Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests: Difference between revisions

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Browse history interactively
← Older editNewer edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
SignBot (talk | contribs)
Bots
101,330 edits
m Signing comment by Rikki9876 - "→‎File:Þróttur Vogar.png: new section"
Line 275: Line 275:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C990917
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C990917


* [[File:1990 Vauxhall Nova L 1.2 Front.jpg]]
* [[File:1990 Vauxhall Nova L 1.2 Front]]
* [[File:1990 Vauxhall Nova L 1.2 Rear.jpg]]
* [[File:1990 Vauxhall Nova L 1.2 Rear]]


--[[User:Vauxford|Vauxford]] ([[User talk:Vauxford|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 10:20, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
--[[User:Vauxford|Vauxford]] ([[User talk:Vauxford|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 10:20, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:52, 24 May 2018

Current requests

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

Request undeletion

Enter a descriptive heading and press the button:

This is a dashboard widget.

Files uploaded by VoidWanderer

Several files of mine were deleted, and I have reasons why they should be restored.

1. I've received a permission by Pavel Netesov, the author of the Blokpost Pamyati exhibition {{PermissionOTRS|2018040410013134}}:

2. Large batch of files are exhibition plates, and are falling under {{PD-text}}, because simple geometrical shapes, logos and tiny pictures may not be considered as copyright violation:

The depicted text is ineligible for copyright and therefore in the public domain, because it is not a “literary work” or other protected type in sense of the local copyright law. Facts, data, and unoriginal information which is common property without sufficiently creative authorship in a general typeface or basic handwriting, and simple geometric shapes are not protected by copyright.

--VoidWanderer (talk) 18:56, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose

1) These must wait their turn at OTRS. When they reach the head of the queue there in about 50 days, if the license is acceptable they will be automatically restored.
2) I looked at about half of these and all of the ones I looked at have photographs and/or drawings which have copyrights and all have far more text then is necessary for a copyright. I don't see how we can restore them without a free license from the copyright holders. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:11, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Jameslwoodward, all of the photos in a nomination are taken by me personally. OTRS ticket was aquired for the exhibition as a whole, not the pictures whose author I am already. So no one will mark them on OTRS queue, they're literally not queued.
Are you really saying exhibition plates that I took photo of are violating the copyrights? --VoidWanderer (talk) 22:16, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1) I understood your comment to mean that the creator(s) of the works portrayed had sent a free license to OTRS. I have now looked at them, and in every case that will be required. In some cases, there are photographs, text, and other copyrighted works in the images, so the copyrights for those will also have to be freely licensed.

I do not understand "So no one will mark them on OTRS queue, they're literally not queued." OTRS Ticket 2018040410013134, which you cite above, is in the OTRS queue. It will be read and acted on by an OTRS volunteer when it reaches the head of the queue, which will be around June 1.

2) Yes. All of the images that I examined infringe on the copyrights for the drawings, photographs, and the texts shown in them. While I did not look at all of them, I doubt very much that any of them can be kept on Commons. This should not surprise you. Sealle, Christian Ferrer, and I, all experienced Commons Admins, all reached the same conclusion -- that they are all far above the threshold of originality anywhere. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:11, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jameslwoodward, I mean how would those photos be possibly restored, if I have no guarantee OTRS Ticket even have those exact pictures mentioned? I suppose there's only the author's permission to take pictures of his exhibition. So I doubt volunteer will be even notified there're deleted photos that require to be restored. --VoidWanderer (talk) 09:41, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose per Jim, if the permission is valid then the images will be automatically restored. When you take a photo of something then you own the copyright on your photo, that is true, but if the thing depicted is protected by copyright (which is the case as soon as there is creativity) then the copyright holder of the depicted thing has also some rights on the publication of your photo, and in such cases it is required that we have his permission to publish here the photos. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:05, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ticket 2018040410013134 has permission for the Exhibition "Блокпост Пам'яті" from Pavel Netesov. It looks OK for me. But I do not know what pictures are from this exhibition.--Anatoliy (talk) 18:10, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ahonc: You can restore the files and add the template {{OTRS received}} while you check which files have been authorised. I've left you a note in the ticket, and we can continue the discussion there. Cheers --Ruthven (msg) 12:23, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/undefinedinsource:59832923@N02 -hastemplate:delete

It's probably better to see what comes from Commons:Deletion requests/undefinedinsource:huntingtontheatreco before we start deleting a few dozen randomly nominated files. I suspect File:Tristano and Matteo in The Miracle at Naples.jpg was actually https://www.flickr.com/photos/huntingtontheatreco/6762342679/ so this probably wasn't even a list of really obvious copyvios.

I've been meaning to organize that mess a bit, but was holding out to hear from the digital content manager from Huntington. - Alexis Jazz 23:24, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Photos of Wilson Cleveland

File:Wilson Cleveland Non-Transferrable Premiere.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This image is my own work. I am the author of this image and have noted CC-BY-SA 3.0 permissions in the description on both the Pro IMDB page (my account): https://pro.imdb.com/name/nm0166505/ and on my Flickr account: https://www.flickr.com/photos/thetemplifetv/26783817967/ Does this meet your requirements? Thank You. Wilsoncleveland (talk) 01:23, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NB: ticket:2018051810012974. --Ruthven (msg) 06:48, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wilson Cleveland and Milo Ventimiglia on set.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This image is my own work. I am the author of this image and have noted CC-BY-SA 3.0 permissions in the description on both the Pro IMDB page (my account): https://pro.imdb.com/name/nm0166505/ and on my Flickr account: https://www.flickr.com/photos/thetemplifetv/12043571106/ I sent this image to Tim Ryan at TAR Productions for his blog. That post is here: https://tarproductions.com/5-realities-about-branded-entertainment-every-creator-should-know/ Does this meet your requirements? Thank You. Wilsoncleveland (talk) 01:36, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I can talk to Tim. The TAR Productions copyright covers his entire site so he probably wont change that. Can I ask him to make this attribution in the caption? ©2014 Wilson Cleveland. CC-BY-SA 3.0. The photo was taken by Mark Rywelski. I hired him to take the photo. I own the files. Wilsoncleveland (talk) 05:23, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Wilsoncleveland: As before: the copyright holder of a photograph is the person who took the photograph, rather than a person who appears in it, unless the copyright is transferred by operation of law or contract. Can you please have the photographer send in a free license release for this image, or clarify how the copyright was transferred? --Ruthven (msg) 06:12, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Wilsoncleveland

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I hold the copyright for all of these images. They are stills and poster images from content I've created. I've licensed these images CC-BY-SA 3.0 and included those permissions in the captions on my IMDB Pro and Flickr Pro accounts. IMDB Pro and Flickr image links below for your convenience. Thank you.

