Talk:Graz school shooting

The perpetrator fatally shot 11 people, including himself.

"He fatally shot 10 people, and then died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound" is just a bizarre statement. It implies that he didn't commit suicide, or murder himself, but...accidentally died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound? This kind of verbal gymnastics is common in public media but is ridiculous and shouldn't be used here. NNNNNNNN (talk) 15:12, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

I changed it to "killed himself" with a link to Suicide and changed the gunshot wound link to Suicide methods#Shooting Laura240406 (talk) 17:01, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

"The gunman killed himself with a self-inflicted gunshot wound" does not seem right.

You don't kill someone (or yourself) with a gunshot wound, you kill someone with a gun.

Maybe its just me, but i think it should be changed to something closer to "The gunman killed himself and died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound" or "The gunman shot and killed himself" Aggår (talk) 19:43, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

I like the "shot and killed himself" version Laura240406 (talk) 19:48, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Just FYI - I just made an edit to this wording that I thought would reduce redundancy, but I didn't realize the phrasing was under discussion. I don't have a strong opinion on the matter, and I wasn't trying to push past this discussion to get to any particular wording. Larry Hockett (Talk) 00:18, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

He misclicked. Acoolusername2025 (talk) 23:19, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

Perpetrator name removed from article ... why ?

Why was the name removed ? Glasperlenspieler (talk) 01:05, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

I guess the name was removed due to it either being unsourced or names shouldn't be revealed in this article. Let's discuss in the talk page first before reinserting the name in. Galaxybeing (talk) 04:18, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

But now it looks like the name has been re-inserted? I agree, we should discuss this first... Hraeswelg (talk) 07:03, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 June 2025

I request to remove the name of the perpetrator. While it is mentioned in some of the more lurid newspapers in Austria (Krone.at, Oe24), the general consensus among Austrian media is to not mention the perpetrator's name and focus on the victims instead. Hraeswelg (talk) 07:14, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

 Not done. Wikipedia is not censored, we are not Austrian media. The perp is dead, his first name and surname initial are widely published. WWGB (talk) 07:45, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Correction of Misinformation

The offender lived alone with his mother, not with a brother. 213.147.166.91 (talk) 08:12, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

I've removed the sentence since the cited article says nothing about his living situation. Celjski Grad (talk) 08:54, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Correction Request

Last name of perpetrator should be removed as name has not been official confirmed and threats have been made to unrelated bearers of same name. Publication of last name is illegal in Austria when imposing harm on bearers of same name. 2001:871:269:D59E:7DFD:4BED:86B4:8EF0 (talk) 23:19, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn’t bound by Austrian law, and isn’t an Austrian media outlet. 47.201.69.28 (talk) 01:55, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

Re: name of perpetrator

The shooters full name has been added several times and immediately removed. Austrian police have not stated the full name officially, but multiple foreign outlets and users have confirmed his full name.

Austrian Media is not allowed to publish the full name, but Wikipedia isn’t Austrian media. The Austrian laws can effect the Deutsch language version of this article, but Wikipedia isn’t controlled by Austrian laws. 47.201.69.28 (talk) 01:53, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

Then you should cite the foreign outlets. Acoolusername2025 (talk) 23:16, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 June 2025

Change the perpetrator's name from "Arthur A". to "Arthur Achleitner", many people have found the shooter's identity and it can be confirmed via various social media of his. 1devson (talk) 09:38, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

Social media is not a reliable source for Wikipedia. WWGB (talk) 11:24, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

Is it allowed to post the names of the victims here ?

What are the rules ? Glasperlenspieler (talk) 12:17, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

Yes, but only he fatalities. Short info like name, age and nationality. No wordy obituaries. WWGB (talk) 14:31, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

Yes, it is allowed if the relevant, normal content policies are followed. —Alalch E. 14:31, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

See how it is done in Belgrade school shooting. Beware of small errors in news reports such as incorrect birth date or age (incorrectly inferred from the other information point) and misspellings. I found these errors to be common in early reporting. —Alalch E. 14:33, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

OK. I was able to find 5 of the 10 deceased victim's names and added them (without their last names, last names are not published here in Austria for privacy reasons). Glasperlenspieler (talk) 03:29, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

Publishing a truncated name is pointless, means nothing to readers. WWGB (talk) 03:37, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

Why ? It seems this is just your opinion. It's better to include them this way, because it protects their privacy and their families. Glasperlenspieler (talk) 08:42, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

How does a list of truncated names and ages of victims add to the reader's understanding of the article? The ages are already part of the article text. Celjski Grad (talk) 09:18, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

