Commons:Undeletion requests

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

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.

Please read the instructions below, before requesting undeletion.

Enter a descriptive heading and press the button:

This is a dashboard widget.

Commons deletion (policy)

• Regular deletion (candidates)

(Missing: 0 timestamps • 0 reasons • 2 subpages) • 0 malformed

• Speedy deletion (candidates)

16 copyvios • 46 duplicates • 8 others

---

• Media without a license
• Media without a source
• Media missing permission
• Orphaned talk pages

---

• Deletion log
• Undeletion requests

---

Finding out why a file was deleted

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

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

Appealing a deletion

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

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

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

Temporary undeletion

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

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

To assist discussion

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

To allow transfer of fair use content to another project

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

Projects that accept fair use

* Wikipedia: als | ar | bar | bn | be | be-tarask | ca | el | en | et | eo | fa | fi | fr | frr | he | hr | hy | id | is | it | ja | lb | lt | lv | mk | ms | pt | ro | ru | sl | sr | th | tr | tt | uk | vi | zh | +/− Wikinews: en | no | pl | +/− Wikibooks: en | it | +/− Wikisource: fa | fr | +/− Wikiversity: en | +/− Wikivoyage: en | fa | fr | ru | zh | +/− Wikiquote (regarding images): he | +/− Note: This list might be outdated. For a more complete list, see meta:Non-free content (this page was last updated: March 2014.) Note also: Multiple projects (such as the ml, sa, and si Wikipedias) are listed there as "yes" without policy links.

Adding a request

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

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

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

Closing discussions

In general, discussions should be closed only by administrators.

Instructions for administrators

Use common sense. If, for example, a file was deleted for missing a source, and the requesting user is the photographer, the file can be undeleted without further discussion. If the user wishes to tag a file with a certain license, you can do that for them if you want to, or leave it to them to do it. However, it is important that you remove any speedy deletion templates from the file. In general, try to comply with the requests of well-intending users. Files can, for example, be undeleted for the requesting user to look at without the request itself having to be closed. The deleting administrator may undelete the file if compelled by the arguments or information provided. The deleting administrator may also participate in the discussion. The deleting administrator should, however, not close contentious requests as "Not done." When a debate is settled, close it with a remark such as "Not done" or "Undeleted" and add the template {{Udelh}} above the header and the template {{Udelf}} below your own comment. (The templates are short for "undelete header" and "footer.") Closed requests are automatically archived. When undeleting a file, reference the discussion (for example "Per https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests&oldid=nnnnnnnn#Heading"). Files temporarily undeleted for transfer purposes should be tagged with {{Temporarily undeleted|transfer=yes}}. This places them into Temporarily undeleted files, a subcategory of Candidates for deletion, and automatically nominates them for speedy deletion after two days. Files temporarily undeleted to assist discussion should be tagged with {{Temporarily undeleted}}. These are automatically nominated for speedy deletion after thirty days.

Archives

Closed undeletion debates are archived daily.

Current requests

File:Historische PLESSEN-Dokumente Rittergut Dolgen ausgefertigte Heimatverzichtserklärungen zu Dolgen im Entwurf, die abgelehnt wurden.pdf

Guten Abend, es handelt sich bei dem gelöschten File um ein familiengeschichtlich relevantes Dokument der Plessen-Familie. Das Dokument ist bzgl. des abgewickelten Rittergutes Dolgen von zentraler Relevanz und erklärt historische Fakten nach der Wiedervereinigung Deutschlands. Das Rittergut Dolgen ist insgesamt von enzyklopädischer Relevanz. MfG --Gordito1869 (talk) 19:21, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

All of the people mentioned are identified by their real names by the Chairman of the Plessen-Family and I therefore see no violations of personal rights through the historical family document. - My mother Rosemarie Pfeiffer (geb. von Plessen) is dead. This is a historical- and one of the last documents of the Dolgener-Plessen-Family and it was the last with of my dead mother to complete the family documents, regarding "Rittergut Dolgen" of her suicided father Leopold Freiherr von Plessen, in an encyclopedic format for all Plessen-members and Wiki-readers. I think the chairman of the Plessen family - User:Christian von Plessen - also agrees, since he has publicly named everyone's real names. " Best regards --Gordito1869 (talk) 07:48, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

@Raymond du hast offenbar eine Oversight Anfrage zu dieser Datei bekommen und diese durchgeführt. Abgesehen davon waren die Angaben zu Autor und Urheberrecht falsche, es müsste auch geklärt werden, woher das Dokument stammt. GPSLeo (talk) 08:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Das historische Familiendokument der Plessen stammt - völlig klar erkennbar von User:Christian von Plessen - dem Vorsitzenden des Familienverbandes der Plessen. Ich denke, Herr Rechtsanwalt Dr. jur. Christian von Plessen zu Damshagen & Schönfeld wird mit der Veröffentlichung des historischen Dokuments bzgl. des Rittergutes Dolgen sehr einverstanden sein, da er selber alle Klarnamen öffentlich publiziert hat und immer an einer wahrheitsgemäßen enzyklopädischen Außerdarstellung der Familie von Plessen sehr interessiert ist, so denke ich. Als Rechtsanwalt und Volljurist hat er die Publizierung der Klarnamen hinsichtlich des Datenschutzes ganz sicherlich geprüft, so denke ich. MfG --Gordito1869 (talk) 10:03, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

@GPSLeo Das ist richtig. Der Benutzer mag sich gerne für eine Überprüfung wieder an die Oversighter, aber logischerweise nicht an mich, wenden. Raymond (talk) 10:04, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

@(Christian von Plessen möge sich zur mögl. Freischaltung äußern) - Das historische Familiendokument der Plessen stammt - völlig klar erkennbar von User:Christian von Plessen - dem Vorsitzenden des Familienverbandes der Plessen. Ich denke, Herr Rechtsanwalt Dr. jur. Christian von Plessen zu Damshagen & Schönfeld wird mit der Veröffentlichung des historischen Dokuments bzgl. des Rittergutes Dolgen sehr einverstanden sein, da er selber alle Klarnamen öffentlich publiziert hat und immer an einer wahrheitsgemäßen enzyklopädischen Außerdarstellung der Familie von Plessen sehr interessiert ist, so denke ich. Als Rechtsanwalt und Volljurist hat er die Publizierung der Klarnamen hinsichtlich des Datenschutzes ganz sicherlich geprüft, so denke ich. Ich bitte hiermit um Freischaltung des Dokuments, da es im Interesse einer enzyklopädisch korrekten Außendarstellung der Ur-Adelsfamilie derer von Plessen liegt. MfG --Gordito1869 (talk) 10:08, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

 Support My vote, the reasons have been explained. Best regards --Gordito1869 (talk) 12:37, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

@Gordito1869: you cannot vote on your own undeletion request. Günther Frager (talk) 12:45, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

I only wanted to express my argument visually. Best regards --Gordito1869 (talk) 13:23, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

The activation of this historical document +++ https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:R%C3%BCckabwicklung_des_Plessengutes_Dolgen_am_See.pdf&action=edit&redlink=1 +++ would be even more important, as it clearly documents the final and historical demise of the Dolgen manor. All people were publicly expelled from Commons by the chairman of the Plessen-family association +++ here +++. I therefore do not recognize any data protection violations. I would very politely ask you to also unlock this encyclopedic and contemporary historical document. Best regards --Gordito1869 (talk) 07:49, 29 January 2024 (UTC) - PS : "...das Verständnis familiärer und historischer Zusammenhänge" ist das enzyklopädische Ziel; deshalb ist die Freischaltung i.S. des Vorsitzenden des Familienverbandes der Plessen enzyklopädisch dringend geboten & absolut erwünscht, so denke ich. ... vgl. auch +++ hier +++; die neuesten Forschungsstände zum abgewickelten Rittergut Dolgen wurden leider bisher noch nicht enzyklopädisch erfasst resp. dokumentiert. MfG --Gordito1869 (talk) 09:03, 29 January 2024 (UTC)-

