fichier donc j’aimerai qu’il soit restauré…

Merci. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.153.69.223 (talk • contribs) 17:57, 20 January 2024 (UTC) (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done: No file by that name. Please log in and provide a file name. --Yann (talk) 17:58, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Awahl 622 upadki bunga.jpg

A proper agreement of the copyright owner has been received. See ticket:2023111110004671 Polimerek (talk) 12:15, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

✓ Done: Polimerek FYI, please update permissions. ─ The Aafī (talk) 12:18, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

alle gelöschte Dateien

Warum werden alle von mir hochgeladenen Dateien gelöscht?

Die Fotos hat mir Gerhard Neubert (mein Vater) vererbt und sie befinden sich in meinem Besitz. Ich bin berechtigt sie auf seiner WikipediaSeite zu veröffentlichen.

Also fragen Sie vorher bevor sie einfach alles vernichten was ich über meinen Vater veröffentliche. Oder wir löschen seine ganze WikipediaSeite

Joachim-Neubert-Torgelow 20.01.2024 14:00 Uhr — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joachim-Neubert-Torgelow (talk • contribs) 13:00, 20 January 2024‎ (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Joachim-Neubert-Torgelow: Es gab einen regulären Löschantrag, siehe Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Joachim-Neubert-Torgelow, über den du benachrichtigt wurdest und wo du 9 Tage lang Gelegenheit zu einem Kommentar hattest (der dort in diesem Zeitraum nicht kam). Gelöscht wurden die Dateien, weil es klar war, dass es sich um urheberrechtlich noch geschützte Werke von de:Gerhard Neubert (Bildhauer) handelt, es aber nicht klar war, ob du, wie du zumindest andeutest, über Rechte an diesen Werken verfügst. Wenn du Inhaber des Urheberrechts sowohl der gezeigten Kunstwerke als auch der Fotografien dieser Kunstwerke bist (z. B. weil beide von deinem Vater sind), und du die die Fotos unter der gewählten freien Lizenz hier veröffentlichen willst, dann bestätige das bitte mit einer Genehmigung per E-Mail. Details, Wortlaut der E-Mail und die Adresse, an die die Mail geschickt werden soll, siehe COM:VRT/de. Wenn diese Genehmigung akzeptiert wird, beantragt der zuständige Mitarbeiter des Support-Teams die Wiederherstellung der gelöschten Dateien. Das kann einige Tage dauern. --Rosenzweig τ 20:20, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 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 9 days. . .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:42, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Zeichnet 8 Kriegsanleihe LCCN2004666163.tif

World War I poster from the Library of Congress. JPG file was undeleted, but not TIFF file. Both files show poster by Alfred Offner, being PD-old-70. Michalg95 (talk) 14:58, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Support Austrian author died in 1947 (PD in its country of origin) and it was published in 1918 (PD in the US). Günther Frager (talk) 15:05, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Support:peer Günther Frager,this image in PD its OK (Google translator) AbchyZa22 (talk) 17:06, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

✓ Done: per request. public domain in the EU since 2018. --Abzeronow (talk) 18:03, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Example.jpg

NO ME ES POSIBLE CAMBIAR MI FOTO DE PERFIL. ES UNA FOTO DE MI PROPIEDAD — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivonnegonz (talk • contribs) 00:20, 21 January 2024‎ (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ivonnegonz: Example.jpg has not been deleted. Please explain which photo should be undeleted. Thuresson (talk) 03:46, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done: Please provide a file name. --Yann (talk) 11:36, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:ThunderbirdsT38.jpg

Moved from User talk:Well-Informed Optimist#Undeletion request by Cresterest. —Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 07:50, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I am copying this undeletion request of a file for cresterest (talk · contribs) since this talk page was protected.

The following edit describes an image deletion explained essentially by not being able to establish copyright status of the deleted file. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:ThunderbirdsT38.jpg Today I am establishing this image is public domain as released in multiple formats of the mishap/accident investigations published by the Air Force and released to the media. I am hereby requesting it be undeleted given this documentation. Below I will post a web page that includes a photo collage that the 5th from left I believe includes one such formation-impact-scar image credited to the Air Force by The Las Vegas Review Journal. I would have pasted that photo with credit here for direct consideration but no means of pasting an image exists on this template. https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/military/usaf-icons-the-thunderbirds-know-how-to-woo-a-crowd-photos-2639036/ I also believe the deleted photo appears on page 126 of the External Link to the 1982 Thunderbirds Diamond Crash Wikipedia page. This document is a use work product of the USAF released under FOIA as described in a cover page attached to this attachment: https://jjetspress.com/TBDmishapreport.pdf

Ca (talk) 01:53, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Oppose The deleted photo is not a photo of a crashed airplane / airplane crash site. Thuresson (talk) 16:28, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Comment The photo depicts four airplanes flying together in a tight formation. Abzeronow (talk) 18:06, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, can you describe the “tight formation,” i.e. was it line-abrest? Can you somehow show me the deleted image?
Also you may be more experienced on Wikipedia than I— I can’t find the edit where the formation crash ground scar I was trying to replace with my errant undeletion request was lost from this article. I would like to place that image to the same location where it was lost from. Maybe it was because of a dead link? Cresterest (talk) 02:24, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done: per discussion. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:43, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Portrait photos of Günther K.H. Zupanc

Please undelete

We have permission per Ticket:2024012110000225.

Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 10:12, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

✓ Done: @Mussklprozz: FYI. --Yann (talk) 11:40, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:PIlar Gil Miguel.jpg

The image does not have copyright, it has been distributed freely so that the media can illustrate news about this person. For this reason, I request that its publication be allowed.

Thank you --JorgeVBis (talk) 19:26, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Oppose Please read COM:L. The Berne Convention says that fixed works are automatically copyrightable, and this photograph has a copyright. We would need an explicitly free license to host it here. Abzeronow (talk) 19:31, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done: per Abzeronow. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:43, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Club de Lucha Tinecheide.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I am part of the team staff, this is the logo the team has adopted and it was created by me. The logo is currently uploaded to the team social media accounts in instagram (@c.l.tinecheide) and facebook (Tinecheide Lanzarote). The image has no type of copyright and its purpose is to let the fans, media and other teams and look or use our logo. Thank you very much, we hope you undelete our logo. ChristianLPL2 (talk) 22:10, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@ChristianLPL2: Why is this file useful to a Wikimedia project? Is there a Wikimedia article about this? Thuresson (talk) 03:05, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Sankebetsu incident newspaper.jpg

This file was nominated for speedy deletion by a user later identified as a sockpuppet evading a block. The rationale for speedy deletion was declined and a regular deletion discussion was opened at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sankebetsu incident newspaper.jpg on 17 January. The only contributor to the discussion was the sockpuppet and the file was deleted within 2 days. I am rather concerned that the sockpuppet was able to circumvent a previously declined speedy deletion and obtain standard deletion in 2 days without community scrutiny. Can this file be restored and the deletion discussion resumed? As I am not an admin, I can't see the circumstances of the deleted file. If admins reviewing this case confirm that it was a clear copyright violation (as claimed by the sockpuppet) I will be content to withdraw my request. From Hill To Shore (talk) 23:30, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Túrelio: Why was an image in a deletion request deleted after 18 hours? Thuresson (talk) 03:02, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Template removed from image description page. Thuresson (talk) 03:15, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
User:Túrelio deleted it, citing the DR in the summary but apparently pursuant to a speedy tag rather than via handling of the DR itself. The uploader, DR nominator, and editor who replaced the DR tag with a SD tag (process abuse) are all in the same sock-drawer. This is not the first time that these socks have interfered in the deletion process of this file. DMacks (talk) 03:50, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Support The fact that it is a recent copy photo is irrelevant. It's a 1915 work and therefore PD. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:47, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

✓ Done as per Jim: undeleted all relevant revisions except vandalisms and bogus deletion nominations. Ankry (talk) 20:22, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Logo big bordered 200 200.png

There are no any copyright violations. This logo was made by my friend for St. Petersburg Griffins American Football Club. How'd you found any violations? Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Illychev (talk • contribs) 04:28, 22 January 2024‎ (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Oppose It is a copyrighted logo. Since we have no way here of knowing who User:Illychev is or if they have permission to freely license it here, Commons policy requires that the actual copyright holder must send a free license using VRT. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:52, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done: This file would be automatically undeleted if valid permissions are received at COM:VRT. ─ The Aafī (talk) 21:49, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Example.jpg

This monthly magazine belongs to the Iranian Railway Transportation Engineering Association and all its rights belong to this association — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.56.27.247 (talk • contribs) 05:57, 22 January 2024‎ (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Oppose Nothing to do here -- the actual file is unnamed and the user did not log in. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:53, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done: Please log in and provide a file name. --Yann (talk) 16:46, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Ship in a bottle 3 (4866061437).jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: deleted in deletion requests like COM:Deletion requests/File:Ship in a bottle 1 (4866687312).jpg. But as per consensus at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Nelson's Ship in a Bottle, the artwork, though temporarily placed on the fourth plinth, has been moved to a location that still meets "public place" requirements ("in premises open to the public"), which is a public museum in Britain. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:18, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:kripalandsajeet.jpg

Don't remove it, help us add it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanjeevnet (talk • contribs)

  •  Oppose Cross-wiki spam, and copyright violation as usual. Deleted several times. @Sanjeevnet: , if you don't stop spamming, you might get blocked for causing disruptions. ─ The Aafī (talk) 10:59, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done: Obviously not, as per The Aafī. --Yann (talk) 16:45, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Shahbazhasanpour.png

we take it from his personal site : http://shahbazhasanpour.ir/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/unnamed-file-7.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by ابراهیم پویان (talk • contribs) 12:49, 22 January 2024‎ (UTC)Reply[reply]

Commons:File upload service

Although defunct, the edit history of the project should still be restored and preserved instead of just simply deleted it out of existence. —— Eric Liu（Talk） 14:36, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It was deleted 16 years ago. Why should the the edit history be preserved? Thuresson (talk) 16:31, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Bobtux.jpg

This file is my personal work and contains an image of myself, which I freely give the right to use. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobphoenix (talk • contribs) 16:47, 22 January 2024‎ (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Bobphoenix: Thanks, but why is this photo useful to a Wikimedia project? Thuresson (talk) 18:03, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests&oldid=840982298"