Policy on files that were kept in DR being speedily deleted

This happens a lot, and I don't think it should. Here's the latest example I've seen:

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mohawk.png:

Kept: In use, in scope, no evidence for copyright problem. - User:Infrogmation, 19:21, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Mohawk.png&action=edit&redlink=1

• 08:10, 15 June 2025 Krd talk contribs deleted page File:Mohawk.png (No permission since 7 June 2025) (thank) (global usage; delinker log)

I thought it was policy that when a file has already been kept in a deletion request thread, it should never be speedily deleted for the same reason and must go through another deletion request thread. To be fair, there is the Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Eughhh thread, but none of the participants in the previous deletion thread were pinged, and the reason why these two admins disagree about there being or not being a copyright problem with the file was never addressed. And furthermore, it's quite common for files to be speedily deleted after being kept, and it's quite uncommon for me to be pinged as someone who participated in the previous DR thread if the issue is "permission". -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:36, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

It's kind of tangential but admins sometimes don't add a link to the DR on the files talk page. Meaning there's no way to know that a file was previously kept. It's kind of unrealistic to expect an admin to not speedy delete a file due to the outcome of a previous DR if they aren't aware of it though. --Adamant1 (talk) 04:51, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

I thought it was automatic for there to be a note with a link added to the file's talk page. I agree that if no-one adds that note, there is no easy way for an admin to know the file was previously kept, and in that case, the problem is further upstream, so to speak. Can adding the note be automated? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:38, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

@Ikan Kekek: It is automatic for those Admins who use MediaWiki:Gadget-DelReqHandler and click [keep], as Help:Gadget-DelReqHandler says "Clicking [keep] automatically modifies the image description page and removes the {{Delete}} tag. It also automatically adds {{Kept}} with the correct date and a link back to the deletion request to the image talk page." However, addition and removal of the delete template should also be documented in the file description page's revision history if the performers use Edit Summaries, even if they are manually performed.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 13:07, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

This information should also have been available to Modern primat when they tagged the file as missing permission and then notified the uploader in this edit 15:45, 7 June 2025 (UTC).   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 13:19, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

as i said in DR: ""it is not hard to contact VRT for give proof about copyright. also all files has no metadata.. maybe they are coming from whatsapp? or instagram?""

if there is no solid proof about copyright, then it should be deleted. if user cannot reach, and give information about copyright then the file shouldnt be here. also, if there is no other uploads from the user that shows these files are free licensed(and that shows user is trustworthy about copyright)... modern_primat ^{ඞඞඞ ----TALK} 15:27, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

if there is no solid proof about copyright, then it should be deleted.

There is no such policy. You do not get to invent one on a whim. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:37, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

COM:BURDEN? GMG^talk 20:00, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

You should have pinged all the people involved in the previous deletion request thread. But the fallacy of your point of view on copyright is shown by the fact that many photos from other sites (Flickr, etc.) are uploaded here, regardless of the fact that the original uploaders are not asked to prove copyright. Moreover, it is not a requirement for all Commons users to contact the VRT to prove authorship, and the VRT has a heavy enough workload without requiring them to check every photo! Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:29, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

@Modern primat: This is not the level of understanding that we expect from license reviewers.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 01:35, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

ok modern_primat ^{ඞඞඞ ----TALK} 09:10, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

• I note I was the closing admin of the earlier request, and that the file did have a "kept" notice on the talk page. I have restored this image, as there is an open discussion about it at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Eughhh, and IMO the tagging and deletion was inappropriate. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 13:40, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

•  Comment IMO the "no permission" tag seems to be sometimes used as a sort of tool for deletion without actual discussion, sometimes inappropriately. We have an unfortunate backlog of tasks, but it might be a good idea for admins to take a quick look to see if the tag was applied appropriately before deleting a file so tagged. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 13:45, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

What was the basis for the deletion?

What was the basis for this as speedy deletion?

