Commons:Undeletion requests

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

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.

Finding out why a file was deleted

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

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

Appealing a deletion

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

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

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

Temporary undeletion

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

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

To assist discussion

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

To allow transfer of fair use content to another project

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

Projects that accept fair use

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

Adding a request

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

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

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

Closing discussions

In general, discussions should be closed only by administrators.

Archives

Closed undeletion debates are archived daily.

Current requests

This buddha seems to be an architecture instead of a sculpture according to the Chinese Wikipedia introduction, which says, 由莲花座到佛顶共分六层,底层为小佛堂,二至五层设有塑像及文字解说关于佛陀一生事迹。拾级盘旋而上可达顶层。/There are six floors from the lotus seat to the top of the Buddha. The bottom floor is a small Buddha hall, and the second to fifth floors are equipped with statues and text explanations about the life of the Buddha. Go up the stairs and circle up to the top floor. (Translated by Google). COM:FOP Taiwan allows architecture. Teetrition (talk) 14:21, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not Only one photo deleted. Here are more photos of Great Buddha Statue of Baguashan.--祥龍 (talk) 14:38, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Actually there were 2 images under that name. For the latest, it is quite a stretch to call this "not a statue", even if it is hollow. But the former is a general view, and it may be OK, depending of the wording of the law, and local court cases. Yann (talk) 15:13, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
How do you think that a statue or a building need a window on it? Reke (talk) 15:23, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, it is a statue with a window, but it is still a work of art, not a building. Yann (talk) 15:26, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It is a historical building. Reke (talk) 15:32, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A 3D artwork, not architecture. Not covered by FoP in Taiwan Abzeronow (talk) 16:49, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As far as Japan's FoP law, which Taiwan's is very closely related to, some buildings can be considered "artistic works" rather than architectural. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Freedom_of_panorama/Archive_1#Hideyuki_Murata @JWilz12345: @Clindberg: Abzeronow (talk) 17:01, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Abzeronow: I won't comment on the matter as I am heavily involved on Taiwanese FOP ruckus made by the latest Taiwan Intellectual Property Office (TIPO) reply of December 2022. I won't oppose this UNDEL request, but I won't support either. See also w:zh:Wikipedia:互助客栈/其他#有关维基共享资源台湾全景自由问题一事. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 17:45, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hmm. I think there is a fine line here. I would hesitate to call the Statue of Liberty "architecture", even though people can go inside and climb the staircase to the crown. However the description above sounds like this is a Buddha museum, with five floors and exhibits inside. I think the divider has to be the purpose to which it is put, not the exterior shape, so I think this is architecture. The US Copyright office would agree,

"The Copyright Office may register a claim to copyright in an architectural work if the work is a humanly habitable structure that is intended to be both permanent and stationary. Examples of works that satisfy this requirement include houses, office buildings, churches, and museums. By contrast, the Office will refuse to register bridges, cloverleaves, dams, walkways, tents, recreational vehicles, or boats...." [USCO Circular 41, emphasis added]

Note that other countries, notably France, include bridges as architecture. The subject work is not, of course, in the USA, but I doubt that other copyright offices would see it differently. Symbol support vote.svg Support .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:12, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Striked my oppose per comments by you and JWilz. Although as noted above, Japan (whose laws on this are similar to Taiwan) considered Tower of the Sun as an artistic work not a work of architecture but since our servers are in the US, we could go with The Copyright Office guidance in this case. Abzeronow (talk) 15:42, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am a bit surprised that this would qualify for architecture in USA, but I won't oppose undeletion. Yann (talk) 19:12, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
By only this file, I Symbol support vote.svg Support, but by that batch? Then some files may involve public interiors, are Taiwanese FOP rules allowing em? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:48, 21 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If those public interiors can be considered as artistic works, then Taiwanese FOP rules does not allow them because the rule requires "outdoor". See [1]. Teetrition (talk) 04:11, 21 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Taiwan Intellectual Property Office ("TIPO"), the Copyright authority in Taiwan, thinks that Taiwanese FOP provision on artistic works can be applied to a work of both architectural and artistic nature. See 智著字第11260001910號. If this work is qualified for architecture in USA, I won't oppose my own request. But as per precautionary principle, it seems like the withdrawal of the request may be more secure. Teetrition (talk) 11:13, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello hope all is going well. I have a tired recovery of the photo.--Nimarto (talk) 13:50, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nimarto has no substantial global contributions. ─ The Aafī (talk) 13:54, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hmm. If you Google nima keshtkar you come up with a number of solid hits, including shows of his works in several places. There is no WP article, but I'm not sure we should dismiss him as not notable. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:00, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jameslwoodward, I did search on Google but I am not satisfied if these hits would help in establishing notability on any local Wikipedia. If this is not promotion and undisclosed COI editing, then what it is? That's what makes me stand with two admins who deleted it as F10. I'd a bit however incline it being deleted under G10, because of the linked Wikidata entry that has been created for advertisement only given the nature of the "username" Nimarto. ─ The Aafī (talk) 15:43, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
He's an artist. He has had several gallery shows. Gallery shows are hard to get, so his works must have some traction in the art world. Any entry for an artist is naturally an advertisement of his work, so I don't see that as a negative. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:48, 4 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, you have a point but neither is Wikidata a place of "self-promotion" nor is the "Wikimedia Commons" its hub. I would gladly approve of any images of this or any other artists which are genuinely uploaded by constructive editors but if every other artist begins using Wikimedia Commons for "self-promotions", we lose our educational goal. As such, I oppose restoring this image. ─ The Aafī (talk) 17:03, 4 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The related Wikidata item appears to have been deleted. ─ The Aafī (talk) 10:25, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Picture was published in a draft and I was working on getting full permission by the copyright holder. Since I got full permission now and only failed to communicate it clearly to Wikimedia I would like to have it reuploaded in order to be able to finsih the process in the Wikimedia VRTS release generator. Thanks in advance!--Akropolis17 (talk) 12:42, 4 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I see that when you uploaded the photo, you claimed that you were the actual photographer. Now, above, you say that that is not true. Please understand that making false claims of authorship is a serious violation of Commons rules. If you do it again, you may be blocked from editing here.