I don't know what the problem is: the victim names are also added in articles for other such shootings, what does it matter if the last names are just truncated or written completely ? Glasperlenspieler (talk) 09:35, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

You haven’t answered my question. Celjski Grad (talk) 09:55, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

Informing readers that "Lea B" was killed in no way enhances their understanding of the shooting. It's just a meaningless array of letters. Victim names in other shooting articles are written in full. WWGB (talk) 11:07, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

And how does it make a difference ? It informs people of their names and keeps their privacy at the same time. Glasperlenspieler (talk) 12:18, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

That's not true. It does not inform people of their names. WWGB (talk) 12:29, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

Your argument doesn't make sense. The killer's last name is also shortened ("A.") and in the article and shortened according to privacy customs in Austria ... but the shortened last names of victims are not allowed ? You are contradicting yourself. If anything, the victim names should be in there as well, because they are of more value than the killer. Glasperlenspieler (talk) 12:38, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

No point discussing further. Please gain consensus to publish truncated victim names. WWGB (talk) 13:07, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

I for one agree with @Glasperlenspieler. You do not require the last names for the list of names to be informative. First names and truncated last names are perfectly fine. This is an odd obsession. Nevertheless I have added the full names as known. IF3lixDE (talk) 21:20, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

You can't say "obsession". Please follow Wikipedia:Etiquette. I am noting that you added a list of victims with the last names included. Thank you for that. "First names and truncated last names are perfectly fine" is not correct, but it is not something that we need to continue discussing, as the article include a list of the full names. —Alalch E. 23:22, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Do not make your personal opinion out to be objective truth. Thanks. IF3lixDE (talk) 05:25, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

And the word obsession was not meant negatively. I meant it as in “thing to demand”. Please be mindful that I am not a native speaker. IF3lixDE (talk) 05:28, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

If Austrian media are bound by a certain code of professional ethics or community mores or statute not to disclose the full names, and they haven't disclosed the names and have only disclosed the truncated names, Wikipedia isn't. Wikipedia should not include these incomplete names. We need the full names or nothing. We can't abide by those geographically specific regulae. —Alalch E. 19:50, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Arthur A. full name and DOB

Arthur A.'s full name is Arthur Achleitner according to multiple Swedish reports. He was born on June 23, 2003. 2600:1702:5225:C010:D952:B048:C25:17B8 (talk) 21:13, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

What are those sources? I am unable to find any reliable sources by a Google search of the name you posted + Swedish words that are likely to appear in coverage of the shooting.

Last names are not published here in Austria for data privacy concerns. This counts for victims and perpetrators alike. --Glasperlenspieler (talk)

Name of perpetrator

Last name of perpetrator should be removed. There have been several instances of false allegations and threads against innocent families. Name has not officially been confirmed and several outlets report this is not the correct name. Should be removed until source can be added. Current source does not contain perpetrators name 213.147.166.30 (talk) 20:02, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Name of victim

why do you protect the name of the perpetrator but not the names of the victims. Who provided the full name of Leo? We are his family and we did not communicate it to anybody. 178.115.38.213 (talk) 18:29, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

I am sorry for your loss :-( The name of Leo was released in the obituary at "Kleine Zeitung" - the major newspaper of Styria and Carinthia. The name of the perpetrator is shortened, and I was also in favor to keep it shortened like the victim names, but someone else added the complete victim names. If the victim names are now shown with their full names, the perpetrator name should also be shown in full. Glasperlenspieler (talk) 02:56, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

The perpetrator’s name has not been released in any news media so I couldn’t add it. IF3lixDE (talk) 09:37, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

As Glasperlenspiele stated you released his name by making a public obituary. The purpose of an obituary is to make a death publically known.

The perpetrator’s name has not been released by police, media, or an obituary by the family so could not be added. IF3lixDE (talk) 09:39, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

I would also like to point out that you made the death known on facebook. Although this is not a citable source and as such the article did not include his name before the obituary; you are being untruthful if you say that you did not communicate his name to anybody. IF3lixDE (talk) 09:46, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

A death notice is not a good source for this information, per WP:BLPPRIMARY (and this policy applies to recently deceased people as well). Based on this, I have removed the entire list of names. For some of the other victims, the source is a news article that explicitly states that a person named so-and-so (full name) was a victim of this event. And that is different from a death notice. Also, please be more sensitive when discussing this topic on the talk page. —Alalch E. 11:46, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Obituaries are not "public" records per WP:BLPPRIMARY. Obituaries are published in secondary sources, namely newspapers. I specifically did not use obituaries from the funderal homes.

