The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Davewild (talk) 17:28, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Capture of Bijeljina (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article arose (partly) from discussion on Talk:Bijeljina massacre, but the "new" content (ostensibly about the "fighting/resistance" in the town prior to the massacre) in this article is not reliably sourced. While I originally suggested that any reliably sourced content on the "fighting/resistance" be merged into Bijeljina massacre, it is clear there isn't any. This is essentially a POVFORK attempting to justify the massacre using reporting of uncorroborated testimony of defence witnesses in the ICTY case against Radovan Karadžić, which is ongoing. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 03:45, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it is well sourced by the BBC & CNN.

attempting to justify the massacre, keep politics & ad hominem comments out of the discussion, please. All I ever said I am doing & am doing is balancing the article & including facts, etc. Citadel48 (talk) 23:05, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per above. I'm ignoring the wikilawyering. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 23:46, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I'm ignoring the biased & ad hominem accusations and actions. Citadel48 (talk) 01:24, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete as per Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia major portion of the article has simply been copy and pasted from parent article with zero attribution. This editor seems to have a copy and pasting problem in general. Could apply Template:Copied but the editors involved at the parent article seem to agree the sourcing is a problem..... that is new info sourced to copyrighted videos. (Thus not much to save that is new) As i have suggested before to Citadel48, he needs to uses scholarly publications over news stories and linking to copy vios on youtube. --Moxy (talk) 06:22, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete clearly a WP:CONTENTFORK. 23 editor (talk) 18:38, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bosnia and Herzegovina-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:09, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Yugoslavia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:09, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:09, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:09, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:10, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - per nomination (the small amount of additional material, where relevant and supported by RS, could be merged into the original article, but this looks mostly like a POVFORK to me). Anotherclown (talk) 16:12, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.