Commons:Undeletion requests

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

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

Other languages:

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

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

Commons deletion (policy)
v • d • e

Finding out why a file was deleted

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

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

Appealing a deletion

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

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

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

Temporary undeletion

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

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

To assist discussion

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

To allow transfer of fair use content to another project

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

Projects that accept fair use

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

Adding a request

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

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

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

Archives

Closed undeletion debates are archived daily.

Current requests

File:Peace and Friendship stadium 2014.JPG

Per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Peace and Friendship Stadium; this had valid fair uses on various Wikipedia pages (as the depiction of an object which was directly discussed in the relevant articles); and the closer of that discussion did not react to my request to spare this bureaucracy, so there you have it. This should be restored and moved to relevant Wiki as appropriate; I assume that one can trace back from which pages on other encyclopedias than the English one this was removed (where it also was likely fair use), likely via the edits of the Commons bot. RandomCanadian (talk) 04:04, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose @RandomCanadian: Commons does not accept Fair Use, see COM:L. Ankry (talk) 07:31, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ankry: This is not a request to undelete this for use on Commons. This is a request to restore it in a temporary fashion so it can be moved to Wikipedia where fair use is accepted. RandomCanadian (talk) 11:46, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Symbol support vote.svg Support temporary undeletion. But @RandomCanadian: , enwiki no longer applies fair use for images of unfree buildings from no FOP countries. Enwiki applies U.S. freedom of panorama for such buildings, thus w:Template:FoP-USonly. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:53, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Restored temporarily -- please advise when this has been moved. Please do not close this UnDR without deleting the file. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:59, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see there are other Wikis where this image is also used. I've restored a copy on english WP under a slightly different title ("File:Peace and Friendship stadium 02 03 2014.JPG"). Noting the others for the record in case the other wikis also want to use it:
Extended content

Usage on az.wikipedia.org

Usage on kk.wikipedia.org

Usage on mni.wikipedia.org

Usage on ro.wikipedia.org

Usage on sr.wikipedia.org

Usage on tr.wikipedia.org

Usage on uk.wikipedia.org

RandomCanadian (talk) 23:59, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Additional note: mind doing the same treatment for File:Faliro_Sport_Pavillion.jpg and File:OAKA_Olympic_Velodrome.jpg (found via the history of w:Venues of the 2004 Summer Olympics)? Same considerations apply. RandomCanadian (talk) 00:19, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@RandomCanadian: ensure that all of them must be used. The fact that enwiki has accepted original-resolution images of unfree international buildings from no-FOP countries does not mean enwiki is an indefinite host for all images of unfree buildings, as it is not a media repository. Thus there are only four Burj Khalifa images there and a single image of Burj Al Arab. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:54, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JWilz12345: These all seem to be related to buildings and venues from the 2004 Olympics ([1] shows the Faliro pavillion being removed from multiple pages, including the page about the venue itself; [2] idem for the velodrome). RandomCanadian (talk) 02:35, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@RandomCanadian: in such case, then I Symbol support vote.svg Support undeletions of the two other files. Be sure to tag them with en:Template:FoP-USonly once they are transferred at enwiki. German Wikipedia also does seem to allow unfree buildings of no-FOP countries, but I cannot remember what is their relevant tag of it. Unsure about other Wikipedias though. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:30, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blacked-out images

Per input by Kai Burghardt at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Blacked out versions of images relying on FoP in France. No copyright concerns on blacked-out versions of images. To quote their input: To qualify as a derivative work, you need to create a work. A solid black shape is not a work. There is hardly any creative/artistic process involved in creating that. Even if you claim it was a work, to be derived there still must be recognizable features, discernible clues of the original work present. Without any copyrightable traces of the source work, no violation..

In terms of scope, as these come from no-FOP countries, these are excellent illustrations on one of the effects of having no FOP in a country: censorship just to respect artists' / architects' copyrights.

From the Philippines

I excluded those whose mother files are suspected copyvios, and those whose buildings are from pre-1972 era. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.)

