Commons:Undeletion requests

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
(Redirected from Commons:UR)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Translate this page

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

Other languages:

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.

Commons deletion (policy)
v • d • e

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

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.

Archives

Closed undeletion debates are archived daily.

Current requests

File:Ribbon, Twitter.png

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Twitter bird logo is now under {{Apache|Twitter}} per [1] A1Cafel (talk) 05:39, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Some of em need more license files to indicate, as those may be more complex than the de-facto Twitter bird. Or some may be low-quality (e.g. {{FakeSVG}}, low-quality raster image forks, or just graffitis aim to indicate Twitter.) --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:00, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have undeleted all of these, examined them all, and deleted again the ones that either have bad licenses, are very small, or are out of scope. The closing admin will need to cleanup the files and remove the DR tags..     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:32, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jameslwoodward: If the license is valid, File:Above socialmedia.jpg is in scope. I speedy deleted some of them after you undeleted them, as they were tagged with {{SD}}. Now fixed. Yann (talk) 19:50, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Android-2.2-CyanogenMod.jpg

When I wrote a request to delete this file, I made a mistake. There really were standard wallpapers of CyanogenMod and it is distributed over Apache Lisence 2.0. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Артём 13327 (talk • contribs) 12:31, 12 December 2022 (UTC) (UTC)Reply[reply]

These are probably these wallpapers in the source code of CyanogenMod https://github.com/CyanogenMod/android_packages_apps_CMWallpapers/blob/froyo-stable/res/drawable-mdpi/wallpaper_jai_cmchrome.jpg https://github.com/CyanogenMod/android_packages_apps_CMWallpapers/blob/froyo-stable/res/drawable-hdpi/wallpaper_jai_cmchrome.jpg Артём 13327 (talk) 14:33, 18 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Adolf Lazi - Selbstporträt.jpg, File:Adolf Lazi im Fotostudio.jpg, File:Haus Lazi.jpg

Ich bitte darum, diese Bilder wieder zu aktivieren. Alle Rechte daran habe ich selbst. Ich besitze das Adolf Lazi Archiv und damit den gesamten Nachlass meines Vaters. Ebenso selbstverständlich alle Nutzungsrechte. Die Löschung der Bilder durch Rosenzweig τ 13:19, 24 November 2018 (UTC) war nicht gerechtfertigt.

Es geht um diese Abbildungen:

  • File:Adolf Lazi - Selbstporträt.jpg
  • File:Adolf Lazi im Fotostudio.jpg
  • File:Haus Lazi.jpg

Freundliche Grüße, Ingo Lazi www.Adolf-Lazi-Archiv.de

Lazyland 13.Dez.2022 Lazyland (talk) 11:04, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wow, die Löschung war vor 3,5 Jahren! Übrigens nicht durch Kollegen Rosenzweig, der hatte nur nominiert. Grundlage war dieser LA: Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Adolf Lazi, der übrigens 6 Monate offen war; dennoch hast du nicht reagiert. Du musst nun von deiner offiziellen Emailadresse eine Bestätigung an permissions-commons-de@wikimedia.org (OTRS) senden, aus der hervorgeht: 1) dass Adolf Lazi tatsächlich der Urheber aller 3 Fotos ist (beim zweiten Foto ist das nicht selbstverständlich), 2) dass du der Alleinerbe des Urheberrechts deines Vaters bist (oder die Miterben mit der Freigabe einverstanden sind), und 3) dass du die 3 Fotos (Commons-Dateinamen angeben) unter der gewählten freien Lizenz freigeben willst.
Das 4. Foto aus dem LA, File:Caratsch.jpg, wird automatisch am 1.1.2026 "entlöscht" (wiederhergestellt) werden. --Túrelio (talk) 11:19, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Túrelio, Perhaps the Google translation of "deleted" is incorrect, but I think you meant to say "restored" in speaking of the last file above -- it has been deleted and the German copyright expires on 1/1/2026. The image was taken in 1938, so it will not be free of US copyright until 1/1/2034 unless it can be shown that it was published in the US without notice or renewal,
Also, note that as a general rule, unless the will specifically provides otherwise, each of the heirs holds an undivided interest in the copyright and, therefore, any one of them may grant the required free license, so your #2 is not required. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:40, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:창경궁 조선고적도보 배치도.jpg, File:조선고적도보의 창덕궁 배치도.jpg

