Talk:Assassination of Boris Nemtsov

Contested deletion

This article should not be speedy deleted as being recently created, having no relevant page history and duplicating an existing English Wikipedia topic, because...the death of the Nemtsov is a major event comparable to death of Anna Politkovskaya -- Yablochko (talk) 23:26, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure this article is necessary. Seems the info could fit on the parent Boris Nemtsov article... ---Another Believer _(Talk) 06:57, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Agreed. Move to include it in the Boris Nemtsov article Santamoly (talk) 10:44, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

There are (were) two people who could plausibly be described as "Opposition Leader" in Russia, one is Aleksei Navalny, a nationalist, and the other was Boris Nemtsov, a liberal. I appreciate the Russian opposition is marginalised, but the assassination of one of its leaders has still (understandably) rocked the country, and will be a point of reference. Also this page has been linked to from the Main Page. I vote Keep. -- Yablochko (talk) 20:04, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Rocked the country? Are you even serious? The western media appear to be far more interested in this man than russians. He did not have any prominence on the political scene for at least 10 years. Five, ten, or even twenty thousand followers is nothing when we're talking about Russia.89.233.128.158 (talk) 09:48, 2 March 2015 (UTC).

Keep it..no one in their right mind would consider otherwise unless they had an ulterior motive.66.177.244.25 (talk) 20:59, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Про 213.230.100.55 (talk) 08:55, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Tasteless image

I know Wikipedia isn't censored, but the image shows the deceased partially undressed. It would be unencyclopedic to include graphic crime scene photos.– Gilliam (talk) 01:00, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

That image appears not to have been uploaded with the proper copyright info. I suspect it won't be in the article long if the copyright is not remedied. N2e (talk) 02:24, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

 Done -- removed. TNKS, Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 11:34, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Washing down the crime scene (literally)

Ukrainian journalist Olga Takariuk has tweeted a photo of the Russian autorities rather quickly hosing down the crime scene. It is going viral on twitter right now. Unbelievable: scene of #Nemtsov murder is being washed. Kinda shows how serious investigation gonna be

Nothing to see here, move along. N2e (talk) 02:03, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes, and would someone say, "At this point, what difference does it make?" ... I hope not. -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 11:35, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Which bridge?

Inital reports had it that Nemtsov died on Bolshoy Moskvoretsky Bridge, while later edits here and on Boris Nemtsov page had Bolshoy Kamenny Bridge. BStarky (talk) 03:41, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

And the Russian-language Wikipedia article is certain it was on Bolshoy Moskvoretsky Bridge. BStarky (talk) 03:42, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

There's a video from the scene where spokeswoman of the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs says it's Kamenny bridge: link (12:11) (in Russian). --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 04:10, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Another reference

Wall Street Journal has an article, but you need to log in to read it all. It begins, "MOSCOW—Russian opposition leader Boris Nemtsov was gunned down on a bridge next to the Kremlin late on Friday, in what authorities said appeared to be a contract killing."[1] -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 11:38, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Title -- killing vs. murder vs. assassination

What is best suited in title: Killing, Murder, Assassination or Death? Please discuss here. -Nizil (talk) 20:39, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

The word "death" is too vague, because that could describe virtually any death, e.g. by accident, natural causes, etc. "Killing," too, is overbroad, because it could describe an accidental incident, e.g. a careless driver who accidentally runs someone down. Nemtsov was clearly murdered; he was shot multiple times by a gunman in a classic drive-by shooting. There's no way that could be accidental. Even if the gunmen intended to shoot someone else (albeit a highly unlikely scenario), killing the wrong person is still murder because the act is intentional. As to whether this is "murder" or "assassination" is a matter of semantics. If politically motivated in any capacity, then one would argue this was an assassination. A number of media sources, including the New York Times, are calling the act an assassination in headlines and article ledes.[2][3]Siberian Husky (talk) 15:44, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

For me this is a question of specificity, and I think we should be as specific as we can. A killing is a death with an active agent, a murder is a deliberate killing, and an assassination is a particular type of murder, defined on Wikipedia as "the deliberate killing of a prominent person or political figure, usually for payment or political reasons". Nemtsov's death was certainly deliberate, and probably political, so the question is whether or not being an opposition leader makes him sufficiently "prominent" to fit the criteria of assassination. One possible precedent is Kazem Rajavi, a senior Iranian oppositionist killed in 1990, and the Wikipedia page about him refers to that death as an assassination. On that basis I'm inclined to go with "assassination". -- Yablochko (talk) 19:08, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

I notice now that the front page of Wikipedia says "Russian opposition politician Boris Nemtsov (pictured) is assassinated in Moscow" under the "In the news" section.Siberian Husky (talk) 21:03, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

• Assassination, per Yablochko.--The Theosophist (talk) 12:39, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

While his death bears the hallmarks of assassination and is, on the balance of probability, linked (directly or otherwise) to Vladimir Putin, almost all of the sources use the term murder. As far as I can see no RS are using the term 'assassination' yet. Therefore, by our own policies, we are obliged to use the term murder until we have RS to indicate otherwise. Bellerophon _{talk to me} 15:10, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