And if you consider the obituary to be a primary source; a misuse is not apparent, most notably since only basic information, in this case names, is used and not descriptions of their lives or accomplishments or other data requiring interpretation. IF3lixDE (talk) 12:08, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

I would consider these death notices to he primary sources, yes. They are submitted by the family, and the distinction of beong published by a funeral home or a newspaper is not important. —Alalch E. 12:14, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Okay. That hasnt adressed my point in that their is no misuse. WP:BLPPRIMARY doesnt say one cannot use primary sources at all, just that they should not be misused. There is no issue with WP:PRIMARY either as, again, no interpretation occurs. IF3lixDE (talk) 12:24, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

An obituary is not a primary source. These are generally written by undertakers or journalists, not by the deceased. They are no different to a front-page newspaper article. The list should be restored. WWGB (talk) 12:28, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

This is not an obituary, it's a death notice. They are submitted by the family and take the form of certain templates. They do not verify who the individual was in the relevant context. E.g., Leo's death notice doesn't say that the Leo was a victim of the shooting. Do not use ... other public documents, to support assertions about a living [or a recently deceased] person. —Alalch E. 12:32, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

"Public" means of the state or government. Not published. IF3lixDE (talk) 12:35, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

And the death notices *are* written or at least reviewed by the undertakers. It is not unfiltered information straight from the families IF3lixDE (talk) 12:37, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Death notices in newspapers are similar to public records on deaths. Source for Hanna (link) – good; source for Leo (link) – not good. —Alalch E. 12:41, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

I fail to see your point. More text good, less text bad? A death notice is nowhere near a public record. Again, even if the article on Hanna is to be considered a secondary source, and the one on Leo a primary; a misuse of them has not occured. Could you elaborate on that issue? IF3lixDE (talk) 12:50, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Ultimately, yes, in a sense – more text good. Because if it looks like a work of journalism, a media report, in this case a funeral-reportage, then we can be reasonably sure that it is a secondary source. And this source, for Hanna, states that a person so-and-so named was killed in the shooting. So we can extract the relevant statement from the appropriate source without WP:SYNTH. With the death notice we cannot do this. It was only ever intended to produce a record, even if it is not a governmental record, but it is more broadly a public record, of the fact that someone died. —Alalch E. 12:59, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

So your problem isnt at all about WP:BLPPRIMARY or WP:PRIMARY but WP:SYNTH in that the death notice doenst explicitly say that *that* Leo was a victim of the shooting? I would have apprecitated leading with that. IF3lixDE (talk) 13:06, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Or at least it does not without requiring itnerpretation. As "aus der Mitte des Lebens gerissen" does mean victim of a sudden violent crime. IF3lixDE (talk) 13:07, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

it's a boilerplate language formula denoting that someone died unexpectedly from any reason, and it is matched by boilerplate verbiage in English-language obituaries and death notices such as: "taken from us too soon", "taken in the prime of life", "taken before his time", etc. No "violent", "crime", especially no "school shooting", etc. —Alalch E. 13:17, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

That is not what that means. Are you a German native speaker? It does not simply mean died too soon, it specifically refers to a violent daeth at the hands of someone else or, if specified, due to an accident. IF3lixDE (talk) 13:38, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

So if it had been an accident, that would have been specified by adding or changing some word? I don't think so. The language could have been the same even if the death was due to an accident. —Alalch E. 13:59, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Glad to know youve suddenly become a native speaker well-versed with German language death notices. IF3lixDE (talk) 14:07, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

From a funeral card-maker website (PDF)

