Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2016-04

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

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

File:Ronnie Peterson 1974 British GP.jpg

Image now has the right licence on Flickr 1. Zwerg Nase (talk) 22:24, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

I see that a lot of later requests have already been dealt with. This one here should be a no-brainer. It would be highly appreciated if someone could come back to me on it. Zwerg Nase (talk) 17:12, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Actually, it's not a no-brainer. I didn't touch it because I couldn't tell whether the Flickr account actually owns the copyright or if this is Commons:FLICKRWASHING. On another look, however, it seems unlikely that it is Flickrwashing -- he has uploaded thousands of racing images, so I'll  Support restoration. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:34, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: I agree with Jim: likely OK. --Storkk (talk) 11:42, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Burgantankbattle.jpg

Permission confirmed by OTRS ticket 2016013010012345 Rrburke (talk) 20:44, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: Thank you!. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:47, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Panpaka and Punyan.png

Permission confirmed by OTRS ticket 2016030310002742 Rrburke (talk) 20:46, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: Thank you!. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:42, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

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

Files to undelete

Liebe Commons Bitte machen Sie die Löschung folgender Dateien wieder rückgängig:

  • La Presse März 1989 über "Der Neapelfries".png
  • Der Stumme Gaudenz Meili.png
  • Gaudenz Meili 1.jpg

Grund: alle Massnahmen zur Lizenzierung und Einholung der Rechte wurden erstellt und wie gewünscht rechtzeitig an [email protected] gesendet.

--Riboa111 (talk) 08:27, 1 April 2016 (UTC)


  •  Oppose If a free license has been sent to OTRS, then the file will be restored automatically when and if the email is received, processed, and approved. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 5 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.
If the message was sent to the English language version of OTRS and the email has been properly received there the sender will receive an automatic reply with the ticket number. If the sender has not had a reply, please check that it was sent correctly and try again. Other language versions may or may not provide the automatic reply. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:06, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Two w/ unknown author and 1 w/ author who's not the uploader. Msg on talk page left. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:05, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Audrey Marie Anderson-cropped.jpg

Hello

Please undo the deletion of this file

File:Audrey Marie Anderson-cropped.jpg

the flickr source of the photo now has the proper rights to share this photo https://www.flickr.com/photos/33245259@N06/25854148695/in/photolist-FoDgEp


Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarcusL007 (talk • contribs) 08:09, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: per discussion. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 03:55, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Sergio Saas ft Jesus Copyright.jpg

A Imagem é de uso público e usada em diversas plataformas sérias como tal--177.183.128.104 22:13, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose Image is poster or screenshot with copyright watermark. No evidence of free license. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:44, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim. If you are the copyright holder, please follow the instructions on COM:OTRS to have the file undeleted. --Storkk (talk) 17:38, 3 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Jornal Francês.jpg

O arquivo é de uso livre e usado por diversas plataformas sérias como tal.--177.183.128.104 22:17, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose Scan of copyrighted newspaper page. Obviously not "own work" as claimed in the file description. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:38, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim. No evidence that the newspaper is freely licensed. --Storkk (talk) 17:41, 3 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:MirandaVidakDoveFashionWeek.jpg

This image is not copyrighted or restricted, it a public image from a public event, a Fashion Week in Zagreb Croatia, in 2012, posted on many many websites. One example is http://www.story.hr/galerija/revijom-envy-rooma-story-je-proslavio-10-rodendan. The original image was posted on the website - www.novaarena.net, and the website has since been deleted. I don't believe this image has been published in Italy, since the person on the question is a Croatian celebrity, not Italian. The photographer of the image is called Robert Gašpert, and he does't have any licensing on his photos, that are taken in public place. Can you please tell me what is the problem with this publicly used image on many other websites? And can it be restored?

thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by AkhMilla (talk • contribs) 13:53, 3 April 2016‎ (UTC)

 Oppose Although you claimed that the image was your own work when you uploaded it, you admit above that that is not correct. With very few exceptions, none of which apply here, all created works have a copyright until it expires, usually 70 years after the death of the creator. This image is no exception and since you did not create it, you must prove that it is freely licensed. Although a copyright notice is not required, I see at the Wayback Machine that www.novaarena.net had an explicit copyright notice on its pages. Your other example above also has an explicit copyright notice. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:08, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Robert Gašpert should follow the instructions on COM:OTRS to confirm. --Storkk (talk) 17:45, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Germán_Mera_Cáceres.jpg

Se especifica el dueño de los derechos y la url, por tanto no hay justificación para borrar, otros de igual forman son tomadas desde lugares en la red e igualmente proyectos. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jair2016 (talk • contribs) 00:07, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose @Jair2016: , no es suficiente especificar el dueño y la url, ya que las imágenes tienen todos los derechos reservados. Especificar el autor, la url y la licencia es válido únicamente cuando el autor original ha publicado las imágenes bajo licencias libres como las Creative Commons, con lo cual está dando un permiso de antemano sobre el uso de estas. Cuando lo derechos son reservados esto no se puede hacer. Que las imágenes hayan sido tomadas desde lugares en la red no significa que se encuentren bajo licencias libres. --Sahaquiel - Hast du eine Frage? 02:44, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
 Oppose Clear copyright violation. The source, http://deportivocali.co/el-equipo/, shows:
"© Copyright 1912 - 2015 - Asociación Deportivo Cali - Todos los Derechos Reservados"
.     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:24, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Jim, clear copyright violation. --Storkk (talk) 09:46, 4 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Pigmen.jpg A pigmen

I took the picture of it myself. I did not steal it at all.

Kianlolcat99 (talk) 04:30, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Minecraft's license is not considered free enough (see the discussion here). A screenshot of software is a derivative work, and as such can only be free if the underlying software is free. --Storkk (talk) 09:42, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Pandora of Runaway Nightmare.jpg

Please undelete File:Pandora of Runaway Nightmare.jpg, verify the license is Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) and add {{PermissionOTRS|id=2016032510015251}}. Riley Huntley (talk) 21:37, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Riley Huntley: please edit file description and license as appropriate. --Storkk (talk) 13:10, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Maya Kulenovic.jpg

Please undelete File:Maya Kulenovic.jpg, verify the license is Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) and add {{PermissionOTRS|id=2016031910008869}}. Riley Huntley (talk) 21:37, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

@Riley Huntley: since the person depicted in the photo claims to be its copyright holder, I'd prefer either an explicit statement that it was a self-portrait or an explanation of how copyright was transferred before I undelete... Storkk (talk) 22:40, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
  •  On hold The individual in question stated they hold copyright for both the work depicted and the media in question, I have sent a follow up email clarifying copyright for the media as requested above. Riley Huntley (talk) 23:02, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Riley Huntley: please curate the file's description as appropriate (source, license, OTRS tag, etc.). --Storkk (talk) 13:06, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

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

Documentary Awards/Posters

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: There are No Copyright Violation. I am owner of the picture. Azadjain001 (talk) 03:45, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

@Azadjain001: Then please send an e-mail to the OTRS to confirm you are the copyright holder of the image. By sending an email to the OTRS, you irrevocably agree to publish your files under a free license, indefinitely (which means you cannot change your mind). Thanks, ★ Poké95 03:52, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Yes I mailed the OTRS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Azadjain001 (talk • contribs) 04:04, 4 April 2016‎ (UTC)

Respected Sir/Madam, I am not only hold copyright to the image but also depicted cover/poster of the film. Please watch it carefully. Thanx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Azadjain001 (talk • contribs)

  • Please Check it again I give you answer of your each and every question and also give details and try to clear all your doubts. Thanx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Azadjain001 (talk • contribs)
  • I have merged the two undeletion requests together for sake of simplicity. There is no need to respond here, I get alerted of every email you send. If the ticket is approved, I will support your request for deletion. Until then, responding via email is sufficent. Riley Huntley (talk) 05:23, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Non admin closure by OTRS agent; concerns of COM:SCOPE, notability, and most importantly COM:DW. Riley Huntley (talk) 14:40, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

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

Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Frontera_Marítima_Chile_-_Perú.jpg

(After a year, no questions please) According to the DR, Gunnex (known to questionate foreing legislation) tried to questionate Elelch, a peruvial that seems to know well the peruvian legislation (and claimed to be an attorney). As the file is effectively in the PD according to the legislation of Peru, why the file was deleted, heeding the comments of the foreing instead of the local? --Amitie 10g (talk) 03:34, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

In regards to the deletion discussion, where article 9 of the copyright law is discussed, and the issue of the whether the term "text" referring to visual info or not.
"Art. 9. The following are not eligible for copyright protection: ... (b) official texts of legislative, administrative or judicial character, or official translations thereof, without prejudice to the obligation to respect the texts and mention the source"
If we do a straightforward interpretation of "official texts of legislative, administrative or judicial character", and exclude maps. Then can we consider if, as mentioned in the discussion, the map would qualify under "Art. 9(d): simple facts or data."
If we get to that point can we temporarily undelete the image to see if it can be interpreted as "simple facts or data".
PS per the copyright law document a map falls under "Art. 5 (i): illustrations, maps, outlines, plans, diagrams and three-dimensional works relating to geography, topography, architecture or science." Rybkovich (talk) 06:41, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose It's at http://cde.3.elcomercio.pe/ima/0/0/8/5/0/850732.jpg (It appears on a copyrighted newspaper page, but I don't think that's important to this discussion.)

It appears to be a map produced as part of a decision of the International Court of Justice, so I'd guess that Dutch law applies, not Peruvian and that since it is recent, it will be under copyright for many years. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:20, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

You are right re source, it is part of the International Court of Justice January 27, 2014 decision. The illustration is not part of the decision, only illustrations numbers 2 and 4 are included. This map is practically same as, the main difference is an added non graphic data table, the map identified as illustration number 3 in File:ICJ Peru Chile judgment map3.png. Per wiki article the court is a branch of the UN. In the image the file is custom tagged as {UN map} with a public domain reference to http://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/english/about.htm. So I think it should be considered either as in the public domain as a UN document, or as a non-copyrightable derivation of a UN document.}} Rybkovich (talk) 19:55, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
PS in the newspaper the woman appears to be holding the map with the table. So its 99% to be an official judgment related UN document. Rybkovich (talk) 20:03, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Rybkovich, you cite http://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/english/about.htm as if it were a free license. It seems to me to be unfree. It very explicitly says that you may use the map for any purpose provided that you remove any reference to the UN. It goes on to say:
"We do not permit posting of our maps into your web site (if the map is not part of a specific publication, book or article) because we revise the maps very often and want to ensure that only an updated map is posted on the Web. You can however create links to our site instead. No permission is required for the link."
That reads to me like an explicit prohibition on exactly what we do here.
.     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:50, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Got it, it is crystal clear upon a re-read of their policy. So this becomes a very clear that the deletion should be upheld. I will strike out the conclusion of my previous post.
PS Per the UN policy I think we should change the description on the tag that maps can be used as derivative works only and can not be uploaded as they are I will raise this issue on village pump. template:UN map Rybkovich (talk) 17:49, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim. --Storkk (talk) 09:20, 5 April 2016 (UTC)


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

Martin Medina (Composer).tif

I, Martin Medina am the subject and copyright owner of the image Martin Medina (Composer).tif which I posted on Wikimedia Commons. I took the photograph in February 2016. This is also the photo I have used for the Martin Medina IMDB PRO page and for LinkedIn and other webpages.

--Medinm01 (talk) 23:47, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Please follow the procedure at Commons:OTRS to have a volunteer undelete the file in due order. Thuresson (talk) 07:01, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 Oppose Martin, I don't see how the subject of this can also be the photographer. I also note that you are in flagrant violation of WMF policy on Conflict of Interest by writing your own article on WP:EN. Please read and comply with Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:24, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

In order for me to take the photograph myself, I used my Canon EOS 1100D using the RS-60E3 remote switch while I was recording a vocal in my studio. I deleted the article following the comment able. I'll read up about COI and look at a possible re-submission in the future some time. Thanks to Jim Woodward for this response (which I've copied here for ease of reference): OK, but it's much better to make comments at the UnDR, where the community is likely to see and act on them. As far as the article goes -- although it is certainly better if third parties write bios, I don;t think you need to delete it, provided that you disclose your real name on your WP:EN User page.. Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) 21:57, 29 March 2016 (UTC). Medinm01 (talk) 22:42, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Comment able = comment above (pesky grammar/spelling correction).Medinm01 (talk) 22:44, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Riley Huntley: marked as OTRS received, please complete (so that you are noted as the ticket's agent). --Storkk (talk) 09:44, 5 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Marianmorenollaneza.jpg

I have permission of the person to use her image, the image is from his personal blog that mentioned in references.

--Telmoedu (talk) 19:51, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose The image has appeared elsewhere on the Web without a free license. Therefore, policy requires that the actual copyright holder -- almost certainly the photographer, not the subject -- must send a free license to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:23, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Note that it is a serious violation of Commons rules to upload an image a second time after it has been deleted and an UnDR is pending. If you do it again, you may be blocked from editing here. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:27, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim... photographer needs to contact COM:OTRS. --Storkk (talk) 09:46, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Flag of the Portuguese Communist Party.gif

Image is unoriginal and can be easily replicated. Image also cannot be copyrighted because of this. No copyright exists for this image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jp16103 (talk • contribs) 00:13, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

The Hammer and sickle comes in many variations, especially the handle of the sickle, the head of the hammer and which tool should be on the left and right side. This particular image have an unusual sickle handle. Why don't you use File:Logopcp.gif or File:Comunismo.svg? Thuresson (talk) 18:59, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
It really doesnt though. Its a hammer and sickle. No copyright exists for it.Jp16103 (talk) 16:36, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
The file was deleted because there was no license. If you are the author/copyright holder of the file, then please reupload it with the free license (see COM:L) you want. Thanks, ★ Poké95 04:26, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: per discussion. --Storkk (talk) 09:45, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Charamsa wikipedia.jpg & File:Krzysztof Charamsa coming-out.jpg

I don't know what more can I do for undelation of files? ticket:2016031310006354 I'm owner of all rights to it. --Swaysgroom (talk) 19:33, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

  •  Oppose If a free license has been sent to OTRS, then the file will be restored automatically when and if the email is received, processed, and approved. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 5 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.
If the message was sent to the English language version of OTRS and the email has been properly received there the sender will receive an automatic reply with the ticket number. If the sender has not had a reply, please check that it was sent correctly and try again. Other language versions may or may not provide the automatic reply. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:26, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:15, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:History HD Logo.svg

Clearly PD-textlogo for the United States, where the History Channel is from. Fry1989 eh? 16:52, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: Since I also declined the speedy deletion of the other three logo's. --Natuur12 (talk) 17:09, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

File:Sergio Saas.jpg

A Imagem é de uso público e usada em diversas plataformas sérias como tal--177.183.128.104 22:19, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose Screen shot of copyrighted television show. Obviously not "own work" as claimed. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:40, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Not done. Thuresson (talk) 04:24, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:EdwardSturm.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: OTRS agent requests undeletion in relation to ticket; ticket:2016032610009247. Upon undeletion, I will add the ticket number, and verify license/author. Thanks! Riley Huntley (talk) 19:59, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: I have added the ticket to the file. Please make the other necessary changes. --Jianhui67 talk★contribs 07:47, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Luvelli.jpg

https://www.flickr.com/photos/luvelli/25515157323/in/dateposted-public/ KatrinaMcCaffery (talk) 23:52, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

 Support This is also CC-BY-SA at the source provided in the file description, http://www.jonluvelli.com/biography/.

Katrina, you would save yourself and your colleagues here trouble if you did not claim "own work" for the work of others. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:57, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: see above. --Yann (talk) 10:58, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Quy Nhon Night Panorama.jpg

The photographer, Lê Hồ Bắc of Bình Định, Vietnam, specifically authorized via email on 27-Mar-2016 the use of his pictures on Wikimedia under the Creative Commons 3.0 license.VeeWin (talk) 02:05, 30 March 2016 (UTC)


  •  Oppose If a free license has been sent to OTRS, then the file will be restored automatically when and if the email is received, processed, and approved. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 5 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.
If the message was sent to the English language version of OTRS and the email has been properly received there the sender will receive an automatic reply with the ticket number. If the sender has not had a reply, please check that it was sent correctly and try again. Other language versions may or may not provide the automatic reply. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:08, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as above. --Yann (talk) 10:58, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

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

Request for undeletion of pictures with valid copyright permissions deleted from article

Hello

The below mentioned images have been deleted from the article "Institute of Driving Training and Research".

  • File:IDTR Loni03.jpg
  • File:IDTR Loni02.jpg
  • File:IDTR Sarai Kale Khan.jpg
  • File:IDTR Rohtak.jpg
  • File:IDTR Bahadurgarh.jpg
  • File:IDTR Loni01.jpg
  • File:IDTR Rohtak01.jpg
  • File:IDTR Bahadurgarh01.jpg

Our firm has worked on four of these prestigious projects and the photographs have been clicked by our own professional photographer during the progress of the project.

The article is for the description of the institute and the photographs have been used to give the readers a view about how the institutes at different places look like and how are the facilities designed, in order to give more visual information to the users.

We would request the undeletion team to kindly consider this and process the undeletion procedure for the above.

Regards --Parulgupta03 (talk) 03:34, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

@Parulgupta03: Hello, you need to get permission from your photographer if s/he wants to publish their photographs under a free license (see COM:L). After getting the permission, please ask him/her to send an e-mail to the OTRS to confirm that s/he is the copyright holder of the images. Then our OTRS volunteers will process their request in weeks (or rarely, months). Thanks, ★ Poké95 03:40, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
 Oppose Hold on. This looks very much like a violation of COM:ADVERT here and on WP:EN. It is also clear that Parulgupta03 is in violation of the rules on Conflict of Interest both here and on WP:EN. I doubt very much that the WP:EN article will be kept, so sending a license to OTRS would be a waste of time. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:42, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
 Oppose per Jim, I striked my comment. Thanks Jim. --★ Poké95 03:55, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as above. --Yann (talk) 10:58, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:DC Talk.jpg

I request this file to be undeleted for the reason that I have been wrongly accused of using a file that had been copyrighted. I created this file by myself and I did not copy any other individual or group's work. I made an original collage of un-copyrighted images of each of the members of the Christian vocal trio DC Talk. Please read this message and see to it that my problem is solved. Thank you. --WIKIswagmaster842 (talk) 18:08, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Where did you get the "uncopyrighted" images from? Did you take them yourself? --rimshottalk 19:24, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose There is no such thing as an "un-copyrighted" image -- with minor exceptions which don't apply here, all created works have a copyright until it expires, usually 70 years after the creator's death. All three of these images appear on the Web in at least one place with a clear and explicit copyright notice. Your collage is a derivative work and infringes on all three copyrights. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:47, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as above. --Yann (talk) 10:57, 7 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Ménerbes 335-6.JPG

Hallo,

der Uploader ist der geistige Eigentümer des Bildes.

Igggy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Igggy (talk • contribs) 18:35, 3 April 2016 (UTC)‎ (UTC)

Previously published at the web site of Wolfgang Pietrzok [1]. Copyright owner should follow the instructions at Commons:OTRS. Thuresson (talk) 19:00, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as above. --Yann (talk) 10:54, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

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

abderrazzak_sitail.jpg

Hello,

Please undelate abderrazzak_sitail.jpg. He is my employer and the publication is totally allowed by him in person.

Thank you in advance.

Hasnae EL MADANI 04/04/2016

There has never been a file at File:abderrazzak_sitail.jpg, and because you have not logged in, I can't tell which file you mean. In any case, when you find the correct file name, please have the photographer follow the instructions on COM:OTRS. Storkk (talk) 10:04, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
File in question; File:Abderrazzak Sitail.jpg deleted March 29. As aforementioned, let's get that COM:OTRS rolling. Riley Huntley (talk) 14:42, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as above. --Yann (talk) 10:54, 7 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Iglesia_de_Villarejo_Sobrehuerta.jpg

Se trata de un templo de hace más de 150 años de antigüedad. Según leí creo que se permiten subir este tipo de imágenes de edificios antiguos y obras antiguas de arte, pero me gustaría que me lo confirmasen. Amqmd (talk) 20:22, 5 April 2016 (UTC)AmqmD

 Oppose The building is not the problem. The problem is that the image came from a photographer at Panoramio and you do not have right to freely license it. I also appears at many other places on the Web with a copyright notice. In order to restore it here, the actual photographer must send a free license via OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:48, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Español: El templo en cuestión no es el problema, el archivo fue borrado porque la imagen proviene de un fotógrafo en Panoramio y usted no tiene derecho a conceder licencias libremente. También aparece en muchos otros lugares en la web con un aviso de copyright no es utilizable en los Comunes. A fin de que los administradores restaurar el archivo, el fotógrafo real debe enviar una licencia libre a través de OTRS. Riley Huntley (talk) 20:56, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as above. --Yann (talk) 10:53, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:George Papahatzis 1964-10-03.jpg

File:George_Papahatzis_1964-10-03.jpg was found in http://pandemos.panteion.gr/ library of Panteion University.

