Jump to content

Talk:Kurdistan Workers' Party insurgency

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 86.50.111.125 (talk) at 17:18, 13 January 2016 (→Protected edit request on 8 January 2016). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Turkish media, unreliable sources

Dear editors,

I see that some sources are Turkish news media. The problem is that the Turkish government is known to be a very harsh against journalists and media. Limited freedom of speech, and things like YouTube are forbidden. How should we deal with such sources? Aren't Turkish mainstream media per definition unreliable as source due to the heavy control by the Turkish state? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.209.199.204 (talk) 23:41, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, they aren't. --Mttll (talk) 09:48, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The Turkish media carry their own weight. They are one side's propaganda. Ofcourse they are not neutral, they are heavily biased.23x2 φ 14:31, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Incorrect, I could count more than 10 newspapers that are opposed to government and are indeed very critical of the government. As a matter of fact, this whole accusations about Turkish government being harsh on Turkish media is coming from media inside Turkey, which shows the contradiction since they are already capable to make such accusations. Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspapers_in_Turkey for list of newspapers, the top 4 are anti-government, and there's more. 142.197.140.15 (talk) 03:38, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

First PKK or KCK?

KCK is at upper level at current hierarchy of the organization. I acknowledge it. But, PKK is the preferred name in the media and PKK existed since the start of the conflict but KCK is new. Should we put KCK or PKK at top in "Belligerents" in the template? Kavas (talk) 15:15, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Kurdish%E2%80%93Turkish_conflict&diff=564147788&oldid=563519323 Now, PKK is at top, I agree with the decision to put it at top. Kavas (talk) 11:16, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Who says the conflict is over?

According to the infobox the peace process was finalized, rather than just initiated. Just because the peace talks have begun, one cannot conclude the conflict is over - it is a question on time and wikipedia is not a WP:CRYSTALBALL to prophesize such things. Moreover, there were recently casualties in Kurdish demonstrations and currently the entire peace process is on the brink of being withdrawn by the PKK (see [1]). It is fine we write down "cease fire from January 2013" at the infobox, but the conflict is certainly not over.Greyshark09 (talk) 14:07, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree with you. There was a ceasfeire in 1999 to, but the hostilities continued in 2004 (5 years later!!). We shouldn't just assume that the conflict is over because there is a (temporary) ceasefire. I did try to make this change see here, but it was reverted. --Երևանցի talk 19:11, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed with the above mentioned points. Might I also add that the conflict is not only about the armed warfare, but it also involves "greater political and cultural rights for Kurds inside the Republic of Turkey" as mentioned in the lead. Have we ever come across a source that mentions that these rights have been granted to the Kurdish population? I personally have not. Therefore, the conflict in that regard is continuing and some might argue, in full force. Proudbolsahye (talk) 19:22, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Foreign support to Kurdish?

No nation supports the Kurds in this conflict. That should be fixed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.131.87.35 (talk) 18:07, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are claims and facts that both need to be listed.KazekageTR (talk) 21:24, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

about the name

The name is not sounding well actually. Cause it is a fact that PKK's personnel is not %100 Kurdish. There are lots of conscripted Kurds on the Turkish Armed Forces . And this conflict is not ethnical, but the name sounds purely ethnical.

By the way there was a rename conversation in Arcive 2, which majority supported my ideas. I suggest a re-look at that conversation and rename the article.KazekageTR (talk) 12:12, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Revert to pervious title

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Jenks24 (talk) 12:45, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Turkey–PKK conflict → Kurdish–Turkish conflict – This page was moved without sufficient discussion on the matter, personally I believe the previous title was better because it acknowledged that the PKK was not the only Kurdish belligerent. Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 21:17, 2 August 2014 (UTC) Charles Essie (talk) 14:31, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Like Indo-Pakistani War not Indian-Pakistani war and Russo-Georgian war rather than Russian-georgian war. -- Rameshnta909 (talk) 18:31, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But this was not a short and intense war, this was a long running on-and-off conflict (like the Abkhaz–Georgian conflict, the Arab–Israeli conflict, the Chechen–Russian conflict, the Georgian–Ossetian conflict, the Iraqi–Kurdish conflict, the Israeli–Lebanese conflict, and the Israeli–Palestinian conflict). Charles Essie (talk) 19:04, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly Oppose; Kurdish people not a party to the conflict! A "terrorist organization" mentioned here. We can not talk about a war between Turkish Armed Forces or Turks and Kurds. All losses consists of soldiers of Turkish army and militants of PKK. Also, civillians killed by PKK. It should not even open to discussion. Maurice Flesier (talk) 15:01, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose there are lots of Kurds in Turkish Armed Forces and lots of people from other ethnicities in PKK and in those other militant groups. So this war is not ethnical. elmasmelih 16:54, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are also Arabs in the Israel Defence Forces and Chechens in the Russian Armed Forces, but that doesn't change the nature of those conflicts. Besides the PKK is not the only militant group fighting against the Turkish government in this conflict. Charles Essie (talk) 21:22, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There was a previous discussion about it in the archives. In addition to that, every news organisation in Turkey calls that conflict as PKK conflict.elmasmelih 15:51, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's a whole new war