@(Christian von Plessen have now been repeatedly asked publicly to support the activation by publicly agreeing; since it is a verified user Template:User account verified I suggest that the support team made a corresponding request to the verified User / Benutzer Christian von Plessen via e-mail. The matter is very important for all Plessen and CvP will certainly agree, I think. Best regards --Gordito1869 (talk) 08:37, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

...zur vollständigen familiengeschichtlichen-, historischen- und auch enzyklopädischen Dokumentation der Abwicklung des historischen Rittergutes Dolgen wäre sicherlich insgesamt die Freischaltung folgender - gelöschter - Files wünschenswert und im enzyklopädischen Interesse der Familie von Plessen :

• File:Rückabwicklung des Plessengutes Dolgen am See.pdf
• File:Historische PLESSEN-Dokumente Rittergut Dolgen Einlassungen eines unberechtigten Dritten Vorsitzender des Familienverbandes der Plessen.pdf
• File:Historische PLESSEN-Dokumente Rittergut Dolgen gemeinschaftlicher EALG-Antrag an LARoV Hartwig von Plessen, Rosemarie Pfeiffer, 10-1994.pdf
• File:Historische PLESSEN-Dokumente Rittergut Dolgen ausgefertigte Heimatverzichtserklärungen zu Dolgen im Entwurf, die abgelehnt wurden.pdf
• File:Historische PLESSEN-Dokumente Rittergut Dolgen Notarvertrag zum Erbe des Rittergutsbesitzers zu Dolgen Leopold Freiherr von Plessen.pdf
• File:Historische PLESSEN-Dokumente Rittergut Dolgen LARV Schwerin Entscheidung nach AusglLG.pdf
• File:Historische PLESSEN-Dokumente Rittergut Dolgen Flächenerwerbsabsicht auf dem vormaligen Rittergut Dolgen nach ALG.pdf
• File:Historische PLESSEN-Dokumente Rittergut Dolgen Beschluss Deutscher Bundestag zu vollmachtloser BVVG-Vetternwirtschaft zu Damshagen, mit Auswirkung auf Dolgen.pdf
• File:Historische PLESSEN-Dokumente - Rittergut Dolgen - BVVG Landerwerbszusage nach ALG bzgl Dolgen.pdf
• File:Historische PLESSEN-Dokumente - Widerruf der BVVG bzgl einer zuvor bereits mehrfach durch LARoV und BVVG schriftlich erteilten ALG-Landerwerbszusage auf dem Rittergut Dolgen am See.pdf
• File:Historische PLESSEN-Dokumente - Aufkauf der (E)ALG-Rechtsansprüche an Plessengütern in der vormaligen SBZ.pdf
• File:Historische PLESSEN-Dokumente - Rittergut Dolgen - EGMR-Beschwerde 2005-1.pdf
• File:Historische PLESSEN-Dokumente - Rittergut Dolgen - EGMR-Beschwerde 2005-2.pdf

Die Freischaltung der vorstehenden Files würde die komplette jüngere Vergangenheit der sog. "Nach-Wende-Zeit" vollständig visuell ab dieser Zeit abbilden; genau das liegt exakt im erklärten wissenschaftlichen Forschungs-Interesse des Vorsitzenden des Familienverbandes der Plessen @(Christian von Plessen, so denke ich. Beste Grüße --Gordito1869 (talk) 14:47, 30 January 2024 (UTC)--Gordito1869 (talk) 14:47, 30 January 2024 (UTC) --- ps : es liegt leider die absolute Vermutung nahe, wir könnten es hier mit einem Hochstapler der PLESSEN zu tun haben, der sich als vorgeblicher Rechtsanwalt in eigener Sache mutmaßlich widerrechtlich ausgegeben haben könnte, so denke ich (nach meiner sehr validen Kenntnis familiärer Zusammenhänge ist CvP kein (!) Rechtsanwalt ... und auch niemals Rechtsanwalt gewesen, so denke ich. - MfG --Gordito1869 (talk) 19:00, 30 January 2024 (UTC) ... ps II. - ich denke, die aktive Untätigkeit des Vorsitzenden der Plessen - @(Christian von Plessen - resp. Rechtsanwalt (?) Dr. jur. Christian von Plessen - könnte als passive Zustimmung zur Freischaltung der historischen- & familiengeschichtlich besonders wertvollen Dokumente ausgelegt werden. Vielleicht kann mit der Freischaltung des ersten Dokuments begonnen werden, das den Vorsitzenden des Familienverbandes der Plessen sehr persönlich angeht ? - MfG --Gordito1869 (talk) 09:19, 31 January 2024 (UTC) ... ich denke, CvP liest - wie eigentlich immer - vollständig hier mit; wenn nunmehr auch noch eine e-mail Anfrage des support teams an @(Christian von Plessen ohne Reaktion verläuft, sollte m.E. freigeschaltet werden. Die unvollständige & absolut beschönigende resp. wahrheitswidrige Plessen-Saga des Edelherren Christian von Plessen muss unverzüglich geschichtsfest fortgeschrieben werden, so denke ich. - Ich habe ein aller-letztes Mal persönlich versucht, mit familiären & sehr persönlichen Worten, diesen offenbar völlig "abgetauchten" User "aus der Reserve" zu locken. - Alle entscheidenden familiären Zusammenhänge waren dem Vorsitzenden der Plessen bekanntlich leider bisher nicht bekannt, das sollte sich durch Freischaltung der hist. und enzyklopädisch wertvollen Familiendokumente aller Plessen sicherlich ändern können, so denke ich. --- Wie vermutlich einige (deutschsprachige) User bereits festgestellt haben werden, haben wir es mit dem widerwärtigsten und ehrlosesten VERRAT in der 1000-jährigen Geschichte der Plessen zu tun; Wiki-Commons ist m.E. der würdigste Ort, Geschichte enzyklopädisch und familienhistorisch korrekt zu schreiben resp. zu dokumentieren. - Wikipedia und Wiki-Commons sind "Orte", die sich der Wahrheit verschrieben haben und deren User/Benutzer nicht käuflich sind (ich selbst war und bin als Mensch und Bundebeamter niemals im Leben käuflich) : nur deshalb war ich lange Jahre Wikipedia Autor (158-Artikel & Listen) ... und bin seit ewigen Zeiten Wiki-Commons-User. Geschichte muss immer & überall auf UNSERER Welt auf nackter & ungeschönter Wahrheit beruhen, so denke ich ! - MfG Michael Pfeiffer alias --Gordito1869 (talk) 19:35, 31 January 2024 (UTC)--Gordito1869 (talk) 19:35, 31 January 2024 (UTC) ... ich denke, wenn @(Christian von Plessen keinerlei "Lebenszeichen" mehr seit nunmehr 3-Jahren - als vormals sehr aktiver Commons-User & hochtalentierter Wikipedia-Schriftsteller - von sich gibt, ist das sicherlich kein gutes Zeichen. (Bei Wikipedia gibt es für diesen Fall eigens die "Liste der vermissten Wikipedianer". Eine Anfrage unter dessen hinterlegter e-mail Adresse wäre vor Aufnahme in die Vermisstenliste - rein aus Fürsorgegründen - dringend geboten, so denke ich. Auch die durch Herrn Rechtsanwalt Dr. jur. Christian von PLESSEN vor 3-Jahren bereits angekündigte enzyklopädische Fortschreibung der "Plessen-Sage" darf m.E. nicht auf unbestimmte Zeit ausgesetzt werden, so denke ich. --Gordito1869 (talk) 13:05, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Guten Abend + kurz nachgefragt : Spricht etwas dagegen, die enyklopädisch- und insbes. familiengeschichtlich- resp. historisch relevanten Dokumente in anonymisierter Form (wie z.B. hier : geschwärzt) ggf. neu hochzuladen ? - H.E. steht nicht mehr zu erwarten, dass der mannigfach "angepingte" User einer Publizierung zustimmen wird; ich denke, die Gründe dafür sollten hinlänglich bekannt sein. Das Anonymisieren von Akten ist allgemein üblich - ohne die zu dokumentierenden Fakten auszublenden. MfG --Gordito1869 (talk) 20:52, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Guten Morgen, gibt es administrativ irgend eine Vorstellung, wie meine "undeletion requests" zum Abschluss gebracht werden könn(t)en ? - Ich möchte nochmals höflich darauf hinweisen, dass die familiengeschichtlichen Dokumente der "Plessen-Family" zum Verständnis der komplexen historischen Situation nach 1990 (Wiedervereinigung) von zentraler Bedeutung sind und - auch enzyklopädisch relevante - Zusammenhänge wahrheitsgemäß geschichtsfest dokumentieren (...ggf. mögen einzelne Namen und Adressen - aus Datenschutzgründen - geschwärzt werden; das ist/wäre ein absolut übliches Verfahren). - Herr (Rechtsanwalt (?)) Dr. jur. @(Christian von Plessen wird sich aus nachvollziehbaren Gründen sicherlich nicht mehr zum endgültig abgewickelten Rittergut Dolgen einlassen, so denke ich. - Die historischen Dokumente gehören allesamt +++ hier hin +++. --- MfG Michael Pfeiffer alias --Gordito1869 (talk) 07:43, 12 February 2024 (UTC)--Gordito1869 (talk) 07:43, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

