Talk:Georgia (country)/Archive 1

message: I have recently put up a request for someone to create an article on the Georgian language.  From what I understand it is a real linguistic anomoly and mystery.  It is not related to any nearby languages and some have tried to link it to Japenese....I could be wrong but I figured here would be a good place to request it...
-Bob —The preceding comment was added by  16:33, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A guideline on whether or not to italicize Georgian (and all scripts other than Latin) is being debated at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (text formatting)#Italics in Cyrillic and Greek characters. - - Evv 16:43, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Georgian Language

message: Referring to Georgia as the original site for winemaking is difficult to substantiate. The reference in the fourth paragraph which includes the origins of wine (see  http://www.selectwinesllc.com/repofgeor.html) is actually a commercial website with no substantiating evidence. The next reference, which I placed there, is somewhat better but we still need hard facts to support this assertion. (I have sent a request for their sources.) Right now the region, per se, is considered the birthplace of wine making but the most readily available source of any serious scholarly repute places the oldest known evidence for wine in Persia in the Zagros Mountains (see University of Pennsylvania website for Museum of Archeology and Anthropology at http://www.museum.upenn.edu/new/exhibits/online_exhibits/wine/wineintro.html).
Meantime, every time I go to Tblisi I am told that they have evidence of the oldest wine making in the world--but no one seems to be able to produce these sources. 
Malangthon 19:25, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The evidence for the oldest wine making is a discovery of carbonized grape seeds on the sites of the Shulaveri-Shomu culture (Arukhlo and others, 5th-6th millenium BC). How reliable is this evidence...mmm... nobody really knows. But there are serious claims, and it can be mentioned.ZMatskevich 04:31, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Georgian Wine

message: In the "economy" section, I found an unusual statement: "However, revived investment could spur higher economic growth in 2000, perhaps up to 6%". Since 2000 is long since past, shouldn't it be updated? Ralphael 18:44, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Economy

message: About the national anthem, is it Sakartvelo as stated in the article or Dideba zetsit kurthelus? I just ran across this article and was wondering. Dori 05:15 12 Jul 2003 (UTC)
:I apparently can't read, nevermind. Dori
:: Yesterday (May 20, 2004) Georgia adopted a new anthem (music by David Kechakmadze, text by David Magradze) and coat of arms (which should be pretty close to the previous one, judging by its description here, in Russian). I can't finnd anything on it but we need at least a new image -- apoivre 16:05, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: National anthem

message: I'd just like to say that I like the words "...Russia increased their pressure by deploying Security Council secretary Igor Ivanov..." since Ivanov really is a weapon used against Georgian leaders... Hah! --Oceanhahn 04:59, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: comment

message: I've copy-edited paragraph 1 of the section 'History'. This looks as though it has been written by someone whose mother tongue is not English. I'm not questioning the accuracy of the information given, but perhaps someone who knows more about the subject than me (i.e. anyone who knows the basics of Georgian history) might like to review this paragraph to check that my changes have not intorduced errors. Thanks,  Arcturus 21:56, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: copyedit

message: the COA in the main page is not similat to the COA in the "full size"!!!
83.130.27.45 18:12, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Georgia COA 

message: Just to state that there is an open poll in here regarding the fact of Georgia being or not being in Europe and if it should figure in the template.--Joao Campos 17:38, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  European country? 

message: About an hour and a half ago, somebody cut-pasted the Georgia (country) article. Anything to say?? Georgia guy 14:07, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah. C&P moves are evil. –Hajor 14:27, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cut-paste move 

message: Dzvirpaso tanamemamuleno da KARTVELEBO,
Dges aris mtsdeloba wikipedias entsiclopediashi kartuli istoriis gakalbebisa.  bagrationta samepo dinastiis web gverdze moikares tavi zogiertma dzalebma, romlebits tsdiloben tsarmoadginon es kartvelta samepo dinastia somxebat.  es xalxi mizandasaxulad (rogorts chans) uarkops kartul mepeta istorias da ganzrax gamokavt kartveli mepeebi somxebat (vitom ragats dasavluri tekstebis mixedvit). tu gakvt raime resursi an dzala rom amas tsin agudget, gtxovt imokmedot.
--Promethe 7 Noemberi 2005
Can anybody translate this? Nick Fraser 09:46, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [Title]