Punkt 4: Abschiedsformulierung

German	English
1. ❏ (Unendlich) Traurig, aber auch dankbar nehmen wir Abschied von ...	With profound sadness and in gratitude, we bid farewell to …
2. ❏ In stiller/tiefer Trauer nehmen wir Abschied von …	In silent/deep mourning, we bid farewell to …
3. ❏ In Liebe und tiefer Verbundenheit müssen wir Abschied nehmen von …	With love and deep affection, we must bid farewell to …
4. ❏ In Liebe und Dankbarkeit nehmen wir Abschied von …	With love and gratitude, we bid farewell to …
5. ❏ Mit vielen schönen Erinnerungen nehmen wir (viel zu früh) Abschied von …	With many fond memories, we (far too soon) say goodbye to …
6. ❏ Mit schwerem Herzen müssen wir Abschied nehmen von …	With heavy hearts, we must bid farewell to …
7. ❏ Wir nehmen Abschied von …	We bid farewell to …
8. ❏ Fassungslos/Tief bewegt/betroffen und mit schwerem Herzen nehmen wir (viel zu früh) Abschied von …	Stunned, deeply moved, and with heavy hearts, we (far too soon) bid farewell to …
9. ❏ Fassungslos/Tief bewegt/betroffen und unendlich traurig müssen wir (viel zu früh) Abschied nehmen von …	Stunned, deeply moved, and infinitely saddened, we (far too soon) must bid farewell to …
10. ❏ Völlig/Ganz unerwartet müssen wir (viel zu früh) Abschied nehmen von …	Completely unexpectedly, we (far too soon) must bid farewell to …
11. ❏ Nach einem reich erfüllten Leben verstarb (gestern Abend/heute Nacht/heute früh) …	After a richly fulfilled life, … passed away (yesterday evening / last night / this morning).
15. ❏ Nach langer, geduldig ertragener Krankheit ist …	After a long, patiently borne illness, …
16. ❏ Nach einem (langen,) reich erfüllten Leben ist (heute) …	After a (long,) richly fulfilled life, (today) …
17. ❏ Für uns alle unfassbar ist …	Unfathomable to us all is …
Nach Krankheit / Leidenszeit
20. ❏ … heute Nacht friedlich eingeschlafen.	… peacefully passed away last night.
21. ❏ … im 84. Altersjahr von den Leiden ihrer/seiner schweren Krankheit erlöst worden.	… at the age of 84, was released from the suffering of a serious illness.
22. ❏ … heute Nacht friedlich/sanft eingeschlafen und von ihren/seinen Leiden erlöst worden.	… peacefully passed away last night and was freed from their suffering.
Unerwartet nach kurzer Krankheit / Unfall
23. ❏ … durch einen tragischen Unfall, im Alter von … Jahren, aus dem Leben/aus unserer Mitte gerissen worden.	… was tragically taken from us in a fatal accident at the age of … years.
24. ❏ … heute unerwartet an einem Herzversagen gestorben/verstorben.	… unexpectedly passed away today from heart failure.
25. ❏ … plötzlich und viel zu früh von uns gegangen.	… suddenly and far too soon departed from us.

The translations are approximate. There are no perfect translations of these idioms. This is proof that the language formula is not used only for violent death sutuations.—Alalch E. 14:37, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Allgemeine Zeitung: "Ein geplatztes Gefäß im Kopf hat ihn, kurz vor seinem 55. Geburtstag, jäh aus dem Leben gerissen". Link.—Alalch E. 15:11, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Can you guys please stop ? We need to find a compromise or a solution now, if we can add the victim names or not. And if yes, should their last names be in full or short ? Glasperlenspieler (talk) 16:45, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

No, we cannot stop and we do not need a moderator. Just state what your position is, but please take into account the arguments brought forth in the discussion up to this point. —Alalch E. 17:04, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

I already stated my arguments on top: Include the victim names, but with the last names in short (the same as for the perpetrator). Glasperlenspieler (talk) 17:15, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

I appreciate you restating it. I would support adding a list of full names that only consists of everyone's full names. And we cannot have that and comply with policy at the same time. I am against a list that includes names with missing or redacted last names. That leaves us with: no list. —Alalch E. 17:24, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Ping @WWGB for a follow-up comment. I think that I have proven that the death notices don't serve us well here. That means that we don't have sources for some (most) of the names in complete form. Would you review your position in this discussion? —Alalch E. 17:27, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

The perpetrator's name is Arthur "Zenie" Achleitner

Not to be confused with the German Writer

According to some sources, that is what appears to be his name.

He went under Internet alias Zenie on Tumblr, YouTube and Twitter. GreetingsIndividual (talk) 14:48, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

The alias is "z3nie", "zenie", or "z3", with varying numbers added after and/or an underline. Not "zini". In any case, no credible source has reported on this, so while it is true, it cannot be included in Wikipedia. If you do have an appropraite source, do feel free to add it. IF3lixDE (talk) 17:08, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

There is a source: https://valorantzone.gg/noticia/ex-pro-de-valorant-e-apontado-como-autor-de-massacre-na-austria/

The content is a news article on a Brazilian online esports media outlet VALORANT Zone (valorantzone.gg). That website has a mission statement on their About page, claiming to have a journalistic orientation (link). There is no mention of an editor. The author is the professional esports journalist Cristino Melo (https://cristinomelo.carrd.co). This is actually pretty close to a usable source. —Alalch E. 17:22, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

My apologies, i misremembered his username. GreetingsIndividual (talk) 18:28, 20 June 2025 (UTC)