Commons:Undeletion requests

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Translate this page; This page contains changes which are not marked for translation.

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)
(Missing: 1 timestamp • 0 reasons • 0 subpages) • 0 malformed
97 copyvios • 29 duplicates • 8 adverts • 59 selfies • 91 others
v • d • e

Finding out why a file was deleted

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

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

Appealing a deletion

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

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

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

Temporary undeletion

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

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

To assist discussion

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

To allow transfer of fair use content to another project

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

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

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

Adding a request

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

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

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

Closing discussions

In general, discussions should be closed only by administrators.

Archives

Closed undeletion debates are archived daily.

Current requests

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Photographs by Pavel Troshkin

Images were published after 2015, expiration of posthumous copyright protection of photographer after death, or before 1954. Overly hypothetical doubts by now-banned user who made many overzealous deletion requests. Kges1901 (talk) 18:16, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose As I noted in the DR, these are either under URAA copyright, as are all Russian images published after 1942, or, if unpublished until recently, are under copyright in Russia. In either case we cannot keep them. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:16, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We usually assume that old works were published at the time of creation, unless evidence says otherwise. If I understood correctly, the author was a reporter for RIAN, so I see no reason to assume that these pictures were not published at the time. The first file in the list, File:Сессия Верховного Совета СССР первого созыва (2).jpg, is dated 1938. That may not be sufficient for all images, but it seems OK for this one. Yann (talk) 20:10, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Troshkin was a reporter for the newspaper Izvestiya, and his photographs were published at the time in Izvestiya, Krasnaya Zvezda, and other papers. --Kges1901 (talk) 20:19, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Carl Lindberg also made an interesting argument about the country of origin. If these newspapers were distributed in the Soviet Union, they were simultaneously published in all successor nations, and that under the Berne Convention, the shorter term applies. Yann (talk) 20:23, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These newspapers were distributed across the entire Soviet Union, not just on the territory of the RSFSR. In any case, the definition of publication under Russian copyright law is that the back of the photograph was marked by the artist in the appropriate way, which for war photographs implies that it passed through censorship processes and could be published. Since most of these photographs are not taken from the photographer's negatives, it is reasonable to assume that they were marked on the back, and recently digitized images appeared on the internet after 2014, when the posthumous publication copyright term expired. Kges1901 (talk) 20:32, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Carl Lindberg is not sole in such assumption. But this is just assumption so far, it is not supported by court decisions (of 12-15 post-Soviet states) or jurisprudential literature (as I have known on today, I continue to seek it, to confirm or refute it). As I see such questions in court decisions (of several post-Soviet states) or jurisprudential literature - the concrete Soviet republic is place of publishing (because, the civil legislation was on republican level) or the RF is place of publishing, even if work was published outside of the RSFSR (as USSR-successor on union level). Alex Spade (talk) 10:29, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure there is any test case over the Berne definition of "country of origin". The question would not come up internally for Russian law or that of the old republics, most likely. It would only matter in a country outside those which implement the rule of the shorter term, and over a work which that question may be involved. Not sure I know of any, anywhere. But, the Berne Convention is pretty specific in its definition when it comes to works simultaneously published in multiple countries, and that is the definition that Commons follows. Of course, the Soviet Union was not a member, though most all subsequent countries are now. One complication is the U.S. status -- the definition of "source country" for the URAA would follow different logic than Berne, the country of "greatest contacts with the work", which would be Russia. Russia was 50pma on the URAA date, but I think had some wartime extensions, which I think push these over the line, such that only ones published before 1929 (or created before 1904, if unpublished) would be PD in the U.S., regardless of current status in Russia, or the country of origin (if different). Carl Lindberg (talk) 19:09, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do not know such cases (on the Berne definition) too, but in the Russian copyright legislation there are 3 criterions of copyrightability - (1) the Russian territory (the territory of the Russian Federation (the RSFSR previously, not the USSR) since Nov.7, 1917 to today) in the borders on the date of publication, (2) the Russian citizenship on the date of publication, and (3) international treaties.
