the solution to this is very simple find a source which says this isn't genocide if you can't then the article can't say that it might not have been genocide do you think you're the only person who has ever wanted to write something that can't be supported by wp rs i can think of a hundred occassions when it has stopped me contributing something i consider blindingly obvious but wp rs is the only way to keep wikipedia halfway honest to address your criticism of the article i point out that governments for obvious reasons are reluctant to issue a direct order to commit genocide even if genocide is their aim even hitler didn't issue a direct order to gas all of the jews in europe that doesn't mean that the holocaust wasn't genocide they will also always claim that the genocide was quid pro quo or an unavoidable part of a war they are committing the kosovo war is an excellent example of this but many people today seem to think genocide brutal warfare terror actions and large massacres are the same thing and can all be called genocide when you like no way during the rwanda war madeleine albright famously said that genocide wasn't being committed but that acts of genocide were how many massacres make a genocide you seem to think it is obvious that this episode of massacres did not add up to genocide but the point at which many massacres become genocide is tragically subjective