From UAE
From Luxembourg

_ JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:22, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Plenty of photos to illustrate this subject at Category:Blacked out versions of images relying on FoP. There is no real reason to add another 10 photos, 100 photos or 10 million photos of a black cube. Thuresson (talk) 08:38, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Thuresson: but there is nothing specific to the Philippines. All come from other countries. We need demonstrations about the disadvantage of having no FOP in our country. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:40, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This seems reasonable. But I do not think all 13 are needed for them. Do you intend to use all of them? Ankry (talk) 14:15, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ankry: yep. Off-wiki on social media (of course, complying with attribution conditions). I support not restoring the UAE and Luxembourg ones. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:45, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Plus I may use several of the Philippine-related images on Tagalog Wikipedia to illustrate the lack of freedom of panorama. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:47, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JWilz12345: Please add File:Hand of epigyny 2 Blacked Out.jpg to undeletion request. Ox1997cow (talk) 15:51, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JWilz12345: And when files are undeleted, will you add the category of countries without freedom of panorama to User:JWilz12345/FoP? Ox1997cow (talk) 15:53, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ox1997cow: my userspace subpage is intended to illustrate those from countries with FOP, excluding those without FOP. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:46, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JWilz12345: I am not convinced that you need the whole bunch for social media for educational purposes. Ankry (talk) 18:07, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ankry: yet there is no such image specific to the Philippines. All of the existing ones are of other countries. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 18:13, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JWilz12345: Yep. And I would support 2-3, but not 14. For educational purpose this should be enough. Not supporting more per COM:NOTHOST. Ankry (talk) 18:19, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ankry: I chose five six instead:

_ JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:49, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

While I disagree with Jim's doubts concerning scope, I think that his doubts concerning silhouette copyright need to be considered. So I leave the decision here to another admin. Or, maybe, you wish to upload images not showing sculpture shapes so exactly? Ankry (talk) 05:51, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from thinking these are out of scope, I Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose restoration on copyright grounds. In of the cases above that I examined, the silhouette of the work is distinctive and almost certainly infringes on the creator's copyright. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:18, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jameslwoodward: but users who commented at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Blacked out versions of images relying on FoP in France think of otherwise (@Ralf Roletschek, Kai Burghardt, and Romaine: ). No distinctive features like style of windows, sculptural details, and façade details seen. Blacked-out representations of copyrighted works from no-FOP countries are also extensively used on comparison graphs like File:Tallest towers in the world.svg (containing Iran's Millad Tower) and File:Tallest Buildings in the World 2020.png (containing Burj Khalifa and Saudi Arabia's Abraj al-Bait Building), including Ox1997cow's derivatives File:Tallest towers in the world whether or not FoP.svg and File:Tallest Buildings in the World 2020 whether or not FoP.png. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:14, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JWilz12345: Why not mention Lotte World Tower? Obviously, I marked that Lotte World Tower does not have freedom of panorama. (because there is no freedom of panorama in South Korea.) Ox1997cow (talk) 16:52, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Dino Galvani1.jpg

The deletion argument was that while the PD magazine did not attribute a photographer for the uploaded image, the uploader should have done research outside of the magazine to find a primary source that names the photographer. We don't require that, however in some jurisdictions if an anonymous photographer is later revealed through research, the PD status can be clawed back., and we will honor that. See an example of the magazine here. --RAN (talk) 22:19, 22 December 2021 (UTC) The following images were deleted based on the same rationale, that a named photographer may exist somewhere outside of our PD magazine, and we can't host until that information is discovered and we wait till 70 years after their death: Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with "Film Star Who's Who "[reply]

Also

  • File:Marguerite Churchill.jpg, it isn't clear if this image came from the PD Film Star Who's Who, but the rational is the same, I want to see what magazine it is sourced to. --RAN (talk) 22:50, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The magazine was published in the UK sometime in the 1930s, so UK law applies. The chart at File:UK non-Crown copyright flowchart.pdf helps with this. These are photographs taken and published before June 1, 1957. Therefore copyright expired 70 years after publication, sometime in the 2000s. That's past the URAA date, so they are still under US copyright.

The file description for File:Marguerite Churchill.jpg gives

"Source = Image from Film Star Who's Who on the screen 1938. UK magazine."

which means that the same reasoning applies.     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:42, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Undelete in 2034 unless an earlier than 1938 publication is found. Ankry (talk) 21:33, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:DANA-WEB-IMAGES.png

File is from https://sa.alp.org.au/election-campaign/. The site is licensed as CC4.0 at https://sa.alp.org.au/contact-us/ for the convenience of Wikipedia editors like me to be able to illustrate articles where no other free alternative exists. The pictures are not great, but they are a start. Alex Sims (talk) 23:25, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PS. This is part of a larger deletion of files from the same site at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_DavidGriffiths94
Eventually I'ld like to fill out all the SA politician pages. This at least fills a gap for ALP current politicians. Alex Sims (talk) 23:29, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well it is unclear to me what the information Note: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. applies to: web design only? everything in this site? Who should be attributed? Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral. Ankry (talk) 11:32, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose While I think that the statement on the cited page probably intends to freely license everything, I doubt very much that the party actually has the right to do so. The images all look like professional portraits. Professional portrait photographers rarely allow their subject to freely license their work. I think this needs to be settled for all the images on the page by a query from VRT to the webmaster. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:14, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Superresolution Microscopy.svg

