Commons:Help desk

• Community portal
  • introduction
• Help desk
• Village pump
  • copyright
  • proposals
  • technical
• Administrators' noticeboard
  • vandalism
  • user problems
  • blocks and protections

Shortcut: COM:HD

Skip to table of contents | Skip to bottom | 🌐 Help desks for other languages

This help desk is a forum for questions and help on:

How to use Commons

Anyone, from newbie to experienced, can ask a question here. Questions will be replied to here as well. Any answers you receive are not legal advice and the responder cannot be held liable for them.

Ask your question

or

In order to get quick answers consider the following points:

• Have you checked the frequently asked questions, help pages and the help desk archive?

• For licensing and copyright issues, please use the copyright village pump
• For proposing changes to the way Wikimedia Commons works, please use the proposals village pump
• For community-wide discussions, please use the main village pump
• For changing the name of a file, please see our file renaming guidelines
• For matters requiring the attention of an administrator, please use the administrators' noticeboard or contact an individual administrator directly
• For questions about Wikipedia content, try English Wikipedia's "Teahouse"
• For questions not about Wikimedia projects, try English Wikipedia's reference desk

Resolved sections (marked by {{section resolved|1=~~~~}}) will be archived after two days. Sections with no discussion will be archived after ten days. The latest archive is Commons:Help desk/Archive/2025/10.

For quicker help, join our live chat room. ^webchat

Translate this page

COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES

• Commons Help desk
• Village pump (general discussion)
  • Copyright
  • Proposals
  • Technical
• Graphics and photography discussion
  • Photography critiques
  • Image improvement
    • Illustration workshop
    • Map workshop
    • Photography workshop
    • Video and sound workshop
• Categories for discussion
• Undeletion requests
• Deletion requests
• Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard
• Translators' noticeboard
• Work requests for bots

---

• Contact administrators
  • Vandalism
  • User problems (Dispute resolution)
  • Blocks and protections
• Bureaucrats' noticeboard
• CheckUser requests
• Oversight requests

---

• Telegram
• IRC ^webchat
• Commons mailing list (archive)
• Commons' bugs on Phabricator

	SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 2 days and sections whose most recent comment is older than 10 days.

Oreo cookie

IM trying to use the wikimedia commons to upload a picture of a Oreo cookie but it says there is one already with the same name as the file I was trying to upload. I couldn't change the name since my account is too new. Is there any possible fix for this? (My user is Zakkgamesontwitch) Zakkgamesontwitch (talk) 15:38, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

I do not have anything on here. Its on wikipedia Zakkgamesontwitch (talk) 15:39, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

What exact name? The usual solution is to choose a different target name. Did you take a look at Category:Oreo cookies and subcats? . Regards, --Burkhard (talk) 21:06, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

Like what do you mean? Zakkgamesontwitch (talk) 14:52, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

(cross-posted) @Zakkgamesontwitch: Change the name of the file you are uploading, never the one that is already there on Commons! - Jmabel ! talk 21:09, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

how to regain access to my old account

I can not access my old account - eitan f - because the mail I used for my first registration doesn't exist any more. Any help? Eitan Ferman (talk) 11:31, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

You can try askng about this at COM:VPT, but I think you'll need to be able to access your old email account if you want to either reset your password or change your registered email address to something else. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:12, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

You can only access your old account if you still have the password. If that's not possible and if you cannot access the e-mail address linked to that account for a password recovery, then the account is lost. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 13:16, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. I do have my password.

But when I am trying to enter, using my name and pass word, the page request a code sent to the old email which I can't get.

Anything I can do? Eitan Ferman (talk) 13:28, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Convenience link: Eitan f (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions). @Eitan Ferman: looks like (1) You had this account for a long time, so this is worth solving if we can. (2) You used it here less than two months ago, and used it on he.wiktionary.com as recently as 15 September; I take it you very recently lost that email. Are you also on a different device and IP address (which would make it harder to prove you are the same person)? (3) Is there anywhere you posted identifying information on that account (photo of yourself; actual name; etc.) Don't put that information here, just yes or no. - Jmabel ! talk 13:56, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes, there are some. Eitan Ferman (talk) 16:56, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Have I lost my account forever? Eitan Ferman (talk) 17:00, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

@Eitan Ferman: Possibly. (1) Is there any chance you can even temporarily recover access to the "lost" email account? It doesn't even have to be access to the archived email, just to an account of that name so you can receive a confirmation email. (2) Is there any chance you remain logged in on some PC or other device and can make use of that to recover? (3) Failing either of those, you might be able to follow us as described at m:Help:Account_recovery. If you have proof that you are the same person who had the account all these years, they may be able to re-grant access. - Jmabel ! talk 02:32, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

thank you very much Jmabel Eitan Ferman (talk) 08:11, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Uploading image files that I restored from videogame box covers

Hi, I'm wondering if there's any problem uploading the images I've restored of old video game covers. They're basically photoshopped images of damaged covers. HeavyStoneClouds (talk) 21:47, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi HeavyStoneClouds. There's some information about this is COM:Packaging. The copyright statuses of the covers themselves is what matters in a case like this. Your photoshopping would be considered a case of either COM:Derivative work or COM:2D copying. If the video game covers are still under copyright protection, you can't upload any photos of them to Commons without obtaining the COM:CONSENT or their respective copyright holders. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:21, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly, thank you so much for your answer. I checked the info and I think the imagages already uploaded to commons could be updated with higher quality ones. HeavyStoneClouds (talk) 15:28, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

State seal of Nevada

I am genuinely confused. So, I am a native of the U.S. state of Nevada, a history nerd, and am very good at doing research. I shouldn't need to say all that to also know it is not incumbent upon someone to claim that something doesn't exist. If someone says something exists, they must show that it does. There are two things in the commons that are simply made up. First, the "gold" version of the Seal of the State of Nevada. State law literally has a picture of it NOT being gold. It's blue—one of the two state colors the other being silver. But because some user found it in a 1990s publication by the Centers for Disease Control, apparently I'm wrong. This is absurd on so many levels. I'm offended intellectually and as a Nevadan. It's absurd that someone—well-meaning or not thinks that his evaulation of the situation is so profound that it literally is wrong according to state law. That's insane. Just because Vegas is adult Disneyland doesn't mean people can decide for themselves what is and isn't real here. Secondly, like I said, it's not on me to prove it doesn't exist him to prove it doesn't. I mean, I can show you my birth certificate from the same era as that stupid CDC document and guess what, the CDC made a mistake. And to Nevada has had multiple changes of state flag, but it has never had a flag for the governor. This is just insane and it makes me want to disengage from editing or working with anything to do with Wikipedia/the Commons. Just because @Clindberg says something is a thing, doesn't make it so. This is beyond frustrating. TheYearbookTeacher (talk) 00:55, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello @TheYearbookTeacher, I’m not fully aware of the situation, but here in Commons, we keep images based on their educational usefulness (see Commons:Project Scope). So even if something is wrong, not real or doesn’t exist, if there is an educational use for it, then we will keep the image.

Now, is the gold version of the State Seal of Nevada educational useful (in-scope)? Commons policy COM:INUSE dictates that when an image is used by another Wikimedia project, then the image is automatically considered to be educational useful. This means even if we think the image is inherently not educational useful, we still have to keep the image as long as it is used by another project.

Of course, anyone can edit the articles the image is currently in-use and replace it with the more accurate version. If the image is not in use anymore, we can decide whether to keep or delete the image. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 01:30, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

While Commons:Project Scope does allow for non-official or even incorrect images if they have clear educational value, it also requires that description pages be accurate and not misleading. Right now, it is not listed as so, even though it is wrong according to NRS § 235.010(5). That law explicitly prescribes the seal’s coloration—blue, not gold—and includes no recognition of an alternate or historical “gold” version. There is no evidence of any government-issued variant meeting that description.

The claim that this represents a historical seal is not supported by any cited state source or archival material. Unless reliable documentary evidence is presented showing that the State of Nevada ever officially used this version, the file should not be described as “historical.” Mislabeling it so constitutes factual inaccuracy, not educational completeness.

Yes, a file in use is presumed educationally useful—but only so long as it is used appropriately. If its inclusion in articles misrepresents Nevada’s current seal, those usages should be corrected. I have replaced most usages of it, except if @Clindberg may have reverted, which he has done so with regards to my flagging the descriptions of the file as inaccurate—I had gotten it almost completely removed from Wikimedia projects, so this deletion request should be reconsidered on factual grounds given that the author is simply trying to argue a factual point he is patently wrong about.

The objective here is not to suppress information but to prevent misinformation from propagating through the Wikimedia ecosystem. I appreciate the patience and time of all involved in resolving this properly and in accordance with Commons policy on accuracy and educational integrity. TheYearbookTeacher (talk) 05:38, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

@Tvpuppy Sorry for not tagging you. I apologize for my earlier tone, but arguing with someone over the fact when he's deliberately wrong is difficult. The law, for the record, clearly states, "Except as otherwise provided in subsection 6, a colored reproduction or facsimile of the State Seal may only be used if it is in substantially the following colors:" and then has a picture of the seal that is blue, not gold. It cannot be clearer. It's insane to keep going back and forth when he is patently false. TheYearbookTeacher (talk) 05:40, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

I imagine this is in regards to 1) Commons:Deletion requests/File:Seal of Nevada.svg (closed, but just re-nominated), and File talk:Flag of the Governor of Nevada.svg.

As for 1), the current law of Nevada does have preferred colors, which the file in question does not use. Historically, Nevada law did not always have those preferred colors listed. I have noted this situation on the file's description; there is another seal image which should likely be used most/all of the time elsewhere. It's still useful as a historical depiction, and a free (copyright-speaking) source of a vector which others can use to make other versions. The copyright status of other versions is often murkier, but having a US federal government-authored vector is helpful. Files can be useful in an educational context even if it should not be prominently used anymore. Deletion is an entirely separate question over whether the file should be used to illustrate the Nevada seal (likely not).

As for 2), I have little idea whether there is a such a flag or not, but did post a link to a CRW Flags page which stated that a governor's flag once existed, but is no longer used. I gave a Google Books link as well, though I could not see the actual source. With further looking, it comes from Volume 1 of Raven, a journal of the North American Vexillogical association. They have made their issues available online; Volume 1 is here. That has a detailed history of the Nevada flag here. That barely mentions a governor's flag except for one sentence: Further, Nevada is the only state with two governor's flags, one civil and one military. The citation on that statement is: Las Vegas Age, 7 Dec. 1934; Frederic C. Gale, State of Nevada, Flag of the Governor (Carson City: Governor’s Office, 22 May 1968). The Las Vegas Age is online as well; the Dec 7 1934 issue is at the Library of Congress, and the article is on page 14 of that issue. That does indeed describe a governor's flag. The poster here has removed all categorization on that file in favor of his view. Carl Lindberg (talk) 01:47, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

I've now replaced the file almost everywhere; in some language versions, the image was hidden in some templates; (I couldn't find it on simple.wiktionary.org, so it's still used there), in esWP, User:Nacaru edited the template after my request. זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 07:14, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Fixed on simple.wikt. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:19, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

I am trying to upload a picture of myself taken at Penney's photography studio for pay.

