Talk:2026 Berlin Pride attack

attribution to Islamic state

So far most of the news seems is saying things like the suspect is "linked to Berlin's Islamist scene" so maybe it's too soon to be mentioning islamic state at all in the info box? "islamist" covers a wide range of groups i guess 33k6 (talk) 13:04, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Request for clarification

The article states that the suspect, "had been convicted in May 2026 for planning an attack."

I'm requesting that the article explain why he was set free after this conviction, instead of being locked up. It seems that this attack was 100% predictable and 100% preventable. The article should explain why they set him free and knowingly allowed him to carry out this attack, instead of locking him up after he was convicted of planning such an attack.

U87115bgcz (talk) 14:14, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Hopefully clarified – seems that it was a suspended sentence. Discussing the implications of that here is WP:FORUM. MIDI (talk) 14:31, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your response.

This wikipedia article should explain why he was given a suspended sentence instead of being locked up.

In the context of trying to improve this wikipedia article, it is extremely relevant that this attack was predictable and preventable.

This wikipedia article should explain why the German government knowingly allowed this guy to do what he did, after he was convicted of planning to carry out an attack.

All of this is extremely relevant to this wikipedia article.

U87115bgcz (talk) 22:23, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Can you share any German- or English-language sources that discuss this? Alaexis_¿question? 11:29, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

German courts are allowed to decide whether 18–20 year-olds can be tried as adults or not. In this case the sentence was suspended in lieu of time already served, a guilty plea, and the (apparent) distancing of the suspect from radical groups. Celjski Grad (talk) 13:42, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Perpetrator's name

Hello, should we include the perpetrator's name or not per WP:SUSPECT? Just wondering. (Or maybe an RfC?) — SimpleObjects-9ei 🏖️/☀️/🥵 (see talk) 18:33, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Idk if you are aware but the "Biographies of LIVING people" does not apply to people who are dead. AFeatherlessBipehead (talk) 18:35, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

No, I was just wondering because I came across 2026 Tacloban school shooting and the edits containing the perpetrators name(s) were suppressed by an oversighter. And I DID revert one of the edits containing the forbidden names in the article. — SimpleObjects-9ei 🏖️/☀️/🥵 (see talk) 18:36, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

The name of the perp is already in the article body, not sure why people seem so hesitant to adding it in the infobox... AFeatherlessBipehead (talk) 18:38, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Because per WP:BLPCRIME, “accused” should be used and not “perpetrator” if there is no conviction. As he is dead, there cannot be a conviction. Celjski Grad (talk) 18:52, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

The WP:BPD thing is completely arbitrary, most articles of this nature lists the assailant as a perpetrator even if he died within a few hours. AFeatherlessBipehead (talk) 19:09, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Regardless of other articles, he died as a suspect. There was a second person involved as well, who was arrested and charged. Celjski Grad (talk) 19:16, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Accused is not for names, it is for numbers of people involved. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:14, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

The name of the perp is already in the article body

The name of the suspect is in the article body. Celjski Grad (talk) 18:54, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Yes it does. Celjski Grad (talk) 18:50, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Renaming to 2026 Berlin Pride attack?

1. Per WP:CONCISE.

2. Besides of a van, some sources mention possible stubbing as well. Cheese and honey (talk) 22:28, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

I support this. Celjski Grad (talk) 00:24, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

3. Agree Yes do it, traditional cars do not drive themselves. Clearly the Islamic State sympathizer perp drove the car into the crowd. XavierItzm (talk) 23:51, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

"murdered" vs "killed"

We are calling the islamist a "perpetrator", not an "alleged perpetrator", not an "unlucky driver", not a "martyr" or anything else of the sort. Likewise, I called his premeditated actions murder. @Inzessin then objected to that.

I cite a passage from WP:BLPCRIME: "Generally, this policy does not apply to material concerning people who are confirmed dead by reliable sources. The only exception would be for people who have recently died, in which case the policy can extend for an indeterminate period beyond the date of death—six months, one year, two years at the outside." The policy can extend, in exceptional cases.

It is my view that this case is as clear as it gets, considering his history, his prior convictions, his actions. This was not an accident, and to insist on giving him the benefit of the doubt for half a year is a blatant violation of WP:NPOV.