These two files were deleted due to 'No license since 7 December 2022', but as I remember, I added the license template before that date. The licesne is provided by {{PD-Korea-1910-1945}}. Please check and undelete those files. @Krd: — Sadopaul 💬 📁 15:13, 17 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Yes, you added {{PD-Korea-1910-1945}} shortly after the bot tagged them. However you did not add a USA copyright tag which is also required. It appears that these were not PD in 1996, so they have a USA copyright until 1/1/2026. This assumes that the 1930 creation date is correct, which is unproven here. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:33, 17 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jameslwoodward: I couldn't understand why you mentioned 1996. It was created and published in public by the governor-general in 1930 (See the item '발행년도' here). I don't know whether the photographs where taken in 1996 or not, but that is merely mechanical copy of original one. Please review my comment and reply. Hope you have a great year-end. Thanks. — Sadopaul 💬 📁 13:50, 18 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You can refer to {{PD-Japan-oldphoto}} as well. — Sadopaul 💬 📁 13:58, 18 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sadopaul, 1996 is the URAA date. Works that were not PD in their home country in 1996 have a US copyright that runs until 95 years after creation which, as I said, is 1/1/2026 for a work created in 1930. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:59, 18 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jameslwoodward: However, per {{PD-Japan-oldphoto}}, the copyright of these works expired in May 6, 1970, so these were PD in Japan in 1996. The photographer and publisher were Japanese in law, but these works still PD before 1996 even if we apply the Korean copyright law because the copyright had expired in March 21, 1980. Thus, URAA is not for these works in any case.— Sadopaul 💬 📁 19:01, 18 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think that the country of origin here is Korea, not Japan. While Korea was occupied by Japan at the time these were made, it was still a separate nation. It is clear that you agree with that, as the first template you added was {{PD-Korea-1910-1945}}. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:26, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jameslwoodward: IMO, since these photographs are published under the name of the local government of Japanese empire, only Japanese copyright act must be applied. However, even under the Korean copyright act, it is still PD in both U.S. and South Korea. The very first Korean Copyright Act was established 1957, in which the works made public in the name of an organization would be protected for 30 years since the publish. These two photographs were made public in March 21, 1930, and there was no additional Copyright Act were established between 1957 and 1960, the status of these works were PD in 1996. See Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/South_Korea#Pre-1963_deaths,_organization_works and Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/South_Korea#Status_in_the_United_States. Or see [2] (Korean)— Sadopaul 💬 📁 12:51, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:5G Irancell.jpg

File:5G Irancell.jpg Hallo, ich bin der Programm Manager von kourosh torbat zadeh , bitte stellen Sie diese Datei wieder her, ich gebe eine kostenlose Lizenz für dieses Foto. Vielen Dank — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmadrezaeimtn66 (talk • contribs) 21:35, 19 December 2022‎ (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:José Eduardo Evangelista Franco Cheis.jpg

Hi,

I have submited the image File:José Eduardo Evangelista Franco Cheis.jpg wich is a photo I own. I probably incorrectly filled the info on the form for the photo. I ask that the file to be undeleted or, if not possible, to explain me what I have got wrong so that I can upload the photo again and correct the mistake.

Sincerely, Eduardo Cheis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eduardo.cheis (talk • contribs) 00:58, 20 December 2022‎ (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In the file description, you claimed that you were the actual photographer. Now you say "which is a photo I own." which suggests that were not the actual photographer. The image looks like a professional portrait. You should be aware that owning a paper or digital copy of an image does not give you the right to freely license it -- that right almost always belongs to the actual photographer. In order for this to be restored either (a) the actual photographer must send a free license using VRT or (b) you must send a free license together with a written license from the actual photographer which gices you the right to freely license the image. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:57, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:The Eminence in Shadow from manga.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Я сам лично делал фото по купленной книге и она может совпадать с похожими картинками на это фото нет и не может быть лицензионных прав, прошу восстановить фото и вновь вернуть на страницу по поводу загрузок моих фото можно написать также мне на почту - (Redacted)

I personally took a photo of the book I bought and it may coincide with similar pictures in this photo there are no license rights, I ask you to restore the photo and return it to the page again about uploading my photos, you can also write to me by email - (Redacted) Konosina333 (talk) 03:34, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Phony license. Fair use from en:File:The Eminence in Shadow light novel volume 1 cover.jpg. Thuresson (talk) 06:23, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:I'm in Love with the Villainess light novel volume 1 cover.jpg

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: Я считаю что причина удаление объекта является не верным этот объект взят со сайта wikipedia EN (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/db/I%27m_in_Love_with_the_Villainess_light_novel_volume_1_cover.jpg) использование Вики не запрещает использовать файлы из другой вики библиотеки Сообщить мне можно на почту результат (Redacted) I believe that the reason for deleting the object is incorrect this object is taken from the wikipedia EN site (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/db/I%27m_in_Love_with_the_Villainess_light_novel_volume_1_cover.jpg ) using a wiki does not prohibit using files from another wiki library Konosina333 (talk) 03:46, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Phony license. Fair use from en:File:I'm in Love with the Villainess light novel volume 1 cover.jpg. Thuresson (talk) 06:19, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Antoni Cañete Martos.jpg