 Support Legal Terms of Use are available online at http://pandemos.panteion.gr/images/Oroi_xrhsh_Pandhmou.pdf. It reads (translating from Greek and summarizing) that everything published is free for any non-commercial use and as long credits are attached. Editing is allowed but it should be clearly stated as an edit and referenced to original work.

I believe the file should be undeleted and we could somewhere add credits to Pandemos Library along with a mention of editing (i.e. cropped image, slightly retouched) and a link to the respective Pandemos webpage.

DataDispenser (talk) 01:43, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose Does not allow commercial use. See Commons:Licensing. Thuresson (talk) 04:20, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Wait, it seems to be an old file, so the library cannot hold copyright on it. @DataDispenser: Who is the author, when was the author's death, and what country this work was made? I will look if this file is in the public domain. Thanks, ★ Poké95 08:08, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
 Oppose I don't think so. The subject is Georgios Papachatzis (1905 - 1991). Greece is pma 70. The file name says 1964 and the file description calls him "Rector", which he was in 1964-65. Even if the photographer dropped dead the day after he took this picture, it would be under copyright until 1/1/2035 (and, of course, he could very well still be alive). THe only way to restore this image is to have the actual copyright holder send a free license to OTRS. Although as noted above, the University purports to be licensing the image, they may own a copy of the image, but it is unlikely that they own the right to license it. That almost certainly rests with the photographer or his heirs. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:26, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

 Support @Pokéfan95: & @Jameslwoodward: Correct data. Picture was taken on 3 Oct 1964. The photographer may still be alive but he has no rights on the picture since he was a University employee not a freelancer. Nowadays Universities and other public institutions cooperate with freelancers for certain events but at that time almost everything was done internally (a huge public sector!). After all, this University is a public institution that claims owning the rights and I see no reason questioning them. The Legal Terms of Use available at University's photo library reads that University owns everything published and defines the terms as mentioned before. DataDispenser (talk) 11:44, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

If the copyright is owned by the University, they would have the ability to license it. However, a license that restricts commercial use is not "free", so is not a valid license for Commons. User:Thuresson mentioned this. The copyright could not have expired, so we would need evidence for a license conforming to the terms at Commons:Licensing or http://freedomdefined.org . A non-commercial restriction inhibits the freedom of distribution, so is not "free". So, unless the University comes up with a different license either documented on the site or sent via COM:OTRS, it's  Oppose for me. Carl Lindberg (talk) 13:06, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
@Thuresson: , @Pokéfan95: , @Jameslwoodward: , @Clindberg: , you are right that given the non-commercial restriction it cannot be considered "free" as defined. But it can be accepted under the license of "fair use". Non-free content are also accepted under certain conditions. 9 out of 10 criteria regarding non-free content are already met. What I suggested was that a by adding credits to Pandemos Library and a link to the original file, the 10th criterion is also met.— Preceding unsigned comment added by DataDispenser (talk • contribs) 15:40, 6 April 2016‎ (UTC)
@DataDispenser: Some local wikis may allow fair use. Commons does not. Storkk (talk) 14:44, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as above. --Yann (talk) 10:53, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

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

Restore File:74277841 1981-01-19 panorama tony benn euro referendum.jpg

As I mentioned on the talk page of the file which was deleted yesterday (as well as on the talk page of the user who deleted it before I was referred over here), the image was in the public domain as evidenced by this Guardian article (See the caption: "The Daily Mail gleefully reports Denis Healey attacking Tony Benn in 1975. Photograph: Public domain"). Zumoarirodoka (talk) 16:57, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose As much as it pains me to say it, I do not believe that the Guardian can simply claim a Daily Mail front page from 1975 with legible text is public domain and have it be true. Storkk (talk) 17:27, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
 Not done Agreed. Wile the Guardian's use may be legal as fair use, a 1975 newspaper page is certainly not PD and will not be for another thirty years. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:00, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

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

FC "Jadran Tučepi" Files

Hello, I am Secretary of the FC "Jadran Tučepi". The three images that I put, and that you have deleted, they are emblems of the club throughout history. We have all the legal rights to these pictures / logos, and ask you to return the pictures. Thanks. Greeting. Cedomil Simic — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jokic1911 (talk • contribs) 17:08, 4 April 2016‎ (UTC)

 Oppose That may be, but we have no of knowing that User:Jokic1911 is actually Cedomil Simic or the Cedomil Simic is authorized to give away a free license to the team's logo. Policy requires that an authorized official of the club send a free license to OTRS. Please note that OTRS, like Commons, is all volunteers, and, also like Commons, is badly understaffed, so it may be several weeks before the image can be restored. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:27, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Jim. --Natuur12 (talk) 08:02, 8 April 2016 (UTC)


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

maisons cjdt2.jpg

These are two old photos which I had permission to use and which I rearranged into a single photo while putting together a draft article on the Cité-Jardin du Tricentenaire. The draft article is not ready for submission and I would appreciate it if you would put the photo back. There is also another photo called plan.jpg which I also have permission to use. It is also in draft form and has not been submitted for review.

In both instances I indicated the source with a superscript which is later referenced in the text of the article. If I need to reference this more dynamically, kindly advise.

Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Cveltman (talk • contribs) 16:25, 6 April 2016‎ (UTC)

  •  Oppose If you are the photographer, please confirm that fact by following the instructions on COM:OTRS, whereupon an agent will request the photos' undeletion. If you are not the photographer, you are not able to apply a free license to someone else's content, and you must ask the photographer to follow the instructions on COM:OTRS if they wish to license their photographs freely. Storkk (talk) 15:33, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Cité-Jardin du Tricentenaire de Montréal title=File:Maisons_cjdt2.jpg

A similar photo is posted on our Association website, which is not copywrited (https://sitearcj.wordpress.com/cite-jardin-en-quelques-mots/). The webmaster gave me explicit permission to copy the two photos and integrate them for the draft article. I did the integration myself in photofiltre. We likely will update these photos when there is Spring and/or Summer foliage and we can take better pictures than we can at the current time.

Further, I listed with superscript the source of the photo, the superscript bearing the same number as the reference in the draft article.

Kindly give me some feedback here because I am not at all clear re your objections to the use of this photo.

Thank you.

Calvin Veltman — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cveltman (talk • contribs) 16:53, 7 April 2016‎ (UTC)

@Cveltman: as outlined in my previous reply, please have the photographers confirm the licenses by following the instructions on COM:OTRS. Storkk (talk) 17:12, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Storkk. --Natuur12 (talk) 08:01, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

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

Files by Tigerson1995

The file is the picture of my university campus hospital.

The file is the picture of my university campus library.

The file is the picture of my university hostel building and I live there too.

The file is the picture of my engineering department building in my university campus.

The file is the picture of my university administrative building.

The file is the picture of my lecture hall complex in my university.

The file is the picture of a defence jet situated in my university campus.

The file is the picture of a new lecture hall complex in my university campus. I myself clicked all these from my camera and uploaded them. They are not copied from any website. Please, I request you to undelete them.--Tigerson1995 (talk) 17:12, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

  • @Tigerson1995: I have modified your nomination to include all your requests under one section, I hope you do not mind. Your files were all deleted for the same reason, the EXIF data on the files stated "Copyright, Spreadtrum, 2011" which lead us to believe you were not the copyright holder. If you are the photographer, please confirm that fact by following the instructions on COM:OTRS, whereupon an agent will request the photo's undeletion. If you are not the photographer, you are not able to apply a free license to someone else's content, and you must ask the photographer to follow the instructions on COM:OTRS if they wish to license their photographs freely. Riley Huntley (talk) 19:39, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Per RileyH. --Natuur12 (talk) 08:01, 8 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Haarausfall Alopezie und Mikrohaarpigmentierung.png

Permission confirmed by OTRS Ticket 2016022310018459. Rrburke (talk) 14:00, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done Ankry (talk) 14:15, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: as above. --Storkk (talk) 08:09, 8 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Mikrohaarpigmentierung - Microhaarpigmentierung.png

Permission confirmed by OTRS Ticket 2016022310018459. Rrburke (talk) 14:01, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done Ankry (talk) 14:14, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: as above. --Storkk (talk) 08:09, 8 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Presaditev Las.png

Permission confirmed by OTRS Ticket 2016022310018459. Rrburke (talk) 14:02, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done Ankry (talk) 14:14, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: as above. --Storkk (talk) 08:09, 8 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Scalp Micropigmentation Review Results.png

Permission confirmed by OTRS Ticket 2016022310018459. Rrburke (talk) 14:02, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done @Rrburke: you can go on. Ankry (talk) 14:14, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: as above. --Storkk (talk) 08:09, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

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

Several freely licensed retro computer images

The above files are illustrative of simple "home brew" computer graphics on retro systems on such as Sinclair computers and the Atari ST. I created all computer code and data to generate all graphics in those files myself and released all files under a free license.

They were speedy deleted on grounds of "out of project scope". I don't mind at all having a discussion on the scope of these images or otherwise if they are nominated for deletion in the usual way. However they were speedy deleted, which in my opinion is incorrect as they did not meet the criteria for speedy deletion. Also, I was not notified of their deletion therefore I could not argue against it at the time - I only found out they had been deleted a couple of weeks later.

Two files from the same batch were also destined for speedy deletion:-

File:Benkid77 CNPD.png and File:MEMPTR Snake.png

However an admin noticed they should have instead been nominated for deletion rather than speedy deleted and they were ultimately kept per Commons:Deletion requests/File:MEMPTR Snake.png and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Benkid77 CNPD.png.

So please can the above deleted files be restored? If it is still felt that they may be out of scope then there will at least be a chance to discuss this via the normal deletion nomination process. I think some of them at least would be found to be in scope. Some of them have been used in articles already and also by external sites.

The original statement contained within the speedy delete rationale "never-used images" was also factually incorrect.

My argument is not that the files were deleted per-se, simply that they should have been nominated for deletion rather than being speedy deleted as illustrated by the deletion discussions I linked to above.

Rept0n1x (talk) 20:12, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Any comments on this, @Taivo? Thuresson (talk) 21:39, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
I deleted most of the mentioned files speedily per request. I thought, that they are out of scope. Two files I transferred into regular deletion requests, because I thought, that they may illustrate computer game "snake". The other files depicted in my opinion a non-notable computer game. But it was pointed out on the deletion requests, that the files can be used to illustrate game-producing platform or how to call it. If you still think so, then I am not against deleting all mentioned files. Taivo (talk) 12:18, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: I have to say that I'm rather dubious as to whether these are in fact "realistically useful for an educational purpose" as required by COM:PS, but that's an issue that ought to be dealt with by community discussion and which has been bypassed by speedy deletion. I'm accordingly restoring these images, and if anybody wants to argue that they are not in scope, that can be done via the standard deletion requests. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 13:46, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Anne wilsdorf portrait.tif

J'aimerais replacer cette photo transmise par l'illustratrice Anne Wilsdorf et prise par son mari Henry Meyer. Elle a écrit pour spécifier cette autorisation de la manière suivante:

La photo de Anne Wilsdorf envoyée pour illustrer l’article de Madame Corine Weber, peut-être utilisée par Wikipédia sous licence libre CC (réutilisation autorisée sans modification et sans but commercial) . Photo de Henry Meyer. Cordialement Anne Wilsdorf

à l'adresse ci-dessous:

[email protected]

Madame Wilsdorf demande simplement que cette photo ne soit pas utilisée à des fins commerciales mais autorise le share alike. Quel est le problème ?

Merci d'avance

--CoWeb (talk) 16:54, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

@CoWeb: Wikimedia Commons accepte uniquement médias qui ne sont pas soumises à des restrictions liées au droit d’auteur qui empêcheraient leur réutilisation par tout un chacun, à tout moment, et pour tout motif y compris commerciale. Lisez, s'il vous plaît COM:L. Storkk (talk) 18:17, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

This is Commons UnDeletion Requests. This image has not yet been deleted, although it likely will be, as Storkk says, we do not accept non-commercial or no-derivatives license. You may wish to comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Anne wilsdorf portrait.tif, although it will do little good unless you change the license. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:52, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:ONESHEET_DWF.jpg

Permission confirmed by OTRS ticket 2016022510023092. Rrburke (talk) 13:25, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done @Rrburke: You can go on. Ankry (talk) 14:26, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: see above. --Yann (talk) 07:29, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Vector Security logo 2016.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I have permission from Vector Security for use on this site, and explicit permisison to upload this file for use on Wikipedia - contact davillella(at)vectorsecurity.com for more information. Open2discussion (talk) 13:44, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as above. Please see COM:OTRS. --Yann (talk) 07:29, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Vector Security Corporate HQ.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Reason: I have permission from Vector Security for use on this site, and explicit permisison to upload this file for use on Wikipedia - contact davillella(at)vectorsecurity.com for more information. Open2discussion (talk) 13:45, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as above. Please see COM:OTRS. --Yann (talk) 07:28, 9 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Inner Worlds Outer Worlds Film Poster.jpg

Permission confirmed by OTRS ticket 2016022510015574. Rrburke (talk) 14:35, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: as above. --Yann (talk) 07:33, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Jacques Martineau.jpeg

Hello, this was nominated for deletion in error as a possible copyright violation, but is Matthisvalerie's own work. Battleofalma (talk) 15:48, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

@Matthisvalerie: If the copyright was questionable enough for an admin to delete it, we will need OTRS to get involved. Please prove that you are the copyright holder of these photos through COM:OTRS and release these images under a free license via email. Follow the instructions at COM:OTRS, an OTRS agent will request the photo's deletion when needed. Riley Huntley (talk) 16:01, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as above. Please see COM:OTRS. --Yann (talk) 07:28, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Richard Hollis.jpg

Hello,

I would like to appeal the deletion of File:Richard Hollis.jpg. I want to know why this image was deleted and provide evidence as to why it was deleted. I am the owner of Polaris Studios as copyrighted on the image uploaded and want to restore this image.

Thank you,

Steve Cherry --Sycherry (talk) 17:46, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

First, image has been published elsewhere before submitting it to Wikicommons. Secondly, on February 19 a different user claimed to be the copyright owner. If you are the copyright owner, please follow the instructions at Commons:OTRS if you wish to have the file undeleted. Thuresson (talk) 21:33, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as above. --Yann (talk) 07:27, 9 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Daniel Giovannangeli.jpg

Permission confirmed in OTRS ticket 2016022710009836. Rrburke (talk) 09:59, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: as above. --Yann (talk) 07:37, 9 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:DellPoster2.jpg

Permission confirmed in OTRS ticket 2016022510019516. --Rrburke (talk) 10:44, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: as above. --Yann (talk) 07:39, 9 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Formetric 4D 12x14cm RGB.jpg

Permission confirmed in OTRS ticket 2016022310011849. --Rrburke (talk) 11:23, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: as above. --Yann (talk) 07:40, 9 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Chris Tarrant OBE & Lord-Lieutenant of Berkshire, Mr J Puxley, unveil the memorial.jpg

Permission confirmed in OTRS ticket 2016022310012991. --Rrburke (talk) 12:34, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: as above. --Yann (talk) 07:43, 9 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:The Unveiling of the Trooper Potts VC Memorial.jpg

Permission confirmed in OTRS ticket 2016022310012991. --Rrburke (talk) 12:35, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: as above. --Yann (talk) 07:43, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Jackmackenroth.jpg

Permission confirmed in OTRS ticket 2016022010000811. --Rrburke (talk) 14:44, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: as above. --Yann (talk) 10:00, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Child with easypod 400 x 300.jpg

Also:

File:easypod_device.jpg
File:Easypod_faceplate.jpeg
File:easypod_instructions.png
File:easypod_schematic.png
File:easypod_screen.png

All confirmed by OTRS ticket 2016021710022447. --Rrburke (talk) 14:31, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: as above. No file with the names of File:easypod_device.jpg and File:easypod_schematic.png. --Yann (talk) 10:04, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:"Ackergifte? Nein danke!"-Logo.jpg

A couple of weeks ago, I uploaded this logo which I knew was under a creative commons license. Unfortunately, the website where I took them from was lagging behind and, by mistake, still had a copyright notice on it. This has now been modified and the website includes a copyleft notice specifying a cc-licence which explicitly includes the logo uploaded: http://landwende.de/home/impressum.html

I would like to have this image undeleted as I would like to use it in connection with the following Wikipedia page I created: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bürgerinitiative_Landwende

Kind regards, (Trueblue80 (talk) 08:05, 8 April 2016 (UTC))

 Support I combined two requests, so the references to a single image above are actually to two. The source site now has a CC-BY-SA, so these should be restored. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:47, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: as per above. --Yann (talk) 07:18, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks, Jim and Yann! But there is still another image from the same website that needs to be undeleted: File:Landwende-Logo.png (Trueblue80 (talk) 11:19, 9 April 2016 (UTC))

✓ Done Yann (talk) 11:27, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! (Trueblue80 (talk) 12:13, 9 April 2016 (UTC))

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

File:Southern Lights from Treble Cone Skifield, Wanaka.jpg

Have received permission from photographer, as follows:

Sure that's great feel free to post as long as I am correctly sourced and linked prominently underneath it, if you can link my blog http://youngadventuress.com/ that's perfect, thanks for thinking of me.

Cheers liz

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 8:25 PM, Hi there,

I'm looking for good photos of the Southern Lights to add to the Wanaka wikipedia page ... and your pic http://youngadventuress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/12039242_10100174174968865_6478147855602476028_n-650x433.jpg looks just perfect for it!

would you be ok with releasing it with an appropriate licence so that we can upload it to Wikipedia? Would try to make sure that it gets tagged with your blog or twitter handle as the source...


Somej (talk) 06:47, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

@Somej: Hello, the permission you recieved from the copyright holder is not enough. They didn't specified what license they want their image to be published (like CC-BY-SA-4.0). Please contact the copyright holder again to license their image under a free license (compatible with Commons:Licensing), and if they specified a free license, ask them to forward their permission to the OTRS. Thanks, ★ Poké95 06:59, 10 April 2016 (UTC)


Somej (talk) 07:17, 10 April 2016 (UTC) @Pokéfan95: thanks! Will do.

 Not done Requires OTRS which requester agrees to do. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 08:56, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

File:Увражин. Рабочее издательство Прибой. 1926.jpg

I kindly ask you to restore the file mentioned below:

File:Увражин. Рабочее издательство Прибой. 1926.jpg

The file is a scan of the cover of the book, which was published in 1926. The author was died in 1938. The file has an appropriate license "PD-old-70".

--Bookseller2005 (talk) 09:28, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Here you can find the date of death of the author:

http://www.efim-uvrajin.com/#!bio/c1enr

The death date is 20. Januar 1938.

That is why a simple scan of the author's book (dated 1926) is a public domain.

--Bookseller2005 (talk) 11:50, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

 Support It's more likely that the publisher holds any copyright there might be for the cover, but that's moot. I think this is clearly {{PD-text}}. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:51, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Done, PD-text. Thuresson (talk) 21:56, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Poster of Be My Cat- A Film for Anne.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I am the creator and the copyright owner of the the poster. "Be My Cat: A Film for Anne" is my movie. I would like to add its poster on Wikipedia Commons. Adrian Tofei (talk) 15:17, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose Unfortunately, identity theft is common here, both by vandals and by fans, so policy requires that you send a message from an address at adriantofei.com or from your official email that confirms both that User:Adrian Tofei is the filmmaker and actor Adrian Tofei and that you want to release the poster under a free license. Please use the procedure at OTRS. Please ask the OTRS volunteer to add the {{Verified account}} tag to User:Adrian Tofei so that you can upload posters for your future successes without having to go to OTRS again. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:31, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done In OTRS Ticket:2016041110022151, User:Adrian Tofei has confirmed that he is the actor and filmmaker. Thank you, Adrian. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:41, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Rob LoCascio.jpg

If the content of this deleted file is the same as https://www.liveperson.com/sites/default/files/pictures/RobLoCascioFinal.jpg , there is a permission on file at OTRS ticket 2016030310017496. Rrburke (talk) 14:40, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:05, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

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

To transfer the files to Wikipedia. It was a mistake to use commons.

