Talk:Dnepropetrovsk maniacs/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Transcript

My goodness, the spanish is making my head spin. I actually wrote it out in the translator phrase by phrase (as best I could) to translate into russian and english (just the parts I REALLY wanted to know) and it didn't work out so well ^_^. Aahh a transcript would be so nice. Hey, so did anybody else notice the whole "dun dun dun" thing they had going on, just like I said earlier? The whole close up of Suprunyuck, trying to make it like some sort of horror movie. uggh I hate when documentaries do that. Lenachka25 (talk) 06:02, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the editing was a disappointment, because it made parts of the material unclear. However, I'm not sure that a full English transcript would tell us much that the article does not already say.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:08, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah you are right. I think we may have dissected this whole thing in every which way already with the limited sources available. At least the pictures were ones we hadn't seen before. *_* Lenachka25 (talk) 03:15, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

The Chilean documentary has now had English subtitles added to it. It can be seen here http://stagevu.com/video/hnxlknpzikdg Please note that not only did the Chilean documentay team obtain a longer version of the 3guys1hammer video. They also show several clips of another murder video in this documentary. There are said to be five murders filmed in total. The killings (all 21) took just 15 days.The documentary coveres a lot of aspects that are missing from Wikipedia. Thankyou. (Warren. UK) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.23.61 (talk) 16:56, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the link, which is very useful. Starting at 26:35 in the video, reporter Michele Canale is in a car, describing how he obtained a CD from a confidential source, which he says shows another murder by the Maniacs. This was discussed back in August (see above) and the blurry video material where the Maniacs say "He has gold teeth" is apparently not from the Yatzenko video. The wording in Spanish at 27:47 appears to be "La victima es un hombre distinto de la video Tres Hombres y un Martillo" (the victim is a different man from the 3Guys1Hammer video") Other comments are welcome here. The article mentions that at least five more videos of the murders are known to exist, but it does not say that at the end of the documentary Canale attempted to obtain an interview with the Maniacs in prison, but was denied by the authorities. This is something that should probably be in the article.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 19:40, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
The second videotaped victim shown in the documentary is said to have been beheaded, as well as having his stomach cut open. This explains the apparent throat cutting we previously discussed. Unfortunately the man isn't named in the documentary; is there any solid way of identifying him from the news reports? There's still nothing new said about the discrepancy between the video footage of a bicycle and the news reports of a motorcycle in the Yatzenko murder. I reckon it's time to correct the article in that regard, because video footage of a bicycle surely trumps a single early report of a motorcycle. If the news report said he arrived on the scene in a hot air balloon would we still have to say that in the article just because it's an established media source? haha PCLM (talk) 00:04, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
It is now time for the article to say that the "gold teeth" victim is from a different video, although I would like to get a second opinion on the English translation of this section, as some of the subtitles are a bit rough and ready. Apart from the commentary saying that the victim is a different man from the 3Guys1Hammer video, there is no mention of which of the other victims it is. I also agree that the article should say that the Chilean documentary shows Yatzenko arriving on a bicycle, and that the newspaper report mentioning a motorcycle must be wrong or confused in some way.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:04, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
IanMacM, you had asked about the accuracy of the Spanish captions in the Chilean documentary. In the extract you linked me, you're right, there's a little bit of paraphrasing, and I noticed at least couple sentences were not captioned. Is there anything in particular that needs to be cleared up? - Ruodyssey (talk) 16:47, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
The main thing was confirming that the five minute video showing the "gold teeth" victim is not Sergei Yatzenko, who appears in the 3Guys1Hammer video, which seems to be the main thrust of Michele Canale's commentary. Also, the victim is described as being mutilated and beheaded in the captions, is this "mutilada y degollada" in the voiceover? This may mean beheaded, but could also mean that they cut his throat or simply killed him with the knife.[1] Since this would be used in the article, the translations need to avoid error, which is why a second opinion was requested on the subtitles. Any other points on errors or misunderstandings would be welcome.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 18:09, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
I'm really not sure how I can tell if it's Sergei Yatzenko, since I'm not too familiar with the case. But yes, the voiceover sure sounds like "La victima es degollada y mutilada." Since "degollada" is the adjective used, a more direct translation would be "decollated" or "de-collared" or simply "beheaded". One definition I found said "to cut or slit the throat", but they all agree on "beheaded". Hope this helps. - Ruodyssey (talk) 11:18, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
The "gold teeth" victim in the five minute video is described as an exclusive, with the words "La victima es un hombre distinto de la video Tres Hombres y un Martillo" (the victim is a different man from the 3Guys1Hammer video", which is Sergei Yatzenko. Wiktionary and several other online dictionaries give the main meaning of "degollar" as "cut the throat", which is why I was cautious about giving the meaning as "beheaded".[2] Since the documentary declines to show what happens in the video, it may remain a mystery.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 14:42, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
This has been added, the video material on which it is based is here. The English subtitles are passable but not perfect. For example, the caption says "its another murder by the maniacs" although the spoken words are "Es un homicidio real grabado por los propios asesinos" (It is a real murder recorded by the killers themselves).--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 16:29, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Do we really need the Image with the Cat?

