|This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to . If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.|
|This page was nominated for deletion on 24 January 2010. The result of the discussion was keep.|
- 1 POV
- 2 Citation
- 3 Baloney
- 4 Request for improved sources, verification of non-English sources
- 5 David Copperfield doesn't really fly
- 6 Arman Cagle's input
- 7 Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence
- 8 International Verification...
- 9 Collection of Reviews/Comments
- 10 Links to the articles
- 11 Stop manipulating it please
- 12 Ukrainian book of records and other issues
- 13 Chess
- 14 Scientific articles?
- 15 Biography
- 16 Rybka aftermath
- 17 Andriy Slyusarchuk Chess Scam Hoax of The Century! By Anthony.R.Brown.
- 18 Status Quo
- 19 Spiegel Online
- 20 False information
This artical has serious NPOV issues, someone needs to look at citing in particular the claims that this man can actually read minds
- I do welcome any critical info on Andriy Slyusarchuk's abilities, as well as references to skeptical reviews or debunking. Unfortunately, I haven't found such info so far. There are actually more sources (including independent TV shows about Mr. Slyusarchuk) documenting his extraordinary abilities, but I just don't have the refs on my fingertips. One of the things I was very much impressed with, was a TV show where he hypnotized a man so he did not feel any pain when taking a glass of boiling water right from the heating fire. The camera showed man's hand after that. It was all white because of burns. They said it would take a few weeks for it to heal. Mr. Slyusarchuk also hypnotized that man to feel no pain in the burnt hand until it fully recovers
note: ever heard of anesthesia? ...
- Another thing was that he was able to give a book to a person, and told that person to read mentally a few random sentences from that book. Then he was able to find out from that person’s thoughts which sentences did he/she read and on which page of the book…
- There are many other interesting things about this man…NazarK (talk) 11:07, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
- That's a good question. I'm going to look into this, something's off, I wonder if the editor of this article is Andrily himself, I'm surprised there isn't a statement about his godhood in bed here... Someones going to have to edit this shit fast...Sanitycult (talk) 06:09, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
And I cant even help clean it up because every effin' source is in Ukrainian! This man certainly cannot mind read, levitate, stop bullets with his glare or whatever. This article reeks of sensationalism and outright false reporting. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 10:02, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
- There are, however, plenty of citations certifying his supposed achievements. And there are no reliable debunking proofs (except of private opinions like the ones expressed above). As far as the article is concerned, it's a perfectly true mirror of the existing information from mass media, press and other sources... NazarK (talk) 20:39, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Request for improved sources, verification of non-English sources
I added the "BLP sources" message box due to the concerns discussed on this page. In particular, the "Theory" section is totally unsourced, and while the "Records" section contains some citations, it's difficult for me to assess their reliability since I don't speak Ukrainian or Russian. Perhaps an independent editor could review some of these citations? As a physicist, I'm tempted to mark the hypnosis/mind-reading claims as pseudoscience, but I'd like to assume good faith, and I don't feel like I'm in a good position to evaluate the level of controversy, if any, about this man's claimed abilities. Madgrammarian (talk) 21:47, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
- I'm a native Ukrainian/Russian speaker. The links do contain abundant information about the claimed abilities, supposedly verified by independent academic scholars and other respectable/trustable persons. I live in the same city with Mr. Slyusarchuk and am interested in his abilities. That's why I've collected information and wrote that article. I tried to contact him personally as well, but with no success so far (though I did not try it very hard, and he's quite a busy and famous man nowadays). The links are mostly to different media highlighting his achievements. I was able to find only very scarce info about authentic academic publications related to Mr. Slyusarchuk's theory in Internet. My personal exploration of various forum posts and discussions related to him (including the stories of people who met him personally) suggests that he is quite a queer fish. Although multiple persons do confirm his abilities. He's most likely not able to fully explain his own skills... NazarK (talk) 23:02, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
- Check also Talk:Piphilology NazarK (talk) 23:05, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
- I've added some English links, including a link to official site of President of Ukraine. NazarK (talk) 23:21, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
David Copperfield doesn't really fly