  • FileBestand:14pc.jpg Replica van een prehistorische asurn
  • File:10pc.jpg De grafheuvels op de Veluwe stammen al uit de periode van de late Steentijd (ongeveer 2850 en 2000 voor Chr).
  • File:11pc.jpg In handkracht wordt met de boorschop een smalle opening van 80 – 90 cm diep gemaakt waarin een glazen- of keramieken urn wordt geplaatst.
  • File:12pc.jpg Een replica van een historische urn beschermt bodem en grondwater tegen vermenging met crematieas. Deze duurzame aanpak benadrukt tevens de eeuwenoude traditie van het begraven van een urn in de natuur.

To transfer the files to Wikipedia. It was a mistake to use commons

Kind regards

--Timme018 (talk) 10:35, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

 Support There never was a file named FileBestand:14pc.jpg or anything like it. However, I think the rest can be restored. I think they all appear to be "own work" as claimed and should be on Commons, not WP. The only mistake here was that Timme018 did not specify a license, even after he or she was warned. If they are restored, what license to you want? .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:34, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

File:14pc.jpg is what he was referring to, although not deleted. There was, however, File:13pc.jpg which was deleted on the same day for the same reason. @Timme018: as Jim asked above, what license do you want? Riley Huntley (talk) 00:48, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
That particular image has been here ("(C) 2005 - Alle Rechte vorbehalten" [2]) since at least 2008, well before the 2016 Commons upload. Merely adding a coloured gradient does not grant Timme018 copyright to the image. Similarly, File:13pc.jpg appeared here ("© Urnengedenkparken - Nederland BV") prior to upload to the Commons. Эlcobbola talk 22:39, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Elcobbola's discovery of deception. --Storkk (talk) 09:13, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Portrait Bundeswehr.jpg

Would like to undelete the following file: Portrait Bundeswehr.jpg in my article "Timor Oliver Chadik".

There is no possible copyright violation, because i have all the copyright on my own. 1. I am the person, Timor Oliver Chadik, about the article is written. And i have published the article. 2. I have the right to use the photo in every kind of publication. 3. The Photo is in a download area at the following adress: www.bigband-bw.de/pr. This is a special area for pressmembers for downloading all the required information and photos about the "BigBand der Bundeswehr" and the bandleader, Timor Oliver Chadik.

--Maestro76~dewiki (talk) 19:36, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

  • @Maestro76~dewiki: Please proof that you are the copyright holder of these photos through COM:OTRS and release these images under a free license via email. Please note, the press member section on your website specifically states "Alle Dateien sind zur nicht kommerziellen Nutzung" which if my translation is correct, means that these files may only be used for non-commercial use. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content and in accordance with our acceptable licenses commercial use of the work must be allowed. Follow the instructions at COM:OTRS, an OTRS agent will request the photo's deletion if needed. Riley Huntley (talk) 19:49, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
 Oppose Two other things. First, note that your claim of "own work" on two images (this and File:Dirigierportrait Timor Oliver Chadik .jpg) where you are the subject and they are obviously not selfies will make us very skeptical of any claims you make. Second, in your editing here and on WP:DE, you are in violation of our rules on Conflict of Interest. You must immediately disclose who you are both on a User page here and at WP:DE and stop editing your article there. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:19, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Jim and Riley. --Natuur12 (talk) 10:26, 13 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Peltier Cooling Diagram.jpg Wronfully undeleted!

The image file, Peltier Cooling Diagram.jpg, was removed due to lack of permission. It looks like the written content I provided to the "Operating Principle" section of the "Thermoelectric cooling" article was also removed along with the image. Josh Liegel, owner of the diagram, emailed [email protected] the following message:

"I hereby affirm that I, Josh Liegel, am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of both the work depicted and the media as shown here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Peltier_Cooling_Diagram.jpg I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the following free license: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International.[5] I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work, even in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws. I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites. I am aware that the copyright holder always retains ownership of the copyright as well as the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by the copyright holder. I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project. Josh Liegel Senior Sales Engineer, EIC Solutions 03/08/2016"

I do not understand why the image would then be removed on March 19th and why our text was removed, as well. I request this material be undeleted.

Thank you, Midigital — Preceding unsigned comment added by Midigital (talk • contribs) 13:56, 7 April 2016‎ (UTC)

@Midigital:
  •  Oppose If a free license has been sent to OTRS, then the file will be restored automatically when and if the email is received, processed, and approved. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 5 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.
If the message was sent to the English language version of OTRS and the email has been properly received there the sender will receive an automatic reply with the ticket number. If the sender has not had a reply, please check that it was sent correctly and try again. Other language versions may or may not provide the automatic reply. Riley Huntley (talk) 15:19, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
 Oppose Unfortunately, we get our share of forgers here and therefore when an image has been taken from a page that has an explicit copyright notice, the permission must be sent directly to OTRS, in this case directly from an address at eicsolutions.com. I also note that giving away corporate property is an action usually reserved to corporate officers, so that if Mr. Liegel sends the license to OTRS he will probably have to prove that he is authorized to grant such a license. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:25, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Jim and RileyH. --Natuur12 (talk) 10:26, 13 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Aaualogo.jpg

File:Aaualogo.jpg The image was made available for me by the institution. --Laru0004 (talk) 10:10, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose Policy requires that for organizational logos to be kept on Commons, an authorized official of the organization must send a free license directly to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:49, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as above. --Yann (talk) 10:25, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:320x486.jpg

this was uploaded from forbes and the necessary credit was given however due to the secretive nature of mr grayken not a lot of photos are available online and thus i had to use the photo used by forbes.I request that my edits be reinstated and rechecked to see if i have done any wrong.Which i sincerely think i did not. thanks Unsigned request by User:GH05T 1095

 Oppose From forbes.com, "All rights reserved". Thuresson (talk) 17:35, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

@GH05T 1095: We don't accept files that are not freely licensed (it doesn't matter how difficult it would be to get a free photo). Please see COM:L and COM:Fair use for more information. Some local wikis, like the English Wikipedia, do accept non-free files in some narrow circumstances (see Wikipedia:Non-free_content_criteria), however their first criterion is usually interpreted to mean that the subject is dead. Merely being a recluse or very private is usually not enough. In any case, we certainly do not accept them here. Storkk (talk) 17:49, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as above. --Yann (talk) 10:25, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Psb logo justo.jpeg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This logo is our property . It was designed by the National Simon Bolivar Journalism Award and has been used by our brand since 1975. Premiosimonbolivar (talk) 18:02, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose Policy requires that for organizational logos to be kept on Commons, an authorized official of the organization must send a free license directly to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:47, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as above. --Yann (talk) 10:25, 13 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:-WhyLucasInLA (14518944283).jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: The source which Jcb claims copyvio from is attributed to the "City of Los Angeles", which the flickr user is the mayor of. Therefore not a copyvio. The part about the image including a drawing that might resemble R2-D2 is imo not a close enough derivative to warrant Disney copyright of that. Seems to be above the TOO to warrant the mayor copyright of the drawing (See another example). Josve05a (talk) 22:10, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

File was tagged by Sismarinho. Question: Who is the author of this picture? Apparently the mentioned 'author' is the depicted person rather than the author. Jcb (talk) 22:16, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
The author seems to be a worker in the office of the "City of Los Angeles" acting on behalf of the "City of Los Angeles" of which Eric (the mayor) it the "head" of. (See en:Work for hire) Josve05a (talk) 22:22, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Also it is most likely not his personal account, but a "Office of Mayor Eric"-account. Josve05a (talk) 22:23, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Maybe, but undeletion should not be based on wishful assumptions IMHO. Jcb (talk) 22:28, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Same thing in reverse for speedy deletions. Still, whoever owns the flickr feed uploaded it earlier than the newspaper, and they can name their feed what ever they'd like. Josve05a (talk) 22:30, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

 Support I would tend to be skeptical of this -- just because it's on the Mayor's Flickr page does not mean that it was taken by a city employee. If it were taken by a city photographer, it would be {{PD-CAGov}}. If an outside photographer took it, the copyright would belong to him or her and not to the mayor. However at http://www.citylab.com/politics/2014/06/why-cities-should-be-more-skeptical-of-new-cultural-centers-and-expansions/373258/ it appears credited to "City of Los Angeles". Since that's an Atlantic Monthly web site, I think we can assume that they have the credit line right. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 00:13, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: Per Jim. --Natuur12 (talk) 10:25, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Kleinglockner.jpg

Vittorio Sella died 1943. Have you any problems? --Schlesinger (talk) 18:58, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

 Support This is a pretty clear case -- Sella is credited right on the deleted photo. This was deleted in 2009 and should have been restored automatically on 1/1/2014.

Schlesinger, when this is restored, you need to change the file description

|Source= give us the name of the book
|Date=about 1890
|Author = Vittorio Sella
|Permission = {{PD-Old}}

and remove your GFDL/CC license -- you have no rights here that you can license..     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:34, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: as above. --Yann (talk) 10:21, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

The license for this is {{PD-old-70-1923}}. Yann (talk) 10:23, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Yann, I'm not so sure. There's no evidence that it was ever published in the USA before the upload here. That would make it PMA 70 in the USA, not PD-1923. That's why I thought it better to use {{PD-old}}. We don't really have a tag for PMA-70 in the USA, do we? .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:07, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:For Yoko Ono's wish tree at MoMA.JPG

Permission received in OTRS ticket 2016030810018913. Rrburke (talk) 12:02, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: Looks OK. Please curate the file page as appropriate. --Storkk (talk) 12:24, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:1938 Autoportrait en soldat 41 x 33, s. bois.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: While Commons:Deletion requests/File:1938 Autoportrait en soldat 41 x 33, s. bois.jpg was closed as delete, the copyright of this media was verified through OTRS (ticket:2013111210013534) in 2013 by Jcb. Riley Huntley (talk) 01:20, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Support - uploader is the son of Philippe Marie Picard - Jcb (talk) 14:59, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: per ticket 2013111210013534. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:16, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

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

Image:Nando Gazzolo 1981.jpeg

Based on this close, this other one and the subsequent discussion, I assume the URAA issue should be ignored and the image restored. --Cavarrone (talk) 02:04, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose This is a scan of a halftone. Since it appears to be a 1981 image, it is PD only if both

  1. it does not qualify for a 70 year pma' Italian copyright -- it is "devoid of creative character" -- and
  2. it was not published anywhere but in Italy.

I think (1) is a close call, particularly since our policy is to be very careful about using the Italian 20 year rule. (2) is harder. Certainly it must be proven that the publication from which this was taken is Italian and not from some other country because almost all other countries have much longer copyright terms. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:08, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Both the conditions are met. The image was published by Radiocorriere magazine N.46 page 19 year 1981 and illustrates a brief interview with the actor, and it is obviously not "devoid of creative character", just an anonymous standard close-up photo without any creativity. For anyone interested, it is still available (and used) on it.wiki [3]. The only concern is if the URAA applies or not. --Cavarrone (talk) 17:23, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
You say "it is obviously not "devoid of creative character"". Perhaps you misunderstand. In order for it to qualify for the 20 year Italian copyright rule, it must be devoid of creative character. If what you say is correct, then it has a 70 year pma copyright. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:25, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
@Jameslwoodward: , it is obviousy a typo. I also explained why it is OBVIOUSLY devoid of creative character. "Anonymous standard close-up photo without any creativity" is clear enough, I think. Everyone can check the image. --Cavarrone (talk) 06:00, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
If the magazine had a copyright notice, it was always copyrighted in the U.S. and did not need URAA restoration. Does the image conform to the {{PD-US-1978-89}} tag as well? I am fairly loath to keep PD-Italy images which were restored by the URAA anyways; those are basically certain to be by living authors and are much more likely to cause issues when used in other countries -- and use in the U.S. is a copyright violation, period, as it would be in many countries outside Italy. Also, while I can't see the picture, I think there were cases where posed portrait photos were considered to be above the PD-Italy threshold. Also, still frames from movies would have a longer copyright in the U.S. regardless, if the movie itself had a copyright notice -- those may be PD-Italy, but they are copyrighted in the U.S. regardless of the URAA. Carl Lindberg (talk) 18:35, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
@Clindberg: , I hope I am not saying something idiotic, but I think the image does not meet {{PD-US-1978-89}} for the simple reason the image was never published in the US (Radiocorriere is a defunct Italian TV-guide magazine which was published only in Italy). For the evalutation of the image, you can check it here, it is still available and used on it.wikipedia under PD-ITALY. --Cavarrone (talk) 06:27, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Publication in Italy would count for "publication" in the U.S. I think both Italy and the U.S. were members of the Universal Copyright Convention which did have some copyright notice awareness; if the magazine had a copyright notice then the U.S. copyright was never lost. Most of the time, we do assume that most foreign publications were without notice (other than books and probably movies), but for relatively recent works that might have changed since there was more awareness. So, even if we were ignoring the URAA, we would have to show how it became PD in the US in the first place (i.e. some avenue given the Commons:Hirtle chart). If it didn't, then the URAA would not matter (though of course the copyright has been restored since if it was lost). Carl Lindberg (talk) 07:46, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Carl Lindberg. Sorry but com:PCP applies. --Natuur12 (talk) 10:01, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Randolph college logo horizontal.png

The image file is the current official logo of Randolph College. It is displayed on the corresponding Wikipedia page for Randolph College as the official logo for that institution. I have the permission of Randolph College to use it on this page.

If there is a standard or process by which this permission can be validated, I would be happy to provide it. (Dmb86 (talk) 18:52, 4 April 2016 (UTC))

Hello, Dmb86. Please forward us the permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. We require that the owner makes a clear statement that they release the image under a free license. To help prevent confusion or misunderstandings we really prefer one of the email templates be used. Permission grants must specifically contain a free license grant and may not merely give permissions for Commons or Wikipedia. There is currently a backlog of OTRS requests but if you respond here once the email has been sent, I or another agent can review your ticket. In addition, please attach the file in question so that non-administrators can review the file in question. Riley Huntley (talk) 19:07, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Riley Huntley. Randolph College will not release its trademarked logo or seal under a free license. The standard across Wikipedia for the logos and marks of academic institutions is a low resolution file released Non-Free under Fair Use. That is what the College will release.
See peer institutions:
Dmb86 (talk) 12:53, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done If, as you say, the College will not give a free license for its logo, then there is nothing more to be done on Commons. All of the images you cite above are hosted on the English language Wikipedia, not here. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:53, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Nigel Henbest.jpg

Received copyright confirmation from the owner by email 4 April 2016:

Here is the photo for the "Nigel Henbest" page of Wikipedia.

I confirm that I am the copyright holder and that I am releasing the image under Creative Commons Attribution (cc-by-3.0)

Nigel Henbest— Preceding unsigned comment added by Alan-hicks-london (talk • contribs) 14:34, 5 April 2016‎ (UTC)

@Alan-hicks-london: That appears to be from the person depicted in the photograph, who is not normally the photographer/copyright holder. Please have the photographer follow the instructions on COM:OTRS to confirm the license... an agent there will request the photo's undeletion when satisfied. Storkk (talk) 13:40, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done No response for a week. As noted by Storkk, this requires a free license from the photographer via OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:56, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:LIR marcha.jpg

Solicito recuperar el archivo LIR marcha.jpg el cual fue tenía fotos tomadas por mí y era un artículo escrito personalmente. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hitman2007 (talk • contribs) 13:19, 6 April 2016‎ (UTC)

Es que parece escaneada de un diario, puedes probar que el escrito es tuyo? --Ezarateesteban 13:45, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done No response for a week. As Ezarate says, it appears that the uploader scanned a newspaper page. He claims above to have taken the four photographs and written the text, but even if that is correct, we need a license from the newspaper publisher via OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:46, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Tom mid.jpg

Reason: Permissions have been submitted Ticket:2016040610010986 SurfaceAgentX2Zero (talk) 15:21, 6 April 2016 (UTC)


  •  Oppose If a free license has been sent to OTRS, then the file will be restored automatically when and if the email is received, processed, and approved. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 5 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.
If the message was sent to the English language version of OTRS and the email has been properly received there the sender will receive an automatic reply with the ticket number. If the sender has not had a reply, please check that it was sent correctly and try again. Other language versions may or may not provide the automatic reply. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:32, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Jim. --Natuur12 (talk) 10:01, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Dr. Patrick W. Hsu MD, FACS.jpg

I really don't know what's happening here. Please let me know what to do so that the file will not be deleted. Thank you. --Mpsdoctor (talk) 09:43, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose @Mpsdoctor: Copyright is usually owned by the photographer of a photo, not the subject. Please have the photographer confirm the free license (or confirm that they have transferred copyright to you) by following the instructions on COM:OTRS. Once that checks out, an agent will request the photo's undeletion. Thank you. Storkk (talk) 10:17, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Storkk. --Natuur12 (talk) 10:01, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


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

Restore the files

Please restore all deleted files, because all these illustrations have a free license for the publication and distribution.

All of that files is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 and free for use. --Cherus (talk) 13:56, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose The file descriptions say:

"|source=open free cources
|author=Pogrebnoj-Alexandroff"

There is no evidence that you are Pogrebnoj-Alexandroff, so they were deleted for lack of source information. You must prove that they are, in fact, licensed as CC-BY by either providing the source site that has that license or having Pogrebnoj-Alexandroff send a free license directly to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:56, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Jim. --Natuur12 (talk) 10:02, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:LogoITP.png

File:LogoITP.png. El logotipo de la compañía es correcto . La solicitud de borrado por otro usuario es incorrecta. --ITPGroup (talk) 11:36, 8 April 2016 (UTC)ITPGruop

 Oppose Policy requires that in order to keep a corporate logo on Commons, an authorized official of the corporation must send a free license via OTRS. Please note that OTRS, like Commons, is all volunteers, and, also like Commons, is badly understaffed, so it may be several weeks before the image can be restored..     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:19, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Jim. --Natuur12 (talk) 10:02, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


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

Reasonless Deletions

These two of them are just graphics, report was published by Global Wind Energy Council and these informations are open for all. I translated them to Turkish, what is wrong?

And this is just a simple technic scheme and I found it in English wiki with bad resoulution. I made it again in photoshop myself. You can't delete it.

--Aynamahruti (talk) 22:23, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

OTRS-permission will solve your problem--Motopark (talk) 05:36, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
I have sent an email weeks ago but there was no response. You've deleted my creations just for missing infobox. Now I added a source last file was requested to deletion. But I can't add others because they are gone.--Aynamahruti (talk) 16:18, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose If a free license has been sent to OTRS, then the file will be restored automatically when and if the email is received, processed, and approved. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 5 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.
If the message was sent to the English language version of OTRS and the email has been properly received there the sender will receive an automatic reply with the ticket number. If the sender has not had a reply, please check that it was sent correctly and try again. Other language versions may or may not provide the automatic reply. Riley Huntley (talk) 20:02, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Per above. --Natuur12 (talk) 10:02, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:LFO official poster.jpg

On March 15 a mail was sent to [email protected] from [email protected] to prove permission to use the now deleted "File:LFO official poster.jpg". Despite this mail, the image has been deleted. This is not acceptable.

We would highly appreciate if you take action to undo this apparent mistake on your behalf.