Moreover, there is similar situation with reports of telegraph agencies or press-releases- they are reported/released worldwide formally, but the country indicated in report/release is the country of origin (some reports/releases have two of more indicated countries). Alex Spade (talk) 22:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Right -- the Berne country of origin pretty much never applies to internal works, or even most situations involving foreign works. The specific definition in Berne pretty much only matters if a country is applying the rule of the shorter term for a foreign work to have lesser protection than their own works normally do; the Berne definition would have to be used in that case to determine the country, since that is in the treaty. In pretty much any other situation, more sensical definitions can be used (which even the US did, with the URAA -- the "source country" there is pretty much the same thing, but differs quite a bit once it comes to simultaneous publication). But however nonsensical it seems, Commons uses the Berne definition, since that should control when works expire in many countries (even if that virtually never comes up in a court case to test it). Carl Lindberg (talk) 01:15, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another aspect to consider is how publication is defined. For example, in this academic article about Russian copyright law, it is stated that an author, transferring a work to another by agreement, gives consent to publication, and thus the work can be considered published. This means that if Troshkin transferred his negatives to his employer (Izvestiya), the works would be legally considered published. Since all photos in question are of a professional nature, there is no reason to assume that Troshkin kept any of these photographs in his personal possession and did not transfer them to his employer. Considering this, then all of his photos would have been legally published when he transferred them to his employer, that is, definitely before his death in 1944, and all these photographs would be firmly public domain. Kges1901 (talk) 08:13, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Term publication (обнародование or опубликование in Russian, and these are two different term in the Russian copyright) is defined in the paragraph one and two of part 1 of article 1268 of the Civil Code. Consent to publication is not publication (right for exercise of some action is not action). And mentioned resent discussion on the Ru-Wiki for orphan works (where I was the main speaker) does not matter for Troshkin's works - author of photos (Troshkin) is known. Alex Spade (talk) 09:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    At the same time if there is a source for original of photo and its reverse side, and such original (reverse side) is marked by author name and a year, then this year can be considered as year of publication according to the last paragraph of article 475 of the Soviet Russian Civil Code. Alex Spade (talk) 09:22, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • In terms of copyright I am specifically discussing the nuances of обнародование because the term contains a broader meaning than simply опубликование, and the expiration of copyright (if work is posthumously published) is calculated from обнародование and not опубликование of a work – regarding photographs, that public display of a work counts as обнародование while not опубликование in the strict sense, therefore opening broader possibilities for the release of a work during Troshkin's lifetime.
Regarding originals, another aspect is that at least some of Troshkin's photographs were sent into TASS and copyright thus transferred to TASS, falling under PD-Russia under the TASS aspect. For example this photograph was marked on the back with TASS copyright stamp even though Troshkin was an Izvestiya correspondent.
In any case presence of markings on the back is the most hopeful approach to this problem of posthumous copyright since any photograph/negative with a description had to have been marked on the back with a caption and name of the author, since Troshkin's photographs presumably entered into a centralized group of photographs cleared for publication, as his photographs were not just published in Izvestiya, but in Krasnaya Zvezda, Vechernyaya Moskva, other newspapers, and books (for example a large quantity of his photographs taken during the Battle of Khalkhin Gol appeared in this 1940 book without mention of his name. Secondly finding an exact date for negatives such as this example would have been impossible if there was no marking on the back. The fact that exact dates taken are available for negatives indicates that they were also marked in some way with captions, dates and names of author. Examples of such author name and year markings on the back of a Troshkin photograph include [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. Kges1901 (talk) 13:35, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, обнародование is wider than опубликование, but the fact (and the date) of обнародование must be proved (for example for some painting "This painting was created in 1923 and was shown on ZYX-art exhibition in 1925, see reference link").
  • Yes, if photowork is marked by TASS (no matter by TASS only or by TASS+name_of_real_photograph), this photowork is TASS-work. Alex Spade (talk) 14:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Undeletion of individual photographs

