Deletion of Trial of Gotovina et al

Comment: per , significant coverage in multiple reliable sources
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: per all of the above. Although I'm not a fan of articles on trials supported solely by press releases published by the court (e.g. Prosecutor v. Milan Martić) as it turns Wikipedia into a court archive, the Gotovina, Mladić and Milošević cases have attracted considerable media attention and had repercussions beyond the courtroom, thereby turning them into topics worthy of standalone articles per 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: The supposed basis for the deletion (an "all-or-nothing" argument) is not based on policy and is therefore invalid. Editors are definitely not obliged to produce a series of articles in order for coverage to be "consistent". Given the volume of coverage of this particular topic (71 references in the article, out of which more than one half are in English), a notability-based line of attack against the article |does not stand a chance
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOWBALL)

Comment: The nominator presented no valid argument for deletion whatsoever. It is only natural that there shall be only one article on an ICTY trial before there is the second one. Besides that, the nominator has poorly researched the topic he/she is objecting to, since there is yet another article on the ICTY trials - the Trial of Slobodan Milošević. Finally, if an article meets  it should not be deleted - and this article definitely meets the standard
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)