Talk:Bijeljina massacre/Archive 3

"Plavsic and the body" RfC formulation
I want to take this article to FA, and I believe that the inclusion of the material about "Plavsic stepping over a body to kiss Arkan" needs to be resolved by the community in order to progress the article. I have formulated a RfC for that purpose, and want to give regular contributors to this article an opportunity to tweak it before I lodge the RfC. This is the formulation as it stands:

RfC: Should this article make reference to a photograph that reportedly shows the Bosnian Serb politician Biljana Plavšić stepping over the body of a dead Bosniak civilian to kiss the Serb paramilitary leader Željko Ražnatović (aka Arkan)? The current version of the article makes reference to a photograph in the following terms: "A photograph, described as "widely-circulated" and "notorious", reportedly shows Plavšić stepping over the body of a dead Bosniak civilian during the kiss." This material is sourced to an online BBC report and a journal article, which itself cites another news source. The kiss between Plavšić and Arkan is not at issue here, there are many reliable sources that mention it, and it has been accepted as an agreed fact in several prosecutions at International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. The question is over whether or not a photograph showing this detail exists, and whether or not it is an extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary sources. Plavšić is still alive, so WP:BLP obviously applies here.

Thoughts? Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 13:57, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * It should be explicit in that there is no source that counters with a claim that the photograph doesn't exist. Also those aren't the only two sources as there are more above and these should also be thrown in:
 * Maggie O'Kane in Court comes of age with her surrender published by The Guardian (12 January 2001): "It is known that she kept bad company for most of 90s. Infamously, she was photographed stepping over the body of an executed Muslim in the town of Bijeljina in April 1992, to kiss Arkan, Serbia's most brutal paramilitary leader."


 * Nancy Amoury Combs in Prosecutor v. Plavšić. Case No. IT-00-39&40/1-S published in the American Journal of International Law by the American Society of International Law (October 2003): "A notorious photograph taken during the first days of the conflict showed Plavsic stepping over the body of a dead Muslim civilian to kiss the murderous Serbian warlord Zeljko Raznjatovic, better known as Arkan, greeting him as a patriot." --Potočnik (talk) 16:57, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Here is a summary of the sources Potočnik has presented:


 * 1) BBC—Doesn't mention Bijeljina
 * 2) Drakulić—Contradictory, body or bodies?
 * 3) Subotić—Cites Glauber 2002, who doesn't mention Bijeljina at all
 * 4) Glauber—No mention of Bijeljina (see above)
 * 5) Uggelberg—No mention of Bijeljina
 * 6) Combs—Doesn't mention Bijeljina
 * 7) The Guardian—Mentions dead bodies in Bijeljina.

Here are some of the sources that make no mention of her stepping over corpse(s).


