Talk:Anna Politkovskaya/Archive 4

I think that citation of Arutunan article has no place here for the following reason. Arutynan makes a lot of strong claims but does not provides any sources. When asked by

There is a reference to book by Gennady Troshev in this article. Can someone include the number of the cited page? I do not see how this source supports the claim in the text.Biophys 23:23, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Having paid close attention to this article for the last several days I can categorically say that it is a total mess. As I see it there are three main problems:

1. Length - it's way too long and dwells on minutiae that are not appropriate for a biography of a person who is really not at all well known in the English-speaking world.
2. Reliability - its use of source material is shoddy at best and a severe POV problem at worst.
3. Quality - the standard of writing is, in general, pretty horrible (in part because of the previous two factors).

The most immediate problem is the use of source material. It has become obvious that several editors have little interest in improving the article according to established Wikipedia standards and are instead simply trying to make it conform to their personal opinion of Politkovskaya. It is clear that the reliability of sources is being questioned simply because the editors questioning them don't like what those sources are saying. At the same time, it appears that source material is being inserted simply because the editor likes what the text says about Politkovskaya, without regard as to whether or not the source is sufficiently reputable, or whether or not the text is sufficiently notable. The overall impression given - from the way the article is being edited and from the discussions on this page - is that several editors are using the article as a battleground to defend their POV and to attack any appearance of a contrary POV.

This must stop.

The purpose of editing any Wikipedia article should simply be to improve it. The more contentious the topic the more difficult it is to make improvements. However, if we conform to certain agreed upon standards then such improvements are certainly possible. Accordingly, I propose the following:

• All editors should start from the position of wanting to make the article better, rather than attempting to make the text conform to their personal opinion of Politkovskaya. In doing so, they must accept the fact that their view of her and her work may not always be accurate, and that notable information from reputable sources should stay in the article even if it contradicts those personal opinions.
• No source should be questioned purely on the basis that it does not provide evidence of the claims it is making. To suggest that it should is to entirely misunderstand how journalism works.
• All editors should refrain from using inherently dubious sources (e.g. blogs, barely-known news outlets, government-controlled media, etc.).
• Any text that is inserted, or any contentious assertion that is made, should be backed up by at least two reputable sources (e.g. major national newspapers, international news wires, etc.).

That last suggestion should help in two ways: it should limit the amount of obviously biased assertions in the article and it should also limit the amount of non-notable information and thus make the article more useful to the reader. Let's face it: if a particular assertion doesn't appear at least twice in the respectable press then it almost certainly isn't notable enough for a Wikipedia article!

Thoughts? -- Hux 07:35, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

From my side - I give up. There is a professional well-paid international journalist machinery not only making claims they have no supporting information for and making ones up when needed, but also a mob of people readily biting into it. With this amount of bias I see no way to save the article.

I do not agree that a claim by reputable source, which has no factual information to back up this claim is valid as a fact, it is however valid as "newspaper "name" claims that". Something that has been largely confused all over in the article.

I won't edit here any more at all - I've no intention to lead an rv/edit war with people who need a proof that Soviet Union and KGB don't exist. This is simply the level of absurdity combined with enthusiasm which I see only surgical solutions for.Lost Angel 11:48, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Politkovskaya tells of her excitement about breaking a news story that a ``terrorist who had been involved in the Russian theater hostage taking in October 2002 was now employed by the government of President Vladimir Putin. Expecting a flurry of queries and phone calls, she is surprised by the lack of reaction to her expose. [2]

?? All sources say they all were executed. Any details/source? --HanzoHattori 14:06, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! See [3]. This should be also in her publications in Novaya Gazeta. I can look later.Biophys 15:37, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Abu Bakar guy? Guess you'd put a note and a link about it somewhere in the article(s) then. Btw, I think he has no article. Abu Bakr (name) --HanzoHattori 16:28, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and here:

Something remains unexplained. In one way or another all of the suspects have indicated contacts with a certain Abu Bakar, who introduced himself to them as an agent of the Russian special services.

All that is known about Abu Bakar is that there are three of him. One is the mythical special services agent. The second is the treasurer of a Chechen criminal association in Moscow, who has had links to the hotel and gambling business. This second Abu Bakhar shared one of the "locations" with a retired employee of the former KGB.