Sincerely /Patrik — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drmoog (talk • contribs)
Moved from Commons:Village pump/Copyright#Regarding the removal of File:LFO official poster.jpg by ★ Poké95 04:03, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello OTRS volunteers, can you check if a mail was sent from [email protected] regarding the deleted file File:LFO official poster.jpg? Thanks, ★ Poké95 04:03, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
@Pokéfan95: This is a request for deletion, and therefore should have been moved here instead of to Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard. @Drmoog: Thank you for emailing OTRS, as noted in the automatic response email "If your article or file has been deleted in the mean time, please don't worry. Any administrator can restore these later." I have processed your ticket, please address the concerns I mentioned in my response. OTRS: Ticket:2016031510008411. Riley Huntley (talk) 04:12, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done The OTRS permission is for WP only and there has been no response there for a week. This will be restored when and if the copyright owner sends an acceptable license. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:02, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Mir Həsən xan.jpg

Benyamin-ln (talk) 07:23, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

@Benyamin-ln: Hello, why do you want this file to be undeleted? Unless you provide a reason, this request will be declined. ★ Poké95 07:46, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done No reason given. No response for a week. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:03, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:ISS-600x350.jpg

Benyamin-ln (talk) 07:25, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

@Benyamin-ln: Hello, why do you want this file to be undeleted? Unless you provide a reason, this request will be declined. ★ Poké95 07:46, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done No reason given. No response for a week. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:04, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Trooper Fred Potts 01.jpg

OTRS permission confirmed in Ticket 2016022310012991. Rrburke (talk) 10:12, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

@Rrburke: it appears to be a very old photo (it's a high quality version of File:Frederick_William_Owen_Potts.jpg). Could you please reconfirm that they don't simply own a copy, but somehow own the copyright? (I'm uncomfortable simply assigning the small version's {{PD-old-70}} to a 1915 photograph without knowing the death date of the photographer...) Storkk (talk) 10:25, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
@Storkk: . Sorry, I thought this was one the uploader took himself (I'm not an admin so I can't view the deleted file). I'll look into it further. Rrburke (talk) 10:32, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done As I understand this long OTRS ticket (14 messages), the OTRS correspondent claims to be the creator of the 1915 Potts image. Since it is a studio portrait, while that might be barely possible if he is now well over a hundred years old, it so unlikely as to be silly. There's been no clarification for a week, so I think this can be closed. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:13, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Jammersprocom-jammer-b97-2.jpg undeletion

A permission to use the image has been sent to [email protected] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lazio75 (talk • contribs)

  • @Lazio75:  Oppose If a license has been sent to OTRS, then the image will be restored automatically when and if the e-mail is received, processed, and approved. If the e-mail has been properly received there, then you should receive an automatic reply with the ticket number. If you have not had a reply, please check that you have sent it correctly and try again. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be several weeks before the e-mail is processed. --★ Poké95 01:38, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done Will be restored when and if a license is approved at OTRS .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:26, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Bricksmartlogo.png

I have been given approval from the content owner to use the media file.— Preceding unsigned comment added by W5nio (talk • contribs)

@W5nio: if that is indeed the case, please send an email in this form to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (COM:OTRS) and explain your situation to them, providing evidence that the copyright holder has given permission to publish the file under a free license. If everything checks out, they will restore the file, if deleted in the meantime. But see also Commons project scope. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is all volunteers and is understaffed and may take several weeks to process the license. Gunnex (talk) 18:28, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done Will be restored when and if a license is approved at OTRS .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:27, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Easypod device 568 x 426.jpg

Permission received in OTRS ticket 2016021710022447. --Rrburke (talk) 12:29, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:32, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Easypod diagram.png

Permission received in OTRS ticket 2016021710022447. --Rrburke (talk) 12:33, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:33, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Banda Sexual Democracia.jpg

Soy Webmaster de Sexual Democracia y el que incluyó la imagen que yo mismo coloqué como material de la banda en http://www.sexualdemocracia.cl/index.php/historia No entiendo cómo es posible que se tomen esta clase de determinaciones si yo mismo me he encargado cuidadosamente de ver el contenido que se encuentra fotográficamente aquí, para https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_Democracia Si se requiere alguna clase de validación de parte mía o del mismísimo vocalista-lider de la banda, por favor indicarme pasos a seguir para validar nuestra propiedad. Gracias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Monogorn (talk • contribs) 16:43, 12 April 2016‎ (UTC)

 Oppose The image appears with an explicit copyright notice: "Copyright © 2016 Ailin Producciones." at http://www.sexualdemocracia.cl/index.php/historia. Therefore policy requires that an authorized official of the band send a free license to OTRS. The message must come from an address at sexualdemocracia.cl. Please note that OTRS, like Commons, is all volunteers, and, also like Commons, is badly understaffed, so it may be several weeks before the image can be restored. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:14, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as above. --Yann (talk) 14:42, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:O Meu respiro.jpg

Ticket:2014032610011989 concerns this file among others. File:O Meu respiro.jpg seems the least likely to be encumbered by other entities' copyrights. Storkk (talk) 14:44, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

I'd rather not fulfill my own request, could another admin please take a look? Thanks, Storkk (talk) 09:10, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done Sorry, I looked at the file name and assumed the ticket was in Spanish. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:14, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

File:Escudo de Santa Comba.svg

It is not a copyvio. It is own work of user SanchoPanzaXXI~commonswiki (talk · contribs), a reliable user. See his contributions. 37.10.132.206 07:52, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

File restored by User:Rastrojo. Thuresson (talk) 20:32, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Speculative-fiction-template-logo-v2.png

This file was deleted as a copyright violation by Jcb, but I have no idea why it was thought it was a copyright violation. The images used it in are all CC-SA-3.0, and they were all attributed. Jcb says to send permission to OTRS, but I have no idea exactly what I'm supposed to send in that request. I work OTRS queues myself, so I know how things work, but this kind of image doesn't need or require any sort of permission to be sent to OTRS. ···日本穣Talk to Nihonjoe 22:37, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Carsten Peter Thiede Oxford.jpg

This picture is a private picture of mine (the subject was my father), which I uploaded in the acknowledgement that it would thereby be for free use.— Preceding unsigned comment added by FWTTVK (talk • contribs)

When you uploaded the image you wrote that the photographer is anonymous. What does this mean exactly? That an unknown person took a photo of your father and gave a copy to him? Thuresson (talk) 19:30, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 Oppose The photograph was taken in 1995, so it must still be under copyright. The only person who can give permission to keep it on Commons is the photographer (or his heir), so if the photographer is actually anonymous, then it is an orphan work and cannot be restored here until its copyright expires. That might be as early as 2045 if the image was first published in Israel, but not until at least 2065 if it was Germany, Switzerland or the UK. If the first publication was here, then it will be PD in 2111.
I note that you have made edits to Carsten Peter Thiede. I suggest that you read and obey Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. If you make more edits your father's article without declaring your conflict, you may well be blocked from editing on WP:EN. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:18, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Jim. --Natuur12 (talk) 10:55, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Brasao Blaneario Rincao.png

A remoção de minha imagem foi indevida pois a imagem não infringe direitos autorais — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniel França06 (talk • contribs)

@Daniel França06: "(...) não infringe direitos autorais" E porquê? (this was the 3rd attempt by this user to upload this coat of arms of a Brazilian municipality = not own work/grabbed from Internet) Gunnex (talk) 20:56, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Per above. --Natuur12 (talk) 10:55, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:施伯谟 Singapore.jpg

Author's picture appears in his book published in 1933. It is considered public.--Qvrikuduo (talk) 23:13, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

@Qvrikuduo: When did the author died? And who is the author of the book? We need this information before assuming that the book is in the public domain. Thanks, ★ Poké95 01:07, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 Support This is a formal studio portrait of a man, presumably the author of the book. The rule in Singapore for photos taken before 1987 is that they become PD 70 years after they are taken, so this has been PD for at least 13 years. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:57, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: Per Jim but pleae fill in all the details correctly next time. --Natuur12 (talk) 10:55, 15 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Madc logo.pdf

I have sent an email regarding the permission and license. Please un-delete the image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sangram12 (talk • contribs)

  •  Oppose If a free license has been sent to OTRS, then the file will be restored automatically when and if the email is received, processed, and approved. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 5 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.
If the message was sent to the English language version of OTRS and the email has been properly received there the sender will receive an automatic reply with the ticket number. If the sender has not had a reply, please check that it was sent correctly and try again. Other language versions may or may not provide the automatic reply. Riley Huntley (talk) 18:57, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Per RileyH. --Natuur12 (talk) 10:52, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Join us.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Provided the permission and license. Sangram12 (talk) 13:23, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

 OpposeIf this is "own work" as claimed, then it is out of scope -- we do not keep personal art. If it is copied from an IEEE web site, then it is a copyright violation. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:21, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Jim. --Natuur12 (talk) 10:51, 15 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Winners2014-2015.jpg

Reason: Permission granted under free license. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sangram12 (talk • contribs) 13:25, 14 April 2016‎ (UTC)

 Not done: Please contact com:OTRS. --Natuur12 (talk) 10:52, 15 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Winners2013-2014.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Reason: Permission granted under free license. Sangram12 (talk) 13:26, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose If this is "own work" as claimed, then it is out of scope -- we do not keep personal art. If it is copied from an IEEE web site, then it is a copyright violation. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:20, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Jim. --Natuur12 (talk) 10:52, 15 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Madc facebook.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Permission granted under free license. Sangram12 (talk) 13:33, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose The stated source page, http://www.ieeemadc.org/, does not have a free license. Therefore, in order to restore this, we will need an authorized official of the IEEE to send a free license to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:14, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Jim. --Natuur12 (talk) 10:52, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Con Mickey Cora.jpg

No entiendo por que borran las fotos en que aparezco y que son de mi propiedad?.Por que borran mi Autobiografia?. Como puedo subir o dar a conocer mi Biografia? Etiquetando imagen File:Collage Grandes Artistas.jpg

And also:

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jose Penalver (talk • contribs) 20:06, 15 April 2016‎ (UTC)

Except for one, which was a clear copyright violation, these files have not been deleted. You must make your comments at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Jose Penalver, not here. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:19, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:VAWT-Cycloturbine.png

 Not done: No rationale given. Appears to be copyright protected. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 06:35, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:RapidShare_Logo_(old).jpg

I don't understand why it was deleted. After all, it was the old logo and the article still contains the latest logo. --Dejo02 (talk) 17:28, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Please read Commons:Licensing before making further uploads. Thuresson (talk) 20:51, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done --MichaelMaggs (talk) 06:33, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Pello Bilbao.JPG

I have equipment authorization Caja Rural-Seguros RGA to upload photos of their cyclists are outdated in Wikipedia. Pello Bilbao's photo is the first of a series of photos that I plan to climb. These photos has given me the equipment itself and are creative commons — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anacefp (talk • contribs)

@User:Anacefp, you can make your request in Spanish if you like. Thuresson (talk) 11:41, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
@Anacefp: please have the photographer send in a free license by following the instructions on COM:OTRS. Available in Spanish: COM:OTRS/es. Storkk (talk) 11:49, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done Needs OTRS license from photographer. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:13, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

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

Andresmarinjarque Files

File:Sombreo.jpg, File:Riu-rau.jpg, File:Mulo cargado con sacos.jpg. Files loaded by Andresmarinjarque. As We can check in the description given by himself at his userpage, he works for Museu Valencià d'Etnologia, museum which is collaborating with Amical Wikimedia. They will send an ORTS liberating properly all those files.TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 10:37, 19 February 2016 (UTC)


  •  Oppose If a free license has been sent to OTRS, then the file will be restored automatically when and if the email is received, processed, and approved. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 5 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.
If the message was sent to the English language version of OTRS and the email has been properly received there the sender will receive an automatic reply with the ticket number. If the sender has not had a reply, please check that it was sent correctly and try again. Other language versions may or may not provide the automatic reply.

Please note that in all three cases the main issue is the copyright for the work of art itself -- the hat and the two drawings. Only the photograph of the hat has a copyright separate from the copyright for the hat itself. The images of the two drawings are merely reproductions and do not have their own copyrights.

In most cases museums do not own the copyright to art works in their possession -- the copyrights remain with the artists their heirs. Therefore, the OTRS license from the museum must declare that the museum does in fact own the copyrights to the works of art and license them freely. The e-mail must come from an authorized officer of the museum corporation. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:54, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

I'll tell them. In this case, the artwork is made by Museum staff, and the very same author was who originally uploaded it.--TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 21:58, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
I don't know what the museum liberated. Please check this ticket.--TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 19:39, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

 Not done I don't like closing UnDRs where mine is the only comment, but this has been open for a month and a half with no action. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:35, 16 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:JIB_01-03-2014.jpg

Solicito que se se reinstaure esta fotografía puesto que no incumple ningun copyright y, de hecho, fue realizada por mí personalmente.

87.218.63.149 17:34, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Hola, les escribo para solicitar que se reinstaure esta imagen, puesto no que no incumple -ni pueden incumplir- ningún derecho ni coypright, ya que fue realizada personalmente por mí y yo soy el único propietario.

87.218.63.149 17:37, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

The only Google hit for this image of Juan Ignacio Blanco cites Commons as the source. However, since this uploader clearly has a poor understanding of "own work" -- see the claim that the two newspaper pages above are his own work -- I think it is very likely that he scanned or photographed a photograph for this upload. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:12, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

 Not done I don;t like closing UnDRs where mine is the only comment, but it has been almost three weeks with no response. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:33, 16 April 2016 (UTC)


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

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:The Waifs

"There are many 'proud' or 'experienced' people who make mistakes on the field of copyright" was the comment of the deleting admin, who faces currently his second de-adminship-procedure. Does he really beleave , that a long-time-professional as Rinaldi is not allowed to upload files of her co-workers or employees under a CC licence ? (btw: These files were uploaded by russavia. Is that funny or sad?) 2003:45:5C3D:DF01:1908:4CF3:DD5:4B50 08:49, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose EXIF clearly credits a "marek jezierski". We should therefore a priori treat this exactly like any other case where Person A uploads a photo, where metadata credits Person B: person B needs to confirm license via COM:OTRS. To answer your specific question, no I do not believe that she is allowed to upload co-workers' files under an attribution license without attributing the photo to them, unless she is somehow the copyright holder (a fact we'd need a confirmation/explanation of)... why do you? Storkk (talk) 09:17, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
The problem with the file is that the copyright holder on the EXIF data is different than the stated author on Flickr. We need to get OTRS permission from the copyright holder on the EXIF data, per COM:PCP. Even though these are files that were uploaded by russavia, this case is different now. --★ Poké95 09:20, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 Oppose Agreed. When the EXIF doesn't match the uploader or, as in this case, the Flickr user, we require an OTRS license from the person named in the EXIF. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:01, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
I have found out, that she sometimes credits Marek Jezierski as here http://humanstatuebodyart.blogspot.de/2010/11/sea-shepherd-returns-to-bondi-beach.html and sometimes not, as here https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Eva_Rinaldi_Bodyart_(5721165661).jpg . Probably she is the boss. 2003:45:5C3D:DF01:1908:4CF3:DD5:4B50 10:48, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Good catch, thanks. BTW, we would probably need confirmation even if we knew for certain she was the "boss": Australia doesn't have the concept of work for hire, and unless it is clearly specified in the contract, the employee often owns the copyright (see e.g. Insight SRC IP Holdings Pty Ltd v The Australian Council for Educational Research Limited [2012] FCA 779, commentary here). Storkk (talk) 11:08, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the link. I will study it in the evening. But this will last a bit, because my English is not the best :-). Regards 2003:45:5C3D:DF01:1908:4CF3:DD5:4B50 11:26, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
As far as I understand this little comment, Jezierski's copyright may depend on the agreement between him and Ms. Rinaldi.
I have no flickr account, so I can't ask Eva Rinaldi or Marek Jezierki whether they are interested in an OTRS ticket. Perhaps russavia or another commons user is interested to ask them ? 2003:45:5C3D:DF01:5541:CB9F:114B:8FA5 14:16, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: per discussion, COM:OTRS verification needed. --Storkk (talk) 12:53, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Niños_Constellation_Iberia.jpg

What is the problem with this photo? I don't Understand the problem. There are not an a copyright problem.

In fact the photo has more than 60 years and it was in a public web without autor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cuentaprueba10 (talk • contribs) 22:41, 16 April 2016‎ (UTC)

 Oppose Of course there is a copyright problem. First, the source site may be a "public site" but, like almost all public sites, it has a clear copyright notice. Second, a sixty year old photograph is very recent for copyright purposes. In most countries, the copyright lasts for 70 years after the death of the photographer, so as a general rule we do not assume that a photograph is out of copyright unless it predates 1886. That allows for a photographer born in 1866, taking the photo at age 20 and dying in 1946 at age 80. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 00:28, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Chile has some shorter terms for anonymous works, or works not published 50 years after creation, or if the author died before 1962 (Chile non-retroactively increased to 70 pma recently, so the effective terms are shorter). The problem with anonymous works is that we need to know the photo was published anonymously (or never published at all), not that the author was unknown to a modern web page. It sounds like the image was taken from an actual exhibition, so if there is author or other information on the photo there, that could help clarify things. Where did the photo come from? Carl Lindberg (talk) 03:04, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Nominated at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Niños Constellation Iberia.jpg. I'm closing this request since it is not a matter of undeletion. Thuresson (talk) 07:55, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Noela Monograph 2 small.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016030610003263. Rrburke (talk) 10:17, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Restored ticket is ok--Ezarateesteban 21:38, 17 April 2016 (UTC)


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

Noela_Monograph_1_small.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016030610003263. Rrburke (talk) 10:19, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Nothing to do Ticket is ok but the image wasn't never uploaded--Ezarateesteban 21:41, 17 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Noela_Hjorth_body_print_circa_1980's.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016030610003263. Rrburke (talk) 10:20, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Restored --Ezarateesteban 21:47, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:David Satrio 2014.jpg to undelete

this is my family wikipedia and this is our personal photo collection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lunarvader (talk • contribs) 02:52, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

It's everyone's Wikipedia, actually, and you're at Wikimedia Commons, which is the corresponding media repository. Did you really take the photo yourself, like you claim? If not, the copyright is owned by the photographer and only the photographer can choose a license. Secondly, how does the image fit in the COM:SCOPE? We're not a personal photo collection, and we're not a resumé database either (nor is Wikipedia). Finally, please don't re-upload deleted content. --rimshottalk 07:02, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 Oppose I see that the image was used in an article in your sandbox on WP:EN about David Satrio. The article is in Bahasa Indonsesia. If he is a member of your family, as you say above, you are in violation of WMF policies on Conflict of Interest.
The article is in the wrong language for its present location and certainly won't be kept there. It would not be kept there even if it were in English because it describes a man who, while probably a very solid citizen and employee of Microsoft, is not notable. Therefore the image is out of scope for Commons as not filling any educational purpose.
Also, the image appears at https://www.linkedin.com/in/david-satrio-45591a21 without a free license and it appears to be a professional studio portrait. Therefore the copyright almost certainly belongs to the photographer, not you, and it is a copyright violation for you to have uploaded it here.
Finally, As Rimshot says, it is a violation of Commons rules to upload an image a second time after it has been deleted. If you do it again, you may be blocked from editing on Commons. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:26, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as discussed. --Storkk (talk) 12:07, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

File:München bei Sonnenuntergang Altstadt Richtung Norden c. 1997-1999.jpg

This photograph was made by myself and I was the uploader. I have given the source and the license. There is no valid reason for deletion. I don't understand why this deletion happened. --Mattes (talk) 04:58, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

 Support This was from a group of suspicious images that I deleted. I see that that was probably a mistake. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:31, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Done. User:Mattes, please check the file description page. Thuresson (talk) 15:33, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Forrest Mims with his 1970 rocket equipped with a TX-1, MITS' first telemetry transmitter.JPG

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016032010008026. --Rrburke (talk) 13:40, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: All seems fine. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:02, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

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

Temporary undeletion: old Finnish official Electrical Safety Exams File:Sähköturvallisuustutkinto kevät 2014.pdf and File:Sähköturvallisuustutkinto syksy 2014.pdf

These files were deleted because they were unused (see: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_Vesa_Linja-aho ), which they were not: they had no links inside commons.wikimedia.org but they were in busy use in Finnish language Wikibooks-page, where they now appear as red link: https://fi.wikibooks.org/wiki/Sähköturvallisuustutkintojen_materiaali . Could you temporarily undelete them, so I could move them from Commons to Finnish language Wikisources? I work as a teacher of electrical engineering and these old exams are copyright free according to Finnish law (no threshold of originality + product of Finnish government) and very important when practicing to the official exam. Request temporary undeletion --Vesa Linja-aho (talk) 18:32, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

@Vesa Linja-aho: temporarily restored... please ping me when you have transwikid them to Wikisource. Storkk (talk) 19:38, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: to move to fi.Wikisource. --Storkk (talk) 19:38, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

They were deleted for being out of scope. However being in use on a wikimedia project means they are automatically in scope. Carl Lindberg (talk) 23:31, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:2016 EU Referendum HM Government Pamphlet.jpeg