Russian department awards

Please, restore deleted Russian department awards and close (as keep) similar current DR. Alex Spade (talk) 09:59, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closed DR discussions

Current DR discussions

Yes, they are not state awards, but they are state symbols ({{PD-RU-exempt}}) indeed - symbols, which are established by state authorities, which design (including both text description and visual representation) are established (which design are integral part of) in respective official documents of state government agencies (the Russian official documents are not just texts), which are subjects of the en:State Heraldic Register of the Russian Federation (point 3 subpoint 4). Alex Spade (talk) 09:59, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Question Any opinion about this? Yann (talk) 18:50, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion it would be crucial here to know if the documents granting awards and awards themsetves are official (i.e. if they have legal basis).  Support if yes,  Oppose if not (unless we have knowledge that Russian courts interpret the word official differently), and COM:PCP if unsure. Without extra information it is the third option. If they are issued and granted just basing on an internal decision of the organization, then they are not official (IMO). Ankry (talk) 15:30, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, department order for decoration of someone(s) by department award(s), наградной лист (award paper), and наградная книжка (award card) for department awards are official documents of administrative characters. Same as for state awards. Alex Spade (talk) 09:15, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How can we verify its official status? Where and when the decission that established this reward was published? Ankry (talk) 21:09, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In general, the specific Russian department lists its award(s) on its official site (for example, награды Минобрнауки). Also, department order (приказ) of award establishment can be found in the Russian juridical databases (like pravo.gov.ru, consultant.ru, garant.ru, docs.cntd.ru, and others). Alex Spade (talk) 22:06, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose I do not see "Awards of Rostekhnadzor" on the page mentioned above. Ankry (talk) 21:51, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, Минобрнауки (Minobrnauki) was just example, it is not Rostekhnadzor. Link to current Rostekhnadzor awards. Alex Spade (talk) 12:11, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Generałowie podczas Święta Wojska Polskiego 2007.jpg

Request temporary undeletion

I'm requesting a temporary undeletion but not to assist a discussion nor transfer the file to a fair use project. I just wish to see the photograph to verify what badges and medals one of the men depicted has on his uniform (specifically to confirm whether or not he received certain ex officio badges). The website that the photo was taken from is dead and hasn't been archived and it's not hosted anywhere else. I have no other way of seeing this photograph. ElCet (talk) 13:24, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose This is not a valid reason for undeletion. But you can try to contact an admin in private. Ankry (talk) 10:18, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: as per Ankry. --Yann (talk) 20:44, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Emma Headshot

I took this photo myself and own it. It was provided to the Miss America Org as our official titleholder's headshot. The person or bot that is trolling our page continually pulls this crap and we are getting tired of it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarahdanette (talk • contribs) 14:58, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose Please do not make ad hominem attacks. The image's deletion was required by policy and was done by one of our oldest and most respected Admins. Images that have appeared on copyrighted web sites must have a free license from the actual creator using VRT. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:10, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: as pr Jim. --Yann (talk) 20:44, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Rhay Polster.jpg

O arquivo se trata de uma foto normal, pública da artista. Veja https://www.purepeople.com.br/midia/rhay-polster-atriz-que-da-vida-a-chiara_m3765795

 Oppose Obvious copyright violation, no permission. Yann (talk) 17:12, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: per Yann. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:22, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:昭和２０年８月10日福島民報.jpg の削除取り消しを要請します