@Bellerophon: I do not suggest that Putin ordered the killing. What I do suggest is that, even if the perpetrator was a lone wolf, the killing was obviously for political reasons (i.e. an assassination). After all, the Beauchamp–Sharp Tragedy -an honour killing, at least as far as the accepted version is concerned- belongs both in Category:Honor killing and in Category:Assassinations in the United States, because there are chances that it was politically motivated. And, honestly, these chances are far less in that case than in our case, here.--The Theosophist (talk) 11:41, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

• I prefer killing, to which I originally moved the title, because "murder" is a legal term (a crime that must be proven, one which involves malice of forethought, etc.) and "assassination" seems likely but is also something that requires proof. My suggestion is made without prejudice to a future move pending the outcome of an inquest and possible court case (not that I'm holding my breath). I would prefer "assassination" to "murder", if there is not sufficient support for "killing". -Kudzu1 (talk) 04:13, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

The crime is self-evident. So this is at least "murder". My very best wishes (talk) 04:30, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

I think we all can agree that the murder is politically motivated regardless of what side committed it. So 'assassination' is a proper and fairly neutral term. Ivan the Formidable (talk) 01:37, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

This was obviously a murder...assination is murder by definition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.177.244.25 (talk) 13:39, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

So Putin must have had him shot?

"Any propaganda is unacceptable. West or East. It is essential to present neutral, unbiased facts and have as little emotion as possible. If there is no choice but to present propaganda sources, opposite side must be represented as well."

“The killing happened the day before the opposition march Vesna (Russian for “spring"), a street demonstration organized to protest against economic conditions in Russia and the war in Ukraine.”

“Media reports suggested Nemtsov had told friends he felt he was in danger of being killed by Putin due to his opposition to Putin's policy of supporting the pro-Russian rebels in eastern Ukraine.”

Honestly, this anti-Russian POV pushing reads more like a (poor) cold war novel. Should not any such (sub-007) BS be deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.243.217.152 (talk) 22:41, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

It appears that the last unpublished (almost finished) book by Nemtsov was about involvement of Putin at the war in Ukraine. The book and computer copies appear to be confiscated by the FSB from his apartment, and the apartment locked down (even his relatives are not allowed to enter). But this should be checked more carefully per sources. My very best wishes (talk) 03:10, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Claims of POV on this are very weak, at best, and only for the second item. The first statement is a fact. It happened the day before the march. Stating that fact is not biased. The second one needs to be sourced, but if sourced, is not POV. It could be better phrased, however, as "media reports suggested Nemtsov had told friends" is unduly vague. The article also includes statements from Putin elsewhere, etc., so multiple sides are presented.Siberian Husky (talk) 15:43, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

There are many reliably sourced claims about this, for example by brother of Boris Nemtsov. He said that it was obviously Putin who ordered this murder. He also explains 3 reasons why Putin had to do it [4]. Perhaps this should be included in the page. Moreover, Dmitry Peskov officially disproved such claims by telling that Nemtsov was not a threat for the Kremlin. In response, Stanislav Belkovsky commented: "did he [Peskov] mean that any politician who would be a threat will be killed?" - I am giving this link, but this has been published in a lot of sources. My very best wishes (talk) 06:32, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

You actually might want to check older mutual "compliments" of Nemtsov and Putin. The one always threatened to overthrow the other, and the second one always blamed Russia's 90s crisis on the then-government and Nemtsov in particular. We have been hearing "Putin killed this and that and that and that one, too..." from Nemtsov for over a decade now. Moreover, at some point about 7 years ago Putin even stopped reacting to that nonsence. This last statement of Nemtsov, whenever it may have been made, is nothing special and is completely in line of his regular agenda, and does not deserve special highlighting.89.233.128.158 (talk) 09:55, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

It's really sad to realize that Wikipedia turned to another american/western propaganda tool(( The article is such POVed and engaged.

Would you prefer if it became a propaganda tool for the Russian government? The motive is obvious, and the subject of the discussion should be included. 79.184.166.86 (talk) 12:41, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

• Of course, informally speaking, there is no doubts who did it. The site of murder was under constant surveillance by the FSO (and Nemtsov himself was under surveillance). But yes, that must be reliably sourced per WP policies. My very best wishes (talk) 14:50, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Exactly because "there's no doubts who did it" (particularly for the socalled "liberal world"), it is most likely that they did not do it, and this position, even if it turns out to be true, at this point is extremely biased. Nemtsov was a nobody of about the same value as, say, Kudrin or Khakamada on Russian political arena. He definitely had some sympathizers in quantities significant for a youtube channel or a blog, but not for a country. And having that as a background, he is known for a long list of his controversial second-level political and business activities, and for even longer list of rumored ones. There's plethora of people who did not wish him well, if you dig a little deeper.89.233.128.158 (talk) 06:53, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Well, that is what his brother tells. And this has been published in a lot of sources [5]. The video cameras were turned off by authorities [6] and so on. Even without any evidence, as in any crime, there are several standard questions, such as (a) who had a motif, (b) who had technical capabilities to accomplish that particular crime right near the Kremlin. According to experts, this could not be done even by highly trained GRU operatives if they acted without support from other Russian special services (here is ref). This has been discussed in multiple RS and should be reflected in this page. My very best wishes (talk) 16:22, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Using Svoboda as a source? Might as well cite Mein Kampf. Anyway, it is evident that those responsible must be either Ukrainian fascists or Western intelligence agencies. Putin had no motive, in fact, this event only worsens his position. Meanwhile, the West and their Ukrainian collaborators did have quite a bit to gain: more propaganda material and possibly more destabilization. Always ask, cui bono? Who benefits? And that is clearly not Putin, only the West benefits. —Славянский патриот (talk) 04:39, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Well, even Andrey Illarionov, a former adviser of Putin, tells about "exceptional efforts" by the Russian authorities to hide the murderers in an avalanche of governmental disinformation [7], and this is telling. My very best wishes (talk) 14:53, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