This was speedy deleted, because the uploader was not the copyright holder of the work in question. However at the time of deletion, it was clearly marked that the author was HM Government and was tagged with Template:OGL. The admin who deleted it suggested I find links to show that this is under OGL. The license tags says that almost all works produced by HM Government since 2010 fall under it and I've read the exemptions section and it doesn't fall under any of them. I would also argue that it's likely to not meet the threshold of originality in the UK since it uses a rather simple font and HM Government logo can be claimed as minimal. However, I felt that OGL was the simplest rationale. Jolly Janner (talk) 23:04, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

  • I support the reinstatement of this image. I too checked the details of the OGL licence which states quite clearly that the image may be freely used used with the following exceptions:
This licence does not cover ... departmental or public sector organisation logos, crests and the Royal Arms except where they form an integral part of a document or dataset ...
For the document in question, the royal coat of arms, which are an integral part of the document, occupy less than 1% of the surface area of the document. For the record the document, a copy of which is in front of me, is 210 mm by 147 mm and the coat of arms is 13 mm by 11 mm.
Martinvl (talk) 11:52, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
There may be a misapprehension here. In contrast with the situation in the US, where government publications are by default freely available for reuse, in the UK the default is that government publications are protected by Crown copyright, and cannot be used unless they are explicitly licensed. Licensing of government departmental material under the OGL is generally encouraged by central government, but it is not mandatory and it is certainly not automatic. The official guidance document states quite clearly that "You cannot use information which has not been offered for use expressly under the OGL. You will need to contact the relevant rights owner of the information if no licence or re-use details are given". So before looking at the wording of the OGL and discussing whether the document falls within its terms, there is a prior question to be considered: has the government actually released this particular document under the OGL in the first place? I have the document in front of me, and on the face of it it does not seem to have been released under a free licence. Unless anybody is able to find a government statement (or statement of the Controller of HMSO on the government's behalf) which confirms that the document has been licensed, we have to assume that it remains Crown copyright protected and that we cannot host it. The alternative argument that the text and layout of the front cover does not meet the threshold of originality is a complete non-starter under UK law. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 17:44, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
"www.eureferendum.gov.uk is published under the Open Government Licence, and you can reproduce information from the site as long as you obey the terms of that licence." (www.eureferendum.gov.uk essentially the online version of the leaflet). Jolly Janner (talk) 22:25, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
A secondary issue is the leaflet is itself in violation of copyright - see this. As none of the images are sourced, I would not treat any of the images (or any page that includes an image) as OGL. That prevents Commons upload of the PDF itself, but the front cover is probably OK.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:35, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
To me, that looks like evidence that they got licenses for all the photographs they included... for one of them the putative licensor was not legally able to license it, but that appears to have been (retroactively) corrected. Do you read that article differently? Storkk (talk) 23:45, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
There's a world of difference between getting a license to use a photo in a specific use, and getting that photo released under a free license. The government now has obtained permission to use, and that doesn't mean it sought and received permission to license under OGL. We need to satisfy that stricter standard before we can accept to Commons.--Nilfanion (talk) 23:50, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done Thanks for the link to www.eureferendum.gov.uk, Jolly Janner, that's exactly what we need. This page states that all material on the site is released under the OGL, and this page reproduces the pamphlet itself. The front cover does include the HM Government logo, which is not free under the OGL, but as you've pointed out above that is very small and I think we should be able to consider that as de minimis. The issue about copyright in the photographs doesn't apply to this image which is of the front cover only.--MichaelMaggs (talk) 05:16, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Instagram Icon.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: i want to undeleted Ragilnih (talk) 05:55, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done This logo clearly has a copyright and there is no evidence that the requester has any right to license it. There are many things we want to undelete, but they must have a free license or be PD. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:55, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Desert Inn logo.jpg

Please explain why there's no listing for this artwork at copyright.gov, it was licensed as copyright not renewed, yet carelessly deleted as a speedy copyvio with no DR. This is a copy of the file rationale and license with note regarding the search done for renewal at copyright.gov.

Description Image of Desert Inn logo taken from a mending kit given out by the hotel.
Date 1950's according to other hotel items with the logo on them during that time.-see below
Source

eBay cover cover inside

inside
Author Wilbur Clark's Desert Inn/United Hotels Corporation
Permission
(Reusing this file)		 Copyright not renewed
  • Though it is believed that the logo was not copyrighted and it is displayed on items from the hotel during this time period which carry no copyright notice, a renewal search was done at copyright.gov. The only renewal listings for a title "Desert Inn" were in music for a 1958 work and in film for a 1960 film. There were no listings pertaining to the Las Vegas hotel or to any artwork belonging to the hotel. United Hotel Corporation and Wilbur Clark were also searched at copyright.gov; there were no listings for either.

Other items from the 1950s with the logo:

1957 Desert Inn Menu cover logo at top right with date of March 23, 1957 back of menu with logo. Back of menu asks for a three cent stamp as postage.

Paper napkin dated October 15, 1958 Logo is on the napkin which was signed by Betty Grable, who was appearing at the hotel at the time.

Wilbur Clark sold his shares of the hotel in 1964 and died a year later. In November 1966, tycoon Howard Hughes was a guest at the Desert Inn, occupying the two top floors. In December of that year, Hughes was asked to leave to make room for New Year guests. Hughes responded to the request by entering into negotiations to purchase the Desert Inn. By 1967, he was the hotel's owner.

This 1973 ad for the Desert Inn in 1973, illustrates the changes. Wilbur Clark's name is gone from the Desert Inn name and the logo has undergone some changes.Dr. Blofeld (talk) 15:34, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

 Support I think this was probably deleted because all of the information on the file description page and above is entirely irrelevant to its copyright status. What should have appeared is simply

|Permission = {{PD-US-no notice}}

which is the tag that should applied when it is restored. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:43, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: per Jim. --Storkk (talk) 15:37, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

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

Files uploaded by Hiamag

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: These file belongs to Adnan Alkateb and Hia Magazine. In the website Hiamag.com you can find the same email that I'm using for wiki commons in the top social media bar of each page or in the following link: http://www.hiamag.com/aboutus Hiamag (talk) 05:56, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose They are taken from a copyrighted source, therefore policy requires that the magazine publisher send a free license to OTRS. Please note that OTRS, like Commons, is all volunteers, and, also like Commons, is badly understaffed, so it may be several weeks before the image can be restored..     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:35, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: For the reasons stated by Jim. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 16:24, 19 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Daniela Bessia 安达 Bdaniela.jpg

Is an Artist who won many awards, viewed by millions in china an other countries, be on the news on many newspapers, i just try to make the wikipedia peage, but looks like its impossible.. there is not helpers on wikipedia who fix what we do, they just deleted if they are ignorant about it. I just i see the wikipedia helpers doenst make any research--Managerfilm (talk) 09:58, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: It is for the uploader to show that these images have been released by the copyright owner under an acceptable free licence. If the copyright owner can present a good case following the procedure at COM:OTRS then we could reconsider. Until then, we cannot host these. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 16:28, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

File:Golden Fox Logo.gif

logo fur 

|Article           = Golden Fox Footwear
|Use               = Org
|Source            = This logo is from the www.goldenfoxfootwear.com website
|Used for          = Golden Fox Footwear article
|Owner             = Golden Fox Footwear
|Website           = www.goldenfoxfootwear.com
|History           = 
|Commentary        = 
|Description       = 
|Portion           = 
|Low_resolution    = 
|Purpose           = 
|Replaceability    = 
|other_information =

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Barelagang (talk • contribs) 19:09, 14 April 2016‎ (UTC)

 Oppose I don't see any reason given above why we should restore this. the source site is clearly marked "© 2016 All Rights Reserved." .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:42, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Not done. Thuresson (talk) 20:25, 19 April 2016 (UTC)


This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

File:Ella-Masar-Heather-D.jpg

The Flickr user who shared this photo originally had all rights reserved on this photo, but she has changed it to use in the public domain so I can use it on Wikipedia.

Here is the Flickr photo url - https://www.flickr.com/photos/47858265@N02/20908196363/

--Atypical chick (talk) 20:32, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

It is preferable for them to change it to CC-0 ... the Flickr "public domain" tag is actually meant for when someone else's photograph is public domain... it's a point of argument whether to accept the "public domain" tags here, while CC-0 is unambiguous and a much better statement legally (see https://creativecommons.org/about/cc0/ ). CC-BY is also accepted here if they want their attribution to remain. I would still  Support undeletion in this case since it seems obvious the Flickr user owns the image, but it would be best to change the Flickr license again, if possible. Carl Lindberg (talk) 20:42, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
 Support It's now {{Cc-by-2.0}} on Flickr. Storkk (talk) 09:57, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 Support Now CC-BY-2.0, and no doubt that the Flickr user is the photographer/copyright holder of the image. --★ Poké95 05:44, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Done. @Atypical chick, please check the image description page for missing information, categories etc. Thuresson (talk) 20:33, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Abandoned firehouse infrared.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016031410001062. The file is also on Flickr licensed cc-by-2.0. --Rrburke (talk) 16:08, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done @Rrburke: please continue. Ankry (talk) 15:59, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Bruce Isaacson.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016031310001797. --Rrburke (talk) 16:16, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done @Rrburke: please continue. Ankry (talk) 16:00, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Kerstin-080-Edit.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016031610000569. --Rrburke (talk) 19:39, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done @Rrburke: please continue. Ankry (talk) 16:00, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Nickolai Stoilov.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016040410000786. --Rrburke (talk) 10:48, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done @Rrburke: please continue. Ankry (talk) 16:00, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Swing Racers Gameplay.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016031510022351. Rrburke (talk) 10:57, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done @Rrburke: please continue. Ankry (talk) 16:00, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:EXIT Art Magazine 5 cover.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016030910007371. --Rrburke (talk) 12:02, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done @Rrburke: please continue. Ankry (talk) 16:00, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Iss1.jpg

Also File:Iss2.jpg
File:Iss3.jpg
File:Iss5.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016030110000999. --Rrburke (talk) 15:14, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done @Rrburke: please continue. Ankry (talk) 15:51, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Non ci è stato regalato niente Poster.png

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016030610003147. --Rrburke (talk) 15:46, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done @Rrburke: please continue. Ankry (talk) 15:53, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Ayuntamiento Gumpoldskirchen.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016030110025436. --Rrburke (talk) 16:19, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done @Rrburke: please continue. Ankry (talk) 15:52, 20 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:COLORADO LOTTERY with Tagline.jpg

This file should not have been deleted. As an employee of the Lottery, I have the authority and permission to post this logo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kellytabor (talk • contribs) 15:52, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

 Info The file was deleted because the Colorado lottery website states that everything on it is "all rights reserved". If your organisation is indeed happy to release the logo under a suitable free licence we would be happy to host it. Because we have to be very careful in a case like this to ensure that the copyright licence is issued by an authorised person, we would need to get you to follow the procedure set out on the OTRS page and send us formal confirmation by email. We will then store that in our permissions database, in case anybody queries the licence at a later date. You would need to have the email sent from an official email account within the coloradolottery.com domain (we can't accept permissions sent from gmail or similar unconnected accounts). The person signing the email should have the authority to grant copyright licences on the company's behalf, and should for example be a director or the head of the company's legal department. I hope that helps. If you have any queries, do please feel free to leave a message on my talk page and I will do what I can to assist. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 16:59, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: COM:OTRS verification needed as discussed. --Storkk (talk) 15:06, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Peltier Cooling Diagram.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: OTRS verified; ticket:2016030910001474. Riley Huntley (talk) 17:59, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Riley Huntley: please curate the file description as appropriate. --Storkk (talk) 15:05, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Ďáblický hřbitov, pohřeb Jana Badalce (1).jpg

Hello, Please undelete following files:

A permission for them came to OTRS under ticket:2016041710008923.

Thanks, --Mates (talk) 20:53, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Mates: please add the OTRS template. Thanks!. --Storkk (talk) 15:03, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Pta 1000.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Sehr geehrtes Support-Team. Ich, Peter Teuschel, erkläre in Bezug auf das Bild »Peter Teuschel .jpg«, dass ich dessen Urheber/in bin. Ich erlaube hiermit jedermann die Weiternutzung des Bildes unter der freien Lizenz »Creative-Commons-Lizenz „Namensnennung – Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen 4.0 international“«. Ich genehmige somit in urheberrechtlicher Hinsicht Dritten das Recht, das Bild (auch kommerziell oder gewerblich) zu nutzen und zu verändern, sofern sie die Lizenzbedingungen wahren. Mir ist bekannt, dass ich diese Einwilligung üblicherweise nicht widerrufen kann. Mir ist bekannt, dass sich die freie Lizenzierung nur auf das Urheberrecht sowie verwandte Rechte bezieht und es mir daher unbenommen ist, aufgrund anderer Gesetze (Persönlichkeitsrecht, Markenrecht usw.) gegen Dritte vorzugehen, die das Bild im Rahmen der freien Lizenz rechtmäßig, auf Grund anderer Gesetze aber unrechtmäßig nutzen. Gleichwohl erwerbe ich keinen Anspruch darauf, dass das Bild dauerhaft in Wikipedia oder einem ihrer Schwesterprojekte eingestellt wird.


Mit freundlichen Grüßen Peter Teuschel

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> 

<bilddaten>
  <file number="286" filename="Peter Teuschel .jpg" project="commons" missing="false" person="true">
    <depictedpersons />
  </file>
</bilddaten>
<uploader>
  <type type="urheber" subtype="urheber" />
  <name name="Peter Teuschel" pseudo="Cidrin" iswpnick="true" />
</uploader>
<lizenz>
  <license intern="CCBYSA4_un" short="CC BY SA 4.0 unported" />
</lizenz>
<anmerkung>
  <anmerkung text="" />
</anmerkung>

Cidrin (talk) 11:15, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose The image appears without a free license at http://interviews-mit-autoren.blogspot.ch/2015/01/helga-konig-im-gesprach-mit-dem.html and other places on the Web. Therefore policy requires that the actual copyright holder, who is almost always the photographer and not the subject, must send a free license to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:51, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done Ankry (talk) 16:36, 20 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Entre-dos-aguas-laucke-version-sample.flac

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016031810007826. --Rrburke (talk) 13:21, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Permission in OTRS ticket 2016031810007826. --Rrburke (talk) 13:21, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
✓ Done @Rrburke: please continue. Ankry (talk) 16:03, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:PeddeShot.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016031710023275. Rrburke (talk) 17:33, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done @Rrburke: please continue. Ankry (talk) 16:04, 20 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Anúk Guerrero, contemporary trans disciplinar performance artist. 1. México.jpeg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016030810013927. --Rrburke (talk) 11:35, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done @Rrburke: please continue. Ankry (talk) 16:14, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Anúk Guerrero, contemporary trans disciplinar performance artist.jpeg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016030810013927. --Rrburke (talk) 11:36, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done @Rrburke: please continue. Ankry (talk) 16:14, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:UnaOHagan-1Web.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016030810022061. --Rrburke (talk) 12:04, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done @Rrburke: please continue. Ankry (talk) 16:14, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Wikipedia instructions GVRL.webm

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016032010011781. Rrburke (talk) 12:18, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done @Rrburke: please continue. Ankry (talk) 16:15, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Wikipedia instructions InfoTrac.webm

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016032010011781. Rrburke (talk) 12:19, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done @Rrburke: please continue. Ankry (talk) 16:15, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Cover of 'JeevanKo ChheuBaata.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016032210001485. --Rrburke (talk) 13:25, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done @Rrburke: please continue. Ankry (talk) 16:15, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Kamara Gamma - Pretentions.jpg

Template:OTRS ticket seems to be valid. Then, the file was deleted the January 26, 2016 with the reasoning "No permission since 19 January 2016", therefore, if the file is attributed as Own work, then, the deletion rationale was not valid (unless the file don't have the proper license prior to the deletion). --Amitie 10g (talk) 05:00, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose Ticket:2016020110014781 is for the cover of a CD and I see nothing in the ticket that appears to be from the music publisher. Instead, if I understand it correctly, the ticket appears to be from an editor at Spanish Wikipedia... could you clarify? Storkk (talk) 08:16, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Since I aren't an Admin, I can't see the file, so is little that I can do rather than requesting the temporary undeletion, or at least, to send the file to my email address. --Amitie 10g (talk) 15:29, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done/withdraw: Effectively non-free CD cover. --Amitie 10g (talk) 16:12, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Conjunto_español_1993_Bucarest.png

Per Template:OTRS ticket, the uploader also declared that this file is her own work. --Amitie 10g (talk) 17:16, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done @Amitie 10g: please continue. Ankry (talk) 17:44, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:MQ ebook cover full size.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: OTRS ticket:2016040510017285 received; licensed under CC-By-SA 4.0. Josve05a (talk) 04:20, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

    • This ticket needs some extra work. We need an explenation how he became the copyright holder. Did he (the writer) made the cover himself, did the person who designed it merely grants him a license or perhaps the publisher is the copyright holder? Covers are a bit tricky since it is often unclear who is the actual copyright owner. A couple of short follow up questions should do the trick. Natuur12 (talk) 08:25, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: Ticket has been resolved. And well, covers are just tricky since there are a lot of potential copyright owners and often a lot of clueless people. Luckly that wasn't the case here. --Natuur12 (talk) 19:55, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Stephliana_webcomic.jpg

This image was deleted from my userpage with the reason "Copyright violation: not 'own work'". However, the image in question is of one of my conference posters, featuring my own artwork - the full version is on my website, here: https://grimmart.net/publications-presentations/.

Stephliana (talk) 21:43, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Stephliana Hi,
As for all content previously published elsewere, a formal written permission is needed. Please see COM:OTRS for the procedure. Regards, Yann (talk) 07:14, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Yann, thank you for the information! This work wasn't published elsewhere -- it's a conference poster, but wasn't printed or reproduced in a separate publication, and the copyright was never transferred for purposes of display or reproduction; also, I'm an independent researcher, so there's no institutional ownership of the work. Do I just need to make the image available under a CC-BY license to meet the Commons standards? And will I be able to re-upload the image in question?

Best, Stephliana (talk) 14:55, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose First, is everything on the poster -- all of the text and all of the images, both drawings and photographs -- your own personal work? It looks to me if you have summarized and clipped material from a variety of sources. If there is anything on the poster, text or image, that you did not yourself write, draw, or photograph, then you will need a free license from the actual creators. Second, please tell us how this fragmented image of a poster serves our educational purpose? A legible copy of the whole poster might do so, but I don't think this does. Third, unless no one but you has seen the poster, it was "published" in copyright terms. With minor exceptions which do not apply here, all created works have a copyright until it expires. That's why we require a free license from the actual copyright holder via OTRS for works published elsewhere without a free license. Finally, no, you may not upload the image again -- that would be a serious violation of our rules. Commons never actually "deletes" anything -- your image has simply been removed from public view. If you can satisfactorily answer the questions above and a free license comes via OTRS, the image will be restored to view. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:49, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jim,

I can't see the image anymore so I don't remember if the small screenshots of five website pages are included, but aside from those, all of the images on the poster were drawn by me. This is material from an academic poster, and the text and notes are not summaries or clips from external sources -- they're summaries of ongoing original research, representing data collected and written by me. It's a "fragmented" image and not the full poster because I cropped to a drawing of myself to use as a profile picture on my userpage (and there only). If the issue is with the website screenshots, then please delete the image and I can contribute a new one with those images removed.

