Jump to content

Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests: Difference between revisions

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Browse history interactively
← Older editNewer edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 802: Line 802:


Architect copyright has expired in Iceland since he died in 1950 [[User:Abzeronow|Abzeronow]] ([[User talk:Abzeronow|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 00:59, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Architect copyright has expired in Iceland since he died in 1950 [[User:Abzeronow|Abzeronow]] ([[User talk:Abzeronow|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 00:59, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

== [[:File:Masahiko Kimura and Nori Bunasawa.jpg]] - A photo taken from my Camera ==

[[:File:Masahiko Kimura and Nori Bunasawa.jpg]] is a photo from my personal collection. It was taken using my camera and I am myself in this photo. I allowed it to be published in the novel I co-authored: The Toughest Man Alive. The link that the user -akko reported from the Russian website used my photo without my permission. Please advise me on the steps I should take to get this photo undeleted.

--[[User:110347nbtough|110347nbtough]] ([[User talk:110347nbtough|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 03:33, 22 January 2021 (UTC)Nori Bunasawa

Revision as of 03:33, 22 January 2021

Current requests

Shortcuts: COM:UDR • COM:UDELC • COM:UNDELC

Request undeletion

Enter a descriptive heading and press the button:

This is a dashboard widget.

File:Ethiopian Abyssinian Church, Jerusalem 09.jpg

Also:

Files were deleted because of "no FoP for Israeli paintings". (Ref. Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ethiopian Abyssinian Church, Jerusalem 09.jpg). But one deleted photo of the same subject (probably) was successfully undeleted: Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2010-08#Request for undeletion File:EAC IMG 6549.JPG, applying the argument that the church is a public place and these paintings in the Israeli legal literature are integral part of it, as religious paintings. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:39, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kameraad Pjotr and O: Can you comment what do you think of this inconsistency if you are still around? Ankry (talk) 20:26, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Weak support to have consistency in Wikimedia Commons admins' decisions. However, I still have doubts whether this painting is covered by ToO or not. Ankry (talk) 00:47, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It appears the undeleted file File:EAC IMG 6549.JPG is used in a userspace FoP essay, User:Pieter Kuiper/Freedom of Panorama in Israel. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:45, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Undeletion of Logos

OTRS agent (verify): request: Regarding

JuTa has deleted these files as "no permission" and "no license". A Wikipedia in Spanish user has claimed (and another users have supported) the undeletion since

  • "All the files were {{PD-textlogo}}, and fall under the TOO.
  • All these files survived a Deletion request as "Kept".

Please verify this information and undelet, if necessary. Thanks a lot. --Ganímedes (talk) 20:14, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Undeleted for discussion. Some images are CC-licensed, which is incorrect if they are PD-textlogo, most are declared to be {{Own}}, which would warrant them Out of scope status if correct (we do not host personally created logos). Also fixed ping to deleting admin. Ankry (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Noting that the mentioned DR was about scope, not about copyright, so irrelevant here. Ankry (talk) 13:06, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Some were in use when deletion, and they belongs to the National Television of Chile, so it's not "Own work" and they're perfectly in scope. Wrong license or wrong attribution are easy to solve; files don't need to be deleted if logos are PD-texlogo, and usefull. Thanks for undelete to re-evaluate the case. --Ganímedes (talk) 18:03, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to check images within the subcats Category:Media without a source and Category:Media missing permission and fix such cases before they get eligable for deletion. --JuTa 20:48, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I'll try. If other people (including yourself) can be involved in that before to delete the files, could be more effective. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 06:53, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Now, this, is something I don't understand. I've fixed the source and now added the right license. So, is there any other problem?? --Ganímedes (talk) 22:41, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've corrected another license and I've reverted again. Can I proceed with the files or not? --Ganímedes (talk) 18:08, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ganímedes: FYI the files (temp) restored here still not fixed and are still wearing some problem tags. They will get up to speedy deletion again in a few days. --JuTa 09:45, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

PS: You need to add a valid source (not {{Own}}) and author as well. --JuTa 09:47, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@JuTa: when I' ve tried to fix them someone undo it (including yourself). Can I proceed Yes or Not? --Ganímedes (talk) 12:25, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ganímedes: Yes --JuTa 15:09, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ganímedes: I now removed the problem tags for those which are fixed OK. But there are still several which needs still a valid source and author. I marked the with - still not OK - above. --JuTa 21:35, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
JuJuTa: One more finished. I didn't find yesterday sources for the rest. Later I'll try to find them. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 01:11, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Geraka Street in Gerakas 01.jpg