It is not needed as if you are searching the Dnepropetrovsk Maniacs you already have a image in mind and we just do not need the cat picture! This is just plain disturbing.

The image is used mainly because it gives a clear view of the faces of Sayenko and Suprunyuck, and it is the only image showing them together in the article. The dead cat is blurred with a mosaic effect. The image is disturbing, but this is a disturbing case. Most of the photo and video material presented in court cannot be shown in the article because it is unacceptably disturbing, but this image captures the nature of the case without going too far. See also WP:IDONTLIKEIT.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:58, 24 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fixingmistakeseverywhere (talk • contribs)
Can you please discuss this Image instead of just repasting it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fixingmistakeseverywhere (talk • contribs) 17:50, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
See the above. The article has gone to great lengths to screen out disturbing material, but there needs to be at least one image of Suprunyuck and Sayenko in the article.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 17:53, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
I agree with Ian. The picture before had Alexander Hanzha in it and so hoards of people assumed there were 3 murderers just because they glanced at the picture and didn't bother reading the article. I know that's their problem - but it just makes more sense to have a pic of just Suprunyuck and Sayenko. Plus, if somebody has looked up the "dnepropetrovsk maniacs" they should know it's going to be disturbing, picture or not. Cheers Lenachka25 (talk) 01:30, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
Yes, the infobox image no longer shows Hanzha. This was leading to some confusion, as the court accepted that he was not involved in the hammer attacks. There is currently no picture of Hanzha in the article, since it would probably have to be a fair use press photo.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:39, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Should we add slight details about the murder video?

It is written in the article "One full video was leaked to the Internet, showing the murder of 48-year-old Sergei Yatzenko. He is seen laying on his back in a wooded area, and is struck repeatedly in the face with a hammer held inside a plastic bag." There's just one thing I would edit, and it is the fact Yatzenko was hit exactly seven times in the face with the hammer while it was in the plastic bag. Should this detail be told or should it stay withheld? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.122.164.81 (talk) 02:11, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Not sure about exactly seven, as I have not watched the video recently. He is hit in the face repeatedly with the hammer at the start of the video, and again at the end after the attackers are disturbed by the train passing at the nearby rail crossing and want to get things over as quickly as possible. The details of the video are not withheld, but linking to it is off limits per WP:EL.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 16:19, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Article spelling

Few things on Wikipedia are more lame than spelling wars. All of the Google news coverage of this case is spelled Dnepropetrovsk Maniacs, so this is the WP:COMMONNAME. Ignore the spelling warriors and please use the WP:COMMONNAME.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 16:28, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

We commonly defer to the local entity on how it wishes to name itself. By any common usage reasoning, for example, the Sendai earthquake should be called that, and not the horribly ungainly and unused 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami. The insistence that we not call Dnipropetrovsk what the natives call it, and what it is called here at wikipedia, because that would be making a nationalist point (while using the language of its former conquerors would not?), is pretzel logic that gives me a headache trying to visualize it. If you can get the article Dnipropetrovsk renamed Dnepropetrovsk because the first spelling is nationalist, get back to me. And no, I am not Ukrainian. μηδείς (talk) 21:34, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
This is going over old ground. Typing "Dnipropetrovsk maniacs into Google brings up results which invariably use the spelling "Dnepropetrovsk". Please try find any article about the case where the spelling "Dnipropetrovsk" is used. Also, removing all of the Russian spellings (eg in this edit) suggests a lack of WP:NPOV. The murder video is in Russian, as is the vast majority of the media coverage of the case in Ukraine itself. I am well aware that the Wikipedia article about the city uses the spelling "Dnipropetrovsk", but a Pekingese dog is not renamed a Beijingese dog because there is a newer or alternative spelling of the name.