From The Story of Goldilocks and the Three Bears "Someone's been sleeping in my bed," Xx234 (talk) 11:19, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

In the paragraph "Investigation" appears the sentence Independent sources have dismissed such speculations by referring to them as "conspiracy theories". This tidbit refers to a single Daily Beast article itself (cleanly) referring to a site "The Interpreter" run by an Institute of Modern Russia. This organ describes itself ([8]) as a "non-partisan" US think tank headed by Mikhail Khodorkovsky's son Pavel. I think, and at least one other person [9] too, that this is not an independent source. Also, in any case where it was not a lone wolf assassin who did it, it logically needs to be a criminal conspiracy. Cui bono? 83.101.67.8 (talk) 20:03, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

• Agree, the sentence refers to opinion of a single commentator Catherine A. Fitzpatrick, fixed Alex Bakharev (talk) 00:47, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Coordinate error

{{geodata-check}}

The following coordinate fixes are needed for

55.750114 37.624131 or 55 44' 00 37 37' 26

—91.146.33.143 (talk) 23:39, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Closing this request, since you've already made the change yourself. Deor (talk) 11:25, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Video

The murder has been video recorded, although from a significant distance. It was shown at Russian TV. [10], [11]. At the video one can see a slow-moving snow machine that almost covers Nemtsov and his women friend from the video camera. At this very moment, the killer comes on foot to them from a side, and shoots Nemtsov several times from behind. Four bullets hit him to head, heart (precisely), liver and stomach. Then a white car appears and picks up the killer. Although not claimed in the sources, it appears that snow machine might also be somehow involved. My very best wishes (talk) 03:05, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Russian crime investigators speculate

Seems POV.Xx234 (talk) 14:23, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Not a POV. This particular statement about "a provocation" (by whom? they did not arrest or announced anyone) indeed appear to be a pure speculation. My very best wishes (talk) 12:55, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Was it in Morse code?

"he President, Vladimir Putin, telegrammed Nemstov's 86-year-old mother" - I'm assuming "telegrammed" is supposed to mean something else than it appears to mean here? Volunteer Marek (talk) 02:14, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

"sent a telegram to...", presumably. I presume he used the Central Telegraph service. RGloucester — ☎ 04:20, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Fixed Alex Bakharev (talk) 08:48, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Proper title

• Assassination of Abraham Lincoln
• Assassination of Archduke Ferdinand
• Assassination of Leon Trotsky
• Assassination of John F. Kennedy

This was not a "murder". It wasn't a street robbery gone wrong, or an attempted rape, or a crazed drug fiend. It was an "assassination", the professional killing of a high profile politician. The killer tailed Nemtsov, shot him repeatedly, left the girlfriend completely unharmed, and then jumped in a waiting get away car. It was planned well enough that the perpetrators were not caught, even though they were right beneath the Kremlin walls, one of the most highly surveillanced places on earth. There is no evidence whatsoever that this killing was anything other than a deliberate political hit. I suggest that the article be moved accordingly, and if some surprising proof comes out that this was not an assassination, we can always fix it later. Wikipedia doesn't wait for 100% proof. The 1% doubt that this might not have been a professional hit shouldn't justify the use of weasel words. Jehochman ^Talk 14:27, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Even more tellingly, at the time of his assassination that location had its surveillance turned off for maintenance, according to the Telegraph which describes it as 'what appears to have been a highly professional assassination'. We may need more than one source calling it an assassination to justify the move though. I expect such sources to appear in the coming days. Lklundin (talk) 14:47, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Sure, this is obviously a political assassination, even if the assasins are unknown. My very best wishes (talk) 14:55, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Not less so if the assassins remain unknown, as per Assassination of Olof Palme. In fact, I suspect that in this case they will remain unknown. Unless someone decides to send the message 'I kill with impunity'. Lklundin (talk) 15:30, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

I already have a list of sources for "assassination". [12][13][14][15] There was a snow removal truck perfectly positioned to aid in the hit, and it drove away after Nemtsov fell. [16] This killing was highly professional. Jehochman ^Talk 15:04, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

It does seem to fit the standard definition of an assassination, as well as comport with general article naming standards in Wikipedia for articles that start with "Assassination of ..." N2e (talk) 15:39, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

I disagree with this move and believe it should be reverted, per the repeated remarks from WP:ITN/C. The overriding principle is WP:COMMONNAME, we use what the rest of the world uses for something as established as this rather than debate about the meaning ourselves. (To the extent that we want to anyway, I am baffled that "murder" somehow connotates "random maniac," or takes away from the severity of the incident. It's correct to say that Lincoln or Archduke Ferdinand were murdered, too.) Jehochman moved it "per the sources", but this doesn't appear to be actually correct. To be sure, there are plenty of sources calling it an assassination; there simply appear to be far more sources calling it a murder. Google News search on "Nemtsov" comes up with 9 references to "Murder", 5 references to "Killing", and 2 references to "assassination" via CTRL-F. Vanilla Google Search for "Nemtsov murder" yields 1,650,000 results; the same for "Nemtsov assassination" yields a mere 144,000 results. Vanilla Google search should be taken with a grain of salt as there are probably incidental uses of that phrase seeping in from before his death, but it's still a pretty huge margin.

