Commons:Undeletion requests

Shortcuts: COM:UNDEL • COM:UR • COM:UND • COM:DRV

On this page, users can ask for a deleted page or file (hereafter, "file") to be restored. Users can comment on requests by leaving remarks such as keep deleted or undelete along with their reasoning.

This page is not part of Wikipedia. This page is about the content of Wikimedia Commons, a repository of free media files used by Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects. Wikimedia Commons does not host encyclopedia articles. To request undeletion of an article or other content which was deleted from the English Wikipedia edition, see the deletion review page on that project.

Please read the instructions below, before requesting undeletion.

Enter a descriptive heading and press the button:

This is a dashboard widget.

Commons deletion (policy)

• Regular deletion (candidates)
  (Missing: 1 timestamp • 0 reasons • 6 subpages) • 0 malformed
• Speedy deletion (candidates)
  12 copyvios • 12 duplicates • 1 advert • 72 others

---

• Media without a license
• Media without a source
• Media missing permission
• Orphaned talk pages

---

• Deletion log
• Undeletion requests

---

Finding out why a file was deleted

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

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

Appealing a deletion

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

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

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

Temporary undeletion

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

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

To assist discussion

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

To allow transfer of fair use content to another project

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

Projects that accept fair use

* Wikipedia: als | ar | bar | bn | be | be-tarask | ca | el | en | et | eo | fa | fi | fr | frr | he | hr | hy | id | is | it | ja | lb | lt | lv | mk | ms | pt | ro | ru | sl | sr | th | tr | tt | uk | vi | zh | +/− Wikinews: en | no | pl | +/− Wikibooks: en | it | +/− Wikisource: fa | fr | +/− Wikiversity: en | +/− Wikivoyage: en | fa | fr | ru | zh | +/− Wikiquote (regarding images): he | +/− Note: This list might be outdated. For a more complete list, see meta:Non-free content (this page was last updated: March 2014.) Note also: Multiple projects (such as the ml, sa, and si Wikipedias) are listed there as "yes" without policy links.

Adding a request

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

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

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

Closing discussions

In general, discussions should be closed only by administrators.

Instructions for administrators

Use common sense. If, for example, a file was deleted for missing a source, and the requesting user is the photographer, the file can be undeleted without further discussion. If the user wishes to tag a file with a certain license, you can do that for them if you want to, or leave it to them to do it. However, it is important that you remove any speedy deletion templates from the file. In general, try to comply with the requests of well-intending users. Files can, for example, be undeleted for the requesting user to look at without the request itself having to be closed. The deleting administrator may undelete the file if compelled by the arguments or information provided. The deleting administrator may also participate in the discussion. The deleting administrator should, however, not close contentious requests as "Not done." When a debate is settled, close it with a remark such as "Not done" or "Undeleted" and add the template {{Udelh}} above the header and the template {{Udelf}} below your own comment. (The templates are short for "undelete header" and "footer.") Closed requests are automatically archived. When undeleting a file, reference the discussion (for example "Per https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests&oldid=nnnnnnnn#Heading"). Files temporarily undeleted for transfer purposes should be tagged with {{Temporarily undeleted|transfer=yes}}. This places them into Temporarily undeleted files, a subcategory of Candidates for deletion, and automatically nominates them for speedy deletion after two days. Files temporarily undeleted to assist discussion should be tagged with {{Temporarily undeleted}}. These are automatically nominated for speedy deletion after thirty days.

Archives

Closed undeletion debates are archived daily.

Current requests

Flags of municipalities of Slovenia

Can you undelete the following flags? The flags are actually the public domain by the law. These includes coat of arms (that are PD) on these images.

Template:PD-Slovenia-exempt

1. File:Flag of Ajdovščina.gif based off File:Coat of arms of municipality of Ajdovščina.png
2. File:Flag of Brežice.gif based off File:BreziceGRB.png
3. File:Flag of Črna na Koroškem.gif based off File:Črna na Koroškem.png
4. File:Flag of Divača.gif based off File:Wappen Divaca.jpg
5. File:Flag of Dobje.gif based off File:DobjeGrb.png
6. File:Flag of Dobrovnik.gif based off File:Coat of arms of Dobrovnik.png
7. File:Flag of Hodoš.gif based off File:Hodoš grb.png
8. File:Flag of Jezersko.gif based off File:Coat of arms of Jezersko.png
9. File:Flag of Kostanjevica na Krki.gif based off File:Coat of arm of Kostanjevica na Krki.png
10. File:Flag of Kostel.gif based off File:Kostel.png
11. File:Flag of Pivka.gif based off File:Pivka.Grb.png
12. File:Flag of Radeče.gif based off File:Wappen Radeče.png
13. File:Flag of Razkrižje.gif based off File:Coat of arms of Razkrižje.png
14. File:Flag of Ribnica na Pohorju.gif based off File:Ribnica na Pohorju.png
15. File:Flag of Rogašovci.gif based off File:Rogašovci.png
16. File:Flag of Sveti Andraž v Slovenskih goricah.gif based off File:Sveti Andraž v Slovenskih goricah.png
17. File:Flag of Sveti Jurij ob Ščavnici.gif based off File:Sveti Jurij.png
18. File:Flag of Trnovska vas.gif based off File:Trnovska vas.png
19. File:Flag of Veržej.gif based off File:Coat of arms of Veržej.png
20. File:Flag of Vransko.gif based off File:Vransko.png
21. File:Flag of Vuzenica.gif based off File:Vuzenica.png
22. File:Flag of Žetale.gif based off File:COA-Žetale.gif