@Minorax: , @Odder: , @Rama: We need an oversighter here, and Raymond was already involved and says others should take it on. Any other admins won't be able to do anything here. --Rosenzweig τ 09:54, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Just to confirm that it is agreed that the privacy concern with regards to the files has been addressed and this is a successful undeletion request? --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 10:04, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

I can't even see the files, nor do I have access to oversighter communication channels, so I cannot confirm anything. Presumably the privacy concern has not been addressed, but that's what an oversighter would need to look into and possibly tell the uploader which parts of the documents would need to be covered/blocked/removed for a re-upload which was already suggested by the uploader (and then probably close this undeletion request as unsuccessful). Any other admins won't be able to move this forward. --Rosenzweig τ 10:40, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

@Raymond: Mind commenting on this? Google translate doesn't seem to be helping me to understand the situation. --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 02:54, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

They are documents of Plessen-family history and historical value. Professor Ernst Münch (University of Rostock)-, the renowned writer Elisabeth Plessen and other experts were involved in the important Plessen documents and the matter at all; activation is also expected for scientific reasons. If there are data protection concerns, certain information may need to be blacked out, which is common practice. - If it causes "a headache", please at least unblock this one document regarding Dolgen-Manor : https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:R%C3%BCckabwicklung_des_Plessengutes_Dolgen_am_See.pdf&action=edit&redlink=1 --- All people involved were named personally by @Dr. jur. Christian von Plessen, the chairman of the Plessen-Family himself; Data protection violations are therefore not apparent. - Best regards : --Gordito1869 (talk) 10:21, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

@Minorax Email sent. Raymond (talk) 11:08, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

@Dr. jur. Christian von Plessen wird sich - mehr als offensichtlich & aus allseits bekannten Gründen - nicht zu den historisch & familiengeschichtlich (enzyklopädisch) wertvollen (hier leider gelöschten) Familiendokumenten bzgl. Rittergut Dolgen einlassen, so denke ich. - PS : Bei Ratten im Langzeitversuch verursachte GVO in der Nahrungskette diverse Krebserkrankungen; ich hoffe dringend, meinem "lieben" Verwandten a.d.H. 19205 Schönfeld blieb- resp. bleibt das Schicksal der armen & kranken Genraps-Ratten erspart ... und der Edelherr äußert sich nun ggf. aus gesundheitlichen Gründen nicht mehr, obwohl er seine "Plessen-Saga" noch allumfassend & in seinem Sinne fortschreiben & bebildern wollte (?) - MfG --Gordito1869 (talk) 09:00, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

@Rosenzweig: Please check through. Thanks. --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 12:03, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

You are a true man of honor and hero of our democracy : Thank you on behalf of my dead Plessen mother and my dead grandfather Leopold from the Dolgen Manor house !!! - Best regards, Michael J. Pfeiffer alias --Gordito1869 (talk) 20:47, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

@Minorax: I've looked at some, but will need a bit more time to read them all and form an opinion about their copyright status, if they're in scope, and about possible privacy concerns. --Rosenzweig τ 08:37, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

(Please don't forget : all real names were published by the @Dr. jur. Christian von Plessen (@Christian von Plessen: ) personally. The documents regarding Dolgen manor are of central importance for a truthful continuation of the encyclopedic and family history-relevant "Plessen saga". - Best regards, Michael Pfeiffer alias --Gordito1869 (talk) 10:32, 1 March 2024 (UTC) )

Chilean TOO files

Hello there. I want to ask for the undeletion of some images from Chile that have been deleted as a result of the misleading effect a now-removed phrase included on the COM:TOO Chile had. Per my reasoning at Commons:Deletion requests/File:AbcdinLogo.svg, these files are not copyrighted in Chile as they are way too simple, and the former claim that the "Estamos bien los 33" was copyrighted was not correct, there was a "presumed copyright" which has since been disputed in court.

Some of the files include:

• File:Primera dama logo.png
• File:MegaDementeLogo.jpg
• File:Estación Vivaceta.png
• File:Mega.png
• File:Logotipo de Teletrece (1994-1995).png
• File:Logotipo de Teletrece (1970-1972).png

--Bedivere (talk) 19:59, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Was your statement in that DR a ruling by the court, or just an argument by one of the parties? Not sure we can take an argument by one party in a court case as evidence that they will win on that argument. That all said, if the authority that registered the phrase earlier did not have any obligation to determine if it was above the threshold of originality in the first place, then not sure the registration can be taken as evidence for their being a copyright (unlike the U.S., where a copyright registration comes with that determination, so if published as a registered work there, it's likely above the threshold). Carl Lindberg (talk) 21:53, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

That's correct. The registration authority just complies with registration requests without actually pronunciating or determining the registered work is or not copyrightable, that's what I've called presumed copyright. The court case is still ongoing (has been for several years for causes unrelated to the actual Leitmotiv). Sernageomin's position (to my knowledge of Chilean law, and as a graduate) is entirely correct, but it just helps (within the DR comment) to illustrate why giving the "Estamos bien..." registration as the cause for deletion of files such as those I've mentioned is not prudential, as the registration does not imply a copyright was actually generated, and including it in the TOO Chile page was not helping. You've understood the whole point though Carl. Just a close look at the pertinent law clears up the whole picture Bedivere (talk) 07:11, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

• I have restored Primera dama, MegaDemente and Mega as they seem to me, very clearly, too simple to be copyrighted in Chile, which was the reason to delete them originally. I'm unsure for the others, they are not trivial. Simpler versions of the Teletrece logos could be uploaded by leaving just the letters. I withdraw the request to undelete Estación Vivaceta as it is not too simple (as I thought it was when nominating). --Bedivere (talk) 02:45, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

File:Семејство во носии од с. Рудари, Долна Преспа.png

I'd like to have this brought back, as it is dated to 1928/1929 in the original facebook post, and the current process for uploading says that something is in the public domain in the us if it was published before 1929 – Big ooga booga mf (talk) 13:06, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Is it a Facebook user in the photo? Who is the man in the back? Thuresson (talk) 15:10, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

I do not know, I have never noticed him thus far . . . Big ooga booga mf (talk) 15:54, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

@Big ooga booga mf: Where exactly was it published before 1929? Definitely not on Facebook. Being made before 1929 is not enough for PD status. Ankry (talk) 00:01, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

"Фотографија од @Valja Trajkovska / Photograph from (repeat)"

the uploader was provided the photo by the woman mentioned above Big ooga booga mf (talk) 11:30, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

This is not about publication. I suspect that this is a private photo, unpublished before Facebook publication. Unless we know who the photographer is, it would be copyrighted 70 years since the FB post. At least in Russia. In US it may become PD 120 years afret creation, in 2050 (1929+120+1). Ankry (talk) 13:28, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

it seems to me as well that it might be a private photo, as a specific photographer is never mentioned anywhere, just a list of the family members & who "donated" the photo to the uploader Big ooga booga mf (talk) 13:36, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

