File:2026-05-07 - Washington, DC - Presidente da República, Luíz Inácio Lula da Silva, chega para encontro com o presidente dos Estados Unidos, Donald Trump, na Casa Branca.jpg

This license is not valid for content that was produced (i.e. date taken) by Agência Brasil after 23 February 2017. Yacàwotçã (talk) 01:21, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Agência Brasil continues to operate with content licensed under specific criteria, and the understanding regarding the sharing of its material involves the separation between the company's founding legislation and the copyright rules in force in the country.

To understand exactly how the agency's current licensing works, it is worth highlighting the following points:

The Standard License: Creative Commons (CC BY)

Most of the proprietary content produced by Agência Brasil (texts and photographs from its institutional reporters and photographers) is made available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Brazil (CC BY) license.

This means that the content is free for reproduction, redistribution, and even adaptation, provided that:

Explicit credit is given to the author and Agência Brasil.

A link to the original publication is included when reproduced in a digital environment.

Third-Party Content and Partner Agencies

Not everything published on the Agência Brasil portal can be freely replicated. There is a crucial distinction in their content:

Clearly identified with the professional credit accompanied by "Agência Brasil" (e.g., Photo: Marcelo Camargo/Agência Brasil). These follow a free license.

Materials, videos, or images replicated from partner international news agencies (such as Reuters, AFP, Xinhua, among others) or from independent photographers contracted under strict terms of patrimonial rights. This content remains protected by conventional copyright (all rights reserved) and cannot be redistributed to the general public without direct authorization from the original holders.

The 2017 Legal Framework and EBC: In 2017, there was a significant legislative change in the structure of Empresa Brasil de Comunicação (EBC) — the manager of Agência Brasil — through Law No. 13.417/2017 (resulting from the conversion of Provisional Measure 744). This legislation reformulated the governance of the public company and the objectives of the broadcasting services and public agency.

However, this law did not extinguish the open licensing model adopted by Agência Brasil. EBC maintains, as an institutional guideline, the function of circulating information of public interest broadly, preserving the Creative Commons seal for its own production as a way to subsidize regional newspapers, blogs, and other media outlets across the country.

Access link: Acessar material fotojornalístico gratuitamente (Agência Brasil) — UserLeonardo (talk) 16:02, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

Access the link and click the start button for licensed images and search "Meeting between the President of Brazil Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Donald Trump" you will see the images completely free for use on Wikimedia Commons and in compliance with copyright laws.— UserLeonardo (talk) 00:25, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

Contact the email address for licensing information mentioned in this news report— UserLeonardo (talk) 00:35, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

File:2026-05-07 - Washington, DC - Presidente da República, Luíz Inácio Lula da Silva, chega para encontro com o presidente dos Estados Unidos, Donald Trump, na Casa Branca (cropped 1).jpg

This license is not valid for content that was produced (i.e. date taken) by Agência Brasil after 23 February 2017. Yacàwotçã (talk) 01:21, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Agência Brasil continues to operate with content licensed under specific criteria, and the understanding regarding the sharing of its material involves the separation between the company's founding legislation and the copyright rules in force in the country.

To understand exactly how the agency's current licensing works, it is worth highlighting the following points:

The Standard License: Creative Commons (CC BY)

Most of the proprietary content produced by Agência Brasil (texts and photographs from its institutional reporters and photographers) is made available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Brazil (CC BY) license.

This means that the content is free for reproduction, redistribution, and even adaptation, provided that:

Explicit credit is given to the author and Agência Brasil.

A link to the original publication is included when reproduced in a digital environment.

Third-Party Content and Partner Agencies

Not everything published on the Agência Brasil portal can be freely replicated. There is a crucial distinction in their content:

Clearly identified with the professional credit accompanied by "Agência Brasil" (e.g., Photo: Marcelo Camargo/Agência Brasil). These follow a free license.

Materials, videos, or images replicated from partner international news agencies (such as Reuters, AFP, Xinhua, among others) or from independent photographers contracted under strict terms of patrimonial rights. This content remains protected by conventional copyright (all rights reserved) and cannot be redistributed to the general public without direct authorization from the original holders.

The 2017 Legal Framework and EBC: In 2017, there was a significant legislative change in the structure of Empresa Brasil de Comunicação (EBC) — the manager of Agência Brasil — through Law No. 13.417/2017 (resulting from the conversion of Provisional Measure 744). This legislation reformulated the governance of the public company and the objectives of the broadcasting services and public agency.

However, this law did not extinguish the open licensing model adopted by Agência Brasil. EBC maintains, as an institutional guideline, the function of circulating information of public interest broadly, preserving the Creative Commons seal for its own production as a way to subsidize regional newspapers, blogs, and other media outlets across the country.

Access link: Acessar material fotojornalístico gratuitamente (Agência Brasil) — UserLeonardo (talk) 16:02, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

Access the link and click the start button for licensed images and search "Meeting between the President of Brazil Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Donald Trump" you will see the images completely free for use on Wikimedia Commons and in compliance with copyright laws.— UserLeonardo (talk) 00:24, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

Contact the email address for licensing information mentioned in this news report— UserLeonardo (talk) 00:35, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Washington (DC), Washington (DC), 07-05-2026 - Presidente da República, Luíz Inácio Lula da Silva, chega para encontro com o presidente dos Estados Unidos, Donald Trump, na Casa Branca.jpg

This license is not valid for content that was produced (i.e. date taken) by Agência Brasil after 23 February 2017. Yacàwotçã (talk) 01:22, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Agência Brasil continues to operate with content licensed under specific criteria, and the understanding regarding the sharing of its material involves the separation between the company's founding legislation and the copyright rules in force in the country.