File:Wilson Cleveland and Shannen Doherty in the Lifetime series Suite 7.jpghttps://pro.imdb.com/name/nm0166505/photos/#rmConst=rm1605847808

File:Wilson-cleveland-milo-ventimiglia-the-temp-life-season-5-law-and-lunch-order.jpg https://pro.imdb.com/name/nm0166505/photos/#rmConst=rm1705921280

File:The-temp-life-wikipedia-poster.jpg https://www.flickr.com/photos/thetemplifetv/26741544127/

File:Taryn-southern-sandeep-parikh-the-temp-life.jpg https://www.flickr.com/photos/thetemplifetv/26741544457/

File:Jaime-murray-eddie-mcclintock-suite-7-poster-image.jpg https://www.flickr.com/photos/thetemplifetv/39801586660/

File:Jaime Murray and Eddie McClintock in the web series Suite 7 distributed by Lifetime.jpg https://www.flickr.com/photos/thetemplifetv/39801588090/

File:Hartley Sawyer.jpg https://www.flickr.com/photos/thetemplifetv/15801687904/

File:Hartley-Sawyer-cup.jpg https://www.flickr.com/photos/thetemplifetv/16424178635/ Wilsoncleveland (talk) 04:53, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • For this sort of thing, we'll really need to go through the COM:OTRS process, where you email in a verification of identity. If you do this broadly enough, and establish whose account this is, you should only have to go through the OTRS process once, and can get permission that also lets this account upload your work in the future. Basically, you'll get a ticket number and that ticket can be put in a template you can use in the future.
  • Please understand, this is for protection of your rights, really the only way we can know that this Commons account is not someone impersonating you. We had a lot of times someone claimed to be a given designer or photographer and wasn't, which is why we initiated that system. - Jmabel ! talk 06:20, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Leap Year title poster.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I hold the copyright to this image. This is a series I created. I've licensed as CC-BY-SA 3.0. Here is the link to the image on my IMDB Pro account with license permissions in the caption: https://pro.imdb.com/name/nm0166505/photos/#rmConst=rm3808054272 Wilsoncleveland (talk) 05:13, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Wilsoncleveland: We cannot base on information located on non-public pages, including pages that require loging in. Ankry (talk) 11:06, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ankry: Of course. Sorry about that. Here's the image on my Flickr with permissions info: https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8438/7910617948_ac225a94c8_n.jpg Will that work? Wilsoncleveland (talk) 18:10, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Fabriciofffs

These files were created and uploaded by Fabriciofffs (talk · contribs), who submitted them for an unspecified contest. When he repented, way past the 7 days grace, he started to falsify the licensing metadata of his own files, which eventually led to the deletion of some. Please restore all of his files with their original licensing terms.

Some shall also be marked with {{Published|small=yes|legal=no|url=https://www.viajali.com.br/motivos-para-conhecer-caverna-do-maroaga-e-gruta-da-judeia/|accessdate=3 May 2018}}

Kind regards, --Usien6 (talk · contribs) 16:10, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've found some more: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Fernando de Noronha 1.jpg, …2.jpg, …3.jpg, …5.jpg, …6.jpg, …9.jpg, …10.jpg, and …11.jpg. Att --Usien6 (talk · contribs) 16:29, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Support. I agree with @Usien6: . Apparently the user did not read properly the rules of contest, not won the prize and now wants to delete the photos. But, our licenses are very clear: "By saving changes, you agree to the Terms of Use, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license and the GFDL. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.". EVinente (talk) 17:07, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Usien6: Most, maybe all, of them contain copyright information that according to our rules should be explained via OTRS permission; see Commons:Deletion requests/Files_ uploaded by Fabriciofffs.  Oppose unless we get such a permission, which is unlikely. Ankry (talk) 11:33, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ankry: "BELO HORIZONTE" is actually a Brazilian city. The sixth largest one, in fact. There was, more than obviously, a technical mishandling of metadata. All of his uploads were created by a single person: himself. Att --Usien6 (talk · contribs) 14:21, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I said the same about BELO HORIZONTE here, but Yann ignored me. @Usien6: please, link to Commons resources wherever possible. Wikipedia has too much publicity nowadays. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 07:21, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, there was some uncertainty, that's why I created a DR, and Jcb seems to agree, as he deleted the files. There were not many comments in the DR. More opinions would be useful. Now if there is a (near) consensus that this was a technical mishandling of metadata, as Usien6 suggests above, I am fine with restoration. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:15, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Yann: I see you have administrator rights and should therefore be able to inspect deleted files. Would you mind checking if any of the aforementioned photos were taken by either a Canon/Canon PowerShot SX50 HS or a SONY/DSC-H55 ?? Thank you so much, --Usien6 (talk · contribs) 13:03, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Usien6: I checked 2 of them. There is no mention of a camera in EXIF data. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:20, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Incnis Mrsi: Thank you for your support !! I could not understand your last two sentences, though, as English is not my mother tongue … Kind regards, --Usien6 (talk · contribs) 13:03, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Atle r s (talk · contribs)

@Atle r s and Jameslwoodward: Back in 2013, Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Atle r s was closed as Delete, because the source page, http://atle.no/?p=1421 was marked Creative Commons Non-commercial, and Atle r s couldn't prove he was the Atle of http://atle.no. A mere 5 years later, I found another one of Atle r s's files, and opened Commons:Deletion requests/File:SynnøveMacodyLund.jpg on basically the same principle - in response to which Atle change the license on his pages - all his pages - to CC-BY-SA! So not only do we get to save File:SynnøveMacodyLund.jpg but we can undelete the other files as well.

Also, if some knowledgeable person can find a template to mark User:Atle r s as having been verified as the Atle of http://atle.no, we can avoid possible future misunderstandings. --GRuban (talk) 20:58, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Lasse-lehre.jpg is not published at atle.no, in fact according to the image description the photo is from www.hoyre.no. I can't find the photo there today. Thuresson (talk) 04:37, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not having the mop, I can't see the deleted images. Is the other image at least from and on atle.no? --GRuban (talk) 14:14, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done File:Forfatter Stig Sæterbakken.jpeg, but am unclear about File:Lasse-lehre.jpg, which as Thuresson noted, is credited to Høyre. I appreciate that it is reasonably likely that Atle r s was the photographer, but given he credited it to Høyre, I'd be more comfortable with OTRS confirmation. Likewise, marking his user page as OTRS confirmed would require actual OTRS confirmation. Storkk (talk) 09:44, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Coat of arms of the Republic of Ararat.png