 Support {{PD-Russia-1996}} should be OK with this one. Yann (talk) 12:23, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

ok with russian copyright? Big ooga booga mf (talk) 12:42, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

as in, specifically russian copyright Big ooga booga mf (talk) 12:56, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

 Oppose This was posted at a Macedonian Facebook page so Russian copyright law is probably not relevant. More importantly though, it looks like a Facebook user photoshopped himself into the photo (backrow), hence out of scope. Thuresson (talk) 04:18, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

perhaps, as it is strange that the left shoulder is missing on the background man, yet I've never seen the actual face of the guy behind the page "Егејскиот дел на Македонија". who knows who it could be Big ooga booga mf (talk) 09:16, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

It is also probably in the public domain in Macedonia ({{PD-North Macedonia}}), but I can't support a photoshopped image. Yann (talk) 09:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

i've contacted the original guy who uploaded it, he said he uploaded the image as it was given to him, so it being photoshopped is ruled out

now i've texted the woman who lent the photo to the guy behind "Егејскиот дел на Македонија", am just waiting on her response (which could be hours later, idk when she'll respond)

regardless, the guy who uploaded it on the aegean facebook page says the image in untouched Big ooga booga mf (talk) 10:44, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

i've had enough of waiting, i just asked his permission, he granted it (given that the original lady hasn't responded in 4 hours at least, nor has she gone online at all) Big ooga booga mf (talk) 15:12, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

i have been granted permission, what will happen to this file? or is it still being deliberated over? wherever y'all do that Big ooga booga mf (talk) 17:18, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

I see nothing about unpublished works in {{PD-North Macedonia}}. @Yann: Why do you think that it is PD there? Ankry (talk) 00:56, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

We usually assume that old documents were published at the time of creation. At that time, a picture leaving the photographer's custody constituted publication. Yann (talk) 10:04, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

it's been over a week and i have the required permission from the uploader.

do i have to prove this? and if so, how?

.

can we just get this over with?? Big ooga booga mf (talk) 21:15, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

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

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Kevlo92400

These items were deleted "per nomination" and the nomination was that the uploader listed themselves as the creator: "very unlikely to be own work". The attribution was fixed prior to deletion, yet they were deleted. Another voter wrote delete because of "self-promotion" but loading images from a family archive of watchmakers is not self promotion. Providing images of one's ancestors is not self promotion, adding your own image would be self promotion, and even then, we are allowed to add a self image for our user pages. There were no images at all of the uploader. --RAN (talk) 18:10, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

 Comment I agree with you on scope, but some of these appear to be 1920s or 1930s photographs and File:Portrait de Théophile Joseph Lognoné (1869-1920).jpg could have been 1910 rather than 1900 as the receding hairline points more to 40 than 30. Did the uploader state that their ancestors were the photographers or merely that they were in a family archive? We'd need to have correct information on the copyright status and not assumptions that make it more convenient to keep the photos. Abzeronow (talk) 18:37, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

 Support for the following images. Yann (talk) 18:42, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Please, let me know when they will be restored ? CC BY-SA 4.0 Deed - Source : http://lognone.blogspot.fr (my family archives) Kevlo007007 (talk) 23:28, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

• File:Mariage de Marguerite Chanvril et Théophile Lognoné le 19 avril 1922 à l’Eglise Toussaints de Rennes.png
• File:Médaille du docteur Victor Even, vétérinaire à Santa Catalina (Argentine).jpg
• File:Portrait de Théophile Joseph Lognoné (1869-1920).jpg
• File:Statue de Chateaubriand à Dol-de-Bretagne.jpg
• File:Entrée de la bijouterie-horlogerie de Théophile Lognoné, au n°8 de la Grande Rue des Stuarts.jpg

@Kevlo007007: since they have asked to restored a few of these files in duplicate requests below. Abzeronow (talk) 23:18, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Can you please restore them ? CC BY-SA 4.0 Deed - Source : http://lognone.blogspot.fr (my family archives) Kevlo007007 (talk) 23:26, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

•  Comment I closed the DR as a deletion because I considered they were all derivative with no sufficient indication on source, not because they were self promotion. In particular, Chateaubriand's bust was erected in 1998 and this artwork is not PD (BTW files in Category:Buste de Chateaubriand (Dol-de-Bretagne) are problematic). I would have appreciated to be contacted first or at least notified of this request. — Racconish ^💬 11:16, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

• OK, I cancelled the support for the statue. Yann (talk) 12:10, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

•  Comment Victor Even's medal is lifted from Ebay [1] and the uploader is obviously neither the engraver nor the seller. — Racconish ^💬 13:27, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

• OK, I also cancelled that support. I thought that the issue was the copyright of the medal, which seems old enough. Yann (talk) 13:34, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

•  Comment File:Mariage de Marguerite Chanvril et Théophile Lognoné le 19 avril 1922 à l’Eglise Toussaints de Rennes.png is signed by a professional photographer and cannot be deemed to have "no author disclosure". — Racconish ^💬 13:55, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
  • I agree here.  Oppose restoration until at least 2043 unless we can find the death date for the signed photographer. Abzeronow (talk) 17:29, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
• What is the name of the photographer, I have access to the French death index. --RAN (talk) 18:01, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
  • It is difficult to tell at the low resolution used since it's cursive. Might be better if the uploader gave us a higher res scan of just the signature. Abzeronow (talk) 19:24, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
• @Kevlo007007: You claimed at one point that you are the heir to the Théophile Lognoné archive and the copyrights, you need to indicate which images were taken by Théophile Lognoné (1869-1920) or Théophile Julien Lognoné (1895-1974) and switch those to {{Cc-by-sa-4.0-heirs}} from their current CC license, and you need to file a VRT form. There are photos of his family taken in their home, so he owned a camera and was an amateur photographer. Images taken by third party photographers, the copyright belongs to them until they expire. Also write the family biographies at Familypedia (Fandom) first and work out the references there, that way if they get deleted at Wikipedia they will still exist at Familypedia. I started an entry there and left the link on your talk page. Wikidata links to Familypedia. Familypedia is part of Fandom and is the for-profit version of Wikipedia, started by the same guy. I know English is not your first language, but people are giving you good advice, but you do not always follow it. --RAN (talk) 18:11, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

  Good. I will follow it Kevlo007007 (talk) 22:52, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

You can start by rescanning File:Mariage de Marguerite Chanvril et Théophile Lognoné le 19 avril 1922 à l’Eglise Toussaints de Rennes.png You should scan all images at 600 dpi, you can always make smaller but can't add resolution. Store as a png file instead of a jpg, so they do net get overly compressed. --RAN (talk) 23:35, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

• You also need to file a COM:VRT and list what images were created by Théophile Lognoné (1869-1920) and Théophile Julien Lognoné (1895-1974). Those would be the images that you inherited the copyright to. I had asked you to do this over a month ago. List the correct person as the author= instead of adding your name. You are the uploader, not the creator. You are welcome to load the images to Familypedia, but there you also have properly list the correct author. Familypedia accepts fair use imagery for ones that you are not the copyright holder. If one of your articles get accepted at Wikipedia you can add in fair use images there too. --RAN (talk) 23:56, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Done: 3 files undeleted. --Yann (talk) 09:56, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Première usine des industries Probiomer.jpg

Can you please restore File:Première usine des industries Probiomer.jpg ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevlo007007 (talk • contribs) 23:06, 2 March 2024‎ (UTC)

@Kevlo007007: when was this photograph taken and who is the photographer? Abzeronow (talk) 23:09, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

1920. CC BY-SA 4.0 Deed - Source : http://lognone.blogspot.fr (my family archives) Kevlo007007 (talk) 23:16, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Same reference for the other requests. Kevlo007007 (talk) 23:19, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for answering one question. OK, do you know who took the photograph? Merely possessing photographs isn't enough to prove a copyright, we need to know if an ancestor took the photographs or if they were taken by someone else. Any information you provide about the physical photographs would be helpful. Abzeronow (talk) 23:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Sure, it belongs to my ancestor : https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q124083997 Kevlo007007 (talk) 23:23, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

(google translate) Théophile était-il le photographe ? Posséder une photographie ne signifie pas que vous détenez les droits d'auteur. Abzeronow (talk) 23:26, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

•  Comment The photograph was likely taken by Créations artistiques Heurtier [2]. — Racconish ^💬 14:17, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
  • I also believe 1960s is more likely than 1920s here for this aerial photograph. Abzeronow (talk) 17:27, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Not done: 1960s picture, not PD yet. --Yann (talk) 18:07, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Horlogerie bijouterie de la Grande rue des Stuarts.jpg

Can you please restore it : File:Horlogerie bijouterie de la Grande rue des Stuarts.jpg ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevlo007007 (talk • contribs) 23:09, 2 March 2024‎ (UTC)

• Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.