There also appear to be vague hints that using "murder" somehow plays down the severity of the incident or is related to Putin-apologetica. That isn't true at all; there are plenty of articles hostile to Putin that still use "murder" (e.g. Secretary of State Kerry, which isn't surprising as murder is about as horrible as crimes go! So, buh.

Anyone else want to chime in? I'd like to revert the move, but am open to counterarguments... SnowFire (talk) 00:11, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

There are no established common names for current events. The WP:Consensus is not on your side. Please do not revert anything. My very best wishes (talk) 13:06, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

If there's no established common name, then how can you defend the move? Or for that matter recommend any title at all? Perhaps the article should be moved to "1985 Radishes For Sale." I've provided sources that indicate "murder" appears to be the common name in the media. SnowFire (talk) 17:28, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

How? Please read Article titles. This is all explained there. A lot of article names are not common names. And it's not obvious what "common name" should be in this case. For example, "assassination" is a more precise "descriptive title". Regardless, WP:Consensus rules. My very best wishes (talk) 18:03, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

I can read, thank you very much, I wasn't going to move the article back unless nobody objected, and you did, so there's no need for the constant harping on about the current consensus.

Descriptive titles are, to me, more about the likes of History of the United States (1849–65) where the overall topic is divided up and the "descriptive" part is the clarification on scope. They don't apply here where there IS a common name used in the media. (And, to be clear, if the common name in sources a year from now is "Assassination", I will be happy to endorse the current title... then.) SnowFire (talk) 18:15, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

not sure which way you are going here..seems justified to call it an assassination to me...sure hope I don`t end up on a KGB hit list for saying it though. 66.177.244.25 (talk) 02:49, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

I am recommending the article title be restored to "Murder of Boris Nemtsov" if you're not sure. SnowFire (talk) 17:28, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

It was an assassination quite obviously. As to who did it, now that is up to speculation this point . . . *cough* Ukrainian nationalists *cough* —Славянский патриот (talk) 05:48, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

That statement not only reeks of speculation but is counterintuitive as well..sounds like Russian propaganda to me..more than likely he was killed by Putin..the KGB..some other reactionary faction of the government or a combination thereof. 66.177.244.25 (talk) 14:41, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

A Russian friend of mine said that if there is Russia without Crimea, soon there will be Russia without Putin. The Russian government is not monolithic. There are factions vying for dominance, and perhaps one of them decided "enough" and put four bullets in Mr. Nemtsov. Putin is riding a big wave of nationalism and needs to balance himself carefully or he too will be wiped out. Whether Putin ordered or encouraged this hit, or if it was done by some other faction is really hard to tell. The best, most neutral position we can take is that this was a political killing, but that the exact dynamic is unknown and possibly will not be known for a long time, if ever. Jehochman ^Talk 15:10, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

This is irrelevant to WP:COMMONNAME, a policy which nicely frees Wikipedia from having to figure this out. SnowFire (talk) 17:28, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

What about these? How is this article different?

• Assassination of Abraham Lincoln
• Assassination of Archduke Ferdinand
• Assassination of Leon Trotsky
• Assassination of John F. Kennedy

Thanks for your feedback. Jehochman ^Talk 02:03, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

We're going in circles. I saw your opening comment already, and I've already explained why COMMONNAME appears to be against "assassination," which is "how this article is different" than your examples. I could just as easily link to the 440 articles that start with "murder of" and ask you why this article is different; it's pointless. Even if every single other article on a political death used "Assassination of", it would still be irrelevant to *this* article, WP:OTHERSTUFF.

I'll double-check and see if there's been a shift the past few days, then open a RM if the sources continue to appear to prefer "murder" so strongly. SnowFire (talk) 20:01, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Kremlin-appointed?

Since it's a functional government, it's seems obvious it isn't Washington-appointed investigation. It should be noted that Vladimir Putin prioritized the investigation because of possible outside influence. Any matters of national security should be prioritized. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.240.247.8 (talk) 01:36, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

This is devolving into a classic rhetorical argument..obviously this crime wasn`t some random act of violence or whatever the powers that be want the public to believe..all the more reason for the article to be protected and remain protected indefinitely. 66.177.244.25 (talk) 00:42, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Sources

Discovered intentional (or unintentional) mistake by BBC article misquoting original source and not providing complete information.

• "I'm afraid Putin will kill me," he said in the article (in Russian) on 10 February." Title of the original article is 'Mother of Boris Nemtsov afraid for his life' at the bottom it clearly states in Russian "Если бы я боялся очень сильно, то вряд ли возглавлял бы оппозиционную партию, вряд ли бы занимался тем, чем занимаюсь." - "If I feared very much, it is unlikely that would be headed by an opposition party, is unlikely to be involved in what I do."

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivan the Formidable (talk • contribs)

Yes, that was his mother who warned him that he will be killed for cursing Putin. This just like Litvinenko warned Politkovskaya that she will be killed for writing Putin's Russia. There are quite a few comments about this in RS and blogs. One hotly debated question: why he was killed right near the Kremlin, in a place with a lot of video cameras, people, and passing by cars? Was not it much easier to kill him just near his apartment (like Politkovskaya)? One of possible answers: no, he was actually killed in the place most convenient for his killers (FSO) because they had their video cameras and their people around. My very best wishes (talk) 22:10, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

His killers were most definitely not government. The very idea that Putin would want to kill a marginal opposition figure with just 1—3% support in the electorate is just so contradictory to common sense and logic it just baffles me how anyone can even believe it. Let's break this down, shall we?