The article was created in December 2008 by User:Flyboy Will, with the spelling that was and still is the WP:COMMONNAME for the case (eg in the courtroom video and here on Russia Today). All that Flyboy Will and I have done is to reflect the sourcing for the case material.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:00, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

While I am not arguing to change the name of the article itself, but would support it, I am steadfastly opposed to changing links within the article to reflect the Russian spelling of Ukrainian entities, especially when such spelling disagree with the article itself. μηδείς (talk) 16:37, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Gtoonsr, 13 May 2011

The men on this page shot and posted the now famous "3 guys 1 hammer". The video depicts the brutal murder of a man using only a sledgehammer and screwdriver. The man survives for a long time and yet the maniacs continue to torture him. At one point they ask "How is he still alive?" saying "I don't know, I felt his brain." The video is extremely disturbing and not for the faint of heart or minors.

Gtoonsr (talk) 00:26, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Stickee (talk) 09:58, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Eye Gouging?

I watched this video several times today and while it's obvious that one of the killers stabs Yatzenko's eye with the screwdriver I didn't see any evidence to suggest that his eyeball had been gouged/poked out. Any thoughts on this? PCLM (talk) 09:46, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Eye-gouging is reported to have happened in some of the killings, but without the video as evidence it is hard to be sure what this means. Injuring the victims' eyes seems to have been a recurring feature of the killings, and the Yatzenko video shows him being stabbed in his left eye with a screwdriver.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 10:00, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Copycat case?

In the Russian language news at the moment is the case of Artem Anoufriev and Nikita Lytkin from Irkutsk, who allegedly committed six murders and six attacks with a mallet. They were detained on 5 April 2011 after a video recording of one of the attacks was found by Lytkin's uncle, who contacted the police. Under questioning, the youths (born in 1992 and 1993) confessed to being inspired by reading about the Dnepropetrovsk Maniacs on the Internet. One of the suspects was a first year student at a medical school, the other was unemployed. Sources: [3], [4]--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 15:35, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

wow..very disturbing and sad. I hadn't heard of this..thank you for bringing it to my attention. I'm going to try and look up more info (Lenachka25) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.85.235.143 (talk) 19:23, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
More coverage here. There is a video showing the incident that led to the arrest, but it is blurred so non-graphic. Clear similarities to the Yatzenko video here. It will be interesting to see if the court considers that there were any direct links with the Maniacs case.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 19:43, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
I saw the uncensored version of this video recently and wondered if it was related to this case - I'm quite shocked to discover that it is. Am I right to assume that the Western media is oblivious to this case as well? PCLM (talk) 11:04, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Anyone who wants to check out the case can paste Артем Ануфриев и Никита Лыткин into Google etc. As with the Maniacs case, the vast majority of the coverage is in Russian. The main interest for this article is whether a court finds that a copycat element was involved. It interesting that cases like this pick up widespread coverage in the Russian language media, but hardly any English language coverage.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 11:17, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
There is more media coverage today at [5]. It says that they will stay in prison until 6 October and undergo a psychiatric examination. There have been suggestions of a far right nationalist motive, but the crimes also had the same random nature as the Maniacs case, which is noted in the NEWSru article.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 16:26, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Yeah I've been reading about this since you first mentioned it, Ian. Younger and younger. Really disturbing. .. Even the haircolour, I know completely irrelevant but notice one lightbrown and one darkbrown/black just like Suprunyuck and Sayenko. I dunno, just creeped me out a bit. (Lenachka25) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.85.235.143 (talk) 05:45, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

There is a very interesting video in this news story [6], called "Кто кошмарил Академгородок" (the person who creates a nightmare in Akademgorodok). It shows a youth in dark glasses swinging a hammer. This seems to be Litkin, who posed on far right websites in a similar way, and is wearing the same shirt here The one fingered salute is reminiscent of Suprunyuck. The caption is "Расчленённая ПугачОва", still looking into what this means and refers to.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 18:41, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
"ПугачОва" is an intentionally misspelled last name of Alla Pugacheva (spelled "Пугачёва" or "Пугачева" in Russian; regardless of spelling the letter ё is pronounced as "o"). "Расчленённая" means "dismembered". I don't know why the last name is intentionally misspelled (and I assume it's done intentionally because the letter "O" is emphasized); perhaps there is some cultural reference there I'm not getting. Pugacheva isn't exactly a popular artist among the younger demographics.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); June 13, 2011; 13:08 (UTC)
Ah, I've just googled this up, and it seems there is some "noisecore" group by that name. Looks like the image is a fan art or something to that effect..—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); June 13, 2011; 13:12 (UTC)
It could be fan art related to the group here (lyrics NSFW). There has been a debate on how the Internet affects Russian children after the Irkutsk and Dnepropetrovsk cases, in this article.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 13:40, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Sentences contradict

The sentence for Hanzha is stated as 9 years imprisonment at the top and as 15 years hard labor later in the text. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.111.33.2 (talk) 09:26, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Hanzha did receive a nine year prison sentence for robbery, the prosecution had asked for 15 years hard labour.[7]--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 09:45, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Suspects?