The third Abu Bakhar was a member of the band of the younger Barayev, who seized Nord-Ost. After the hostages were freed his body mysteriously disappeared for a time when it was already in the morgue. [4]

Looks like a misunderstaning on the Bloomberg's side - he's not "now employed", because he's dead alright. (unless the revelation came later) --HanzoHattori 16:36, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Also, more on the guy (non-Politkovskaya) - guess important becuase of the morgue events:

Khinshtein avoided specifically labeling Abubakar/Elmurzaev as a double agent. But the reporter insisted that this mysterious figure had managed, somehow, to leave the theater before it was stormed by Russian commandos--and that the authorities have shown a striking lack of zeal in pursuing him. "Every effort should have been mounted to capture him," wrote Khinshtein, "even closing Russia's borders; after all this is not some petty thief but one of the most bloodstained criminals on earth. His name was already known to the procuracy: He is really Ruslan Elmurzaev, 30-years-old, born in Urus-Martan, a former police employee. But even to this day he is not on any official most wanted list; in spite of the huge weight of evidence, he has not even been formally accused of anything."

Khinshtein suggested that the importance of Abubakar/Elmurzaev should have been clear even when the Dubrovka episode occurred. At the time, the prominent Chechen singer Iosif Kobzon and the Russian filmmaker and politician Stanislav Govorukhin recounted how they negotiated with someone named "Abubakar," who acted as if he, rather than the relatively young "wolf-cub" Movsar Baraev, was the real leader of the Chechen hostage-takers. The reporter acknowledged that two different passports with Abubakar's photo had been found among the bodies of the hostage-takers after Russian commandos stormed the theater. But Khinshtein claimed that, according to his sources, detailed analysis by police investigators had shown that "Abubakar" in fact had managed to escape. [5]

Mikhail Trepashkin:

Last year the independent commission, chaired by the veteran human rights activist and federal Duma member Sergei Kovalev, added to its agenda the October 2002 attack on Moscow's Dubrovka theater. Trepashkin had provided the commission with information about the shadowy figure of Ruslan Elmurzaev, alias "Abubakar," thought by some to be a Russian double agent manipulating or even directing Movsar Baraev and the other Chechen terrorists who seized the theater (see Chechnya Weekly, May 29). [6]

--HanzoHattori 16:50, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

This is it. I guess he might deserve a separate article. We also do not have any article about Achemez Gochiyayev who possibly even more important than this man. Biophys 17:55, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Found something:

Among the terrorist leaders at Dubrovka had been an Arab named "Yasir," a "subject of Saudi Arabia" and leader of Al-Qaeda (utro.ru, 30 October 2002). It soon emerged, however, that "Yasir" was but another name for "Abubakar" (real name: Ruslan Elmurzaev), an ethnic Chechen and the de facto leader of the hostage takers. According to an article by Aleksandr Khinshtein in the May 23 issue of Moskovsky komsomolets this mysterious figure had managed, somehow, to leave the theater before it was stormed by Russian commandos--and that the authorities have shown a striking lack of zeal in pursuing him. Russian procurators proved unable to show Elmurzaev's corpse and, during a visit to Chechnya in October 2003, Russian intelligence officers there confirmed to film director Sergei Govorukhin (son of a well-known Duma deputy and filmmaker), who served as one of the volunteer negotiators at Dubrovka where he met Elmurzaev and whom he identified as an FSB agent, that Elmurzaev is alive and living in Chechnya (ruskur.ru, 23 October 2003). This Elmurzaev was said to be the key figure behind several other terrorist attacks in Moscow as well. Among other things, according to informations supplied to Khinshtein by investigators, the name "Abubakar" emerges also in relation with a car-bomb attack on a McDonald's restaurant in southwestern Moscow only few days earlier to the Dubrovka siege. The "main hero" among these investigators was Yevgeny Taratorin who however was removed from his position by the procuracy which opened a criminal investigation against him for allegedly revealing secrets from the investigation.[4e] Elmurzaev was reported by a former FSB lieutenant colonel turned lawyer, Mikhail Trepashkin. Trepashkin recalled that he had alerted the FSB in the period of late July and early August 2002 to the activities of Elmurzaev and others but had been informed that the FSB "was aware of the information" (chechenpress.com, 21 and 31 July 2003). Moreover, as a member of public inquiry committee into explosions in Moscow in 1999, Trepashkin found evidences of the ties between the FSB and the authors of this terrorist act.[4eb] At this point Trepashkin was immediately arrested by the FSB on 22 October 2003. A trial for "revealing a state secret," is now getting under way in the Military Collegium of the Russian Supreme Court.[4f] Trepashkin was asked by an independent State Duma commission to investigate the bombings in the summer of 2002. The commission was formed by then-deputies Yuly Rybakov, Sergei Yushenkov, Sergei Kovalyov, Yury Shchekochikhin and Otto Latsis. Today Trepashkin has been arrested, Yushenkov was shot dead, Shchekochikhin died in unclear circumstances because of a food poisoning and Latsis (also editor of the newspaper Russky Kurer) was beaten unconscious in his apartment building's elevator. Kovalyov and Rybakov are still in circulation but have been accurately expunged from politics by the state media and failed to win re-election to the Duma in the December 2003 parliamentarian elections. [7]