The actual photographer can send a free license using the file name above. The file will be restored if and when they do that and the license is read and approved at VRT. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:42, 4 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Jim. Can be undeleted if adequate permissions are received. Please ask the copyright holder to send a VRT release, much easily using COM:RELGEN. Best, ─ The Aafī (talk) 19:38, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done: See above. --Yann (talk) 17:24, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Paul Hermann Fritz Hennig mit dem Kegeleverein 01.jpg

As a previous UDR demonstrated, the uploader was unreliable as far as dates so this may not be a 1900 photograph, but I'd like to get a better idea on the actual date of this photograph. Abzeronow (talk) 16:18, 4 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Paul Hennig, July 16, 1874 in Frankfurt (Oder) ; † June 28, 1930 in Munich. He could be 26 in this image. He might even be 46, so maybe this is a little premature. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:28, 4 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 1900 seems quite plausible, based of the clothing. Yann (talk) 20:04, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

8 Files

These are in the public domain as per the copyright law of Iran. Hanooz 09:19, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files uploaded by CerroFerro

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by CerroFerro

The 1927 films would be public domain in the US now. I also forgot to include one from 1925 in a previous UDR request. Abzeronow (talk) 16:43, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol support vote.svg Support Should be PD-US-expired regardless if they are frames of the actual film or accompanying still photographs. --Rosenzweig τ 13:25, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

It does accurately reflect current US because 36 CFR § 261.22 and 16 U.S. Code § 580p are still in effect. Gemink (talk) 23:03, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This is a useless template as it can be properly used only on files that must be deleted. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:17, 6 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


 Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 08:39, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

I'm Simon Bettencourt, President of Academica SC and owner of the logo. We'd like to undelete it to add it to our page.

--Simonbett04 (talk) 20:10, 6 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Since we do not know who User:Simonbett04 actually is and imposters are common here, policy requires that an authorized official of the organization owning the copyright send a free license using VRT. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:40, 6 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


 Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 08:38, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Hi:

We are requesting to undelete the file: NCT GordyMelJessSharon.jpg on our page for National Comedy Theatre

This is our own promotional photo, it was taken by us directly, and there is no copyright on it, other than our own organization (National Comedy Theatre).

Thank you very much- Gary Kramer Artistic Director — Preceding unsigned comment added by SD3717 (talk • contribs) 20:35, 6 March 2023‎ (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The image appears without a free license in the San Diego Reader and other places at much higher resolution than here. Restoration will require that the actual copyright holder, usually the photographer, send a free license using VRT.

Note also that in the File Description, you claimed that you were the actual photographer. "Own promotional photo", above, suggests something different. Please understand that making false claims of authorship is a serious violation of Commons rules and may lead to be being blocked from editing here. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:50, 6 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


 Not done: as per Jim. --Yann (talk) 08:38, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am the author of this image

(Sadhu Burlington D (talk) 04:53, 7 March 2023 (UTC))Reply[reply]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It was deleted because we do not keep personal images of non-contributors. Commons is not Facebook. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:39, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Liebes Wikipedia-Team,

hiermit beantrage ich die Wiederherstellung der im Betreff genannten Datei. Bei der Bilddatei handelt sich um eine eigene Arbeit, die ich bei Wikipedia veröffentlichen möchte.

--Wirtschaftswunder (talk) 12:02, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: It is an official version of Microsoft Office 2021 BIGBOSSPRO (talk) 12:42, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It was deleted because it violates Microsoft's copyright and therefore cannot be kept on Commons. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:37, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Hi, please undelete this. We have permission at ticket:2023020110007122. (I am a VRT agent for that queue.) Jon Harald Søby (talk) 14:30, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


✓ Done: @Jon Harald Søby: FYI. --Yann (talk) 17:21, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request from ‎Грустный Кофе

Я привел разрешения на использование вышеперечисленных файлов. Прошу их восстановить. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎Грустный Кофе (talk • contribs) 17:23, 7 March 2023 (UTC) (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Грустный Кофе: We need an evidence of free license from the photographer, not from the uploader. Either through the source website, or following VRT instructions. https://m.vk.com/marposad_21ru is not a CC-BY-SA 4.0-lecensed website as you claimed. Ankry (talk) 19:41, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:LoveRadioCebu new logo.jpg

Please cancel the deletion request for File:LoveRadioCebu new logo.jpg because this is the official logo for DYBU-FM (Love Radio Cebu) from Manila Broadcasting Company. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CAAPDVO (talk • contribs) 00:19, 8 March 2023‎ (UTC)Reply[reply]

Procedural close, file is not deleted. Comment this at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Love Radio. Thuresson (talk) 01:28, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]