Shouldn't this be retitled 'perpetrators' or 'convicts'? They did it. They aren't 'suspected' of anything! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.222.219.34 (talk) 22:11, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

The use of the word "suspects" is in the Investigation section. At the time, they were suspects, so the use of the word seems to make sense here.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:30, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Igor Sayenko image

This was removed (File:Igor Sayenko.jpg) because it gave a misleading impression. There is no secret about what he looks like, and he is on the left in this news article from Segodnya, along with Suprunyuck's father (also here). The image with his face blurred was from the time of the arrest and trial. --♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 19:46, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Snuff film?

Re this edit. As the article Snuff film points out, the Yatzenko video is a recorded death, which is not generally considered to be a snuff film. Someone asked Snopes why their article A Pinch of Snuff does not mention the Maniacs case, and they replied that it does not "fit their description".[8].--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 02:42, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Image

Found this image: File:3 Guys 1 Hammer in Court..jpg at commons. Looks like them. dont know how this image was taken. may not actually be allowable, but if it is, it should go in the article.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 06:50, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

2010 Chilean documentary

This section has barely any sourcing and contains some big statements. Are there any sources to substantiate the notability of this documentary and the weight it receives in the article? — R2 13:52, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

All of the material in this section can be verified by watching the documentary, which is around 85 minutes long. It is on YouTube in several parts, starting here, although for copyright reasons this cannot be given in the article. This is the only time that the case has received major media coverage outside Ukraine. The most important aspect of the documentary is the extended version of the Yatzenko video, and the second murder video which the team found while visiting Ukraine. Michele Canale wanted to interview the killers while he was in Ukraine, but was denied permission.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 15:30, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
OK. Thanks for the clarification. Nice to see you still around Ianmacm. — R2 17:07, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Fifth anniversary

This news article and video looks at the fifth anniversary of the killings, including an interview with Igor Sayenko (still maintaining his son's innocence) and Ivan Stupak, who headed the police investigation.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 19:41, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Languages in article

For a long time now, the names of the three people involved have been given in English, Ukrainian and Russian. Most of the media coverage of the case is in Russian, the trial was in Russian, and the language spoken in the Yatzenko murder video is Russian. This is to be expected in the eastern region of Ukraine, where Russian is the most commonly spoken language.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 17:26, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Alleged copycat case on Russian Wikipedia

The case of Artem Anoufriev and Nikita Lytkin has an article on the Russian language Wikipedia. This goes into much more detail than here, and it says that the dead woman in the mutilation video who led to their arrest was a tramp, but does not name her. According to the sourcing, they will be in custody until March 2012.[9]

The table of Romanization of Russian recommends transliterating у as u. The spelling of Ануфриев was changed to Anufriev, although it is commonly transliterated as Anoufriev, which is to prevent confusion with /nʌf/.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 14:07, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

2010 Chilean documentary

There is no online transcript of the documentary, which is around one and a half hours long. The only source is the online documentary itself. The quotes from Natalia Ilchenko and Lidia Mikrenischeva can be seen here as a screenshot in Spanish.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 18:55, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Animal in infobox photo

Re this edit: I have seen the uncensored photo, and from the ears and the tail it seems to me clear that it is a cat. There are also other photos of the same incident where this is more apparent. It is not worth getting into an WP:OR dispute over this, so the caption has been changed to "dead animal".--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:01, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Graphic details

Is the incredibly disturbing/graphic account of the torture of the cat really necessary? It has already been established that these people tortured animals and it seems unnecessarily brutal/upsetting. I'd like to see it removed? Thanks. Awkwardboy (talk) 23:00, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

WP:NOTCENSORED applies here. The description is in text only, and is necessary to explain some aspects of the case. People were stunned when the video evidence was presented in court on 29 October 2008 and some left the court in tears. The relatives of the victims were removed from the courtroom before the video and photographic evidence was shown.[10] The article should not try to hide this. For reference, the source material in Russian is

Пытки, которым подвергся в гараже крошечный белый котенок, друзья снимали в мельчайших подробностях: как сколачивали из двух брусков крест, прибивали жалобно мяукающее существо за лапки гвоздями, расстреливали его из двух пистолетов, а чтобы не орал, залили рот монтажной пеной и клеем. Смотреть на это было просто невыносимо. Многие присутствующие вышли из зала, а отец Игоря, бывший летчик, сидел с глазами, полными слез. Но парни на экране хохотали и весело матерились, комментируя мучения своей жертвы.