And so:

There was at least one terrorist, however, whose body was not found among the others. This was Ruslan Elmurzaev, alias Abubakar, who-- like "The Colonel" at Beslan-- had been in de facto control of events and who escaped at their conclusion. Abubakar was, the evidence suggests, an FSB "plant" and double agent who was rewarded for the success of the operation with his life and, presumably, other consideration. [8]

So, not mistake after all.

And Kavkaz Center to the boot:

In the result of this investigation a certain Abubakar (or Elmurzaev Ruslan) who allegedly worked in the occupation structure, Leninsky District Department of Internal Affairs (so-called ROVD), and as it has turned out he has served directing and organising role in the kidnapping.

The relatives of the kidnapped and killed kids have bought the checked information for a lot of money from Yusupov Ruslan, the former officer of the Soviet and afterwards Russian Army. He confirmed that Elmurzaev Ruslan along with the Chief Intelligence Department of the Ministry of Defense of Russia (so-called GRU) was involved in kidnapping of young Chechens aiming at getting their internal organs for following sale.

The relatives of the killed unhappy kids have established that firstly officers of GRU brought their victims to Khankala and then tortured them in the basement of service house.

It was turned out that as far back as 2002 this Abubakar betrayed his brothers to Russian occupants. Adam Ugurchiev, the relative of kidnapped and killed boys, has confirmed this information. He has left for mountains and is searching for Abubakar (Ruslan Elmurzaev) to have executed his vendetta for the murder of the kids.

As the author of the article writes that two members of the Elmurzaev family have been killed since 2003, however nobody took responsibility for these murders. The closest relatives of Elmurzaev Ruslan run away from Chechnya and moved to Moscow.

Officers of the Federal Security Service (so-called FSB) and journalists have come to Ugurchieva Yakha and told her that unknown persons are murderers of her sons, and just these unknown persons have represented special services of Russia. [9]

Wow.

Updated for Kommersant:

“The investigators did not identify Elmurzaev's body”

Lawyer Ilyas Gelagaev, who obtained an acquittal for his clients, accused of forging documents and suspected of aiding and abetting the terrorists who seized the hostages at the musical Nord-Ost, contends that the death of Ruslan Elmurzaev, the organizer of the terrorist act, has not been legally established and he may be alive.

(...)

– But the investigators in the case of the terrorist act on Dubrovka have always claimed that the identities of the terrorists, in particular Elmurzaev, have been established!

– The investigators did not conduct an identification of the body. The forensic examination report states: “The photographs designated by the number 2029 show a body that, of all the putative male persons whose documents were submitted for examination, can belong only to the person registered under the names Aliev, Khunov, and Elmurzaev”. In other words,17 other photographs were provided to the expert; of these, the body most closely resembled the photo pasted in the passport under the names Elmurzaev, Aliev, and Khunov. Is this really how they determined the identity of the deceased? Why wasn't Elmurzaev's body – if it really was him –shown to his mother for identification? This combination of circumstances suggests that the investigators didn't have his body.”

– Are you saying that Elmurzaev is alive and that during the storm they killed someone who resembled him?