The poster only occupies a small portion of the image, can be removed/blurred without affecting the image much--137.189.204.121 06:29, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Support For the sake of this discussion I have temporarily restored the image. I suggest blurring most of the poster leaving the red footer with the ΣΥΡΙΖΑ slogan visible. This allows a connection to the banner on the fence. De728631 (talk) 16:47, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose - Whether the poster is included or not, this seems an unremarkable street/chain link fence and is neither used (although not entirely a fair consideration as it had been deleted) nor of particularly good quality. What is the expected educational utility of this image? Эlcobbola talk 20:35, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • "What is the expected educational utility of this image?" - presumably as an example of how en:Syriza or its supporters communicated at that time and place (even after blurring most of the content of the communication for copyright reasons). De728631 already mentioned that above. For my part, I'm merely guessing as someone who doesn't read Greek, though. whym (talk) 13:09, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nicholas Alahverdian and Andre Dubus III.jpg

Speedy deleted by Gbawden on 10 September 2019 as G7. Content was not G7 eligible (created 17 August 2017, not within 7 days) and deletion requests had already failed multiple times: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nicholas Alahverdian and Andre Dubus III.jpg. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 12:39, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also all the following files which were deleted. Not sure if solely author requested is a valid rationale?

ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 12:46, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looking back File:Nicholas Alahverdian and Andre Dubus III.jpg shouldn't have been deleted. Not the best quality true but my error.
As for the other 2 - File:Nicholas_Alahverdian_and_Senator_Sheldon_Whitehouse.jpg is low quality with no exif and I suspected a copyvio although I didn't comment on that at the time. File:Nicholas Alahverdian photo.jpg was a terrible quality crop of another photo so there was no reason to keep it. The photo it was a crop of has since been deleted Gbawden (talk)
I have undeleted the first one. Others can decide on the others Gbawden (talk) 14:07, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
How do we decide if we can't see them? What pic was it a crop of? ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 01:52, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Please see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nicholas Alahverdian and Andre Dubus III.jpg, opened January 8th. --Ruthven (msg) 17:16, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nicholas Alahverdian 2013-07-05 23-55.jpg

Please undelete the following files:

The files were deleted in 2015 as out of scope, following this discussion. An article for the subject was subsequently recreated on the English Wikipedia and has survived a deletion discussion. Cheers, Genericusername57 (talk) 18:28, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:No COVID-19 apps signs in the Netherlands

Around six (6) months ago I created this category as I noticed that some "privacy freaks" (not sure how otherwise to call these people, not meant as an insult) would put up signs that people that have COVID-19 apps weren't allowed in their houses, shops, buildings, Etc. I noticed that this category was deleted with the reason "This page does not exist. The deletion, protection, and move log for the page are provided below for reference. 09:15, 29 June 2020 Túrelio talk contribs deleted page Category:No COVID-19 apps signs in the Netherlands (CSD G1 (test page, accidental creation, or page containing nonsense or no valid content)) (thank)" and the files seemed to have been moved out of it into a less specific category. This tells me that these files aren't not educational (a double negative, I know), but also that these signs can't have their own category, why though? As it seems counterproductive to add them to a less specific category. Also, some of these notices seem to border on SARS-CoV-2 denialism so I wanted to create another category for those, but as this category was deleted I'm not sure if this should be created or if unspecific categories are preferred. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 20:42, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So far I have only found two such files in Category:COVID-19 pandemic related signs in the Netherlands, so it seems to be a rather small phenomenon that would not warrant a category of its own. If there are more anti-warning-app pictures from other countries though, we should create a common category for all of them. De728631 (talk) 23:43, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:UltraStar WorldParty.jpg

Hola, la foto tomada File:UltraStar WorldParty.jpg es de una captura de pantalla de un juego gratuito y de código abierto que tiene licencia GNU GPL v3 (adjunto licencia: https://github.com/ultrastares/ultrastar-worldparty/blob/master/LICENSE )

¿no se puede usar este tipo de foto? Mariac84 (talk) 18:18, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vitral Templo Maipu.JPG

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: File was deleted because there was no knowledge on Chilean FOP ca. 2009. (Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Vitral Templo Maipu.JPG) Now we know that there is COM:FOP Chile if the works are situated permanently in public places. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:50, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Arquivo: LuizGoulart.jpg