To understand exactly how the agency's current licensing works, it is worth highlighting the following points:

1. The Standard License: Creative Commons (CC BY)

Most of the proprietary content produced by Agência Brasil (texts and photographs from its institutional reporters and photographers) is made available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Brazil (CC BY) license.

This means that the content is free for reproduction, redistribution, and even adaptation, provided that:

Explicit credit is given to the author and Agência Brasil.

A link to the original publication is included when reproduced in a digital environment.

Third-Party Content and Partner Agencies

Not everything published on the Agência Brasil portal can be freely replicated. There is a crucial distinction in their content:

Clearly identified with the professional credit accompanied by "Agência Brasil" (e.g., Photo: Marcelo Camargo/Agência Brasil). These follow a free license.

Materials, videos, or images replicated from partner international news agencies (such as Reuters, AFP, Xinhua, among others) or from independent photographers contracted under strict terms of patrimonial rights. This content remains protected by conventional copyright (all rights reserved) and cannot be redistributed to the general public without direct authorization from the original holders.

The 2017 Legal Framework and EBC: In 2017, there was a significant legislative change in the structure of Empresa Brasil de Comunicação (EBC) — the manager of Agência Brasil — through Law No. 13.417/2017 (resulting from the conversion of Provisional Measure 744). This legislation reformulated the governance of the public company and the objectives of the broadcasting services and public agency.

However, this law did not extinguish the open licensing model adopted by Agência Brasil. EBC maintains, as an institutional guideline, the function of circulating information of public interest broadly, preserving the Creative Commons seal for its own production as a way to subsidize regional newspapers, blogs, and other media outlets across the country. Access link: Acessar material fotojornalístico gratuitamente (Agência Brasil) — UserLeonardo (talk) 16:02, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

Access the link and click the start button for licensed images and search "Meeting between the President of Brazil Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Donald Trump" you will see the images completely free for use on Wikimedia Commons and in compliance with copyright laws. —UserLeonardo (talk) 16:04, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

Contact the email address for licensing information mentioned in this news report— UserLeonardo (talk) 00:36, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Réseau express métropolitain logo.png

The image is not linked to, and it is a PNG duplicate of the vector image at File:Logo Réseau express métropolitain.svg. SomeRailfan (talk) 01:41, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Neuer Hackescher Markt.jpg

Scan from an offset reproduction, probably a book, "own work" therefore questionable Carl Ha (talk) 07:34, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

•  Delete per nomination. Vehicles and other elements of scene suggest a modern photo that would most likely be copyrightable. TheFeds 04:18, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

File:Бурнадз Лев.jpg

Copyright of this photo was restored under URAA SomeFancyUsername (talk) 10:14, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Габель Ю. О. Хемія тютюну.pdf

Copyright of this book was restored under URAA, so undelete in 2027 SomeFancyUsername (talk) 10:18, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

According to COM:Ukraine, “A Ukrainian or Ukrainian SSR work is in the public domain in Ukraine if it was published before 1 January 1951, and the creator (if known) died before that date.”

The book ''Хемія тютюну'' was published before 1 January 1951. Its author, Yu. O. Gabel, died in 1949, also before 1 January 1951. Venzz (talk) 14:04, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

•  Delete and restore in 2027. It entered the Ukrainian public domain at 50 p.m.a. = start of 2000 (prior to the 2001 extension to 70 p.m.a.), but that was after the applicable URAA date. At COM:Ukraine, see the paragraph below it: "in the public domain in the U.S. only if it was in the public domain in Ukraine before 1 January 1996". Would enter the U.S. public domain 95 years from first publication (given in text as 1931 in Kharkiv or Kyiv, Ukrainian SSR) = start of 2027. TheFeds 03:23, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

File:Morits Hrodzynskyi 1950.png

Copyright of this photo was restored under URAA, so undelete in 2046 SomeFancyUsername (talk) 10:20, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

 Comment 1950+51=2001 so the photo became PD after 1996. SomeFancyUsername (talk) 10:23, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

I do not think the URAA argument is correct in this case. URAA did not restore copyright in works that were already in the public domain in their source country on the URAA date. For Ukraine, the URAA date is 1 January 1996.

This photograph was first published in 1950 in the Ukrainian SSR, in the photo album ''Kharkov Law Institute named after L. M. Kaganovich. Graduation class of 1950''. The album does not identify the photographer and does not contain a copyright notice. There is also no evidence that the photographer was an employee of the Institute or that the Institute owned the copyright.

The relevant provisions are Articles 472 and 493 of the Civil Code of the Ukrainian SSR of 1963.

Under Article 472, copyright in photographic works was recognized only if each copy of the work indicated the author’s name, the place and the year of publication. In this case, the photographer’s name is not indicated.

Article 493 is also relevant. In the original 1963 version of the Civil Code of the Ukrainian SSR, photographic works had a special short term of protection: 5 years from publication for individual photographs and 10 years from publication for collections of photographic works. Thus, even if this image is treated as part of a photographic albumn, a 1950 publication would have entered the public domain no later than 1 January 1961.

Later amendments to Article 493, including the 1971 changes, cannot be used to assume that copyright was revived for photographs whose term had already expired under the previous law. Later Ukrainian copyright laws did not retroactively restore copyright in works that had already entered the public domain under earlier Soviet/Ukrainian SSR law. There is no clear retroactive restoration provision for such already public-domain photographic works. Therefore, the photograph was already public domain in Ukraine long before the URAA date of 1 January 1996.