– I don't know. But there is a very interesting document from the criminal case that supports this conclusion. In a separate instruction from an investigator of the Interior Ministry (MVD) of Chechnya there is the notation: Establish Elmurzaev's whereabouts. If it is established that Elmurzaev is dead, I would ask you to obtain a certified copy of the death certificate'. There is no information in the case materials on whether this order was carried out.” [10]

--HanzoHattori 21:06, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

You are so good! How could you find so fast all these sources? By the way, Ismailov from Novaya Gazeta just gave an interview to French newspaper Liberacion about Politkovskaya murder. But your information probably belongs more to article Moscow theater hostage crisis. We should use these sources of course. I have to finish my scientific paper at work (there is a deadline), but I will have more time in a couple of days.Biophys 21:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

There are more references to Elmurzaev [11], [12],

[13]. It seems we are looking at the article State terrorism by Russia or Political repressions in Russia (or both) that may include cases of Litvinenko, Yandarbiev, the theater and apartments bombing in Moscow, Beslan (?), the entire Chechen war (this is like US making "war" in Michigan by bombing out Detroit - nasty place indeed with a lot of criminals), and who knows what else? Biophys 04:29, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

POV. Correcting Moscow crisis article (not all killed appearently - one woman escaped too, returned to Chechnya by train?) and making one on Elmurzaev (Categories: Mysterious people) would be enough. Abubakar ("demolition expert") was also appearently the one who made the bombs in and outside theater harmless without telling the others.

Politkovskaya said in this film that he is "now employed by the government of President Vladimir Putin" and KC in 2007 that he "allegedly worked in the occupation structure, Leninsky District Department of Internal Affairs" (maybe they repeat after her, and they don't claim he was martyred and actually activily villainize him). He was also "former police employee" and Moscow-based "private security" leader (mafioso?) even before the hostage crisis. --HanzoHattori 07:41, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Agree.Biophys 23:50, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Ruslan Elmurzaev :P (Emurzayev?) --HanzoHattori 08:04, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Hanzo, I almost fell in this trap! Politkovskaya and Litvinenko talked about another FSB double agent, Khanpasha Terkibaev [14] [15], not about Elmurzaev. It is not clear who Trepashkin was talking about (others claimed he was talking about Elmurzaev, but this is questionable, and there were three "Elmurzaevs" as Politkovskaya said). Khinshein is talking about Elmurzaev, but Khinshtein works for FSB. Dullop believed in Khinstein version, which was also promoted by FSB-related media such as "utro" and others. So, he wrongly decided that Terkibaev (who died soon in car crash) was a fake [16]. Dullop was also wrong in some other details. Real spy story! So, the real Abu Bakar was probably Terkibaev, but that is difficult to write down. Can you read Russian? Biophys 02:41, 8 June 2007 (UTC) Then read this: Nord-Ost. Unknown details of terrotist actBiophys 03:01, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Trepashkin actually said the following [17]:

"I also," Trepashkin continued, "received information on 'Abubakar,' who, for an extensive period of time, had been living in the city of Moscow and had been earning a profit from firms based at the Hotel Salyut in the southwest of Moscow that no one was laying a hand on. Information had come even earlier that the Hotel Salyut was sending part of the funds to support the Chechen rebels. However, no one was carrying out any checking, since the shadowy funds were also being disseminated to several leaders of the [Russian] power structures. The Hotel Salyut was headed by two Chechens,... but their deputy was [retired] Lieutenant General of the USSR KGB Bogantsev. For this reason, no one [among the authorities] was laying a hand on 'Abubakar' in the hotel." Following the Dubrovka incident, Trepashkin voluntarily turned over the information he had collected concerning "Abubakar" to the FSB, but the FSB reacted to this gesture by "trying to fabricate a criminal case against me."

In a later statement, dated 20 July 2003, Trespashkin added: "At the end of July-August 2002,... I received information about a concentration in the city of Moscow of armed Chechen extremists.... They were especially concentrated in the Southwest and Central districts of the city of Moscow." Trepashkin recalled that he had earlier taken "Abdul" into custody in Chechnya in 1995 but that a senior secret police official, Nikolai Patrushev [now head of the FSB], and the then director of the FSK, Mikhail Barsukov, had "ordered me to leave him in peace.(25) ... "the experts from the Russian FSB deemed the information I possessed about the events at the 'Nord-Ost' to be a state secret of Russia, and I was charged with having revealed a state secret." Trepashkin is also taking about a different man, Abdul, who was fighting alongside with Raduev and who probably was not in the Theater (second man mentioned by Litvinenko).