Airstrikes and battles and everything. needs revisions galore.

The PKK is not the Kurdish militant group fighting the government, the Israeli–Palestinian conflict isn't refered to as the Israel–PLO conflict or the Israel–Hamas conflict because despite the fact that those are the most active groups, they're not the only ones. Charles Essie (talk) 00:09, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
I agree. It's been called a Civil War, but I wouldn't go that far just yet. Anyway this is a whole new phenomenon fueled by AKPs political goals, the spillover of the Syrian Civil War, and the formation of a de facto Rojava state south of Turkey. The success of the Syrian Kurds had ignited Northern Kurdish national aspirations while concerning the Turks. Anyway, I think this is quickly becoming "big" enough to warrant its own page. --Monochrome_Monitor 03:54, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This article is called Turkey-PKK conflict but content is totally something else. It is more Kurdish-Turkish conflict. Ferakp (talk) 09:50, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The NY Times article doesn't refer to the situation as "civil war". Additionally, considering that not every Kurdish-origin citizen supports PKK (actually substantial amounts are against the militant actions), and since PKK is not an official or ethical representative of the Kurdish minority of Turkey and in fact it is a narco-terrorist organization designated so by many states and bodies, the article's name should stay as what it is. Berkaysnklf (talk), 12 June 2016, 23:21 (UTC)
Comment It doesn't matter how many states or bodies classify the PKK as a terrorist organization, PKK is not a terrorist organization until UN decides it. Russia, UN, Switzerland, China, India, Brazilia and Egypt don't see the PKK as a terrorist organization and they allow PKK to run their business. Turkey see the PKK as a drug trafficking organization, the US see some PKK leader drug traffickers but not the PKK. EU and all PKK supporters don't see the PKK as a drug trafficking organization. EU has also published reports where they say that there is no evidences that PKK is selling drugs.Ferakp (talk) 02:08, 13 January 2016 (UTC) Sorry didn't know you are from the future. 12 June 2016? :) Ferakp (talk) 02:23, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, Kurds are not minority in Turkey. "Considering that not every Kurdish-origin citizen supports PKK" This is not sincere. Also why you said 'Kurdish-origin citizen' ? If I say to you 'Turkish-origin citizen' you will be happy? 30 million Kurds are supports PKK. The whole world knows it. Bruskom talk to me 02:57, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing article

The name of article is Turkey-PKK conflict, but it says that The Turkey–PKK conflict[note] is an armed conflict between the Republic of Turkey and various Kurdish insurgent groups... The name of article doesn't describe its content. Name should be changed or the article should focus on conflict between Turkey and PKK. Ferakp (talk) 09:52, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agree This title is very confusing and incorrect.
It is NPOV propaganda that follows the Turkish state agenda to falsely represent a +300 year old conflict between Kurds and the Turkish (prev. Ottoman) government as a conflict between them and one organisation they want to brand as a terrorist organisation.
It is a conflict between both unorganized Kurdish civilians in cities and villages and more then 10 Kurdish organisations (including PKK) on the one side and the Turkish government (AKP party) on the other side.
This representation is very wrong and leans Wikipedia to be used for false propaganda objectives.
It is very false to mark unorganized civilians 'PKK terrorists' in cities like Cizre, Diyarbakir,... that revolt against the Turkish government for being oppressed while a lot of them never joined or claimed to be part of for example an organisation like PKK. It is abominable to do so and it even provides a safe conduct to conduct human right abuses against these citizens.
Wikipedia should not participate in this and should not lean itself for such an abusive agenda.
The original, non-propagandist title was much better. In comparison. There are Palestinians, Arabs serving inside the Israëli army. That does not change anything about the reality that it is called a Israëli-Palestinian conflict. That there are some Kurds serving inside the Turkish army does not change the fact it is a conflict against the oppression of the Kurdish people, culture and the occupation of Kurdistan by the Turkish state, like Tibet is occupied by China.--Niele~enwiki (talk) 01:41, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I already made request to change the article's name. Changing name will solve many problems in this article.Ferakp (talk) 01:52, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Citation needed for some other forces