1. Nemtsov was unpopular, and a recent Levada Center poll says that many Russians didn't even know he existed. There are many opposition figures who are much more popular than he is. How can he be a threat when he is incredibly unpopular among those who do know him, and many have never even heard of him until now? In fact, Nemtsov being alive and in the opposition is helpful to Putin: it makes the appearance that there is an opposition in Russia, but no one wants to vote for them, giving Putin more legitimacy. So Nemtsov was actually useful to Putin, not a threat.

1(b) And in the sense, the whole opposition is useful, because frankly no one in Russia wants to vote for them. Especially when opposition leaders are seen going into the U.S. embassy in Moscow. They barely get any votes or much support. There is no reason at all for Putin to want to kill anyone from the opposition at this point, it only harms his position.

2. Why would Putin do it in such an obvious location and in such a blatant, obvious way? If he wanted him dead for some reason (still the other side has not provided any logical reason for Putin wanting him dead), then he would have killed him quietly, like with a poison or something else along those lines, not a blatant murder right in front of the Kremlin. You don't use a nuke to kill a fly. The very way this was carried out alone should rule out Putin's involvement. Some might argue that Putin did it this way to put fear into the opposition in this way. But, again, why would he do that? He doesn't need to make any hostile moves toward the opposition, they are already weak. So the people who carried out and/or organized it wanted it to be as much as possible public and in the right location, so that Putin would be blamed. Which brings me to my next point.

3. Cui bono? Who benefits? We have established that Putin clearly gained nothing from this, except for more anti-Putin propaganda in the media and more attention to the Russian opposition, which would not have received that much attention otherwise. In fact, Putin predicted two years ago that the opposition may be looking for a 'martyr' to gain them more of a following and attention. So Putn does not benefit. The opposition does benefit, as I just described. The United States benefits as well, it gives them more material to use in anti-Russian propaganda. Everything about this murder, from its location, to its timing, to its victims, does not make logical sense for Putin having done it. Everyone but Putin benefits from this. The very thought of Putin being behind it is just ridiculous. Another thing I should mention is that his Ukrainan girlfriend was left alive. Why would a murder leave a witness? Nemtsov was said to have been hit with eight bullets, so they were very careful to deliberately not hit his girlfriend. Now I am not exactly sure what they had been going for with this, but the witness is able to speak out about this murder and bring more attention to it. If they were dead, then they would not be able to.

Now, I don't know for sure who did it, but I am just looking at the facts and being the voice of reason and common sense. This was clearly an attempt at destabilizing the situation in Russia in order to cause more unrest. —Славянский патриот (talk) 17:40, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

As per WP:NOTFORUM: 'Talk pages are not for general discussion about the subject of the article'. So please make actual suggestions for improvements, instead of posting your own analysis. Lklundin (talk) 18:15, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Why don't you tell that to the people who are blaming Putin and the Russian government, no one seems to say anything when they speak. —Славянский патриот (talk) 20:07, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Would you care to point out where WP:WALLSOFTEXT and speculative analysis and theories have been posted by those rude "...people who are blaming Putin and the Russian government." are on this talk page, Славянский патриот? There's plenty of constructive discussion as to the development of the content. I'd be grateful if you could pull up specifics to back up your contention. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 05:27, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

I don't understand why you cannot look for it yourself, but OK.

Quotes from this talk page

"That statement not only reeks of speculation but is counterintuitive as well..sounds like Russian propaganda to me..more than likely he was killed by Putin..the KGB..some other reactionary faction of the government or a combination thereof. 66.177.244.25 (talk) 14:41, 5 March 2015 (UTC)" "Yes, that was his mother who warned him that he will be killed for cursing Putin. This just like Litvinenko warned Politkovskaya that she will be killed for writing Putin's Russia. There are quite a few comments about this in RS and blogs. One hotly debated question: why he was killed right near the Kremlin, in a place with a lot of video cameras, people, and passing by cars? Was not it much easier to kill him just near his apartment (like Politkovskaya)? One of possible answers: no, he was actually killed in the place most convenient for his killers (FSO) because they had their video cameras and their people around. My very best wishes (talk) 22:10, 5 March 2015 (UTC)" "Of course, informally speaking, there is no doubts who did it. The site of murder was under constant surveillance by the FSO (and Nemtsov himself was under surveillance). But yes, that must be reliably sourced per WP policies. My very best wishes (talk) 14:50, 2 March 2015 (UTC)"

—Славянский патриот (talk) 19:40, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Did you not notice that Lklundin left a reminder to editors invoking WP:NOTFORUM? The other two users may have drifted WP:OFFTOPIC, but they did not write a blog thesis. The reminder was to everyone, not just you. Thank you for your understanding. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 09:23, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Obviously, there are many sources who claim it. For example, Andrey Piontkovsky just said here ("The Party of big blood"):

"Now let' go back to the list of heads of the Russian special services, who are the only people capable of arranging proper support of the events on the bridge in the fateful night. The list is small - Putin, Ivanov, Patrushev, Bortnikov, Zolotov, Murov - and I named all of them already in the night of the murder.". (Andrey Piontkovsky)