And that guy doesn't do anything he claims. That's pretty obvious. Only some nationalist Ukrainians can believe in that circus. The video showing him "prove" that he remembers the first 3 million digits of Pi shows him saying ten digits. How on Earth does that prove anything, except that he could remember ten (not three million) digits ? As with all such charlatans, the tricks used are rather simple and can convince only those who are already convinced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 15:11, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- The above unsigned comment seems to come from some nationalist Russians (check IP location) who just hate to accept any human achievement if it comes from Ukraine. It's a purely personal opinion based prejudiced interpretation/imagination, not backed up by any reference sources or citations. NazarK (talk) 11:40, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Added the POV-check tag, this obviously needs more english sources, citations in general, criticism section or the like, and maybe a rewrite.188.8.131.52 (talk) 03:44, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
- Nationalist Russian ? I'm not Russian, just happen to live here. I couldn't be more indifferent to the little political conflict between the 2 countries. Here is the video proving he remembers 30 million figures : http://kinoplaneta.net/video/753/index.html
No one can take that as a proof, all he does is pronouncing "9,3,1,7,3,0,1,6,0,1". I can do that too. Am I a genius too ? This is just grotesque. 1 million dollar will be offered to him if he proves any of his tricks to be something else than illusionist's trick. If you don't believe that David Copperfield can fly, why do you believe this guy can read minds ? There is no published debunking because no foreign media cares about it, except one Russian newspaper that probably had to justify the payment of a trip to Kiev.184.108.40.206 (talk) 11:38, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I'm not saying he's not an illusionist. And I'm not saying I believe all his claims are 100% true. I just summarize what the media says. But, of course, as stated in the article, the guy is not going to recite all 30 million of decimal places of pi, because this is not physically possible. There are, however, plenty of references certifying his very extraordinary skills. It's not just one or two, or even a dozen of persons saying that. The evidence is overwhelming. If he's an illusionist, then he must be a pretty good one to mislead so many... That's quite enough for an encyclopedic article anyway... And please do find a reliable debunking review. I'll be happy to see it included here... NazarK (talk) 13:22, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
- Nazark. Please see on youtube the videos of James Randi exposing Uri Geller (in 4 parts), and James Hydrick (in 2 parts). In his confession, James Hydrick says "My whole idea behind this in the first place was to see how dumb America was, how dumb the world is"
Slyusarchuk doesn't need a specific debunking, it's always the same dumb tricks. It doesn't matter whether the conman is Israeli, American or Ukrainian, laws of physics are the same in all countries and there is no such thing as psychic powers.World citoyen (talk) 22:01, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
- I wouldn't be so sure that all his extraordinary achievements are simple dumb tricks. I've studied lots of various reports about him and my personal opinion is that there's a real something behind all this. However, my own conclusion is also that Slyusarchuk's abilities aren't always easy to control for him and require a certain effort and proper mental condition to be fully demonstrated. He's also far from being perfect as a human and has many character flaws and weaknesses, which aren't superhuman at all. The above reference to James Randi isn't enough to reliably debunk Slysarchuk's claims. NazarK (talk) 15:03, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
- The official world record for memorizing digits is 2080 in one hour. He says he did 5100 in 120 seconds. If he actually could do it, he could come to the World Memory Championships and win the total prize money of 90000 US$. Even for a professor thats a lot of money. But he never did. As noone ever did who claims to be eidetic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 15:23, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
- Well, he's a weird person, as far as I was able to find out from the reports of people who contacted him personally. Also, as far as I know, in spite of his supposedly extraordinary eidetic memorizing abilities, he has rather poor foreign language skills. For that reason it might be embarrassing for him to participate in an international championship, showing evidence of this obvious inconsistency. Also, some reports say, when reproducing eidetically memorized digits or figures he occasionally makes mistakes, especially when not in a quiet and confident mental condition. It took him several attempts to reproduce the correct sequences of digits from 1 million of digits of Pi, when that record was being verified. Also, if you watch the TV report showing him reproducing the text of eidetically memorized book, you can see that he spells out the text very slowly, like a little child who just started learning how to read. He's not able to read out the randomly chosen fragment of memorized text at high speed. It's like it takes quite some effort and at least a few seconds of time for him to restore each small fragment of what he reproduces...NazarK (talk) 15:02, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Arman Cagle's input
- Sorry, I had to cleanup a bit the messy translation (which was just too messy) and some other stuff, which seems too inappropriate for a talk page in Wikipedia. Thanks. -- Nazar (talk) 19:31, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence
This article is verging on the absurd and it is totally inappropriate to be on Wikipedia.
