Commons:Pedidos de restauração

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page is a translated version of a page Commons:Undeletion requests and the translation is 77% complete. Changes to the translation template, respectively the source language can be submitted through Commons:Undeletion requests and have to be approved by a translation administrator.
Outdated translations are marked like this.

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

Nesta página, os utilizadores podem solicitar que uma página ou ficheiro (doravante, "ficheiro") seja restaurada. Outros utilizadores podem comentar sobre os pedidos, deixando comentários a favor ou contra a restauração.

Esta página não é parte da Wikipédia. Esta página é sobre o conteúdo do Wikimedia Commons, um repositório de ficheiros de mídia livre utilizadas pela Wikipédia e por outros projectos Wikimedia. O Wikimedia Commons não hospeda artigos enciclopédicos. Para solicitar a restauração de um artigo ou outro conteúdo que foi apagado da Wikipédia lusófona, consulte a página de revisão de eliminações deste projecto.

Descobrindo o porquê um arquivo foi apagado

Primeiro, veja o registro de eliminação e veja o porquê um arquivo foi apagado. Utilize também o recurso Páginas afluentes para verificar se existe alguma discussão com ligação ao arquivo apagado. Se você é o responsável por carregar o arquivo, procure em sua página de discussão alguma mensagem informando o motivo da eliminação. Em seguida, veja novamente a política de eliminação, o escopo do projeto e a política de licenciamento para verificar o motivo do arquivo pode não ser permitido no Commons.

Caso o motivo dado não seja claro o suficiente ou você deseja contestá-lo, você pode contactar o administrador responsável pela eliminação e pedir maiores esclarecimentos ou fornecer evidências contra o motivo da eliminação. Você também pode contactar qualquer administrador ativo (talvez um deles fale seu idioma)—a maioria se mostrará feliz em ajudar e se um erro foi cometido, corrigir a situação.

Contestando uma eliminação

Eliminações que estejam corretamente baseadas nas políticas de eliminação, escopo do projeto e licenciamento não serão desfeitas. As propostas para mudanças das respectivas políticas deverão ser feitas nas suas páginas de discussão.

Se você acredita que o arquivo em questão não seja uma violação de direitos autorais tampouco esteja fora do escopo do projeto:

  • Você pode conversar com o administrador que eliminou o artigo, buscando uma explicação detalhada ou apresentando evidências que suportem o restauro.
  • Se você não deseja contactar ninguém diretamente, ou se um administrador recusou o restauro, ou se você quer dar a oportunidade para que mais pessoas participem da discussão, você pode solicitar o restauro nessa página.
  • Se o arquivo foi apagado devido a falta de evidências da permissão de licenciamento do detentor dos direitos autorais, por favor siga os procedimentos para submeter a evidência da permissão. Se você já o fez, não há necessidade de solicitar o restauro aqui. Se a permissão enviada estiver correta, o arquivo será restaurado quando a permissão for processada. Por favor, seja paciente, isso pode demorar algumas semanas dependendo do volume de trabalho e da quantidade de voluntários disponível.
  • 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.

Restauro temporário

Os arquivos podem ser "temporariamente" restaurados seja para auxiliar uma discussão de restauro ou para que seja possível a transferência do mesmo para um projeto que permita seu uso através do fair use. Use a predefinição {{Request temporary undeletion}} na respectiva solicitação de restauro e forneça uma justificativa.

  1. se o restauro temporário é para auxiliar a discussão, diga o porquê será útil fazê-lo, ou
  2. se o restauro temporário é para permitir a transferência a algum projeto fair use, informe qual projeto você pretende transferir o arquivo, fornecendo um link para sua declaração de fair use.