Alexphangia Talk 16:16, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

{{PD-Slovenia-exempt}} (which the files were marked with) does indeed mention ‘’municipal flags and coats of arms’’. The files were speedied by User:Yann after User:Εὐθυμένης had marked them with the {{Logo}} template, noting in the edit commentary “This logo exceeds the threshold of originality and therefore is subject to copyright.” Any comments? --Rosenzweig ‘’’’’τ’’’’’ 17:10, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

I don’t believe that the flags are calling my uploaded images as “logos”. Alexphangia Talk 17:20, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

The original designs are OK, but these are copied from crwflags.com. Not sure this is fine. I won’t oppose undeletion, but other opinions are welcome. Yann (talk) 18:12, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Well, for example the flag of the Netherlands is way to simple and it belongs to PD-shape, striking this image from crwflags is useless. Alexphangia Talk 08:38, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

And is the flags are public domain, Slovenian crw flag images should also be public domain by the law. Alexphangia Talk 08:40, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

 Oppose Unless they are too simple to have a copyright, all of these have copyrights owned by the CRW creator. That is a general rule for works containing a coat of arms – individual renditions of the COA have a copyright belonging to the creator. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:24, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

@Rosenzweig and Jameslwoodward: the general rule don’t seem to apply here. And if it does, we should change {{PD-Slovenia-exempt}}. BTW, this request is about the flag, not the CoA (who have been - inconsistently - kept…). Also, more importantly, it seems that it’s indeed CRW that copied Wikimedia Commons in the first place… (https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/si-001.html#emb says the CoA is from 2010 but File:Coat of arms of municipality of Ajdovščina.png is from 2009 and has Croatian Academic and Research Network has source) If I’m not mistaken and if there is no objection, then I’ll undelete these flags. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 08:07, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

I object. The only element of the flags that has a copyright is the COAs and, as I said, individual realizations of COAs always have a copyright unless below the ToO. You say “the general rule doesn’t seem to apply here.” Why not? What evidence do you have for this assertion? Also, I note that the home page of the Croatian Academic and Research Network has an explicit copyright notice, so if that is the ultimate source of one or more of these flags, they are probably not copyright free. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:42, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

@Jameslwoodward: my “evidence” is that law applies beore general principle, and especially that the local law applies. I’m also assuming that {{PD-Slovenia-exempt}} is correct (especailly the point 2 and its comment, which is not unusual, PD-GOV is sometime extended to other official documents, including but not limited to the CoA).

If we follow your reasoning, then you should ask the CoA for deletion as well as {{PD-Slovenia-exempt}}.

For the CoA, either CRW copied Wikimedia or w:CARNET (the source of Wikimedia files themselves) but in both case, for the flags, « all of these have copyrights owned by the CRW creator. » is false as - as you said yourself - « The only element of the flags that has a copyright is the COAs ».

Finally, Željko Heimer website (previously on CARNET) is just gathering CoA (and creating flags out of it?) from the official website. These websites are following the local law, making the CoA free.

An example to make it more clear: File:Coat of arms of municipality of Ajdovščina.png has for source http://public.carnet.hr/fame/hrvat/si-obc01.html#si-aj wich is now https://zeljko-heimer-fame.from.hr/descr/si-obc01.html#si-aj90 where the CoA is just a 2005 copy from http://www.ajdovscina.si and from a 1990 official decree. I didn’t checked all files but most seems to be in the same situation.

Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 15:03, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

https://zeljko-heimer-fame.from.hr/descr/si-obc01.html#si-aj90 has:

”Copyright © 1996-2017 by Zeljko Heimer. All rights reserved.”

Yes, I think {{PD-Slovenia-exempt}} is incorrect in that while the blazons of CoAs are copyright exempt, individual representations require interpretation of the blazon and such interpretations have copyrights which belong to the creator. It is certainly possible that the creator of these has released them under CC-0 or that the creator was a government employee which might make them free, but so far the trail leads to an explicit copyright notice. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:42, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

@Jameslwoodward: but Zeljko Heimer is not the creator of the CoA, so it’s copyfraud and the copyright claim doesn’t mean anything. The source is the city (which give very detail instruction - including the exact Pantone colour - it’s more a logo than a CoA, which may or mya not make a legal difference).