I paid to have this professional photograph paid for my use.

I do not know how to contact Penney's to get the right to use it.

Richard Lavely Laveswiki (talk) 15:03, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Assuming that the photo was taken in the United States, almost always, the copyright is owned by whomever took the photo. Two big exceptions are works by some governments (e.g. almost everything from the American federal government is in the public domain) and works for hire, where you have a contract saying "You make this creative work, but I own the copyright". If those two exceptions don't apply, then it's likely the case that the person from the photo studio owns the copyright. If you can't get that person to verify and license it appropriately, then it can't be shared here. For that matter, the photo needs to have some educational value, broadly construed. Typically, a lo-rez headshot is going to need some further justification for being uploaded here. Is there a particular reason you want this photo on Commons? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:02, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Koavf,

Thanks, but in this case the person was an employee of Penney's the department store, so the copyright is owned by the owner of Penney's. Which is a public company, known as JCPenney, Inc. The picture was taken in the 90s before even the internet, as I do not have a user name and a password for their website. So who can I contact to get permission?

Richard Laveswiki (talk) 18:19, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Exactly, that's a work for hire and to Penney's. I bet you'd have a really hard time trying to resolve this, but were I you, I'd try just calling some help line and seeing if they can direct you somewhere and I've found them when I deal with weird bureaucracies like this, I usually ask, "If you were me, what would you do?" and that tends to get some creative and useful answers. Furthermore, the parent company is Catalyst Brands, which may have some kind of phone number you could find to call as well. Seems like a long shot, but not impossible. Additionally, if you are located somewhere near the store, you could ask managers there now if they know who was manager then and maybe play a game of tag to get to the right person? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:26, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

What Justin says here is largely correct, but the issue of "work for hire" should be made clearer: the copyright was taken by a Penney's employee, in there capacity as such; it is Penney's that hired them and owns the copyright, not you. Plus I doubt anyone in management at a given store can help you at all, but it is imaginable that Penney's would be willing to assign you the copyright for such a photo; the problem is going to be contacting someone who cares to deal with it. They'd almost certainly have to be someone with authority to sign a contract for the corporation. - Jmabel ! talk 02:56, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

That's what I was trying to say by "that's a work for hire and to Penney's", i.e. Penney's will now own the copyright because it was certainly part of the photographer's contract to give it to them. Thanks for clarifying. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:56, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Koavf,

I contacted Catalyst Brand and they respeonded the following.

jcpnews

From:news-sm@catalystbrands.com

To:Richard Lavely MD,jcpnews@jcp.com

Tue, Oct 14 at 4:42 PM

Hi Richard,

Thank you for reaching out! If you purchased the photo when it was taken, you are the rightful owner of the copyright for the image. No concerns on our end for use where you please.

Best,

JCPenney Media Relations

From: Richard Lavely MD <laves@aol.com>

Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2025 2:07 PM

To: jcpnews@jcp.com

Subject: Dear Customer Service rep. If you are not customer service rep please forward it on.

You don't often get email from laves@aol.com. Learn why this is important

WARNING :This email originated outside of JCPenney.

DO NOT CLICK links or open attachments unless the actual email address, not just the display name, is the actual email address that you expect to see. Report any suspicious emails immediately via the Report Phishing button in Outlook, or forwarding to phishing@jcp.com.

Dear rep:

I had a picture taken at JCPenny's way back in the 90s, before the internet even, and it was a professional photograph which I have used many places.

Now I am trying to upload it to wiki and they are telling me I have to have permission from the owner of the copyright.

The store was in Orange CT, and I don't live there now, I live in Behtlehem, PA.

But I need some kind of permission from JCPenny's to use the photograph.

Now I am sure it was taken by an employee as most of the photographs were of little kids for their parents.

If you were me what would you do?

I need to get this resolved because for the internet I use only this photo. It is me in a tux.

Please help me however you can. I include the photos and I did have one for a head shot for media work in NYC.

Very Respectfully,

Richard Lavely MD JD Laveswiki (talk) 14:17, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Wow, that's actually kind of shocking. Unfortunately, the process for proving that you are the copyright owner is sometimes complicated and tricky here. There is a process outlined at Commons:Volunteer Response Team that requires forwarding your email contact to permissions-commonswikimedia.org. I am not a member of that team, so I'm not someone who is competent to tell you more about how it works on the back end. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:23, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Koavf,

ok I’ll forward it to them permissions-commons@Wikimedia.org.

if you can let them know that would be great

thanks,

Richard Lavely MD JD MS MPH Laveswiki (talk) 22:35, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

I don't think I can provide any value in that process, unfortunately. Genuinely shocked I could help at all. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:45, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Koavf,

well thanks anyway you did a lot I forwarded it as directed.

where are you in the world? Just curious.

Richard Laveswiki (talk) 22:53, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm an Indianapolitan, friend. Yourself? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:01, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Copyright when the source is defunct

Hello all,

earlier today I asked for the speedy deletion of a picture whose copyright situation I had misjudged. The picture was the thumbnail of Vampetaço. I misjudged it because 1. the original meme belonged to a now deactivated Twitter page - contacting the owner isn't possible, but I genuinely thought all memes were CC0; and 2. The meme always uses a photo which I now understand is always protected by copyright, even if it's the template of memes. However, the copyright holder of this photo, G magazine, isn't active anymore.

Can someone please explain what this entire situation means for the copyright? I am honestly confused but would like to find a replacement for the thumbnail if possible.

Thank you in advance! Barbalalaika (talk) 20:17, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi Barbalalaika. The copyright on a creative work does not automatically expire just because its creator has died; copyright is an asset that can be passed on to the creator's heir or some other third-party, and it can continue to be enforced by the "new" copyright holders for a designated period of time after the creator has died before it enters into the public domain. This time period can vary from country to country but for many countries a creative work continues to remain protected for 70 years en:post mortem auctoris (p.m.a.). The same rationale, in principle, applies to works with a corporate author: a company's intellectual property rights don't become void just because the company is defunct. So, assuming that the photo was an original work created by someone working for G Magazine and copyright over it was part of a en:work for hire agreement, whoever now owns the magazine also owns all its intellectual property rights. Any photos whose copyright is "owned" by the magazine can't be uploaded to Commons without first obtaining copyright holder COM:CONSENT.

As for all memes being CC0, that sounds incorrect to me. An original meme could itself be eligible for copyright protection if it's considered to be sufficiently creative; the same meme could also be subject to addition copyright restrictions if it incorporates copyright-protected content created by others, i.e. it's considered a COM:Derivative work. The meme's creator could probably make a claim of en:fair use or en:fair dealing regarding the use of third-party works in their meme, but they don't void the copyrights of others by using their works in the meme. When it comes to derivative works and Commons, Commons' policy requires that the entire work (all its copyright eligible elements) be licensed in accordance with COM:L because Commons' policy doesn't allow the hosting of fair use content per COM:FAIR. So, if you're looking for a replacement photo, you're going to need to find something which is considered to either be within the COM:Public domain or is otherwise released by its copyright holder under a license that meets COM:L. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:00, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you SO much for the thorough response! I really appreciate your time. So, if I understand correctly: even if the meme was created under fair use or fair dealing AND the meme creator granted it the necessary CC for Commons, I wouldn't be able to upload it because the picture the meme is based on still (currently) lacks the same permission?

I'll think of an eligible thumbnail. This information helps a lot. Thank you again! Barbalalaika (talk) 18:01, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Commons doesn't accept fair use content but some of the different language Wikipedia's do as explained in COM:FAIR#"Fair use" allowed on some Wikimedia projects. Each project that does, however, has it's own particular policies/guidelines regarding such content, which in many cases is more restrictive than what's required for fair use/fair dealing. English Wikipedia refers to such content as "non-free content", and its policy can be found here, with additional guidance found here. If a particular meme has received significant coverage in reliable sources to satisfy the local project's notability guidelines, a stand-alone article could be written about it, and a non-free image of the meme could possibly be used in such an article. (A meme that's a derivative work would need to be treated as non-free content on English Wikipedia since it's not 100% free so to speak.)

If, however, another image could be used to replace a non-free one for thumbnail purposes, then the photo doesn't really sound essential to the meme, and it would probably be hard to justify that type of non-free use in terms of relevant policy (paricularly en:WP:FREER), at least on English Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:50, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying! Now I understand some aspects of the matter better. I was under the impression that all images within English Wikipedia had to be uploaded to Commons. I didn't consider the possibility of uploading a file outside of Commons (provided all points within the exception policy are met).

I expressed myself badly when I mentioned I'll think of a suitable thumbnail. I do plan on trying to reach out to someone from the former G Magazine, first. Meanwhile, I thought of uploading a Commons image of the person whose photo is used in the meme. But this may not be appropriate if the article's theme is so specific - as you said, the meme itself is the essential part. So it does seem like I could consider the non-free content guidelines you cited, but I'll read the provided links carefully before taking any action. Thank you again for your patience and guidance! Barbalalaika (talk) 07:47, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Be careful about using images of living persons (regardless of copyright status) in memes when it comes to English Wikipedia because doing so might have issues related to en:WP:BLPIMAGE. In addition, there is already one non-free image being used in the article en:Vampetaço (no comment on whether its use is policy compliant) so trying to justify the use of another one might be hard per en:WP:NFC#Meeting the minimal usage criterion. One non-free example of the meme is might OK, but one is already considered an exception to en:WP:COPY#Guidelines for images and other media files; so, additional examples of the meme will become increasingly harder to justify, if it's even possible to do so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:01, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Very important comment, thank you. I'm very new to Wikipedia so I'm still learning about new guidelines every day (en:WP:BLPIMAGE was new to me). I stumbled upon the article recently and haven't done much editing on it besides (erroneously) adding the thumbnail image. In case the image does meet the non-free criteria (as I mentioned, I'll read about it more carefully when I have time), would you think removing the current non-free image in the article's body in favour of adding the more descriptive, non-free thumbnail would be justified? Barbalalaika (talk) 08:07, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

English Wikipedia's non-free content policy tells us to use a free equivalent/alternative for non-free content whenever possible (all things being equal), not only for images but also for text. So, if the choice is between a non-free image and a free image in which both are essentially capable of serving the same encyclopedic purpose, policy tells use to the free one. If the discussion is between two different non-free images and one is less non-free than the other, policy again tells (assuming other things are otherwise equal) us to use the one that is less non-free. If the choice is between a non-free image whose en:provenance is clearly established and one whose provenance is a bit sketchy, policy tells us to use the former since there's less potential for problems.

English Wikipedia policy also requires that non-free content be used in at least one article; otherwise, it's eligible for speedy deletion as "orphaned non-free use". So, replacing a non-free image generally means the image is going to end up being deleted unless another policy-compliant use can be found for it. Because of this, sometimes deciding which non-free image to use can be contentious and is something that needs to be resolved through consensus either on the article's talk page or by discussion at en:WP:FFD. I don't know whether that applies in this particular case, but it's something you could propose on the article's talk page before uploading any non-free files if you want to be sure. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:32, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Definitely! That's great, I have a very clear picture of the situation now. Huge thanks again :) Barbalalaika (talk) 06:40, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

The only way something can become CC-zero is that the legitimate holder of the copyright grants a CC-zero license. - Jmabel ! talk 03:03, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

To elaborate on this, while CC-0 tries to be an equivalent to the public domain, it's still a declaration by someone who holds the rights and tries to release them into the public domain to the greatest extent allowable by law (in some places, you cannot give up all your rights, such as moral rights). Being in the public domain means that the law does not in principle cover whatever creative work anymore or never did. So while in practice they are very similar, they are not the exact same. For the purposes of Commons and what we do here, the distinction is mostly irrelevant. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:26, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

can I upload photos that I sell on photo stocks?