 * 1) Gojko Beric, Celestial Serbs: "The Bosniaks will always remember her for the kisses she showered on [Arkan] after the massacre and "liberation" of Bijeljina, where the streets were still littered with the corpses of civilians who had just been killed." No stepping over bodies.
 * 2) Janine di Giovanni—Madness Visible: A Memoir of War: "Going through old newspaper clippings of Plavsic in her finest hours, storming the battlefields and kissing murders like Arkan on the cheek..." No bodies.
 * 3) Silber and Little, The Death of Yugoslavia: "Izetbegovic also sent a joint delegation to Bijeljina to investigate alleged crimes there. [...] Plavsic didn't hide her own interpretation of events. She greeted Arkan with a kiss." No body.
 * 4) Armatta, Twilight of Impunity: "For his success in ridding Bijeljina of its non-Serb population Arkan received a kiss, recorded on camera, from the RS presidency member Biljana Plavsic. ." No bodies.
 * 5) Kurspahić, As Long as Sarajevo Exists: On that day in Bijeljina, when the cameras were recording the kiss Ms. Plavsic bestowed upon the notorious war criminal Zeljko Raznatovic-Arkan in the presence of high-ranking JNA officers..." No body (p. 118)
 * 6) Central Intelligence Agency, Balkan Battlegrounds: "Biljana Plavsic first encountered Arkan after the Bijeljina takeover. She greeted him with a kiss." Again, no body. (p. 164)
 * 7) Vidosav Stevanovic, Trude Johansson, Milosevic: The People's Tyrant": "After Arkan had cleansed Bijeljina of Muslims, Biljana Plavsic kissed him in front of cameras." (p. 100)
 * 8) Carole Rogel, The Breakup of Yugoslavia: "Plavsic [...] greeted Arkan with a big kiss after his 1992 exploits in Zvornik" (p. 136) No bodies. Zvornik?
 * 9) Emir Suljagic, Kisses as Bosnian War Kicked Off: "When the delegation met Arkan in front of the municipal offices in Bijeljina, Biljana Plavsic kissed him on the cheek. "She called him 'my child'," said Omeragic." Nothing
 * 10) The Seattle Times, Karadzic Gives Power To Hard-Line, Notorious `Serb Empress : "She is well-remembered for walking hand in hand with a Serb paramilitary leader, Zeljko Raznatovic, better known as the notorious Arkan, during his 1992 seizure of Bijeljina, a northeastern Bosnian town that became a symbol of Serb atrocities. In front of cameras, a euphoric Plavsic kissed Arkan on the cheek. He later named her "the Serb empress" and gave her his self-styled "Obilic" medal for bravery." No bodies'
 * 11) The Independent, Foreign Office to welcome Serbian 'Nazi : "They remember, as Mr Cook's officials apparently do not, how in April 1992 the Serb paramilitary boss Zeljko Raznjatovic "Arkan" stormed the small, mostly Muslim town of Bijeljina in north-east Bosnia, butchering many of the inhabitants, and how Mrs Plavsic rushed to the town and - after inspecting Arkan's grisly handywork - gave him a rapturous kiss." See how phrases such as "inspecting Arkan's grisly handywork" can eventually morph into literally stepping over dead bodies?
 * 12) The Moscow Times, West Finds Peculiar Ally In Former Hawk Plavsic: "She shocked the world in 1992 when she publicly kissed Arkan, a Serbian fighter whose troops are suspected of atrocities against Moslems." No mention of bodies.
 * 13) The New York Times, Ex-Bosnian Serb Chief Is Said to Surrender : "Early in the war, which lasted from 1992 to 1995, Ms. Plavsic was photographed kissing a notorious paramilitary leader, Zeljko Raznatovic, better known as Arkan, after his forces seized the Bosnian town of Bijeljina, slaughtering and expelling its Muslim inhabitants." Note: this was published two days before the The Guardian article which purports Plavsic stepped over a dead body in Bijeljina, yet it makes no mention of this (extremely important) detail.

The story is the invention of Izetbegović ally and Young Muslim Ešref Čampara, from his book semi-fictional book Human rights throughout history and today (2000; Vijeće Kongresa bošnjačkih intelektualaca). On page 21, he mentions how Plavsic steps over a corpse "to kiss the Avenger", Arkan. This is where Western journalists got the idea. Investigative reporter Miroslav Lazanski, writing for Politika, explicitly says such a photo doesn't exist. See, BILJANA, GRAĐANIN SRBIJE (21 March 2009):


 * "A ta "slika" nije prikazana u haškoj sudnici samo zato što slika i ne postoji, jer Plavšićeva i nije prešla preko leševa. Da se pozdravila s Arkanom, jeste, ali to još nije zločin. Slika sa leševima postoji samo u zlim mislima Slavenke i Margarete, samo što se nisu usaglasile u broju leševa."

Translation:


 * "That "photo" wasn't presented at The Hague tribunal because it simply doesn't exist and Plavšić did not step over any corpses. That she kissed Arkan is not in dispute, but a kiss in of itself is not a crime. A photo of corpses exists, but only in the heads of Slavenka and Margareta [two writers who mentioned the alleged photo], the only problem is even they can't agree on the number of bodies."
 * Jesus half of your sources don't mention Bijeljina either and are you honestly saying that it was in a different town? Them not mentioning a body does not preclude it from being there and hell you even have your own source say "the streets were still littered with the corpses of civilians who had just been killed" contrary to what you've claimed over and over. I've heard enough of your little theories. First it was "not a single source mentions her stepping over dead bodies prior to 2003" then "the first mention of [a] body/bodies comes in late 2002" when you have it mentioned January 2001. Now this Čampara is behind it all and everyone was duped - Maggie O'Kane the journalist who was in Bosnia during the entire conflict, the journals BRILL and American Journal of International Law, the Guardian, BBC, and Chicago Tribune. Ah yes, congratulations on not finding a tabloid, but rather Miroslav Lazanski, who is the nephew of Plavšić. It's amusing to hear you moan about "vested interest" and then pull this. Let's cite Karadžić's daughter or Mladić's wife for the Bosnian War article while we're at it. --Potočnik (talk) 21:46, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Saying folks like Čampara didn't have a vested interest is absurd given their ties with the SDA. Lazanski, who has no more of a vested interest than them, is reliable in my book. He's cited in Featured articles like Battle of Vukovar and scholarly books like those of Glaurdic, Gow, and Magaš and Žanić. But since Lazanski's rebuke is nowhere near as extraordinary and outlandish as your claim, verifiability demands a photograph be provided (especially in the face of Lazanski's denial). You asked for a source that explicitly states the photo doesn't exist (an almost impossible demand given how difficult it is to "prove" a negative outright) and still I managed to provide one. As far as the above sources go, 10/13 mention Bijeljina and one mentions Zvornik(?). For some of them, I deliberately didn't include that portion of the text so as not to make the quotes too long. I've done that now, since obviously you have no interest in looking at those sources for yourself. If I hadn't inspected yours more closely, we'd all have thought the BBC, Chicago Tribune, etc. actually mentioned Bijeljina, which they don't, rendering them useless. Go figure. 23 editor (talk) 22:13, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Your original research on Čampara (interestingly no quote there anyway, just your word on it) that he is the root of all this does not interest me nor Wikipedia. Reliable sources do the talking and Plavsic's nephew is not one. Your personal Čampara theory carries as much weight as your claim that there's a demonizing cabal after Plavsic that gets to evade slander and libel liability. You cannot conclusively say that the bodies were there or that they weren't. What you can say is that "some sources mention her stepping over a body, while others do not" and if you want reword the article to something akin to that then I have no issue with that. --Potočnik (talk) 09:25, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

-

I would suggest posting an RfC notice on the following Noticeboards to get editors to comment; the Biographies of Living People Noticeboard, the Reliable Sources Noticeboard and possibly the Neutral Point of View Noticeboard. If things get heated, aggressive or otherwise uncivil, perhaps a notice on the Admin Noticeboard with a request for moderation of comments. A notice should also be placed on the related WikiProjects listed above.

As for the ongoing dispute over sourcing; put them into a table. 4 columns by however many sources are used. Column titles would possibly be "Kissed over body/bodies"; "Quote (plus sentence on either side)"; "Kissed but no bodies (lack of mention/outright disputed)"; Quote (plus sentence on either side)

It may also be best to place a caveat warning for users to do a bit of fact-checking WP:Before placing a comment either way. Hope this helps with the RfC formatting. If you want help with setting up the table, just give me a user ping. Cheers, Drcrazy102 (talk) 23:08, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * That's a great help, Doc. A table is a good idea, I'll set one up and I'll ping you for a 2O before I post the RfC. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 23:16, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