Grato pela atenção. Essa imagem pertence ao acervo da instituição Corrente da Paz Universal, criada por Luiz Goulart, da qual eu, Maximo Ribera, sou o diretor-presidente. Está publicada em nosso site correntedapaz.com, e como retemos os direitos de publicação do acervo, colocar essa e outras imagens do mesmo acervo em nossa página da Wikipedia não me parece violação de direitos autorais. Solicito, por favor, ajuda para o melhor procedimento de nossa parte no sentido de consolidar junto aos senhores a veracidade do que afirmamos. Muito Grato. Maximo Ribera- 08-01-2021-Maximo Ribera (talk) 15:35, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Files deleted by Sealle

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Attention! These are files with OTRS permission, river uniforms and river transport. (There are also high-quality files of the winner of the competition Wiki loves ... For example, the wheelhouse of a motor ship.). Part of a large project Wikimedia RU Uniformology (ex: WMRU Annual Report 2019, p. 29). Please restore, as this is not an advertisement. Removal is like hidden vandalism. Captains in river transport uniforms were also used in the Vodokhod article. Niklitov (talk) 19:38, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Files deleted by Jcb, nominated by Sealle

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Attention! These files are wrongly nominated for deletion by Sealle: 1. "Extremely low res images" = These are icons for Wikidata (Property pictograms). 2. Not "probably scaled down derivatives of ones found on the Web" — found on Commons, ex: File:1-02-БелОрел.png ↔ File:Order of White Eagle Badge both sides.jpg with {{PD-RU-exempt}} (type=orders, decorations and medals), etc. — Niklitov (talk) 20:37, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:PrincipiaSynGen.jpg

I created this book cover image from a painting that I commissioned specifically for this book cover. I also published the book.
The entire book, including the cover is considered 'Kopyleft,' meaning copyright free, or public domain, therefor I consider the image's inclusion on Wikimedia Commons/Wikipedia to be valid and legitimate.

Synaptyx (talk) 12:15, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Carte-poitevin-saintongeais.jpg

[Fr]

Bonsoir,

Ce fichier est un fichier créé bénévolement pour et avec l'association Parlanjhe Asteur. Il est évidemment sur leur site internet (http://wp-parlanjhe.asteur.fr/index.php/2015/12/26/592/) avec d'autres cartes de vœux faites par moi-même, et sur le mien : https://lu-chapeu.jimdofree.com/gr-occitan-e-autres/peitavin-santong%C3%A9s-parlanjhe/.

Je suis graphiste, et défendeur des langues minoritaires, mes créations ont pour but de mettre la langue concernée en avant sur un support simple (carte de voeux, carte géographique...). Si certains de ces travaux sont sur Wikimedia Commons, c'est pour qu'elles soient accessible facilement, étant libres de droit.

Le poitevin-saintongeais est peu visible sur la toile, merci de restaurer ce fichier.

Bonne soirée.

--Jiròni B. (talk) 21:13, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Files found with Special:Search/bulletinsofameri248254pale

(Above per original listing.) This work (which is from 1970, not 1895) does not have a copyright notice, and was not timely registered; it is therefore in the public domain in the U.S., where it was published (see PD-US-no notice). TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 15:04, 13 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

File:Rishab Jain Inventor 2020.jpg

I request this file to be undeleted.

  1. I took this photo of Rishab Jain. I have full rights of it.
  2. The "Facebook" page where the image was detected was created after I took this original photo. They are infringing on my copyright, not the other way around.

Thus, I own the rights to the image, and uploaded it. The Facebook page where the image was detected used the image that I took. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 50.39.96.24 (talk) 02:57, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Pogchampion20204: Please login. I assume File:RishabJainPhotograph2018.jpg is the same as this one, am I right? Do you mind if you upload the full resolution of the photo and include complete EXIF data from the camera? Thanks, pandakekok9 03:09, 16 January 2021 (UTC)][reply]
@Pandakekok9: Hello there, thank you very much. That would be great; and yes, the full resolution of the image would be better. Appreciate it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pogchampion20204 (talk • contribs) 02:38, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hugo Scheiber.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/Files of Battarlin

Hugo Scheiber died in 1950. It should be public domain in the EU now. Abzeronow (talk) 02:02, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I assume this was of a painting... what year was the painting from? Carl Lindberg (talk) 14:46, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have no way of being able to see the description so I have no clue. Abzeronow (talk) 19:47, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's a painting by Scheiber from the 1930s. There is no date mark by the artist himself on the picture but the uploader wrote this in the description, so potentially from after 1926. De728631 (talk) 13:01, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the information. I suppose it may be a while before this particular painting can be restored. Abzeronow (talk) 23:28, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:The Nandi, their language and folk-lore (1909)

