Not sure where to put this; the talk page seems to have fragmented, and nothing is in chronological order anymore.  This section looks like as good a place as any.

Just in case you're looking for an outside opinion, analogous to an admin closing an AFD: For reasons unrelated to this content decision, I spent last night looking at this entire talk page (not the archives, thank God).  After reading it all, I figured I might as well put that to some use.  It is my opinion that there is no consensus to add the war crimes information to the article in any form, and that achieving such a consensus is not going to happen at this time, and further discussion is going to amount to going around and around in circles, with no benefit.  Since no consensus for controversial information defaults to "don't include", I think it should not be included, and you should all move on.

I note that "consensus" does not mean unanimity; there is no obligation to discuss this until everyone agrees.  Otherwise, AFD's would last several years.  I cannot imagine any possible compromise wording that would gain a consensus for inclusion.  I actually have no strong opinion on the inclusion itself; just an outside take on how your consensus building is going.

Non-binding, of course, but to be honest, there's a 95% chance that that's what formal mediation would end up telling you anyway.  Accept this, or ignore it, I don't care; just thought you'd like a completely uninvolved opinion.