message: -You should give sources instead of the politized references
-You should prove, that the Georgian tsar George XIII did not ask emperor Paul about incorporation of Georgia into Russia
- You should prove, that Russian troops (after incorporation of Georgia) did not protect Georgia against  Persian invasions, as for example in 1805 Ben-Velvel 23:44, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: To add from a reader's perspective: there is no context for the stated facts, which in turn seem to be carefully selected to support one particular point of view. Given the politicized title there should be at least an attempt to present a more complete picture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.82.40.38 (talk • contribs) 16:57, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  false "references" on the  "annexation" of Georgia by the Russian empire 

message: The article says that perhaps Georgia´s name came from this persian word, but what does it mean after all?!... -- NIC1138 02:52, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry if I was unclear.  I was neither arguing that Persia somehow gave your country its name nor that I know better than you what you are called.  I agree, that the real name of Georgia is Sakartvelo.  If anything, I was actually arguing that english-speakers were mistaken in referring to Sakartvelo as Georgia, since that name is based on a Persian denomination.  And I'm not sure I understand your point about the Greeks.  --Treemother199 06:43, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Treemother199's observations are basically correct. There are many theories about the origin of Georgia's name. As far as I know, the Persian "Gurj" means "a wolf". David Marshall Lang authored an interesting article on the etymology of the word. I'll try to find it. The section (and the entire article, I guess) could be organized better than it is now. Thanks, --KoberTalk 06:34, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Stan is the Persian word for "country," it does not denote religion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.135.219.70 (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What are you guys talking about? Is it a Persian language wikipedia? Gurj is the name that Eastern World knows Georgia with, but nobody knows what that means. Kober said that Lang thought that maybe Gurj is a wolf, but this is just an assumption. Another theory is that Gurj in ancient Persian means beautiful. Note, that Greeks contacted Georgians 2000 years before Persians did. If you take any books which deals with the origins of the name, it will say that George is a Greek name and means a farmer. So, please do not edit this section again, because without the first sentence the flow does not make any sense. SosoMK 17:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

text: You are exactly right my friend. Wow! Excellent etymology, I will look forward when you update the Origin of the name section and we can also get rid of the other assumptions, which might lead people to confusion. Cheers! SosoMK 01:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gurji 

message: Everything I have read about the origins of the name Georgia indicate that this name came from a mistake.  Gurjistan, if I recall correctly, was the Persian name for the country, coming from the Persian word for mountain.  English speakers came into contact with this name from the Turkish Gürcistan.  They then mistakenly thought that this name was Greek in origin and derived from the national patron saint, St. George.  Hence, the information under this subheading is wrong and should be changed.  I would do it myself, but I am hesitant because I don't know off hand what the original Persian word was that led to this etymological history.  I would appreciate it if someone would clear this matter up.  But in any rate, I am 95% sure that the current information in this article is incorrect.  Treemother199 03:47, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry if I was unclear.  I was neither arguing that Persia somehow gave your country its name nor that I know better than you what you are called.  I agree, that the real name of Georgia is Sakartvelo.  If anything, I was actually arguing that english-speakers were mistaken in referring to Sakartvelo as Georgia, since that name is based on a Persian denomination.  And I'm not sure I understand your point about the Greeks.  --Treemother199 06:43, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Treemother199's observations are basically correct. There are many theories about the origin of Georgia's name. As far as I know, the Persian "Gurj" means "a wolf". David Marshall Lang authored an interesting article on the etymology of the word. I'll try to find it. The section (and the entire article, I guess) could be organized better than it is now. Thanks, --KoberTalk 06:34, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Stan is the Persian word for "country," it does not denote religion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.135.219.70 (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What are you guys talking about? Is it a Persian language wikipedia? Gurj is the name that Eastern World knows Georgia with, but nobody knows what that means. Kober said that Lang thought that maybe Gurj is a wolf, but this is just an assumption. Another theory is that Gurj in ancient Persian means beautiful. Note, that Greeks contacted Georgians 2000 years before Persians did. If you take any books which deals with the origins of the name, it will say that George is a Greek name and means a farmer. So, please do not edit this section again, because without the first sentence the flow does not make any sense. SosoMK 17:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