Hello, my name is Elena, and I live in Turkey. I have a lot of photos of historical monuments in Turkey. I'd like to participate in the contest. But I have a question: can I upload photos that I sell on photo stocks? Because my photos are listed on five major photo stocks. Thank you. Mybeautifuluniverse (talk) 23:00, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

@Mybeautifuluniverse: Yes, though you might want to mark those images as under a free license on one of those major photo stocks. This is so that someone doesn’t look at your uploads, then look at the photo stock source, and then tag your images as a copyvio.

ANOTHERWꞮKꞮPEDꞮAN wɑit thɑt’s ɑ typo 23:15, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

@Mybeautifuluniverse: I'm an admin, and what Anohthterwikipedian says here is not particularly on the mark. There are a few things going on here.

The only way you can post these photos on Commons is to grant a free license, presumably either {{CC-BY-4.0}} or {{CC-BY-SA-4.0}}. Once you grant that, you are allowing people who conform to those licenses to use those photos for free. This may seriously interfere with your stock photo business model.

Further, it is generally frowned upon here to aggressively pursue damages for copyright violations for photos you have uploaded here, even if people do not conform closely to the license, assuming they have made a good-faith effort. Again, this may seriously interfere with your stock photo business model.

If you are OK with that, given that you have made multiple previous publications of these photos on stock sites, Anohthterwikipedian's suggestion really does not cover the case. Immediately after uploading, you'd need to go through the email-based process described at COM:VRT to clarify that you are, indeed, the copyright-holder, and that you are granting whatever specific license you choose to grant for these particular photos. Jmabel ! talk 03:19, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Mistake with uploading a newer version of an image

Hello,
I tried to upload a newer version of File:MAP of PARO 11 (Phitsanulok) EN.svg but it failed.
I think I, I made the mistake of uploading a newer version first and then the older version.
Maybe someone can delete this so called uploaded older version.
I'll try to upload the newer version later. SietsL (talk) 10:01, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

convenience link File:MAP of PARO 11 (Phitsanulok) EN.svg. - Jmabel ! talk 02:00, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@SeitsL: I don't have time to look closely now, but it looks like you are repeatedly overwriting with the same file, but not clearing the cache so you can see it. Take a look on any other browser or device than the one you have been using. - Jmabel ! talk 02:02, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

The upload at 09:37, 14 October 2025 (UTC) does look different. If that version is not what you are seeing, then it is definitely a caching problem. - Jmabel ! talk 05:15, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Erin Meyer

I Uploaded a new photo of Erin Meyer for her account. It said if I wasn’t the photo owner but had permission to pass the link for obtaining permission along to the photo owner. “The creator of this work or their representative must send a consent to permissions wikipedia commons to release this work under a free license within 30 days of your upload. Please use the generator below.”.

We did that but they have been unable to find the name of the photo and approve our upload. Should we just let the 30 days pass and try uploading again having the original owner do so? They asked that as their social media agency we handle but I understand the terms of wikipedia commons to be a little different and want to ensure we follow those to result in the best outcome. Any and all advice is appreciated. The file name as we see it is Erin Meyer NYT Bestselling Author & Culture Expert.jpg ImpactSocial2025 (talk) 13:57, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

@ImpactSocial2025: Hi, Who is "they" in "they have been unable to find the name of the photo"? The holder of the copyright? Did you not tell them the file name? The file name is recorded in the logs of your account. The file, which is currently deleted, is File:Erin Meyer NYT Bestselling Author & Culture Expert.jpg. The upload and deletion logs of the file are there. Do not worry about 30 days, given that the file was deleted already after 7 days apparently for missing a license template. Please do not upload another copy of the same image. The currently deleted file will be undeleted if and when a valid permission from the holder of the copyright is received and a VRT member completes the procedure. -- Asclepias (talk) 18:15, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

To build off of what Asclepias wrote, see COM:VRT for more details about the VRT procedure. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:27, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Besides the above, all of which I agree with:

1. Not so much for this photo as if you are doing something similar in the future: you may want to know why it was deleted after only 7 days. You missed a step (one that is easy to miss right now because of a problem in the Upload Wizard): if you read Commons:Uploading works by a third party#How they can grant a license (and how you upload) you will see a set of numbered action steps. Currently, the Upload Wizard does not do step 12 itself, and you have to go in and edit to achieve that step. As remarked above, because you did not indicate what license is forthcoming, your file was deleted after 7 days instead of 30. Not an issue at this point: if the copyright-owner goes through VRT, the file can be restored and all will be OK. Just make sure that in their correspondence they refer to the file name as Asclepias gives it above.
2. You listed the author as "QSP Summit". Am I correct that "QSP" here is "Quantitative Systems Pharmacology"? Since that is an organization, not an individual, the VRT (Volunteer Response Team) process is inevitable: an organization cannot have a Commons account, only a person, so even an uploader from within the organization would need to go through the VRT process.
3. The representative of QSP Summit may need to indicate how QSP Summit came to own the copyright, since an organization cannot be a photographer. But that can be sorted out once they (presumably a representative of QSP Summit) begin the email correspondence.

If anything is still unclear, please respond on this thread with your further question(s). Jmabel ! talk 05:32, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Catholic Music Composers

Greetings from Uganda, Africa. I'm a Catholic Music Composer, now with more than 100 music works including Compositions, Harmonies and Arrangements. I would like to be put on the list of Raman Catholic Music Composers. How can this be possible??? Regards, Mayambala Kizito, Catholic Music Composer. Mayambala Kizito BM (talk) 15:04, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi, what "list of Roman Catholic Music Composers" are you referring to? No such list exists on Commons that I'm aware of. Thanks, Suriname0 (talk) 15:53, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

@Mayambala Kizito BM: were you perhaps meaning to post this question in the English-language Wikipedia? If so, you will probably want to read en:Wikipedia:Autobiography. Any further related questions probably belong on the English-language Wikipedia, not here on Wikimedia Commons. Use this link to ask a question there. - Jmabel ! talk 05:37, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

VRT release

Hi, when I'm looking at a file on Commons, how can I tell that the process at Commons:Wikimedia VRT release generator has been followed? For example, if I'm looking at a professional headshot that the uploader claims as own work released CC-BY 4.0, how can I tell that they've provided a representation to that effect via the VRT process? Is there a template or other metadata I can look at? (Is it just the presence of {{PermissionTicket}} specifically?) Thanks for any help, I know this is a basic question. Cheers, Suriname0 (talk) 15:47, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

@Suriname0: Hi, Yes, it is the presence of the template PermissionTicket placed by a VRT member. -- Asclepias (talk) 16:42, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

If you are asking about a particular photo, and Asclepias answer isn't enough for you to work this out yourself, please link the specific photo here so that someone can evaluate it for you. - Jmabel ! talk 05:40, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Right, although can you give instructions on how to verify that someone was formerly a VRT member? The ticket notices have often been added by a volunteer who is no longer active. For example, what do I check to make sure that User:Mhhossein was VRT? – b_jonas 06:45, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

@B jonas: they are a currently active administrator, so the chance that they would be faking something like that would be close to nil. But you could ask at Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard if you had doubts. - Jmabel ! talk 12:38, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

I don't have doubts about User:Mhhossein in particular, I'd just like to know if there's a simple general procedure how to check when you encounter a VRT ticket template by a user that you don't know yet. – b_jonas 15:40, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

@B jonas: That's a very good question. I don't know the answer but, FWIW, there is at least this. -- Asclepias (talk) 16:40, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Ah! So I have to filter for global rights log instead of user rights log, that's what I hadn't realized. So I go to the Logs on meta, select global rights log, filter for the username with User: prefix in the “target” field, and look for OTRS-member or otrs-member or vrt-permissions. Except this doesn't always seem to work, because https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=gblrights&page=user%3AW.CC doesn't list OTRS/VRT rights for User:W.CC. – b_jonas 20:51, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Well, as I said, I don't have the answer, that was just one thing to try and that happened to sort of work with your example. A probably more simple way that comes to mind now is to look at the date when the VRT template was placed on the relevant file and then look at the history of the page meta:Volunteer Response Team/Users to find if the user was listed on that page near the same date. To continue with your previous example, it can be seen that the name Mhhossein was added to that page on 1 September 2016 [1] and was removed on 1 September 2021 [2]. That may still be a bit complex for readers who are not familiar with Wikimedia, and the updates to the page may not match exactly the dates when the VRT right was actually added or removed, but I suppose that it can work well enough. You could also ask directly to one of the VRT administrators, who might know of a better method. -- Asclepias (talk) 05:54, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

I guess I just assumed the VRT had some kind of backlog or edit filter to automatically find and remove erroneous PermissionTicket templates? Otherwise, if I see PermissionTicket, I'm assuming it's an acceptable "pro" image, and if I don't I'm assuming I should nominate it for deletion. Suriname0 (talk) 15:35, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

In the large majority of cases, the templates "PermissionTicket" are indeed placed by VRT members, as they must be. But it is prudent to check who placed the template and in what circumstances

When the template is placed by a non-VRT member, the corresponding edit in the page history gets tagged automatically with the line "Ticket permission added by non-VRT member". As far as I can tell, the template is not removed automatically.

A proportion of those tagged edits relate to templates that were initially placed by VRT members but something happened. For example, the page was blanked and was restored by a non-VRT user. Or the template was added on a Wikipedia file (not Commons) and later the file was transferred to Commons and the template was modified and translated in English.

Another proportion of tagged edits are templates added by mistake by non-VRT users unaware of the procedure or, rarely, fraudulently.

Sometimes, the template is placed by a bot because the bot "assumes" that a general-purpose VRT permission from an uploader is valid, and also that it is applicable to all their uploads. Such bot edits are apparently not tagged with the non-VRT line. -- Asclepias (talk) 21:40, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Template problem

{{Teilnehmer WikiCon 2025}} includes problematic features: on category:WikiCon 2025§Pages in category "WikiCon 2025" appear 2 pages. Could someone pl. fix it? Thanks --Mateus2019 (talk) 16:28, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

You may get more appropriate eyes on this request at Commons:Village pump/Technical, which is specifically for "tools, gadgets, or other technical issues about Commons". —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:28, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

@Mateus2019 and Koavf: I don't think VP/T is necessary, it's a technically trivial template. What isn't clear is its intent, because a series of edits have changed its effect several times without explaining what it is meant to do. Some questions to Mateus:

1. What type of pages is this template meant to be used on? (User pages? Something else?)
2. Besides what it places visually on those pages, what side effects is it intended to have (place those pages in some category? What category?)