(This section has been renewed after the article was locked)

Following forces need to be verified with reliable sources: HIK: was legal Islamic movement and never involved in an armed conflict. PŞK: is political party, not armed group and has never involved in an armed conflict. No evidences atm. TKP/ML: is not Kurdish insurgent group, it is Turkish insurgent group carrying attacks against Turkish Government. Some claimed cooperation with the PKK has been reported but never confirmed. Source needed to verify it is Kurdish insurgency group and is part of an Kurdish armed conflict. MKP-HKO-PHG: This group is not Kurdish insurgency group and has nothing to do with the Turkey-PKK conflict. Revolutionary Headquarter: This group is not Kurdish insurgency group. There is no evidence that it is Kurdish insurgency group and is part of an armed conflict even they have allegedly cooperated with other communist parties. Communist Labour Party of Turkey/Leninist: This is Turkish illegal political party, not Kurdish insurgency group. Hasn't been a part of PKK-Turkey conflict. Reliable sources are needed. Ferakp (talk) 08:25, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


[citation needed] tags will be requested and you are free to delete them if you find reliable sources to prove that they really belong to this article. Good to know: Sources have to say that they are Kurdish insurgency groups. Ferakp (talk) 08:30, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DHKP/C should be deleted, it has nothing to do with Kurdish issue and it is Turkish insurgency group. Also, it has own article DHKP/C insurgency in Turkey. Cooperation with other forces is alleged and never confirmed. Strong sources are needed to prove that this group is part of Kurdish issue. Ferakp (talk) 09:00, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 8 January 2016

Requests explained in "Citation needed for some other forces" section. (Above)
HİK to HİK[citation needed]
PŞK to PŞK[citation needed]
Delete DHKP/C, it is Turkish insurgency group not Kurdish insurgency group. Also, it has its own article: DHKP/C insurgency in Turkey. There is claimed cooperation between other Turkish communist parties that are allegedly cooperated with the PKK but never confirmed.
TKP-ML to TKP-ML[citation needed]
MKP-HKO-PHG to MKP-HKO-PHG[citation needed]
Revolutionary Headquarter to Revolutionary Headquarter[citation needed]
TKEP to TKEP[citation needed]

Ferakp (talk) 08:54, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You don't understand it do you? The mlkp, dhkpc and many other have strong ties with pkk and ither kurdish groups. The mlkp and some other for example helped each other in syria for support. They both fight against the government and both have been sourced by the article as well. If it was for, everything on the other forces section should be removed wich makes bo sense when you can't even come up with a reliable source. The HIK and PIK are and have been for a time active and still are in existence. The HIK for example worked for a time together with the pkk wich is sourced. Read the main article better. Gala19000 (talk) 17:16, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 7 January 2016

Turkey–PKK conflict → Kurdish conflict – Using the name Turkey-PKK conflict for this article is against WP:PRECISION. Turkey-PKK conflict means more conflict between PKK and Turkey. The content of this article relates more to the conflict between Turkey and all Kurdish insurgent groups than Turkey and PKK. PKK is just one of the insurgent groups.