Do you have proof of your interpretation of the Slovenian law? Maybe @TadejM: (who wrote this sentence in the template) could give more details.

Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 20:17, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

As I have been pinged: I don’t object to the undeletion of those CoAs that are either too simple or meet the {{PD-Slovenia}} criteria (i.e. they were published under state/municipal jurisdiction as part of the official text, its annex or independently). The study referenced in the template explicitly states that under the said article a work qualifies as free if published ‘v okviru uradnih pristojnosti’ (p. 28), which means that a CoA should be considered free if published ‘in the context of official competences’. However, if a CoA has only been published on CRW, in the absence of proof to the contrary, it should be considered copyrighted to CRW. Here, it doesn’t matter whether the site owner created it from a blazon or derived it from an image published by the municipality as long as it meets the criteria for an author’s work. --TadejM ^(t/p) 21:22, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

@Alexphangia: you indicated CRW as the source but CRW is a secondary database so it can be the real source here. Could you *for each file* indicate the true source? It would help a lot.

@TadejM: does a municipal website count as an exception under the Slovenian law? Or does it have to be explicitely an official municipal law? (I think it’s also the case, but see my previous point).

Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 06:33, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

I don't think all content published on municipal websites should be considered free. There was no copyright-related case in Slovenia regarding municipal coats of arms, but there was a case in Slovenian High Court regarding questionnaires for final exams in Slovenian grammar schools. They were considered public domain as they had been prepared and published under an official procedure with official conclusions (please see the footnotes on p. 31). Per analogy, this would lead me to consider municipal coats of arms public domain if they had been published following an official procedure, for example as a part of the municipal charter (example). In any case, please note again that the case law is lacking and the court could finally decide differently. --TadejM ^(t/p) 18:15, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

File:G-Dragon on M' Countdown - 4.jpg

These files seem to be deleted by accident according to the dialogue on User talk:KLIFE88. Given that some which had passed the license review, please consider recovering the rest.

• File:G-Dragon on M' Countdown.jpg
• File:G-Dragon on M' Countdown - 2.jpg
• File:G-Dragon on M' Countdown - 3.jpg
• File:G-Dragon on Infinite Challenge Yeongdong Expressway Music Festival - 13.jpg
• File:G-Dragon on Infinite Challenge Yeongdong Expressway Music Festival - 10.jpg
• File:G-Dragon on Infinite Challenge Yeongdong Expressway Music Festival - 11.jpg
• File:G-Dragon on Infinite Challenge Yeongdong Expressway Music Festival - 12.jpg
• File:G-Dragon on Infinite Challenge Yeongdong Expressway Music Festival - 9.jpg
• File:G-Dragon on Infinite Challenge Yeongdong Expressway Music Festival - 7.jpg
• File:G-Dragon on Infinite ChallengeYeongdong Expressway Music Festival - 8.jpg
• File:G-Dragon on Infinite Challenge Yeongdong Expressway Music Festival - 6.jpg
• File:G-Dragon on Infinite Challenge Yeongdong Expressway Music Festival - 4.jpg
• File:G-Dragon on Infinite Challenge Yeongdong Expressway Music Festival - 5.jpg
• File:G-Dragon on Infinite Challenge Yeongdong Expressway Music Festival.jpg
• File:G-Dragon on Infinite Challenge Yeongdong Expressway Music Festival - 2.jpg
• File:G-Dragon on Infinite Challenge Yeongdong Expressway Music Festival - 3.jpg

--Larryasou (talk) 11:16, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

File:Pita Limjaroenrat, May 2023 press conference (1).png

Assuming this was an accident, for some reason a screenshot I uploaded from a Voice of America (VOA) video was removed. The content produced by VOA is under a public domain license, as the official broadcaster of the Federal government. The screenshot was apparently removed along with a swath of other media that was in fact produced by the Thai Government (which does not produce public domain media) that was uploaded by User:Kohptrp2023. What’s weird is I cannot find the screenshot in the list (the file’s deletion entry) of other deleted media that it was apparently included with. The media uploaded was from VOA only and not other sources, and is thus licensed under the public domain. Bobertrobert0709 (talk) 03:38, 20 September 2023 (UTC) {{PD-USGov-VOA}}

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

File:CathyJKT48.jpg

Maybe the image contains copyright from JKT48 but the image belongs to the person concerned or belongs to Cathy herself which I took via her Twitter, I will attach a link to the photo

https://twitter.com/N_CathyJKT48/status/1619982962845704192?t=4gFtogwBF-gYtgHnjq32hA&s=19

If the photo still cannot be returned, I don’t mind having the photo deleted, and I give permission to upload other photos so that they can be posted on Cathleen Nixie or Cathy JKT48’s page. There is a photo in question --DecaOnes (talk) 13:24, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