Jmabel ! talk 05:51, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

1. What type of pages is this template meant to be used on? This is intended is for Commons user ns. --Mateus2019 (talk) 07:48, 16 October 2025 (UTC)
   1. I've never seen the expression "Commons user ns". May I presume it means "Commons user pages"?
   2. Do I take it that your not addressing question number 2 means this is not intended to categorize the user pages?

Jmabel ! talk 03:26, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Point 1 means the namespace "User" on the Commons website. (Aka ns:2, ns:user.) For point 2, the conclusion seems correct, judging from the wording of the initial question. -- Asclepias (talk) 14:21, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

The template initially categorized in "category:WikiCon 2025" until that category was removed from the template. That change was recent when you asked your question. I suppose you just had to wait a little until the servers updated in consequence. -- Asclepias (talk) 14:21, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Negative image on Alfred Vogel

Question: Did something happen to the image to invert it? When en:Alfred Vogel was created in 2016, the image File:Alfred Vogel.tiff was used. It is a negative of a b&w pic. the pic was later moved to an infobox. The article was edited dozens of times until the image was replaced with a positive by user: on their first edit. The longevity of that pic on Alfred Vogal and that it is still being used on a number of other Wikis suggests that something happened to the pic. Did it somehow change from a positive to a negative image? Thank you Adakiko (talk) 18:34, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

The image on the English Alfred Vogel article was replaced with File:Porträt von Alfred Vogel.jpg. Adakiko (talk) 18:44, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

This unused image File:Alfred Vogel2.tiff is also a negative. Adakiko (talk) 18:47, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

I've opened both images in the freeware IrfanView, where they were both shown correctly and then simply saved them without any special options. Voila, problem solved. --Túrelio (talk) 19:07, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Pushed the wrong button?

A couple hours ago, my Google lens/Tineye/Yandex drop-down menu disappeared, and the appearance of everything changed. I've tried resetting everything to no avail. Did I press "try the new appearance" or whatever that is in the upper left corner? Something happened right after I replied to Yann on the Village Pump a couple hours ago. As of right now Commons is unusable for me. I use the default skin, ajax, twinkle, and visual file change and I have them all checked in my gadgets. Usually I have a drop down menu just above the middle of images that has options for a direct image search with Google Lens or Tineye. I haven't been able to get this back. Geoffroi (talk) 21:41, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Geoffroi. Were you using the Vector 2010 skin or the Vector 2022 (default) skin? Perhaps check if you still have the “Reverse Image Search” gadget selected in your gadget list?

I have checked the gadget, it does appear in the drop down list and it is working correctly. The only change I observed today is the beta feature "Discussion tools" is now enabled for everyone, but this shouldn’t cause the appearance of everything to change. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 03:02, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@Tvpuppy: Everything is back to normal now. I was getting a small black mediawiki error popup that said something about not being able to load a gadget. It's gone now. Geoffroi (talk) 18:23, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

PDF previews

Have uploaded several PDFs lately, for example File:Mario Savio Part 02.pdf, File:On the Road to Bolshevization.pdf, File:Wv-1-7.pdf. However, the previews don't upload. This has been an issue when uploading PDFs for a while and seemingly strikes some PDFs at random while leaving others untouched. Is there a reliable way to remedy this issue? Will it ever be remedied? Would appreciate some clarification. Kingofthedead (talk) 21:46, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

This is a very common issue with PDFs due to caching. The solution is to purge the page. I have done this and made them appear for me, they likely appear for you and everyone else now, too. There are user tools you can add to make purging easier if you'd like to add one to your interface.

As an aside, please note that files should not have ambiguous or meaningless names like File:Wv-1-7.pdf. See COM:FR. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:41, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Photo contest

trying to enter photo contest. Unable to make sense of site. Not sure i have an account Heinzokh (talk) 02:26, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

You do have an account and are logged in. You can participate like anyone else. See Commons:Photo_challenge#Challenges_open_for_submission. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:35, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@Heinzokh: You posted the above using your account so to speak. Are you asking whether you need a special account to participate in the contest? I'm not too familiar with the operation of these contests, but I believe you should be able to upload photos using your "Heinzokh" account, as long as you're a user in good standing (i.e., An example of not being in good standing would be [prior phrase edited for clarity by User:Jmabel] you previously used Commons under a different account that has been blocked for some reason and decided to create another account to circumvent the block just to enter the contest.). Just make sure whatever you upload is in accordance with the contest's rules and also complies with Commons:Licensing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:36, 16 October 2025 (UTC); post edit for clarification per below. -- 06:19, 16 October 2025 (UTC), and edited once again to remove attemot at clarification altogether. -- 07:53, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: some of that makes no sense. Someone who previously used Commons under a now-blocked account would precisely not be a user in good standing. - Jmabel ! talk 06:13, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Yes, you're correct Jmabel and thanks for catching that. Hopefully, things make more sense now. @Heinzokh: My apologies if my original post was confusing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:19, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: You still said the opposite of what you presumably meant; I'm taking the liberty of editing accordingly. - Jmabel ! talk 07:11, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that again. In hindsight, it's probably best to just strike all of that out as being TMI and trying to clarify something that probably doesn't need clarification. My apologies for the confusion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:53, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

My button to contribute is inactive

Hello.

I made several contributions in the past, now my button to contribute is inactive. Can you please help me?

Also, when will I have the possibility to write my own article?

Thank you, Nicolae RomanianEditor1 (talk) 10:09, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@RomanianEditor1: I'm not aware of anything on this site called a "button to contribute." What exactly are you trying to do?

This appears to be your first edit of Wikimedia Commons, the site on which you are asking this, on this account. I see you've edited the Romanian-language Wikipedia. Maybe that is where you meant to ask this? Wikimedia Commons does not have articles, the Romanian-language Wikimedia does.

When you say "to write my own article", I'm not certain if you mean to start an article, in general or to write an article about yourself. The latter would not be allowed, period. See ro:Wikipedia:Autobiografii. - Jmabel ! talk 03:34, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer. In the left menu, there are several options like Main Page, Contents, Contact us and Contribute. You can click on them, they are clickable. The button Contribute it is not active, clickable, even though in the past it was because I contributed to several articles by clicking on that link. So, this is the question.

About the article, it is not about me, about some other persons and about some topics I would like to introduce. RomanianEditor1 (talk) 13:40, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Commons does not have (and to the best of my knowledge, never had) a "contribute" button. I suspect you are confusing it with a different WMF site. There is a term "participate" in the UI, but it's just a section header (like "action" and "general"). - Jmabel ! talk 20:41, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Or maybe this is different in different skins? Or it used to say that and since it wasn't an active button I never noticed? - Jmabel ! talk 20:44, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

How to Ask for a File Removal based on the Trademark Rights

Hello,

We would like to remove one file (logo) from the wikimedia files. We do not own the file, however, we own the Trademark to that logo as we are the company's representatives.

The issue that our logo is on the platform and attached to our brand in Wikidata relates only to the fact that the logo had been badly published with the false rights that we would like to change. Or just to delete the file from the platform.

Please share the information on how we could do this.

Thank you, Volodymyr.popovych00 (talk) 12:01, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Our general policy is that we delete copyright violations. We don't delete files for trademark problems, see for example File:Coca-Cola_logo.svg, which is not copyrighted, but trademarked. Which file is this question about? There might be copyright problems as well, if this isn't a very simple or text-only logo. --rimshot^talk 15:15, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

We are writing as representatives of Crowdin OÜ, the company that internally developed and fully owns the Crowdin logo, including all graphic elements and the stylized word “Crowdin”.

Crowdin OÜ holds exclusive copyright over the entire design. The trademark rights for this logo have been registered under the company’s shareholder, Serhiy Dmytryshyn - https://sis.nipo.gov.ua/en/search/detail/1444658/This logo was first published by Crowdin OÜ in our official materials. The file currently on Wikimedia Commons was uploaded by a contributor who did not have the right to publish it under any license, and it was incorrectly released under a free license (GNU FDL). This license does not reflect Crowdin’s copyright ownership.Because the full file — both the graphic elements and the stylized text — is copyrighted and not intended for free distribution, we request that it be completely removed from Wikimedia Commons.

Please let us know if any further information or documentation is required to process this deletion. Volodymyr.popovych00 (talk) 09:52, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Is this it? File:Crowdin Logo.png —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:38, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Yes, this is the file we are talking about. Volodymyr.popovych00 (talk) 11:10, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

If the file is not eligible for copyright, we can (and should) indicate on the file page that it is trademarked. However, as Rimshot explained, while there are limits to how someone can use a trademarked but uncopyrighted file, its presence on a site like this would not violate those limits. - Jmabel ! talk 03:37, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Upload an image to Wikimedia Commons

Hello, I would like to upload a movie poster from the movie "Sepia Cinderella" so I can add it to the corresponding Wikipedia article but I am not sure if I can upload it or if it is copyrighted. The image is from the "RateYourMusic" website. https://rateyourmusic.com/film/sepia-cinderella/ Matt574 (talk) 18:53, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

By definition everything is copyrighted. However in this case I do not see any copyright notice on the poster. So, it is likely in public domain now. Ruslik (talk) 19:36, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

But at the bottom of the page, it says Copyright Sonemic Inc. so I am not sure if I can upload it to Wikimedia Commons. Matt574 (talk) 20:29, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

By definition everything is copyrighted is simply not true. Ruslik what did you mean to say, surely not what you said?

@Matt574: Sonemic can say whatever they like, but it isn't necessarily true. If this 1947 poster was published in the U.S. without an overt copyright notice, it lost any claim of copyright at the time of publication. See Commons:Hirtle chart for the somewhat complicated details, if you care. - Jmabel ! talk 03:42, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

USGS Image Use

I recently made a wikipedia account and would like to know if i could use it for a page about the RFC Munititons Explosion the website i got the image from is https://apps.nationalmap.gov/viewer/ JustANewYorker (talk) 19:35, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@JustANewYorker: I literally do not understand the question. Could you look at your wording and see if you can say this more clearly? What is it that you want to do? Upload a file to Wikimedia Commons, or something else? - Jmabel ! talk 03:44, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi, i was really tired but this is better worded

I recently made a wikipedia account and would ;ike to know if a map from the USGS website would be usable for my article. JustANewYorker (talk) 21:47, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

@JustANewYorker: obviously on Commons I can't tell you whether Wikipedia in some language would consider the map a good one, but in terms of uploading to Commons I believe that should be fine. Anything that USGS itself creates should be public domain; the issue would be if someone outside of the U.S. federal government had made copyrighted contributions. Use {{PD-USGov-USGS}} in lieu of a license. - Jmabel ! talk 03:17, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

I uploaded a logo today but would like to remove it.