 Comment Black and white photograph. @Kevlo007007: Who is the photographer and when was this photograph taken? Abzeronow (talk) 23:13, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

1900. CC BY-SA 4.0 Deed - Source : http://lognone.blogspot.fr (my family archives)

 Support as PD-old-assumed-expired. Clothing, facial hair and the style of the store are suggestive of 1900 or thereabouts. Abzeronow (talk) 23:24, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Kevlo007007 (talk) 10:26, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Done: See above. --Yann (talk) 18:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

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

The Dover Boys files

A few years ago some files from the film "The Dover Boys" were deleted, as per this deletion request, with the reasoning that the film is still copyrighted. The proof given was a document mentioning the film. However, lots of documents are filed later in regards to films, and just because it's mentioned that doesn't mean it's still copyrighted. What counts more in this case with a film from 1942 is if the film's copyright was renewed. A glance through the copyright catalogs for 1969-1971 returns no renewals. That would mean the film is in public domain, as it says in the article "List of animated films in the public domain in the United States" on Wikipedia, which has credible sources. The document in the deletion request contains quite a few films besides "The Dover Boys" which didn't have their copyrights renewed. I want the files to be restored and put in Category:The Dover Boys at Pimento University since I see no reason the files should be deleted. Grey ghost (talk) 21:20, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

It is true that the deletion reason was a citation to a "Recorded Document", which is just a statement filed with the Copyright Office on copyright transfers, terminations, and some other housekeeping stuff related to copyright. They are not themselves a registration or renewal, and can include works never registered or works that have expired. It is simply a statement made for the public record, and making things easier to research and trace. It is not an indication that the copyright still existed -- you would need to find an explicit renewal record for that. I did a quick search and could not find one, though I wouldn't put much stock in that. However, it sounds like more careful searches have been done, and the deletion reason was definitely wrong, so  Support. Carl Lindberg (talk) 22:45, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Done: as per Carl L. above. --Yann (talk) 13:22, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Mittra - Desce no time.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

• File:Mittra.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
• File:Mittra - Desce no time.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Reason: permission received at ticket:2024021210011489 ━ Albertoleoncio Who, me? 22:40, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Done: @Albertoleoncio: FYI. --Yann (talk) 22:45, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Clara Soares comédienne.jpg

This is MY picture ! I made it ! So it's ok !! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josclyde (talk • contribs) 11:39, 4 March 2024‎ (UTC)

 Support HR picture with EXIF data, while the FB copy is much smaller. Yann (talk) 13:55, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Done: Per request. --Bedivere (talk) 02:47, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Rizespor-baskani-ibrahim-turgut-vesikalik.jpg

picture

i want to add photo of çaykur rizespor football clubs president

--Caykurrizespor1 (talk) 17:40, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

 Oppose Then you need to make the photo yourself, using your own camera. Not grab it from Internet and claim false authorship. Ankry (talk) 00:33, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Not done: as per Ankry. --Yann (talk) 09:54, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

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

Files deleted by Holly Cheng

Please restore the following pages:

• File:Salò o le 120 giornate di Sodoma 1.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
• File:Aldo Valletti - Salo (cropped).jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
• File:Bonacelli-Salò.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
• File:Salo2.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
• File:Salo3.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
• File:Salo4.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
• File:Salo5.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
• File:Salo6.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Reason: These files have been deleted in accordance with the discussion Commons:Deletion requests/Screenshots from Salo (film). The nominator noted that this Italian film was released in 1975 with a US copyright notice. But this is a mistake. The file the nominator linked to (it:File:Salò o le 120 giornate di Sodoma 001.jpg) is not the original screenshot from the 1975 film, but a screenshot from a later DVD release (no one was releasing a DVD in 1975). There is no reason to believe that the copyright was registered not only in Italy but also in the USA at the time of the film's release. Filming places was be Bologna, Castelfranco Emilia and Mantua. According to the legislation of Italy, where this film was shot, frames of the film are protected by copyright for 20 years (Art. 92 of Law for the Protection of Copyright and Neighboring Rights n.633). Since the film was first screened on 22.11.1975 at the Paris Film Festival (filmed between 03.03.1975-09.05.1975), it was in the public domain as of the Copyright Restoration Date (URAA) of 01.01.1996 (22.11.1975 + 20 years = 22.11.1995).

I see no reason to believe that screenshots from a DVD release or a Blu-ray release are sufficient grounds for removing a files. In addition, judging by the resolution of the files, they are not from this DVD.

You can read more about the PD-Italy consensus at the Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PD-Italy. Seva Seva (talk) 19:59, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

 Oppose the film is still under copyright in the United States. The stills may be free in Italy, but they are under copyright under U.S. law. Abzeronow (talk) 20:21, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Not done: Not PD in the US yet. --Bedivere (talk) 14:49, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

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

Four files of exhibition Antike in Bayern

Please restore

• File:2024-01-27 Ausstellung Antike in Bayern 17.jpg
• File:2024-01-27 Ausstellung Antike in Bayern 15.jpg
• File:2024-01-27 Ausstellung Antike in Bayern 13.jpg
• File:2024-01-27 Ausstellung Antike in Bayern 11.jpg

We have permission per Ticket#2024030410006016.

Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 20:54, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Done: @Mussklprozz: , please update permission. --Abzeronow (talk) 21:04, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Luxair Hal Findel.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

• File:Luxair Hal Findel.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Reason: if the image shows the same hangar building as that of File:Boeing 737-5C9, Luxair AN0757085.jpg, then it is now OK for hosting on Commons as it is already in public domain. Built in 1952, and there is no known architect or designer. In PD in Luxembourg as an anonymous works (1952+70+1=January 1, 2023). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 22:56, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Done: See above. In addition, this is purely utilitarian. --Yann (talk) 09:43, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Phantix Games Mafia City.jpg

This was provided by the copywriter to post on the Company website. I work for this company and am working on added our game info to wikipedia. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oprime404 (talk • contribs) 13:22, 5 March 2024 (UTC) (UTC)

• Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.

 Oppose Please ask a legal representative from the company to send a permission via COM:VRT. Yann (talk) 13:21, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 09:56, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Vairankode Vela.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

• File:Vairankode Vela.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Reason: "Permissions" queue of OTRS, on Meta-Wiki Vairankodepooram20 (talk) 04:41, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

 Oppose Same photo as File:Vairankode vela photo.jpg. Thuresson (talk) 05:49, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Not done: as per Thuresson. --Yann (talk) 09:42, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Gajraj Bahadur Nagar (cropped).jpg

He i believe this image should not deleted because this image doesn't belong to anyone and its available in public domain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whois360 (talk • contribs) 12:50, 5 March 2024 (UTC) (UTC)

• Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.

 Oppose Copy from [3]. No permission. All documents on the Internet have a copyright by default, even if you don't know the owner. Yann (talk) 13:17, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Not done: per Yann. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 22:09, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

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

Γιώτης Φωτιάδης (Yiotis Fotiadis) deleted photos

Hello! I want to ask for the undeletion of some images of the singer "Γιώτης Φωτιάδης (Yiotis Fotiadis)". They were deleted for Copyright reasons. The source of the photos is the artist's official website. At the Gallery page there is a note that the photos can be used freely.