At this point there was a speedy tag on it for "missing evidence of permission". A tag that was obviously invalid, as they all had CC0 dedications on them. It should definitely not have been deleted at that point: a bogus speedy is a bogus speedy. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:56, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

I said it in the DR already, but 99% of the time CC0 licensed "selfies" uploaded by SPA accounts that lack any kind of EXIF information are COPYVIO and IMO it's totally legitimate to tag files as "no permission" in such an instance. Plenty of users, including admins, have done just that in similar instances. People act like COM:BURDEN and "reasonable doubt" aren't things on here. Although personally, I wouldn't have done it myself since the files were already kept in a previous deletion request but that's a separate issue to if requesting speedy deletion was wrong because of the existence of CC0 licenses. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:04, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

You're diverting from the main topic of this thread, which is the policy on files that were kept in a DR subsequently being speedily deleted. It is my opinion that it is not legitimate to put speedy deletion tags on files that were previously kept as not copyright violation, that any further deletion request for the same reason the file was previously kept must be a regular deletion request, and that all the people who participated in the previous deletion request need to be pinged. Furthermore, there needs to always be a post on the file's talk page with a link to the previous deletion requests thread, and any admin must look for that and refrain from speedily deleting a previously kept file in such circumstances

The points you bring up may be relevant to files (I'd add files not COM:INUSE) that were not previously kept in deletion requests. I would say that any file that is in use needs to be considered in a regular deletion requests thread unless the copyright violation is really obvious, such as because a website it was stolen from is linked, but that is also a side point in this thread. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:32, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Maybe I missed it somewhere but what policy are you talking about? --Adamant1 (talk) 09:01, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Please reread the thread title, unless you're referring to side points. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:24, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Deletion policy for unsourced images

Should I nominate this map for deletion since it cites no source? What is the policy regarding this? I would think the image is "not educationally useful" if it isn't based on reliable sources. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 21:22, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Please see {{Map datasource missing}}. Help:Misinformation may also be of interest. You can nominate it for deletion. There is no specific policy for images where the data is unsourced afaik, they can be nominated for deletion like any other file where you can name this as a reason to delete it. However, this file has to be kept per COM:INUSE. You could ask on the Wikipedia talk pages though. Prototyperspective (talk) 21:32, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. But it can't be deleted as long as it is in use somewhere? That seems wrong. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 21:37, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

The problem of the uses is bigger than the file existing on Commons. Only very very few files are similar to the case you described. Please consider these two things and asking about clarity on the file on Wikipedia. Prototyperspective (talk) 21:52, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

storage space / server load

I couldn't find any mention of whether storage space is of any concern at all.

There are obviously many images on Commons that do not appear to be very educational or even useful in any way.

Does it make sense to flag them for deletion in order to save on storage/ digital memory or server load?

Or are deleted images in fact only hidden from sight and never actually properly deleted? In this case it might not be worth to bother with deletion requests in the first place.

An example of images with debatable educational value are these what appear to be more or less holiday pictures here.

KaiKemmann (talk) 07:27, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Deleted files are only hidden, not actually deleted (at least the full-resolution files – I guess thumbnails, transcoded versions of audio/video files, and the like do automatically get deleted eventually). In general, I don’t think we should think too much about performance; devs will tell us if it matters. The main reason in my opinion for deleting non-educational files is maintenance: every file needs to have its licensing and infobox checked, should be added to categories, and so on. If the files bring zero benefits to us, this maintenance is wasted time. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 21:45, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Eliminação total da página Mulher Pantera Lutadora Circense no Wikipédia e as imagens no Wikipédia Commons

Simplesmente desisti de fazer ou completar a biografia da Mulher Pantera, então peço a gentileza de fazer uma eliminação total sem resquícios das imagens no Commons e todo conteúdo do Wikipédia. ~2026-22067-86 (talk) 18:03, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

~2026-22067-86 / @Yanguas: Olá e seja bem-vindo(a). Por favor, inicie sessão e depois utilize COM:DP/pt / pt:WP:DEL.

Hi, and welcome. Please login, and then use COM:DP / pt:WP:DEL.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 18:49, 10 April 2026 (UTC)