This describes what they did to the cat, and were laughing while they were doing it. It is often said that serial killers hone their skills on animals first, and the Dnepropetrovsk maniacs case is one of the most disturbing examples of this.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:03, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
One thing that the article does not say is that Suprunyuck and Sayenko look considerably younger in some of the animal cruelty photos. This suggests that they had been doing this sort of thing for maybe several years before moving on to humans; they were 19 at the time of the killing spree in mid-2007. Unfortunately this is original research as the sourcing does not date material like the kitten video.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 14:48, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. Would you be amenable to rewording the paragraph to exclude some of the details? As it stands, it's nightmare fuel for anyone who loves cats/kittens. Awkwardboy (talk) 01:25, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
I still believe that WP:NOTCENSORED applies here. Suprunyuck and Sayenko were engaged in photographing and videoing acts of extreme animal cruelty for a considerable period prior to the 2007 killing spree. Although cruelty to animals by teenagers is nothing unusual, their behaviour was extraordinary, as the kitten in the garage incident shows. Some people in the past have complained that the description of what happened to Sergei Yatzenko is too graphic. This may be one of the reasons why the English language media has ignored the case, as it is just too disturbing for some people.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:53, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Spelling again

Re this edit: there is a long history of Ukrainian language enthusiasts deciding that Dnipropetrovsk is the correct spelling. The article uses the WP:COMMONNAME of the case in a Google search.[11] The killers are from eastern Ukraine and speak Russian as a first language.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:25, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Disapperance of Sergei Yatzenko

Re this edit: the source says "12 июля Сергей после обеда решил заправить старенький мотоцикл "Днепр". В последний раз на звонок жены он ответил по мобильному в 14.30: "Заеду к внуку - и домой"... Но у сына так и не появился." - "After lunch on 12 July, Sergei decided to fill up an old Dnepr motorcycle. He answered a final mobile phone call from his wife at 14:30, saying "I will drop in on my grandson and come home" but he did not show up for his son." The confusion has arisen because the source uses the words внук (grandson) and сын (son). Overall I think that the source is saying that he went to visit his grandson but failed to turn up.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:04, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Dnepropetrovsk maniacs. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:26, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Value of stolen phone that Suprunyuk tried to sell

Re this edit: In 2007, one U.S. dollar bought around five hryvnia , but today it is more like 25.[12] I think it is better to use the exchange rate at the time, rather than the current exchange rate.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 10:21, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Origin of the name

Not for the first time, someone has changed the article name to Dnipropetrovsk maniacs, and I have reverted it back to Dnepropetrovsk maniacs. Chicken Kiev has not been renamed Chicken Kyiv to please Ukrainian language speakers. Russian is the dominant language in eastern Ukraine. The name of the case was invented by the Ukrainian media, and the first significant English language coverage was the video Dnepropetrovsk Maniacs Courtroom Video on LiveLeak in December 2008. This uses the spelling Dnepropetrovsk and it seems to have stuck. There is little point in renaming the article Dnipropetrovsk maniacs when virtually all of the coverage in a Google search uses the spelling Dnepropetrovsk.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 17:09, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 17 external links on Dnepropetrovsk maniacs. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:30, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dnepropetrovsk maniacs. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:49, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Spree killers

They should be listed as spree killers, not serial killers, yes? They fit the bill for spree killers and aren't listed on the serial killer list by country, while they are listed under the rampage killer list. Promestein (talk) 05:29, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

This has been discussed before, and the murders don't fit the definition of spree killer or rampage killer according to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics definition, which is "killings at two or more locations with almost no time break between murders". There were cooling off periods between some of the murders, although it is an unusual case as they committed 21 murders in the space of around three weeks.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 05:45, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
That makes sense to me. I imagine the other pages should be changed, then. Promestein (talk) 06:15, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Release of Hanzha

Re this edit: the two sources use almost exactly the same text but the Fakty source is more detailed than the Dnpr.com source, so I pruned it back to the Fakty source. The Fakty source does not say that Hanzha has been active on social media, it says that residents on the Red Stone housing estate, where two people were killed in one night in June 2007, reported on social media that he had been released. This appears to be the first murders on 25 June 2007. Hanzha did not take part in these killings but was convicted of robbery that occurred before the murder spree.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 12:19, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Spelling inconsistencies

Within the article and Wikipedia at large, the town is spelled as "Dnipropetrovsk" rather than "Dnepropetrovsk". Only the title of this article still contains this inconsistency really. Should this page be moved? puggo (talk) 00:59, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