• File:Γιώτης Φωτιάδης (Yiotis Fotiadis).jpg
• File:Γιώτης Φωτιάδης (1).jpg
• File:Γιώτης Φωτιάδης (2).jpg
• File:Γιώτης Φωτιάδης (3).jpg
• File:Γιώτης Φωτιάδης (4).jpg
• File:Γιώτης Φωτιάδης (6).jpg
• File:Γιώτης Φωτιάδης (7).jpg
• File:Γιώτης Φωτιάδης (8).jpg
• File:Γιώτης Φωτιάδης (9).jpg

Digital Matters (talk) 09:19, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

 Oppose “Photos may be freely used for informational or promotional purposes” is not sufficient for Wikimedia Commons; per Commons:Licensing files must be free to be used by anyone, anytime, for any purpose. The files were deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Digital Matters. --Rosenzweig τ 09:34, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Not done: as per Rosenzweig. --Yann (talk) 09:42, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

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

嚴基俊綜藝出演列表

申請恢復頁面 嚴基俊綜藝出演列表 維基百科是以 百科 的性質讓人們閱讀,以讓閱讀者更了解該事物. 我是可人 (talk) 11:24, 5 March 2024 (UTC)我是可人

這裏不是中文維基百科。請見zh:Wikipedia:頁面存廢討論/記錄/2024/02/27#嚴基俊綜藝出演列表。請在那裏提出申請。--RZuo (talk) 11:42, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

@我是可人: 請在中文維基百科申請。--RZuo (talk) 11:43, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

File:Portrait Emmelmann.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

• File:Portrait Emmelmann.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Reason: Hello,

I am the autho of the article "Claus Emmelmann" and uploaded the file "Portrait Emmelmann.jpg". The copyright owner of this file (Claus Emmelmann) has send a mail to the following adress to state that I have the right to use his picture in this arcticle. permissions-commons@wikimedia.org

If this is not enough proof I have also added the original source below: https://www.hamburg-news.hamburg/innovation-wissenschaft/der-siegeszug-des-3d-drucks-das-sind-die-treiber-der-technologie

Please let me know what else I have to do so that the file gets undeleted and the article gets uploaded to the public Wikipedia.

Best regards, Jan Hue Jan Hue (talk) 12:49, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Hallo @Jan Hue, Du hast auf Deine Mail am 25. Januar auch eine Antwort bekommen, in der drin steht, was Du machen musst. Du hast dann nicht mehr reagiert. Kannst Du mit der Antwort etwas anfangen?

Kurz gesagt: Wir brauchen die Freigabe für die freie Lizenz direkt entweder vom Urheber oder vom Inhaber der Nutzungsrechte.

Du kannst den Text auch ausdrucken, unterschreiben lassen und dann digitalisiert als Antwort auf die Mail zurück senden - vielleicht ist das in diesem Fall der einfachste Weg.

Unter de:WP:Bildfreigabe findet Du den Text, der unterschrieben werden muss.

Viele Grüße, Emha (talk) 19:16, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Photo officielle de Jérémy Redler Maire du 16e arrondissement de Paris.jpg

Hello,

this photo is the official photo of the current mayor. It has been taken by a photographer who de facto give us is authorisation for using it. --Samuellambrozo120282 (talk) 14:30, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

@Samuellambrozo120282: Please ask the copyright owner to follow the instructions at Commons:VRT to verify the license. Thuresson (talk) 16:26, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Not done: as per Thuresson. --Yann (talk) 20:13, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

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

Files in Category:Cosplay of Mario (character)

• File:500px photo (66423961) (cropped).jpeg
• File:Mario (cropped).jpeg
• File:Mario cosplay.jpg

Per COM:COSTUME and Mike Godwin--Trade (talk) 12:19, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

 Oppose Copyrighted Mario mask. The clothing is fine, the mask is definitely infringing Nintendo's copyrights. Abzeronow (talk) 17:30, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Not done: as per Abzeronow. --Yann (talk) 17:56, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Henri Boisselier (1881-1959) portrait.jpg

• File:Henri Boisselier (1881-1959) portrait.jpg
• File:Jean Boisselier (1912-1996) portrait.jpg

Deleted for having the upload date as the creation date, date was corrected. --RAN (talk) 13:35, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

For the first one, we'd need to know more about the publication of the circa 1935 photograph. Could be public domain in France and the US. For the second,  Oppose as still under copyright in the US because of URAA restoration (circa 1945 photo). @Racconish: Abzeronow (talk) 17:34, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose both. The first one, derivated from File:Henri Boisselier.jpg, was likely published in print [4] at an unknown date. Per Commons:Anonymous works, merely ignoring when it was published and who the author was does not suffice to establish the author is anonymous. At best, according to article 113-10 of French copyright law, if there would be proof of a sufficiently diligent search (such as those indicated here which is not the case) the image should be considered as an orphan work, which authorizes certain types of uses but not a commercial one and is therefore incompatible with Commons requisites (per article 6 of EEC Directive 2012/28 on orphan works). — Racconish ^💬 21:23, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Not done: per Abzeronow and Racconish. --Rosenzweig τ 09:34, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

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

Crops of restored image remain deleted

• File:Théophile Julien Lognoné (1895-1974) in 1922.png
• File:Mariage de Marguerite Chanvril et Théophile Lognoné le 19 avril 1922 à l’Eglise Toussaints de Rennes (cropped).png

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk • contribs) 17:54, 6 March 2024 (UTC) (UTC)

---

 Done: Uncontrovertial. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 22:07, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Photos Nora Fatehi snapped on location of a shoot.jpg

Not a copyright volation as per Template:BollywoodHungama XxakixX (talk) 14:25, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Done: per request. --Bedivere (talk) 14:41, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Photos-Tara-Sutaria-snapped-at-Sukoon-by-Joshi-House-in-Bandra-3.jpg

Also applies to File:Photos-Tara-Sutaria-snapped-at-Sukoon-by-Joshi-House-in-Bandra-2.jpg and File:Photos-Tara-Sutaria-snapped-at-Sukoon-by-Joshi-House-in-Bandra~2.jpg Not a copyright volation as per Template:BollywoodHungama XxakixX (talk) 14:48, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Done: @XxakixX: Next time, please use {{Cc-by-3.0-BollywoodHungama}} for the license. --Yann (talk) 17:49, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Hogwarts Legacy.jpg

Die Datei wurde nach dieser LD Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hogwarts Legacy.jpg als COPYVIO gelöscht von user:The Squirrel Conspiracy auf Antrag von user:Wcam. Zwischenzeitlich gab es eine lange LD Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Hogwarts Legacy bei der es um Bilder ging, die nach den selben Kriterien COPYVIO sind oder nicht sind, da sie ebenso wie die gelöschte Datei derivative Werke eines Werks sind, das nach dieser LD unter einer freien Lizenz steht. Beantragt wurde die Löschung von User:Zaxxon0 mit behalten entschieden von User:Taivo. Partizipiert haben User:Yann,User:Omphalographer, User:Di (they-them), User:PantheraLeo1359531, User:Ixfd64, User:Pigsonthewing, User:Nosferattus, User:Trade, User:FunnyMath, User:Gestumblindi, User:Dhx1, User:Wcam, User:Clindberg, User:ElijahPepe, User:Dronebogus, User:萩原麻行, User:Gnom, m:User talk:Slaporte (WMF). Heute wurden der Kategorie weitere Video Captures von user:Prototyperspective hinzugefügt, die ebenfalls derivative Werke des Ursprungswerks darstellen.