This is not the first deletion discussion concerning a photograph from the same 1950 photo album. Another file from the same source, File:Oleksandr Nebotov.png, was previously nominated for deletion and kept. Venzz (talk) 11:49, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Могила отця Івана Мудрого.jpg

The file is licensed as own work, but there is a serious doubt that the uploader/claimed author is the actual photographer. The photograph depicts a grave in Poland. In a private conversation, the claimed author confirmed that he had not visited this village and had not travelled abroad last year. According to the available information, the photograph was actually taken by a person residing in Poland. No VRT permission from the actual photographer/copyright holder has been provided. Therefore, the current authorship and licensing information cannot be considered reliable. Unless proper evidence of authorship or a valid free-license permission from the actual copyright holder is provided via VRT, the file should be deleted as lacking valid permission. Venzz (talk) 10:20, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:CoA Namedy.jpg

"Ortsemblem"ː Kein offizielles Wappen, daher greift Urheberrecht - No real coat of arms, but an inofficial emblem, copyvio GerritR (talk) 11:02, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Grave of Shura Kober and Vitya Khomenko (1).jpg

COM:FOP Ukraine SomeFancyUsername (talk) 11:42, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Grave of Shura Kober and Vitya Khomenko (2).jpg

COM:FOP Ukraine SomeFancyUsername (talk) 11:42, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Olha Yakuba.png

Copyright of this photo was restored under URAA, so undelete in 2046 SomeFancyUsername (talk) 11:45, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

I do not think the URAA argument is correct in this case. URAA did not restore copyright in works that were already in the public domain in their source country on the URAA date. For Ukraine, the URAA date is 1 January 1996.

This photograph was first published in 1950 in the Ukrainian SSR, in the photo album ''Kharkov Law Institute named after L. M. Kaganovich. Graduation class of 1950''. The album does not identify the photographer and does not contain a copyright notice. There is also no evidence that the photographer was an employee of the Institute or that the Institute owned the copyright.

The relevant provisions are Articles 472 and 493 of the Civil Code of the Ukrainian SSR of 1963.

Under Article 472, copyright in photographic works was recognized only if each copy of the work indicated the author’s name, the place and the year of publication. In this case, the photographer’s name is not indicated.

Article 493 is also relevant. In the original 1963 version of the Civil Code of the Ukrainian SSR, photographic works had a special short term of protection: 5 years from publication for individual photographs and 10 years from publication for collections of photographic works. Thus, even if this image is treated as part of a photographic albumn, a 1950 publication would have entered the public domain no later than 1 January 1961.

Later amendments to Article 493, including the 1971 changes, cannot be used to assume that copyright was revived for photographs whose term had already expired under the previous law. Later Ukrainian copyright laws did not retroactively restore copyright in works that had already entered the public domain under earlier Soviet/Ukrainian SSR law. There is no clear retroactive restoration provision for such already public-domain photographic works. Therefore, the photograph was already public domain in Ukraine long before the URAA date of 1 January 1996.

This is not the first deletion discussion concerning a photograph from the same 1950 photo album. Another file from the same source, File:Oleksandr Nebotov.png, was previously nominated for deletion and kept. --Venzz (talk) 11:52, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

On COM:Ukraine marked what the 1993 law is retroactive. SomeFancyUsername (talk) 12:17, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

I understand that Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Ukraine contains a statement about the “retroactive Ukrainian copyright law of 1993”. However, this statement appears only in the Commons summary. It is not, by itself, a legal provision.

Moreover, the Ukrainian-language version of the Commons page does not contain this wording about a “retroactive” 1993 law. I also do not see such a rule in the 1993 Law of Ukraine “On Copyright and Related Rights” itself. The 1993 law defines its scope and copyright terms, but I do not see a transitional provision expressly restoring copyright in works whose term had already expired under previous Soviet/Ukrainian SSR law.

This is important because Ukrainian legislation did use explicit transitional wording when it intended to extend copyright terms. For example, the 2001 amendment expressly provided that the new terms apply in cases where the previous 50-year term had not expired before the amendment entered into force. That is a much clearer transitional rule than anything I can find in the 1993 law.

As a librarian at Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University, I checked the Ukrainian legal sources and library resources available to me, but I have not found any statutory provision, court decision, or scholarly discussion supporting the view that the 1993 Ukrainian Copyright Act retroactively restored copyright in works that had already entered the public domain under Soviet/Ukrainian SSR law. If Commons relies on this interpretation, the actual legal basis for it should be identified.

Therefore, I do not think the general wording on Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Ukraine is sufficient to prove that the 1993 law revived copyright in already public-domain Soviet works. The specific legal basis for such restoration should be shown. Venzz (talk) 13:22, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Also on COM:Ukraine said: "Copyright protection under the 1993 act applied to all works where the copyright had not expired before the act became effective". --Venzz (talk) 14:02, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Kharkiv Pedagogical Institute. Faculty of Literature. Issue of 1951.png

Claim what this photo was not restored under URAA is not true (1951+51=2002), so undelete in 2047 SomeFancyUsername (talk) 11:51, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

I do not think this conclusion follows.

URAA did not restore copyright in works that were already in the public domain in their source country on the URAA date. For Ukraine, the URAA restoration date is 1 January 1996.