Hello. Can you restore this logo that belonged to the organization en:Xoybûn (1927). I myself had sourced with a source dating from the 1930s. This request and the deletion seems incomprehensible to me. Thanks.--Ghybu (talk) 13:51, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose - per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Coat of arms of the Republic of Ararat.png - Jcb (talk) 13:56, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@user:Jcb: Have you looked at the sources that I added? I think this logo has been removed regardless of the sources. We are told that there is no source but there are sources--Ghybu (talk) 14:00, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but I am not impressed. These 'sources' seem to support the concerns of E4024 rather than contradicting them. Jcb (talk) 14:08, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
These sources (for example: (1928), 1930 "Publication de la ligue national kurde de Hoybun" (n°2 and 6) - These are writings published by the organization Xoybûn in the 20s and 30s and we see this logo) attests to the existence and veracity of this logo. I am told there is no source and I show sources to prove otherwise. But I'm not trying to impress anyone. I'm just saying this organization is encyclopedic and it has many pages on Wikipedia. And if there is no copyright problem I do not see why we could not download this 30s logo on Commons.--Ghybu (talk) 15:11, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ps:The name of this page was different when I added sources (this page was a redirect). I am for restoration under the other name (File:Logo of the Hoyboon Organization.png) and the deletion of it.--Ghybu (talk) 15:28, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "This request and the deletion seems incomprehensible to me." Subtract "and the deletion" from there and I also sign your sentence. You are telling us that the image was not what it said it was but you're surprised that... Surprised of what? That at some point of time one of the so many baseless information given to WP users for years hit a wall? Will someone apologize for fooling millions of readers for such a long time? I believe we should discuss these things more profoundly in Commons. If we do that once, people will think twice before uploading whatever they wish to our pages and use them the way they wish afterwards. Please let us all not try to help "make" history; but help "tell" it, objectively, to the people who trust WMF projects as a source of information. Image files in Commons are not an exception. --E4024 (talk) 08:36, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Do not play the candid, I spent time correcting and sourcing this image; in spite of that you still supported the deletion . A request for deletion that can also serve to clarify some points but in this case you have ignored the changes made. This image in the form that I saw and let should not be deleted., that's why I made a request for restoration. I remind you that we are on a wiki and there is also a discussion page that can be used for corrections concerning the informations.
As for your neutrality, your sweet words and your posture of lesson givers seen your passive I do not believe too much. I think it's a camouflage to get your own POV. And in terms of deceiving people you are well-versed:
See cross-wiki on Kurdish and Armenian Genocide articles: [1] (es), [2] (en), [3] (fr) and on ca.wikipedia ([4] and [5]).--Ghybu (talk) 13:24, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am a quite "objective" user (and I appreciate it more than being so-called neutral) and in this case happy to have made some users go to search things, it always makes you learn. Now do you feel better informed about some part of history? Good. No need to thank me. BTW I will not respond to your ... (fill in the blanks). If you want to play, use the sandbox. Discuss the file, I will not contribute any more to this. --E4024 (talk) 13:43, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/Files by Mbazri

Please temporarily undelete all so I can take a look at them. I'm familiar with some of the complexities of Tasnim. At least File:Hadi Hajatmand & Ali Soleimani at the Eighth Ammar Film Festival.jpg appears to have been wrongly deleted. It's https://newsmedia.tasnimnews.com/Tasnim/Uploaded/Image/1396/10/15/139610152329007612973144.jpg and any derivative work that may be seen on that image would obviously be DM, so now I want to look at everything that was nominated. - Alexis Jazz 16:50, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please ping me if this request is honored as I don't check this page on a regular basis. - Alexis Jazz 23:55, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Henrietta Berk

"Copyright violation: Henrietta Berk - died 1990" - completely irrelevant, she's an American. All that matters is the date of the work. As I haven't found any copyright registrations, everything before March 1, 1989 should be public domain. (it doesn't look like she painted copyright notices either, I checked the back of a painting) - Alexis Jazz ping plz 12:50, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexis Jazz: When were these painted? If after 28 February 1989, her copyright lasts until 1 January 2061 per COM:HIRTLE.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 13:49, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jeff G.: I doubt she painted anything the year before she died, but if you tell me exactly which paintings those files show I'll see what I can find. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 13:56, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(Edit conflict) Both were painted in the early 1960s according to the Henrietta Berk Research Project. The IA copyright records are currently down for me for a few of the salient years, but there appears to be no renewal by either a "Berk Henrietta" or "Robin Henrietta", but I find my searches on https://cocatalog.loc.gov to be flaky at best, and so the fact that I haven't found it isn't gospel. Storkk (talk) 14:00, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Storkk: Thank you. Do you have better names for these paintings? The names provided by User:Califpaint leave much to the imagination.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:05, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The {{Information}} template described them as The Valley, Vacaville and Picnic, but whether those are accurate or not I have no idea. Storkk (talk) 14:08, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I hadn't even noticed these were also from Califpaint. Also see Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Califpaint. I found them at Category:Undelete in 2061 when searching for other works by Henrietta Berk. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 14:34, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Is File:Henriettaberk.jpg also a painting? - Alexis Jazz ping plz 14:42, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes and no. It's an old photograph of her painting a picture. So it includes the photographer's copyright for the portrait as well as Berk's copyright for the painting. De728631 (talk) 14:44, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
When was their first publication, and did they have copyrighted notices then? If they were first published in a book, they wouldn't be required to have independent notices. If they're post-1963, they don't need renewals, and even before that they could have renewed as part of the larger work. Proving a painting of that era is in the public domain is really hard unless you're really familiar with its history.--Prosfilaes (talk) 00:23, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dick Ponzi.jpg

I don't understand why this was deleted. I supplied a link, as requested, to the copyright page associated with this image where it states that educational use is allowed. Link here: http://digitalcommons.linfield.edu/terms_of_use.html. This image is part of an academic collection and use on educational sites such as Wikipedia is permitted. Please let me know how to get this undeleted.--Birdeaux78 (talk) 17:18, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There were two files deleted, the one in the title and this one as well: File:Dick Ponzi in his winery.jpg which is from the same source under the same educational use permission. I'd like this undeleted as well. Please advise, thanks.--Birdeaux78 (talk) 17:22, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Birdeaux78: For our purposes here on Commons, those terms at http://digitalcommons.linfield.edu/terms_of_use.html boil down to "do not use unless there is an explicit CC license for that work" because we don't accept Fair Use per COM:FAIRUSE. For Fair Use on English Wikipedia, please see en:WP:F.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 17:41, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Birdeaux78: Is there any way to use the images? Could the copyright holders upload them? Thank you for helping me understand this.--Birdeaux78 (talk) 19:39, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Birdeaux78: Yes, with OTRS permission.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 04:13, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Professor Md. Saidur Rahman.png

This file was created with the intention of using it in a page on Dr. Saidur Rahman, who is a renowned computer scientist and mathematician in Bangladesh. I have just put a publication request for this page that uses this image.

Here is the draft of the page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Md._Saidur_Rahman --Djyoti Mondal (talk) 03:58, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Djyoti Mondal: The target article en:Md. Saidur Rahman was not ready on 2 May due to en:WP:CSD#A7, and the draft is still not ready (awards & honors need refs). Are there other articles which this image could help, perhaps in Bangladeshi Wikipedia?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 04:11, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1990 Vauxhall Nova L 1.2

Two of the files I uploaded where deleted from a OTSR ticket request. The person claimed that the photos breached their personal data because the registration plate on it was uncensored.

What happen was, About a month ago I encountered the said car and I was thrilled since it was a modern classic so I photographed it and uploaded it on Wikimedia Commons. One month later I saw it was on sale on a classic car website. So I thought I show my gratitude to the person and said there image is being used for educational purposes. The car was in a public space and I didn't mention the exact location other then the town name. The registration plate was uncensored which should makes sense for it to be deleted. I personally think a registration plate doesn't reveal their personal data because I photographed thousands of cars. I blurred out the registration plates on all cars unless they are older than 25 years.