I understand the definition of "publication" with regards to copyright -- I wanted to clarify that this has not been published in a medium that required me to transfer ownership of copyright or to grant a competing license. I asked about re-uploading because it was unclear if I'd need to resubmit the image (since it appeared to be removed) and grant a proper CC license in the image information. Stephliana (talk) 17:54, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

 Support While Stephliana is a relatively new user, with 127 total edits in WP:EN and Commons, the use of this on a WP:EN user page seems reasonable to me. While there may be some de minimis copyrighted material present, according to the the explanation above, on the whole it seems to be "own work" and properly licensed. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:08, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: per Jim's reanalysis. --Storkk (talk) 22:51, 20 April 2016 (UTC)


This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

File:160329155625UTC.png, File:160329181132UTC.PNG, File:Reference_desk_Science160404140000.PNG

Files are used here:


https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science&action=edit&oldid=713271421 Special relativity. Simultaneity

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/17/160329155625UTC.png

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/49/160329181132UTC.PNG


https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science&action=edit&oldid=714473425 Special relativity. Simultaneity 2

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8f/Reference_desk_Science160404140000.PNG — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.53.235.112 (talk • contribs) 16:05, 14 April 2016‎ (UTC)


According https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_Image_upload_160329142034UTC some EugeneZelenko user deleted files. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.53.235.112 (talk • contribs) 16:08, 14 April 2016‎ (UTC)

I understand that the files have been used in the past. Please clarify why the files should be undeleted now. Thuresson (talk) 17:27, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


Someone may follow current https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science and see link to previous discussions. Someone in future may also read history. Also I think that archiving Reference_desk is bad idea, because it's pretty hard to find info in history.
I've added mirror to archive.org, but why actually files were deleted, due to hosting problems? 37.53.235.112 18:57, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


 Oppose

I admit, I don't understand this request, and two of the citations above are 404 errors, but I see no way we can restore these without someone providing information both as to what they are and where they came from. It would also be much better if they were SVGs. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:55, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


These images was made by me in Autodesk Autocad (software) and converted to PNG via PrtScr-key and pasting in Microsoft Paint. MS Paint cannot save images in SVG file format. Who invented SVG requirement? Anyway, I have no space on HDD to install additional software for creation SVG.
I add links to images in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science&action=edit&oldid=715328481 Special relativity. Simultaneity 2. First 2 images are merged.
It's very important to make information from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science recoverable in any time in future. Deleting images makes it impossible. Yes, I have added mirrors, but I've found deletion by lucky chance 37.53.235.112 09:10, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
You may think it is important to have the images, but we don't keep images without a full file information page -- source, author, description, and categories. We have none of that for these. That includes the author -- an IP cannot have uploaded these images. I suggest you sign in and provide a description of each of these so that we can consider your request seriously. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:44, 15 April 2016 (UTC)


This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Frederico Rochaferreira.png

A imagem Frederico Rochaferreira.png é de autoria própria, isto é, fotografia tirada por mim mesmo, Frederico Rochaferreira. Pode-se conferir a data da primeira aparição em público em minha página do facebbok, no endereço: https://pt-br.facebook.c Unsigned request by User:Sitefilosofico

This particular image is already being discussed here from April 18. If you have any new information, add your information at its entry. Thuresson (talk) 22:09, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Lutje per Gjyqtarët.jpg

This was a picture I took during a visit to the Great Hall of the Supreme Court of Albania, and the image taken was that of a mural with the words and a portrait of mother Tereza. Theoden sA (talk) 17:03, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

To begin with, who is the painter of the mural? Thuresson (talk) 17:20, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
 Oppose In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in Albania.
Albanian copyright lasts 70 years after the death of the artist, so this painting of Mother Teresa must still be under copyright. The Google translation of the caption at https://snl.no/Religion_i_Albania is not completely clear, but I think the text shown here is a quote from Pope Francis, who is, of course, still alive. We cannot keep it on Commons without a free license from both the artist and the writer of the text (the Pope?). .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:55, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
 Support Being the person who took the picture, I wanted to clarify that the text represents the words of Mother Tereza in a prayer, where she seeks the help of god to guide judges in delivering justice ("Lutje për Gjyqtarët" literally means "prayer for judges"). Also, I asked at the court, and from what I could gather there is no signed artist of the mural afresco, because it was commissioned by the Supreme Court and apparently this public institution retains authorship rights. I believe that the public ownership of authorship rights and the fact that it has been displayed in a public place (like the courtroom) without any evident restrictions on the taking of images of the mural means that the Supreme Court has relinquished its copyrights to this work of art. Theoden sA (talk) 15:38, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
There are two problems with that. First, Mother Teresa died in 1997, so her words will be under copyright in the USA until at least 2067 and possibly longer in the country where they were first published. The Supreme Court of Albania does not have any ability to grant a license to her copyright.
Second, there is nothing in Albanian law which supports your reasoning. While
"the official texts of a legal, administrative, legislative, political nature and their respective official translations; the official symbols of the state, symbols of other public organizations and public authorities, such as: Coat of arms, seals, flags, emblems, medallions, medals;" (see Commons:Copyright rules by territory#Albania)
have no copyright in Albania, a painting of a notable Albanian person is not any of those. The fact that it was commissioned by the Supreme Court does not mean that the Supreme Court owns the copyright. Copyright always remains with the artist unless it is explictly transferred in a written agreement. That is the reason that we cannot host any of the official White House portraits of the most recent presidents. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:19, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim. --Storkk (talk) 07:13, 21 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Animado de la OIDA Terapia.jpg

Buen día Recibí el siguiente mensaje el día de hoy:

Josve05a te ha dejado un mensaje en tu página de discusión sobre «File:Animado de la OIDA Ter...». File:Animado de la OIDA Terapia.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, image...

Quiero aclarar que esa imagen no tiene derechos de autor en este momento, pues fue creada para el manejo de la Oidaterapia, que es la pagina en Wikipedia que estamos desarrollando. Por favor revisar esta cancelación de la imagen. Gracias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OIDA Terapia (talk • contribs) 03:22, 15 April 2016‎ (UTC)

 Oppose The image appears without a free license at http://cursovirtual.oidaterapia.org/chamilo/index.php. Therefore, policy requires that an authorized official of the copyright holder must send a free license to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:57, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim. --Storkk (talk) 07:12, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Inf97 1.jpg

Also:
File:Infa99 1k.jpg
File:Derinfant99 2.jpg
File:FranzLittmann2013.jpg
File:Album "tripdown" by beg56.jpg
File:Album "homeless" by beg56.jpg

Permission confirmed by OTRS Ticket 2016030210025158. --Rrburke (talk) 23:38, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

I have some doubt about the permission, at least for the album covers. Moreover, these files are most probably out of scope (personal images of poor quality and very tiny album covers). Regards, Yann (talk) 11:17, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
@Yann: I'm not an admin so unfortunately I can't view the files and don't know what they depict. Do you want to reply to the OTRS ticket or should I just tell the user they were declined? --Rrburke (talk) 12:28, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 Oppose I agree. The first two are so small that they are useless. The Franz Littmann image is OK, but who is Franz Littmann? WP doesn't know him. The latter two look to be album covers, and the OTRS is from an individual, not a record company. Further, the last one labels a woman as "Homeless" when that may or may not be true. Policy explicitly forbids that. So I would not restore the first, second, and last under any circumstances. File:FranzLittmann2013.jpg could be restored if he meets our requirements of notability and File:Album "tripdown" by beg56.jpg if the OTRS sender tells us both how it is that he has the right to license an album cover and proves that the album's band is notable. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:36, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm asking the uploader about the album covers, but I thought that the copyright for cover art remained with the artist unless it had been transferred to the record company; I will try to confirm that he is the artist. But I can't find any information at AllMusic or elsewhere about any band called Beg56 or any album called Tripdown anyway (there are lots of albums called "Homeless" but none I can connect with this band), so the point may be mooted by the lack of notability. As for Franz Littmann, I will ask him to provide evidence of notability. Rrburke (talk) 14:19, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as discussed. --Storkk (talk) 09:44, 21 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Dd2015.jpg

my own work,no copyright violation— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nairunnigs (talk • contribs) 07:14, 21 April 2016‎ (UTC)

This file has not yet been deleted. It will be soon, because it is a photograph of a TV show. The TV show is copyrighted, please read COM:DW. Unless we receive confirmation from the TV studio through COM:OTRS.Storkk (talk) 09:58, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done cannot undelete what isn't deleted. As above. Storkk (talk) 09:58, 21 April 2016 (UTC)


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

* File:Wellness jpg.jpg * File:Fantastica jpg.jpg * File:MSC YC JPG.jpg * File:Bella exp jpg.jpg * File:Aurea jpg.jpg * File:Wifi msc.jpg * File:Yc experience logo pantone gold.pdf * [[:File:Aurea experience logo.pdf]...

Please delete the request of delete below files as I am from MSC cruises there are permision to use these logos.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaun1021 (talk • contribs) 10:44, 21 April 2016‎ (UTC)

These files have not been deleted, so cannot be undeleted. However, they will be deleted unless confirmation comes through our OTRS system. Please read that page and follow the instructions there. In case they do get deleted, without OTRS confirmation we will be unable to restore them, so no point in requesting here then either. Storkk (talk) 09:54, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done as above. Storkk (talk) 09:54, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Trooper Fred Potts 01.jpg

Image is PD in both the UK and US: taken in 1917 by Walton Adams (1842-1934). Also see OTRS ticket 2016022310012991. --Rrburke (talk) 10:35, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Finally! Good job. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:25, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Autorretrato Pepe Castro.jpg

Per Ticket#2016021510017966, permission confirmed for the self-portrait. --Amitie 10g (talk) 15:16, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: looks good. Please curate the file page with the appropriate templates. --Storkk (talk) 15:46, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Aruna Jayanthi.jpg

Hi,

I uploaded the image but I know the copyright holder and he has given me the permission to do so.

--ManishK236 (talk) 07:12, 22 April 2016 (UTC)User:ManishK236

 Not done: please have the copyright holder follow the instructions on COM:OTRS. --Storkk (talk) 10:21, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Paul Cardall.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016031810015184. --Rrburke (talk) 10:38, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: Excellent. Please curate the file's page as appropriate. --Storkk (talk) 11:58, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Aija Sakova.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016031210015211. --Rrburke (talk) 13:02, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done @Rrburke: please continue. Ankry (talk) 16:16, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: done by Ankry. --Storkk (talk) 12:13, 22 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Sebastià Salellas Memorial Poster.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016032110014311. --Rrburke (talk) 13:48, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done @Rrburke: please continue. Ankry (talk) 16:16, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: done by Ankry. --Storkk (talk) 12:13, 22 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:SKAGEN Fondene logo.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016032210005105. --Rrburke (talk) 14:53, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done @Rrburke: please continue. Ankry (talk) 16:16, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: done by Ankry. --Storkk (talk) 12:13, 22 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:MICHAEL PAUL THOMAS.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016030810020857 --Rrburke (talk) 10:44, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: Good work. Might be worth asking if he has an original he would be willing to share: the one in the ticket is higher resolution, but a worse crop and has some color weirdness on the left hand side. Not absolutely necessary, though. --Storkk (talk) 12:03, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Funciones del Community Manager.jpg

Per Ticket#2016012710016161, copyright holder confirmed the permission. --Amitie 10g (talk) 14:30, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: looks OK... as long as it's not used for promotional purposes. Please curate the file's page as appropriate. --Storkk (talk) 14:51, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Alex Santos SFL live 2009.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016030910024128. --Rrburke (talk) 15:35, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

@Rrburke: I don't think that file has ever been uploaded here or on enwiki (going out on a limb here, but under any name)... Could you please ask the original submitter if they uploaded the picture, if so what the username is? Storkk (talk) 15:56, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, I got mixed up: I don't think the user ever did upload this file. I presumed he did because otherwise why would he be contacting OTRS? --Rrburke (talk) 16:17, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Possibly scared by a warning in the upload wizard. In any case, I'll close this now as not done as file was never deleted. Thanks for your help. Storkk (talk) 16:46, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: file never deleted. --Storkk (talk) 16:46, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Martin Grove Brumbaugh circa 1915.jpg

I am pretty sure this was properly labeled as coming from the Bain collection of the Library of Congress, and I really should have been asked to add whatever the deleter felt was missing before it was deleted. No one should have to see a red link in their contributions to find out something was up for deletion. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 17:58, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): You are correct in that FastilyClone should have notified you. I have restored the image, but I do think we need a more specific/verifiable source and author than the words "Library of Congress" and "Bain". Storkk (talk) 19:42, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: PD-1923, source fixed. --Storkk (talk) 20:04, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Telegram Sticker.PNG

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Greetings. Before the image is eliminated I changed the original sticker to Mozilla Firefox OS icon set. Now describes another figure and has nothing to do with Steve Jobs. I would like to recover only the already updated image. Diego Sanguinetti (talk) 23:09, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose I see the first image -- a page of stickers with another page under it; now we have a blank page, save for three words, with the same page under it. I see nothing here that has any educational value. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:16, 2 March 2016 (UTC) -- see below
I do not mean that image (the package stickers). What I mean is that exhibited like that, and added to the Spanish Wikipedia. That image, now changed, is to demonstrate the use in a chat. PD: I changed the image link, apology for this confusion.--Diego Sanguinetti (talk) 15:45, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 Oppose First, on the new image I see a lot of smiley's which probably don't have a copyright, but also two images at the top which probably do. Second, and more important, this is a fairly complex image, but is only 183x275px, so it is really too small to be useful. Finally, what's the point -- a bunch of smileys under a skyline and a silhouette -- why is this useful for any educational purpose? .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:32, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
First, the icon is in the public domain, the background can be eliminated or crop the image. The second is a sticker feature. For the third, the image is a example from the Telegram Blog. What if I design again and just focus on that feature?--Diego Sanguinetti (talk) 17:24, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
You cannot just state that the icon is PD, you must prove it. More to the point however, is that the Telegram Blog, like all created works, is copyrighted, and you cannot copy material from it to Commons without a free license. And, as I noted above, the image is so small that it useless. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:54, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
The link is a reference, not necessarily an identical copy of the image. Anything else, the image in question also serves Wikibooks tutorial so it have another use. Cite from spanish Wikibooks tutorial: "Desde el teclado, seleccionando a un emoticono. Los stickers deben estar acordes a sus respectivos estados emocionales". Next, if I make another capture without the icon and the background, would it be okay? In this case, I could change the icon to File: Telegram logo.svg, a PD icon and recent logo.--Diego Sanguinetti (talk) 16:57, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

No. If your new version is close enough to the original to be useful for educational purposes on WMF, then it must infringe on the source copyright. If it is so far from what is used on the Telegram Blog that it does not infringe, then it would be wrong to describe it as in any way related to the Blog -- it would be your own personal art, which we do not keep on Commons. Finally, you cannot cite its being in use if you are the one who added it -- if that were not the rule, anyone could force us to keep any image. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:47, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. I just uploaded a different and free-copyright version for use on Wikipedia and Wikibooks (File:Sticker preview from Telegram's Sticker bot.png).--Diego Sanguinetti (talk) 19:39, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sticker preview from Telegram's Sticker bot.png. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:46, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
So I think the argument would also with Telegram main screenshot. The main screenshot is File:Telegram Android screenshot.svg (now without copyright). The other image that I upgraded, employing fictional characters, it would be wrong too. However, the application is official. Making a comparative, the stickers are invented (or like "fandom"), the bot (used to create the stickers) and the app are real. Not to confuse I'm asking in Spanish Café#¿Una captura de Telegram fuera de tópico? to seek a consensus.--Diego Sanguinetti (talk) 17:26, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Unclear copyright status. Per COM:PCP. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:23, 23 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Pydna logo.png

I have made this logotype myself. Why was it deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bjornjobb (talk • contribs) 08:43, 15 April 2016‎ (UTC)

 Oppose If the logo is a close copy of an organization's logo, then it is a copyright violation. If it is not a close close copy of a notable organization's logo, then it is out of scope because it has no educational purpose. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:41, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: Please follow Storkk's instruction. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:38, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Nfv-pokal logo.jpg

Can you explain, why the file was deletes? On the website wasn't any copyrigt visuable. - 91.97.40.73 11:04, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose With limited exceptions, which do not apply here, all created works have a copyright until it expires. Except in the USA before 1989, no copyright notice is required. Therefore, the only way you can take an image from another web site is if it is explicitly marked with a CC-BY or other acceptable license or if Commons receives a free license from the copyright holder via OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:37, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: per comment above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:15, 23 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:St.Martin 1.Bauphase.jpg Datei wurde erst heute hochgeladen. Zustimmung der Autorin wurde heute beantragt.

Ich finde es merkwürdig, dass eine Datei, die heute hochgeladen wurde, nach nicht einmal 12 Stunden gelöscht wird. Normalerweise stehen dafür 7 Tage zur Verfügung. Die Autorin wurde von mir angeschrieben mit der Bitte um Übersendung der Zustimmung mit folgendem Inhalt: "Ich erkläre in Bezug auf das Bild {Template:St.Martin 1.Bauphase. {{{https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:St.Martin_1.Bauphase.jpg}}}, dass ich a) dessen Fotograf/in bin oder b) Inhaber/in des vollumfänglichen Nutzungsrechts oder c) die Inhaberin / den Inhaber eines vollumfänglichen Nutzungsrechtes rechtmäßig vertrete. Ich erlaube hiermit jedermann die Weiternutzung des Bildes unter der freien Lizenz „Creative Commons Namensnennung-Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen 4.0“ (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.de). Ich gewähre somit in urheberrechtlicher Hinsicht Dritten das Recht, das Bild (auch gewerblich) zu nutzen und zu verändern, sofern sie die Lizenzbedingungen wahren. Mir ist bekannt, dass ich diese Einwilligung üblicherweise nicht widerrufen kann. Mir ist bekannt, dass sich die Unterstellung unter eine freie Lizenz nur auf das Urheberrecht bezieht und es mir daher unbenommen ist, aufgrund anderer Gesetze (Persönlichkeitsrecht, Markenrecht usw.) gegen Dritte vorzugehen, die das Bild im Rahmen der freien Lizenz rechtmäßig, aufgrund der anderen Gesetze aber unrechtmäßig nutzen. Gleichwohl erwerbe ich keinen Anspruch darauf, dass das Bild dauerhaft auf der Wikipedia eingestellt wird. {Template:Tübingen, 18.04.2016, {{{Prof.Dr.Barbara Scholkmann}}} Es braucht schon ein bisschen Zeit, bis die Zustimmung erfolgt . Korn708 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Korn708 (talk • contribs) 20:53, 17 April 2016‎ (UTC)

✓ Done: by Krd. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:15, 23 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Frederico Rochaferreira.png

Solicito que a imagem Frederico Rochaferreira png, da página; https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederico_Rochaferreira; seja restaurada, porque se trata de fotografia própria, tirada pelo próprio autor.

Obrigado. Frederico Rochaferreira — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sitefilosofico (talk • contribs) 10:28, 18 April 2016‎ (UTC)

 Oppose The image appears on Facebook without a free license. Therefore policy requires that the actual copyright holder must send a free license to OTRS.

If User:Sitefilosofico is actually Frederico Rochaferreira, as you claim above, then there are two things to keep in mind.

First, since Frederico Rochaferreira is the subject of the image, it cannot be "own work", as you claimed. The OTRS license must either come directly from the photographer or be accompanied by a copy of the written agreement between you and the photographer giving you the right to freely license it.