This image reports that a collection of poems written by Japanese second Lieutenant Hiroshi Ota on the battlefield during the Battle of Okinawa at the end of World War II arrived safely in his hometown of Fukushima, crossing the sea under the Allied forces' control of sea and air. The collection contained over 40 poems. Among them, the poem "Air Defense Hood," which praises the enthusiasm of the Himeyuri student corps who participated in civil engineering work to build anti-aircraft gun positions, suggests that Okinawa was in a tense situation at the time in anticipation of the upcoming US military landing operation. The Himeyuri student corps, consisting of female students in their teens, lost many young lives in the harsh battlefield while singing "Farewell Song," written by second Lieutenant Ota. Second Lieutenant Ota lived his life on the battlefield as a poet rather than as a soldier　and like many girls, he died in the battle field leaving his trusted poetry collection behind in his hometown. https://www.sousiju.com/farewell-song This image was published on August 10, 1945, five days before Japan accepted the Potsdam Declaration. I believe the copyright has expired. I would like this evidence, which conveys the truth of this precious history, to be preserved for the world and future generations as a common heritage for all of humanity. I request the deletion be undone.--Rubicon1215 (talk) 01:17, 28 November 2024 (UTC)Rubicon1215[reply]

We didn't have this authorship information before as you had erroneously uploaded it as an own work. And I am familiar with the story of the Himeyuri girls. Abzeronow (talk) 01:37, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Abzeronow
Thank you for your comment. I regret that I uploaded multiple images without detailed explanations because I wanted to introduce as many materials about the poet Hiroshi Ota as possible. I sincerely apologize for the inconvenience I have caused you. In fact, I was the editor-in-chief of the book "Hiroshi Ota's Posthumous Manuscripts" listed on the website below. In order to create this book, I met with the late Mr. Ota's younger brother several times and received many materials such as images, poems, and diaries, including this newspaper article. Based on these materials, I created a homepage and launched the site https://www.sousiju/. If you look at the photo of the presentation ceremony for "Hiroshi Ota's Posthumous Manuscripts" at the Himeyuri Peace Memorial Museum on the first page of the site, you can see me in the back row, third from the left. About 10 years ago, Hiroshi Ota's younger brother also passed away, so I am the only one who has materials related to Hiroshi Ota. I hope you understand that I have reached this request after going through the above process.
I would like to thank you again for your interest in the Himeyuri Student Corps and for your comment this time. We would appreciate your cooperation in canceling the deletion of this image. Rubicon1215 (talk) 04:45, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Abzeronow
Thank you very much for your understanding. Although it may be unnecessary to add, I feel that I have a connection with Lieutenant Ota in two ways. One is that Mr. Ota was a senior at my alma mater, but of course I was not able to meet him as he passed away in 1945. The second is that I also studied under Miss Anderson, a missionary whom Mr. Ota respected. In the image on the site(https://sousiju.com/irene-anderson), the boy in black school uniform standing beside the boat on the far left is me in my younger days. The exchange of trust and respect between Lieutenant Ota and the Himeyuri Student Corps, and the farewell song that was born from it, are miracles in the midst of war. Lili Marleen, sung by both friend and foe on the European front, is also a miracle song. I hope that people all over the world will know about the heart-to-heart exchange between Lieutenant Ota and the Himawari Student Corps. I would like to thank you for tolerating the mistakes of an old Wikipedia beginner. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rubicon1215 (talk • contribs) 00:32, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done: per request, have corrected file information. --Abzeronow (talk) 18:33, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:frgal-intro.jpg

Provided explanation to placing the file and providing also the confirmation, but email to address displayed on Wikipedia (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org) returned as undeliverable. When asking any support, no feedback received and picture deleted ignoring the troubles. Therefore reuploaded the same picture with different filename and providing the permission again, deleted again. No communication or explanation, a picture used alseady in another webpage, I'm losing my illusions about the seriousness and professionalism of Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FrgalOlomouc (talk • contribs) 07:38, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@FrgalOlomouc: check if the address you are sending to is correct, or if your email server is configured correctly. If you still have problems you should probably contact the VRT team at Commons:Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard as we cannot address your issues here. Günther Frager (talk) 08:19, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Kivi-Vigala kirik.JPG

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I missed the VRT ticket on the category's talk page Ticket:2023041810005671. To closing admin: I suggest to move the VRT ticket to the main page to avoid anymore incidental deletion A1Cafel (talk) 08:09, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done: See above. --Yann (talk) 20:40, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:سيدي عبد العزيز الصغير.jpg