My very best wishes (talk) 01:06, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Anzor Gubashev

According to the reports Anzor Gubashev had worked in a private security company in Moscow.--91.10.27.156 (talk) 20:37, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Do you have reliable sources for these 'reports'? --Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:57, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

This info is in Kommersant article that already linked. Note that Anzor beeing a security guard in a hypermarket does not contradict him working as an employee of a security firm, quite possible the hypermarket outsourced its security to a private firm or something like this. Anyway put both pieces of info to the article Alex Bakharev (talk) 23:50, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

thought against Islamists ("Wahhabis") previously..what does this mean? fought? 66.177.244.25 (talk) 13:04, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

 Fixed --Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:23, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Secondary source represents Armenian Ruling Party or Russia's control of the state ?

I have with some surprise read a recent addition to the article, citing armenianow.com:

The ruling Republican Party issued a statement that said: "We hope Russia’s law enforcement agencies will punish those who committed the crime as quickly as possible and with the utmost strictness of the law".

Is this really true, or could it be a misunderstanding or a mistranslation? The implication would otherwise be a lack of regard for the separation of powers, either in the Republican Party of Armenia or (in their mind) in Russia ? (To phrase that differently: In a civilized country, it is not the police that punishes anyone, there is a judicial system for that).

Can the cited statement be confirmed through another source? Lklundin (talk) 18:35, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Assassination

How to describe the killing has been brought up already, but not resolved.

The Telegraph is used as an example for having "assassination" in the title. But The Telegraph says it "appears" to be an assassination, and its article title refers to it as a "murder," which is how it is referred to throughout the article.[17] There is a difference between saying something appears to be something and saying it is something. If we follow common usage, which is supported by WP:COMMONNAME, then we would use "murder."

The other alternatives are death, killing, or homicide, all of which are are accuate and neutral. Murder is less so because unlike homicide, it requires criminal intent and would exclude for example a homicide carried out by an insane person. Nonetheless I would support murder since that is what sources are calling it, and there is little likelihood it was not.

TFD (talk) 12:31, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

It seems that a lot of RS are mixing the two terms in one article (i.e., using 'murder' in the title of the article, then assassination in the body, or vice versa). They are the predominant descriptors per COMMONNAME, rather than killing/death/homicide, and all are invariably ascribing political motives to the killing. That fact, in itself, qualifies 'assassination' as being correct and neutral in context, regardless of what speculation over the political motives were, or who/what political faction may be responsible. Personally, I have no particular preference over which of the two potential candidates for nomenclature - being 'assassination' or 'murder' - are used. Nevertheless, I don't see that there is a neutrality issue over the use of assassination as it is being used as commonly as murder (or, should I say, murder is being used as being interchangeable with assassination to avoid dull copy). --Iryna Harpy (talk) 23:40, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

I agree. BTW, here is a publication in Novaya Gazeta that noticed 15 similar features/facts between this case and murder of Anna Politkovskaya - here (unfortunately, this is a Russian language source). My very best wishes (talk) 17:20, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Reactions

I suggest to significantly reduce section "Reactions" as containing a lot of completely uninformative statements. e.g. "Chancellor Angela Merkel condemned the killing of Nemtsov, described the incident as "a vile murder" and urged the Russian authorities to find and punish those responsible" or "Mikhail Khodorkovsky called the slaying his personal grief" if there are no objections. Some statements do contain something of substance (e.g. by Alexander Vershbow or Dmitry Gudkov) and therefore would remain. My very best wishes (talk) 23:07, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