Second, you are in serious violation of the WMF rules on conflict of interest. Although you have done so here, you must disclose who User:Sitefilosofico is on Usuário:Sitefilosofico before you make any more edits there. In any case, you should not edit your own article..     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:14, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Also please note that it is a serious violation of our rules to upload an image a second time after it has been deleted. That is particularly true when done while an UnDR is pending. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:17, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: COM:OTRS permission needed. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:26, 23 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Kurudhi Pookkal.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: the image is all over the internet for a simple movie first look its not copying when someone uploads this work Gopinathms2012 (talk) 21:40, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose Dollar bills are all over the place too but they don't come for free either. Please read Commons:Licensing before making any further uploads. Thuresson (talk) 21:48, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:17, 23 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:ICDD at Shibuya Cyclone.jpg

Request temporary undeletion

I was given seven days to obtain proper permission from Imperial Circus Dead Decadence. However, the image was deleted the day after the upload. I will still try to have the permission form completed in time. Ruukasu2005 (talk) 20:04, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose Temporary undeletion is meant to facilitate copyright investigation by people who are not administrators, not to allow some arbitrary time window for copyright violations to stay up. This case seems pretty straightforward and no investigation seems necessary. The file's undeletion will be requested by an OTRS agent if and when the copyright holder (usually the photographer) confirms a free license by following the instructions on COM:OTRS. Storkk (talk) 10:17, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
If it was listed with the {{No permission since}} tag, that does sort of promise 7 days. Carl Lindberg (talk) 06:32, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
It was not: it was tagged by Krdbot as {{Copyvio}}. Storkk (talk) 16:17, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: It was uploaded at 15 April 2016, 7 days are over. File will be restored if OTRS permission is valid. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:28, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Panoramica Presa Almendra.jpg

Uploader confirmed ownership in Ticket#2016011310011593. --Amitie 10g (talk) 23:22, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

@Amitie 10g: please use ticket:2016011310011593-style links if you wish to use the ticket number. You are using "OTRS" as the prefix (which takes ticketID) instead of "ticket" (which takes number). Storkk (talk) 10:21, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Amitie 10g: Please add ticket, etc. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:15, 23 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Elijah Yates.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I got in contact with the flickr user a while back and they been gave permission and made the file public domain so I don't understand why they keep deleting the file without even checking when permission was given and posted to public domain Joeyfats67 (talk) 02:34, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose The first problem is that it is tagged on Flickr as having "no known restrictions", which is not an irrevocable license like we require. Please have them use CC-0. The second, and much bigger problem is that the Flickr user does not seem to be the copyright holder: they seem to be the subject, and while subjects often buy promotional rights to photographs of themselves, they usually do not own the copyright. The photographer will need to follow the instructions on COM:OTRS to confirm the license. Storkk (talk) 10:08, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: per comment by Storkk. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:14, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Portada Soledad Vivir Es Hoy.tif

Please restore File:File:Portada Soledad Vivir Es Hoy.tif (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Per Ticket#2016021510017653, uploader is the legitime designer and copyright holder of the file, and released it under a free license. --Amitie 10g (talk) 03:07, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Looks OK. Some qualms that the creator may just be the designer and not own the copyright to the photo (but just have a license to use it for promotion or somesuch), but as they are also a photographer and as we accept similar tickets from website owners with less evidence, so I'd  Support. Storkk (talk) 10:03, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Amitie 10g: Please add ticket, etc. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:11, 23 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Cartel-XX-TRIATLoN-IES-YAIZA-424x600.jpg

the image is a poster on the latest edition of triathlon Yaiza. It does not have any copyright . Evavalpa (talk) 10:33, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose With few exceptions, none of which are applicable here, every created work has a copyright. In order to restore this, we will need a free license from the creator via OTRS. Please note that OTRS, like Commons, is all volunteers, and, also like Commons, is badly understaffed, so it may be several weeks before the image can be restored. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:08, 21 April 2016 (UTC) .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:08, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: per Jim. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:14, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:AvatarLogo.jpg

File:AvatarLogo.jpg this logo was shared with the permission of TALC and several trustees; there is no copyright violation for use on the TALC page. Troglopedetes (talk) 11:41, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose Please have a legal representative of the company follow the instructions on COM:OTRS. Note that we only accept images that are free for anybody to use for any purpose, including creating commercial derivatives (but still of course subject to trademark and other laws). Storkk (talk) 13:52, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:14, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Laura García Hernández.jpg

Per Ticket#2016031110022591, uploader confirmed that is the copyright holder. --Amitie 10g (talk) 20:38, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Amitie 10g: Please add ticket, etc. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:14, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Milagres Church, (now Cathedral) Kallianpur Udupi during 1960s.jpg

Per Ticket#2016041710002518, uploader confirmed that is the owner of both the photo and the painting and released it under a free license. --Amitie 10g (talk) 03:15, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Amitie 10g: Please add ticket, etc. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:13, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Richard Werbe.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Richard Werbe is the copyright owner of this photo. SuzExplorer (talk) 07:07, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose the copyright holder should follow the instructions on COM:OTRS. Note that for portrait photographs, the usual copyright holder is the photographer, not the subject, so if Mr. Werbe is indeed the copyright holder, he will have to confirm how he came to hold the copyright. Ideally, the photographer would confirm the transfer of copyright. Storkk (talk) 12:06, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:13, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:AirstreamUB.PNG

This is a personally taken screenshot by me when I was on a flight of theirs. Therefore this is not a copyright violation as it is my own work. Screenshot personally with my own iPhone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cacrazy234 (talk • contribs) 07:27, 22 April 2016‎ (UTC)

 Oppose An analogous situation would be if you took a video camera into a movie theater and started recording. Of course it's a copyright violation, unless the underlying work (movie in the example, software in your case) is freely licensed or public domain. Storkk (talk) 10:20, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: per above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:13, 23 April 2016 (UTC)


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

Ticket#2012051510000912

File:WO! album cover.jpg was already confirmed with Ticket#2012051510000912 in 2012 at english Wikipedia, but it was deleted regardless it. And permission for File:Bobby in studio-11-5-2010--5-.jpeg was received yesterday from the same author. --Amitie 10g (talk) 01:34, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Amitie 10g: Please add ticket, etc. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:10, 23 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Kbow2 large.jpg

Permission confirmed by Ticket#2016041510015071. --Amitie 10g (talk) 03:54, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Amitie 10g: Please add ticket, etc. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:10, 23 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Marianne Eigenheer, Untitled, 2015.png

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016030610007536. --Rrburke (talk) 11:22, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Also:
File:Bonn 2012.jpg
File:ME BilderZurLage-2 bild.jpg

✓ Done: @Rrburke: Please add ticket, etc. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:19, 23 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:WRO RGB.png

TECHNIK BEGEISTERT e.V. is allowed to use the Logo as a official national organizer of WRO Unsigned edit by User:Dennis1906

Allowed by whom? Allowed to do what? Thuresson (talk) 17:28, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: The copyright holder must send permission to COM:OTRS to get the file restored. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:36, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

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

Restore the gallery page Víctor Jara (poet, singer-songwriter), please view: Chile#Chileans

The page Víctor Jara is not a case for speedy deletion! Never.

flowers at the grave

File:Victor Jarra Nicha.jpg exists today, but was removed from the page once.
It is a case to analyse such deletions and how and of whom they are done.
Let's have a look to Chile#Chileans! Is it an important page? The content (an older version) before the speedy deletion has been:

{{en|Víctor Lidio Jara Martínez (September 28, 1932 – September 15, 1973) was a Chilean educator, theatre director, poet, folk singer-songwriter, and political activist.}} <gallery> Image:VICTOR JARA76.jpg Image:Victor Jarra Nicha.jpg </gallery> [[Category:Victor Jara| ]] [[Category:Musicians from Chile|Jara, Víctor]] [[Category:1932 births|Jara, Víctor]] [[Category:1973 deaths|Jara, Víctor]] [[Category:Songwriters from Chile|Jara, Víctor]] [[Category:Communists|Jara, Víctor]] [[Category:Activists from Chile]]

Please restore that page and the history! --LudwigSebastianMicheler (talk) 18:31, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

New (additional) contents:

English: Víctor Lidio Jara Martínez (Victor Jara - sometimes written Victor Jarra), (September 28, 1932 – September 15, 1973) was a Chilean educator, theatre director, poet, folk singer-songwriter, and political activist.
Español: es:Víctor Jara (1932-1973), un músico, cantautor, profesor, director de teatro, activista político.

Tributes and places named after Victor Jara

[[Category:Victor Jara| ]] [[Category:Musicians from Chile|Jara, Víctor]] [[Category:1932 births|Jara, Víctor]] [[Category:1973 deaths|Jara, Víctor]] [[Category:Songwriters from Chile|Jara, Víctor]] [[Category:Communists|Jara, Víctor]] [[Category:Activists from Chile]]

✓ Done: restored & content added. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:34, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Casa de las Hormigas.jpg

Permission confirmed via OTRS Ticket#2016042310009054. --Amitie 10g (talk) 18:58, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Amitie 10g: Please add ticket, etc. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:09, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Tiburtino III Roma.jpg

Permission confirmed via OTRS Ticket#2016042310009027 --Amitie 10g (talk) 19:06, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Amitie 10g: Please add ticket, etc. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:09, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Louise Guerra Yo No HOmeWork.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016030610007536. --Rrburke (talk) 11:14, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Rrburke: Please add ticket, etc. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:19, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

I have done the tagging, to remove them from the copyvio cat. Jcb (talk) 20:32, 23 April 2016 (UTC)


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

Files uploaded by Bobsgame

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: These images are in scope as long as there is a Wikipedia article about the subject, which there is. Also, permssion has been received; Template:OTRS ticket (license cc-by-sa 3.0/GFDL). Josve05a (talk) 19:25, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: Please do the proper clean up and add the ticket. --Natuur12 (talk) 19:34, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Natuur12, I think that nine minutes is a little quick for this decision. I'm not so sure about notability. Please read the Bob's Game article on WP:EN, which is largely written by the subject, and see if you agree with me. He's proven good at getting publicity, but the game has apparently had no commercial success at all. I doubt that we need thirty images from a game that very few people have played. I think we're just being used for the next round of publicity..     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:40, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Of course. But as long as ES-wiki and EN-wiki have an article about this game the material is in scope. (A flaw in our scope policy if you ask me) And while 9 minutes is quick, admins who have OTRS-access do the undeletions themself which is even quicker. As soon as the articles are gone, the files should be deleted again of course but the ES-wiki article has been around since 2010 and the en-wiki article since 2009. Natuur12 (talk) 20:47, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Bob's game faked littering in Nintendo World Store.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Same reason as https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests&oldid=178154881#Files_uploaded_by_Bobsgame. Josve05a (talk) 20:58, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: Sinde I already undeleted the rest and the client was told that they have been undeleted. --Natuur12 (talk) 20:59, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

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

Ticket #2016041210009486

Please restore:

Permission confirmed from copyright holder. --Amitie 10g (talk) 05:03, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Amitie 10g: Please add ticket, etc. --Steinsplitter (talk) 06:40, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Elijah Yates OutLawStar Cover.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Flickr user was contacted and changed it to public domain for use Joeyfats67 (talk) 02:29, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: The file was deleted because it had PDM 1.0 and, despite this request, the license at the Flickr source has not been changed. Green Giant (talk) 09:28, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Born Again Cover.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Contacted the flickr user a while back and he been changed it to public domain and for some reason the picture keeps getting deleted he though he gave permission and changed it to public domain Joeyfats67 (talk) 02:33, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: The file source was elijahyates.com, which does not appear to have a license. In the user's Flickr stream is flickr.com/photos/57282984@N06/16714950383/in/dateposted-public/ which has PD Mark 1.0 but that is not acceptable for Commons because it could be revoked at anytime. Feel free to ask him to change to a CC license (but not one that has -NC or -ND). Green Giant (talk) 09:36, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Palestinian infobox v4.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I will add source for each photo to make it right, thanks Ibrahim.ID ♒ 12:02, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

@Ibrahim.ID: the problem is that at least one of the images in the collage, File:Juliano mer khamis.jpg, was likely a copyright violation. This made File:Palestinian infobox v2.jpg a derivative work of a copyright violation, and then File:Palestinian infobox v4.png likewise. Possibly it would be best to re-create the collage. Storkk (talk) 12:35, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
@Storkk: you are right, thanks --Ibrahim.ID ♒ 20:54, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
@Ibrahim.ID: in case you aren't aware, enwiki has en:template:photomontage which means you don't actually have to stitch photos together -- it may be a better investment of time to port that template and copy its lua module to other wikis than to manually stitch photos, since it only has to be done once per language, and you get proper sourcing for free. Storkk (talk) 21:43, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as above. --Storkk (talk) 21:44, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

File:Demilitarized Zone, North Korea (2914652546).jpg

Deleted as derivative work (which it is), but North Korea has Freedom of Panorama for all kinds of work, including 2d artwork. This work is in a public space (see this image). Finnusertop (talk) 11:46, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

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

Two Swiss Files

I closed Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Morningbastet as Deleted because these two 1950-60s images were obviously not the own work of the uploader. That has been confirmed in a long discussion on my talk page. Storkk has pointed out there that the Swiss ToO for photographs is high, so these may never have had a Swiss copyright.

After reading Copyright_law_of_Switzerland#Lack_of_originality, and studying its examples, I think that while these are certainly not formal studio portraits, the photographer has caught characteristic expressions and they are well composed, so I think they may have a Swiss copyright. However, I am certainly not expert on the subject, so I bring them here for a wider opinion. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:28, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

I think I remember Carl saying that a US judge would apply the other country's rules on whether or not the work was copyrightable -- I don't think a work can have a US copyright if it is not copyrightable in its home country. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 01:09, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
Pretty sure the U.S. would apply U.S. rules of copyrightability. They would apply foreign rules to determine a copyright owner though. This was from the en:Itar-Tass Russian News Agency v. Russian Kurier, Inc. case (more specifically, it said it would use U.S. rules on whether infringement occurred, so I'm assuming it would use U.S. rules of copyrightability as well). But publication in Switzerland would probably still count as publication in the U.S. in that it required a copyright notice. Unsure what the URAA would do there... they would not restore works in the public domain in its source country through expiration of term of protection on the restoration date, which would seem to say that works in the public domain for other reasons could be restored, but if something is below the Berne threshold of a work then the U.S. probably wasn't required to restore it either. Carl Lindberg (talk) 01:49, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for this, Carl. Just to clarify: the US copyright status of a simple photo published only in Switzerland before 1977 would likely rest on whether it was accompanied by a copyright notice (despite it not being copyrightable where it was published)? Disregarding URAA, that is. If I am reading you correctly, I'd  Support; absent relevant case law I don't think we should interpret URAA so generously. Storkk (talk) 07:29, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Yep, like anything else, if it was published before 1989 without a copyright notice, it lost its U.S. copyright (other than maybe the 9th circuit of course due to the Twin Books ruling). The URAA would be the only thing which could have restored it. Carl Lindberg (talk) 04:01, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: per Carl... PD from time of creation, unlikely to be restored by URAA. I have pinged the uploader to fix authorship and source information. --Storkk (talk) 10:39, 25 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:JohnBrittas2016SOP.jpg

the attached photograph is the portrait of Malayalam Media personality and Managing Director of Kairali TV, Mr. John Brittas.

 Not done: This file has not been deleted, so cannot be undeleted. However, it will be unless Shahin Olakara (the copyright holder named in the metadata) confirms its license via COM:OTRS. --Storkk (talk) 10:17, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Flyer dasWertvollste.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016031110012476. --Olaf Kosinsky (talk) 13:14, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Olaf Kosinsky: please add the PermissionOTRS tag to the file. Green Giant (talk) 18:51, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:FRANK ASTOR.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016031110006376. --Olaf Kosinsky (talk) 13:19, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Olaf Kosinsky: please add the PermissionOTRS tag to the file. Green Giant (talk) 18:51, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Die roten Zeichen, 2003.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016031810007933. --Olaf Kosinsky (talk) 13:24, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Olaf Kosinsky: please add the PermissionOTRS tag to thefile. Green Giant (talk) 18:51, 25 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Heidi Bucher, Dragonfly-Costume.tif

Also:
File:Heidi Bucher Fliegender Hautraum.jpg
File:Heidi Bucher Ablösen der Haut Herrenzimmer, Winterthur 1982 Photo Hans Peter Siffert 1.tiff
File:Heidi Bucher La Chute de l'espoir.jpeg
File:Untitled Herrenzimmer–1977-1978 Latex and cotton ca200 x 180 x 20 cm.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016030610007581. --Rrburke (talk) 13:22, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Rrburke: please add the PermissionOTRS tag to each file. Green Giant (talk) 18:43, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Steven Rumbelow.png

Please restore File:File:Steven Rumbelow.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Permission confirmed via OTRS Ticket#2016042510016301. Picture is already available at the Rachel Rumbelow's official website. --Amitie 10g (talk) 03:44, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Amitie 10g: please add ticket, etc. --Storkk (talk) 09:13, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Dieter Lenoir by FOTOSTUDIO AM KUFÜRSTENPLATZ MÜNCHEN.JPG

Bereits in der Umfrage sowie in der Email vom 29.03.16 an [email protected] wurden alle Daten genannt sowie die Freigabe des Fotostudios abgegeben. Daher bitte um Widerherstellung der Datei. Danke.

--88.217.111.12 11:04, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


  •  Oppose If a free license has been sent to OTRS, then the file will be restored automatically when and if the email is received, processed, and approved. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 5 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.
If the message was sent to the English language version of OTRS and the email has been properly received there the sender will receive an automatic reply with the ticket number. If the sender has not had a reply, please check that it was sent correctly and try again. Other language versions may or may not provide the automatic reply. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:30, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Permission in OTRS Ticket 2016032910025116 --Olaf Kosinsky (talk) 22:19, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Olaf Kosinsky: Please add template etc. to the filepage. Thanks. --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:45, 26 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Together, Giuseppe Inglese.jpg

Also File:Together Giuseppe Inglese.pdf. Requesting temporary undeletion in order to show the files to the artist to confirm that he agrees to publish them under a free license (they were uploaded by a third party). See OTRS ticket 2016030210018095. --Rrburke (talk) 11:45, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: {{Temporarily undeleted}}. --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:43, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:NB Bhopal header.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016031410005291. --Rrburke (talk) 12:17, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Rrburke: Please add otrs template etc. to the file desciption page. --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:41, 26 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Enfants autistes, bienvenue à l'école - collège et lycée.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016031410019081. --Rrburke (talk) 12:25, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Rrburke: Please add otrs template etc. to the file desciption page. --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:42, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Enfants autistes, bienvenue à l'école - maternelle et primaire.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket 2016031410019124. --Rrburke (talk) 12:42, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Rrburke: Please add otrs template etc. to the file desciption page. --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:41, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:RICKYN EL ARQUITECTO.jpg

File:RICKYN EL ARQUITECTO.jpg--Colombia music (talk) 20:13, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: The file has been tagged as "no permission". It has not been deleted yet. Focus on providing evidence of permission first. Green Giant (talk) 22:04, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Rickyn el arquitecto artista urbano.jpg

File:Rickyn el arquitecto artista urbano.jpg--Colombia music (talk) 20:16, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: The file has been tagged as "no permission". It has not been deleted yet. Focus on providing evidence of permission first. Green Giant (talk) 22:04, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:RICKYN LOGO.png

File:RICKYN LOGO.png--Colombia music (talk) 20:27, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: The file has been tagged as "no permission". It has not been deleted yet. Focus on providing evidence of permission first. Green Giant (talk) 22:04, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Chauka Cricket Scoring App - Amateur and Professional Cricketers Guide.jpg

Hi team,

Requesting you undelete the above given guide as i provided the source and permission through email. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gowinrj (talk • contribs)

@Amitie 10g: Does the creator agreed to license their app under free license too? ★ Poké95 11:32, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Good question! I lost this thicket since I've reviewed many other ones. I'll ask the author for the license of the app. --Amitie 10g (talk) 14:02, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
I don't think that's really relevant, the copyright holder of the app should be able to freely license screenshots of an otherwise unfree program, I think. However, the ticket is from a random gmail account, and appears to claim ownership only of the image; it should be confirmed that the submitter is actually the copyright holder of the app. Storkk (talk) 11:55, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: permission came through. --Storkk (talk) 09:56, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Bildwechsel material.jpg

Also:
File:Hist.sichtung-klmonimt1.jpg
File:Halb-zoll-zeichnung.jpg
File:Denkkarium41.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket:2016030710009131. --Rrburke (talk) 12:04, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: @Rrburke: please add the PermissionOTRS tag to each file. Green Giant (talk) 18:58, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Will rees.jpg

This file should not be deleted, because I have a written permission of the copyright holder to use it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arjoopy (talk • contribs)

@Arjoopy: Hello, please ask the copyright holder to forward the permission to the OTRS. And does the copyright holder agrees to release their file under a free license? Also, please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). Thanks, ★ Poké95 09:26, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Please clarify why this image is useful for a Wikimedia project. Thuresson (talk) 11:37, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done Per Thuresson, COM:SCOPE. Riley Huntley (talk) 04:06, 28 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Grotta della Cioia Ciara (623254430).jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I had uploaded the image in good faith from the original published on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/marcoberri/623254430/in/faves-47912543@N00/ and I don't know why it was missing source and license information, probably an error on my part since I have rarely uploaded images on Commons. I hope it can be restored and/or uploaded again. Thank you for your work, ciao --Steko Steko (talk) 09:33, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

@Steko: There was no error in your part, it is an error of the Flickr user. The image was deleted because it is "licensed" under the Public Domain Mark 1.0. The Public Domain Mark 1.0 is not and will never be a license nor a legal tool, so the image on Flickr is technically still considered as "All rights reserved", which is unacceptable on Commons. Please contact the Flickr user to license their image under CC0, and addtionally explain to them that to release their images in the public domain, they should use CC0, not Public Domain Mark. Thanks, ★ Poké95 13:44, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done Per Pokéfan95, please contact the Flickr user to request license change. Riley Huntley (talk) 04:11, 28 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:TAKE AWAY ONE onesheet tk6 wiki 400w.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket:2016030610006715. --Rrburke (talk) 10:37, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Not in scope, see en:Draft:Take Away One. Thuresson (talk) 22:11, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done Per Thuresson, COM:SCOPE. Riley Huntley (talk) 04:13, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:False Pro Picture.jpg

I made the picture

Unsigned edit by User:Nathan398

Out of scope. A logo for a product or company whose article was speedy deleted at en: ([4]). Thuresson (talk) 22:40, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done Per Thuresson. Riley Huntley (talk) 04:05, 28 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:TIMI PHOENIX - FOCUS AFRICA.jpg

To Whom It May Concern, I hereby request for the undeletion of article drafted and submitted on my wikimedia reason include the fact that the content it true about the subject matter in person of "Timi Phoenix" with relevant reference stated and can be traced back that all content(images & audio) are mine without infringing into any persons right. I will request that the content be considered for publication after necessary investigation is carried out to satisfy the terms and conditions of Wikimedia.org. yours faithfully --Timi phoenix (talk) 21:32, 25 April 2016 (UTC) Timi Phoenix 4/25/2016

Out of scope. The article mentioned is en:Draft:Timi Phoenix Thuresson (talk) 22:16, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done Per Thuresson, COM:SCOPE. Riley Huntley (talk) 04:08, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

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

The following files:

Was tagged for deletion by FastliyClone, and then, deleted by Fastily (the same person!) without a valid rationale.