See the various discussions in the talk page archive. The WP:COMMONNAME for the case in media reports is Dnepropetrovsk maniacs. This case occurred before the Ukrainian nationalists insisted on removing Russian-style transliterations of place names. More importantly though, a Google search would not show any results with the spelling "Dnipropetrovsk" and Wikipedia articles should stick to what is found in the sourcing.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 05:40, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
Re this edit: there is no point in overriding the WP:COMMONNAME of the case simply to make a point about the modern Ukrainian spelling. The Ukrainian nationalists have ditched all of the Russian-style place names, but at the time that this case occurred, the media coverage said "Dnepropetrovsk maniacs", which created the WP:COMMONNAME for the case. There is a note explaining this in the article.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 05:39, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia talkpages are for discussion Wikipedia article related matters. Not for moaning on about "Ukrainian nationalists" (that is Dmitry Kiselyov's job). Don't blame "Ukrainian nationalists" for a few edits on this article you did not like. Replace "Ukrainian nationalists" in your above remarks with "Africans" and you would be a..... person as despicable as Dmitry Kiselyov..... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 14:39, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

The name "Dnepropetrovsk maniacs" stuck because of the Liveleak video of the three named accused appearing in court, which brought the case to the attention of the English speaking world. At the time, the spelling "Dnepropetrovsk" and all of the other Russian-style transliterations were in standard use. It was only after the 2014 Ukrainian revolution that the Russian spellings were binned as they were deemed to be unacceptable. But we still have Chicken Kiev, not Chicken Kyiv.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 15:50, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
Attitudes in the English speaking world sometimes changes. Wp:commonname is not something a change in Ukraine (or people from Ukraine) can change. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 17:20, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Russian Doc and LateNight Show

I have a question regarding two sources that I have yet to see be mentioned, covered or referenced in the Wiki article, Archives or Reddit. It took me a while to find these considering that I am a fanatic over this case because of its unprecedented notoriety, uniqueness and modernism of snuff evidence. I am unsure how and what rules I am supposed to follow but I will just link the sources I am talking about with hope that somebody with greater knowledge, can provide further insight. 2013 Russian Documentary that includes an interview with Igor Suprunyuck: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRzW9BSJIrA I believe a 2011 Political late night show involving the prosecutor, Viktor Saenko's father, Elena Shram's mother among others discussing the case and its authenticity from what I gather: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWcyUD2-Vpk

I would really like more information surrounding this, if possible with the help of those who speak the Language and can provide accurate information to match with what is currently known. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.183.61.206 (talk) 17:37, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

The most interesting part is in the 2013 documentary where Igor Suprunyuk speaks on camera. I had never seen this before. Since a lot of it is practically unintelligible, I asked Brandmeister to help and got a partial translation (even Brandmeister who speaks native Russian said that parts of it are unintelligible). The video of Suprunyuck speaking, possibly to investigators in the case, is here. The transcript is:

- My first murder was in Vinnytsia Raion (?), near the notarial office. The murdered person was a man aged about 45. I came and saw a man sitting on a bench. I approached him and hit his head with a hammer. On the road to Dniprodzerzhinsk, near the Tarnovo Proyezd (?) (unintelligible) we pulled over, opened the car's hood (unintelligible) Vitya saw a cyclist, he took our binoculars, looked and said "a cyclist". I grabbed the hammer. Vitya said "Let's do it" (unintelligible) I stood at the road. When the cyclist had approached, I hit his head with the hammer. (unintelligible) He made some sounds, so he was still alive. I poked a knife into his eye. (unintelligible) give a sincere admission. A sincere admission.

- About what?

- That I committed murders in the city of Dnepropetrovsk and in Podolsk. I committed murders with my accomplice, Sayenko Viktor Igorevich. I can even show a video recording where everything is documented.

- Documented on what?

- Our video recording was made on Vitya's phone, I have the video.

- Who made the recording?

- Vitya.

- For what purpose?

- Well, as a keepsake. (unintelligible)

The part where Vitya (Viktor) refers to the cyclist is the murder of Sergei Yatzenko. This confirms that the reports that he was on a Dnepr motorbike are wrong; as the video shows, the killers watch him approaching through binoculars and knock him off the bicycle after taking him by surprise. The 2013 documentary covers mostly ground that is already known about the case, while the 2011 television studio interview shows Igor Sayenko insisting that his son is not guilty. It would take a long time to produce an English language transcript of all of this, so the priority was to get a transcript of what Igor Suprunyuk says. Thanks greatly to Brandmeister for the help.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 13:33, 21 July 2020 (UTC)