To claim that Slyusarchuk can read minds etc is an 'extraordinary claim' as it is (to the extent of our current understanding) supernatural. Therefore it should not be published unless it has 'extraordinary evidence' supporting it. I would suggest that a few newspaper articles in the Ukraine do not qualify. Sorry if this sounds patronising Nazark (as you seem to be a big fan, which is something of a conflict of interest dare I suggest). As such I am deleting some of the crazy stuff in here. Amilnerwhite (talk) 02:40, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
- This article's purpose is not to support or debunk Mr. Slyusarchuk's claims, but rather to provide a a short summary of what the media and other sources say about him and his skills. Slyusarchuk's achievements are widely covered in Russian and Ukrainian media by hundreds of publications and numerous TV reports. Even if his claims are a scam, the public resonance is more than enough to bring the topic up in Wikipedia article. However, please note that skeptical reviews would require at least the same level of credibility and references as the supportive ones. Thanks. NazarK (talk) 19:43, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
"skeptical reviews would require at least the same level of credibility and references as the supportive ones" ... which means no credibility at all. The article's purpose should be to provide a summary of sources with a minimum of credibility. Otherwise I can just troll the Area 51 article with crackpot theories made up by the mass media. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 19:07, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
- "The article's purpose should be to provide a summary of sources with a minimum of credibility" - and so it does of course, look at the reference to Ukrainian Record Book! As Wikipedia must be formal, this article must stay here even if nobody believes in it! Cheers, Paloff (talk) 16:13, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
There IS obvious evidence - against the claims for memorising Pi: Just calculate how many digits he would have to learn within one hour (even without sleep...). Ot is obvious that this would be impossible. This kind of articles is absolutely inappropriate for Wikipedia! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jansan (talk • contribs) 15:30, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Approach this article's subject with extreme skepticism. Today I learned of this individual here . This is a Chessbase article reporting a Chinese news article on the subject. The Chinese news article, as printed, includes numerous absurd claims. Not just improbable, but absurd. This may be a failure in translation or th Chinese news agency's fact checking, however it should serve as a signal to us that the media coverage of this individual touting his ability is probably really exaggerated. No doubt if he really had these abilities, then he would be able to prove it to the worldwide scientific community. That said, some of his claims may also be simply unprovable.
This article at present is little more than a list of ridiculous claims with dubious references. Someone please contribute a sizable section containing a skeptic rebuttal! Without that counterpoint, this article is of no value, it is simply misinformation. With a rebuttal however, it can at least be an educational tool for healthy skepticism. Rschwieb (talk) 17:31, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
Please check the discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:NazarK#Andriy_Slyusarchuk -- NazarK (talk) 18:35, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Collection of Reviews/Comments
For those of you who can read Ukrainian and Russian here is the link to a collection of over 300 reviews/comments on Andriy Slyusarchuk from different people (many of them met him personally). http://www.studzona.com/teacher/5702/1 . Useful for analysis. NazarK (talk) 21:23, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Links to the articles
A small collection of links to the articles related to Andriy Slyusarchuk -- http://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/Обговорення:Слюсарчук_Андрій_Тихонович NazarK (talk) 21:40, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Stop manipulating it please
People start again to edit out the comments in the article, that doubt the truth. This article must not under any circumstances stay here as an article about true skills. It might exist to document his "performances" and the Ukrainaing audience failing to see the scam, but it must be clear, that none of his record is accepted outside of the Ukraine and even his CV can not be verfied. He never accepted any international verificiation of his skills, even when offered money. It is a scam, we all know that, and therefore the article should be about a skilled mentalist and illusionist and must not claim any unreal records. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 13:09, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
- If you want to add the "comments in the article, that doubt the truth", you need a reliable source which you can quote, explicitly expressing these 'doubts about the truth". You can not add your own logic and interpretation into the article. You also should not remove referenced information claiming certain records, even if you think these records are 'fake'. Thanks. -- Nazar (talk) 10:18, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
- How can this article claim that no official attempt to debunk him was succesfull when he refuses any official attempt to verify his skills? How shell anybody publish a proof that he is a liar, when he never ever answers any request from outside the Ukraine? Why does he not compete in the World Championships and take away the 40,000 US$ he would win easily? THIS IS JUST A BIG SCAM. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 11:22, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Ukrainian book of records and other issues