This is a photographic work first published in the Ukrainian SSR in 1951. The “1951 + 51 = 2002” calculation assumes that the 50-year term for anonymous works under the 1993 Ukrainian Copyright Act applies retroactively to this photograph. But this photograph had already entered the public domain long before that Act entered into force.

At the time of publication, the relevant law was the USSR copyright law. Under the USSR Fundamentals of Copyright Law of 1928, photographic works had a special copyright term: 5 years from publication for individual photographs and 10 years from publication for collections of photographs. Therefore, if this is an individual graduation photograph published in 1951, the copyright term expired no later than the end of 1956, and the work entered the public domain on 1 January 1957. Even if it were treated as part of a collection of photographs, the term would have expired no later than the end of 1961, and the work would have entered the public domain on 1 January 1962.

The later Ukrainian Copyright Act of 1993 introduced a 50-year term for anonymous works, but I do not see a provision in that Act that retroactively restored copyright in works that had already entered the public domain under earlier Soviet/Ukrainian SSR law. Therefore, the anonymous-work calculation “1951 + 51 = 2002” is not applicable to a photographic work that had already become public domain decades earlier.

Could you please provide the specific legal provision which, in your view, retroactively restored copyright in Soviet photographic works that had already entered the public domain before the 1993 Ukrainian Copyright Act came into force?

This is also consistent with the later Ukrainian SSR Civil Code approach. Article 472 of the Civil Code of the Ukrainian SSR of 1963 required the indication of the author/photographer and publication data for copyright in photographic works to be recognized. Article 493 regulated the term of protection. These later provisions cannot be used to assume that copyright was revived for photographic works whose term had already expired under the previous law.

Since this photograph was already public domain in Ukraine before 1 January 1996, its U.S. copyright should not have been restored under the URAA. Therefore, “undelete in 2047” does not seem to be the correct conclusion. Venzz (talk) 12:01, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

@Venzz On COM:Ukraine marked what the 1993 law is retroactive. SomeFancyUsername (talk) 12:17, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

I understand that Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Ukraine contains a statement about the “retroactive Ukrainian copyright law of 1993”. However, this statement appears only in the Commons summary. It is not, by itself, a legal provision.

Moreover, the Ukrainian-language version of the Commons page does not contain this wording about a “retroactive” 1993 law. I also do not see such a rule in the 1993 Law of Ukraine “On Copyright and Related Rights” itself. The 1993 law defines its scope and copyright terms, but I do not see a transitional provision expressly restoring copyright in works whose term had already expired under previous Soviet/Ukrainian SSR law.

This is important because Ukrainian legislation did use explicit transitional wording when it intended to extend copyright terms. For example, the 2001 amendment expressly provided that the new terms apply in cases where the previous 50-year term had not expired before the amendment entered into force. That is a much clearer transitional rule than anything I can find in the 1993 law.

As a librarian at Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University, I checked the Ukrainian legal sources and library resources available to me, but I have not found any statutory provision, court decision, or scholarly discussion supporting the view that the 1993 Ukrainian Copyright Act retroactively restored copyright in works that had already entered the public domain under Soviet/Ukrainian SSR law. If Commons relies on this interpretation, the actual legal basis for it should be identified.

Therefore, I do not think the general wording on Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Ukraine is sufficient to prove that the 1993 law revived copyright in already public-domain Soviet works. The specific legal basis for such restoration should be shown.Venzz (talk) 13:24, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Also, COM:Ukraine itself states: “Copyright protection under the 1993 act applied to all works where the copyright had not expired before the act became effective.” This wording means that the 1993 Ukrainian Copyright Act was not retroactive in the sense of restoring copyright in works whose term had already expired before the Act entered into force. It applied only to works that were still protected at that time. This seems to create an internal inconsistency in the interpretation being used here. If a Ukrainian SSR work had already entered the public domain before the 1993 Act became effective, then the Act should not be used as a basis for treating it as newly protected. Therefore, if the file is considered copyrighted despite the explicit COM:Ukraine rule, the specific legal basis for that interpretation should be identified. --Venzz (talk) 14:08, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Berezovyi Hai Park, Kyiv (4).jpg

COM:FOP Ukraine SomeFancyUsername (talk) 11:56, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Bust of Lomonosov in Kharkiv8.jpg

COM:FOP Ukraine SomeFancyUsername (talk) 11:56, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Bust of Hero of the Soviet Union Z. K. Slyusarenko.jpg

COM:FOP Ukraine SomeFancyUsername (talk) 11:57, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Brotherhood grave of Soviet soldiers. Zmiiv (3).jpg

COM:FOP Ukraine SomeFancyUsername (talk) 11:57, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Brotherhood grave of Soviet soldiers. Zidky (3).jpg

COM:FOP Ukraine SomeFancyUsername (talk) 11:57, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Brotherhood grave of Soviet soldiers. Zidky (2).jpg

COM:FOP Ukraine SomeFancyUsername (talk) 11:57, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Monument to students, teachers and employees of the law institute who died during the Great Patriotic War (4).jpg

COM:FOP Ukraine SomeFancyUsername (talk) 11:57, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Monument to students, teachers and employees of the law institute who died during the Great Patriotic War (3).jpg

COM:FOP Ukraine SomeFancyUsername (talk) 11:57, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Monument to students, teachers and employees of the law institute who died during the Great Patriotic War (2).jpg

COM:FOP Ukraine SomeFancyUsername (talk) 11:58, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Monument to students, teachers and employees of the law institute who died during the Great Patriotic War (1).jpg