(Above per original listing.) This work was first published in the U.S., where it is in the public domain; thus, it is acceptable for inclusion at Wikimedia Commons. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 23:56, 17 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

  • Per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:The Nandi, their language and folk-lore (1909), the country of origin is the United Kingdom, not the United States-- and if this is the case, undeletion can only occur in 2032. @TE(æ)A,ea.: Can you provide any evidence that this is not the case? --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 18:08, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • The publishing company’s colophon (from the document) indicates simultaneous publication in the U.S.; thus, such is the country of origin. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 18:49, 18 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]
      • While the work does note

        HENRY FROWDE, M.A.
        PUBLISHER TO THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD LONDON, EDINBURGH, NEW YORK
        TORONTO, AND MELBOURNE

        the copy available on IA only notes

        OXFORD
        AT THE CLARENDON TRESS
        1909
        @TE(æ)A,ea.: Could you provide us with a US copy to prove that it was simultaneously published in both countries? (Please note this DR in which the OP provided a link to a US copy to prove simultaneous publication). --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:34, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

        • The colophon would indicate that his office carried the works, which is sufficient for publication in the U.S. I do not need to, and could likely not easily, produce a copy printed in the U.S., but that does not mean that such work was not published in the U.S. (The standard at the time this book was printed was public display, with “tangible copies” availble for sale, which occurred.) TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 22:58, 18 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Files in Category:Picturesque Nepal (1912)

(Above per original listing.) I do not know which from which of the listed documents the listed images were generated; but it matters not, as both volumes appear to be scans of the same edition (printing, perhaps) of this work. This work was first published in the U.S., where it is in the public domain; thus, it is acceptable for inclusion at Wikimedia Commons. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 23:59, 17 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

@ShakespeareFan00 and Fitindia: FYI Gbawden (talk) 07:00, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Picturesque Nepal (1912), the country of origin is the United Kingdom, not the United States-- and if this is the case, undeletion may only occur in 2026. @TE(æ)A,ea.: Can you provide any evidence that this is not the case? --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 18:11, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • The publishing company’s colophon (from the document) indicates simultaneous publication in the U.S.; thus, such is the country of origin. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 18:49, 18 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]
      • While the work does note agents in the US and other countries, the copy available on IA only notes

        LONDON
        ADAM AND CHARLES BLACK
        1912

        @TE(æ)A,ea.: Could you provide us with a US copy to prove that it was simultaneously published in both countries? (Please note this DR in which the OP provided a link to a US copy to prove simultaneous publication). --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 22:51, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

        • The colophon would indicate that his office carried the works, which is sufficient for publication in the U.S. I do not need to, and could likely not easily, produce a copy printed in the U.S., but that does not mean that such work was not published in the U.S. (The standard at the time this book was printed was public display, with “tangible copies” availble for sale, which occurred.) TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 23:01, 18 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]
          •  Oppose What we need to know is the country of first publication. A colophon may indicate publication in the US at some time but it does not indicate when it happened. A remark like "London & New York" would indicate simultaneous publication in both countries, but this way it looks like the book was first published in the UK and later sold in the US by said agents. That would make it a UK work first of all and non-free for Commons. Apart from that it is in fact you who needs to produce "tangible evidence" since you would like to have these files undeleted. De728631 (talk) 12:52, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
            • That is incorrect. The U.S. is the country of first publication. Unless you have some stunning evidence which contradicts the claim that a publisher sold books at the offices listed in the book, then it was first published in the U.S. by law. According to Commons’ licensing policy, the work must be in the public domain under both U.S. law and the law of the country of origin; under U.S. law, this work was first published in the U.S., and is in the public domain. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 14:16, 19 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]
              • @TE(æ)A,ea.: De728631 is correct here. Per COM:EVID, the burden is on the party seeking or supporting undeletion. We will need concrete evidence here that there was indeed simultaneous publication -- the colophon here does not provide the requisite evidence needed for undeletion. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 12:34, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
                • Why is the colophon insufficient evidence? I would consider the colophon to be an extension of the location given on the title page. It is currently practice to list a number of (location) offices on either the title or copyright page, and this function is served similarly by the colophon. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 18:22, 20 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]
                  • If indeed they were simultaneously published, we would have found evidence of such. I took a gander around library catalogues, book search engines, online bookstores, and found no evidence. Compare this with the work Kate Greenaway where there is clear evidence of simultaneous publication:

