Although I agree that the subject deserves an article, any article with this title cannot be NPOV.

Zoe

 daniwo59@aol.com wrote:

Now we have an article called "Turkish atrocities against Kurds" which consists of a random selection of cut and pasted articles from other sources. It exceeds 35 K and the heading says "Notes for an article." Wikipedia is not a place to stick random notes, newspaper articles or whatnot. I believe this can be an article. It can even be an NPOV article (though it isn't now, because apart from political rhetoric, the article barely documents the atrocities it claims to describe). Can we at least formulate a policy on this type of behavior.

Danny