I just uploaded my company logo in the wrong place. I see that the file I uploaded is now "licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International". However, it is a copyrighted logo and should not be there. I want to use it on my company's page. Can you help? DL548 (talk) 19:47, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

This is a simple text logo, so it's not a copyright issue. I've changed the license to {{PD-textlogo}}. I've also added the Illinois based company category. What page do you want to use it on? Geoffroi 20:02, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi Geoffroi, Thank you for your help! I'm not sure you're seeing the logo because it's not just text. There's also a blue swoosh element. I want to include it on my company's page that is now in draft form: en:Draft:Videojet Technologies, DL548 (talk) 20:28, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi DL548. A "simple text logo" is often used to refer to logos with simple shapes (like swooshes) and text because such elements can be things too simple to eligible for copyright protection, and I think that's what Geoffroi probably meant. This is particularly true in the case of US copyright law because the en:threshold of originality that the US follows is pretty high; for example, Commons hosts File:Logo NIKE.svg (i.e. the en:Nike swoosh) because the opinion is that it's too simple for copyright protection under US copyright law. Other countries can have different thresholds of originality, and some are much lower than the US's; in your company's case, though, US copyright law is all that matters to Commons because the US is where your company is based.

As for your company's logo (I'm assuming it's File:Videojet-logo-blue-black-rgb.jpg), if your company submitted an application for copyright protection to the en:US Copyright Office that ended up being approved, then for sure Commons would treat the logo as protected by copyright; without something formal like that, however, it's probably going to be considered too simple to be eligible for such protection and OK for Commons. FWIW, your company might've COM:Trademarked its logo, but that's not the same thing as applying for copyright protection. Anyway, since you uploaded the file within the past seven days, you could try tagging it for speedy deletion per speedy deletion criterion G7 (you can use Template:db-author for that). You move quickly on that, though, because if seven or more days pass since you uploaded the file, you will need to start a deletion discussion about it as explained in COM:DR instead. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:18, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@DL548: I've added the image to your draft. Geoffroi 22:57, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

city logo

here is the updated logo of city göppingen.. : https://www.goeppingen.de/site/Goeppingen-Internet-2021/resourceCached/24.2.0/img/logo.svg

the one on the wikiidia page https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6ppingen is old one.. Zaher.mohsen (talk) 22:57, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

In scope bypass

A file is required to be educationally useful in order to be hosted on Commons, and photos exclusively used on user pages are considered personal and should be hosted locally. However, there is a big exception to this, being that wikis that don’t support local uploads must have even personal photos hosted on Commons. This means that it is really easy to bypass this rule, as you just have to put your personal photo on any one of these wikis for it to be hosted here. ANOTHERWlKlPEDlAN _{wɑit thɑt’s ɑ typo} 01:30, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

@Anohthterwikipedian Yes, per Commons:Project scope#User pages, what you said above is true. However, Commons requires users to be an active participant on that project, and only small number of these images are allowed. Tvpuppy (talk) 02:41, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

@Tvpuppy: Thanks, I just needed confirmation as this wasn’t specifically mentioned there.

ANOTHERWlKlPEDlAN _{wɑit thɑt’s ɑ typo} 07:50, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Where is my Mother Tongue Language - Tamil

? Ashokkumar Ganesan (talk) 06:16, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

@Ashokkumar Ganesan: I'm not sure I understand what you are asking. Commons is a multilingual project; you may use pretty much any language here. If you wanted to mark a description (or other wikitext) as being written in Tamil you would use {{Ta}}. If you want to add a Tamil caption to the structured data, that should be done in a manner parallel to any other language.

If by some chance your question is about the Tamil-language Wikipedia, that is ta:முதற்_பக்கம். And if you meant something else, please ask the question more explicitly (including in Tamil if that is easier for you). - Jmabel ! talk 12:44, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

My Publications like novels

I am a writer. I want to post my written works. The cover pics will be uploaded. How can I do it? I uploaded one but was unsusseccful. Prof. K S Bhardwaj (talk) 08:47, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello and welcome @Prof. K S Bhardwaj, your upload was blocked by the filter because the image size is too small (312x499), usually small image size indicates it is a crop from another image, or it is a copy/screenshot of an image online. If you are the copyright owner of the cover pictures, please upload the images in full resolution. Thank you. Tvpuppy (talk) 11:56, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

But also: please read COM:SCOPE to see if these are within Commons' scope. If they are not published by a reasonably recognized publisher, most likely they would be considered personal content and do not belong here. - Jmabel ! talk 12:46, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Problem with loading photos

I'm trying to upload two photos. I'm getting the message: "This action was automatically identified as malicious and has therefore been rejected. If you believe this edit was justified, please contact the administrator and inform them of the situation. A brief description of the abuse rule your action was matched to: LTA 141." These are portraits of an artist I want to include in an article I'm working on about him. I have permission from the photographer, etc., but I don't know what to do. Can someone help me? Adam Jędrusyna (talk) 09:21, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

You don't mention what upload tool you used, but it is likely to go best with Special:UploadWizard. Please read Commons:Uploading works by a third party before trying, though, because it sounds like you are trying to upload photos you did not take yourself, and that is one of the most difficult things to do correctly; it is very easy to make a mistake that will result in deletion of the photo. If you still have questions after reading that linked page, feel more than free to ask here. - Jmabel ! talk 12:50, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer. The problem was disapeared when I wrote author's surname before name. Adam Jędrusyna (talk) 13:54, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

@Jmabel: As an administrator, you may have access to the description of the LTA filters, in this case possibly based on some string of characters, and can evaluate if the case looks like a false positive. -- Asclepias (talk) 15:03, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

The problem is solved. Adam Jędrusyna (talk) 15:13, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

@Asclepias: yes, but it was a lot quicker for me to give the answer I gave than to go looking through logs and filters, and it turned out to give the user what they needed. - Jmabel ! talk 20:46, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

I want to upload my research paper on my Wikipedia I'd how can I upload

I Chourasiya Rohit (talk) 11:36, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

@Chourasiya Rohit: Typically things like this are not in Commons's scope. - Jmabel ! talk 12:52, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

i want to change a hatefull picture

I need help to edit and publish it Lamia hossen (talk) 12:49, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

@Lamia hossen: no one is going to be able to give you meaningful help without a far more specific request. - Jmabel ! talk 12:53, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

File Combination

I previously uploaded a portrait File:Andrusyak Vasyl Vasylovych "Rizun".jpg, which is a slightly improved version of the portrait File:Wasyl Andrusiak "Rizun".jpg, but I couldn’t simply upload the new version because I’m not the file uploader. At the time, I didn’t know that it was possible to request an upload of a new version. So, could you please help me make this portrait the new version of that portrait File:Wasyl Andrusiak "Rizun".jpg? S. Mochar (talk) 14:13, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Opinions may differ on the relevance of overwriting a file, but IMHO in this case it is probably better to leave things as they are. The other file has had its filename for many years. It is in use. That version is also much in use elsewhere on the internet. Some people may prefer to display that copy. Also, your version is from a different source. It could be interesting to have a copy of the uncropped and unretouched photo with its context. -- Asclepias (talk) 14:51, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

About uploading images

I downloaded a photo of my brother who is a rugby player from his club's website and I want to upload it on his wikipedia page but im not sure if im allowed Johnshelby1243 (talk) 15:43, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Unless you can get permsision from the copyright holder for its sue under a suitable licence; sadly not. Please see Commons:Uploading works by a third party. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:53, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

English translation from Latin as requested -How do I upload it?

The article at this address requests a translation from the Latin to English. Here is my offered translation of: Cremato eo (corpore), inimici ... remeanti animae veluti vaginam ademerint. Cremeating the body, the enemies took away the sheath of the soul so to speak from returning. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/vagina#Latin Linda Seriously (talk) 20:09, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

@Linda Seriously: you don't seem to be asking for help in using Wikimedia Commons (the purpose of this page) and offhand I don't see any relevance to Wikimedia Commons. It looks to me like what you want to do is to edit the page in question on the English-language Wiktionary, which should be an option on that page if you are logged in. - Jmabel ! talk 20:52, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you Jmabel. I was indeed trying to upload a translation to the Latin page, because there was a request there that indicated that a translation was needed. At the time I didn't have an account. I will try again. Can I come here if I need some help in uploading to that page? Linda Seriously (talk) 22:30, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

@Linda Seriously: questions are generally better asked within the web domain that the questions are about. Each wiki has its own methods and policies. - Jmabel ! talk 03:19, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Can you publish this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Davidemeador Davidemeador (talk) 01:03, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

@Davidemeador You're on the wrong website now, this is Commons, not Wikipedia. Look at the current version Draft:David E. Meador, there is some guidance with helpful links at the top. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:46, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

But not any longer, because it was deleted. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:19, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Uploading from Flickr & licensing

Hello, I am a new user on Commons and I have a question regarding uploading pictures from Flickr. Actually it's not a question but rather a case - you see, I've been wanting to upload several albums' worth of pictures, all from the same author, that I think would make a great contribution to Commons and especially for some pages I'm editing on Wikipedia. But there's a problem, they've all been uploaded with a (C) "all rights reserved" license. However, in all of these pictures' descriptions, (and by all I mean all, I checked) they say "Reproduction is allowed with a mention of the source." So is it possible for me to upload the pictures, while crediting the author of course? I should mention that I don't have a way of contacting the author (I do not have a Flickr account). Here's an example of one of the pictures I want to upload. The description is in French, so you might need to translate it.

Here's a list of all the albums I'd like to upload:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/fototak/albums/72157642708191795

https://www.flickr.com/photos/fototak/albums/72157642540979634/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/fototak/albums/72157642612925264/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/fototak/albums/72157642439833775/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/fototak/albums/72157642554020114/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/fototak/albums/72157642439674515/ Zach1055 (talk) 08:27, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

@Zach1055 Sorry. As the uploader also says, "Commercial use subject to prior special authorization." And stuff on Commons must be ok for commercial use.

Commons:Licensing#Well-known_licenses lists licenses that can be used here. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:40, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Okay, well thanks for the help anyway. Zach1055 (talk) 14:43, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

@Zach1055: Some photos of this flickr account are under free licenses, for example in Category:Files from Fototak Flickr stream. Apparently uploaded to flickr in 2011-2012. Even some of those have the non commercial restriction in their descriptions, and others do not have it, so it can be somewhat confusing. You might find a few other photos that have free licenses but maybe not many and maybe not in the more recent uploads. You will have to look at the license in the flickr page of each photo. -- Asclepias (talk) 14:09, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

@Asclepias Funny thing though, at least two pics in that category, [3][4], are "All rights reserved" now. Not for example [5]. I don't know what to make of that, did the uploader change the tag later or did the flickrbot get it wrong? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:27, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Their license history on flickr shows that those photos were under the free license from 2012 until 2021. The template Change-of-license Flickr-change-of-license can be added to their pages on Commons. An interesting detail is that they were copied to Commons soon after the free license was placed on flickr. That suggests that the user who requested those bot uploads to Commons might have contacted the flickr user and asked the permission of the free license for those particular photos. Notifying User:Arbalete. -- Asclepias (talk) 14:54, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Ahh, you can see license history, never knew that. Still, from the Commons-pov, the "free" license is "no backsies", right? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:05, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Answering my own question, that's what the template you linked says. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:06, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I did contact him and he agreed to change the license for the upload on Commons. Arbalete (talk) 22:19, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Well done! Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:30, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

আমি একটু আগে বিকাশ চন্দ্র রায় নামে একাউন্ট খুললাম

সে একাউন্টে কি তৈরি হয়েছে। এর পরবর্তী ধাপ আমার কি ? বিকাশ চন্দ্র রায় (talk) 10:12, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

The account Bikash Chandra Roy has indeed been created, you just posted this comment with it. I have no idea what you want to do next, perhaps Commons:Welcome will help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:34, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Photographs from the 1960s in the UK

Besides Crown copyright, is there any way to figure out if a photograph published in the UK during the 1960s is public domain/appropriate to Commons? StarTrekker (talk) 23:05, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

See COM:UK. It's a little complex, but as far as I can tell a photograph is going to get at least 70 years from creation, so they will be in copyright in the UK until the 2030s.--Prosfilaes (talk) 05:00, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Damn, so there is almost no way then.StarTrekker (talk) 21:47, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Hundreds of duplicate files

Hello, Category:RAA images Den Helder 1905-1940 to be categorised contains 183 files which I believe are all already in Wikimedia Commons. I did not check every single file but the dozens that I did check are all already there. For example Category:Bloembollententoonstelling (Den Helder, 1931). The resolutions of the files are the same but the MB size differs a little bit. Last year I asked the uploader User:MichellevL (WMNL) on her discussion page but I got no response, I now see that 3 years ago someone else had already asked her about it and that she inquired at the Village Pump and that there was no problem if it took some time to fix the duplicates. It's been almost four years now? There might be more duplicates in the 1800+ file parent category Category:Media from Regionaal Archief Alkmaar to be categorised.