text: You are exactly right my friend. Wow! Excellent etymology, I will look forward when you update the Origin of the name section and we can also get rid of the other assumptions, which might lead people to confusion. Cheers! SosoMK 01:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Origin of the name

message: I noticed User:Sosomk just changed Eurasia to Eastern Europe, as the location of Georgia. While I personally don't care much about exactly where the border between Europe and Asia lies (a notoriously vexed question), I would only like to point out that the current wording does not match the definitions of Europe or Eastern Europe given in the Wikipedia and implied by most of its articles.  Pasquale 23:43, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to Kober's footnote, 70.65% of Georgia lies on the European (northern) slope of the Caucasus and 29.35% on the Asian (southern) slope. This will surely come as a surprise to anyone who's ever looked at a map of the area. I support Chaldean's reversal to Khoikhoi's version. There is no need to discuss where the border between Europe and Asia lies in this article, since that topic is already discussed ad nauseam elsewhere. As for Soso's points below, what is there to say? Geography has nothing to do with culture or politics, or are we to consider the United States, Australia, and Israel also European countries? With all due respect, Soso's rantings make absolutely no sense. Soso seems to think that a geographic location in Asia is somehow dishonorable, even communist! Now why is that? Sure, the ancient Greeks knew about ancient Iberia and Colchis, but they placed them squarely in Asia, since Asia began at the Bosphorus and Hellespont. In fact, many important ancient Greek cities were situated in Asia, e.g. Miletus. What else? The Japanese are extremely fond of Beethoven's 9th symphony. Does that make them European? I must say I am a little mystified. I thought the Wikipedia was supposed to stick to reality, not emotion.  Pasquale 18:56, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I think the main problem here is that there is no clear line between Europe and Asia as the borders are arbitrary and realistically they'd be considered one continent as they share a landplate as well. However, culturally Europe is generally a region of its own (as are many parts of Asia for that matter as well as the divide between North Africa and sub-Saharan Africa) and Georgia, due to its being Christian and a part of prominent empires etc. of Europe (Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, even the Ottomans, and of course Russia/Soviets) makes it very tough to not (I believe that without them we would be stronger today and we would be bigger country in Europe, so it really does make it harder to include)Sosomk 01:29, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fine, Soso. Thank you for pasting those two maps, by the way. I find them both fascinating. The second one puts European Russia in Asia, and both put Cyprus in Europe and the Sinai Peninsula in Africa. Oh, well! Obviously, this is all a matter of opinion, not of science. (And, Tombseye, what you are saying is obvious, but we were talking about continents here, not of "a region, country, or people".)   Pasquale 19:21, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I know, I was merely point out the obvious in order to extricate the people from the geographic dimension which I agree is somewhat hazy since reference books vary as some place Georgia geographically in Asia and others in Eastern Europe. Since this ambiguity exists, using the term Eurasian makes sense until such time as Georgia is universally regarded as GEOGRAPHICALLY European. I don't think there is much debate that the Georgians are European by culture though. Tombseye 22:09, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Ok, I agree with you to keep Eurasia. I just don't want to underestimate Georgia's culture, history and location. We are proud of our heritage and ancient culture. At least we can say that the city of Kutaisi is older than the city of Rome. :)).Virtus vera nobilitas (Virtue is the True Nobility) Inquinat egregios adjuncta superbia mores. (The noblest character is stained by the addition of pride.)  