What, pray tell, does anyone reasonably doubt about his intentions? After he crashed, he continued stabbing people with a machete. He was a known mohammedan sleeper, under surveillance, convicted of planning an attack. Nothing about that is going to change in a few months.

So, please: Can everyone weigh in on this? Thank you. ~2026-42603-63 (talk) 21:45, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

I don't know for sure what your intentions are @~2026-42603-63, but if the word "kill" is used in the sources, then Wikipedia is also supposed to use the word "kill". Not everyone is Sherlock Holmes, so we don't know what the perpetrator's intention was; what you see here is what the sources tell us. We don't use our own definitions here regardless of what we personally think about this incident. Thank you.

P.S: One more thing, "Murder" is a legal verdict. In German law it's Mord under §211 StGB, established by a court. Since he has not been convicted, and won't be anymore, you CANNOT use word "murder" anyway, legally speaking. Morris (talk with this worm) 02:48, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

That is nonsense for two reasons: 1. the meaning of "murder" is far wider in English than it is in German (degrees of murder vs Totschlag, et cetera), and 2. we use "murder" routinely without a verdict, in case the perpetrator is dead and circumstances are clear: Look up any murderer who died before he could be tried, Stalin, Che Guevera, Hitler, Mao, et cetera. We don't say the Ashkenazi Jews were "killed", we say they were "murdered". We don't call Hitler a "mass killer", we call him a "mass murderer".

So my question to you: Do you believe he is still alive, or do you believe his intention was anything short of maim and murder as many as possible? ~2026-42592-87 (talk) 12:27, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

Maybe we should also call him a "victim" instead of a "perpetrator" then? Given that the poor man died and, as you say, it is entirely unclear if he intended any harm to begin with? Who knows, right? Could've been a leg cramp. Followed by a machete stabbing spree -- because his leg hurt, for example? Maybe he was catching flies, and the people were randomly in his way? You're so far off left-field, I have no sympathy left. May the gods help you. ~2026-42592-87 (talk) 12:36, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

I have already explained to you that Wikipedia relies on what sources say. All of the used sources echo word "killing"/"killed". Please, if you can find a single reliable source (not Fox News) that uses the word "murder", we will discuss it here. If you can't, please stop wasting everyone's time, and yours too. Do not try to vandalise the page either. Regarding your two questions: 1. term "Murder" is a legal verdict. Again. You cannot use it casually, regardless of what they have done. There is no court verdict in Germany calling the perpetrator a "murderer". Read this (from WP:BLPCRIME): A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law. Accusations, investigations, arrests and charges do not amount to a conviction. Since there has been no conviction of this person, because HE IS DEAD, we CANNOT use the word "murder". Close home, you can read the Sandy Hook school shooting page too: The perpetrator, 20-year-old Adam Lanza, shot and killed 26 people. In this case, the perpetrator shot himself after killing (which according to you would be "murder") those children. There was no court verdict, so he is not called a "murderer". 2: I tried my best, but I could hardly find the word "murder" applied directly to any of the people you mentioned. Those that are, are quotes. They are people's quotes, not Wikipedia's. Also, "mass murder" is in itself a different phrase with its own meaning and funny enough even that uses word "killing". This phrase was first noted 1915-20 (according to dictionary.com), way before the Holocaust occurred and Hitler came to power. Do you believe he is still alive, or do you believe his intention was anything short of maim and murder as many as possible?: What could possibly make you ask me this question? Anyway, I have some advice: Wikipedia is not here for your opinions; you could use unencyclopedia.com for that. Morris (talk with this worm) 15:19, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

He is not a living person, nor does the exception for recently deceased apply, which reduces your entire argument to: "Here we blindly parrot the choice of words of the ideologically hard-left legacy media." Like I said, suicidal empathy and all that. May the gods help you. ~2026-42856-93 (talk) 14:13, 3 August 2026 (UTC)

Term "murder" will NOT be used. Its legal necessity. End of story. You can read this story from Onion in the meantime. Morris (talk with this worm) 17:13, 3 August 2026 (UTC)