Jump to content

Commons:Deletion requests/File:İsa Aras Mersinli, perpetrator of the 2026 Onikişubat school shooting.png

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

File:İsa Aras Mersinli, perpetrator of the 2026 Onikişubat school shooting.png

[edit]

Original version of the image is considered insensitive to the victims of the attack Arsabent (talk) 22:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I would potentially support remove because it appears to be a photo of a screen Salmon Of Ignorance (talk) 07:38, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
wdym? AloneSlk (talk) 09:54, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: While the underlying event is tragic, the image under discussion is a low-quality and heavily blurred still extracted from CCTV footage which does not show any gruesome or explicit acts of violence. It depicts the perpetrator in the moments surrounding the incident and therefore can serve to illustrate the timeline, location, setting, and circumstances of a documented notable historical event. Per COM:SCOPE, material connected to notable events carries clear educational value for the Wikimedia projects even when the file is not actively used in the main article, since such images help readers better understand the context, progression, and environment in which the event took place.

The heavy blurring makes the subject barely recognizable, which substantially mitigates any potential COM:DIGNITY or identification/privacy issues that might otherwise arise. Comparable CCTV-derived stills from other school shooting incidents have been retained on Commons without issue. Regarding copyright status, the file constitutes a still from public-domain-eligible CCTV footage. A photograph of a screen showing such footage qualifies as a faithful reproduction analogous to the principles in COM:PD-Art and PD-Scan when there is no significant creative editing or additional three-dimensional creative elements introduced. No Turkish law or established case law has been presented that would place copyright restrictions on the original CCTV material, and therefore the standing Commons position supporting {{PD-CCTV}} remains applicable in the absence of contrary evidence.

After careful review of the deletion discussion, including points raised about the nature of the still, its blurriness, and its documentary character, there is no overriding Commons policy reason requiring deletion. Also see ticket:2026050810011559 for VRT context. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 22:48, 8 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

File:Maraş shooting 2026.png

[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Raskuly as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: This is a screenshot from someone recording CCTV footage with their phone, therefore the CCTV license does not apply and it is eligible for copyright. The edge of the television and the wall is even clearly visible. | source= https://x.com/visegrad24/status/2044412384383566251 Yann (talk) 20:42, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. It is still public domain per w:Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. which established that photographs and scans of public domain images are in the public domain as well. In fact, a ton of C.C.T.V. footage on Wikimedia Commons is literally just a video recording of a screen (which, quick rant, is stupid and the result of technologically illiterate people being put in charge of managing important infrastructural technology). There have been discussions about this in cases when the area around the screen is also visible. To that I have to say that a tiny strip of blurry wall does not meet the threshold of originality. Nutella lover • [ chat│supervise ] 17:10, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Kept Withdrawn. Raskuly (🐰) 17:15, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

File:İsa Aras Mersinli, perpetrator of the 2026 Onikişubat school shooting.png

[edit]

While I agree with User:Josve05a that this is in scope, we do not have evidence that CCTV is copyright free in Türkiye, so COM:PCP would have us assume it's protected unless there was evidence to the contrary. Given that Türkiye wants this taken down, we really should have our i's dotted and t's crossed when it comes to this file. Courtesy ping for @BChoo (WMF): Abzeronow (talk) 02:57, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete: explicit evidence is required that CCTV is public domain in Turkey. – Howardcorn33 (💬) 23:02, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely not. The idea of works requiring a human author to be eligible for copyright is something that is universal for virtually all countries in the world with few exceptions
Unless there is clear evidence that Turkey doesnt require human creator for copyright to be created we can reasonable presume that it is in fact a requirement Trade (talk) 04:06, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep --Trade (talk) 04:06, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also i dont buy the privacy argument. The photo is already censored and too low res for anyone to be identified without further context--Trade (talk) 04:10, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep Based on the notes from WMF Legal, prior to this reopening of the deletion request, there are 2 official arguments that are part of the take down notice. Neither is about a claim that the image has IP rights.
The first argument is "Under Turkish law (including Article 24 of the Turkish Civil Code), the display of graphic or traumatic images may raise concerns relating to personal rights, privacy, and dignity, depending on the circumstances." With respect to this concern, this single frame has no identifiable people, does not invade privacy, nor does it appear to affect anyone's dignity. Though the event is traumatic, this image is not by itself a graphic one.
The second argument is not legal, but a similar one based on media regulations. "RTÜK advised that traumatic footage and content violating the privacy of victims, students, or their families should not be broadcast." which in Commons' terms would be respectful treatment of model or image subjects. The image is about a traumatic event but is a frame rather than specifically footage, and this single frame does not include faces, injuries or undignified images of the people affected by the event. By itself this frame can not be claimed to invade anyone's privacy in a meaningful way.
As it has already been assessed as of educational value, the conclusion is to keep as the take down request does not introduce new information that would reverse the earlier deletion request closures. WMF Legal have the authority to remove this image based on their understanding of legal risks, though no doubt they will take on the observations here when assessing the risk. --Fæ (talk) 06:12, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
If you knew with 100% certainty that keeping this file would cause Commons to be geo blocked in Turkey would you still support keeping it? Trade (talk) 07:48, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Disclosure: I was the closing admin above)  Keep I am neutral on the Turkish copyright status of CCTV footage. However, my earlier reasoning on scope stands and has only been strengthened since the file is now COM:INUSE, and the image serves a clear educational purpose in illustrating a notable historical event. It is heavily blurred, shows no graphic violence, and does not identify individuals in any meaningful way. If Commons were to delete files solely because they might provoke legal threats, political pressure, or removal demands from governments, we would lose many of our most important educational materials. The purpose of this project is not to avoid controversy at all costs, but to apply our policies consistently and neutrally. I acknowledge that a certainty of geo-blocking in Turkey (or any country) would be a serious practical concern. However, if the sole basis for deletion is external pressure rather than a clear violation of Commons policy or applicable law, then retaining the file upholds the principles the project is built on. Commons has always accepted that there can be consequences for hosting policy-compliant material. Where a file is in scope, legally defensible, and educationally valuable, the mere possibility of governmental objection should not by itself justify deletion. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 08:02, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    per @Josve05a, of course, this topic is highly sensitive, but the image not depicting problematic graphic content, it should be fine --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 09:28, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Fine by Commons, not by Turkish courts Trade (talk) 11:44, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Then let the courts order a takedown and let the real lawyers decide if we should care or not. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 12:07, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:İsa_Aras_Mersinli,_perpetrator_of_the_2026_Onikişubat_school_shooting.png&oldid=1227864738"