I agree with your assessment. Please feel free to par down the unnecessary detail. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:35, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Oh yes, especially now. So here they are: My very best wishes (talk) 16:28, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Domestic/international reactions moved here from main page.My very best wishes (talk) 17:18, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
UN member and observer states Russian Federation: The President, Vladimir Putin, sent a telegram addressed to "Dina Yakovlevna Eydman, mother of Boris Nemtsov", expressing his condolences and adding, "We will do everything to ensure that the perpetrators of this vile and cynical crime and those who stand behind them are properly punished." Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev expressed his condolences to the families. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said the murder was a 'filthy' crime and it would be investigated with utmost vigor. Head of the Chechen Republic, Ramzan Kadyrov accused western agencies saying "Boris Nemtsov was killed in the center of Moscow. Only those forces interested in fomenting tensions could take such a treacherous step. The organizers of Nemtsov's murder hoped to make the whole world blame the leadership of the country and to cause a wave of protests. There is no doubt that Nemtsov's murder was organized by Western intelligence services, seeking any means to cause internal conflict in Russia." He also stated that he wants to see the perpetrators of the attack brought to justice and expressed his condolences to the victim's relatives. Ukraine: President Petro Poroshenko: "Shock. They killed Boris. It's hard to believe. I have no doubt the killers will be found. Sooner or later. Eternal memory ..." "He said he would reveal persuasive evidence of the involvement of Russian armed forces in Ukraine. Someone was very afraid of this ... They killed him." On 3 March 2015, he posthumously awarded Nemtsov with the Order of Liberty. Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk: "Patriot of Russia, at same time a friend of Ukraine. This is what will remain in our memory of Boris Nemtsov. RIP." Armenia: The ruling Republican Party issued a statement that said: "We hope Russia’s law enforcement agencies will punish those who committed the crime as quickly as possible and with the utmost strictness of the law". Canada: Prime Minister Stephen Harper stated that he was "shocked and saddened" and called the murder a "shameful act of violence". Estonia: President Toomas Hendrik Ilves expressed his condolences over the death of "a personal friend and a friend of Estonia, who was a great democrat and a courageous fighter for freedom". Finland: President Sauli Niinistö stated that "the murder of Boris Nemtsov was a ferocious and reprehensible act". He suspected political reasons behind the killing and expressed his worries over the consequences. Latvia: Minister for Foreign Affairs Edgars Rinkēvičs wrote on Twitter that the "murder of Boris Nemtsov is a proof of the lunacy that rules in Russia". Expressing his condolences to the family, he also stated that "there's a very little hope for an objective investigation". Lithuania: President Dalia Grybauskaitė said the "murder of Boris Nemtsov shows that Russia is sliding down into the darkness of terror against its own people". United States: President Barack Obama called Nemtsov's death a "brutal murder" and called for a "prompt, impartial and transparent investigation". Secretary of State John Kerry said the United States had no information on the murder of Nemtsov and "wouldn't comment anyway". Deputy Secretary-General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and former United States Ambassador to Russia Alexander Vershbow connected assassination of Nemtsov with the 2014–15 Russian military intervention in Ukraine:"... President Putin’s aim seems to be to turn Ukraine into a failed state and to suppress and discredit alternative voices in Russia, so as to prevent a Russian “Maidan”. We’ve seen that the victims are not just in Eastern Ukraine, with the brutal murder of Boris Nemtsov last Friday. While we don't know who pulled the trigger, we do know that Boris Nemtsov was a powerful voice for democracy and against Russia's involvement in Ukraine who was among those vilified as “traitors” and “fifth columnists” in Russia's official propaganda ..." Germany: Chancellor Angela Merkel condemned the killing of Nemtsov, describing the incident as "a vile murder" and urging Russian authorities to find and punish those responsible. Hungary: Prime Minister Viktor Orbán expressed his sympathy on behalf of Hungary to Nemtsov's family and also said they "expect the Russian government to create the conditions for a full investigation." France: President François Hollande strongly condemned the killing in Moscow and described Nemtsov as "a bold, never-tiring defender of democracy and a resolute fighter against corruption". Sweden: Minister for Foreign Affairs Margot Wallström said: "I think everyone is deeply taken by the assassination of Nemtsov. It's an execution. And it is clear that this reinforces the image of Putin's reign of terror when it comes to security, human rights and democracy. This is furthermore one more name to be added to the already long list of, not least journalists, who have lost their lives". United Kingdom: Prime Minister David Cameron said that he was "shocked and sickened" by the murder and said the "callous" killing "must be fully, rapidly and transparently investigated, and those responsible brought to justice". Supranational bodies European Union: The head of the European Union's delegation in Russia, Vygaudas Ušackas, told Kommersant that he was "shocked and hopes that the Russian authorities will act without delay". The European Parliament on 12 March adopted a special resolution calling for an independent international investigation into the murder. Council of Europe: The Secretary General of the Council of Europe, Thorbjørn Jagland, said: "I am shocked and appalled by the fact that a key opposition leader, Boris Nemtsov, was shot". NATO: NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg condemned the murder of Boris Nemtsov, stating: ”He was a strong voice for democracy and we call for an impartial investigation into this terrible crime.” In Russia The co-chairman of the RPR-Parnas, Mikhail Kasyanov, called the killing "outrage beyond imagination". Leonid Gozman stated that he believes the death of Boris Nemtsov to be a message towards political opponents in the Russian Federation. Mikhail Khodorkovsky called the slaying his "personal grief". Garry Kasparov tweeted "Devastated to hear of the brutal murder of my long-time opposition colleague Boris Nemtsov. Shot 4 times, once for each child he leaves." Criticizing "24/7 propaganda about enemies of the state", Kasparov said "When they started displaying pictures of Boris and other prominent oppositionists around the city and on TV, it was an invitation to execute them." He said, "Opposition leaders are always watched closely by Russia's security services before public rallies—Boris had been planning a protest against the Ukraine war on Sunday—so how could these trained bloodhounds not notice that someone else was following him?" He criticized statements from Western leaders who had "done so much to appease the Kremlin," which he called "a criminal rogue regime", and condemned the Russian media for "[churning] out preposterous and insulting conspiracy theories about the death of a man they had called an enemy of the state." The vice-dean of a department of the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, where Boris's son, Anton Nemtsov, is a student, published a statement: "The Americans themselves created this sleazeball, themselves financed him, themselves killed him. It is the fate of all prostitutes. Yesterday evening there became one sleazeball less." After a collective letter from the students the institute apologized to Anton Nemtsov. Henri Reznik accused the Russian mass media of escalating the hate campaign against opposition which could have easily "attracted one of the sociopaths". He also criticised president Putin for announcing the intended direction of the investigation to be a "provocation" shortly after the murder, which, taking into account "the psychology of our law enforcement" will inevitably lead to turning the investigation into "a search for confirmations for the presidential version". Parliament member Dmitry Gudkov said that officials had created "the hostile atmosphere of hate in the country—they should feel guilty today for this cold murder. Even today I heard from ... members in the parliament that we, the opposition, are ‘the fifth column,’ agents of the USA." Alexei Makarkin of the Center for Political Technologies stated that Nemtsov's murder "demonstrates to what extent hatred has been legitimized or even sanctioned in Russia," saying that Russia's media coverage of the war in Ukraine had portrayed individuals as "patriots" or "enemies." Yevgeny Yasin, Russia's former economy minister, stated that "Nemtsov always said everything that others were afraid to say." Alexei Navalny, an opposition leader, said that Nemtsov "kept acting rather than waiting for the regime to fall. This made him influential and dangerous for the regime." Former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev suggested that the killing was a provocation: "It’s an attempt to push the situation into complications, maybe even to destabilising the situation in the country." Irina Khakamada, a prominent opposition figure who co-founded a liberal party with Nemtsov, stated: "It's a provocation that is clearly not in Putin's interests, it's aimed at rocking the situation." Kremlin-appointed investigators have speculated that the assassination could have been "a provocation aimed at destabilising the country" or that it was motivated by "Islamic extremism". Catherine A. Fitzpatrick has dismissed such speculations by referring to them as "conspiracy theories", and The Guardian noted that the only explanation that is not being considered by the authorities is the "blindingly obvious one" that Nemtsov was killed for his criticism of Putin. A Kremlin spokesman said "It is too early to make any sort of conclusions but we can say with 146% certainty that it is a provocation." A spontaneous memorial took place at the scene of the murder. People carried flowers along with posters emblazoned Je suis Boris, as an echo of the Je suis Charlie response to the Charlie Hebdo shooting two months earlier in Paris. Outside Russia In Armenia, a parliamentary opposition party, the Armenian National Congress, released a statement condemning the murder. The independent opposition MP Nikol Pashinyan offered condolences to Nemtsov's family and stated that his murder is a "major challenge" for Russia to overcome. The speaker of the Polish Senate, Bogdan Borusewicz, said that Nemtsov "fell victim" to "a chauvinistic campaign against people who do not agree with imperialistic policies and aggression against a neighbouring country." ref name=RFE150302>Baryshnikov, Valentin (2 March 2015). "Kasparov: 'Putin Is Accountable For This Bloodshed'". RFERL.</ref>