COM:FOP Ukraine SomeFancyUsername (talk) 11:58, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Memorial plaque to Vladyslav Frankovskyi (1).jpg

COM:FOP Ukraine SomeFancyUsername (talk) 11:59, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Memorial plaque to Vladyslav Frankovskyi (2).jpg

COM:FOP Ukraine SomeFancyUsername (talk) 11:59, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Memorial plaque to Vladyslav Frankovskyi (3).jpg

COM:FOP Ukraine SomeFancyUsername (talk) 11:59, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Monument of Kovtun.jpg

COM:FOP Ukraine SomeFancyUsername (talk) 11:59, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Hryhoriy Skovoroda bust in Skovorodynivka (1).jpg

COM:FOP Ukraine SomeFancyUsername (talk) 12:00, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

This monument already destroyed by russian agression... Venzz (talk) 12:02, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Hryhoriy Skovoroda bust in Skovorodynivka (2).jpg

COM:FOP Ukraine SomeFancyUsername (talk) 12:00, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Hryhoriy Skovoroda bust in Skovorodynivka (4).jpg

COM:FOP Ukraine SomeFancyUsername (talk) 12:00, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Grave of D. Leshchenko (1).jpg

COM:FOP Ukraine SomeFancyUsername (talk) 12:02, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Grave of D. Leshchenko (2).jpg

COM:FOP Ukraine SomeFancyUsername (talk) 12:02, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Grave of D. Leshchenko (3).jpg

COM:FOP Ukraine SomeFancyUsername (talk) 12:02, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Bang Bros logo.png

Not a simple logo Trade (talk) 12:05, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Katja Amberger (C - Janine Guldener).jpg

possible copyvio - © Janine Guldener- we would need a COM:VRT permission to keep this M2k~dewiki (talk) 12:15, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

I am the owner of this picture and I'm doing the Wikipedia Side for my mother who is a german actress since many, many years. The fotografer sould the rights and the picture - showing her (my mother) - to my mother. Actors Headshots are ment to be used for promotional and informational terms without any restriction. The use of it is 100% lawful.

So please do not delete this foto. It is completely unnecessary to delete it. I am saying this beeing a lawyer in german law myself.

Greetings ~2026-29130-12 (talk) 17:10, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Wenn du Janine Guldener bist, dann musst du eine Freigabeerklärung an ORTS schicken. Nur bitte bitte sagen hilft nicht und behaupten, alles geht mir rechten Dingen zu (ohne Restriktion) widerspricht den Gepflogenheiten bei Commons. --AxelHH (talk) 20:10, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Oder nachweisen, dass man im Besitz der Urheberrechte an dem Bild ist. --AxelHH (talk) 20:16, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Wenn man mir sagt, wie ich den Nachweis erbringen soll, dass ich im Besitz des Bildrechts bin, dann tue ich das gerne. Ich habe diese Seite für meine Mutter erstellt, die Schauspielerin ist. Für eine irgendwie geartete Löschung besteht nicht der geringste Anlass. Mit freundlichen Grüßen Javier Ramon II (talk) 13:14, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

File:Oleksandr Nebotov.png

On COM:Ukraine marked what the 1993 law is retroactive. So copyright of this photo was restored under URAA and can be undeleted in 2046. SomeFancyUsername (talk) 12:19, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

I do not think the URAA argument is correct in this case. URAA did not restore copyright in works that were already in the public domain in their source country on the URAA date. For Ukraine, the URAA date is 1 January 1996.

This photograph was first published in 1950 in the Ukrainian SSR, in the photo album ''Kharkov Law Institute named after L. M. Kaganovich. Graduation class of 1950''. The album does not identify the photographer and does not contain a copyright notice. There is also no evidence that the photographer was an employee of the Institute or that the Institute owned the copyright.

The relevant provisions are Articles 472 and 493 of the Civil Code of the Ukrainian SSR of 1963.

Under Article 472, copyright in photographic works was recognized only if each copy of the work indicated the author’s name, the place and the year of publication. In this case, the photographer’s name is not indicated.

Article 493 is also relevant. In the original 1963 version of the Civil Code of the Ukrainian SSR, photographic works had a special short term of protection: 5 years from publication for individual photographs and 10 years from publication for collections of photographic works. Thus, even if this image is treated as part of a photographic album, a 1950 publication would have entered the public domain no later than 1 January 1961.

Later amendments to Article 493, including the 1971 changes, cannot be used to assume that copyright was revived for photographs whose term had already expired under the previous law. Later Ukrainian copyright laws also did not clearly and expressly restore copyright in works that had already entered the public domain under earlier Soviet/Ukrainian SSR law. Therefore, the photograph was already in the public domain in Ukraine long before the URAA date of 1 January 1996.

I understand that Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Ukraine contains a statement about the “retroactive Ukrainian copyright law of 1993”. However, this statement appears only in the Commons summary. It is not, by itself, a legal provision.

Moreover, the Ukrainian-language version of the Commons page does not contain this wording about a “retroactive” 1993 law. I also do not see such a rule in the 1993 Law of Ukraine “On Copyright and Related Rights” itself. The 1993 law defines its scope and copyright terms, but I do not see a transitional provision expressly restoring copyright in works whose term had already expired under previous Soviet/Ukrainian SSR law.

This is important because Ukrainian legislation did use explicit transitional wording when it intended to extend copyright terms. For example, the 2001 amendment expressly provided that the new terms apply in cases where the previous 50-year term had not expired before the amendment entered into force. That is a much clearer transitional rule than anything I can find in the 1993 law.