A couple of years ago I categorized every single file that has to do with Den Helder. If these duplicates were to be deleted I hope the categorized ones stay so I don't have to redo all the categorization. Larshei (talk) 09:04, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

@Larshei: assuming that is an accurate description, you should start a DR for these, proposing that each be turned into a redirect to the better-categorized file. You might do well to use Cat-a-lot to add a maintenance category to the ones you want to delete, so you can characterize them as "all the files in [MAINTENANCE CATEGORY]." - Jmabel ! talk 12:54, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Logo of a company

Hi, I wanted to upload a logo of a company that is no longer in business singularly. The logo is the one used by the company when it was in activity in the ‘90 wich is different from the one in use now with the new owners of the company. So i wanted to know if i can upload that logo or not. Lunovar (talk) 14:35, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

At Commons, we can accept media if it has an appropriate license and if it fits into an educational scope, broadly speaking (it also needs to be in a proper filetype, which most logos would be). A company's logo is almost always trademarked, meaning that how and when it is reproduced needs to not confuse possible consumers, but it is only sometimes copyrighted, meaning that the logo as a piece of art is sufficiently complex to be eligible for legal protection. So a company's logo could in principle be uploaded here, but not if that company has a logo that is as a piece of art something that is copyrighted and without a license to reproduce it. See Category:Logos, which includes many corporate logos. In case you end up uploading it here, please add {{Trademark}} on the file's page. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:55, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

@Lunovar: I will add: none of what you've said here has any bearing on the copyright status of the logo, which is going to be more or less completely about what country it was from, when it was first created, and how visually complex it is. If you can point to a copy of the logo online, it is much more likely someone can give you a meaningful opinion. - Jmabel ! talk 13:13, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

TRING TO LOAD FILE

אני מנסה להעלות קובץ. ניסיתי להעלות את הקובץ בגרירת הקובץ ולא הלך ניסיתי לעשות העתק הדבק וגם לא הלך. איך אני מעלה את החומר? גודלניק (talk) 15:20, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

@גודלניק: I don't read Hebrew, so I am working via Google Translate here, but you don't mention what upload tool you were using. If it is not Special:UploadWizard, please try that, generally the best tool for beginners. If it is Special:UploadWizard, can you please be more specific about what happened when you tried to upload. - Jmabel ! talk 13:22, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

I looked at the logs. It looks like you were trying to do a cross-wiki upload as a new user. That's not possible to do. Special:UploadWizard may solve your problem. - Jmabel ! talk 13:26, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Also, you haven't confirmed your email address. - Jmabel ! talk 13:27, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Can I upload a photo of someone whose name and identity are different?

Can I share the identity of a person whose name and identity is special on social media? That person is not popular on social media but his name is very special. He is a special person because of his name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bilider (talk • contribs) 16:22, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

@Bilider: That is very vague, and sounds a lot like you are asking "can I dox someone here." If that is what you are asking then no, you cannot. - Jmabel ! talk 13:28, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Can't I even show something new through Wikipedia? Bilider (talk) 18:55, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

@Bilider: your postings here sadly don't really presage that you're really able to contribute to Commons (or Wikipedia) as of now. Please read: COM:Scope and COM:What Commons is not (and also COM:Licensing).

Commons is:

1. a media repository
2. for media that are, in a broad sense, educational. You can and will find here historical images, photographic and audiovisual documentations of the state of inanimate nature and of living beings, documentations of events, some stock photography, historical and some modern art and similar motifs.

You won't find memes, material like stuff on and from en:4chan, en:Reddit, joke collections, etc. (except for cases where these things have already gained an external recognition in the media and the pop culture, like en:Disaster Girl, en:Pepe the Frog and some en:Lolcats, but then, utmost care must be exerted in regards to the licensing status). There are other sites with user-generated content for this kind of purposes (like sharing a maybe comical name), your idea is most likely not within the purview of Commons and Wikipedia. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 05:55, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Content from Scratch

When uploading a screenshot from https://scratch.mit.edu, what do you put as the author? Because I am very confused and I don't really know how your you're supposed to do it. RailwayEnthusiast2025 (talk) 18:28, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

For context, this is when you have taken the screenshot RailwayEnthusiast2025 (talk) 18:30, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

The creator of the game  $999$REAL 💬 ⬆   03:01, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

No, I meant like scratch blocks or assets made by the Scratch team itself RailwayEnthusiast2025 (talk) 08:31, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

MIT, see File:Scratch 3.0 editor.png for an example. The license would be {{Cc-by-sa-2.0-Scratch}}. Note that some Scratch assets that are trademarks, including Scratch Cat and Gobo are exempt from this CC license and cannot be uploaded here. See the license linked above for more details. HyperAnd (talk) 10:16, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

So, if I took a screenshot of code that I made myself in scratch,would I say 'Screenshot is own work (RailwayEnthusiast2025), scratch is by MIT and other contributors'? RailwayEnthusiast2025 (talk) 16:13, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Yeah. HyperAnd (talk) 20:27, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

My file

Hi, I uploaded a screenshot of the video game S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 because it's published under GFDL license. But then I found information about restrictions of using this license on Commons. Please check if I did it correctly, Thanks. SkоrP²⁴ 20:06, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Logo of a game

so, I added a game t o the wiki, there are a logo. Can i add the logo? Animeskujop (talk) 04:33, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

@Animeskujop: I'm guessing that by "the wiki" you mean the English-language Wikipedia, or some other WMF wiki, so this would presumably be in scope, and would come down to copyright issues.

Copyright issues are pretty much the same for logos as for anything else. Assuming this is something dating from recent decades, it is almost certainly going to be a matter of whether the logo is below the threshold of originality in its country of origin. If you can link to an online copy of the logo here, someone can probably tell you at a glance. - Jmabel ! talk 13:33, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Logo Upload of page

hello,

I am updating a organization Wikipedia page, and their logo is out of date, i have the new one witch i have downloaded from their branding.

I read somewhere that i can use this just on English Wikipedia for just the page, not the commons how do i do this? and is this allowed under law? SpeedyTrain6000 (talk) 06:40, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

@SpeedyTrain6000 Details matter, but assuming this is about an existing en-WP article, and the logo can't be on Commons per COM:TOO, go to WP:FUW, pick Upload a non-free file > This is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use. > This is a logo of an organization, company, brand, etc.. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:08, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Request to merge or unify two files for Maria al Qibtiyya

Hello Commons administrators, I would like to request that two image files related to Maria al Qibtiyya be merged or technically unified so that both filenames point to the same image across Wikimedia projects. The files are: The first one file:Maria_Al_Qibtiyya.png and the second one File:ماريا القبطية (تخطيط).png. The second file is an improved version that I created. It presents the name in Thuluth calligraphy with a transparent background, following the traditional Islamic artistic approach often used to express dignity and distinction for historical Islamic figures. In Islamic art, calligraphic renderings of names in Thuluth or similar scripts on decorated backgrounds are a long-established and elegant form of representation. Such designs are often used in Wikimedia projects for historical figures when no authentic portrait or coin is available. By contrast, the older file uses a simple Naskh font on a plain white background, which does not align with this traditional calligraphic style. For this reason, it would be best if both filenames were unified so that they display the same new image everywhere. I have already updated the image in the Wikidata item for Maria al Qibtiyya, and this change successfully appeared across many language versions, but several others still show the older file, so a Commons-level unification is needed. If direct merging is not possible, any alternative technical solution (for example aliasing, redirecting, or replacement under the same filename) would also be appreciated. The goal is simply to ensure that all Wikimedia projects display one consistent and culturally appropriate image. Both files are on Commons and share compatible license information. Thank you for your attention and help. Yosf22ww (talk) 16:01, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

@Yosf22ww: I agree that yours is superior, but it is not normally Commons approach to delete a file in this situation. SPQR10, who created the other file, remains moderately active on Wikimedia projects. If they believe your file is enough better that they would like theirs to become a redirect to yours, then that would be fine.

You are of course welcome to edit any of the sister wikis to use your version, and unless they disagree and revert you, that will stick. Also, you can also mark both files with {{Other version}} so that they link to each other on Commons. - Jmabel ! talk 23:37, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you@Jmabel. I thought the merger would lead to both of us being related, so if I'm not mistaken, we should contact him directly to reach a compromise? But maybe I'll try to edit it manually.Yosf22ww (talk) 03:02, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

@Yosf22ww: He should see where I mentioned him here. If he does not respond here in a day or so, yes, you should contact him directly. - Jmabel ! talk 14:03, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Foto's van Meise Nationale Plantentuin

Zojuist heb ik een aantal foto's van deze locatie geuplaod en toch word ik verwezen naar een fout die ik gemaakt zou hebben, maar dat is niet juist. Ik heb alle foto's op exact wijze behandeld. Correct dus. Homoarborea (talk) 19:06, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

I am not good in Dutch, but unless I'm very mistaken, "word ik verwezen naar een fout die ik gemaakt zou hebben" is very vague. Can you be more specific as to what you believe is a problem? - Jmabel ! talk 23:39, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Photograph of a public statue

Every statue is art that was created by SOMEONE, even if owned by, and displayed in, a public space. If I photograph a statue in a public setting, can I submit it to a Wikipedia photography contest? 3dphotoguy (talk) 22:06, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

@3dphotoguy: First you have to check whether the copyright of the artist has already expired (see Commons:Copyright rules) or, alternatively, if the statue is on permanent public display and located within a country that supports freedom of panorama. --AFBorchert (talk) 22:59, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

If you would say what country you are talking about, we can give you much clearer guidance. Rules about publishing photographs of statues vary widely from country to country. - Jmabel ! talk 23:41, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

United States of America 3dphotoguy (talk) 23:51, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

@3dphotoguy: The trickiest, as it happens. (Pinging @Clindberg to correct me in case I get anything wrong here, but this should at least be very close.) There is no freedom of panorama for sculptures in the United States. However, a lot of statues and other sculptures as late as the 1980s are in the public domain (whereas in most countries nothing is PD from the last 70 years, and little from even 100 years ago).