Removed self-promoting badly written fringe theory

I removed the following self=promoting fringe theory "highly appreciated among ordinary Russian citizens" LOL

At the end of October 2017 highly appreciated among ordinary Russian citizens author of the book "The Less You Know, the Better You Sleep" and the author of many other works about USSR and Russia, expelled out of Russia by officials American right-wing political activist and expert, journalist and writer David Satter has published sensational article in National Review about an unofficial public investigation of the assassination, led by Igor Murzin, a St. Petersburg lawyer who specializes in auto accidents and the interpretation of videotape. The article "Who Killed Boris Nemtsov?" by David Satter might help international institutions like Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) to understand what's really going on in Russian politics in connection with the assassination of the most important Russian republican politician and how far from reality seem to be Russian officials and so-called opposition. According to facts, which David Satter attracts attention on, all of formal reports by Kremlin's investigators and state's experts, all of conclusions and decisions of Russian military court system, nearly all reports in mass media, included appreciated foreign tabloids and TV-channels and, finally, Emanuelis Zingeris, who what ever reasons is going to represent so-called "Russian opposition" in PACE, are lying, and real suspects and murderers were never under investigation, were not arrested or appeared in court. Thank the article by David Satter the whole official story turned out to be just an imitation of some procedure, which in reality seems to stop working in Russia as soon as Kremlin enters the game.

However, some inaccuracy in investigation of Igor Murzin, which appears also in the article written by David Satter, was discovered in position of general Kornienko, whose name Igor Murzin has reckoned on "tape of Kalugin". The general belongs not only to FSB and FSO. The highly ranked Karelia-born officer since 2012 is also head of Russian Federal Penitentiary Service.Such involvement of the Russian Federal Penitentiary Service apparently points on formal character of the action, which in fact seems to be rather an execution of Boris Nemtsov, whom Stalin-time-like "court of NKVD troika" might have secretly declared being a threat to safety of the State. The assassination or execution of the most important republican politician in Russian history marks an attempt of Kremlin to proceed further with new constitutional order, which Russian officials organised thank help of dependent on Kremlin imitation of parliament in 2014-edition of Russian Constitution(1993), shortly before tragedy with Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, which was allegedly shot down on 17 July 2014. The newest edition of the Russian Constitution(2014) contents clear signs of Stalin's Constitution (1934) and allows even to shoot down an airplane, full of civilians. There is a video, which can be used as an illustration for the statement. By watching video please pay attention on the fragment coming at 19:54.

Moscowdreams (talk) 05:16, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

• I have removed it again, for the same reason. Apart from being badly sourced and largely incomprehensible, the majority of it is original research. Black Kite (talk) 16:06, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Recent publications

By MediaZona - [18] - a detailed timeline of the assassination and this. My very best wishes (talk) 16:22, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

That was widely cited, including in the book by Amy Knight [19] (Russsian, translation), Navalny said: I believe that Nemtsov was killed by members of a government (intelligence) or pro-government organization on orders from the political leadership of the country... This is not freelancing, but directly Putin, Nikolai Patrushev, Sergei Ivanov , Aleksandr Bortnikov, Vyacheslav Volodin. My very best wishes (talk) 03:46, 7 March 2021 (UTC)