                    New York: G. P. Putnum's Sons
                    London: Adam and Charles Black
                    1905

                    --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:18, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

                    • That work indicates a different circumstance; for that book, it was printed by two different publishers. As I have said, I claim the colophon to be evidence of simultaneous publication, so your reference to another work, which was also simultaneously published, is not relevant. The way a book indicates simultaneous publication, or the method by which simultaneous publication occurs, does not matter. Printing a book through two publishers, one of which is in the U.S., qualifies, as does selling (or offering to sell) a book through a publisher’s office in the U.S., even if the book is not printed in the U.S. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 23:12, 20 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Hallgrimskirkja files

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Architect Guðjón Samúelsson died last 1950, so the church is now PD since the start of this year. Also many images of this church have been undeleted recently, as part of PD year 2021. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:14, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also:

_ JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:24, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Support as the architect's copyright has now expired in Iceland. Abzeronow (talk) 23:22, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Chordate morphology (1962)

(Above per original listing.) This work was first published in the U.S. in 1962, with a copyright notice. A publication of that sort would require a renewal, which did not occur; thus, this work is in the public domain in the U.S. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 16:16, 18 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Files in Category:Internet Archive document agrarianproblem00tawn

(Above per original listing.) This work was simultaneously published in the U.S., where it is in the public domain. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 17:38, 18 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

File:GameStick console.jpg

Без описаний Artyom 5353539 (talk) 18:06, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Victory gardeners' seed and plant guide - seed and plant requirements for a victory garden for a family of four (IA CAT10890830).pdf

There is no notice, and there was no timely registration; thus, this work is in the public domain in the U.S., where it was first published. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 19:03, 18 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

File:A forensic analysis of construction litigation, U.S. Naval Facilities Engineering Command (IA aforensicnalysis109451046).pdf

According to the NPS Calhoun Web-site, this is a work of the U.S. government, and is thus is in the public domain. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 19:07, 18 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

File:Aerothermodynamics of a jet engine Test Cell. (IA aerothermodynami00nico).pdf

ShakespeareFan00: What of this constitutes a third-party copyright claim? I didn’t find anything on p. 85 (or /85 of the PDF) that has any more copyright than the rest of the document. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 19:10, 18 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

File:Aerosol optical depth model assessment with high resolution multiple angle sensors (IA aerosolopticalde109451216).pdf

Only three figures are under third-party copyright; they may be redacted. Otherwise, this work is in the public domain. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 19:16, 18 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

File:Aerosol optical depth retrievals from high-resolution commercial satellite imagery over areas of high surface reflectance (IA aerosolopticalde1094510119).pdf

There is no image on p. 38. There are some images which might be copyrighted, but the indications are not clear. Only a few images would have to be redacted for the document to be entirely PD-USGov. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 19:19, 18 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

For the record, this is obviously about Commons:Deletion requests/File:Aerosol optical depth retrievals from high-resolution commercial satellite imagery over areas of high surface reflectance (IA aerosolopticalde1094510119).pdf. On page 38 there is in fact only original text and calculations by the author, but two copyrighted images are on page 9 (Copyright Digital Globe). Those can be blanked though. So I support undeletion. The document in question can be seen here (PDF). De728631 (talk) 03:36, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Professional picture.jpg

This is a picture about Serena Chiang, and I am Serena Chiang. I give permission for myself to use my own pictures. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sere1212 (talk • contribs) 09:53, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Serena Art picture.jpg

This is a picture of myself, that I took. It is not plagiarism. Sere1212 (talk) 10:05, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Advances in hybrid water-lubricated journal bearing for use in ocean vessels (IA advancesinhybrid1094541622).pdf

This is PD-USGov, and clearly so marked on the first page of the document. The copyright claim is illegitimate. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 18:20, 19 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

The US government remark was added by the Calhoun library, but not by the original author. I'd rather not trust their assessment in this case because there is no evidence that the author worked for the US Navy or some affiliated department. De728631 (talk) 21:32, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • NPS Calhoun is a U.S. government entity; if you have any reason to doubt that determination, mention it; but without a demonstrated pattern of copyright-license abuse generally, or a specific finding that the license applied to this work is incorrect specifically, I trust in the judgment given. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 00:30, 20 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]
    • I have assessed a lot of these mass uploads from the NPS library. They include works that were not even written at the NPS and where the author had no clear affiliation with the US Navy or military in general. The page in question where the Calhoun library mentions the US Government work seems to me more like a boilerplate template than a genuine copyright evaluation on their side. Per our precautionary principle we need to be wary in such cases rather than blindly trusting the authorities. De728631 (talk) 01:44, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • The mark is not indiscriminately applied, at the very least; the institution generally eithers mentions valid copyright, does not mention copyright, or declares the work in the public domain, on account of it being a work of the U.S. government. This work was written at the NPS. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 02:14, 21 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