RfC Table draft
I'll keep adding to this, but won't complain if other editors would also add info they dug up.
 * Peacemaker are you saying this occurred in a different town other than Bijeljina when there is no source (besides a erroneous one off) that says they publicly kissed early in the war in 1992 in a town besides Beijljina? Make up your mind: do you want to say the kiss didn't happen? that the bodies weren't there? that she didn't step over one? or that it occurred in a different town? If you want to argue that a public kiss event happened in a location different from Bijlejina then present sources. --Potočnik (talk) 09:30, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Not really, is it a problem? I don't know where else Plavsic went and/or ran into Arkan. Is it possible that it happened elsewhere as well as Bijeljina? Or are you saying that it didn't happen again, so we can dispense with pointing out that issue? It's just that one source says Zvornik. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 23:32, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes it is a problem. That's the entire implication. If you're suggesting it didn't occur there then there should be sources that are pointing it having happened elsewhere. Have you come across sources pointing out a similar notorious kiss in 1992 or early in the war besides Bijeljina? Come on. If you're aiming for neutrality then these little notes should be removed.
 * Personally from all these sources all that a person can say is that: sources mention her kissing Arkan, some sources say that she stepped over a body to do so, and some sources do not mention a body. Suggesting either of the latter two as being definitive would be going on faith either way. If you think those things should to be pointed out in the article then I'd be open to that otherwise what are we doing, but acting like some jurors. --Potočnik (talk) 07:07, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
 * OK, I get what you're saying. But what about the Zvornik one? Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 08:38, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Like I said it's a one off. I can't find any other source to support the claim that it occurred instead or also in Zvornik so I can only conclude it's a mistake. --Potočnik (talk) 08:44, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Ok, so I don't know who put in all/most/some of the "Kissed but no bodies"'s sources but I want them listed five minutes ago, ok? Good to hear. We will be needing a source and link for the following; Find these sources, post them up, give me a quote and we can keep going ... or ... I cull the sources that are a) not referenced and/or b) not quoted. They've been up for a few days now, there is no excuse. I will give a 24-48 hours limit (depending on my memory) before I remove the "sources". Pinging for timely responses and action. If the quotes were removed, if the source link was removed, put them back up if they support the column header or remove them. Thanks again to Peacemaker67 for putting in the time and effort to create the table, now we just need to keep going at it, then we can post up an RfC and settle this. Cheers, Drcrazy102 (talk) 03:01, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Beric (who the hell is Beric?)
 * 2) di Giovanni (I know some Giovanni's but they use Pokemon, so which Giovanni is this?)
 * 3) Silber and LIttle (yeah they've got a quote, but who are they? I want them verified)
 * 4) Karspahic (same as 1.)
 * 5) Stevanovic and Johansson (same as 1.)
 * 6) Rogel (same as 1.)
 * 7) The Seattle Times (that's great that there's a newspaper, but what article, who wrote the article, when was it published? Find it)
 * 8) The Independent (see above)
 * 9) The Moscow Times (see above)
 * 10) The New York Times (see above)
 * There's no WP:DEADLINE, Doc. I'll get to it. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 03:08, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I heartily agree that there isn't a deadline, but it helps get people moving into action. I won't rush any RfC preparations, just non-sourced source deletion. (Does that last part make sense? I can't tell but it's the best I've got, sorry). Cheers, Drcrazy102 (talk) 03:21, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I would add sentences on either side, but some of these are only accessible to me in snippet view, or the following/preceding page is not available in preview. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 04:05, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * No worries, the "sentence either side" is really more just for context and to make finding the text easier. Thanks for putting up the quotes and sources. Cheers, Doctor Crazy in Room 102 of The Mental Asylum 04:15, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * ... and that is why I love working with . He gets things done, and damn fast. I just saw where the sources were above (skipped because of argument and TL;DR, shame on me), or I would have done this myself. So I now feel bad for rushing Peace, but we are almost ready to go ahead to an RfC. and, do you both agree with the proposal statement from ? (Provided below)