Turkey–PKK conflict is an armed conflict between the Republic of Turkey and various Kurdish insurgent groups, which have demanded separation from Turkey to create an independent Kurdistan, or to have autonomy and greater political and cultural rights for Kurds inside the Republic of Turkey. <-- Turkey-PKK conflict is not an armed conflict between the Republic of Turkey and various Kurdish insurgents. The name describes more conflict between PKK and Turkey. Kurdish insurgents have totally different ideologies and objectives. There is no books, news or any publications that use "Turkey-PKK conflict" name for conflict between Turkey and all Kurdish insurgent groups. Kurdish conflict is used to describe conflict between Turkey and Kurdish organizations that are against Turkey. Turkey-PKK conflict is a part of Kurdish conflict, it is absolutely not the same thing. However, Kurdish conflict could be too vague because there is too many different Kurdish conflicts. Turkish-Kurdish conflict is also used to describe conflict between Turkey and Kurdish insurgency groups, mainly in books.[1] [2] Ferakp (talk) 10:57, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just to remind you guys that there is Kurdish rebellions in Turkey article already.GreyShark (dibra) 14:38, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: The conflict takes place also in Iraq and to a lesser extent Syria, not only in Turkey. Kurdish conflict in Turkey wouldn't be broad enough. Wykx 16:39, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
    • It is an armed conflict and it has been mainly in Turkey. See Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it has similar situation, it takes place also in Libanon, Jordan and Syria. However, another alternative is Turkish-Kurdish conflict : Some groups or forces that have fought against Kurdish insurgency groups with Turkey were not officially part of Turkish armed forces or authorities, for example, Turkish Hizbullah, Grey Wolves and Deep state. The conflict has been mainly between Turks and Kurds even though some Turks have joined Kurdish insurgency groups and some Kurds have joined Turkish side. This source would support Turkish-Kurdish conflict name--> [3] I would choice Turkish-Kurdish conflict if someone agree with me.Ferakp (talk) 18:37, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed I would favor Turkish–Kurdish conflict which is also constructed on the same way as the previous conflict with Iraqi forces (Iraqi–Kurdish conflict). Wykx 19:56, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
@Wykx: what about Kurdish rebellions in Turkey - are not they all a "Kurdish-Turkish conflict"? The Turkey-PKK conflict is a part of the Kurdish-Turkish conflict. To rename PKK conflict into "Kurdish-Turkish conflict" is like renaming "Battle of Sanaa" to "Yemeni conflict" or renaming "Siege of Homs" into Syrian Civil War.GreyShark (dibra) 14:55, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Turkey-PKK conflict is conflict between PKK and Turkey. This article is related to conflict between Turkey and all Kurdish insurgent groups. It is same as writing article about WW2 and naming it as Germany-Russian war. Kurdish rebellion is a far away from content of this article. Ferakp (talk) 15:09, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, if there's no opposition within the next 24 hours, I'll move it. DS (talk) 04:13, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You cannot close this. You are not an admin.GreyShark (dibra) 14:35, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If you have comment or opinion related to this request, feel free to write here. Who is admin or not, is not your business.. Ferakp (talk) 14:54, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - someone changed the target from "Kurdish conflict" to "Kurdish-Turkish conflict" while the vote is ongoing. The change is completely disruptive as it makes the votes of "oppose" and "support" useless and confusing. If you like another name - make a new proposal.GreyShark (dibra) 14:37, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It is disruptive and punishable to change original proposal text. Comment whatever you like. Don't change the original proposal text.GreyShark (dibra) 14:50, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It is not, I asked about it. Show where Wikipedia says it is punishable. Instead of accusing users, write comments about request and let us know, why you are against or for request. Ferakp (talk) 15:01, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sources which support the request: 1. [4] 2. [5] 3. [6] 4. [7] 5. [8] 6. [9] Ferakp (talk) 16:08, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The previous name of this article was Kurdish–Turkish conflict. In a past discussion I suggested returning to that name considering the fact that the Kurdistan Workers' Party is not the only Kurdish group in conflict with the Turkish state (others include the Kurdistan Freedom Falcons, the Communist Party of Kurdistan, the Kurdistan Democratic Party/North, ect.). That said, it should also be acknowledged that there have been Kurdish uprisings against the Turkish state long before the conflict with the PKK and it's allies erupted 1978. So perhaps Kurdish–Turkish conflict could serve as the name of a new article covering this long-running conflict that has existed long before any of the current militant factions emerged. Charles Essie (talk) 16:32, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Greyshark09, Ferakp, DragonflySixtyseven, and Charles Essie: Indeed we have already a global article named Kurdish rebellions in Turkey that already exists. We may have to consider to change name to Turkish–Kurdish conflict (1978–present) for the one we are discussing about. Wykx 17:44, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