Para auxiliar a discussão

Os arquivos podem ser temporariamente restaurados para auxiliar sua discussão, caso seja difícil aos usuários decidir se o pedido de restauro deve ser atendido sem acesso ao arquivo. Quando uma descrição do arquivo ou a citação da página de descrição do arquivo for suficiente, um administrador poderá fornecê-la ao invés de proceder o restauro temporário. Os pedidos podem ser rejeitados caso sua utilidade à discussão seja superada por outros fatores (como o restauro, mesmo temporário, de arquivos onde existam preocupações substanciais relativas a Fotografias de pessoas identificáveis). Arquivos temporariamente restaurados para auxiliar a discussão serão apagados novamente após trinta dias, ou quando o pedido de restauro for encerrado (o que ocorrer primeiro).

Para permitir a transferência do conteúdo fair use para outro projeto

Ao contrário da Wikipédia lusófona e de alguns outros projetos Wikimedia, o Commons não aceita conteúdo protegido com referência as normas de fair use. Se um arquivo eliminado atende aos requisitos de fair use de outro projeto Wikimedia, os usuários podem solicitar o restauro temporário para possibilitar a transferência do arquivo. Normalmente estes pedidos são atendidos rapidamente. Arquivos restaurados com o propósito de transferência serão eliminados novamente após dois dias. Quando solicitar o restauro temporário, por favor informe para qual projeto você pretende transferir o arquivo e informe o link da declaração de fair use do projeto.

Projetos que aceitam o fair use
* Wikipedia: alsarbarbnbebe-taraskcaeleneteofafifrfrrhehrhyidisitjalbltlvmkmsptroruslsrthtrttukvizh+/−

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.

Adicionando um pedido

Primeiro, certifique-se de que você tentou descobrir porque o ficheiro foi apagado. Depois, leia as instruções a seguir de como escrever o pedido antes de adicioná-lo:

  • Do not request undeletion of a file that has not been deleted.
  • Do not post e-mail or telephone numbers to yourself or others.
  • No campo Assunto/cabeçalho: digite um assunto apropriado. Se você está solicitando a restauração de um único ficheiro, um título como [[:Image:DeletedFile.jpg]] é aconselhável. (Lembre-se de colocar os dois pontos ":" no início.)
  • Identifique o(s) ficheiro(s) para os quais você está pedindo a restauração e forneça links para as imagens (veja acima). Se você não sabe o nome exato do ficheiro, dê informações, tanto quanto você puder. Os pedidos que não forneçam informações sobre qual(is) ficheiro(s) deve(m) ser restaurado(s) podem ser arquivados sem aviso prévio.
  • Indique o(s) motivo(s) para a pedido de restauração.
  • Assine seu pedido utilizando quatro tiles (~~~~). Se você possui conta no Commons, faça login (autentique-se) primeiro. Se você for o único utilizador a carregar o ficheiro em questão, isso pode ajudar os administradores a identificá-lo.


Adicione o pedido na página inferior da página. Clique aqui para abrir a página onde você deve adicionar o seu pedido.

Closing discussions

In general, discussions should be closed only by administrators.

Arquivos

Debates de restauração encerrados são arquivados diariamente.

