Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests

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

Current requests[edit]

File:Peace and Friendship stadium 2014.JPG[edit]

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

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

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

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

Usage on az.wikipedia.org

Usage on kk.wikipedia.org

Usage on mni.wikipedia.org

Usage on ro.wikipedia.org

Usage on sr.wikipedia.org

Usage on tr.wikipedia.org

Usage on uk.wikipedia.org

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

Blacked-out images[edit]

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

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

From the Philippines

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

From UAE
From Luxembourg

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

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

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

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

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

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

File:Church_of_the_Gesu_2019.jpg[edit]

Requesting undeletion for upload in the English Wikipedia for en:Church of the Gesù, Quezon City, since there is no explicit FOP in the Philippines.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 06:41, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @Hariboneagle927: Please let me know when you have transferred the image. De728631 (talk) 14:51, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:SolaireResort&Casinojf0966_04.JPG[edit]

No FOP in the Philippines. For reuploading in the English Wiki main space for Solaire Resort & CasinoHariboneagle927 (talk) 07:34, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @Hariboneagle927: Please let me know when you have transferred the image. De728631 (talk) 14:51, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aditayadornkitikhun 2019.jpg[edit]

This picture do come have source, The Television Pool of Thailand is from NBT. --Thyj (talk) 11:12, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pictogram voting info.svg Info Originating from this video and deleted per this DR. Ankry (talk) 17:15, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Television Pool of Thailand, NBT cooperates with this broadcasting pool and also uses the TPT brand. So I don't a problem with them licensing this particular content. De728631 (talk) 14:56, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Torre de Manila (July 25, 2016).jpg[edit]

Requesting temporary undeletion. To be uploaded under fair use in the English wiki mainspace at Torre de Manila. There is no FOP in the Philippines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hariboneagle927 (talk • contribs) 21:51, 30 October 2021‎  (UTC+8)

@Hariboneagle927: As the temporal image seems to work well, then BA candidate.svg Weak oppose this UNDEL request. Regards, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:35, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support temporary undeletion to transfer. Just because we think that the current replacement on English Wikipedia is adequate, does not mean that this is image should be kept away from that project. The file is free enough for English Wikipedia and we should not be letting our editorial preference decide which free-in-the-US FoP images they can use. IronGargoyle (talk) 14:26, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @IronGargoyle: enwiki is not supposed to mimic Commons as per w:WP:NOT#NOTREPOSITORY nothwithstanding of allowance of unfree buildings there by virtue of U.S. law and U.S. architectural FOP. In fact, Patrickroque01 who is the prolific contributor of images of unfree public works there was notified before (in 2015) about his numerous images of Philippine buildings (and was even suggested by NickW557 to reduce some of his files to fair use, which may trigger 7-day countdown to deletion if the files were left unused). As far as my searching on enwiki is concerned, there are only four images of Burj Khalifa, and a single yet heavily-used image of Burj Al Arab (from UAE that does not have FOP too for publicly-visible artworks). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 15:54, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lenka Helena Koenigsmark.jpg[edit]

Hello, we would like to undelete the photo of Lenka Helena Koenigsmark. We did confirmed copywrite ownership as it was recommended to us in this Undeletion requests section at 26 October 2021 . The photographer Michal Ures send an email to [email protected] with copyrights at 3. 11. 2021. Then we were acknowleadge here, that we should send it to another email, so the photographer done it to [email protected] and received reply, that it is OK. It has been over a week. Can you now please undelete the photo?

It is this one photo: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lenka_Helena_Koenigsmark.jpg We use it for this site: https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenka_Helena_Koenigsmark

Thank you.

--Lenka Koe (talk) 13:06, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Lenka Koe: If no VRT volunteer responds here, you may need to ask for the permission review in COM:ON providing the permission ticket number. The information about panding permission request in ticket:2021081910005781 has been added on June 20 by a volunteer who, unfrtunately, died recently. But there is some discrepancy in dates, so maybe, this is not the ticket number you are talking about? Ankry (talk) 19:42, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, it should be the same. Sorry to here that :(
We have the photo visible online and it was deleted and since that we are proving and trying to undelete and do not know what more we can do for that. It seems it is stucked somewhere interspace. Lenka Koe (talk) 15:15, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Breakthrough Party Logo.png[edit]

Previously deleted for lack of license. Lower quality version appears to have been allowed under PD-logo, which should have been what the deleted file fell under (and as such it is suitable for Commons). HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 16:47, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Logo can be seen here. Yann (talk) 16:55, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The TOO in UK is low. I have nominated the other version for deletion. Ankry (talk) 00:42, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

September Woman of the Day banners[edit]

I have been working my way through the files under Category:Women in Red social media banners, adding sources and attribution to them. In my first pass, I have just reached mid-September where there's a run of deleted files, all of which were speedily deleted by JuTa, I think under CSD F5:

Since these were deleted for lacking sources, please could they be undeleted to that I can add sources to them? I've already done this for a couple of hundred other files in this category tree. There was a previous UDR for a file under this tree, at Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2021-09#File:Sep28 Woman of the Day.png, which was granted. --bjh21 (talk) 18:38, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bjh21: Not providing links to the wikipedia article sources / their authors you violated CC-BY-SA 3.0 license terms. As I can read the license terms, once you violated them, the license has stopped to you. This means that you can no longer use the articles under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license; in order to use them, you need to receive another license from all their authors. This means that YOU cannot use this image (but someone else can). Please, let someone correct me, if I am wrong. Ankry (talk) 00:35, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Владимир Колбасов.jpg[edit]