Although, after I exchange email with the person. They said that the car was taken off sale and be used in car show exhibit. (i.e Letting hundreds photograph their car where people could share it on other websites.) Another fact I pointed out was that the pictures on the car sale page they had pictures of the car where the registration plate is clearly visible.

I understand that you usually need to ask permission from the owner but this usually the case with individuals and not cars which are often parked on public roads and car parks. I personally think my images been wrongfully deleted just because it shown the registration plate despite the facts above and there thousands of images on here, including mines are on the commons with registration plates uncensored.

If it does get undeleted I will with all due respect to the owner censor the registration plate.

The page got removed but can be still viewed on a cache. http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C990917

--Vauxford (talk) 10:20, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Though I performed the deletions, based on the OTRS ticket (to which I have no access), I think the only thinkable "privacy problem" might be the well-visible car plates, which could easily be censored. The car was obviously pictured while parking in the public. --Túrelio (talk) 10:28, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The photo was also used in the Opel Corsa article as a quality example of a pre-facelift Vauxhall Nova. I'm very happy to censored the plate. --Vauxford (talk) 10:36, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
But I'm unable to view it. How will I know about the other details the person put on the ticket request? --Vauxford (talk) 10:42, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, GSS. I hope this was OTRS-conform. Anyway, after reading the request, IMO the only reasonable rationale is "car-plates visible". AFAIK, the owner has no right over an image of his/her car, especially if taken in public space. So, I would allow upload of carplate-censored versions of the images. However, as I'm no expert in UK law, the deciding admin-colleague might also take into account whether there is a legal risk for User:Vauxford, who seems to be identified towards the car-owner. --Túrelio (talk) 10:54, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Support Are license plates really private information? My gut says that if you're displaying something to the public it's hard to argue that it's private... but I'm sure this has been fought over before and don't object too much to censoring them out, since I'm not sure there is strong argument that they're educationally valuable. I also cannot see the ticket, though, and don't know exactly why it was deleted. Just to confirm, Túrelio, you were able to see the ticket at time of deletion, and it has since been moved? Storkk (talk) 10:52, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Storkk, no, as I am no OTRS-volunteer, I wasn't able to see the ticket at the time of deletion. The deletions were based on the provided rationale (as per this request on OTRS ... for privacy reason.) and trust towards OTRS-volunteers. --Túrelio (talk) 10:55, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@GSS: In which queue is the ticket? Please move it to a Commons queue. Storkk (talk) 11:03, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Storkk: It was in info-en I just moved it to commons. GSS (talk|c|em) 11:06, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Having now read the ticket, I still support undeletion, possibly with the license plates censored, depending on whether that is actually considered private information in the UK. Storkk (talk) 11:10, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I usually censor the registration plate but I choose not to since it basically a classic (The car is almost 30 years old). Regstration plates in the UK should be kept censored but it not mandatory from what I recall. The best you can do with the registration plate in the UK is finding out the year, make, model, colour, engine size etc. You can find out whether it a write-off or if it stolen as well as finding previous owners but that cost money and usually need special request from the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency which can take days and require a valid reason. --Vauxford (talk) 11:16, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
According to a FOI request from 2015, the DVLA apparently considers number plates to be personal information if the owner is an individual. Now, whether or not that should make a difference is another question (your face is also personal information, but if you're walking around in public, it's not private...) but do I think there is a decent rationale to remove the license plate and undelete. Storkk (talk) 11:27, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Can I write "wiiikis" on it? (Wikipedia says that would be a valid license plate) - Alexis Jazz ping plz 13:23, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I like the idea but I usually censor registration plate using colours that match the plate. Also the deleted photo was taken at a three-quarters angle which could be difficult to replace each letters. --Vauxford (talk) 13:27, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(Edit conflict)If there is consensus to undelete, then I would suggest leaving a clear white or black space to make it obvious that something has been removed, not alter it in a fashion that might be misleading to people without knowledge of the history of the file. But so far, there has only been my opinion, no consensus has been demonstrated. Storkk (talk) 13:30, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Vauxford: I will have no problem with the angle. I could also replace it with "EXAM PLE" or something. I also support the undeletion btw, assuming OTRS doesn't have much more information than what can be read here. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 14:11, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You are welcome to incorporate File:CENSORED.JPG or File:CENSORED.SVG.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 03:56, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate the suggestions, although I have my own of censoring registration plates.--Vauxford (talk) 11:54, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So have we made a decision? Or is there further things need to discuss about? --Vauxford (talk) 21:13, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support undeleting on the basis that the plate's blurred - In the UK atleast one can obtain the name and address of any vehicle owner though any UK website so the whole privacy thing rather fails on that point, Outside of the UK I don't know if these sorts of things exist but if they do then the only way to "protect" yourself is by never driving your car if that makes sense..... –Davey2010Talk 22:09, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:"True Prosperity".jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Deletion was done at Commons:Deletion requests/File:"True Prosperity".jpg.

In OTRS ticket:2016052510034637 the artist / copyright holder gave permission by sharing a copy of the file but neglected to connect the file attachment to their Commons upload. In the follow up there was no response with a URL.

I am writing to make the connection that (1) the art is an attachment in this ticket and (2) the art matches to that upload.

User:PolskaGoyl asked for my help in undeleting the file. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:42, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @Bluerasberry: please add the final OTRS template. De728631 (talk) 20:52, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I fixed the OTRS template. Blue Rasberry (talk) 12:19, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Two W Langdon Kihn works

per my close of Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:W._Langdon_Kihn. I've now checked 1924-1930 as well as the requisite renewal dates. The only Kihn work that appears to have been renewed (that I could find) was The tiger who walks alone Frontispiece. Storkk (talk) 17:32, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Support Pinging @Srittau: who deleted these. De728631 (talk) 20:48, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Support per Storkk's analysis. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 00:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Support per link above. Thanks again for your help Storkk! -- Deadstar (msg) 08:10, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Greg_J._Marchand_MD.jpg

I am the owner of the image, please kindly undelete it. You can see on my webpage that I have posted the image with the cc0 logo under it after attesting. http://gregmarchandmd.com/images-cc0-licensed-used-freely/ This file may be used on different wiki platforms having to do with physicians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ClaraBell89 (talk • contribs) 22:30, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS. We need permission from the photographer, not just the subject.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 03:52, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tahrir Square - February 10, 2011.png (deleted revisions)

What are our stance on a person releasing a low-res file under a free license on Commons, but high-res on Flickr? We have gone forth and back on that issue over a long-time on noticeboards and specific images in the past, and yet we don't have a written policy about it yet.

Creative Commons has stated the following on this issue:

[I]f the low-resolution and high-resolution copies are the same work under applicable copyright law, permission under a CC license is not limited to a particular copy, and someone who receives a copy in high resolution may use it under the terms of the CC license applied to the low-resolution copy.