File:A Design Tool For The Evaluation Of Atmosphere Independent Propulsion In Submarines (IA adesigntoolforth1094542961).pdf

This is PD-USGov, and clearly so marked on the first page of the document. The copyright claim is illegitimate. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 18:24, 19 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

The US government remark was added by the Calhoun library, but not by the original author. I'd rather not trust their assessment in this case because there is no evidence that the author worked for the US Navy or some affiliated department. De728631 (talk) 21:35, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • NPS Calhoun is a U.S. government entity; if you have any reason to doubt that determination, mention it; but without a demonstrated pattern of copyright-license abuse generally, or a specific finding that the license applied to this work is incorrect specifically, I trust in the judgment given. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 00:30, 20 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]
I have assessed a lot of these mass uploads from the NPS library. They include works that were not even written at the NPS and where the author had no clear affiliation with the US Navy or military in general. The page in question where the Calhoun library mentions the US Government work seems to me more like a boilerplate template than a genuine copyright evaluation on their side. Per our precautionary principle we need to be wary in such cases rather than blindly trusting the authorities.
      • The mark is not indiscriminately applied, at the very least; the institution generally eithers mentions valid copyright, does not mention copyright, or declares the work in the public domain, on account of it being a work of the U.S. government. This work was written at the NPS. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 02:14, 21 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

File:A Design Comparison between IPv4 and IPv6 in the Context of MYSEA, and Implementation of an IPv6 MYS. (IA adesigncompariso109459860).pdf

ShakespeareFan00: What part of this has third-party copyright? The work, as far as I can see, is PD-USGov, and I don’t see any figures off-hand that are under third-party copyright. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 18:28, 19 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

In the appendix there are 15 pages of computer code that is "Copyright (C) 1997 and 1998 WIDE Project." This seems a bit much for de minimis, so I don't think blanking these pages could save the PD document. De728631 (talk) 21:42, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see this now. That text is certainly not acceptable. However, the appendix is only mentioned once, and does not appear to be an integral part of the work as a whole; as such, I believe the source code may be removed from an uploaded version of the document without substantial loss. I have not claimed that any copyright of third-party copyright claims could be dismissed by way of de minimis. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 00:30, 20 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]
No, you didn't mention de minimis but that would be the usual argument to keep such works. But since it won't work here, I brought this up. De728631 (talk) 01:42, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:A defense-in-depth approach to phishing (IA adefenseindepthp109452667).pdf

The work itself is PD-USGov, and may be read here. Starting on p. 51, there are a number of images, to which third-party copyright may apply. However, a number of them, or large portions of them, appear to have been manufactured by the author, and would therefore not be under copyright. Some discussion will be needed to fully determine what images will need to redacted, so that this work may be properly uploaded. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 18:38, 19 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

File:A decision making process for movement planning. (IA adecisionmakingp1094540083).pdf

This is PD-USGov, and clearly so marked on the first page of the document. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 18:44, 19 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Again, I wouldn't put too much weight into the assessment of the Calhoun library who added the US government remark. De728631 (talk) 21:48, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • NPS Calhoun is a U.S. government entity; if you have any reason to doubt that determination, mention it; but without a demonstrated pattern of copyright-license abuse generally, or a specific finding that the license applied to this work is incorrect specifically, I trust in the judgment given. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 00:30, 20 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]
I have assessed a lot of these mass uploads from the NPS library. They include works that were not even written at the NPS and where the author had no clear affiliation with the US Navy or military in general. The page in question where the Calhoun library mentions the US Government work seems to me more like a boilerplate template than a genuine copyright evaluation on their side. Per our precautionary principle we need to be wary in such cases rather than blindly trusting the authorities. De728631 (talk) 01:41, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • The mark is not indiscriminately applied, at the very least; the institution generally eithers mentions valid copyright, does not mention copyright, or declares the work in the public domain, on account of it being a work of the U.S. government. This work was written at the NPS. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 02:14, 21 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

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

File:Brücke, Kunstzeitschrift, Kärnten.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Brücke, Kunstzeitschrift, Kärnten.jpg