Sosomk 01:50, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point, Soso, but don't forget Rome is not really a very old city. In Italy alone, there are hundreds of historically attested cities that are considerably older than Rome. One more thing, I don't believe your habit of editing other users' contributions is acceptable. I have removed your edits from a previous contribution of mine above. If you need to make comments, please make your own contributions and don't strike out what others have written.And, Tombseye, continents are merely physical constructs and do not have a culture of their own. Regions, countries, peoples may have cultures, but not continents. So, your notion that the physical continents may shift with time leaves me, once again, a little mystified, unless you are referring to the Continental drift, of course! :-)Seriously, what I am trying to say is that social, cultural, or political considerations do not affect the merely physical constructs referred to as continents. Please refer to Transcontinental nation for a discussion. For example, membership in the European Union has nothing to do with geographic placement in the continent called Europe. Thus, according to the article on Transcontinental nation, Cyprus, a EU member state, is universally considered part of the continent called Asia, but that did not prevent it from joining the EU.Pasquale 19:19, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Pasquale, I don't think we need to discuss Rome and Kutaisi, because I think Rome had little bit more power than Kutaisi did:))). In addition, more people know about Rome than Kutaisi too. Thank you for the link. That's very interesting. It actually supports Kober's figures that 70% of Georgia is in Europe. Geography is considered a Social Science and from the social science prospective it is impossible to prove something, but it is easy to disprove. None of us can prove that Georgia is Europe, but I think I already disproved that it is not Asia. Well, I am not an expert in Geography, so I won't spend hours in trying to prove it. By the way, it is so interesting that you are interested in Folk. I am trying to come up withthe article "Georgian Folk" ort "Georgian Folk Dance" and describe the Folklore of Georgia, which dates back in antiquity also. Even Xenophon described the love of music of Georgians in his writings. I am gonna try to get my hands on some good sources and I will try to come up with a good article. By the way, Pasquale, I was just wondering what was your nationality. I would say Italian, but according to your profile I would assume that you are French, probably from Corsica. I know that people of Corsica have names which are similar to Italian. For example, Bonaparte sound Italian to me but he was French from Corsica, just like Iosef Stalin sounds Russian, but he was Georgian from Gori:)) (Even though he did not that much for Georgia.) Sosomk 15:10, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good points, Soso, however I don't know about geography being exclusively a social science. I would say it's both a social science and a natural science. Certainly, geology, volcanology, the Continental drift, and physical geography in general, are more of a natural science. But the organization of earth's landmass into continents remains a matter of dispute, even though it is presumably based on physical geography. And that's partly because people are trying to inject social, cultural, and political considerations into it. Kober had gotten those figures precisely from that article (Transcontinental nation) and he had provided the link. However, if you read the article carefully, you will see that it espouses a minority view regarding that particular point. On the other hand, to its credit, that article tries hard to stick to strictly physical considerations. The Folklore of Georgia is well-known and extremely interesting, and certainly deserves an article. I hope you can do a good job with it. I am 100% Italian, although I have lived in the United States for several decades. But you are right, Corsica was culturally and linguistically Italian until it was sold by the Republic of Genoa to France. The Corsican national hero, Pasquale Paoli, a friend of Napoleon Bonaparte's father, led an unsuccessful war of independence first against the Republic of Genoa and later, after the sale, against France. Napoleon himself was born one year after the island's sale to France, so he was born a French citizen, but his older brother Giuseppe wasn't. Pasquale 20:01, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eastern Europe or Eurasia? 