It was actually journalist Dullop who suggested that Abu Bakkar is Elmurzaev according to Trepashkin (and this was repeated in other publications). Biophys 03:26, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

It seems after all, that Ruslan Elmurzaev did existed (a terrible criminal) and his nickname perhaps was "Abu Bakkar", but he never was in the theater.Biophys 04:03, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

28.05.2007 Eurasian Secret Services Daily Review AIA

Paper’s investigation reveals Chechens tied with regime as customers of Politkovskaya’s murder

Journalists of the Novaya gazeta, colleagues of Anna Politkovskaya, murdered on October 7, 2006, have identified customers of the murder, – Newsru.com cites Vyacheslav Izmailov, former officer of the Russian army, currently a journalist of the newspaper. He adds that it is necessary to examine, whether they operated independently or have been connected with the Russian intelligence services. Two suspects specified by the journalistic investigation are high-ranking Chechen officials of the regime established by Moscow. Position of one of them assume presence of his ties with the FSB. After Politkovskaya's murder those suspects or their confidants have been appointed to higher posts. To protect itself, the Novaya gazeta has conveyed their names to the BBC, to the New York Committee on Protection of Journalists and French daily Liberation. According to numerous sources of the Novaya gazeta in the Chechen Republic, President Ramzan Kadyrov perfectly knows identity of the customers. The paper cites Kadyrov already allegedly saying to his confidants that "they had killed her, however not under my order, but under the order of the FSB". Newru.com quotes a Novaya gazeta journalist as saying that „in any case, the FSB and the Russian Presidential administration supervising investigation, interfere with an establishment of the guilty." The editor-in-chief of " the Novaya gazeta, Dmitry Muratov, says the FSB has been trying to direct investigation on Berezovsky in the UK.

http://www.axisglobe.com/article.asp?article=1314 --HanzoHattori 18:06, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Right. This interview by Izamilov was discussed yesterday on "Ekho of Moscow" if I remember correctly. And they claimed that Kadyrov said exactly that.Biophys 19:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Edited out from OMON:

--HanzoHattori 12:57, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I urge everyone to read this article. It is worthwhile to remember that she declared the following oath: "I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiances and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereign, to whom I or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic...." etc etc. I don't know for which reason Politkovskaya never revealed her American citizenship, I don't think it's that shameful. Is not it pathetic to call an ethnically Ukrainian person with American citizenship "Russian" after all this? --Ghirla^-трёп- 07:12, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

She was a citizen of Russia. As to your speculations, she is an American citizen at birth (claimed in 1990), so there were no oath. This is a bit strange, as she was born to diplomats, but she certainly didn't go through naturalization as she lived in Moscow in 1990. To my knowledge, she has never claimed anything about her ethnicity (if you know what ethnicity means and what it depends on), so I hink it is totally wrong to classify her as Ukrainian. Colchicum 12:07, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Could anybody fix this mess with the categories? Even if she is ethnically Ukrainian (which is highly dubious, sources say only that she was born to Ukrainian parents), she is certainly not an Ukrainian journalist. Also I am not sure that she can be considered Ukrainian-American. Colchicum 12:15, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it's reasonable to claim Politkovskaya as Russian, after she "abjured all allegiances and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereign, to whom she or which she had heretofore been a subject or citizen". Her claim to being Russian is rather tenuous, no matter what the White House and some CIA-sponsored NGOs think about it. If hatred for all things Russian qualifies one as being Russian, then

Hitler should be listed among Russians as well. --Ghirla^-трёп-

15:00, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

She is a natural rather than naturalized citizen and hence declared no oath. Colchicum 15:15, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Also note that she was a citizen of Russia. What you think is entirely up to you, I don't care, but she was Russian. Colchicum 15:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Ghirlandajo, I do not think you right here. She was writing in Russian language for Russian publications, got Russian education, etc. so she was a Russian journalist. Otherwise Dahl would become Swedish philologist, khodasevich - Polish poet, Catherine II - a German Empress, etc. The parents ethnicity and American passport belonged to the body of the article Alex Bakharev 16:11, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