The main reason for this is that until 1 March 1989, the U.S. did not grant copyright automatically. A very large number of sculptures before 1 January 1978 are in the public domain, along with some from then until 28 February 1989. Also, for works published before 1978, the U.S. determined duration of copyright entirely from the publication date, not the death date of the creator.

Here's a breakdown to cases; much of this information can be found in Commons:Hirtle chart, but that doesn't account for the changed meaning of publication.

Prior to 1978, display of a sculpture in a public place where photography by the general public was possible constituted publication. The only way to retain copyright was to meet both of the following conditions:

1. There needed to be a correctly formed copyright notice on the sculpture itself: either © or the word "copyright", the name of the copyright-holder (typically the sculptor), and the year. If that was missing, then the sculpture can be used on commons under {{PD-US-no notice}}.
2. The initial copyright was good only for 28 years, then copyright had to be renewed. The last year of initial publication for which renewal is relevant is 1963 (because in 1992 the requirement for renewal was dropped). See Copyright renewal in the United States for how to check for renewals. If a work published from 1930 to 1963, inclusive, was initially copyrighted, but not renewed, use {{PD-US-not renewed}}.

All works in the U.S. published before 1930 are now out of copyright. As remarked above, this would include any sculptures erected in public before that date. Use {{PD-US-no notice}}. That 1930 date will be moving year-by-year until 2073, then we will get into issues of author's death dates.

In 1978, the legal meaning of "publishing" a sculpture changed. It's not enough that it was in a place where people could take photos, there had to be authorized photos published in the more obvious sense of "published": e.g. a postcard, a museum catalog, a magazine article, etc. Still, from then until 28 February 1989, the laws did not change a lot in any other respect. The only other large difference is that it became possible to rectify the lack of a copyright notice by registering the work within 5 years. (You check for that the same way you check for renewals.) Works from this period that fail on these formalities can use {{PD-US-1978-89}}.

Everything from 1 March 1989 onward is still in copyright; we can't use photos of these without the permission of the copyright-holder of the sculpture.

As I said: the U.S. is the most complicated case in the world for this.

Jmabel ! talk 14:39, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

@3dphotoguy: You can see the information page on this topic at Commons:Public art and copyrights in the US. -- Asclepias (talk) 16:20, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Yep, that's a good reference. Most public statues put up in the U.S. before 1978 are fine, unless they have a copyright notice on them. You can usually find them in the SIRIS art inventories database to see if a copyright notice is mentioned. Ones put up before 1930 are definitely fine, ones with a notice put up before 1964 also needed a renewal (rare but needs searching). Statues put up since 1978, generally not. You can use your photo of those to the extent of fair use, which is pretty far, but not for commercial use generally. Carl Lindberg (talk) 20:49, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

And, to be clear, Commons does not accept fair use. - Jmabel ! talk 13:54, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Poty results

I found the poty winner for 2024..... Where are the votes received available?.. I tracked my choices. R. Douglas McKay (talk) 23:34, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @DMc75771: You can view the votes for each image at Commons:Picture of the Year/2024/Gallery/Finalists (click the "View votes" button next to each image). ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 20:28, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

download a pic

Can someone download that picture, or tell me if it's possible ? I don't know much about the right. https://www.meisterdrucke.fr/fine-art-prints/Gerard-ter-Borch/1002795/Femme-lisant-une-lettre.html Io Herodotus (talk) 07:03, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

it's already there Io Herodotus (talk) 10:35, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

@Io Herodotus: I don't understand what specific help you are asking for. - Jmabel ! talk 14:41, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

If you're suggesting adding this image to Commons, we already have a version at File:Gerard ter Borch - Young woman in mourning dress reading a letter.jpg. Belbury (talk) 14:49, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Our version is 860 × 1,000 (70 KB); that wanted by the OP (albeit it would need cropping slightly) is 1077 x 1260 (245 KB). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:42, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

thank you. I have created a page on wikipedia for that painting. I'm now looking for information on this magnificent work, but that's another matter.--Io Herodotus (talk) 06:55, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Possibly public domain images published in book

There is a book titled Port Charlotte by Roxanne Read, and within it there are some old photos pertaining to Port Charlotte High School that were apparently provided "courtesy of Port Charlotte High School" (as well as some other public schools in Port Charlotte, including Charlotte Harbor Center). Public records in Florida are considered public domain, and apparently "public record" has a broad interpretation, so these are potentially public domain images. Would I need to try to hunt down either the author of the book or the school/school district officials that provided these to confirm their public record status (meaning that they were, in fact, government produced vs. a private individual or corporation with copyrights producing them for the government), or is the citation in the book enough to qualify them for inclusion in the Wikimedia Commons and/or Wikipedia? PCHS Pirate Alumnus (talk) 19:21, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

@PCHS Pirate Alumnus: this is probably much more likely to get a good answer at COM:Village pump/Copyright than on the help desk. - Jmabel ! talk

Thanks. PCHS Pirate Alumnus (talk) 18:29, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

uploading a picture of a building

I would like to know if I can upload a picture of a small pavilion building that was installed in a National Park about three years ago. The pavilion is now fairly famous, and has won a half-dozen prestigious design awards. It was designed, fabricated, and installed by faculty and architecture students from a university. I am one of the faculty members involved. I took the photo. I plan to freely give copyright and use of the photo to wikipedia or anyone. There are dozens of webpages that also have content about this award-winning project. Clipperdoug (talk) 21:10, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Can you tell where is it located in (including the country) and the name of the project? It might be copyrighted depending on the country and if it is, it can't be uploaded here. See Commons:Freedom of panorama. HyperAnd (talk) 05:54, 22 October 2025 (

@Clipperdoug: If this is United States (I'm guessing from your prior uploads), almost any building is covered by U.S. freedom of panorama. The only exception I can think of would be if it were covered by a mural, or was more of a sculpture than a building. - Jmabel ! talk 14:02, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Sekil yukleyirem yazir ki muellif huququ var.amma ozume aiddir sekil

Sekilimi yukleyirem muellif huququ gelir amma sekilin huququ yoxdur oz sekilimdir Sehrbazsehadet (talk) 09:28, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Pinging @Kadı as the most likely to be able to make sense of this. - Jmabel ! talk 14:04, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

@Jmabel, thanks for notifying. I examined the uploaded content, and I see that the uploaded images violate the F10 policy. Therefore, I deleted all of the images that were uploaded by @Sehrbazsehadet and tagged the azwiki article because of spamming.

(Translation and explanation of the request: I am uploading my own photographs, my photos were marked with copyvio tag but these are my own works.) Kadı Message 18:36, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Photo Not Showing on Contest Results Page

I submitted a photo to the July 2025 waterside structures contest. The photo shows on the entries and voting pages, but not the results page. I believe it should be showing there as well?

This is the photo: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Pearl_Seafood_Restaurant_-_Rockland,_Maine_-_October_4,_2016.jpg David Ratledge (talk) 12:14, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

It seems images without votes aren't included on the result pages. Magnus (talk) 12:51, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Зазрузка фото

Когда фото загружено, а потом есть необходимость скопировать ссылку на него или текст файла на страницу. Как вернуться спустя время назад и скопировать последний этап загрузки? Александр Водолазский (talk) 16:40, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Uploading a photo

---

When a photo is uploaded and you need to copy its link or file text to a page, how can you go back and copy the last upload step?

translator: Google Translate via   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 23:28, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

@Александр Водолазский: Привет и добро пожаловать. Из Special:ListFiles/Александр Водолазский я вижу, что вы загрузили много файлов. Самый последний из них — File:Стара прикраса житлового будинку в Горлівці.jpg. Вы можете отредактировать эту страницу и скопировать/вставить то, что вам нужно, а затем снова выполнить шаги загрузки или создать свою собственную с помощью этой формы.

Hi, and welcome. From Special:ListFiles/Александр Водолазский, I can see that you have uploaded many files. The most recent one is File:Стара прикраса житлового будинку в Горлівці.jpg. You may edit that page and copy/paste what you need, then use the upload steps again or roll your own with this form.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 23:28, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Indian Government Documents Copyright Law

I know that the US doesn't protect their published governmental documents under copyright law, but does India? If I upload a random tender document will I get Wikimedia sued? Okkirae.temp (talk) 17:27, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Wait I'll ask Village Pump hold on Okkirae.temp (talk) 17:34, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Never mind I can't smh Okkirae.temp (talk) 17:38, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

@Okkirae.temp: please see Commons:Copyright rules by territory/India. Indian government documents are not in public domain like US, but recent documents are most often published under {{GODL-India}} which is an acceptable license. MKFI (talk) 06:16, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

How do I use this template when uploading? And if it was uploaded in May this year does it count? Okkirae.temp (talk) 12:57, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Uploading a chart containing information from another work: what options to select when uploading?

I wish to upload a chart/series of charts I made showing the structure of verbs in a certain language. All the information about the structure of the verbs and the forms involved are from a particular thesis, but the layout and design of the chart are not copied from that work, but are from me collocating information about verb structure from throughout an entire chapter to put it in a chart.

What options should I select when uploading it? Both "This work is created entirely by me" and "this work contains the work of others" Don't quite seem to fit. I'm not just copying tables from the thesis, but it would be impossible for me to have made the table without the thesis; it isn't a well known language with lots of descriptions like say, Spanish or Japanese.

I assume it would be "This work is created entirely by me", since if you select "this work contains the work of others", then "the work is copyright protected", it tells you not to upload the image, which would lead it being impossible to upload a chart containing any information only found in copyrighted works, but I wanted to check to be sure, the guidelines are very unclear to me. Aristaeusapiculturist (talk) 19:22, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

@Aristaeusapiculturist: It is "created by you" but the description should cite your source(s). Information cannot be copyrighted, only its expression. - Jmabel ! talk 02:44, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the help! Aristaeusapiculturist (talk) 08:08, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

How can I upload a picture of an old advertising post: the company is out of business

I have a picture of an advertisement proclaiming a world record was set with their equipment. Obviously, it is 'not my own work.' But, it was 'public domain' advertising. I do not have the source document (i.e. the newspaper or folio) it was originally posted in. The company that built the equipment and placed the advertisement has been out of business for some years. It is, to my knowledge, the only citation of the achievement. It would be similar to posting a picture of a newspaper article - but without any knowledge of the actual source document. I also know of no way to verify/document the achievement without this picture of the advertisement. I'm surprised that I can't find an answer for this in these archives - though they are pretty extensive. Antiquetuck (talk) 01:47, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

@Antiquetuck: I strongly suspect you do not correctly understand the term "public domain" which you used: please read at least the initial portion of the Wikipedia article public domain.

The fact that the company is defunct is completely irrelevant to copyright law, except for the fact that it greatly increases the difficulty of determining who owns the copyright. What country would this be from? Roughly what date? - Jmabel ! talk 02:49, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

It is U.S. related. The company went through a couple of changes and has been defunct since about 2014.