RfC: Should this article make reference to a photograph that reportedly shows the Bosnian Serb politician Biljana Plavšić stepping over the body of a dead Bosniak civilian to kiss the Serb paramilitary leader Željko Ražnatović (aka Arkan)? The current version of the article makes reference to a photograph in the following terms: "A photograph, described as 'widely-circulated' and 'notorious', reportedly shows Plavšić stepping over the body of a dead Bosniak civilian during the kiss." This material is sourced to an online BBC report and a journal article, which itself cites another news source. To be clear: the kiss between Plavšić and Arkan is not at issue here, there are many reliable sources that mention it, and it has been accepted as an agreed fact in several prosecutions at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. The question is over whether or not a photograph showing Plavsic  stepping over a dead body to kiss Arkan  exists, and whether or not it is an exceptional claim requiring exceptional sources. Plavšić is still alive, so WP:BLP also applies here. A list of sources both mentioning and not mentioning Plavsic stepping over a dead body, is provided below for easy perusal though respondents are asked to find more sources if possible.(Minor copy-edit and additional sentence) If this proposal statement is acceptable, then I suppose we can get the RfC started. FWIW I can't find fault and copy-edited for clarity rather than because of any errors or non-neutrality. (BTW Peace, I was double checking your quotes as you went, you did better than I did) Cheers, Doctor Crazy in Room 102 of The Mental Asylum 06:57, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Remove the mention of those two sources because we are beyond just those. Modify first line to "stepping over a dead Bosniak body". The "question" is how to best reflect the information at hand into the article not to act as juror and decide whether or not the photograph exists. --Potočnik (talk) 07:04, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Alright, how's this for the text of the RfC, after which the table will appear: RfC: Should this article make reference to the Bosnian Serb politician Biljana Plavšić stepping over the body of a dead Bosniak to kiss the Serb paramilitary leader Željko Ražnatović (aka Arkan)? The current version of the article makes reference to a photograph in the following terms: "A photograph, described as "widely-circulated" and "notorious", reportedly shows Plavšić stepping over the body of a dead Bosniak civilian during the kiss." The kiss between Plavšić and Arkan is not at issue here, there are many reliable sources that mention it, and it has been accepted as an agreed fact in several prosecutions at International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. The question is whether "Plavšić stepping over the body of a dead Bosniak", or words to that effect, should be mentioned in the article, significant number of sources mention mention this detail while a significant number of sources do not'. If you consider it should be mentioned in the article, please say how it should be mentioned in the article. Plavšić is still alive, so WP:BLP obviously applies. The table below lists sources/quotes that mention the "Plavšić stepping over the body of a dead Bosniak" detail in some form, as well as sources/quotes that don't mention that detail regarding "the kiss". This is a bit of a contentious and complex RfC, so it would be appreciated if interested editors would do a bit of fact-checking/reading before placing a comment either way. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 09:55, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Change:
 * "Should this article make reference to the Bosnian Serb politician Biljana Plavšić stepping over the body of a dead Bosniak civilian to kiss the Serb paramilitary leader Željko Ražnatović (aka Arkan)?" to "How should this article make reference to the Bosnian Serb politician Biljana Plavšić stepping over a dead Bosniak body to kiss the Serb paramilitary leader Željko Ražnatović (aka Arkan)?"
 * "The question is whether "Plavšić stepping over the body of a dead Bosniak", or words to that effect, should be mentioned in the article, given that a significant number of sources that describe "the kiss" do not mention this detail." to "The question is how "Plavšić stepping over the body of a dead Bosniak", or words to that effect, should be mentioned in the article, given that a significant number of sources mention mention this detail while a significant number of sources do not."
 * And I'd agree to it. --Potočnik (talk) 10:05, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * It's not really up to you to agree with, old chap, you can do that in the RfC. I'm making the request, and I'm asking for input here before I post it. I have tweaked the wording of the "body" bit to improve the grammar. I am not changing it to "how", but I have re-worded it slightly to ask editors that consider it should be mentioned to indicate how they consider it should be mentioned. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 11:55, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I was asked by Doc if I "agree with the proposal statement". The fact that there's multiple reliable sources saying the same thing already dictates that it warrants a mention. The question is how to do this with other sources in mind. Off the top of my head this is like removing a sentence cited to Milazzo and Hoare because Tomasevich and Ramet failed to mention something. It's absurd. --Potočnik (talk) 12:17, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I appreciate that is what Doc asked you for, but making this RfC about "how" and not "whether" eliminates 's position from the RfC and predetermines the outcome in favour of including the detail. If the premise of not including that detail is absurd, the community should identify that during the RfC, and the detail will be retained in some form. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 22:31, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * While I was asking if the statement was "agreed to", I meant that in the sense of "is this an agreeable statement for uninvolved, clueless editors who have no idea about this stuff to actually understand what the RfC is actually asking?" rather than a "what is your favourite version?". Easily missed point, and I should have been clearer. Sorry for any misunderstandings. Cheers, Doctor Crazy in Room 102 of The Mental Asylum 00:06, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