"According to Memorial, it was closed because there were no violations of a criminal code. [19]" - which phrase of the linked article confirms this?Xx236 09:23, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Right. This source say exactly the opposite. It tells: there are such camps. Thus, there is no any "controversy" after all. The article should be corected.Biophys 16:01, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Recent commemt:The source says criminal case was closed because prosecution has found no violations of criminal code. Dear author, if you quote a prosecutor, don't call him Memorial.Xx236 06:47, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Hanzo Hattori inserts unsupported claims that Baranov was found guilty of ordering to kill Chechen man by Eurpoean court of Human Rights, however the particular court sentence contains no such findings. Instead, European court found that Russian Federation is responsible for the fate od the dissapeared just because his was in custody of the Russian Federation prior to his dissapeareance. No any direct evidence was in the court decision. I think HattoriHanzo should tone down his contributions violating Wikipedia policies. Vlad fedorov 14:42, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the general was found guilty saying: "Get him the heck out of here. Rub him out, kill him, damn it. That's your entire order. Get him over there. Rub him out. Shoot him."[20] about the man who then disappeared in custody (it was the last time he was seen alive), and consequently was proven in the European Court to be killed by the military of Russia, and the Russian state ordered to pay $180,000 for his death.

Because the authenticity of this video was not questioned. This what he said. "Kill him."

And yes, they "the court ruled that Russia had violated the right to life of Mr Yandiyev and failed to conduct a proper investigation". Ordering man who then dies to be "shot" and "killed" ("that's order, damn it") sounds pretty much like "violating the right to life" for me. The ECHR can't do anything more, because it lack a jurisdiction to convict people, it can only convict states and order compensations.

More: "Russian officials say they take the problem seriously but General Alexander Baranov, the man who appeared to be ordering Yandiyev's execution, has not been prosecuted and now commands all troops in southern Russia."[21] (thanks Reuters)

In the meantime, stop defaming the the dead person, Vlad. See the previous discussion. --HanzoHattori 16:57, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh Vlad, and you are the same who lied I was inserting back the unfounded allegations by Arutunyan (I wasn't) to make me banned, while now you are inserting them back yourself. This is awesome. I wonder what will you do next? --HanzoHattori 17:11, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

HattoriNanzo, your false accusations are unacceptable. I never have reported your insertions of Arutunyan. Could you provide diffs in support of your accusations? Anyway I report you now at Administrator's noticeboard. Vlad fedorov 12:20, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh wait, it was Hux who accused me of being you. Also awesome.

Sorry for the confusion. It appears the plagiarized material was most likely first added by Vlad fedorov on February 20th. Unforuntely, it is very difficult to determine when material was first added to an article through use of the edit history interface. Appropriate action will be taken against both Hux and Vlad fedorov. Kaldari 20:10, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. You and your Arutunyan. What "appropriate actions" were taken against you, by the way? Not enough appearently, because you came back for more. --HanzoHattori 18:20, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Some users are removing chunks of texts on Politkovskaya criticism claiming they are poorly sourced based on defamatory and hooliganic statements by Yevgenia Alabts. However these statements are supported by general Troshev, Guardian newspaper and some other journalists. Moreover, Biophys and Hattorihanzo misinterpret court judgement by the European court of human rights, and isert claims which are not contained there. They also delete specific ciatations from the court decision which they personally dislike. Vlad fedorov 18:57, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, "some users" are removing "defamatory and hooliganic statements" by some Anna Arutunyan (whoever she is). --HanzoHattori 18:24, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Please let me summarize this case. A recent College graduate Arutunyan (no one knows anything about her) makes a claim that a prominent journalist Politkovskaya (a winner of many International awards) is lying in her publcations. Arutunayan openly admits to Albats that she has no any independent sources, she never did any investigative journalism reports herself, and she never visited the place of action described by P. When asked what a hell she is talking about, she answer: "I saw those clames in newspapers". When asked, what newspapers she is talking about, she could not answer, and she did not make any references to any sources in her publication about Politkovskaya. Yes, in such case, one can reasonably argue (as HonzoHattori did) that claims by such person has no place in Encyclopedia, just as claims by you or me. I do agree with Hazo about that.Biophys 17:01, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Clear defamation by Biophys of Arutunyan. Fortunately, Biophys couldn't be the source in Wikipedia. Arutunyan summarized all accusations and criticism of Politkovskaya which was censored out constantly by Politkovskaya collegues and published it in international respectable newspaper Moscow News. Afterwards she was lured into radiohost entitled Problems of free speech in Russia by Politkovskaya best friend Yevgenia Albats, where she changed the topic of host and staged a scandal which became known to every interested in politics in Russia. A large campaign was held afterwards in Russian internet with slogan "Alabats - get out of the air". Guess why? Do you know about similar campaign against Arutunyan?