Ich denke, es ist daher höchste Zeit die Löschentscheidung von File:Hogwarts Legacy.jpg zu revidieren und diese Datei wiederherzustellen. --C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm - p7.ee/p) (talk) 14:58, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

I'll wager most of these editors don't speak German Trade (talk) 15:00, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

It remains my opinion that all of these files should be deleted. We have no reason to believe that these files were deliberately published under a free license. Gnom (talk) 16:09, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

That is objectively false. The reason is that the video was uploaded with a CCBY license to Youtube. The video even still has this license. It is CCBY . Also C.Suthorn would you please stop writing German on talk pages? Prototyperspective (talk) 16:20, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

I beg to differ. What I am saying is that the video in question was almost certainly accidentally published with a CC-BY license – by someone who did not have the permission to do so. Gnom (talk) 17:03, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

No, it almost certainly was deliberately published this way. Moreover, if it would be different that would have been changed by now. Prototyperspective (talk) 17:12, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Why would they publish a promotional video under a CC-BY license? Why? Gnom (talk) 08:07, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Unzusammenhängend. Entferne diesen Schreibenden; Hogwarts Legacy.jpg ist ein Wandgemälde, nicht Creative-Commons-Video mit Urheberrecht. ElijahPepe (talk) 16:34, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

In fact, the topic is a bit beyond my horizon, but even if the video is CC-licensed, the trademark protection is still there. So there remains a certain restriction on use, so the company still has several rights on or behind this video --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 17:36, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

We don't care about the trademark. But as it was mentioned below, the poster copyright remains even if the video is under a free license. Yann (talk) 20:11, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

•  Oppose I don't see why the video being CC licensed has anything to do with freedom of panorama somehow not applying the mural. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 17:57, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
•  Oppose I agreed with the The Squirrel Conspiracy. The licensing of the video has nothing to do with the advertisement. The advertisement is copyrighted and freedom of panorama does not apply to it. As for all the other files in the category, they should also be deleted, as even if the video is properly freely licensed, it is full of separately copyrighted content. In fact probably every single thing in the video is separately copyrighted. So the only parts of the video that are actually free are the editing and arrangement of the video content. If we removed everything copyrighted from the video, there would be nothing left. Nosferattus (talk) 19:32, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

•  Oppose I don't speak German, but can use Google Translate. It appears the result of one DR (which was based on not qualifying for freedom of panorama) is being appealed on the basis of us keeping a licensed video from Flickr (and direct derivatives of just that video). I don't see how they are related. The video license only applies to the actual content in the video, nothing any wider, so while those files should be OK, there is no general license for anything related to the game or other materials. If the photo does not qualify for freedom of panorama on its own merits, then it should remain deleted. Carl Lindberg (talk) 21:17, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

•  Comment The main supporting argument for keeping File:Hogwarts Legacy – Official 4K Reveal Trailer.webm was that the publisher themselves released the video on YouTube under a Commons accepted license and it is therefore expected that this publisher has any necessary rights to subordinate copyrighted content (such as the audio accompanying the visuals). Most opposing arguments are second guessing whether the publisher intended to or were themselves permitted to use a Commons accepted license for subordinate works. I don't know any particulars of File:Hogwarts Legacy.jpg but I would assume that it wasn't published under a Commons accepted license by the game publisher, therefore the reason for deletion is different, just an ordinary freedom of panorama justification. --Dhx1 (talk) 00:10, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  • @Dhx1: The file in question was a three-story tall painting of the cover of the video game. It was in a designated advertising space (the contact info to rent that space was right below the image). So it's similar to a billboard; it's only up for the period of time that the purchaser rented that spot. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 03:10, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Not done: consensus is clear against restoring this file. --Bedivere (talk) 14:49, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Álbum EP de Devah.jpg

File:Álbum EP de Devah.jpg This album cover was edited by me. I agree to sharing my rights of this cover to add it to the Wikipedia Commons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Devah oficial (talk • contribs) 17:59, 6 March 2024 (UTC) (UTC)

 Oppose We need a confirmation of the license via COM:VRT. And this is probably out of scope, as es:Devah is nominated for deletion. Yann (talk) 17:59, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

 Oppose Even if VRT permission arrives, these images are probably out of COM:SCOPE. The article on this musicion has been nominated for speedy deletion on es.wiki for lack of notability. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 18:57, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Not done: Out of scope, non notable album. --Bedivere (talk) 14:48, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Das neue Abenteuer Titelbild 001.png

The number 1 of the magazine w:de:Das neue Abenteuer was published in 1952. The front page was deleted several years ago because of copyright violation. However, the copyrights have ended in 2022. I therefore ask undeletion. --Bernd Bergmann (talk) 21:51, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

 Oppose Two issues, 1.) URAA restored copyright so it's still in copyright in the U.S. 2.) Illustrator de:Heinz Rammelt died in 2004, so this can only be restored in 2075. Abzeronow (talk) 22:04, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Not done: per Abzeronow. I've added the file to Category:Undelete in 2075. --Rosenzweig τ 09:30, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Flag of Belarus (old and new).svg

There was very little discussion and no one was listening to my point of view. Besides, it already had an in-scope use somewhere before it was wrongfully deleted. TheKumquatGuy2662 (talk) 02:59, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

•  Oppose There is broad consensus that fantasy flags (e.g. flags made up by the uploader) are not in scope. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 03:06, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

  It may only seem to you like a fantasy flag because you are probably not used to seeing these types of files. I made this so it could have an in-scope usefulness here: User:Pyfisch/Hybrids TheKumquatGuy2662 (talk) 15:09, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

•  Oppose - per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of Belarus (old and new).svg; NOTHOST nonsense. Эlcobbola _talk 15:26, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Not done: NOTHOST. --Bedivere (talk) 16:00, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:CT LOGO.png

I create that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ununpentium115 (talk • contribs) 11:03, 7 March 2024 (UTC) (UTC)

• Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.

•  Oppose It appears on the website of Chulalongkorn University and the image contains the university's logo. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 11:06, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

•  Oppose This was a reupload by original uploader following a DR and UDR. No indication that anything has changed since previous discussions. If you are the owner of the copyright to the logo of Chulalongkorn University (which seems unlikely) you can provide evidence by contacting COM:VRT. For previous UDR see Commons:Undeletion_requests/Archive/2021-05#File:CT_LOGO.jpg. —RP88 (talk) 11:27, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Not done: See above. Reposting of invalid UDR. --Yann (talk) 12:14, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

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

Files uploaded by Afi.beto

Please restore the following pages:

• File:Alberto y Mario Kampmann en pase privado de prensa.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
• File:Alberto Kampmann y Ágata del Barco.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
• File:Alberto Kampmann.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
• File:Still El Testigo Santi Crespo.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
• File:El Testigo Javier Muga.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
• File:Cortometraje El Testigo.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
• File:Cartel El testigo.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
• File:Cartel NEPT.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
• File:Acting No es para tanto.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
• File:Rodaje de No es para tanto, de Alberto Kampmann.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
• File:Rodaje No es para tanto, de Alberto Kampmann.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
• File:Cartel Velo.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
• File:Santi Crespo.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Reason: This is my own work as i am Alberto Kampmann, creator or all those projects; Velo, No es para tanto and El testigo Afi.beto (talk) 11:12, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

 Oppose As explained in Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Afi.beto, please send a permission via COM:VRT, which should include a proof that you are the copyright owner of these pictures. Yann (talk) 11:15, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 09:21, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:PlantonZocaloAyotzinapa20240305 ohs02.jpg

Hi, this seems to be a case of a false positive deletion. As can be seen with the metadata of the user (who is also a frequent and experienced contributor), the photo was taken by him and the cited media used it without proper attribution. I request that it be restored, please, best regards, ProtoplasmaKid (talk) 17:20, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Is this really the same photo as published at suracapulo.mx? Ping @Yann: . Thuresson (talk) 19:45, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

The metadata can show that it is the same camera that I used for the deleted photo as for File:PlantonZocaloAyotzinapa20240305_ohs01.jpg or the one I uploaded a few moments ago File:Pre8M20240307 ohs13.jpg, so I request that it be restored because there is no plagiarism. Thank you. --petrohs (gracias) 05:30, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Done. @ProtoplasmaKid: . Thuresson (talk) 08:45, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Kid masturbating 18+.gif

I miss it so much — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a02:c7c:7d0a:8500:78:b47b:9f1d:4a96 (talk • contribs) 17:42, 7 March 2024‎ (UTC)

 Oppose per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Kid masturbating 18+.gif, title is also rather problematic, and your rationale is not a reason to undelete. Abzeronow (talk) 17:46, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Not done: per Abzeronow. ─ Aafī (talk) 18:25, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Araguarivolei.png

Estou criando uma página para o time do Araguari volei, este que disputa a Série A da Super Liga de Voleibol Masculino 2023/24.