As a librarian at Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University, I checked the Ukrainian legal sources and library resources available to me, but I have not found any statutory provision, court decision, or scholarly discussion supporting the view that the 1993 Ukrainian Copyright Act retroactively restored copyright in works that had already entered the public domain under Soviet/Ukrainian SSR law. If Commons relies on this interpretation, the actual legal basis for it should be identified.

Therefore, I do not think the general wording on Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Ukraine is sufficient to prove that the 1993 law revived copyright in already public-domain Soviet photographic works. The specific legal basis for such restoration should be shown. In the absence of such a legal basis, this photograph should be treated as public domain in Ukraine on the URAA date, and its U.S. copyright should not be considered restored under URAA. Venzz (talk) 13:39, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Also, COM:Ukraine itself states: “Copyright protection under the 1993 act applied to all works where the copyright had not expired before the act became effective.” This wording means that the 1993 Ukrainian Copyright Act was not retroactive in the sense of restoring copyright in works whose term had already expired before the Act entered into force. It applied only to works that were still protected at that time. This seems to create an internal inconsistency in the interpretation being used here. If a Ukrainian SSR work had already entered the public domain before the 1993 Act became effective, then the Act should not be used as a basis for treating it as newly protected. Therefore, if the file is considered copyrighted despite the explicit COM:Ukraine rule, the specific legal basis for that interpretation should be identified. --Venzz (talk) 14:07, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Cykel gjord av en enda lång metalltråd - Ystad 2026.jpg

Image is own work but artwork isn't. Caption on enwp says explicitly "made from a single long metal wire by an Indian craftsman in 2010." The artwork in question is therefor copyrighted. Listz3 (talk) 12:33, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

It was perhaps wrong of me to write that it was made by a craftsman, but I thought it was a better caption than writing that it was made by an Indian girlfriend, (who was not a craftsman) this bike is a fond memory of her, can't I just change the caption to something completely neutral. Jonnmann (talk) 14:42, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

I have now changed the caption to the correct one, - "Bicycle made from a single long metal wire"

I and the woman who made the bike have no copyright requirements, so the image is free to use. -Jonnmann (talk) 08:20, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

.

File:Chappy och några till. Harriers Förlag 1956.jpg

Copyrighted work in Sweden. Listz3 (talk) 12:55, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

This book was written by my Mother 1956, and she died in 1985, and the publisher hasn't been around for many years, so I don't know who owns the copyright. Jonnmann (talk) 14:39, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

If the copyright status/ownership is uncertain then it shouldn't be uploaded to Commons. Listz3 (talk) 15:45, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Hans Rheinfelder 1872-1949.jpg

The photograph refers to Hans Rheinfelder (1898-1971) and in the file name I've mentioned erroneously the years 1872-1949. I'd upload the file again with the correct years to avoid misunderstandings. Many thanks in advance, Uto (talk) 13:35, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Fortiche Productions logo.png

Logo above COM:TOO France? --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 14:06, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Muhammad Nouri Ahmed Aldulaimi.jpg

صورة شخصية لها حقوق  Mohammed Qays  🗣 15:15, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:The original King's Singers.jpg

Doesn't seem to match the simultaneously published (within 30 days) in the U.S. and in its source country (United Kingdom) and is in the public domain in the U.S. as a U.S. work (no copyright registered, or not renewed) licence statement. It's a photo of a British musical group shot in 1968, presumably in Britain, with no suggestion at the source that it was published without any registered copyright. Belbury (talk) 15:41, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Wappen Braunschweig Arminia-Gothia.jpg

Kein eigenes Werk, sondern Wappen einer Verbindung. Dieses kann in seiner Form erheblich jünger sein als die Verbindung selbst (1901). Wirkliches Alter des Wappens unklar. GerritR (talk) 15:58, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Bruce Lee's 死亡的遊戲.gif

A deletion request had already been opened on the file, as it was flagged by User:Dentsinhere43 as non-educational and out of scope. But the author (User:MarioeMary) had managed to "save" the file by spamming it on ru.wiki and ko.wiki. The DR was therefore closed (by User:Wdwd) keeping the image for being in use on other Wikimedia projects. I think that this behaviour doesn't fall under the "use in good faith" requested by Commons:Project scope. Therefore, since the community has been misled the first time, I'm opening a new DR to let the community evaluate if the file falls outside the commons' scope (as I believe) or not. Friniate (talk) 16:43, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

 Keep For me it should be kept for the reasons I argued, but if you believe that my two edits on ru.wiki and ko.wiki warrant deletion of this file, I will abide by your decision. MarioeMary (talk) 16:51, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

PS: I'm noticing now that the author had made those edits before the DR and not during it, as I mistakenly believed. So, I'm assuming good faith and that he didn't know that it was a questionable behaviour. Nevertheless, I think that the community should be able to evaluate the educational value of the image on its merits and not because the author of this .gif has spread it on a bunch of wikis. Friniate (talk) 16:52, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

 Delete per COM:DW, this animation based on other images, no evidence that they are free Evelino Ucelo (talk) 09:04, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

Source:

• File:Bruce Lee, The Game Of Death.svg
• File:Leethumb.jpg
• File:Game of Death 死亡遊戲.jpg
• File:Bruce Lee 2001 Tajikistan stamp3.jpg

MarioeMary (talk) 09:30, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

@Evelino Ucelo What images are you referring to? Because in the file description it's reported that they are... Friniate (talk) 11:21, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