message: Hi. My name is Soso and I am from Tbilisi, Georgia. Dear User:Pasquale and User:Khoikhoi, please read this first (http://assembly.coe.int/ASP/APFeaturesManager/defaultArtSiteView.asp?ArtId=352). Historically and culturally Georgia belongs to Europe. Even ancient Greeks mentioned Iberia and Colchis, which are the mysterious ancestors of Georgian tribes. Various German scientists find connections between Georgian tribes and Etruscans and if is not valid enough, according to Archeological findings of head bones, Georgians are the oldest inhabitants on the European continent. I don’t see the reason why should I be proving the thing that is so "self-evident" on this wikipedia page. The country which is considered the second oldest Christian nation should be considered as the part of Europe too. The head bones say that Georgians lived in the Caucasus long time before Indo-Europeans even got there. Our language is unique and has not mixed into Latin language a lot, but we have some influence from Greece. When we move to middle ages, on of the biggest monarchs of Georgia was Queen Tamara in 1160, when any major Western European country would not even think of having a female ruler. After all, I was brought up in Georgia and I have seen European mentality with my own eyes. We waive European flags ad sing Beethoven's 9th symphony. It is just a result of having a weak economy after all the Soviet oppression and a bad ideology in the country that I have to prove these ridiculous things to you. However, Georgian people are talented and are willing to work and rebuilt the nation, like German rebuilt the country after World War II. President Saakashvili mentions nearly in every speech that Georgia should thrive towards EU. In fact, I don't see why we should not be in EU if countries like Turkey are going to enter it. If you guys read lots of Russian Marxist - Commie philosophies about Georgia you can still keep changing Eastern Europe to Eurasia, but I will l stand up to that and change it back every single time you change to Eurasia, like I would stand up against Commies. Let that be another step for Georgia's integration to EU.
:Gamarjoba Soso. Historically and culturally Georgia is indeed an European nation. However, the term Eurasia is of pure geographic meaning and is probably the best solution out there. According to the UN classification of the world regions, Georgia is in Western Asia though our country is a member of COE. Until the pure geographic boundary between Europe and Asia is finally defined, I think Eurasia is a convenient term to use. All the best, Kober 07:27, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the compromise. Georgia is not 100% European. —Khoikhoi 04:48, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't understand this being plessed by Greek influence on a countrie's culture or history and take this as a proof of being European. Culturally Europe!? but when did European culture emerged? Is it only Greek(Ellas) culture regarded European? Then Scandinavia should not be culturally European. Even religion is only 300 years older than Islam. Religious unity is also can not be European because Elas(geek) culture was not christian for thousand years. If Georgia(Kertvelebi) and Armania(Hayastan) is regarded European becasue of their political, historic and cultural links with Europe, all those countries were part of Ottoman Empire which was then Europe. Ottoman Empire had more direct political, historic and cultural bonds with Europe for centuries. Like attacking Spanish armada in favour of English, patrolling and ruling mediterranean sea and trade, cultural trade with Venetians, etc. Also geographically there should no mention of Euroasia without including Anatolia. (anadolu, mainland Turkey) If it is language, there is more Greek(Elas), Armenian(Hayastan) and Latin influence in Turkish language too. This special pointing of European is either unnecessary or pretentious. Or I suggest we have to add it to Turkey page which has been cultural, historical and political secondary center of Europe for decades. If being Christian makes you European then Lebanon is European or Christian Asian countries, if Greek influence is making you European then again Lebanon and Persia is European. Persia even have linguistic bondage with European languages. By the way we should stop using Greek names for country origins. That is actually misleading. If we call Georgia as Kartvelebi and Armenia as Hayastan, Greece as Ella, it will be more constructive and less political. The original names will also show the ethnic differences better and it must be dishonorable to be known by different name rather than your own original country name...
I provided a Georgian POV on the page and tried to explain the culture of Georgia, which is not very well known in today's societies, because of the history of the past several decades. I understood that you took it seriously defining the border between Europe and Asia. I agree with Kober that UN world classification states that Georgia has only 70% percent in Europe. However, the final border between Europe and Asia is not really defined yet. I am really hoping that the growth of democracy and capitalism in Georgia will lead the country to successfully make an integration in Europe and I will be happy to edit the article within several years and finally say that Georgia is Europe geographically as well as culturally. I dont’ subscribe to Khoikhoi's point of view about percentages. Well I will just wait until the EU and UN update their definitions and maps of Europe.SincerelySoso
In addition, googling the continents, one rarely sees the Caucasus included, although culturally it is an extension of Europe. Due to the ambiguity of the region the term Eurasian is applicable for geographic purposes as Kober and Khoikhoi correctly point out. Tombseye 16:14, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Yeah these kids are not European at all, they look very Asian indeed. Ldingley 00:56, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Dear Luis, you have got a good point. I am not trying to make some ethno-nationalist statement, but I have to say that ancient Greeks did not influence us, but they robbed us (that bastard Jason:)). They regarded Georgia as the place, which produces the most beautiful people. Eve Englsh laguage testifies that "Caucasian" in English is referred to an European race according to the Bluembachs 19th century research of races. For all purposes Georgia would be European in any classification you might want to choose. In addition, I dont give a crap about the UNs definition of Europe, because my country has more history than the UN and the terms Kartli and later Sakartvelo are older than the term Europe itself. SosoMK 20:26, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Let me make it straight again. We don not need to say the word Europe to make ourselves feel better. Georgia has a history as a nation-state of more 4,000 years since the kingdom of Kartli (or Iberia) was formed and the country also has an unique ancient christian, literary and artistic tradition. In contrast with other Europeans who say Europe all the time to make them feel important, we don't do it that way. Sakartvelo is more ancient term than Europe. BTW what the heck is Europe? We don't need to argue about the thing that we can't even define. So those of you who are trying to be smart-asses in saying that Georgia may not be a totally European country, you don't even know what the heck you are talking about. I am afraid you have to do more research or just stop editing this article. SosoMK 11:37, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GEORGIA IS EUROPE!!!