New version (pinging and  for comment too): RfC: Should this article make reference to the Bosnian Serb politician Biljana Plavšić stepping over the body of a dead Bosniak to kiss the Serb paramilitary leader Željko Ražnatović (aka Arkan)? The current version of the article makes reference to a photograph in the following terms: "A photograph, described as "widely-circulated" and "notorious", reportedly shows Plavšić stepping over the body of a dead Bosniak civilian during the kiss." The kiss between Plavšić and Arkan is not at issue here, there are many reliable sources that mention it, and it has been accepted as an agreed fact in several prosecutions at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. The question of this RfC is whether Plavšić stepping over the body of a dead Bosniak, or words to that effect, should be mentioned in the article, given that a significant number of sources mention this detail while a significant number of sources do not. If you consider it should be mentioned in the article, please indicate what wording you consider should be used. Plavšić is still alive, so WP:BLP obviously applies. The table below lists sources/quotes that mention the "Plavšić stepping over the body of a dead Bosniak to kiss Arkan " detail in some form, as well as a list of sources/quotes that don't mention any dead body during "the kiss". This is a bit of a contentious and complex RfC, so it would be appreciated if interested editors would do a bit of fact-checking/reading before placing a comment either way. I suggest editors use the terms Include or Do not include along with their comments and/or suggested wording. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 11:55, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm agreeable to this further in both senses of "agreed to" (detailed in comment above of same edit revision), though I would be explicit about the table mentioning which "whats happening during the kiss"; so probably changing to: The table below lists sources/quotes that mention the "Plavšić stepping over the body of a dead Bosniak to kiss Arkan " detail in some form, as well as a list of sources/quotes that don't mention any dead body during "the kiss", where underlined text is an addition. I am a nit-picking copy-editor, but it's only a minor detail and editors are probably smart enough to realise anyway, but this should cover all bases at any rate. Great work as ever, and I'll drop a note on talk page about this. Cheers, Doctor Crazy in Room 102 of The Mental Asylum 00:06, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I've added that above. Check if you reckon I've understood you right. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 00:29, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Yep, but I've moved the underlining to be clearer about the differences between the options . I used the underlinings to show the difference between what you had originally and what I was suggesting. I've also dropped a note at 's talkpage to try and kick their attention over here for a minute or two when they next come online and check their talk page. I suppose we should re-ping and see if they find this "an agreeable statement for uninvolved, clueless editors who have no idea about this stuff to actually understand what the RfC is actually asking." Is it bad to self-quote? Too pretentious or is this was an okay situation? Curious, is all. Cheers, Doctor Crazy in Room 102 of The Mental Asylum 00:59, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Extend the underline of "stepping over the body of a dead Bosniak" to "mention the "Plavšić stepping over the body of a dead Bosniak to kiss Arkan"". --Potočnik (talk) 07:11, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note that one source explicitly denies there was [a] corpse(s) involved, and we have footage of the kiss (with no corpse[s] present). Also, the Bosniak journalist interviewing her here makes no mention of it at all, and neither does Suljagic (who witnessed the kiss first hand). The RFC should at the very least include Lazanski, direct participants to view footage of the kiss and make clear that none of us have seen such an image. 23 editor (talk) 00:45, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Can I ask if you can point to the specific source rather than simply state that there is a source. I have only done searches about the kiss itself, not about the corpses, so I have likely missed the reference. Cheers, Doctor Crazy in Room 102 of The Mental Asylum 00:59, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * It's in Serbian. Feel free to use Google Translate. . 23 editor (talk) 02:01, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * 23, if you want to have this represented, I'm going to need a translation into English. Both you and I know that using Google Translate without any knowledge of Serbian can provide grammatically confusing and bizarre results. I avoid Cyrillic machine translations because they are even less accurate. Over to you. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 02:45, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * - It seems a bit "politically biased" towards Plavsic. Not sure how reliable the source is because of that, but the relevant (machine translated) quote is: "The Hague indictment of Biljana Plavsic, covering the period until the end of 1992, the crime occurred in Srebrenica in the summer of 1995. Sweden journalist says that the tribunal was shown pictures Plavsic crossing over the dead bodies of Muslims in Bijeljina to be approached and kissed Arkan '. Slavenka Drakulic in his book claims the same, but according to her data, there were more corpses. And this 'image' is not displayed in the Hague courtroom just because pictures do not exist, because Plavsic and not passed over dead bodies. To be greeted with Arkan, yes, but it's not a crime. Image with corpses exists only in evil thoughts Slavenka and Margaret, only that they were not agreed upon in the number of corpses."