I do not think that the term "world record" should be used as it is in this article. The only source backing this is the Ukrainian Book of records which does not include entries from outside the country and its mission statement sets out to promote Ukraine to the rest of the world. I would say that this seriously hampers it being a neutral source and its ability to used a a source for "world" records. Secondly after removing a deadlink there are now only two links to this man that are not Ukrainian. (One of which is a blog that actually refernces this article as a source which probably should be removed). Searching for him on the internet shows that he is not known outside his own country at all. All English sites are mirros or at least directly quoting from other sources, none have independently researched him. Since it has supposedly been a year since his record was set it appears that no other body concerned with the pi reciting records have concerned themselves with him, and neither has he attempted to prove his claims to a world wide audience. I feel that this is enough to remove the terms "verified" and "accepted" when refering to the world record. Thirdly a lot of this article reads as if they are facts about his life "At two years old he was able to read books" when in fact they all seem to be taken from interviews with him. No external sources listed independently make any claims about him and we are merely taking his word for every aspect of his life. Since many of these claims go against expected norms they should be represented as claims and not fact. The link to him being a Law professor is unlikely to be the same person. There's no other link apart from the name. (i will delete that after writing this) Because a couple of editors (Nazar especially) have seemingly put a lot of effort into writing this article and sourcing it i would like to give some time for solutions to be found rather than making wholesale changes. But these issues need to be addressed and i don't think that it is encyclopedic to have a statement "He is also succeeded to get multiple people out of coma state" when the only reference is a quote form the person who has done it. Quoth 31 (talk) 20:17, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- I have also just realised he is not listed amongst the staff at any of the Universities mentioned. This is moving into the area of a delete as non notable.Quoth 31 (talk) 20:51, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- Got little time now. In short, he's not a law professor, but he is a professor at the Chair of General Juristic Disciplines. His specialization there is Management, because his second higher education (he's graduated several high schools, not only a medical University) is in this field. This is 100% sure. I live in the same city and know that this is him (I’ve been to this Chair trying to contact him, but could not catch him – yet everyone there knows it’s him who sets the ‘world records’, starting from the chair secretary to the janitor and security guards in the University). This position is also mentioned in many reports about him. I ain't got the time now to look for more links, but you got his name there, and it's him (there are not so many professors in Ukraine with the same First, Middle and Family Name, as you might think. haha). The other position is also true, and confirmed. But he does not work there anymore, as per available information. I've updated the info.
- As to the rest, in short, you may edit the article to indicate that many of the things stated there are 'claimed to be verified by this or that source'. However, be careful not to overdo that. Neutrality is required here in Wikipedia from the editors, but not necessarily from the sources we cite. The criteria of inclusion is notability, which is undeniable in this case (use Google search for his Cyrillic name -- you'll get a ton of links; add to this the multiple TV appearances, printed press, etc., etc.). Thanks. -- Nazar (talk) 22:41, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- This whole article is still an embarasement for Wikipedia and it is a shame noone cares. This guy is a big liar. Noone ever could proof that he knows more than 100,000 digits of Pi but this person talks about 200 million! All the sources are Ukrainian. He never showed his skills in a reliable independent setting. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 11:27, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
For those interested, Mr. Slyusarchuk now claims to have beaten one of the world's strongest chess programs in two blindfold matches, http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=7183, a feat no professional player would dream to achieve nowadays. There are actually some very strong chess players in Ukraine, so he wouldn't even have to leave the country to give further prove of his outstanding abilities... --184.108.40.206 (talk) 06:36, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Does he have any scientific articles in ISI Web of Knowledge? Look at scholar google. Scholar google does NOT find any articles by "A Slyusarchuk" or "А Слюсарчук" . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 13:05, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
- Not a single one in ISI Web of Knowledge or PubMed. Neather by him nor about him. I repeat: Not a single one. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 15:32, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
The biography in this article is the claimed biographe of Andriy Slyusarchuk himself. The only references are self-statements from him in interviews. No reliable external reference to proof any of his biographical steps and career successes exists. Since some of his performances have been debunked as scam, one has to be in doubt. At least. lol. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 15:32, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
- Currently, the article is full of false statements. "Andriy was allowed to have an appointment with Yevgeniy Chazov, the Soviet Minister of Health Care at that time. Under protectorate of Yevgeniy Chazov at the age of 12..." One can easily check that in 1983 Chazov was not yet a Minister. "His subsequent Ph.D. thesis was «Травматические внутримозговые супратенториальные гематомы, осложнённые острой обструктивной гидроцефалией и прорывом крови в желудочковую систему.»" and a link is given which contains some text dated 2002. One can check that the text is actually taken from 2006 thesis by Alexander Shirshov with the same title. The text is copied by replacing the authour's name and the year to 2002. However, in this "2002 thesis" there are references to some talk at 4th Congress of Russian neurosurgeons in 2006 ("на 4 съезде нейрохирургов России (Москва, 2006)"). A large clean-up of the article is necessary. — Ace111 (talk) 23:12, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
There has been an interesting development after the "Rybka" event, I must say. lol. I haven't had enough time to look deeper into all the aspects of the case, but here are some facts I've gleaned which may be interesting in the context.