I believe we need a set precedence and written a policy about "low-res versions of files being free while claiming the high-res is a different work". But until then, we should side with Creative Commons, it is them that wrote the licenses in question. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 23:44, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Capture d’écran 2017-12-12 à 18.26.03.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: OTRS agent ( verify ) request: Ticket:2018051010011364 alleges permission for this file. Request temporary undeletion to assess the validity of that allegation, and ping me. If the permission looks good for me, I'll remove {{Temporarily undeleted}} and add {{PermissionOTRS}}, otherwise, {{OTRS received}}. Thanks ! Framawiki (please notify) (talk) 10:39, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mandalynn on Greys Anatomy.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: I took this photo on the set, with all actors permission, including my daughter, Mandalynn Carlson. I uploaded to the wiki page. I have the original photo, taken on my phone. I'd like to see this photo back on the page, please. Sherri Carlson MandolinPictures (talk) 02:02, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS. Please send the original file, not one that has been through Facebook.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 02:35, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eric Garris 2018.jpg

The photographer tried to give permission for the photo the same day it got deleted. He said he now knows the permission process, and will give permission as soon as he can if undeleted.


--ChicoDesigns (talk) 15:52, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS. Also, please note that it is a serious violation of Commons rules to upload an image a second time after deletion as you did here. It wastes your time and that of other Commons editors. If you do it again, you may be blocked from editing on Commons.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 17:47, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File: Francisco Pesqueira. Cantante, actor, autor y escritor.jpg

--Carlos Héctor Bonfiglio (talk) 22:24, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS. Also, please note that it is a serious violation of Commons rules to upload an image like File:Francisco Pesqueira. Cantante,actor, autor, director y escritor.jpg a second time after deletion as you did here. It wastes your time and that of other Commons editors. If you do it again, you may be blocked from editing on Commons.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 00:27, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:FC Mecklenburg Schwerin 150px.png

And File:FC Mecklenburg Schwerin Logo.pdf: While these are non-trivial logos, the entire non-trivial part is identical to File:Mecklenburger Bulle (Landeswappen).svg (with some small parts in red rather than yellow) which is in the public domain. The logo consists of that CoA in a circle with a simple text in them (see here). I therefore believe the entire logo is in the public domain. (There are versions of the logo with a knight to the right, my post does not apply to that.) --Redeemer (talk) 16:42, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:1000 Yaroslav.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Based on its usage at en:Millennium of Russia and naming convention (compare files in Category:Millennium of Russia's details), I believe this image is part of the aforementioned sculpture, which was completed in 1862. The sculpture is almost certainly in the public domain by now, so the original deletion rationale is invalid. clpo13(talk) 22:05, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wojciech Bojanowski.jpg

The author of the picture allowed to use it on Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noaibanda (talk • contribs) 22:14, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS.  — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 23:39, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Peripheral edema of a woman's face, before and after; Annapurna Base Camp, 2015.JPG

OTRS agent (verify): request: Ticket:2018030810000535 alleges permission. Request temporary undeletion to assess the validity of that allegation, mark as {{subst:OR}} or otherwise appropriately, and ping me.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 03:15, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeff G.: Undeleted as per request. Thuresson (talk) 18:02, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Thuresson: Thank you. How about File:ERC& ASC w-5 duaghters.jpg? If approved, I will fix the filename.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 06:49, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:ERC& ASC w-5 duaghters.jpg

OTRS agent (verify): request: Ticket:2018030810010221 alleges permission. Request temporary undeletion to assess the validity of that allegation, mark as {{subst:OR}} or otherwise appropriately, and ping me.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 03:32, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeff G.: Temporarily undeleted. Thuresson (talk) 07:16, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Thuresson: Thanks, now we need photographer permission for a photo from ca. 1949...   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 08:08, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Visoko-2.jpg

I made this picture self, with my camerea, i am the owner of all rights,

undelete this please — Preceding unsigned comment added by Woaxit (talk • contribs) 03:40, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Signing your posts on talk pages is required and it is a Commons guideline to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 03:52, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS. Did you upload it to http://semirosmanagic.com/en/bosnian_pyramid.html?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 03:52, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vince Duverge 2017.png

I am requesting the undeletion of this photo as I own the rights of the photo.

While deleting the page someone stated that it belonged to this following page: https://www.facebook.com/vinceduverge/photos/a.163722523687617.39625.163721353687734/1496639987062524/?type=3&theater

As a matter of fact, it is my Facebook page. I am Joseph Guy Vincent Duvergé and can provide identity confirmation if need be. I only wanted to update the photo as the previous one appeared to have been someone else's file.

Regards,

Vincent Duvergé — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joseph1595 (talk • contribs) 05:27, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose You have previously claimed that you are Jonathan Ah-Yu. Please use Commons:OTRS to provide information that you are the copyright owner. Also, if you intend to continue to edit articles about yourself, friends and family, please be advised to read en:Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Thuresson (talk) 21:26, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request undeletion of File:Douglas Reid Skinner.jpg

I uploaded this image on behalf of Douglas Reid Skinner himself, who owns the photograph and gave me permission to use it. Furthermore, the McGregor Poetry Festival blog you cite as reason for deletion is NOT in fact the owner of the photograph. The photograph was provided to them by Douglas Reid Skinner to promote his poetry reading on a blog post. There is no copyright infringement involved, as the image is free and freely circulated with the permission of the owner. MinkiPool (talk) 07:41, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS. We need permission from the photographer, not just the subject.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 05:05, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:กวนอิม.jpg

The author is myself and is also publishing free copyright (CC BY-SA 3.0 TH). Please undelete it. --Thyj (talk) 10:30, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS.  — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 05:04, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Botev-Plovdiv-João-Paulo-Kirov-Kochev.png

I am the original author of the photo. I want it to be published under open source license. Please return the deleted photo. Leon.anavi (talk) 21:24, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS. Also, please note that it is a serious violation of Commons rules to upload an image a second time after deletion as you did here. It wastes your time and that of other Commons editors. If you do it again, you may be blocked from editing on Commons.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 04:56, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Meriem Zobiri

Les droits d'utilisation de ce fichier appartienne à l'actrice créatrice de la page qui en a payé les droits au photographe auteur du shooting — Preceding unsigned comment added by Merimzobiri (talk • contribs) 03:17, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Signing your posts on talk pages is required and it is a Commons guideline to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 04:54, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The rights to use this file belongs to the creative actress of the page who paid the rights to the photographer who made the shooting
 
translator: Google via   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 04:54, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Escudo San Luis Antioquia.png

Archivo: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Escudo_San_Luis_Antioquia.png

Please no deleted this imagen is public domain of San Luis Antioquia colombia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alek25 (talk • contribs) 05:18, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

San Luis Antioquia (Colombia) 22 de mayo de 2018-05-22 MUNICIPIO DE SAN LUIS, ANTIOQUIA ALCALDÍA MUNICIPAL NIT: 890.984.376-5 Señores Wikipedia Asunto: revisión de Fotografías e información licencia Commons.