  • Comment: you should change the page name, but not the request name if a consensus is reached. Wykx 18:57, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
Sorry my mistake, I meant the requested name. Ferakp (talk) 19:06, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Agree This title is very confusing and incorrect.
  • Agree - Strong support for move
It is NPOV propaganda that follows the Turkish state agenda to falsely represent a +300 year old conflict between Kurds and the Turkish (prev. Ottoman) government as a conflict between them and one organisation they want to brand as a terrorist organisation.
It is a conflict between both unorganized Kurdish civilians in cities and villages and more then 10 Kurdish organisations (including PKK) on the one side and the Turkish government (AKP party) on the other side.
The representation of this conflict as a Turkisch-PKK conflict is very wrong and leans Wikipedia to be used for false propaganda objectives.
It is very false to mark unorganized civilians 'PKK terrorists' in cities like Cizre, Diyarbakir,... that revolt against the Turkish government for being oppressed while a lot of them never joined or claimed to be part of for example an organisation like PKK. It is abominable to do so and it even provides a safe conduct to conduct human right abuses against these citizens.
Wikipedia should not participate in this and should not lean itself for such an abusive agenda.
The original, non-propagandist title was much better. In comparison. There are Palestinians, Arabs serving inside the Israëli army. That does not change anything about the reality that it is called a Israëli-Palestinian conflict. That there are some Kurds serving inside the Turkish army does not change the fact it is a conflict against the oppression of the Kurdish people, culture and the occupation of Kurdistan by the Turkish state, like Tibet is occupied by China.--Niele~enwiki (talk) 02:05, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like we are reaching consensus. Agree with Charles Essie. Changing the requested page name to Kurdish-Turkish conflict (1978-present) in 24 hours if there won't be opposition.Ferakp (talk) 22:03, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kurdish Hezbullah needs to be removed

Kurdish Hezbullah needs to be removed from the other forces of Kurdish side. There is many reasons: 1. It has fought against all Kurdish groups with Turkey. It was ally with Turkey. 2. Such group as Kurdish Hezbullah doesn't exist. Its real name is Hizbullah and it is known as Turkish Hezbullah in books and publications. 3. It is Turkish Sunni Islamist militant organization and fighting against the Kurdish groups. How could it be in Kurdish side? 4. It has fought against Turkey also. It is already explained in infobox that this group is fighting against the PKK and Turkey. No need to add it to other side.

Ferakp (talk) 09:21, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Protected edit request on 8 January 2016

Delete Kurdish Hezbollah and its commanders Muhammad Mustafa and Hüseyin Velioğlu  †. Ferakp (talk) 09:41, 8 January 2016 (UTC) Ferakp (talk) 09:41, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, the name of the article should be changed to Turkey/kurdish conflict. The 'kurdish' hezbollah has been neutral in terms of alliance. Removing it makes thus no sense. This article doesn't just includes pkk and their other factiosn in iran and syria but also different kurdish insurgent groups. Gala19000 (talk) 17:11, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So why would you keep it in Kurdish side, for what reason? 86.50.111.125 (talk) 17:18, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 9 January 2016

Add this to Abuses by Turkish side section: In 1993, Mehmet Ogut, his pregnant wife and 7 children were burned to death by Turkish special forces soldiers. The Turkish authorities blamed the PKK and refused to investigate it. After 20 years, the investigations were started and they eventually came to an end in late 2014 with sentences of life imprisonment for three gendarme officers, a member of the special forces and nine soldiers.[10] Ferakp (talk) 15:59, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1469-8219.00065/abstract;jsessionid=7F8284BF5513010C32A50BBA0FB1427C.f04t02?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false
  2. ^ http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2015/12/turkey-western-fiddles-while-kurdistan-burns.html#
  3. ^ http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1469-8219.00065/abstract;jsessionid=7F8284BF5513010C32A50BBA0FB1427C.f04t02?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false
  4. ^ http://www.studentpulse.com/articles/862/the-turkish-kurdish-conflict-in-theory-and-practice
  5. ^ http://aranews.net/2015/04/turkish-kurdish-conflict-resumed/
  6. ^ http://www.telesurtv.net/english/analysis/A-History-of-the-Turkish-Kurdish-Conflict-20150728-0042.html
  7. ^ http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1469-8219.00065/abstract;jsessionid=7F8284BF5513010C32A50BBA0FB1427C.f04t02?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false
  8. ^ https://books.google.fi/books?id=b99dfVMJNRMC&pg=PR5&lpg=PR5&dq=Turkish-Kurdish+conflict+summary&source=bl&ots=8PyqcCyEl5&sig=Iy7YAlKJDEN9VEexEL-iLmrC2kE&hl=fi&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjqn_Ka0aTKAhWEDiwKHfA9CDk4KBDoAQg3MAQ#v=onepage&q=Turkish-Kurdish%20conflict%20summary&f=false
  9. ^ http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1469-8219.00065/abstract
  10. ^ "Turkish military guilty of killing family of 9, blamed on PKK for 20 years". Rudaw. Rudaw. Retrieved 9 January 2016.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kurdistan_Workers%27_Party_insurgency&oldid=699653991"