I've come across somebody who has provided a translated youtube version of the interview we discussed. Contrasting the two I think that Brandmeister might have erred in stating that the first murder occurred in "Vinnytsia Raion" as it sounds and is translated elsehwere as "Leninyskom Raion" which from my understanding is a district that has been renamed to Novokodaksky district and is where Igor and Viktor lived in an apartment complex. The road he speaks about is towards Dniprodzherzhinsk near the village of Taromske that is from the leaked video. Here is the youtube translated version and also the coordinates of the road he speaks of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSUFbFsD4SY Here are the coordinates of where the infamous leaked murder of Sergei Yatzenko took place and which Igor speaks of in the interview. 48.440395, 34.763941 Thanks for your assistance and im looking forward to the TV Studio hour segment transcript or translation. I understand it takes time, theres no rush at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.199.222.159 (talk) 11:04, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, very likely. I was unsure about Vinnytsia Raion, as well as about Tarnovo Proyezd, so put question marks after them. Brandmeistertalk 11:16, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

How sure are we about the identity of the victim in the video?

Reports say Sergei was riding a motorcycle when he was murdered, and not only that, but his abandoned motorcycle is what led the discovery of his corpse nearby. Those of us who've seen the extended version of the video (as shown in the MEGA documentary) know that this isn't the case; the victim in the video is on a bicycle. Either the news reports were wrong about the details of Sergei's final movements, or the identity of the victim in the video clip (as described by Wikipedia) is wrong. How did the article come by this identification? I've read the articles cited which, while admittedly poorly translated by Google, contain details that aren't part of the video clip, including certain statements and behaviours by the killers which aren't in the clip we've all seen. How did this article come to rest on Sergei's murder being the one shown in the video? Because I'm not so sure it's him, and I think it's plausible that the cited articles are talking about a different video. We know at least one other video exists which shows the killers attacking someone in a similar set of circumstances, i.e. in a wooded area next to a road, because we saw clips of it in the MEGA doc, and I understand they made more videos that have never been leaked. So again, how and why did Sergei come to be identified with the victim in the video?

Cheers! 2A00:23C8:90B:B401:114D:39DD:724B:AC61 (talk) 10:49, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

This was previously discussed here and here. As soon as the Chilean TV documentary was broadcast in 2010, people pointed out that the murder victim in the extended video obtained by the documentary showed the victim arriving on a bicycle, not a motorbike. The most plausible explanation is that media reports got this part wrong. Mainstream media reports are not infallible, and Template:Current exists to cover this situation. The media reports are clear that the victim in the leaked Internet video is Sergei Yatzenko, and there is a picture of his widow holding his photo here.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 19:31, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi everybody. I apologize in advance if there are any mistakes in the text, I don't speak English. Recently I decided to re-read an article about maniacs, and I again had the assumption that it wasn't Yatsenko on the video. For some reason I can't add a link. The article is posted on the website nashemisto.dp.ua and it's called "Убийца с ангельским лицом. По следам днепропетровских маньяков". The article published a photo of Suprunyuk, which had not been published anywhere before. It is dated July 12, 2007, just on this day the maniacs attacked Yatsenko. But the T-shirt that Suprunyuk is wearing is different from the one he was wearing when he attacked Yatsenko. And I still can't understand why the old photo, where Suprunyuk is sitting next to the victim, shows a different date, as it seems to me, the end of June 2007, this does not correspond to the date when the maniacs attacked Yatsenko. If someone finds the article I was talking about, please add a link here Kit6966 (talk) 18:42, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

The link to the article mentioned above is here. I read it through, and although there have been previous discussions about inconsistencies in the media reports, the sourcing is adamant that it is Sergei Yatsenko who is the victim in the famous video.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 20:35, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

I still hope that someone will make a normal documentary about this case, as there are a lot of questions left. Kit6966 (talk) 13:14, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