La Administración Municipal del de San Luis Antioquia (Colombia) se permite notificar que actualmente se encuentra realizando un trabajo de actualización de la información y de fotografías del municipio de San Luis con el fin de dar información precisa y actualizada sobre el territorio sanluisano. Se está utilizando información veraz y pública, así mismo archivos fotográficos que por su carácter cultural son de dominio público para los sanluisanos y que se han tomado a lo largo de las distintas administraciones publicas pasadas. Frente a las imágenes del mapa, escudo, y bandera, son de dominio público ya que es un archivo que identifica al municipio ante el estado y la nación Por lo tanto solicitamos el no borrar y aceptar esta archivo que representa a nuestro municipio y que como pueden ver se encuentra en distintos portales institucionales de Colombia como son la Alcaldía, el Departamento y el Gobierno central. No es por tanto una violación al

El trabajo de actualización de datos y fotografías lo está realizando el equipo de comunicaciones bajo la dirección de Diego Alejandro Hoyos, Comunicador Social de la Alcaldía de San Luis y cuyo usuario para la edición en wikipedia es Alek25 Cualquier duda o inquietud en el membrete se encuentran los datos de contacto de nuestra Administración Pública Municipal Cordialmente:

Diego Alejandro Hoyos Comunicador Social Alcaldía Alcaldía Municipio de San Luis Antioquia Colombia Cr 18 # 17-08 PBX: 8348560-61-62, Línea gratuita: 01 8000 400105, Celular: 3148325965 Correo: alcaldia@sanluis-antioquia.gov.co, alcalde@sanluis-antioquia.gov.co, contactenos@sanluis-antioquia.gov.co, bquejasreclamos@sanluis-antioquia.gov.co.Web: www.sanluis-antioquia.gov.co.


San Luis Antioquia (Colombia) May 22, 2018-05-22 MUNICIPIO DE SAN LUIS, ANTIOQUIA ALCALDÍA MUNICIPAL NIT: 890.984.376-5

Gentlemen Wikipedia Subject: review of photographs and information license Commons. The Municipal Administration of San Luis Antioquia (Colombia) is allowed to notify that it is currently carrying out a work of updating the information and photographs of the municipality of San Luis in order to provide accurate and updated information on the territory of San Luis. Public and public information is being used, as well as photographic archives that, due to their cultural nature, are public domain for people of San Luis and that have been taken throughout the different public administrations in the past. In front of the images of the map, shield, and flag, son of public domain and that is a file that identifies the municipality before the state and the nation Therefore, we request that you do not delete and accept this file that represents a municipality and that can be seen in different institutional portals of Colombia such as the Mayor's Office, the Department and the central Government. It is not therefore a violation of The work of updating data and photographs is being carried out by the communication team under the direction of Diego Alejandro Hoyos, Social Communicator of the Mayor of San Luis and his user for the wikipedia edition is Alek25 Any questions or concerns in the place where the contact details of our Municipal Public Administration are located Cordially: Diego Alejandro Hoyos Communicator Social City Hall Municipality of San Luis Antioquia Colombia Cr 18 # 17-08 PBX: 8348560-61-62, Línea gratuita: 01 8000 400105, Celular: 3148325965 Correo: alcaldia@sanluis-antioquia.gov.co, alcalde@sanluis-antioquia.gov.co, contactenos@sanluis-antioquia.gov.co, bquejasreclamos@sanluis-antioquia.gov.co.Web: www.sanluis-antioquia.gov.co.


https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Request_for_data_not_deleted_from_images.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alek25 (talk • contribs) 05:47, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there.

I am the copyright owner of the file film poster File:TSB small poster image.jpg.

Can I add it to the text for the Silver Branch film, which I also am the copyright owner for?

Thanks. Katrina Costello

Katrinacostello (talk) 06:00, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS.  — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 06:08, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Padre Clemente Giraldo.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Padre_Clemente_Giraldo.jpg

Municipio de San Luis, Antioquia (Colombia) Alcaldía municipal Nit: 890.984.376-5 San Luis Antioquia (colombia) 22 de mayo de 2018-05-22 Señores wikipedia asunto: revisión de fotografías e información licencia commons.

la administración municipal del de san luis Antioquia (Colombia) se permite notificar que actualmente se encuentra realizando un trabajo de actualización de la información y de fotografías del municipio de San Luis con el fin de dar información precisa y actualizada sobre el territorio sanluisano. Se está utilizando información veraz y pública, así mismo archivos fotográficos que por su carácter cultural son de dominio público para los sanluisanos y que se han tomado a lo largo de las distintas administraciones publicas pasadas.

Frente a las imágenes del PADRE CLEMENTE GIRALDO. Este es el fundador del municipio de San Luis y cuya imagen se registra en los archivos históricos del Municipio de Granada Antioquia, que es el pueblo que colonizó a San Luis. Esta fotografía a sido usada sin ánimo de lucro o interés comercial, de hecho en la historia reposa como regalo que el pueblo de granada dio a San Luis y cuya obra reposa en el recinto del Concejo Municipal. Son otras páginas en que esta imagen libre y que data de más de hace 70 años el presbítero falleció hace 85 años y esta foto data de de 1930 es por ende un registro histórico y patrimonial de importancia para la gente de San Luis y Granada Es por esto que aparece en el blog de http://robertozocodice.blogspot.com.co/2013/11/ pero esta foto no pertenece a él, sin embargo al ser una tarea informativa y por la antigüedad de la misma consideramos que no hay violación de derechos


El trabajo de actualización de datos y fotografías lo está realizando el equipo de comunicaciones bajo la dirección de Diego Alejandro Hoyos, comunicador social de la alcaldía de San Luis y cuyo usuario para la edición en wikipedia es alek25 cualquier duda o inquietud en el membrete se encuentran los datos de contacto de nuestra Administración Pública Municipal

Cordialmente: Diego Alejandro Hoyos Comunicador Social Alcaldía Municipio de San Luis Antioquia ColombiaCr 18 # 17-08 PBX: 8348560-61-62, Línea gratuita: 01 8000 400105, Celular: 3148325965 Correo: alcaldia@sanluis-antioquia.gov.co, alcalde@sanluis-antioquia.gov.co, contactenos@sanluis-antioquia.gov.co, bquejasreclamos@sanluis-antioquia.gov.co.Web: www.sanluis-antioquia.gov.co.


Municipality of San Luis, Antioquia (Colombia) City Hall Nit: 890.984.376-5 San Luis Antioquia (Colombia) May 22, 2018-05-22 Lords wikipedia Subject: review of photographs and information commons license. The municipal administration of san luis Antioquia (Colombia) is allowed to notify that it is currently carrying out a work of updating the information and photographs of the municipality of San Luis in order to provide accurate and updated information on the sanluisano territory. It is using truthful and public information, as well as photographic archives that, due to their cultural nature, are public domain for Sanluisans and have been taken throughout the different public administrations in the past.