Hello, the original upload contained copyrighted material. The last version would be fine to restore because it is far away form the original file. Could you please do so? Biggerj1 (talk) 09:18, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I have temporarily restored it for discussion. I think the new version no longer contains any copyrightable aspects of the original, and derives merely from the information of the original (like a Wikipedia article paraphrasing a copyrighted news article). -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 15:50, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I have no problem on copyright grounds, but I don't think the image properly shows the technique. The whole point is that the items being imaged don't move between steps yet here we see a square grid in the center on the left and in the center a random pattern with only five items from the grid in the same place as on the left. Also, the size of the donut in the middle does not match the red itemss -- all those in the white area should be red since they have not been switched off by the orange beam.

Since this was not the reason for the deletion of the file, this probably should be closed as Done and a DR opened. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:04, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Biggerj1: Can you redo your version with an evenly spaced square grid? That part is obviously not copyrightable and there is no problem with keeping it from the original as long as you change the colors, design, etc. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:15, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mrmw: created the svgs :) as far as I understand the principle you could easily remove the grid completely and replace it by some transparent circles which represent the switching on and off areas. Then the image is even further away from the original :) Biggerj1 (talk) 08:37, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As I understand it, the circles or dots in all three places should be the same pattern. Presumably that should be random, not a grid. The image on the right should have all the circles that were inside the donut in the middle colored as those are the items that were not turned off by the donut shaped beam. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:30, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File: Jack Ninte 2021.jpg

This picture is free and no copyright claim on it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Recprod (talk • contribs)

  1. As copyright is established by operation of law and not by anybody's claim, how did you find this image not copyrighted?
  2. If the image is not copyrighted, why did you find yourself authorised to grant a license on it and to require any reuser to attribute you as its author?
Ankry (talk) 11:04, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Image appears at https://genius.com/artists/Jack-ninte with '© 2021 Genius Media Group Inc." Cannot be restored here without a free license from the actual photographer via VRT. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:27, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Yar_Mohammad_Khan.jpg

This is the picture of Yar Mohammad Khan, who was elected MLA on a United Front coalition ticket in 1954. Yar Mohammad Khan is also my Grand Father. I declare this picture is free and no copyright claim on it. https://historica.fandom.com/wiki/Yar_Mohammad_Khan --Rambunctious.man (talk) 09:46, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rambunctious.man: Image copyright status is independent on copyright claim, and we cannot host Fair Use images (we need evidence of PD status or a free license). As the image is not deleted, you can still start a DR discussion about its copyright status, where you can explain where did Mohammad Tawhid grant the declared license. Ankry (talk) 11:13, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ankry: This Mohammad Tawhid caused me too much trouble. If you check this link: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/783204191417045508/ you will find that Trouble Maker Mohammad Tawhid uploaded a wrong picture of my grand father. In fact the picture he uploaded is a closed friend of Yar Mohammad Khan. Please check the one comment on Mohammad Tawhid's link. 10 weeks ago I knocked him for his phone number or email address but he didn't respond me yet. Dear Ankry Brother, If you can assist me by providing his Cell No/Email then I will act ASAP.

--Rambunctious.man (talk) 21:06, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done procedural close: image not deleted. Ankry (talk) 11:13, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Yar Mohammad Khan.jpg .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:22, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Anu (Anurag) Gupta.jpg

Please undelete this file in order to generate a URL within Wikimedia Commons so the copyright holder can share an email to get this photo reinstated with the article. Skycross December 24 2021 -- Skycross2021 (talk) 22:35, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Skycross2021: Just give the file name in the permission. Then the file will be undeleted when the permission is validated. Regards, Yann (talk) 22:37, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Example.jpg

Please Undeletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imjaikijaiswal (talk • contribs) 08:53, 25 December 2021 (UTC) (UTC)[reply]

@Imjaikijaiswal: Hi,
Please sign with ~~~~.
You have no deleted files on Commons. What do you want undeleted, and why? Thanks, Yann (talk) 08:53, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests&oldid=575313972"