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: 0 timestamps • 0 reasons • 0 subpages) • 0 malformed
• Speedy deletion (candidates)
  17 copyvios • 5 duplicates • 4 selfies • 1 other

---

• 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

Photos by City of Detroit

All fit under the following license: {{PDMark-owner}} as they are the work of the City of Detroit and were published by their owner under the proper license for this to apply

SecretName101 (talk) 10:14, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

• @Krd: you were the deleting admin; any comment why did you consider them not suitable for Commons? Ankry (talk) 17:42, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

 Oppose We accept the PDM only in cases where the Flickr account is owned by the photographer or someone who is clearly the copyright holder. I don't think that applies here -- it's 50/50 whether the City of Detroit actually has a work for hire agreement in places with all of the photographers involved. I also wonder at the numbers -- one or two photos of each event might be in scope, but not ten or twenty. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:54, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Fc st pauli logo.svg

Classic club crest - which exists on Commons for a long time and thousands of times. Bildersindtoll (talk) 09:09, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

But it is not {{PD-textlogo}}: the image in the middle is neither text nor simple geometric shape. Any valid PD or free licensing rationale? Ankry (talk) 12:16, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

The reason for this is that the Hamburg St. Pauli gymnastics club, from which FC St. Pauli emerged, already uses this city coat of arms in its club emblem. This can be read in the book Fußballwappen by Hardy Grüne (ISBN 978-3-7307-0416-5) Bildersindtoll (talk) 12:33, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Ösa versicherungen sachsen-anhalt.png

Composition of simple letters and the state coat of arms of Saxony-Anhalt (German state), which is public domain. Bildersindtoll (talk) 09:15, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

 Support if someone declares to fix the PD rationale. It is not {{PD-textlogo}}. Ankry (talk) 12:13, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Maybe PD-ineligible? Bildersindtoll (talk) 19:28, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

I think, rather one of these. Ankry (talk) 17:10, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Then I would say that Template:PD-Coa-Germany could fit. What strikes me is that this template is of course totally logical because it is about a public organization. It refers to the "Corporation of public law" (Körperschaften des öffentlichen Rechts) - For example: "Deutschlandradio", "Medizinischer Dienst der Krankenversicherung" or "Industrie- und Handelskammer".

But there is another very similar form of public organization in Germany: The "Institution of public law" (Anstalt des öffentlichen Rechts) - For example: "Versorgungsanstalt des Bundes und der Länder", "Technisches Hilfswerk" or "Deutsche Nationalbibliothek".

The only differences are that the Corporation of public law has members and the Institution of public law has users. Legally, both are basically very similar because both serve a public purpose.

The "Öffentliche Versicherungen Sachsen-Anhalt" is very precise an Institution of public law.

I could therefore imagine that it would make sense if there were also a template for the Institutions of public law (Anstalten des öffentlichen Rechts) (If possible) Bildersindtoll (talk) 18:27, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Gamer Over Cinemáticos, Gran Plaza Mazatlán, 8 de julio de 2023 04.jpg

De minimis

@Infrogmation: You claimed "Kept" and then deleted it. Could you, please, elaborate what was your intention? Ankry (talk) 17:22, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

• If at first I was favoring keeping, that was either a mistake or I had not yet looked at the image in full detail. Image seems to me clear DW - multiple corporate characters/artwork. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:05, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
• Link to original discussion: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by DogeGamer2015MZT. I am not seeing an argument that this one should be kept there. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:11, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Ensec Solutions logo.png

In what circumstance to delete the logo? Reason is the logo checked is approved by Intellectual Property Department. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hellokt336 (talk • contribs) 09:52, 11 August 2023‎ (UTC)

• Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy 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.

 Oppose I note that when you uploaded this, you claimed that you were the designer or the logo -- that's what {{{Own}} means. Such false claims are a serious violation of Commons rules and making them will lead to your being blocked from editing here.

Policy requires that an authorized official of the company owning the logo send a free license using VRT. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:08, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

File: ReeshmaN.jpg

The deleted photo of Indian Actress and Model. That was she uploaded. I gave the source as link and Author as her name. Source link:https://www.instagram.com/p/CaPVmnQj-Hb/?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet&igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA== --Arumobileworld (talk) 18:02, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

 Oppose I don't see any indication of a free license at source. You can ask the photographer to contact COM:VRT and they could confirm permission for a free license. Abzeronow (talk) 18:11, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/AI porn images

I found this DR after it was closed and I have to admit I haven't seen the deleted pictures, but this DR seems abusive to me because:

1. Commons is not censored and some people on that DR clearly have an anti-nudity censorship agenda (NB: some people actually tend to think that nudity in itself is porn, which is not...).
2. Commons offers a variety of choice on every subjects : because of the neutral point of view, we may not chose to delete some files just because we already have other files on ant subject. Such arguments are unvalid, we need other reasons (such as bad quality when we already have equivalent files on the same subjects).
3. Commons covers a wide range of subjects, including crossed subjects, and while we already have examples of porn or AI-generated images, we have none about AI-generated porn since the deletion of those files (therefore there were not out of scope). Which makes the two previous reasons of deletion even more irrelevant.

There may be good reasons of deletion but these 3 aspects lead me to think there was something wrong in that massive DR. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 22:33, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose Agree that nudity and sexual related content should not be censored from Commons if realistically within project scope. These look to me not explicit pornographic (sample I looked at are not sexual activity) but rather a series of nude and partly nude "pin up girl" images - one user's personal fantasy. IMO correctly deleted as OOS. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 00:10, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose I reviewed a random selection of these, and agree with Infrogmation that these are mere fantasy images that serve no value to the project. — Huntster (t @ c) 00:22, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

  @Infrogmation and Huntster: Can you explain how, mainly because of the rule of neutral POV, we should choose which pin-up images or fantasy images or whatever images we should consider in scope and which ones we should delete? I mean amongst files created by someone not famous. Let me take an example connected to this request: if we want to give people some examples of AI-generated nude images (which is in itself a subject that is not out of scope, as explained above), how do we impartially decide, for instance, that we may keep this file and delete the ones from that DR? Do you see what I mean? --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 06:09, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

File:HausFaulensee38-09-17.jpg

This photograph was made in 1938 by my father Erwin Friedrich Baumann (1890-1980). I am the heir of his estate. So the photograph is since 1980 in my posession and it is not possible to ask my father if he agrees that I publish it because he is dead since 43 years! Please help me to publish it. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HF Baumann (talk • contribs) 07:42, 12 August 2023‎ (UTC)

Photographers who have passed away need not leave a permission, this should be done by the copyright owners instead. Please see Commons:Volunteer Response Team on how to submit a permission. Thuresson (talk) 07:58, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

 Support Probably OK with one of these licenses. Yann (talk) 08:17, 12 August 2023 (UTC)