In front of the images of FATHER CLEMENTE GIRALDO. This is the founder of the municipality of San Luis and whose image is recorded in the historical archives of the Municipality of Granada Antioquia, which is the town that colonized San Luis. This photograph has been used non-profit or commercial interest, in fact in history rests as a gift that the people of Granada gave to San Luis and whose work rests in the precincts of the Municipal Council. They are other pages in which this free image and dating from more than 70 years ago the priest died 85 years ago and this photo dates from 1930 is therefore a historical and heritage record of importance to the people of San Luis and Granada.his is why it appears in the blog of http://robertozocodice.blogspot.com.co/2013/11/ but this photo does not belong to him, however, since it is an informative task and due to its antiquity, we consider that it is not there is violation of rights

The work of updating data and photographs is being done by the communications team under the direction of Diego Alejandro Hoyos, social communicator of the San Luis City Hall and whose user for the wikipedia edition is alek25 any questions or concerns on the letterhead are the contact details of our Municipal Public Administration

Cordially: Diego Alejandro Hoyos Communicator Social City Hall Municipality of San Luis Antioquia Colombia Cr 18 # 17-08 PBX: 8348560-61-62, Toll free: 01 8000 400105, Cell: 3148325965 E-mail: alcaldia@sanluis-antioquia.gov.co, alcalde@sanluis-antioquia.gov.co, contact us @ sanluis-antioquia.gov.co, bquejasreclamos@sanluis-antioquia.gov.co.Web: www.sanluis-antioquia.gov.co.

File:Review of photographs and information commons license..jpg

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Alek25 (talk • contribs) 06:15, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:بدر بن صالح الراجحي.jpg, is my picture, the same i'm using in my Twitter account, my twitter account link is also mentioned in my page and the essay (https://twitter.com/badr_s_alrajhi?lang=ar).

Please undelete, this is my picture the same i'm using in my twitter profile account, https://twitter.com/badr_s_alrajhi?lang=ar,--بدر صالح الراجحي (talk) 08:37, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: This picture is my picture and i used also for my twitter profile image https://twitter.com/badr_s_alrajhi?lang=ar بدر صالح الراجحي (talk) 08:53, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS. Also, please note that it is a serious violation of Commons rules to upload an image a second time after deletion as you did here. It wastes your time and that of other Commons editors. If you do it again, you may be blocked from editing on Commons.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 09:15, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose per Jeff --Alaa :)..! 09:18, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mike Jackson - High Resolution 04-26-2018.jpg

Copyright release sent to Permissions-Commons. This should have been handled properly.....

e-mail received from Permissions Commons...... "Thank you for your email. This is an automatically generated response to inform you that your message has been received. Because all emails are handled by volunteers, it may take some time for us to reply. We kindly ask for your patience and understanding as we try our best to reply as quickly as possible. If your article or file has been deleted in the mean time, please don't worry. Any administrator can restore these later.

If you want to send more emails about the same subject, please add the following to the subject bar of the email: [Ticket#:018052110012708].

Yours sincerely,

The Volunteer Response Team

__________________________________________________

'To: permissions-commons@wikimedia.org

I hereby affirm that I Elizabeth Anzalone represent AutoNation Inc Office of Corporate Communications and Mike Jackson Chairman and CEO of AutoNation Inc, the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of Photo described in File File:Mike Jackson - High Resolution 04-26-2018.jpg as shown here: Mike Jackson - High Resolution 04-26-2018.jpg,[4] and have legal authority in my capacity to release the copyright of that work.

I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the following free license: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International.[5]

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. 


 Elizabeth. Anzalone Coordinator Office of Corporate Communications and Public Policy AutoNation Inc. Ft Lauderdale Florida' — Preceding unsigned comment added by CorporateMapWiki (talk • contribs) 13:39, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose If a free license has been sent to OTRS, then the file will be restored automatically when and if the email is received, processed, and approved. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 3 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.
If the message was sent to the English language version of OTRS and the email has been properly received there the sender will receive an automatic reply with the ticket number. If the sender has not had a reply, please check that it was sent correctly and try again. Other language versions may or may not provide the automatic reply.  — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:22, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Duck_Butter_Poster_Print_Hi_27X40_JohnWesleyCredit.jpg

This is the final poster provided by the distribution company. The poster on the page is incorrect and does not include an artist credit. Please use this poster! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brigademkting (talk • contribs) 13:48, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS.  — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:20, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Express November 10, 2017.jpg

File:Express November 10, 2017.jpg

File was published on Flickr using an Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic (CC BY-SA 2.0) license. The original image, with the Creative Commons license, can be found here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/perspective/38286894736/in/photolist-q93hLg-pRu3mu-pchkAz-pRt819-pRAPvp-pRu2sf-q8YY8s-s7enDQ-q93iDt-25uMaQt-s5uEJH-pRC8bk-soPSor-pRt96W-q8YZWN-fAFEJs-pchji4-pc3XVC-pRt7sA-YLiQwu-RVuVoT-soEmrY-HKxxTm-XQ966a-YrSY7S-fAriJi-YsFrd3-YNHwSN-YM9wFb-RiDon8-YsFsgq-RauRDh-YM9vZS-Dib8YE-ZqrFCi-Z4VmLV-Z4Vmhi-Hu8ZrE-YrSZbq-Z471tV-XQ7A6Z-YRievx-YQtH1i-YNFjw9-YNFkn7-PzSNtn-fYFFx7-21khkUL-GBuBbQ-z1puXq

This is a Creative Commons, non-copyrighted image. --Chumash11 (talk) 13:57, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, not every image on Flickr is correctly licensed. This photo shows the cover of a recent newspaper, containing likely copyrighted artwork.[6] Freedom-of-panorama exception does not apply. The Flickr-photographer violates the copyright of the photographer of the cover-portrait. --Túrelio (talk) 14:01, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS.  — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:18, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Protestas por el Caso La Manada - 3.jpg

The photo was removed under three arguments:

  • That it has rights of a third party. False, according to EXIF ​​data I took the photograph by myself.
  • That violates the moral principles of a person, false. The images of the persons in question are of subjects identified and sentenced by the Spanish justice system in a case of public interest (in fact foreseen in the 15/1999 law of the country, although this is not the case, Commons is under US jurisdiction) of which many media outlets (including the country's main television networks) have done the task of dissemination after they were sentenced. The interpretation made of the rule in any case should come from an affected third party and not from a Wikipedia contributor, as it was here.
  • Finally the administrator has stated that it is a derivative work, it is not so, the images of the faces of the people involved are not subject to copyright by the Spanish justice, who presumably is the one who took them the photographs. I don't want to lose the chance to indicate that the User: Iusnaturalista made a presumption in bad faith of me that I violated the rights of a third party as proof of his argument. False absolutely. --ProtoplasmaKid (talk) 15:28, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sinceramente no puedo entender el empeño que hay en el escarnio público cuando en las consideraciones morales establecidas en Commons se dice claramente que el derecho humano a la intimidad y el honor son susceptibles de priorizar más allá de cualquier otra cuestión técnica o jurídica, con independencia de lo que se haga fuera de la Fundación. Tampoco hay manera de saber si el retrato fotografiado tiene derechos de autor en España, pero el individuo retratado sí tiene derechos sobre su propia imagen, como cualquier persona, siendo innecesario que el afectado reclame este derecho para juzgar la procedencia en Commons. En todo caso, para el artículo enciclopédico no es de interés un retrato con el nombre del enjuiciado; eso se llama amarillismo y es algo que se recomienda evitar.

