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 redirect to War crimes in the Kosovo War#Organ theft. Relevant content can be merged from history as editorial consensus may determine. Sandstein 07:52, 14 January 2019 (UTC) reply

Organ theft in Kosovo (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Do we need this?

From the article's lede:

«The United Nations (UN) war crimes prosecutors investigated the case in 2002 and 2003, and again in 2004, but concluded there was insufficient evidence to prove that the organ harvesting ring existed.[6]» and «Since the issuance of the report, however, senior sources in the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (EULEX) and many members of the European Parliament have expressed serious doubts regarding the report and its foundations, believing Marty failed to provide "any evidence" concerning the allegations.[8]»

So it seems like this is a largerly unfounded conspiarcy theory, largerly disseminated by russian and serbian media, yet the article (outside of the lede) presents it in a completely uncritical way. The article should be either completely rewritten or removed alltogether (possibly merging the neutral bits that critically access the conspiracy theory with the War crimes in the Kosovo War article) Openlydialectic ( talk) 13:04, 6 January 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU ^(T) 14:07, 6 January 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU ^(T) 14:07, 6 January 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kosovo-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU ^(T) 14:07, 6 January 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU ^(T) 14:08, 6 January 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albania-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU ^(T) 14:08, 6 January 2019 (UTC) reply

• The question isn't whether the allegations are true, but rather is the subject notable, which it doesn't seem that you are disputing if I'm reading your comment correctly. If there is a POV issue with the current content, that is to be addressed through editing and discussion, not deletion, and merger with War crimes in the Kosovo War is also a topic for ordinary processes. See WP:ATD. postdlf ( talk) 16:04, 6 January 2019 (UTC) reply
• Merge with War crimes in the Kosovo War. The focus of the article is strongly on instances perpetrated by Kosovo Liberation Army during the aforementioned conflict. Adding up the readable prose in both articles, a merge wouldn't put the resulting article over the recommended maximum article size, and there is some well-referenced stuff in this article, so a simple redirect would result in the loss of some valuable content. SITH (talk) 20:57, 6 January 2019 (UTC) reply
• Delete, allegations or investigations on various colors of criminality, in this case organ trafficing, exist in every country. Let's start with US or other western countries where the demand is higher. I don't see any articles for other countries. The article is mainly based on B92 Serbian sources, trying to connect the KLA with organ trafficing, still 20 years after the war without proving anything. The rest are stating allegations, and no substance is being ellaborated. A good part of the references are regarding the MEDICUS case, which has nothing to do with the Kosovo War and is unrelated to the "organ trafficing" allegations.-- Mondiad ( talk) 00:35, 7 January 2019 (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.