The absurdity of my plight is that this advertisement was probably produced by the original company back in the 1930's or so - it is a direct and timely reference to a record their machine set in 1922. If I can't 'use this for verification...' there isn't anything left for verification!

My reference to PD is based on the fact that it was a published advertisement - I have no idea or way to confirm which publication it was published in - and meant for public consumption. It would be like making the statement that Pantyhose Joe Namath wore some one time - there's proof positive out there - and someone saying that the existing sources of proof of that are not usable. A true circle jerk if I ever heard of one.

So, how do I prove what's true, if I can't use the proof that has been published and that it was based on???! Antiquetuck (talk) 03:16, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

@Antiquetuck: Again, you are misusing the term "public domain" and it make the discussion very difficult. Please read at least the leading portion of the article I linked above. If the content is truly in the public domain then it can be uploaded to Commons, but the mere fact that it is "public" does not make it "public domain."

Also: I'm not at all sure what you are talking about when you say you need to "use this for verification". Do you mean citing the content in Wikipedia? Uploading the content to Commons does not make it any more (or less) citable.

"1930s or so" is a bit inconvenient for an upload to Commons. There are several ways that the advertisement could have passed into the public domain.

1. If you can show it was published before 1 January 1930 then it is definitely public-domain in the United States. That date (1 January 1930) will move forward one year on 1 January each year for the next several decades.
2. If you can show that it had an authorized publication without a copyright notice any time before 1978, then it is in the public domain.
3. Failing that, the only way it would have already passed into the public domain—and a quite likely one, I would add—is that they failed to renew the copyright. Unfortunately, without knowing the initial date of publication, that is very hard to determine, because you'd have to go through many years of copyright renewal records (from 27 years after the earliest possible publication date to 28 years after the latest possible publication date) and show that there is no such renewal.

I know that is not the answer you would want to hear. "Orphaned" works toward the end of their period of copyright protection are quite frankly very annoying to deal with, but they exist, and this may be one of them.

I'm going to repeat one more time: read at least the initial portion of en:Public domain. If you are are going to engage in discussions involving this legal term, especially if you are going to use it yourself, it is important that you know what it means. - Jmabel ! talk 03:43, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Jmabel, Thanks again. I laud your time, knowledge and effort to ensure that this meets those specifications. This especially applies in these days of 'false news'.

I suspect that my 'reference material' - the advertisement that publicizes this manufacturers statement, verifying or vouching for the truth and fact of the statement - would pass these musters.

However, I am not going to spend hours playing games looking in every nook and cranny to prove or disprove that something as publicly available as this advertisement is not copyrighted. THAT fact and proof is not THAT important to me.

I know the facts to be true - but I guess no one else will ever get to appreciate that fact in the Wiki, because this techni-legal game is way beyond my enthusiasm. Consider my interest and willingness to share information is sufficiently and unmercifully trashed, and that I'll just sign off on this one - and any others that appear to push on this threshold. Antiquetuck (talk) 05:34, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

New version or new file?

There are currently five SVG files representing "bullet" icons for lines in the Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) rail system: File:DART Blue Line bullet.svg, File:DART Green Line bullet.svg, File:DART Red Line bullet.svg, and File:DART Orange Line bullet.svg File:DART Silver Line bullet.svg. These were all uploaded in 2024 (except the Silver Line icon, which was uploaded earlier this month), and they are versions of the icons from previous rail guides.

Earlier this week, DART published a PDF guide for its new Silver Line, and that guide features revised "bullet" icons which use a different font than the previous guides. The font is the only change, but the new letterforms are distinct. (Compare the icons on page 15 of the PDF to the Commons files; the differences are clearest on the Green and Orange bullets.) The new icon font is also used in updated system maps and station layout maps, so it seems these are permanent replacements.

I'd like to upload the new bullets to Commons and replace them on the appropriate Wikipedia pages/templates. Should I upload the new bullets as new versions of the existing files, or should I create new files and mark the old files using Template:superseded? I'm not sure whether the changes are substantial enough to require a new file, and new versions of the exising files would require less work on the Wikipedia side. LazyCat256 (talk) 03:51, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

@LazyCat256: There's some guidance about this given in COM:OVERWRITE. Unlike many of the local Wikipedias which allow non-free (fair use) content to be uploaded, Commons seems to prefer the retaining out-of-date or no-longer-in-use files rather than overwriting them because of the potential historical and encyclopedic value associated with such files. Typically, a minor change like straightening might be an OK reason for overwriting, but anything which might be considered significant (a crop, color change, font change perhaps) probably is best uploaded as a separate file. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:44, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

photo may be deleted

Hello, I receive message that File:Andreas fredegandus hermans.jpg may be deleted. The picture is on my grandfathers death card dating from 1945. The author is anonymous. I supposed the photo is now in the public domain. He is also used (without mention of autorship) in 2 of the books I refer to in the bibliography. How can I prevent deletion of the photo? I am a new contributor. I can't figure which steps to undertake. Thanks for help. Cfreinet (talk) 13:17, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

• Hello and welcome @Cfreinet. If what you stated is true, that the photograph was published in 1945 (assuming in Belgium or Poland) and the author is anonymous. Then, you are correct that the photograph should be in public domain in Belgium or Poland from 2016 (70 years after publish).
• However, per Commons policies, photos must be in public domain (or freely licensed) both in the source country and the United States. According to the Hirtle chart, the photograph is still copyrighted in the U.S. until 2041, as the photograph entered public domain in its source country after the URAA date of 1996.
• Therefore, this photo is likely not allowed on Commons, but you may want to upload locally to nl-wiki instead.

Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 15:19, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer. Sorry for my ignorance, but I suppose that to join the photo at my text, I have to upload it via Commons. Is it possible to do this only for nl-wiki? Cfreinet (talk) 15:57, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

You're correct, sorry I just realised nl-wiki does not allow for local uploads. So, I think unfortunately there isn't a way to keep this. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 16:54, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

When was the photo on the card taken? You might be able to crop to just that. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:42, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your idea. The photo must have been taken between 1935 and 1942. It is my grandfather, he wore the helmet until he was named police chief in 1942. I suppose that doesn't solve the problem.

The same photo was printed in 2 books I refer to in the bibliography and sources. If I ask permission to the author of the book to use the photo, would that be admitted by commons? Cfreinet (talk) 20:11, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

possibility of overloading files

Good evening, I'm writing to ask you how I can manage to overload the files, because when I try I can't, and I get a warning with the words "Overwriting artwork", and since I heard this would be due to a block, how can I resolve the issue? Sigismondo1996 (talk) 14:27, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello and welcome @Sigismondo1996. Unfortunately, only autopatrolled users are allowed to overwrite files. If you wanted to overwrite a file, please create a request at Commons:Overwriting existing files/Requests. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 15:02, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Wait, how's that possible? I overwrote a file on 2013-02-24, but I got autopatroller rights later, on 2013-05-22. – b_jonas 10:29, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

@B jonas This procedure was only recently introduced in 2023, see Commons:Village pump/Proposals/Archive/2023/08#Limit file overwriting to users with autopatrol rights. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 11:29, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

How do file information and Summary Description of a file work?

Hello, I have recently added File:(R)-Aporphine.gif to Wikipedia Commons. I want to ask how do file information and Summary Description of a file work? Because I believe that by adding 85 notable languages (those with more than 100000 articles or depth more than 100) to the file, the file will get more and more public and accessible to everyone. Hope anyone can clear the confusion/misunderstanding of this Geoopt1234 (talk) 00:38, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Need help regarding category moving/renaming

Hello everyone! I want to move/rename two categories. Category:Indian Space Research Organisation to Category:ISRO and Category:People associated with the Indian Space Research Organisation to Category:People associated with ISRO. I have placed multiple requests here (1 and 2) and here (1 and 2). It's been 20 days since I have placed first two requests but nothing has changed. On the other hand, I managed to move multiple categories at English Wikipedia related to ISRO (for example Category:ISRO). Is there any procedure I have missed? Please guide me in a simple and understandable way. Thanks! – 𝙰𝚔𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚎𝚟™ 🗿 04:01, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Modify Metadata

I would like to know if it is possible for me to modify the metadata associated with one of my contributions. The contribution in question is the following: File:Drying-pants (2018).jpg

I would like to remove my name from the “Author” field. This is information I wish to delete for privacy reasons. Yo (talk) 12:05, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi Everyone! (I'm sorry, I didn’t greet you...)

Thank you in advance for your help. Yo (talk) 12:07, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

@Toutoclic: the author field is part of the image itself, as embedded EXIF metadata (see Commons:EXIF). You should modify the image to remove the author information and then upload the new version. After you have uploaded the new version you can request that first version is revision deleted. Also note that the author is usually set in the camera, so all the photos you have taken with that camera likely have the same author information. MKFI (talk) 08:04, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

@MKFI Thanks for your feedback, I'll try to do that. Yo (talk) 09:08, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

How to upload my photos in my page correctly?

I need more information about this. Kaenjjostlc399 (talk) 13:02, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

@Kaenjjostlc399: your uploads have been blocked by automated filter since you tried to upload a very low resolution images as a new user, and such images are often copyright violations. Remember that if you upload an image as "own work" it means that you held the camera in your hands when the picture was taken or otherwise created the image yourself. From the file names and descriptions I wonder if they would be in Commons:Project scope. Small number of personal images are allowed but perhaps you could first get some experience editing Wikipedia before worrying about your user page. MKFI (talk) 14:22, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

SVG Image rendering incorrectly

File:Palais de l'Élysée rdc.svg has numbers in the original SVG but the PNG rendering (as used in articles) turned all the numbers into various symbols. 84.40.218.239 18:37, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Notification à Chatsam pour information. -- Asclepias (talk) 19:33, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

OK --Chatsam (coucou) 20:35, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Can't access file I uploaded

I just uploaded a file named "File:Freshwater (whereabouts).jpg". Now I cannot access it. In the upload information at the end of the upload, a different name is used in the HTML link: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:UploadStash/file/1c6axwh5wo08.hhfksm.1121630.jpg. What is an "UploadStash file", and what happened that is making it inaccessible? Epipelagic (talk) 02:38, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

There seems to be an issue with Upload Wizard. File is at File:Freshwater (whereabouts).jpg. Not sure where the best forum is for Upload Wizard issues. Abzeronow (talk) 02:56, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Yes, the file is now accessible, so it must have been a stash caught in delayed processing.— Epipelagic (talk) 03:47, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

"Not found" message after upload

I have just uploaded the file "South Australian Railways 600 class diesel locomotive – general arrangement.png". When I clicked the blue underlined filename on the "Thanks for contributing" page, an error page resulted, stating "Not Found Key "1c6bez2tied0.psf37a.4729562.png" not found in stash." Can anybody help to resolve this, please? Cheers, Simon – SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬 at 06:19, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

@SCHolar44: I don't know what caused the error message but image itself looks fine: File:South Australian Railways 600 class diesel locomotive – general arrangement.png. MKFI (talk) 06:39, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

送信する際にエラーが発生しました このウィキは、「.docx」という拡張子を持つファイル名を受け入れていません。

このウィキは、「.docx」という拡張子を持つファイル名を受け入れていません。 YUTAN STONE (talk) 08:02, 25 October 2025 (UTC)