---

 Not done: No permission. --Yann (talk) 17:18, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

File:Can 1972 (Heinrich Klaffs Collection 102).jpg

The file was licensed under CC-BY-SA-2.0 and then relicensed to CC-BY-SA-NC-2.0 on Flickr accroding the "License History" (seemingly a new feature). Since CC licenses are non-revocable, we should recover it. Larryasou (talk) 13:17, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

I don't see "License History" at https://www.flickr.com/photos/heiner1947/4409494480/sizes/l/in/set-72157623560321196/. Where do I find it? .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:25, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

You should delete all characters starting from "/sizes". Larryasou (talk) 13:33, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes, should be o.k. Change to non-compliant license happened March 25, 2011, clearly after upload to Commons (2010). --Túrelio (talk) 14:11, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

ditto：

• File:NDR Jazzworkshop 1972 (Heinrich Klaffs Collection 18).jpg
• File:Musicians of the Michael Gibbs Big band, NDR Jazzworkshop 1972 (Heinrich Klaffs Collection 17).jpg
• File:Albert Mangelsdorff und Volker Kriegel, NDR Jazzworkshop 1973 (Heinrich Klaffs Collection 91).jpg
• File:Herb Geller, NDR Jazzworkshop ca. 1972 (Heinrich Klaffs Collection 94).jpg
• File:Herb Geller, NDR Jazzworkshop ca. 1972 (Heinrich Klaffs Collection 92).jpg
• File:Yusef Lateef, Hamburg 1971 (Heinrich Klaffs Collection 4).jpg
• File:Tony Coe, NDR Jazzworkshop 1972 (Heinrich Klaffs Collection 89).jpg
• File:Maria Bethania 1972 (Heinrich Klaffs Collection 34).jpg
• File:Schnuckenack Reinhardt ensemble 1973 (Heinrich Klaffs Collection 39).jpg
• File:Han Bennink, NDR Jazzworkshop (Heinrich Klaffs Collection 51).jpg
• File:Peter Broetzmann, NDR Jazzworkshop 1972 (Heinrich Klaffs Collection 12).jpg
• File:Benny Goodman band, 1972 (Heinrich Klaffs Collection 57).jpg
• File:Joe Venuti and Band, Hamburg 1971 (Heinrich Klaffs Collection 61).jpg
• File:Big Joe Turner, Hamburg 1974 (Heinrich Klaffs Collection 86).jpg
• File:Count Basie and band. Hamburg 1974 (Heinrich Klaffs Collection 87).jpg

Larryasou (talk) 14:07, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Jameslwoodward: The license history link is at the bottom right of the main Flickr image page, in the Additional info section. It was introduced several months ago. --Rosenzweig τ 14:14, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

 Support Thank you. I looked at five of these, picked at random, and they have the same licensing. One has to wonder why Flickr doesn't simply tell their users that a change from CC-BY to CC-BY-NC is meaningless and therefore not permitted since the CC-BY is irrevocable. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:49, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Museum Herisau AR Textilindustrie.jpg

There is a request for review per Ticket:2023090410003653. I need to see the image to assess whether there is a valid argument to use it. Can it be temporarily undeleted please? Thanks, --Mussklprozz (talk) 14:29, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Mussklprozz: , temporarily undeleted. Abzeronow (talk) 15:48, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

---

 Done: OK now. --Yann (talk) 19:53, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

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

File:Android_Q_Logo.svg

Reason: this file has a different color but was removed as a duplicate. By the way, I marked this as a duplicate. Артём 13327 (talk) 14:49, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

---

 Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:29, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

File:Azemat e bazyafteh - entesharat e universal cover book.jpg

This work is in the public domain in Iran (the country of origin) because its copyright holder was a legal entity and it was published more than 30 years ago (in 1976). w:Dino Attanasio had illustrated the comic book to fulfill a requisition by an Iranian company, Universal Publishers, so this counts as w:work for hire. On the rear cover of the book, it is explicitly mentioned:

حق چاپ، ترجمه، تقلید، اقتباس و عکسبرداری مخصوص و محفوظ و منحصر به شرکت انتشارات یونیورسال میباشد

— [The rights to print, translate, imitate, adapt and photographing are reserved and exclusive to Universal Publishing Company]

HeminKurdistan (talk) 17:48, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

File:Arslan Ash wins EVO 2023.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

• File:Arslan Ash wins EVO 2023.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Reason: Stephanie Lindgren allows Liquipedia to use her images so long she is credited as "Stephanie Lindgren - Esports Photographer Ash king100 (talk) 18:57, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

 Oppose Sorry, but we need a free license. Please ask her to send a permission via COM:VRT. Thanks, Yann (talk) 19:52, 21 September 2023 (UTC)