La foto, además, constituye una difamación (nombre, cara y la palabra violadores), algo explícitamente prohibido https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Photographs_of_identifiable_people/es#Ejemplos

Considerar que la foto podría tener derechos en un sitio web privado o preguntarse cómo es posible que un mejicano haya podido sacar la foto en España, no es presumir mala fe, es duda razonable. --Iusnaturalista (talk) 10:55, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Oppose Unless you are also the photographer of the portrait photos on the board, your photograph of said installation infringes on the copyright of these individual portrait photographs. Presumptions that these portraits were possibly taken by the Spanish justice are insufficient because you as the uploader need to provide hard evidence that your work is free to use. Photographs from Spain have a copyright term of 25 years from their creation {{PD-Spain-photo}} and according to our database the copyright exemption for Spanish government works applies only to texts, but not to images. De728631 (talk) 12:37, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dalida Gigi.jpg

Entering the link that I provided for photo you can clearly see that the buyer of photo has the right of publishing it on internet pages. I bought the photo without watermark and uploaded it on wiki. It was then deleted by user. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DalidaEditor (talk • contribs) 18:19, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose You paid Getty for 15 years of editorial use, not for an indefinite Creative Commons license. Thuresson (talk) 18:39, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I have uploaded a photo of Patrick J Kennedy to the Patrick J Kennedy wikipedia page which has been removed twice.

On first upload, I followed protocol set forth in the upload guide regarding release of rights.

On second upload, I followed these protocols and additionally sent an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org with the image and Wikipedia's direct language for release of rights on 5/18. It seems to me that this should be sufficient for use of the photo.

I am an authorized representative of Mr. Kennedy, who is requesting that this photo be used. I am a novice wikipedia user and am following protocol to the best of my understanding. I appreciate any further assistance.

Thank you

Shellackingoff (talk) 19:55, 23 May 2018 (UTC)shellackingoff 5/23/18[reply]

  •  Oppose We need a permission sent by email from the copyright holder. In most cases this is not the subject depicted in the photograph but the original photographer. Please see COM:OTRS for details. De728631 (talk) 12:39, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Professor_Dr_Rogério_Miranda_de_Almeida.png

A foto é do próprio professor. Não é cópia ou plágio. A mesma está disponível para uso. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcopensak (talk • contribs) 03:00, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Signing your posts on talk pages is required and it is a Commons guideline to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:07, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The picture belongs to the teacher himself. It is not copy or plagiarism. It is available for use.
 
translator: Google via   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:07, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS. @Marcopensak: Que prova você oferece? What proof do you offer?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:07, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Large Scale DND Protest by Nawab Singh Nagar.jpg

This is a genuine photo of Nawab Singh Nagar's protest against DND toll on 28th August. Kindly make the necessary changes.


--Nagar.siddharth543 (talk) 03:08, 24 May 2018 (UTC)SiddharthNagar 24/05/2018 With regards Siddharth Nagar[reply]

  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS. Also, please note that it is a serious violation of Commons rules to upload an image a second time after deletion as you did here. It wastes your time and that of other Commons editors. If you do it again, you may be blocked from editing on Commons.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:03, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:GrammyAward.jpg

This image was initially uploaded by Colby Sharp to Flickr at https://flickr.com/photos/61421932@N08/14048518715.

File was uploaded on April 28, 2014, and is licensed by the author under the terms of cc-by-2.0.

So, the publication https://www.shine.cn/archive/world/2018-Grammy-Awards-returning-to-NYC-beyond14-years-in-LA/shdaily.shtml at May 9, 2017 can not serve as a reason for removal.

SaltVisor (talk) 03:19, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Principales clientes de Teknia Group.pngRequest undeletion

Hi, I am on charge of Communications at Teknia and the original author of the presentation I use as a source of the pic, as you can check on my dropbox (https://www.dropbox.com/s/tpz7stug0h3kk8m/Dossier%20Prensa%202018.pptx?dl=0) and on Properties of the PPT itself:

File:Screen Shot PPT Teknia.png

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Falvarezcano (talk • contribs) 07:00, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am on charge of Communications at Teknia and the original author of the presentation I use as a source of the pic, as you can check on my dropbox (https://www.dropbox.com/s/tpz7stug0h3kk8m/Dossier%20Prensa%202018.pptx?dl=0) and on Properties of the PPT itself:

File:Screen Shot PPT Teknia 2.png

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Falvarezcano (talk • contribs) 07:05, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Signing your posts on talk pages is required and it is a Commons guideline to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:00, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS. This applies to both files.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:00, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Players.jpg

This pjoto should not be deleted. Original author is unknown and possibly death and is's just my photo of original. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beatfan21 (talk • contribs) 13:37, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose As per File talk:The Players.jpg. Thuresson (talk) 14:06, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Players '64-65.jpg

This photo should npt be deleted, original author is unknown and probably death, and is's just my photo of original. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beatfan21 (talk • contribs) 13:51, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose "Google.com" is not enough of a source. A lot of people who lived in 1964 are still alive and well. Thuresson (talk) 14:09, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:W. Ian Lipkin, Columbia University.png

I provided copyright permission, Ticket#2018052210013563, for this specific file. Kindly undelete as Columbia University has authorized the usage of it.Kh2907 (talk) 14:27, 24 May 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kh2907 (talk • contribs) 14:04, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Signing your posts on talk pages is required and it is a Commons guideline to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:20, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose If a free license has been sent to OTRS, then the file will be restored automatically when and if the email is received, processed, and approved. Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 3 days before the email is processed and the file is restored.
If the message was sent to the English language version of OTRS and the email has been properly received there the sender will receive an automatic reply with the ticket number. If the sender has not had a reply, please check that it was sent correctly and try again. Other language versions may or may not provide the automatic reply. @Kh2907: Did you tag the file {{subst:OP}}?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:20, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for not initially signing. Still getting the hang of this. I did submit an email as directed and the ticket number is cited in my original post. I have followed up directly with that automatic email that issued the ticket number. Thank you for the update. I will continue to monitor.Kh2907 (talk) 14:27, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Troféu Taça de Ouro e Campeonato brasileiro de 1981.png

Esta imagem está livre de direitos autorais — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alandelima1996 (talk • contribs) 16:24 May 24, 2018 (UTC)

  • Signing your posts on talk pages is required and it is a Commons guideline to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:56, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image is free of copyright
 
translator: Google via   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:56, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS. @Alandelima1996: Que prova você oferece? What proof do you offer?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:56, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Treatyrights2013.jpg

There was never a reason to delete this file, why the heck is it being deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steve348 (talk • contribs) 15:49, 24 May 2018‎ (UTC)[reply]

  • Signing your posts on talk pages is required and it is a Commons guideline to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:56, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS. Also, please note that it is a serious violation of Commons rules to upload an image a second time after deletion as you did here. It wastes your time and that of other Commons editors. If you do it again, you may be blocked from editing on Commons. See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Treatyrights2013.jpg.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:56, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Info Published here by David Atkin in 2013. Thuresson (talk) 17:30, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:JeanpaulGonzalez.jpg

This photo has been taken with my own camera during the One Health Innovations meeting in Kansas City (August 27-28, 2017).

File:Þróttur Vogar.png

i feel it is unfair to delete a picture that in all fairness should be fair use, it´s a logo for a soccer team in iceland. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rikki9876 (talk • contribs) 21:36, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests&oldid=302907859"