Anton Kolig died in 1950 so his copyright has expired in the EU. Abzeronow (talk) 00:59, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose There is still the question when the painting was first published, so we can determine its copyright status in the US. Also, although it may seem trivial, this is not a faithful scan of the original image but the title page of a copyrighted magazine. De728631 (talk) 01:22, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If the original work is the top right painting here https://www.leopoldmuseum.org/en/press/press-materials/928/Anton-Kolig or the top painting shown here https://worldofwonder.net/artdept-the-homoerotic-paintings-of-anton-kolig/, it's from 1923. But of course, the DW having its own copyright should be considered as well as you say. Thanks for the context though, the DR did not convey that the DW itself could be problematic. Abzeronow (talk) 03:44, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:24, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Головной экран программы СтаДиа.jpg

Этот файл мой собственный, создан 10 лет назад, а 2 дня назад переписан с моего ПК в https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:UploadWizard AKU-47 (talk) 15:15, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose It's a screenshot of proprietary software. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 06:46, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: per WIO. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:23, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Military Map Symbols

I would like to reverse several deletions done on 13 Jan. The deleted files were duplicates, but they were accidentally duplicate. The files that were retained (found at end of redirect for most of the below) are wrong, and I am slowly uploading corrections.

CdnMCG (talk) 22:49, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As follow-up, the accidental duplicates have all been corrected. They now look as they were intended and do not match the deleted files. CdnMCG (talk) 03:18, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

VINOD YOUNG .jpg

Vinod young — Preceding unsigned comment added by VINOD YOUNG (talk • contribs) 03:55, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Игорь Аронович Бяльский.jpg Прошу восстановить файл

Файл был мне предоставлен Бяльским Игорем Ароновичем и помещён по его личной просьбе. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Михаил Польский (talk • contribs) 04:05, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Sony Bravia Android TV.jpg

This photo has been captured by me. Kinldy undelete it so that I will upload new version of the file with screen turned off--Kskhh (talk) 07:00, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: per Elcobbola. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:21, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Toshiba Satellite L50T-A196.jpg

This is not a derivative work but my own work I have this laptop with me--Kskhh (talk) 07:02, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: per Elcobbola. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:22, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Samsung Galaxy S9+ Black.jpg

This photo has been captured by me I have not taken it from the internet. I have meta data also. Kindly undelete it --Kskhh (talk) 07:06, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: per Elcobbola. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:22, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Files received from "Nour House" via OTRS

Hi, requesting deletion of the following files. They have been deleted by various administrators, as "OTRS permission was not received" - however, appropriate release statements for all the files are available at Template:OTRS ticket. From my observation, several emails (and tickets) have been merged into one ticket, and thread has been closed after updating files from one email only. As a result, no one knew about others. I have checked the all the files, and will be able to add OTRS permission asap after undeletion.

  1. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW001.jpg
  2. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW002.jpg
  3. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW004.jpg
  4. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW006.jpg
  5. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW007.jpg
  6. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW010.jpg
  7. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW011.jpg
  8. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW012.jpg
  9. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW013.jpg
  10. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW015.jpg
  11. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW017.jpg
  12. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW018.jpg
  13. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW020.jpg
  14. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW021.jpg
  15. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW023a.jpg
  16. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW027.jpg
  17. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW028.jpg
  18. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW029.jpg
  19. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW030a.jpg
  20. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW033.jpg
  21. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW037.jpg
  22. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW048.jpg
  23. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW049.jpg
  24. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW053.jpg
  25. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW055.jpg
  26. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW056.jpg
  27. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW061.jpg
  28. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW066.jpg
  29. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW072.jpg
  30. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW074.jpg
  31. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW076.jpg
  32. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW080.jpg
  33. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW081.jpg
  34. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW083.jpg
  35. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW084.jpg
  36. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW086.jpg
  37. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW088.jpg
  38. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW089.jpg
  39. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW090.jpg
  40. File:Khalili Collection of Swedish Textiles SW092.jpg
  41. File:Khalili_Collection_Enamels_of_the_World_FR_990X.jpg
  42. File:Khalili_Collection_Spanish_Damascened_Metalwork_ZUL003.jpg
  43. File:Khalili_Collection_Spanish_Damascened_Metalwork_ZUL004.jpg
  44. File:Khalili_Collection_Spanish_Damascened_Metalwork_ZUL014.jpg
  45. File:Khalili_Collection_Spanish_Damascened_Metalwork_ZUL018.jpg
  46. File:Khalili_Collection_Spanish_Damascened_Metalwork_ZUL019.jpg
  47. File:Khalili_Collection_Spanish_Damascened_Metalwork_ZUL023.jpg
  48. File:Khalili_Collection_Spanish_Damascened_Metalwork_ZUL025.jpg
  49. File:Khalili_Collection_Spanish_Damascened_Metalwork_ZUL051.jpg
  50. File:Khalili_Collection_Spanish_Damascened_Metalwork_ZUL059.jpg
  51. File:Khalili_Collection_Spanish_Damascened_Metalwork_ZUL075.jpg
  52. File:Khalili_Collection_Spanish_Damascened_Metalwork_ZUL081.jpg
  53. File:Khalili_Collection_Spanish_Damascened_Metalwork_ZUL092.jpg
  54. File:Khalili_Collection_Spanish_Damascened_Metalwork_ZUL093.jpg
  55. File:Khalili_Collection_Spanish_Damascened_Metalwork_ZUL094B.jpg
  56. File:Khalili_Collection_Spanish_Damascened_Metalwork_ZUL097.jpg
  57. File:Khalili_Collection_Spanish_Damascened_Metalwork_ZUL103.jpg
  58. File:Khalili_Collection_Spanish_Damascened_Metalwork_ZUL110.jpg
  59. File:Khalili_Collection_Spanish_Damascened_Metalwork_ZUL124.jpg
  60. File:Khalili_Collection_Spanish_Damascened_Metalwork_ZUL126.jpg
  61. File:Khalili_Collection_Spanish_Damascened_Metalwork_ZUL130.jpg
  62. File:Khalili_Collection_Spanish_Damascened_Metalwork_ZUL135.jpg