And the following files:

Has been part of this DR, but deleted by EugeneZelenko regardless that and without providing a valid reason (copyvio).

Since the Coca-Cola logo is already in the PD, please restore the files according to the previous concensus about the Coca-Cola logo and packaging, if apply. --Amitie 10g (talk) 01:41, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

 Support first three, but note that process-wise it appears fine: Fastily converted speedies to DRs, and then over a week later closed those DRs.  Oppose second two, as the focus is on modern advertising elements rather than the logo, as is alluded to by the perfectly valid reason. Storkk (talk) 09:58, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 Comment In last two files label is much more complex then plain text. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:19, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Since I can't see the files, I can't determine if actually are fine or not. As the reason for deletion of the two last files seems not be clear for me (and considering that was part of a previous DR), I included here. But, as you mentioned, keep these files deleted. --Amitie 10g (talk) 14:39, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
The reasoning provided in the deletion log was "Derivative of non-free content: Commercial packaging". Storkk (talk) 09:42, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: Undeleted the first three since they are below TOO and/or PD-old. The last two are not okay so those should stay deleted. --Natuur12 (talk) 09:04, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

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

Restoring two images nominated for deletion by 117.240.209.48

I am requesting to restore the two images above, because Green Giant and P199 didn't asked the nominator to confirm their identity through OTRS. The anonymous user that nominated these two images uses the IP 117.240.209.48, which is a proxy server located in Pokhara, Nepal. But the Republic Day Event 2013 image was taken in Pune, which is far from Nepal. This never has been looked nor considered at all. They even nominated a file which was taken in Namaste, New Delhi, which is of course, far from Nepal. It was deleted on Flickr, but that is not the reason to delete it on Commons too. For a more detailed explanation, see https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Odder&curid=45769812&diff=194429435&oldid=193383560. Thanks, ★ Poké95 04:25, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Oppose - The IP 117.240.209.48 is actually an Indian IP registered to the Indian public sector BSNL operator and is a range used throughout India for mobile telecom edits, see.
- "Namaste" is the traditional Indian greeting by joining 2 palms together vertically, and is not a place in New Delhi.
- How did you (actually/indirectly WMF globally banned user "Scott") conclude the India Against Corruption group are behind these deletion requests ?
-In the case of the 2nd. image the uploader admitted the photographer's error (probably also the reason why it was also deleted on Flickr by the photographer).
- FYI, I had already reported the very same Wikipedia Sucks Wordpress blog to WMF so that a formal DMCA complaint can be filed to Wordpress take down the site for copy violations and libels. Unfitlouie (talk) 07:49, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
@Unfitlouie: But why http://whatismyipaddress.com/ip/117.240.209.48 says it is a proxy server located in Pokhara, Nepal? In my opinion, I would trust the results of whatismyipaddress.com, because they can detect proxy servers, unlike whois.domaintools.com. There is even reports against that IP. ★ Poké95 09:32, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Pokéfan95 I don't think UnfitLouoie is saying that they don't trust whatismyipaddress.com but that the IP is owned by an Indian telecomms provider registered in New Delhi. In this increasingly globalized era, it is not surprising that a server might be located in another country. The fact that there are complaints against an IP is not unusual; in fact I'd be surprised if there wasn't some complaint about bad behaviour against most IP's. My account used to have an IP-exemption on English Wikipedia because some of the IP addresses that my ISP provided were also used for vandalism by persons unknown and I was caught in a range-block. Look at this in a wider context than just Commons - in roughly the same time-frame the same IP made 11 edits on wikis other than Commons. Should we assume that those edits were made by the same person? Alternatively, we can assume that it could have been several different people. Green Giant (talk) 10:45, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Pokéfan95 The whatismyipaddress.com website itself admits their possibly 50% error rate in geo-location. The authentic ICANN information I linked shows that this IP is actually used for mobile telecom subscribers of BSNL (India's 3rd largest mobile telephone operator) exclusively within India. The term "proxy server" is not the same as "open proxy". Most such mobile telco IPs are default configured as proxy servers because they are used under "roaming" or clients set up mobile hotspots from their handsets. I checked, this IP is on India's National Internet Backbone (or NIB) server is exclusively within India and not allocated for Nepal. Seeing the wide date separation and other edits to WMF sites from this IP, I agree with previous commenter that it is not possible to assume that same person made both deletion requests, or they are necessarily connected. Unfitlouie (talk) 03:28, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Comment I have undeleted the Oberoi photo and re-opened the DR because I made the mistake of not asking the IP to go through OTRS. Although Scott makes an assumption in his comment on Odder's talk page, I closed the DR on the basis that the photo was no longer in Flickr and the uploader agreed with deletion. I did have a look through the Flickr user photostream to see if it existed under another name. Indeed there other photos apparently taken in a hotel, but not the one in question. So I assumed that it is quite possible that the photographer has removed the photo in response to a request from the person in the photo, unlike Scott's example of people removing photos from Flickr because they don't want them there anymore. I do find Scott's argument about the parent and child possibility a little odd - "How likely is it, that a 20-something hotel employee in New Delhi has a child at a Wikipedia event in Pune (around 1,500km from New Delhi), and that photos of both of them somehow appear on Commons by different photographers and at different dates?" Given that we know next-to-nothing about the hotel employee, it is a lot of assumptions being made about her. News flash: women can have children at almost any age after they hit puberty. The Oberoi photo was taken in March 2009 and the Pune photo in January 2013, so what is so shocking about the possibility that a "20-something woman" has a kid who is still a kid four years after the first photo. Another news flash: quite a lot of Indians (and I daresay other nationalities) migrate huge distances to work whilst leaving their families in their home town - it has been going on for decades. Hundreds of thousands of Indians work abroad e.g. in the Gulf countries. So, yes it is quite possible that she might work 1,500 km away from her family. Finally, just as Scott has been able to edit by going through a server in Japan (despite him normally living in Australia), I don't find it odd that an IP in Nepal was used twice in a month by someone in India (which is next door to Nepal). Trolling by external websites aside, I don't think it is implausible that a "20-something woman", photographed in 2009, in New Delhi, has a child in an event in Pune, four years and 1,500 km later. To be fair, we don't know that one of the kids in Pune necessarily is the child of the woman in Delhi. Too many variables and too many assumptions being made. Green Giant (talk) 08:54, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: Bad faith nomination by Indian Against Corruption sock. --Natuur12 (talk) 09:51, 29 April 2016 (UTC)


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

Mærsk Mc-Kinney Møller docked on the Aarhus harbour (2013).jpg

Hi,

I am the owner of this picture, and I was taken personally by me in the Aarhus Harbour. I took several pictures and with photoshop I made the panoramic. I don't understand why this picture was removed and I would like request to undelete this contribution.

I can prove that this picture is mine because, I am using it in my personal blog (www.livespanske.com) from long time and also because I have HD resolution version of the picture.

--Juanparati (talk) 16:18, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

@Juanparati: We would love to restore your photograph! Please confirm the license by following the instructions on COM:OTRS. This is necessary because we have to be sure you are actually the photographer. (We'd also love to have the full resolution version, if you are willing, once you have confirmed the license via COM:OTRS). Thank you! Storkk (talk) 16:34, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Note that's not strictly normally necessary when the original site is licensed cc-by-sa-3.0, but the fact that your username here is so different from http://www.livespanske.com/autor/ may cause confusion. Storkk (talk) 16:36, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Storkk, I don't understand. The deleting Admin cited it as a copyvio, but the source page is CC-BY-SA. I think we can restore it simply by changing the Source to http://www.livespanske.com/ and the Author to Juan Manuel Lago D. I don't see a need for OTRS. Any of us could upload it from the source page.  Support .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:56, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 Support Yeah, I don't see too any need for OTRS. It is already cited on the website that it is licensed as CC-BY-SA-3.0. --★ Poké95 00:21, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: You are all correct. I have restored it and marked it as license reviewed. Apologies for the confusion. @Juanparati: We'd still love to have the large version, if you're willing to share it!. --Storkk (talk) 09:35, 29 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Bacarra_Official_Seal.jpg

how to change to free license — Preceding unsigned comment added by Admin119 (talk • contribs)

I think you're referring to this not deleted file File:Bacarra Official Seal.png. However, that file will be deleted soon. ★ Poké95 09:18, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done The file in the header doesn't exist, while the PNG file is not deleted. ★ Poké95 09:18, 29 April 2016 (UTC) (non-admin close)

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

File:Prince Beatrice with Dave Clark.jpg

File:Prince Beatrice with Dave Clark.jpg [sic] was deleted today because the person who uploaded it on FlickR changed the license. At the time the file was uploaded on the Commons, it was marked as cc-by-2.0, which was confirmed by the FlickreviewR bot. It was claimed here that the bot was mistaken because the link pointed to the lightbox, but that is obviously nonsense. Four other files from the same photographer and same photostream, all uploaded by me at the same time as File:Prince Beatrice with Dave Clark.jpg, were confirmed as free without any supposed lightbox issues. Those four files are

Evidently, the photographer changed the license of all five photographs (and the rest of the stream) after I uploaded them here. I have gone through my uploads and found more cases of photographers changing licenses of images whose orignal copyright status has already been confirmed by either the bot or human reviewers. For example, File:Vincent and Josephine.jpg, now marked as non-free on Flickr, was confirmed to be free when uploaded to the Commons by the administrator Natuur12. The author of that photograph also uploaded File:Crown Prince Frederik running.jpg to FlickR under a suitable license, which was confirmed by a bot, but then changed it later. File:Birgitte, Duchess of Gloucester.jpg, confirmed as free when uploaded to the Commons by Leoboudv, has also seen a license change.

If that warrants deletion of these files, what is the point of reviewing their copyright status once they are moved from FlickR to the Commons? I have extensively searched FlickR for free images and videos using its copyrght status filters, uploading over a 100 images and videos, with subjects ranging from lampreys to athletes. If the decision of the author to change the license on a whim years after uploading the file is all it takes for my effort to be nullified, why bother? Surtsicna (talk) 20:33, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I'm in favour of undeleting the image if this deletion request is resumed. Thuresson (talk) 03:44, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

: Oppose This is a hard one. On the one hand, the reason we do Flickreview is to deal with exactly this sort of problem and therefore, as Surtsicna asks, why bother if we aren't going to stand by the review? On the other hand, the point of the review is to have the ability to go into court and testify that an independent review absolutely without question established that the license was CC-BY on the date of the review. As I understand it, because Surtsicna did not correctly cite the source, we cannot do that with this image. So, while I think that the circumstances are probably as Surtsicna describes them, they are not beyond our standard of proof of "significant doubt". Therefore, COM:PRP required deletion. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:40, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

So, including "/lightbox" in the source link was an incorrect way to cite the source? Why is that not mentioned here or here? And should all my FlickR uploads with "/lightbox" in the link be reassessed now (before the FlickR uploader changes the license)? There appear to be three: File:Julia Grace Wales in 1916.jpg, File:Julia Grace Wales upon graduation.jpg and File:Gimnazija Mostar.jpg. Surtsicna (talk) 11:21, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

 Comment

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jenniferboyer/6093844178/lightbox/, but the Flickrreview was done at
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jenniferboyer/6093844178/, so it's OK (and has the same license now).
  • File:Julia Grace Wales in 1916.jpg is troublesome. It was taken in Madison, Wisconsin, USA, by the Delonge Studio, so the short Canadian term cannot apply. She had achieved considerable stature by the time this was taken, so I'm prepared to assume that the image was published before 1923, but I respect the opinion that it may have simply sat in a family album until recently, in which case its copyright would not expire for many years from now. I see no basis on which the Flickr uploader can have any copyright -- in order for that to be accurate, Biblio would have to have gotten a license from Delonge and that's unlikely. The Delonge Studio operated until 1987.

Having discovered that the Flikrreview was done correctly on the one image, I checked the subject image, and it, too, was reviewed at

http://flickr.com/photos/59130848@N05/9117055030 rather than at the cited source:
http://flickr.com/photos/59130848@N05/9117055030/lightbox/

so there is no problem and I  Support restoration.

I have changed the tags on the Julia Wales images in accordance with my comments above.

Ellin and User:LavaBaron, who commented at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Prince Beatrice with Dave Clark.jpg may wish to comment here. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:11, 28 April 2016 (UTC) .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:11, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

I have no problem if this image is UNDEL and restored per the above discussion; with the request that an explanation be put on the image talk page. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:24, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done: Undeleted this file and it's derivative. --Natuur12 (talk) 15:01, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Dawn of the Dorks Poster.jpg

Permisson confirmed by Eric Esser (the director and copyright holder of the film and this poster) via Ticket#2016042910006402. --Amitie 10g (talk) 18:48, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Metodi Shatorov.jpg

Hello! Under the actual Bulgarian Law on the copyright and related rights this photo, I have made several years ago in Pazardzik, Bulgaria, is not a copyright violation. Article 24, paragraph 1, item 5, from the above mentioned law reads as follows: Without the consent of the copyright holder and without payment of remuneration is permitted the use of works constantly exposed on streets, squares and other public places (with exclusion of mechanical contact copying) as well their transmission by wireless means or transmission by cable or other technical ways, if this is done with informative or other non-commercial purposes. I am a lowyer, however I didn't understand why it was deleted. This case is a nonsense. Regards! Jingiby (talk) 07:11, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 Oppose The file was deleted because it can only be used for non-commercial purposes. Commons:Licensing says that files should be free for any purpose, including commercial and derivative works. And don't ask why commercial use should be included, because it is part of Wikimedia Commons' mission. And being a lawyer doesn't exempt copyright violations to be deleted. Most of the unpaid volunteers here (including license reviewers) are not lawyers. Thanks, ★ Poké95 08:42, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
@Jingiby: Please see COM:Licensing/Justifications for an explanation of why we only accept content that allows commercial derivative works. Storkk (talk) 11:31, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as above. --Yann (talk) 08:58, 30 April 2016 (UTC)


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

Restauración de imagen retrato del escritor Carlos Liscano File:Liscano nov 2011.JPG

Se trata de una foto de mi archivo, de uso público (libre) por cuanto fue tomada en la Biblioteca Nacional en tanto Liscano era Director General de dicha institución en 2011. En Uruguay tenemos ley de acceso a la información pública. Quien suscribe es asistente personal y abogada de Carlos Liscano y él está perfectamente al tanto de que estoy trabajando en la actualización de la información relativa a su vida y su obra y de que incluí en esta información la foto subida en su página, por lo cual solicito se reponga tal publicación. Atentamente,

Dra Mónica Cardoso usuario Mónica Nero

Unsigned edit by User:Mónica Nero

Photo by Nancy Urrutia, published here. Urrutia is apparently a professional photographer. Thuresson (talk) 22:26, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as above. --Yann (talk) 08:56, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Main Jeeliya.ogg Undeletion request

hey there, I am Imran Butt and this song is the property of mine. I am the vocalist of this song and I have all the rights to edit and upload it on any website. Please tell me the procedure of which I can prove that this song is my property. Looking forward for your positive feedback.

You must have permission from the copyright owner/s to distribute and license music and lyrics. Please see COM:OTRS for more information. Thuresson (talk) 22:32, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as above. --Yann (talk) 08:56, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Berneen.jpg

Hello,

I'm editing an article for this artist Berneen who is a friend of mine and I got this picture directly from her (Berneen.jpg). But it was deleted for possible copywright violation, which isn't true because she herself send this picture to be on wikipedia. Please let me know what are the opportunities to prove that we use this file legaly? Maybe I should mark a different tag (which one?)? Here is her instagram, where the picture has already been publicised: https://www.instagram.com/berneencereska/

Thank you in advance for help.

--Donatabuivyde (talk) 07:11, 26 April 2016 (UTC) 2016 04 26

Donata

@Donatabuivyde: Hello, for a file to remain on Wikimedia Commons, it has to be free for any purpose (including commercial and derivative works). Please ask the copyright holder (Berneen) to send an email to the OTRS. By sending an email to the OTRS, Berneen agrees to release their work under a free license (example, CC-BY-SA-4.0) irrevocably. Thanks, ★ Poké95 07:46, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
@Donatabuivyde: The copyright holder is not ususally the subject of the photo. This appears to be a studio portrait, and the copyright will almost certainly be held by the photographer, who should confirm the free license by following the instructions on COM:OTRS. If Berneen emails us herself, she will need to explain how she came to hold the copyright. Storkk (talk) 09:08, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Why did you claim to be the copyright owner if you in fact are not? Thuresson (talk) 17:20, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as above. --Yann (talk) 08:56, 30 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:HologramCC1234RED.jpg

1. It does not violate copyright(s) 2. It has free license of and fair use 3. It is not self-promotion or vandalism 4. It is educationally useful 5. It has no naming issue 6. It is in good quality ShanksofWessex (talk) 15:53, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose Previously published in 2014 [5] and here. Thuresson (talk) 16:54, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as above. --Yann (talk) 08:56, 30 April 2016 (UTC)


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

File:Game logo kripts.png

I have a personnal confirmation for using of this file from the author, moreover, I've posted a link in the references for the official site of the game, where you can find this file and other files in free access. So, why it was deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bartiksl (talk • contribs) 15:51, 28 April 2016‎ (UTC)

 Oppose The web site http://www.playnebula.com/ which you called out as the file's source in your file description has an explicit copyright notice. We cannot keep the image on Commons without a free license from the copyright owner via OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:35, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done: as above. --Yann (talk) 08:54, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

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

File:Omine-Jissei-shisa.jpg

I accidentally deleted my only copy of this file and would like it back.

Regarding permission, I will schedule a call (or video call) with the artist and his wife who will together grant permission for its use. I will need a Japanese speaker from the Wikipedia organization to communicate with them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cwh2010 (talk • contribs) 03:44, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

@Cwh2010: Please don't schedule a call, since the way we work with our permission archival system is much more amenable to text emails. By far the best way forward would be to point the sculptor to Commons:OTRS/ja, which contains the required permission email in Japanese, and also contains instructions in Japanese. Please have them put "[Ticket#2012102210012109]" in the subject line if possible, and they should reference "File:Omine-Jissei-shisa.jpg" in the email. I understand it might be impossible to communicate with them effectively if you have lost your copy of the photo, so I'd be prepared to send you a low-resolution copy of it that should be sufficient to identify the sculptures in question. Please let me know if you want me to do this. If you are still using the same email address, I will just reply to the ticket, if not please use the "Email this user" function. I don't speak Japanese, so if/when the ticket comes through, I hope whym, who tried to help last time, would be willing to lend a hand again. Storkk (talk) 09:34, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Not done, instructions have been given. Thuresson (talk) 10:45, 30 April 2016 (UTC)


This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

File:Every_next_day_poster.jpg

Permission in OTRS ticket:2016030910023978. --Rrburke (talk) 10:13, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

No deleted file with this name. Thuresson (talk) 22:12, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
@Thuresson: It is an error with the header. I fixed it. ★ Poké95 07:15, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
@Pokéfan95: . please add OTRS ticket to image description page. Thuresson (talk) 10:54, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/Archive/2016-04&oldid=203531085"