- There's an official site of Mr. Slysarchuk, which provides his biography data, as well as the scans of his official and stamped diplomas and certificates
- I've read both the Russian version and the English translation of the critical report of GM G.Timoshenko, and I've noticed the English translations isn't very exact. For example, the translation goes on to state affirmatively things like "Mr. Slyusarchuk clearly had contact with his assistant in the room (remember his friendly camera operator?), and had received the board numbers and the moves I had made.", while the Russian original presents this only as an assumption: "Заходя второй раз в зал, господин Слюсарчук уже имел готовые ответы (тут можно вспомнить про его друга-оператора)." In the same time, it's indeed true that many prominent chess masters have expressed considerable doubts about the validity of this record.
- And, what's interesting, the validity of his diplomas and other documents can reportedly be verified in the data base of Ministry of Education of Ukraine. -- Nazar (talk) 21:17, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
- I can not open the official site you mention. It seems to be password protected. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 14:42, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- It was fully open just yesterday. I think it's been closed or removed. There's currently a lot of changes going on about that site and other scientific claims of A.S. It has been declared by someone in Russian Wiki discussion that the site mentioned is not his official site and the documents there are faked by his ill-wishers. My current view is that there's indeed too much confusion about A.S.'s scientific achievements and their official recognition and certification. I'm inclined to believe that some part of his declared scientific titles are not fully valid, though I may be wrong... -- Nazar (talk) 15:42, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- I can not open the official site you mention. It seems to be password protected. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 14:42, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
The Russian Wikipedia page for Slyusarchuk currently points out that the medical diploma scan at his site is a fabrication. The dissertation mentioned here also appears to be clearly plagiarised (from this original), as pointed out by 'Светлана' ('Svetlana') at this forum. Frankly none of Slyusarchuk's claims stand up to scrutiny, and from further reading there may be serious questions to answer over representing himself as a doctor and potentially putting patients at risk.
My initial interest in Slyusarchuk relates to chess, where his claim to have beaten Rybka is almost universally considered nonsense. I translated Grandmaster Sergey Shipov's comments on this case, which include: "Slyusarchuk’s achievements won’t be believed by anyone with even the slightest grasp of modern chess." The latest commentary by Ukrainian Grandmaster Mikhail Golubev is also a good summary. Mishanp (talk) 10:27, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Andriy Slyusarchuk Chess Scam Hoax of The Century! By Anthony.R.Brown.
Andriy Slyusarchuk Chess Scam Hoax of The Century!
So How did Andriy Slyusarchuk Pull off? “The Chess Scam Hoax of The Century!
Spy Earpiece - nobody can even notice you're getting help!
This benefit of the newest technologies is irreplaceable in the situations where secret communication is needed. Extra small wireless spy earpiece and sensitive microphone let you receive all the necessary information in real time from your assistance without being noticed!
What Is Spy Earpiece For?
The main purpose of this device is to provide invisible communication over a cell phone. You can use it when you are:
passing exams or taking tests
making speech at a meeting or negotiations
working as a security guard
playing games or gambling at casino etc.
More about spy earpieces ...
You can also secretly listen to your MP3 player (music, radio, recordings).
A Special offer for students: Spy Glasses set - the newest spy device to help you at your exam.
How Does Spy Earpiece Work?