Thanks, KCVelaga (talk · mail) 14:10, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Stefan Kutzenberger: Foto (2019)

The picture in question is the official author portrait of Stefan Kutzenberger, it can be downloaded for free from the website of his editor and is free of any copyright requests. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apolinaris Grammophon (talk • contribs) 15:20, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Nissan X-Trail 2018.jpg

File is allowed for publications on information portals, which is stated on "Copyright info" page attached to the file bio. The given info is shown in Russian which is not a reason for file deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SsrKelso (talk • contribs) 16:32, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose That does not allow me to sell postcards with this photo. Thuresson (talk) 16:37, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose - Where, precisely, do you see a free license there? (You failed to provide a license with the upload.) How do you reconcile "Any reproduction, adaptation, translation and / or modification, both full and partial, as well as the use of materials on other websites, in violation of the above conditions is strictly prohibited" ("Любое воспроизведение, адаптация, перевод и/или модификация, как полные, так и частичные, а также использование материалов на иных веб-сайтах, в нарушение вышеприведенных условий строго воспрещается") with our requirement that derivatives be allowed? How do you reconcile "Any other use of these materials without Nissan's prior express written permission is strictly prohibited; this limitation applies, among other things, to the use of materials on advertising and amateur websites" ("Любое иное использование данных материалов без предварительного недвусмысленного письменного разрешения компании Nissan строго запрещено; данное ограничение относится, в том числе, к использованию материалов на рекламных и любительских веб-сайтах") with our requirement that content be useable anywhere for any purpose, including commercial (advertising)? Did you not read the linked policies in the notice you received? Эlcobbola talk 16:42, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: per above. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:21, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Towner Keeney Webster.jpg

This is a photograph of a photograph of my Great Grandfather, Towner K. Webster. It was probably taken around 1920. He died in 1922.

It has been in a family collection of photographs ever since. These are in my sole possession. No one else owns any rights to it. I chose to use it when I created an entry for him in Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Towner_K._Webster

I thought I had given permission for its use under the creative commons license. Can you undelete it?

@Garrison Point:

20:53, 21 January 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garrison Point (talk • contribs) 20:53, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Dyrhólaviti

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Dyrhólaviti

Architect copyright has expired in Iceland since he died in 1950 Abzeronow (talk) 00:59, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Masahiko Kimura and Nori Bunasawa.jpg - A photo taken from my Camera

File:Masahiko Kimura and Nori Bunasawa.jpg is a photo from my personal collection. It was taken using my camera and I am myself in this photo. I allowed it to be published in the novel I co-authored: The Toughest Man Alive. The link that the user -akko reported from the Russian website used my photo without my permission. Please advise me on the steps I should take to get this photo undeleted.

--110347nbtough (talk) 03:33, 22 January 2021 (UTC)Nori Bunasawa[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests&oldid=527559694"