Talk:Alexander Pichushkin

Up to 61-63?
Is there a good reason for not just saying "up to 63"? Also, where does the number 63 come from, I checked the reuters link and it says he was convicted of 49 murders, but asked the court to add 11 more, which makes 60. Maybe there's a good reason for this, which is why I just left it as is, but the link provided doesn't seem to support that. Saisugoi 16:34, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Conflicting Figures
Almost every link (that works) gives different numbers for the amount of people he was convicted of and/or claimed to have killed. Maybe 48-63 would be a good figure for this article. Saisugoi 16:38, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Numbers
The original source was removed during a rewording, but I believe it was AP. However, the BUKHARBAYEVA article is a good representation.

The reason for the wording is this:

He was CONVICTED of 48 of 49 murders.

He is KNOWN to have almost certainly committed 61 murders.

He CLAIMED he committed 63 murders.

Just as in the US and Europe, killers are not necessarily tried on every single murder they commit.

I hope this clarifies. --UnicornTapestry (talk) 08:10, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Reference Removal
The news.com.au reference titled 'Russian chess player on trial for 49 alleged murders' is no longer a valid link. A search of news.com.au reveals a number of Pichushkin links, so I suggest the link either be corrected or removed. --UnicornTapestry (talk) 08:18, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Figures again
IT does seem he was tried for 49 and found guilty of 49, but the references are confused on this. If he admitted another 11 and admitted the 49 then we are looking at 60 unless there is more citeable information out there Rich Farmbrough, 05:49 25 October 2008 (UTC).
 * Anyone speak (read) Russian? . Rich Farmbrough, 05:58 25 October 2008 (UTC).

Another editor suggested this translator to me awhile back: http://multiz.com/translator.php; however, I haven't gotten around to trying it out. --  mo   talk  06:46, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Early life
Could it be possible to add details about his early life into the article I notice that the introduction is laid out, but the information immediately leaps to details concerning his first victim being murdered in 1992. I could potentially add some info about his early life, but I won't do it right now, since as I'm writing this, I'm using a computer that isn't my own; I'm more comfortable on my own computer than the one I'm currently using. Peace. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 04:10, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Notability Discussion
Accordig to WP:CRIME, it seems to me that Alexander Pichushkin is not notable. קולנואני (talk) 23:33, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The amount of coverage that he has received, including discussions of his motives, etc. would seem to satisfy my interpretation of rationale number 2 in WP:CRIME. More than just Russian news sources are covering this - you have Reuters, Time, the BBC, and the Associated Press, etc. &mdash;Akrabbimtalk 20:03, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Do you claim that these murders are "historical events"? The murder of JFK is an historical event. I don't see how these murders are. No matter the amount. קולנואני (talk) 21:55, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Of course they aren't on the same level of "historical significance". But I am interpreting "well-documented historic event" strictly as an event that passes our notability guidelines (since that is what the phrase links to).  Maybe the guideline needs to be a little more clear on what that phrase means.  But in any case, according to WP:EVENT I would say that this at least passes ( "Events are also very likely to be notable if they have widespread (national or international) impact and were very widely covered in diverse sources, especially if also re-analyzed afterwards" ).  It is also worth noting that this subject continued to receive media coverage for several years after his conviction. &mdash;Akrabbimtalk 12:01, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
 * "Alexander Pichushkin" is NOT an EVENT. He is a person. So WP:EVENT does NOT apply. I have no objections for an article about the event, instead of the person. קולנואני (talk) 22:25, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * P.S. An "historical event" is something that you may find in a history book. Will the murders by Alexander Pichushkin ever be in ANY history book? I think not. קולנואני (talk) 22:25, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, let me present my logic more clearly. Per WP:CRIME, a perpetrator can be notable if their crime(s) constitute what the guideline calls a "well-documented historic event", or in other words, if their crime(s) pass the notability requirements of WP:EVENT.  The term 'historic event' is only used to distinguish something from a fleeting news story. ("Generally, historic significance is indicated by sustained coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources which persists beyond contemporaneous news coverage and devotes significant attention to the individual's role.")  It is not used to describe a history book's inclusion criteria, only Wikipedia's.
 * As for whether the article is about a person or an event, I say it is both. He is notable for what he did, but there is a lot of sustained coverage on his motivations and beliefs, etc.  Most of the information surrounds the serial killer himself and his role in it all, as opposed to the murders themselves.  Maybe I'm getting the wrong idea from the sources presented in the article (I haven't done any extra research), but it doesn't look like much notice was given to the crimes until it was revealed that they were all done by one man.  So in my opinion, it makes more sense to have the article at Alexander Pichushkin, not something like Alexander Pichushkin murders. &mdash;Akrabbimtalk 01:28, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Reference 2 (Growing Skull Fracture of Temporal Bone in Adults: A Case Report and Literature Review)
Hi, this is my first time adding a wikipedia reference (that I used the template for) so if I referenced it wrong I am quite sorry on that, if it is improper could someone please fix it. Thank you.--Summi Imperatoris (talk) 15:35, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Rostov Ripper - convicted in 2007?
Little confused by the inclusion of the claim that Pichushkin was in competition with Andrei Chikatilo, "who was convicted in 2007." By the year 2007, Andrei Chikatilo had been dead for 13 years, having been convicted and executed in 1994. Did the person who added this line confuse Chikatilo with someone else, or is this just poorly researched speculation? 80.2.22.188 (talk) 23:12, 4 September 2021 (UTC)