I hope you get the picture back because it is important in many articles about Algerian history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by الأبيض آل يحي (talk • contribs) 10:01, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose Copied from the Internet, no permission. Yann (talk) 10:02, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:KF_Skënderbeu_Korçë_Logo_1908.png

This file should be kept as it provides the real founding date about the club's history. The information about this date is here on this link: https://newsport.al/ckerkon-skenderbeu-ne-korce-historia-e-klubit-sportiv-te-qytetit-te-serenatave

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by AdamSala (talk • contribs) 10:03, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: The logo must be out of copyright in both Albania and the United States. It (assuming it was designed in 1908) is a free file in the United States because it was designed before 1929, but its copyright status in Albania is unknown. If it is an anonymous work, the copyright should have expired, but if there is a designer, you need to check the copyright status of the logo. Fumikas Sagisavas (talk) 10:54, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Fumikas Sagisavas Yes, the logo is not copyrighted. I mentioned the copyright status as "my own work" and also I mentioned as "This work contains the work of others" and "Yes, the pre-existing work is not protected by any copyright law". I have also attached proof that the team is founded on that date, due to the reference I added, so restore the file and let me use it on the club's article page: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/KF_Skënderbeu_Korçë so I will also add the reference there to let the visitors know about the date of foundation. Thanks AdamSala (talk) 11:06, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Again, we need evidence that 1.) This logo was published before 1929 and 2.) That the creator of this logo deliberately withheld their name when it was published or that they died before 1954. Logo also looks somewhat modern to me like 1960s or 1970s. Abzeronow (talk) 18:55, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Support provided some evidence that this version is identical, or nearly identical, to the 1908 version. Yann (talk) 20:38, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:StPaul-church Rakvere.jpg

Image was deleted due to no FOP but as per Category talk:Alar Kotli there is a permission from the architect.

For same reason also please undelete this images that depicts the same work:

--2001:7D0:81F8:9A80:F926:6FF7:F84B:6E0B 13:29, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done: See above. --Yann (talk) 20:43, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Usuario Nora Patricia Jara López

Usuario: Túrelio borró mi página

Yo no se usó ninguna imagen en la página de (usuario:Nora Patricia Jara López), es solo información política y académica de periodismo. Solicito se restaure a la brevedad. Gracias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nora Patricia Jara López (talk • contribs) 16:09, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: it was not a file that was deleted, but her user-page, which consisted of a 28k long professional biography. Del.crit. G10. --Túrelio (talk) 22:20, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose Not a significant Wikimedia contributor: no reason to create a user page. Ankry (talk) 01:47, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Litocerus plagiatus.jpg

We were able to get permission from the file owner on the original site https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/252698081#activity_comment_5f70d8f2-3ae1-4bc9-babb-06d78161a725 to post the photo to wikipedia. The poster says that they updated the license to be CC-BY. --Vorpalm (talk) 18:25, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment the information still shows CC-BY-NC license, see https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/452401818. Günther Frager (talk) 18:39, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Support I see CC-BY 4.0 there now. Ankry (talk) 01:51, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Flag of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham.svg

No consensus was reached before the unilateral deletion, and The Squirrel Conspiracy did not respond to a counterargument. The file was massively COM:INUSE before this was made, and there are a bunch of empty spaces on pages. If this is decided to be copywritten, then I'd at least like it undeleted and uploaded directly to Wikipedia, although no actual alleged copyright was established. NorthTension (talk) 00:23, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Principe vis lub.jpg

It was deleted by Krd for the reason "no license" but, according to the discussion at Commons:Bistro, it did have a Cc-zero template (which may not be a license, strictly speaking, but still a status tag). The uploader, specialized in the field of such industrial objects, says that the image is his own work. That sounds believable. If someone has a reason to dispute it, a deletion request can be started with an explanation. -- Asclepias (talk) 00:52, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests&oldid=949416169"