Se ha eliminado esta imagen por una presunta violación de Copyright, pero los derechos los tenemos nosotros porque fuimos quienes tomamos la imagen. --Palula13 (talk) 09:10, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This file was previously uploaded as File:Antoni Cañete, president de PIMEC.jpg by User:NuriaHF and deleted because it appears at https://www.pimec.org/sites/default/files/memoria_2020_baixa_29-4-2021.pdf without a free license. Note that User:Palula13 is a single purpose sockpuppet of User:NuriaHF. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:47, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files uploaded by User:LRFHEC

@LRFHEC:

These were deleted seemingly as being unlicensed, However, I see NO welcome message on the User's talk page, or an attempt to resolve the issue of what appears to be legitimate bulk uploads by a potential GLAM partner, before a bot slammed a load of warning messages, to them


Undeletion ( unless these are duplicated) is requested to allow the uploader to update the licensing accordingly or submit relevant VRT tickets, It would also be appreciated if the admins, could also provide advice to the uploader, on how to do a successful bulk upload.

List of deleted files

File:LR-FAF-SA6-0009.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0010.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0011.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0012.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0014.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0015.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0016.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0017.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0018.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0019.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0021.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0022.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0023.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0024.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0025.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0026.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0027.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0028.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0029.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0030.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0031.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0032.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0033.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0034.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0035.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0036.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0037.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0038.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0039.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0040.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0041.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0042.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0043.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0044.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0045.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0046.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0047.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0049.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0050.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0051.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0052.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0053.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0054.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0055.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0057.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0058.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0059.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0060.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0061.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0063.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0064.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0065.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0066.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0067.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0068.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0069.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0070.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0071.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0072.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6-0073.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0001.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0002.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0003.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0004.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0005.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0006a.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0006b.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0007.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0008.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0009.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0010.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0012.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0013.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0014.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0015.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0016.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0017.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0018.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0019.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0020.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0021.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0022.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0023.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0024.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0028.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0029.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0030.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0031.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0032.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0033.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0034.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0035.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0036.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0037.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0039.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0040.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0041.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0042.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0043.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-0044.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6a-P-0001.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6b-0001.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6b-0003.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6b-0004.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6b-0005.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6b-0006.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6b-0007.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6b-0008.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6b-0009.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6b-0010.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6b-0011.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6b-P-0001.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6b-P-0002.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6b-P-0003.pdf] File:LR-FAF-SA6b-P-0004.pdf File:LR-FAF-SA6b-P-0005.pdf

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:19, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't know what the overlap, if any, is between the files listed above and the 4,656 images in Category:Images from Lloyd’s Register Foundation, Heritage & Education Centre, but before we undelete these, I think we should insist that User:LRFHEC clean up the 4,656 existing images. I have examined a random sample of the 4,656.

I note first that they are all PDFs. We do not generally permit the use of PDF for single images -- only for multipage documents. Second, I note that all those I examined have a watermark claiming copyright, CC-BY-SA licenses, and a note demanding that they be attributed to LRHF. The bulk of them are from the 19th century and are certainly out of copyright. Some of the more recent ones -- surveys and anchor certificates -- were created by LLoyds Register employees so the copyrights probably belong to the Register, but others were created by ship owners and captains and the copyright never belonged to the Register.They do not have any categories except the one named above. The file descriptions are uninformative -- a typical one is:

"Anchor Certificate for Barclay, February 1863. Please be aware there may be material within the Collection that contains imagery or information that some may find upsetting. The documents were produced within the context of the time and do not reflect the views or opinions of Lloyd's Register or the Lloyd's Register Foundation today."

The referenced source site has more information on the ship Barclay -- why didn't we get it? Finally, many of them are probably out of scope. I see no reason to keep anchor certificates and other detailed information for Barclay and many other ships that are far from noteworthy.

The cleanup would include, for all the images:

  1. Uploading a new image without the watermark and marked CC-0 or PD-old unless it was a recent work by a Register employee.
  2. Adding at least one useful category
  3. Adding all of the information known to LRHF about each image as shown on its website.
  4. We can tolerate the PDFs, but substituting PNGs and deleting the PDFs would be good.