I am referring to File:Bruce Lee 2001 Tajikistan stamp3.jpg. Although this stamp is in PD in Tajikistan, it is based on photo, which isn't work of Tajik Post and still copyrighted in other countries, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:John Lennon.jpg for analogy. Evelino Ucelo (talk) 11:30, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

That would mean that we should delete also the image of the stamp though... The original image is not a photo, but a photogram from the movie en:Game of Death. I don't know US copyright enough to be able to assess this situation from the copyright POV. Friniate (talk) 12:25, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Nélida Roca.jpg

Questionable public domain: this photo is likely not in PD in US, because rule of shortest term isn't valid under US law, and evidence for PD in the United States is necessary. Evelino Ucelo (talk) 16:47, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Jonathon Zadrzynski.jpg

I do not consent to having my image on this website. ~2026-29180-99 (talk) 16:52, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

 Comment you should send request via COM:VRT Evelino Ucelo (talk) 09:00, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

File:City of Fuzuli, October 2023.jpg

I uploaded this photo to Commons, this photo was renamed because of my request. Please delate this redirect page with the old name. Zohrab Javad (talk) 17:29, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Detalle de "Excursionista Olga Engels junto a una de las momias del Dr. Knoche (1929)".jpg

COM:AIIP Dronebogus (talk) 17:56, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello. Please mind reading the rules for posting AI upscaled media in the COM:AIIP. ALL requirements asked for uploading an AI upscaled photo with people are being followes with this file. It's been tagged with the AI upscaled tag, and it provides direct acceso to the original footage. This request for deletion is just senseless. Thanks. ~2026-21939-94 (talk) 18:11, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

 Keep No policy-based reason for deletion here. The AI involvement is minor image cleanup, no more. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:10, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

I disagree. Reconstructing an image from a very low quality newspaper photograph is not “minor cleanup”. Dronebogus (talk) 02:52, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

File:S Navaneeth Krishna.jpg

This file was initially tagged by WikiBayer as Speedy (Speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Out of project scope.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 20:18, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Respected Sir,

Please go through these links (Indian Media)

S Navaneeth Krishna on Kerala Kaumudi

S Navaneeth Krishna on Manorama News

S Navaneeth Krishna on 24 News

S Navaneeth Krishna performing in one of the Manorama Sports Star Award, where VIPs like Sri Lankan cricketer Shri Sanath Jayasuriya, Indian footballer Shri I. M. Vijayan, etc attended.

Thank you so much for spending your valuable time. S Navaneeth Krishna (talk) 20:41, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

I object the speedy deletion nomination. The main object is S Navaneeth Krishna (myself), an artist verified by the Indian Media. The file is intended for educational/knowledge/history preserving uses. It is not a personal use upload. Navaneeth has also performed for events where VIPs like Chief Minister of Kerala Shri Pinarayi Vijayan, Sri Lankan Cricketer Shri Sanath Jayasuriya, etc have attended. The guitar performance at one of the Manorama Sports Star Awards was by him, where VIPs like Sri Lankan cricketer Shri Sanath Jayasuriya, Indian footballer Shri I. M. Vijayan, etc attended. He has also appeared on Flowers TV, Manorama News (both channel and newspaper), 24 News, Mathrubhumi Newspaper, Club FM, and Kerala Kaumudi (both channel and newspaper).S Navaneeth Krishna (talk) 20:22, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

 Delete per nom and COM:CSD#F10, as well as COM:CSD#G10. The previous paragraph's spam, too.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 20:34, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

@Jeff G.:Respected Sir, I respectfully disagree that this is a personal 'selfie' or spam. I am an artist media history.

Not F10: This is a professional biographical photo for a documented artist, not a random personal file. S Navaneeth Krishna (talk) 20:45, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

also not G10 This is not an advertisement. Hope you understand Sir S Navaneeth Krishna (talk) 20:50, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Riiight. All of your Wikidata contributions like d:Q138049087, d:Q138049391, and d:Q139794976 have been deleted as not being notable.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 20:52, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Under COM:SCOPE, this file is useful for potential future use in music history or biographical article. S Navaneeth Krishna (talk) 20:57, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Respected Sir, If these (One of the Manorama Sports Star Awards, 24 News, Kerala Kaumudi, etc) do not prove notability for a biographical photo, please let me know what specific level of media coverage you require. S Navaneeth Krishna (talk) 21:08, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

See en:WP:NMUSIC and more generally en:WP:42.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 21:11, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Respected Sir, those are Wikipedia's notabilty requirements, not of Commons and my musical journey has been briefly documented in the Indian Media. S Navaneeth Krishna (talk) 21:17, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

COM:NOTWP says files here do not necessarily need to comply with Wikipedia’s local rules S Navaneeth Krishna (talk) 21:20, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Wikidata has a lower standard of notability, and your items there were deleted thrice for not meeting it. See also en:WP:AUTO.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 21:27, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Respected Sir, Could you please tell me what could make my photo eligible to be on Commons S Navaneeth Krishna (talk) 21:52, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Nothing, because you are treating Commons as LinkedIn

And because you are now blocked Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 10:54, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

In that case, the copyright is held by the professional photographer. See COM:THIRD.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 21:29, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Apalachee High School shooting CCTV still.jpg

i originally uploaded this to wikimedia commons ive made my decision that i want it deleted please delete it Jman26Hammer (talk) 20:44, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Correction I'll try to find one without meta data it'll get deleted with these but i dont want metadata of any kind on the web Jman26Hammer (talk) 20:53, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:FBOD Logo.png