Current requests

Images were published after 2015, expiration of posthumous copyright protection of photographer after death, or before 1954. Overly hypothetical doubts by now-banned user who made many overzealous deletion requests. Kges1901 (talk) 18:16, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose As I noted in the DR, these are either under URAA copyright, as are all Russian images published after 1942, or, if unpublished until recently, are under copyright in Russia. In either case we cannot keep them. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:16, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We usually assume that old works were published at the time of creation, unless evidence says otherwise. If I understood correctly, the author was a reporter for RIAN, so I see no reason to assume that these pictures were not published at the time. The first file in the list, File:Сессия Верховного Совета СССР первого созыва (2).jpg, is dated 1938. That may not be sufficient for all images, but it seems OK for this one. Yann (talk) 20:10, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Troshkin was a reporter for the newspaper Izvestiya, and his photographs were published at the time in Izvestiya, Krasnaya Zvezda, and other papers. --Kges1901 (talk) 20:19, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Carl Lindberg also made an interesting argument about the country of origin. If these newspapers were distributed in the Soviet Union, they were simultaneously published in all successor nations, and that under the Berne Convention, the shorter term applies. Yann (talk) 20:23, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These newspapers were distributed across the entire Soviet Union, not just on the territory of the RSFSR. In any case, the definition of publication under Russian copyright law is that the back of the photograph was marked by the artist in the appropriate way, which for war photographs implies that it passed through censorship processes and could be published. Since most of these photographs are not taken from the photographer's negatives, it is reasonable to assume that they were marked on the back, and recently digitized images appeared on the internet after 2014, when the posthumous publication copyright term expired. Kges1901 (talk) 20:32, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Carl Lindberg is not sole in such assumption. But this is just assumption so far, it is not supported by court decisions (of 12-15 post-Soviet states) or jurisprudential literature (as I have known on today, I continue to seek it, to confirm or refute it). As I see such questions in court decisions (of several post-Soviet states) or jurisprudential literature - the concrete Soviet republic is place of publishing (because, the civil legislation was on republican level) or the RF is place of publishing, even if work was published outside of the RSFSR (as USSR-successor on union level). Alex Spade (talk) 10:29, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure there is any test case over the Berne definition of "country of origin". The question would not come up internally for Russian law or that of the old republics, most likely. It would only matter in a country outside those which implement the rule of the shorter term, and over a work which that question may be involved. Not sure I know of any, anywhere. But, the Berne Convention is pretty specific in its definition when it comes to works simultaneously published in multiple countries, and that is the definition that Commons follows. Of course, the Soviet Union was not a member, though most all subsequent countries are now. One complication is the U.S. status -- the definition of "source country" for the URAA would follow different logic than Berne, the country of "greatest contacts with the work", which would be Russia. Russia was 50pma on the URAA date, but I think had some wartime extensions, which I think push these over the line, such that only ones published before 1929 (or created before 1904, if unpublished) would be PD in the U.S., regardless of current status in Russia, or the country of origin (if different). Carl Lindberg (talk) 19:09, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do not know such cases (on the Berne definition) too, but in the Russian copyright legislation there are 3 criterions of copyrightability - (1) the Russian territory (the territory of the Russian Federation (the RSFSR previously, not the USSR) since Nov.7, 1917 to today) in the borders on the date of publication, (2) the Russian citizenship on the date of publication, and (3) international treaties.
Moreover, there is similar situation with reports of telegraph agencies or press-releases- they are reported/released worldwide formally, but the country indicated in report/release is the country of origin (some reports/releases have two of more indicated countries). Alex Spade (talk) 22:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Right -- the Berne country of origin pretty much never applies to internal works, or even most situations involving foreign works. The specific definition in Berne pretty much only matters if a country is applying the rule of the shorter term for a foreign work to have lesser protection than their own works normally do; the Berne definition would have to be used in that case to determine the country, since that is in the treaty. In pretty much any other situation, more sensical definitions can be used (which even the US did, with the URAA -- the "source country" there is pretty much the same thing, but differs quite a bit once it comes to simultaneous publication). But however nonsensical it seems, Commons uses the Berne definition, since that should control when works expire in many countries (even if that virtually never comes up in a court case to test it). Carl Lindberg (talk) 01:15, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another aspect to consider is how publication is defined. For example, in this academic article about Russian copyright law, it is stated that an author, transferring a work to another by agreement, gives consent to publication, and thus the work can be considered published. This means that if Troshkin transferred his negatives to his employer (Izvestiya), the works would be legally considered published. Since all photos in question are of a professional nature, there is no reason to assume that Troshkin kept any of these photographs in his personal possession and did not transfer them to his employer. Considering this, then all of his photos would have been legally published when he transferred them to his employer, that is, definitely before his death in 1944, and all these photographs would be firmly public domain. Kges1901 (talk) 08:13, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Term publication (обнародование or опубликование in Russian, and these are two different term in the Russian copyright) is defined in the paragraph one and two of part 1 of article 1268 of the Civil Code. Consent to publication is not publication (right for exercise of some action is not action). And mentioned resent discussion on the Ru-Wiki for orphan works (where I was the main speaker) does not matter for Troshkin's works - author of photos (Troshkin) is known. Alex Spade (talk) 09:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    At the same time if there is a source for original of photo and its reverse side, and such original (reverse side) is marked by author name and a year, then this year can be considered as year of publication according to the last paragraph of article 475 of the Soviet Russian Civil Code. Alex Spade (talk) 09:22, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • In terms of copyright I am specifically discussing the nuances of обнародование because the term contains a broader meaning than simply опубликование, and the expiration of copyright (if work is posthumously published) is calculated from обнародование and not опубликование of a work – regarding photographs, that public display of a work counts as обнародование while not опубликование in the strict sense, therefore opening broader possibilities for the release of a work during Troshkin's lifetime.
Regarding originals, another aspect is that at least some of Troshkin's photographs were sent into TASS and copyright thus transferred to TASS, falling under PD-Russia under the TASS aspect. For example this photograph was marked on the back with TASS copyright stamp even though Troshkin was an Izvestiya correspondent.
In any case presence of markings on the back is the most hopeful approach to this problem of posthumous copyright since any photograph/negative with a description had to have been marked on the back with a caption and name of the author, since Troshkin's photographs presumably entered into a centralized group of photographs cleared for publication, as his photographs were not just published in Izvestiya, but in Krasnaya Zvezda, Vechernyaya Moskva, other newspapers, and books (for example a large quantity of his photographs taken during the Battle of Khalkhin Gol appeared in this 1940 book without mention of his name. Secondly finding an exact date for negatives such as this example would have been impossible if there was no marking on the back. The fact that exact dates taken are available for negatives indicates that they were also marked in some way with captions, dates and names of author. Examples of such author name and year markings on the back of a Troshkin photograph include [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. Kges1901 (talk) 13:35, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, обнародование is wider than опубликование, but the fact (and the date) of обнародование must be proved (for example for some painting "This painting was created in 1923 and was shown on ZYX-art exhibition in 1925, see reference link").
  • Yes, if photowork is marked by TASS (no matter by TASS only or by TASS+name_of_real_photograph), this photowork is TASS-work. Alex Spade (talk) 14:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Undeletion of individual photographs

