Talk:Kurdistan Workers' Party

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kurdistan Workers' Party article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5: 60 days

Kurdistan High‑importance

	Kurdistan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kurdistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Kurdistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.KurdistanWikipedia:WikiProject KurdistanTemplate:WikiProject KurdistanKurdistan articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics: Political parties Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Political parties task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Socialism High‑importance

	Socialism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Terrorism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Terrorism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles on terrorism, individual terrorists, incidents and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TerrorismWikipedia:WikiProject TerrorismTemplate:WikiProject TerrorismTerrorism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Turkey High‑importance

	Turkey portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TurkeyWikipedia:WikiProject TurkeyTemplate:WikiProject TurkeyTurkey articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on November 27, 2011 and November 27, 2013.

A news item involving Kurdistan Workers' Party was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 10 May 2013.

Wikipedia

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Claire Goforth (18 October 2019). "The latest front in Turkey's digital war against the Kurds? Google reviews". The Daily Dot. Retrieved 31 October 2019. Elsewhere, on Wikipedia, people sympathetic to Turkey have edited PKK's page several times in recent days, using unreliable sources or misstating facts to label it a terrorist group. (Several nations, including Turkey and the U.S., have designated it as such; however, many nations, as well as the U.N. and NATO, have not.)

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the topics of Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.

Semi-protected edit request on 9 September 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Chnage "PKK is a terrorist organization" to "PKK is a Kuridsh militant organization". 51.6.130.5 (talk) 08:23, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done Cannolis (talk) 08:55, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While it is obvious that PKK is a terrorist organization. On what basis did you accept this change without any resources? 31.223.61.163 (talk) 17:32, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While I too think it's a terrorist organization as well, it's an organization, and for the sake of objectivity it is best to just call them an organization, and also to clearly inform readers that this organization is designated as a terrorist organization/entity, or an organization involved in terrorist activities amongst other things with correct references. (Eg: Drug trafficking reports published by U.S., Turkish and some other countries' authorities, which can be seen as empirical evidence backed by proof of crime&misconduct) Utku Mun (talk) 01:09, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone know what narcotics the PKK is alleged to be trafficking?

I remember reading a German blog that alleged that they were involved with the trafficking of marijuana and heroin, but I don't, at all, remember where that was. Given common allegations about the Grey Wolves and that this article cites one of their leaders alleging that Turkish intelligence had given them money as some form of entrapment, though clearly wildly speculative, I wonder if such things don't play into their involvement with the heroin trade. Turkey is also notorious for its excessive punishment in regards to hashish, which makes me wonder as to whether that doesn't have something to do with Kurdish independence.

This article also mentions that they are alleged to be involved with human trafficking, which, I, at least, have never heard before, though, as I haven't read the Europol report, I am not making the claim that this allegation does not exist, one that could be expanded upon, as I would certainly feel infinitely less inclined to be sympathetic towards them, were that to be the case, as well as that it would not seem to be affirmed, as per the set-up of the article, by the human resources section, which merely claims that they have become a "mass phenomenon". Daydreamdays2 (talk) 20:07, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some people accuse Murat Karayılan, Cemîl Bayik, Duran Kalkan, Besê Hozat, Sozdar Avesta, Bahoz Erdal and Mustafa Karasu for being agents of Satan, secretly spying for Kurdistan Regional Government and Israel. 155.137.27.93 (talk) 00:07, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So, everyone but Öcalan, then? Phew, it's a good thing he had that change of heart.

Do people actually allege for them to be in league with the devil? I feel like you were just being polemical, but I'm, anyways, curious. I've heard a good bit of rumors about the PKK, but never allegations of Satanism. Daydreamdays2 (talk) 13:47, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Funding edit.

As anyone following the subject closely would know. U.S. designates P.K.K. as a terrorist organization for a long while, yet they have been officially funding P.K.K. since 2018, which was published previously. Also in 2023 military spending bill passed by the house of representatives this support to fund "partner forces" in Syria, includes P.K.K, according to bill(which hardly passed 219-210) the funding will continue until the end of 2024. The subject "partner forces" Also include other organizations designated as terrorist organizations by various countries. So in effect U.S. funds this organization which it designates as a terrorist organization officially even though it contradicts executive order 13224.