I am the original uploader and copyright holder of this unused file. I request deletion because I no longer want this content to be publicly available or used. The file is unused and has no current educational purpose. Please delete it. PowerRocker (talk) 21:44, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Bastard Studios - Drumrecording.jpg

I withdraw my deletion request. The nomination was a mistake. PowerRocker (talk) 21:47, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

I withdraw my deletion request. The nomination was a mistake. PowerRocker (talk) 03:21, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Logo-oficial-ByN.png

Reemplazado por una versión actualizada del logo oficial: File:Complejo_Astronomico_Municipal_logo.png. El nuevo logo está siendo usado en la página del Complejo Astronómico Municipal en Wikipedia en español. Juan.gerini (talk) 21:56, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:FBOD Promo Photo.jpg

I am the original uploader and copyright holder of this unused file. I request deletion because I no longer want this content to be publicly available or used. The file is unused and has no current educational purpose. Please delete it. PowerRocker (talk) 22:07, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:The city of Fuzuli, October 2023.jpg

I uploaded this photo to Commons, this photo was renamed because of my request. Please delate this redirect page with the old name. Zohrab Javad (talk) 22:43, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Retrato de Pablo Correa y Zafrilla en Democracia, federación y socialismo (1886).png

COM:AIIP Dronebogus (talk) 22:51, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Buenas. Me gustaría saber qué razones existen para eliminar esta imagen.

La saqué de la obra original de Correa y Zafrilla publicada en 1886. No tiene copyright, ya que han pasado más de 100 años. Lo único que hice fue quitarle el tono amarillento usando para ello chatgpt. Por eso indiqué en la imagen que era una modificación mía del color. El resto es la imagen original. Es el único retrato del autor que de momento está subido aquí en wikipedia.

De todas formas, si he cometido un error o me he equivocado en algo agradecería que me lo dijeras.

Un saludo. Repub73 (talk) 07:30, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Square and rectangular aluminum–copper conductor.png

Inaccurate AI generated image Dronebogus (talk) 22:56, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Keep. This image was created by me specifically for use in the Ukrainian Wikipedia article Aluminum–copper wire to illustrate the construction of copper‑clad aluminum conductors. At present, Wikimedia Commons and other free repositories do not provide any freely licensed illustrations of this material, so the file fills an important gap.

The image is based on a real photograph of aluminum–copper conductors (archived here), and was adapted with AI tools to serve an illustrative purpose. It is not intended as an artistic rendering but as a clear, educational diagram.

The file is used in an encyclopedic context, has transparent authorship and licensing (CC BY 4.0), and provides readers with valuable visual support for understanding the subject.

— Comment by the file’s author (interested party) Polish.Pav (talk) 20:06, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

Additional note: the nomination claims the image is “inaccurate”, but no specific technical inaccuracy has been identified.

The illustration is based on a real reference photograph of aluminum–copper conductors (archived in the file description) and was manually adapted to show square and rectangular conductor forms in a clear educational format. It is intended as a schematic explanatory illustration rather than a photorealistic depiction.

If any specific technical inaccuracies are identified, they can be addressed and corrected. Polish.Pav (talk) 19:05, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Trustn-lucy-youtube.png

I realized this is taken from a 2020 YouTube video that may not be under the CC 4.0 license. HungryHighway (talk) 23:31, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Portugal road sign A34.svg

Fictional sign uploaded by sockpuppet EthanL13^{[please ping me]} 23:40, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

 Weak keep as proposed sign Evelino Ucelo (talk) 09:14, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Emirbei (talk · contribs)

Uploading numerous old photographs from 1967 to 1937 as his own work. Unlikely to be true, looks more like uploading photos from a family album. The photographs of monuments may be his own work, but there is no freedom of panorama in Kazakhstan.

• File:Хамза Жуматов, Саятов, Марат Хусаинович и другие сотрудники в 1965 г.jpg
• File:Хамза Жуматов - Портрет 1937 год.jpg
• File:Жуматов в лаборатории, 1943 год.jpg
• File:Памятник Хамзе Жуматову в Павлодаре.jpg
• File:Жуматов 1961 г.jpg
• File:Жуматов 1937 год.jpg
• File:Хамза Жуматов - В лаборатории НАН, 1955 г.jpg
• File:Хамза Жуматов - Zhumatov Parents.png
• File:Хамза Жуматов - В лаборатории 1959 г.jpg
• File:Хамза Жуматов - Kazakhstan scientists 1959.png
• File:Хамза Жуматов - Жуматов, У. Бердыбаев, И. Каракулов, 1960.jpg
• File:Хамза Жуматов - Обсуждение плана-Жуматов+Саятов.jpg
• File:Хамза Жуматов - Саятов , Жуматов в лаборатории 1965 год.jpg
• File:Хамза Жуматов - Ленинград 1950 г.jpg
• File:Хамза Жуматов - 1956 г.jpg
• File:Хамза Жуматов - памятник в Павлодаре.jpg
• File:Хамза Жуматов - В Урицком р-не Костан.обл 1954.jpg
• File:Хамза Жуматов - с братьями.jpg
• File:Хамза Жуматов - Жуматов 1967 год.jpg
• File:Хамза Жуматов - портрет 1966 г.jpg
• File:Жуматов портрет 1965 г..jpg

Yellow Horror (talk) 23:45, 14 May 2026 (UTC)