Without such a cleanup, I will probably initiate a DR for at least all of the images that are obviously out of copyright. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:33, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • IMO these may be in scope, but I agree with Jim that the files should be uploaded as JPEG or PNG, the description should contain more information, and also useful categories. There is also an issue with their size, e.g. the first 2 in the list above: File:LR-FAF-SA6-0009.pdf 2,526 × 1,731 (348,782,434 bytes) and File:LR-FAF-SA6-0010.pdf 1,731 × 2,526 (42,044,428 bytes). There is no reason why a 4.4 Mpixels file should be 42 MB, let alone 349 MB. For comparaison, File:Annual Surveys Report for Mermaid, 1866.pdf is 1,537 × 2,322 pixels, file size: 2.62 MB. Yann (talk) 15:48, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Yann@ There are some actual Documents (such as actual "registers") that are multipage and in scope for Commons/(wikisource), and for which PDF is approrpriate though. I was considering suggesting a Wikiproject to get those in some form of Transcript form, although Wikidata mighty be a better projects for that data...
    ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:17, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Yann:
    I am wondering if some of these PDF's are essentially TIFF in PDF (at hi-res), and are thus any nominal pixel size dimensions are a little confused. If Commons supports TIFF, that should be used in preference for single page document original scans, as JPEG is lossy.
    DJVU might also be an alternative format for grouped scans.
    I am not disputing the points you raise about over-sized files for the data contained.
    ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:29, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • For the file format, it depends. For such scans of ordinary letters / documents, TIFF is uselessly oversized. It may be useful for documents with a lot of tiny details, i.e. paintings, although PNG is also not lossy, but of much smaller size. PDF is supposed to be a compressed file format, so TIFF in a PDF should be much smaller. Yann (talk) 16:43, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Some of the uploads seem to be actual plans (Mid-ship sections). I'm wondering if they are PDF, because that's the format the archive had to hand, as opposed to the original scan formats. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:49, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
At the very least, I would strongly suggest someone with GLAM experiecne, attempts to advise the uploader on best practice. I get the sense of unfamiliarity with Wikimedia's ways of working (compared to Internet Archive or other sites). I have however found that a robust dialouge with the right people on Commons, can help resolve misunderstanding quickly. A 'slam' set of warnings is more likely to discourage a GLAM uploader, than some kind of reasoned attempt at resolving the issue. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:22, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the robust response. I had my concerns about the watermarks and unclear licensing situation as well.
Source (archive) attribution is not unexpected, if inconvenient. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:24, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The last version of the uploader's own site's Terms of Use, I could find has an NC clause -https://web.archive.org/web/20221009021411/https://hec.lrfoundation.org.uk/get-involved/using-our-resources, The actual link on their Live website seems to be 404, so I am wondering if they are updating the licensing they are using.This seems to have been resolved.
The uploads at IA (https://archive.org/details/@lrfhec?tab=uploads&&and[]=year%3A%221912%22), are indicated as NC-ND.
(Aside: It seems a number of volumes of the actual shipping register are also listed without clear licensing at Internet Archive:-
https://archive.org/search.php?query=creator%3A%22Lloyd%27s+Register+Foundation%2C+Heritage+%26+Education+Centre%22
)
I'm assuming good faith on the part of the uploader, and that they changed the licensing they are using, however it would be nice to have a clear unambiguous confirmation of the change to the CC-BY-SA 4.0, at least in relation to material the Foundation is copyright successor to.
Does anyone here have the names of some UK based GLAM contacts they could give the uploader?
ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:01, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

File:Rich Waltz.jpg

I am request the undeletion of the photo labeled File:Rich Waltz.jpg. Was waiting on the appropriate permissions that I now have, and will be sending the template email confirming ownership of the photo.

Cgold1996 (talk) 14:44, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The image appears at https://www.paramountpressexpress.com/cbs-sports/shows/college-basketball/talent/?view=rich-waltz with an explicit copyright notice. In order for it to be restored, the actual copyright holder must send a free license using VRT. VRT does not generally accept license forwarded to them by the uploader -- they have seen too many forgeries. If and when such a license is received, reviewed, and approved by VRT, the image will be restored without further action on your part. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:04, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

✓ Done: Permission now OK. --Yann (talk) 19:37, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:DSC 31811(1).jpg

I am the copyright holder. This is a valid submission with no copyright infringement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Activist submissions (talk • contribs) 19:37, 20 December 2022 (UTC) (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Activist submissions: Why such a small size and no EXIF data? If you are the photographer, please upload the original image with full EXIF data, and a better name. Yann (talk) 19:37, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Note that the images appears at https://www.amazon.in/Peter-Young/e/B083GHSDLX%3Fref=dbs_a_mng_rwt_scns_share without a free license. Yann's suggestion is certainly the easiest way to prove that you are the actual photographer. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:07, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Amazon version is slightly smaller than Commons version, so it could be copied from here. Yann (talk) 22:20, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - The identical size version, and with the same file name (Windows, for example, appends a (1), (2), etc. suffix when a duplicate is downloaded) was here in 2019 (see URL). This is a blatant COM:NETCOPYVIO. Эlcobbola talk 23:14, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests&oldid=657884750"