I think this should be shared under funding as well, I am not good at writing stuff out of my expertise(biology) but a simple browser search yields official references, and I think this is a vital piece of information to share with public who do not spend much time researching things and look up to Wikipedia for necessary knowledge.

S. T. Utku Mun Utku Mun (talk) 01:23, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lol the PKK is not the same as the PYD/YPG. They are indeed related groups, but that wouldn’t mean the US supports the PKK just because they support their sister org Serok Ayris (talk) 00:02, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nato needs to be removed on the list

I clicked the reference link and it leads to a page regarding Sweden, Finland, and Turkey Nato joining agreement. Nato does not have a terrorist list. Countries have their own terrorist list. It's dishonest to put up NATO. 70.29.13.216 (talk) 10:44, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Designation of PKK as terrorist organization by Israel

The source for the designation of Israel is unfounded. It’s based on Netanyahu’s word and not on proper legislation or lack thereof. On the contrary - the PKK doens’t appear in the official terrorist organization designation list of the Israeli Ministry of Defense. See: https://nbctf.mod.gov.il/en/Minister%20Sanctions/Designation/Pages/downloads.aspx (accessed April 18 2024). Moto53|Talk to me! 10:55, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of sources

@LeonChrisfield: please explain your removal of MERIP, AEI and Progressive International references. I don't see how any of these fail to meet the criteria for reliable sources or fail verification for the PKK espousing a progressivist ideology. The op-eds are used per WP:BIASEDSOURCES. Soapwort (talk) 23:23, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First of all that’s go through those article:

“Americans Shouldn’t Accept Erdogan’s Cynical Stance on the PKK”

This article has only mentioned a progressive government once referring PKK laid down arms and escaped to Syria, or what was referred as “Syrian Kurds”, equalizing Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria under the SDF and YPG as a PKK subgroup. Whilst both groups are allies and have many similarities, it’s misleading to say both groups are the same organizations or use it as a fact that PKK is progressive, and the article’s mentions of PKK’s engagement of terrorism further complicates things. Additionally, it didn’t mention about what values they hold are considered progressive other than resisting Turkey’s discrimination, and said the group was founded based on “ethnic grounds” or drawing parallels with South Africa, but not specifically on the progressive values themselves. If anything it should be referenced in the connections between PKK and SDF/Northern Autonomous Administration in Syria.

For the second article, “Mad Dreams of Independence”, the only “progressive” reference is the 1950s and 1960s “progressive nationalist” Kurdish politics, not directly referring the PKK. There is mentioning of the goal of a “democratic and federal” state with the Kurdish Socialist Party, which is aligned with the “Democratic Confederalist” ideology and should have been referenced correctly.

Finally, the third article of the Progressive International was written by the a journalist of the “ Rojava Information Center”, a media organization that represents the interests of the SDF and the PKK, and declared its support of Ocalan. If a Turkish media like Daily Sabah cannot be used due to its perceived bias, I don’t see how a pro-PKK media source can be used.

Wikipedia: Biased Source: Bias may make in-text attribution appropriate, as in "The feminist Betty Friedanwrote that..."; "According to the Marxist economist Harry Magdoff..."; or "The conservative Republican presidential candidate Barry Goldwater believed that...".

Clearly those biased sources should be more appropriately given in-text references in such a highly contentious article, especially considering one of the articles have a pro-PKK media’s reference that shouldn’t be used as a direct source when reporting facts about PKK’s ideologies or atrocities. LeonChrisfield (talk) 09:20, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, the highly contenious and controversial nature of the article as per the templates would naturally require better sources, especially those have direct evidences and discussions about a certain ideology to be cited, rather than the media affiliated with either the PKK or the Turkish state, which is generally unreliable in this case. LeonChrisfield (talk) 19:55, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]