Anyway, Biophys, recently one more man revealed to the press that POlitkovskaya was lying about Abu Bakar and involvement of a state in Nord-Ost hostage drama. I soon would add this to the criticism. Vlad fedorov 03:41, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Arutunyan openly admitted all of that herself at a talk show with Albats:Does Russian society need a fourth estate? So, it was not defamation by me or anyone else. She did it herself (when "grilled" by questions asked by Albats). This is a common practice to ask inconvenient questions at the public interviews. Biophys 02:39, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

What's the problem? Arutyunyan used various newspaper publications as sources for her article. I.e. she gathered all criticism of Politkovskaya published in various articles. It's exactly what we are doing here. Of course, this critique doesn't reject significance of work of Politkovskaya as human rights activists. S. Sokolov said that 38 criminal cases were opened on basis of her publications. We should mention this too. But Politkovskaya made also mistakes. Like her famous "При этом солдат применил разрывные пули со смещенным центром, запрещенные международными конвенциями как бесчеловечные." (The soldier used explosive bullets with shifted center of mass, prohibited by international conventions as inhuman.) [22] As you understand, an explosive bullet can't have shifted center of mass. And Arutyunyan's critique should also be mentioned. Of course, we are not going to lower significance actions of Politkovskaya. But she also wasn't a saint, she was a human and made human mistakes. ellol 11:06, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

One problem is that Arurunyan did not cite any sources in her article and she did not tell what source she used when asked. At the same time, she addmitted that she has no any primary sources of her own. Therefore, I agree with arguments by HanzoHattori that Arutynan's article has no value for encylopedia. But we are repeating the same arguments all over again.Biophys 16:40, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't think the works of authors mentioned in Wikipedia articles should always present references (see the note by Hux above). I see a problem with earlier direct inclusions of Arutunyan's paragraphs into the main article without quotation marks or a summary instead. I agree the reliability of Arutunyan's piece is questionable, so a due (minimal) weight might be given to her opinion. Finally, at least one of her statements about Politkovskaya admitting not seeing the pits is against Politkovskaya's own reports and her press-conference. ilgiz 19:32, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: bullets, I could not find a retraction or refutation of Politkovskaya's statement. Perhaps, Ellol's point was that regular bullets tend to reflect from the bones. I don't think such specifics were the point of Politkovskaya's report in her Second Chechen War book, I would not mind seeing a medical inquest into the nature of the interviewee's wounds.ilgiz 19:49, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

My point with bullets is easy (but don't search for it in Arutyunyan's article). A bullet can contain explosives within it, thus exploding in the body of a victim. The other "improvement" of a regular bullet is a bullet with shifted center of mass. This causes aerodynamic unstability during its flight, and thus it makes larger hole in the body of a victim. It's a myth that such bullet can travel e.g. from victim's stomach to victim's head. But. It's clear for everybody that a bullet can't be simultaneously explosive and with shifted center of mass, because these are two different concepts to "improve" a regular bullet. This mistake of Politkovskaya was many times mentioned on Russian forums. ellol 09:14, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

It's written here that she was American citizen. It's your opinion that it's inappropriate for intro. Other people may disagree with you so let's leave it to reader to decide whether it's important. Alæxis_¿question? 15:28, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Is this enough of importance for an article?[23] A slightly different version.[24] --HanzoHattori 08:27, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, It would be great to make an article about him. I am sure there are also many Russian language sources. This is a well known case of framing by FSB, just as case of Zara Murtazalieva. For some reason Murtazalieva case get more publicity.Biophys 02:06, 16 July 2007 (UTC) See this, for example [25] [26] [27] His photo. Biophys 02:15, 16 July 2007 (UTC)