•  Oppose Logo is copyrighted and is complex enough. --Bedivere (talk) 18:25, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Not done: Per Bedivere. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 04:15, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Abstract Wikipedia module titles and content analysis.pdf

This file was part of a Wikimedia Foundation intern project for Abstract Wikipedia, as documented on its page (at the time of the deletion, on meta). See also all the other parts of the project, like File:Module similarity analysis report.pdf, File:Similarity_analysis_and_clustering_of_modules.pdf, File:Clustering and tuning modules.pdf etc.. It'd be great if it could be undeleted. I'll make sure they're all tagged better so the scope is clearer. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 20:05, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

 Support Abzeronow (talk) 22:01, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Done: Uncontroversial. --Bedivere (talk) 22:26, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Files of Category:Het_licht_der_bergen

• File:Het_Licht_der_Bergen.jpg
• File:Het_Licht_der_Bergen_-_Toon_Storms.jpg
• File:Het_Licht_der_Bergen_-_Tirol.jpg
• File:Het_Licht_der_Bergen_-_Luc_Vermeiren.jpg
• File:Het_Licht_der_Bergen_-_Herman_Vermeiren.jpg

As I corrected after deletion request, all these files are published on https://abs.lias.be/query/detail.aspx?ID=911214 at the archival storage. Free use, no permission needed and public accessibility.I think no reason for deletion. Ouwejokke (talk) 22:54, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

@Ouwejokke: Current information about the image seems unclear to me: according to Wikidata the author died in 1941, but the work was created in 1955. Also, the permission (if indeed granted by the actual copyright holder - we may need to verify this) is not CC0 as declared. If this is a site-specific license, the appropriate template needs to be created and accepted by the community in COM:VPC discussion. Ankry (talk) 11:11, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

File:Vinod_Agarwal.jpg

The image in question has no copyright, yet it was deleted.

The image caption states, in Spanish:[5]

"La revista Estilo de Vida y Manuel Alexiades dedica al dominio público esta fotografía, mediante la cesión mundial de sus derechos sobre esta fotografía bajo la ley de derechos de autor y todos los derechos legales adyacentes propios de dicha ley. Es posible copiar, modificar, distribuir y reproducir esta fotografía, incluso con objetivos comerciales, sin pedir aprobación."

Google translates it as:

"The magazine Estilo de Vida y Manuel Alexiades dedicates this photograph to the public domain, through the worldwide transfer of its rights over this photograph under the copyright law and all adjacent legal rights inherent to said law. This photograph may be copied, modified, distributed and reproduced, even for commercial purposes, without seeking approval."

The reason given to delete it was "No permission since 25 February 2024".[6]

However, when I uploaded the image, I included in the description the following text:

The Spanish-language caption states: "Estilo de Vida magazine and Manuel Alexiades dedicate this photograph to the public domain by waiving their rights to this photograph worldwide under copyright law and all neighboring legal rights under copyright law. You can copy, modify, distribute, and reproduce this photograph, even for commercial purposes, without asking permission."

I should also note that I was never contacted before the deletion.

--VsA (talk) 23:56, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

 Done: Uncontroversial. Public domain dedication is clear in the stated source. --Bedivere (talk) 00:01, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Even though I've already restored the file, as the licensing seems clear and okay to me, I've decided to reopen the discussion temporarily in order to get a second opinion, as after the file was restored a very clearly promotional article surfaced on the Spanish Wikipedia and while the file may be free, the person or someone other related to them is using it as advertising. --Bedivere (talk) 02:05, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

It's clearly public domain, so the deletion and its reason was wrong. A {{LicenseReview}} may not hurt. Scope is a more interesting question -- sounds like the individual is a long-term general manager of a Hilton hotel in Cartagena, and not sure there is much about him out there other than the hotel's publicity. But that may be hard for us to judge -- even if the mentioned article is promotional, the person or photo could be in scope, as long as there is some realistic use for it. Could it be in scope for something like Wikivoyage? I'm borderline on the question, but that may argue to lean  Keep unless someone closer to that subject has a better scope argument for removal. Carl Lindberg (talk) 01:31, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

You bring a good point when you say “even if the mentioned article is promotional, the person or photo could be in scope”. So one thing would be to deal with the photo and another with the article as separate? If this is the case I would say  Keep. Normally a photo like this I would catalogue under the category of People of (Place) but this pic is too specific. Miguel Angel Omaña Rojas (talk) 10:37, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

File:Najmeddin Shariati.jpg

Hello dear Wiki This file does not violate the copyright law and this file belongs to Najmeddin Shariati and I uploaded it from the official website of Najmeddin Shariati in Wiki commons. Please return the file I have included the link of that site in the process of uploading this file to the wiki commons. Please return the file I am waiting for your response Thanks

•  Oppose This is not your own work and Shariati has not released the image under a free license. Furthermore this is being used to advertise the person in question. --Bedivere (talk) 16:58, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Logos for Kosovo ethnic Serb municipalities

Please permanently undelete these files:

• File:Stema e Komunës Mitrovicë e Veriut.svg
• File:Stema e Komunës Zubin Potok.svg
• File:Stema e Komunës Zveçan.svg
• File:Stema e Komunës Leposaviq.svg

The deletion requests were:

• Commons:Deletion requests/File:Stema e Komunës Mitrovicë e Veriut.svg
• Commons:Deletion requests/File:Stema e Komunës Zubin Potok.svg
• Commons:Deletion requests/File:Stema e Komunës Zveçan.svg
• Commons:Deletion requests/File:Stema e Komunës Leposaviq.svg

The nominator User:AceDouble gave the rationale "Fictional emblem used by serbian parallel structures and not in official use by kosovan authorities see here: [...]". Similar files have since been kept following deletion requests, on the basis that these emblems are probably not fictional but are emblems of towns or regions in Kosovo that have ethnic Serb majorities, so these files are in COM:SCOPE. The deleting admin has no objection to undeletion, see User talk:Infrogmation#Deleted requests for Kosovo Serb files.

Several similar deletion requests have since been issued with the same rationale, as follows:

• Kept by User:Strakhov, with 'no valid reason for deletion':
  • Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of Leposavić.png
  • Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of Leposavić (vertical), Kosovo.svg
  • Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of North Mitrovica.svg
  • Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of North Mitrovica.png
  • Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of Zubin Potok.png
  • Commons:Deletion requests/File:COA Zvečan.png
  • Commons:Deletion requests/File:Grb-zvecan.gif
  • Commons:Deletion requests/File:Grb-zubin-potok.gif
  • Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of Leposavić, Kosovo.svg

• Still open
  • Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of Leposavic.png
  • Commons:Deletion requests/File:Grb-leposavic.gif

Verbcatcher (talk) 17:34, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

@Verbcatcher: Are you able to provide evidence that the logos are really used in public space if the abovementioned DRs are reopened? Ankry (talk) 10:52, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

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

File:Drell Persis.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

• File:Drell Persis.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Reason: Permission received in ticket:2024030810010969 — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:58, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

---

 Done: please fix the licensing and tag accordingly. --Bedivere (talk) 00:32, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

File:Spree TV 2020 logo.png

The file was first deleted on 9 June 2022, under CSD F5, then I recreated the file on 17 January 2023, then the file was deleted for the second time on the same day, as a result of a copyright violation. I would like the file to be undeleted please, because I would like to add the file to the Spree TV article obviously. I also would like someone to move the file to the English Wikipedia's database of files please, because I do not want the file on the Commons database anyway. That is where I will edit the Spree TV logo file to provide credit to Network 10. Can you please tell me your opinion on undeting this Network 10 logo? --TechGeek105 (talk) 08:16, 9 March 2024 (UTC) (edited 10:29, 9 March 2024 (UTC))

@TechGeek105: The logo is too complex to consider it PD-textlogo. We need an evidence that the logo copyright holder did grant a free license for their logo. IMO, it can ube used as Fair Use in Wikipedias that allow Fair Use (uploading directly to Wikipedia, not here). Ankry (talk) 10:48, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Network 10 is the copyright holder. They did not provide a free license for the logo while they had the Spree TV channel except for the programming with Brand Developers. See their main logo on their 10Play website, as an example. 10Play TechGeek105 (talk) 11:18, 9 March 2024 (UTC)