Является личной фотографией, все права принадлежат непосредственно автору. В этом можно убедиться по личной странице художника: https://vk.com/kolbassov

Translated via Google: "Is a personal photograph, all rights belong directly to the author. This can be seen from the artist's personal page."
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose @ErAxY: When you uploaded this picture here, you wrote that it was your own work. However, I can't find any credits mentioning "ErAxY" on the website you linked above. Nor does there seem to be a Creative Commons licence for the image. In such cases we need a written permission by email coming directly from the copyright holder. Please see COM:VRT. De728631 (talk) 14:41, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:2021 AndreasGloge©MartinaGloge.png[edit]

The foto "2021 AndreasGloge©MartinaGloge.png" has been deleted for no valid reason. The foto is made by Martina Gloge, my wife, meaning the wife of the person the wikipedia-article is about. She owns all the copyrights and she is happy to share this foot on wikipedia. She also states that I can freely use this foto for any public matters. Therefore there are no reasons or copyright violations existent.

Andreas Gloge --Cliffordagain (talk) 18:57, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Taivo at Commons:Deletion requests/File:2021 AndreasGloge©MartinaGloge.png. Thuresson (talk) 20:22, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:SR1-300.jpgTwitterのDMにて撮影者様より許可を頂いて掲載しております。[edit]

ながなの@Naga_nano様からTwitterのDMにて許可を頂いていたため掲載しましたが、削除されてしまったため削除解除リクエストを致します。TwitterのDMでの会話をアップロードしても問題無いか確認出来ないためスクリーンショットは添付出来ません。--Yuku Mizu (talk) 19:18, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Yuku Mizu: We cannot accept forwarded permissions. The free license needs to be granted either in the public post on twitter where the photo was published, or via email as described in VRT. Ankry (talk) 00:16, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cebu Taoist Temple[edit]

The temple building falls under {{PD-Philippines-FoP work}}, as per w:Cebu Taoist Temple it was completed in 1972 (highly likely middle part or 3rd quarter part of the year, or pre-December 15, 1972). If some images depict sculptural works, please do not undelete them yet. (Non-admins like me cannot see deleted images, so I just listed all deleted files here)

From COM:Deletion requests/File:Taoist Temple, Cebu.jpg

From COM:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Cebu Taoist Temple

_ JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:01, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Photos of Spoonbridge and Cherry[edit]

Per the decision to keep an image of the 1988 sculpture Spoonbridge and Cherry on a recent deletion request I initiated. IronGargoyle was convincingly able to demonstrate that although there is no freedom of panorama for public sculptures in the US, S&C was not registered with the US copyright office and tangible copies of the work were distributed (also without copyright notice). Thus, S&C has fallen into the public domain and previously deleted photos of it not prominently also featuring other works at the Minneapolis Sculpture Garden can be restored. Those files may include works previously deleted here including:

It's very possible that some of these may be duplicates of each other (as these files have been uploaded and deleted over the course of the past decade) in which case only one instance need be restored. Thank you! Bobamnertiopsis (talk) 05:52, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per nom and clear evidence that this sculpture is in the public domain per {{PD-US-1978-89}}. IronGargoyle (talk) 05:58, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, it is not clear whether it was published without copyright notice; at least there is one, now. BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Ankry (talk) 09:26, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That plaque is from 2009 or later (note included death date). Even if it was contemporary, remember that the the exhibition of the work is not publication in this time period. It is the photograph. That is where the copyright notice would need to be. IronGargoyle (talk) 13:26, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Also note that (according to the Wayback Machine) a web page from the garden from 2006 (before the new post-2009 plaque you sent) included no such copyright notice (whereas the equivalent website today does). IronGargoyle (talk) 13:53, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:ZeldaHeraldry.jpg[edit]

The file was a simple crop of File:Dragon Con 2013 - Pat Loika (9703021618).jpg, with a focus on the heraldic attribute(s) on the shield. Please restore File:ZeldaHeraldry.jpg so that the heraldic categories can exist on the crop.

Aavindraa (talk) 22:41, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What on the first file might count as de minimis, is the main part of your image. It wasn't only cropped, there's been a correction in perspective too. While hearts, a key and a lion are common charges in heraldry, the way they are displayed represents a copyrighted work of art. That's the problem. -- regards, 32X (talk) 23:30, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[jasonpoon2020.jpg] to be undeleted[edit]

To: [email protected]

I hereby affirm that I Jason POON, the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of jasonpoon2020.jpg as shown here uploaded on Wikimedia Commons, and have legal authority in my capacity to release the copyright of that work.

My facebook fanspage is verified with a blue mark. I have added a phrase of freely licensed on the page https://www.facebook.com/JasonPoonHongKong/photos/a.104317527641909/385585466181779/

I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the following free license: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International.

I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work, even in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.

I am aware that the copyright holder always retains ownership of the copyright as well as the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by the copyright holder.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

Jasonpoon8 (talk) 05:36, 6 December 2021 (UTC) Jason POON 2021.Dec 06[reply]

@Jasonpoon8: please send it via email or any form of correspondence to [email protected], not here, as per COM:VRTS. There is nothing to do here. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 05:56, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Razib Khan.jpg Usage in commons approved by copyright holder.[edit]

Copyright holder approves of use.

File:A reach stacker - container handling equipment.jpg[edit]

Good morning,

As stated in my answer to the initial deletion warning, I own the rights for this photo. I have since added a Creative Common license note here: https://logisticselearning.com/Logistics%20glossary/reach-stacker/

Based on this I would like to request the Undeletion of this file. Regards,

--TrainLearnGrow (talk) 09:51, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests&oldid=612183649"