 * So it does refute the claim of bodies, but it does so by saying that the images (with corpses) is reported to exist and was shown to a "Swedish tribunal" (I presume the Hague?). Not very convincing as it stands as a machine translation, maybe the actual translation is better. Cheers, Doctor Crazy in Room 102 of The Mental Asylum 02:51, 15 December 2015 (UTC); stuck translation for below rendition by a human as of 03:47, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Evidently, Google translate has completely and utterly butchered the translation. It reads as follows: "Margaret Nordgren claims Mrs. Plavšić was indicted for Srebrenica, but this is untrue as [Plavšić's] indictment only covers the period until the end of 1992, while the Srebrenica massacre occurred in July 1995. The Swedish journalist also claims that a photo of Plavšić stepping over a dead body in order to kiss Arkan was presented as evidence at the Hague tribunal. Slavenka Drakulić makes a similar claim in her book, but she alleges that Plavšić stepped over multiple bodies. Such a photo was never presented at The Hague precisely because no such image exists. That [Plavšić] exchanged greetings with Arkan is true, but that in of itself is not a crime. A photo of Plavšić exists only in the imaginations of Drakulić and Nordgren, and they cannot agree on the number of corpses." 23 editor (talk) 03:37, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, it has. However, while I am keen to include it in some way, I think we need to be very careful in handling this source. It is an opinion piece in Politika, a Serbian newspaper that made some pretty wayward claims during the breakup of Yugoslavia as it was pretty much under the sway of the communist party. However, Lazanski is a well-travelled war correspondent. It makes unsourced claims about the non-existence of the photograph. Not straightforward by any means. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 06:00, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Lazanski is Plavsic's nephew... she's his aunt. Are you serious? The only source trying to refute it is a family relative. I've told you a thousand times 23 editor there were two kisses and it is not up to editors to examine primary evidence. Stop trying to push this rubbish into the RFC statement. --Potočnik (talk) 06:50, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Lazanski is Plavsic's nephew? Have you got a source for that? ? I don't think we should include him in that case, too close to it., your views? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 07:06, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * From the man's own lips: --Potočnik (talk) 07:09, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Lazanski is used in Featured articles such as Battle of Vukovar and cited in scholarly works. Let's not pretend that we haven't used sources in the past that potentially have an interest in portraying a certain viewpoint, i.e. Cohen with his HDZ "connections", Pavlowitch with his familial ties to Slobodan Jovanović and others in the Yugoslav royalist government, and the CIA (the last one is pretty self-explanatory). Potočnik asked for a source which explicitly denies stepping over a body and there it is. A plethora of other sources either don't mention it or misrepresent the views of both those who say there was and those who say there wasn't a body. I also must mention that the article as it sits now contradicts itself quite badly: "On 3 April, Serb forces removed the bodies of those killed in anticipation of a delegation of high-ranking Bosnian officials arriving the next day." If the bodies were removed, how could Plavšić be photographed stepping over one? Also the Zvornik mention isn't a one-off. See . 23 editor (talk) 18:51, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Lazanski isn't published by a university press, for starters. I think he must be discounted as far too involved. I agree that we need to explain that at least one source says the bodies were removed the day before. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 00:44, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The man put in charge of collecting the bodies was ordered to do so in the morning of 4 April and worked "until dark" 23's own source says "the streets were still littered with the corpses of civilians who had just been killed".--Potočnik (talk) 07:09, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Interesting that the judgement says the policeman was ordered to guard the hearse "about 3 April", instead of "on 3 April" indicating lack of precision by the witness or concern about his reliability. I think we are best off just forgetting about this "who cleaned up the bodies and when" stuff as far as the RfC is concerned. The TOL source is just a doco transcript and the ICTY transcript is deliberately vague about it. I've made a couple of amendments to the article to reflect what is actually in the source. ? Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 06:14, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * So;
 * "Around/About/Approx./Whatevs 3 April" is a good edit and reflects the ICTY source's information 100% (without a copyvio, whoop whoop)
 * "Serb forces ordered removal of bodies" ... see above. The date the 'order for body-removal' was made is not explicit in the ICTY source and would likely have been given either 2/3 April, but we don't know that; we only know it was for a delegation arriving on 4 April. Good WP:Synth/WP:OR catch.
 * Cheers, Doctor Crazy in Room 102 of The Mental Asylum 07:48, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I think I'm ready to post the RfC with the most recent version above. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 08:51, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Go for it, though I'm sure that and  would probably want to nitpick a few sentences to create a desired outcome; the mention, or not, of the photo of Plavsic stepping over bodies, or not. Pinged them to just double check and get a tick of approval. Cheers, Doctor Crazy in Room 102 of The Mental Asylum 12:59, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * It's as good as it will get I suppose. Push the button! --Potočnik (talk) 13:04, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Put it up. 23 editor (talk) 00:24, 18 December 2015 (UTC)