Speaking of dubious lists, we also have: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_war_criminals The list currently contains people belonging to these categories: 1) people who were convicted for war crimes 2) people who were charged but not convicted 3) people who were never charged due to political reasons, but the consensus is that they were involved in war crimes 4) people whose involvement in war crimes is unclear or a matter of debate. On the top of the list, it writes that: "This is a list of formally charged and/or convicted war criminals" which means 1) and 2). What about people who were formally charged, but later found not guilty? They would be included by the current criteria. What about people who were convicted for "war crimes" by an unfair mock trial in a country under a dictatorship? Should we list them, too?

Speaking of dubious lists, we also have: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_war_criminals The list currently contains people belonging to these categories: 1) people who were convicted for war crimes 2) people who were charged but not convicted 3) people who were never charged due to political reasons, but the consensus is that they were involved in war crimes 4) people whose involvement in war crimes is unclear or a matter of debate. On the top of the list, it writes that: "This is a list of formally charged and/or convicted war criminals" which means 1) and 2). What about people who were formally charged, but later found not guilty? They would be included by the current criteria. What about people who were convicted for "war crimes" by an unfair mock trial in a country under a dictatorship? Should we list them, too?