Russian department awards

Please, restore deleted Russian department awards and close (as keep) similar current DR. Alex Spade (talk) 09:59, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closed DR discussions

Current DR discussions

Yes, they are not state awards, but they are state symbols ({{PD-RU-exempt}}) indeed - symbols, which are established by state authorities, which design (including both text description and visual representation) are established (which design are integral part of) in respective official documents of state government agencies (the Russian official documents are not just texts), which are subjects of the en:State Heraldic Register of the Russian Federation (point 3 subpoint 4). Alex Spade (talk) 09:59, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Question Any opinion about this? Yann (talk) 18:50, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion it would be crucial here to know if the documents granting awards and awards themsetves are official (i.e. if they have legal basis).  Support if yes,  Oppose if not (unless we have knowledge that Russian courts interpret the word official differently), and COM:PCP if unsure. Without extra information it is the third option. If they are issued and granted just basing on an internal decision of the organization, then they are not official (IMO). Ankry (talk) 15:30, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, department order for decoration of someone(s) by department award(s), наградной лист (award paper), and наградная книжка (award card) for department awards are official documents of administrative characters. Same as for state awards. Alex Spade (talk) 09:15, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How can we verify its official status? Where and when the decission that established this reward was published? Ankry (talk) 21:09, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Request temporary undeletion

It seems to have been deleted because it was considered a derivative work. But actually, checking it from the Archive, it does not appear to be a derivative of any particular depiction of Ali. There are many similar illustrations of him with many variations, which are ubiquitous. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 00:33, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For instance, see this image, which is in the public domain. It is also quite similar to the deleted image, so I think these kinds of depictions of Ali are too generic to be considered derivatives of one another. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 01:35, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Request: Could we have it undeleted temporarily for the discussion since the Internet Archive is down? TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 00:13, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose The argument above certainly has some force, but side by side the deleted image and the one cited at Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Mola_Ali.jpg look very similar. Compare the folds in the shirt and the creases in the face. The position of the eyes is also identical. The image cited above does not have the same similarities. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:45, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jameslwoodward: This quote from page 39-40 of the referenced book implies that some of those features you mention are very common in his contemporary portraits:

Contemporary portraits of Imam Ali also give importance to the face. The viewer’s attention is drawn to the Imam’s face by a light illuminating the upper part of his face, that is, the forehead, nasal bone and cheekbones. However, the iconographic detailing of the face often differs between images to present a variety of physiognomic traits all held to represent Imam Ali. The most commonly produced and distributed portraits, which I call the ‘conventional’ facial type, are illustrated in Figures 2, 3, 12 and 14. Imam Ali is shown in part profile with lofty forehead and wide, a little oversized, eyes with large pupils. The high eyebrows accentuate the size of the eye. Ali avoids eye contact with the viewer and the gaze seems to be directed slightly upwards with the look of a far-sighted visionary, creating an almost dream-like appearance. The face is oval, and the cheekbones round. The lips are full rather than thin. Cheekbones and lips are partly covered by a dark, thick, well-trimmed beard.

Also, actually, I can't entirely agree that the public domain image I shared does not have these similarities. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 01:30, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files deleted

Please restore the following pages:

Reason: The design is likely above COM:TOO US however per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by SergioCarino the file acually became free through formalities so therefore these qualify for {{PD-US-1978-89}}. See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:PBS 1971 id.svg which regards an older variant of PBS's logo, also resulting in keep. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 50.201.40.102 (talk) 13:39, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request by MineEdu

Solicito a restauração do referido arquivo, tendo em vista uma autêntica ilegitimidade na reivindicação por sua exclusão, a qual iniciou-se após a remoção de um artigo na Wikipédia lusófona referente à uma personalidade pública. A referida remoção se deu por parte de seus detratores, dentre os quais alguns são wikipedistas. Entendo que todos esses trâmites tiveram por base uma visão parcial da referida personalidade e que, pelo simples fato de haver criado uma página em sua referência, dirigiram-se ataques contra mim e meus artigos e arquivos publicados na Wikipédia e Wikimedia, sendo todos eles de cunho educativo e informacional.

Agradecido, MineEdu (talk) 14:39, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose Per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by MineEdu. It appears also that this contributor has submitted at least one fictional coat of arms, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Coat of arms of the Kingdom of Norway.svg. Thuresson (talk) 20:34, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:ESCUDO ADRC ICASA.svg

I currently work in the Marketing sector of the Associação Desportiva Recreativa Cultural Icasa club, this shield is under our responsibility, there is no problem with copyright, and unfortunately the platform is limiting our uploads to improve communication between fans and the press. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harryson Faustino (talk • contribs) 14:29, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose Policy requires that an authorized official of the copyright holder must send a free license using VRT. This image will be restored automatically, without further action by the uploader, if and when a free license is received, read, and approved at VRT. The current backlog at VRT is 24 days. . .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:09, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yo saqué esa foto. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fernando Vairoletto (talk • contribs) 02:16, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose Published without a free license at laizquierdadiario.cl. Thuresson (talk) 20:29, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This photography was deleted, and I request it to be restored. It is a press image free to use from the website of the Council of Urban Aesthetics in Stockholm (Skönhetsrådet). It is marked as CC BY 4.0 at their website. URL: https://skonhetsradet.stockholm/9-2/press/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandorida (talk • contribs) 13:09, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Solidarity (Ireland) logo.png was correctly labelled as Template:PD-textlogo. The logo consists of a five-point star, which is a geometric shape, and five circles, which are also geometric shapes. The body/arm shapes are also done geometrically, specifically, they are Hypotrochoids. The text is just simple text.

I request that it be undeleted. CeltBrowne (talk) 04:40, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think it could be complex enough for a copyright. I wouldn't have speedy deleted it though. Abzeronow (talk) 04:43, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]