not censored

I agree that the article should not be censored, but there is no point in going into graphic detail when it does not achieve anything. Simply saying the animal was tortured is enough. The rest is trivial. Willbb234Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 12:21, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Re this edit: The source is here and says in the original Russian "Пытки, которым подвергся в гараже крошечный белый котенок, друзья снимали в мельчайших подробностях: как сколачивали из двух брусков крест, прибивали жалобно мяукающее существо за лапки гвоздями, расстреливали его из двух пистолетов, а чтобы не орал, залили рот монтажной пеной и клеем." The source goes on to say that the youths were laughing and swearing while torturing the cat, and that many people left the courtroom when it was shown because it was so disturbing to watch. This is upsetting, but it gives an insight into the animal cruelty that preceded the killings. Like many serial killers, Suprunyuk and Sayenko honed their skills on animals before moving on to humans.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 22:05, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
I absolutely agree that we don't publish offensive material just to cause offense nor to "shock" readers. In this specific case, I'm of the opinion that these gruesome details, as reported by reliable sources, give context to the extent of the depravity of these individuals. Their actions go well beyond simply stating "the animal was tortured", and as such the description of their actions is encyclopedic. If we remove this material, "its omission would cause the article to be less informative", as the guideline states. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 01:09, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
It's disturbing but it is relevant. It is covered by WP:NOTCENSORED as it is important to know how astonishingly cruel Suprunyuk and Sayenko were to animals before they moved on to humans. Wikipedia is not a modern university course where nobody must ever be offended or upset by anything.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 19:06, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Re this edit: WP:ONUS does not mean "I can remove things without discussion". What is your problem here? Do you find an accurate account of what Suprunyuk and Sayenko did to an animal too much to handle? This is an attempt to water down the article without a good reason, and I am disappointed that you have not engaged on the talk page. I fully agree that this is an upsetting detail, but it is in the article for a good reason.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 05:34, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

I do not understand why you continue to throw WP:NOTCENSORED at me and claim that I am offended by this material. Never once have I said this, and I find it concerning that you assume I am based on my editing. As stated at WP:GRATUITOUS, WP:NOTCENSORED "does not mean that Wikipedia should include material simply because it is offensive". This certainly seemed to be your rationale back in 2021 and still seems to be the basis of your reverts in the past few days.

The details here are execssive. I do not undertstand how they give an "insight into the animal cruelty that preceded the killings". Isn't saying that the kitten was tortured not enough to give this supposed "insight"? Or do we have to shock the reader to achieve that "insight"? If we were writing a novel here, the details might help with foreshadowing, but we are here to inform, not entertain or shock. As I have stated before, these details add nothing to the article in terms of helping to understand these people; they were convicted of 21 murders and animal cruelty. I do not think that a reader is going to struggle in understanding that these people were evil.

Additionally, the article is already very long. WP:ONUS is a rule to help keep articles concise, and so by applying WP:ONUS I am attempting to keep excessive and unnessecary details out. Only with clear consensus (and not simply a small discussion on the talk page) should these details be included. Why do we wish to include more detail on this animal cruelty than the murders? These people were known for there murders (that is how they gained notoriety) and so why do some of there murders have single sentence explanations while the animal cruelty goes on for several sentences and into excessive detail? This puzzles me. Simpky because the source goes into this detail, it does not mean we are under any obligation to either.

There is also excessive detail surrounding the torture of a dog. If we wish to remove the details surrounding the tortue of the kitten, then it only seems appropriate for the dog as well. It does not seem like we will agree on this matter, and so I encourage you to seek consensus per WP:ONUS Willbb234 12:44, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Details of animal cruelty

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Consensus gained to remove the material in question Willbb234 20:17, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

I've decided to ask for a RfC on this issue, otherwise we will end up saying the same things over and over again. As Ivanvector and I said above, some of the details of the animal cruelty are disturbing, but were included because they show how astonishingly cruel that Suprunyuk and Sayenko were to animals before the serial killings. I would not want these details in the article simply to be WP:GRATUITOUS, so let's have some input from other editors on this issue.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 13:49, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Notified: WT:WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography/Serial Killer task force, WT:WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, WT:WikiProject Ukraine, WT:WikiProject Biography, WT:WikiProject Death. ––FormalDude talk 09:28, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
  • Wikipedia would do well to not repeat sensationalist content like this from yellow journalism sources that prey on morbid curiosity. The idea that significant information is somehow lost by not going into excessive detail on torture is ridiculous. Torture is known as one of the most devastating experiences that a being can undergo, so just by saying it we already know how cruel the perpetrators are. Nothing of encyclopedic value is added by going into the intricacies. ––FormalDude talk 09:21, 11 July 2022 (UTC) (Summoned by bot)
  • I'm not sure how having this information in the article helps the reader. Alaexis¿question? 13:47, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
  • I understand the argument, but Wikipedia is not a manual for psychoanalyzing serial killers. I can't for the life of me think of anyone whose understanding of the situation is improved by having gory details of animal abuse on this page. PraiseVivec (talk) 22:50, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

I believe there has been sufficient time for this discussion to brew and there is consensus to remove the material in question. I will now remove the tag. Willbb234 20:17, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"Three Guys 1 Hammer" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Three Guys 1 Hammer and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 20#Three Guys 1 Hammer until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. signed, Rosguill talk 15:24, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dnepropetrovsk_maniacs/Archive_3&oldid=1188711598"