The spy ear piece is used the same way as you would use any other hands free or Bluetooth set with your phone except its small size (0.22×0.22×0.4 inch) and skin color makes it invisible for others. All you have to do is to connect the set to your sell phone and make or receive calls like you do regularly. The wireless earpiece receives the signal from the phone through the transmitter. More about the spy earpiece functioning...
Below are the Two Scam Hoax Games incase you have not seen them!.
[Event "Kiev"] [Site "?"] [Date "2011.04.27"] [Round "?"] [White "Slyusarchuk, Andriy"] [Black "Rybka 4"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B80"] [PlyCount "111"] [EventDate "2008.10.23"]
1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 e6 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nxd4 Qc7 6. g3 a6 7. Bg2 Nf6 8. O-O d6 9. Re1 Bd7 10. Nxc6 Bxc6 11. Nd5 Bxd5 12. exd5 e5 13. Re3 Be7 14. Rc3 Qd7 15. a4 O-O 16. a5 Rfc8 17. Rb3 Rc4 18. Bf1 Rc7 19. Be3 Re8 20. Rb4 e4 21. Bg2 Qf5 22. c3 Bf8 23. Qb3 Qh5 24. Re1 Qxd5 25. Qxd5 Nxd5 26. Rxe4 Rxe4 27. Bxe4 Nxe3 28. Rxe3 g6 29. Bd5 Rc5 30. c4 Rxa5 31. Rf3 b6 32. Bxf7+ Kh8 33. Bxg6 Bg7 34. Be4 Bxb2 35. Rf7 h5 36. Bd5 b5 37. cxb5 axb5 38. Rd7 Ba3 39. Kg2 Bc5 40. f4 Ra7 41. Rd8+ Kg7 42. Kh3 Kg6 43. Kh4 Re7 44. Rg8+ Kf6 45. Kxh5 Rh7+ 46. Kg4 Rxh2 47. Rf8+ Ke7 48. Rf7+ Ke8 49. Rb7 Kd8 50. Rxb5 Rd2 51. Be4 Rd4 52. Kf5 Rb4 53. Rxb4 Bxb4 54. Ke6 Ke8 55. f5 Kd8 56. g4 1-0 ??
[Event "Kiev"] [Site "?"] [Date "2011.04.27"] [Round "?"] [White "Rybka 4"] [Black "Slyusarchuk, Andriy"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [ECO "B94"] [PlyCount "56"] [EventDate "2011.??.??"]
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 Nbd7 7. f4 e5 8. Nf5 Qb6 9. Qd2 Qxb2 10. Rb1 Qa3 11. fxe5 dxe5 12. Bc4 Qa5 13. O-O Qc5+ 14. Ne3 b5 15. Bd5 Ra7 16. Kh1 Rc7 17. Rb3 h6 18. Bh4 b4 19. Ncd1 a5 20. Nb2 Be7 21. Nd3 Qb6 22. a3 Nc5 23. Nxc5 Qxc5 24. axb4 axb4 25. Bg3 Bd6 26. Bh4 Be7 27. Bg3 Bd6 28. Bh4 Be7 1/2-1/2 ??
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 09:08, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
There's currently a lot of controversy about Andriy Slyusarchuk. Russian Wiki Page has lots of info. Google Cache still has the copies of the pages with his (allegedly faked, or maybe not totally faked?) diplomas and certificates: diplomas and certificates , official biography (press "Cancel"). Also there's an upcoming on-line press conference by A. Slyusarchuk. See more here and here. -- Nazar (talk) 17:43, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
- The on-line press conference has been scheduled to be on May 13 on 10:00 but A. Slyusarchuk didn't come to it. The reason is probably that he received a lot of rather sceptical questions through the on-line form for which he has no good answers. - Ace111 (talk) 23:46, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Carbon Caryatid again and again added the false information (the male version of Natalia Slyusarchuk’s patronymic) despite my remark that patronymics are derived from male names alone in Slavic-language countries. I would propose to remove the false information from the wikiarticle. --Psychiatrick (talk) 15:12, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- Hello, thank you for engaging on the talk page. Please assume good faith. The last thing I want is for the article to mislead our readers. What I wish to find is some way to include the link, and the concept, of patronymic, which is likely to be a new concept for many people used to the English way of forming names. What constructive way forward can you suggest? Carbon Caryatid (talk) 15:44, 31 December 2015 (UTC)