message: Why is this not in Georgia alone? It's a country for gods sake. Skinnyweed 18:39, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Skinnyweed. Totally agree with you, but please follow this link. Kober 20:32, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title (the brackets) 

message: The article mentions that the ancient name of the country Iberia and the name of one of its western provinces Imereti may be etymologically related. Although not sure about this, as a native Georgian speaker I assume that Imereti is derived from Georgian im meaning that and eri meaning nation, compared to amereti (am this + eri), by which eastern Georgia is sometimes referred to, and that that applies to western and this to eastern Georgia  possibly explained by the fact that the east was historically political center of Georgia. Tamokk 15:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Iberia and Imereti

message: Reasons given are :
* Missing citations.
* LEAD doesn't follow the WP:LEAD guidelines.
* Colchis, known to its natives as Egrisi or Lazica ... is a statement that should state a paper that talks about that.
* ... often saw battles between the rival power of Persia and the Byzantine Empire, both of which managed to conquer Western Georgia from time to time. should be more specific or re-written because it is a bit on the vague side.
* For, This made it easy for Arabs to conquer Georgia in the 7th century., please cite a source.
* As a result of wars against the neighbouring countries the population of Georgia was reduced to 250 000 inhabitants at one point ., from a population of what? ... the population wasn't mentioned before.
* The region of Svaneti was gradually annexed in 1857–1859. should be reformulated.
* Needs a throughout copyedit. Lincher 02:23, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: GA failed

message: I have reviewed the "Economy" section in all country articles on Wikipedia;  unfortunately, many of them have NPOV issues, and by my reading, this article is one of them.
Common issues with this section include:
*verbatim quotes from the CIA world factbook
*describing a country's economic policy as "sound", "unsound", "imprudent", etc.
*assuming a link between economic health and low inflation
*using expressions like "the GDP improved" (should be increased), "beneficial levels of inflation" (should be low levels of inflation), etc.
*postulating cause-effect relationships that seem controversial.
Issues in this specific article are:
*World Bank and IMF described as reasons for "increasing GDP growth", even though not even a number for that is given
*"slashing inflation" described as "economic gains"
*implied suggestion that it was privatization of the electricity company that led to improvements now seen
This note will stay up for a week before I'll make any further changes.  Please feel free to be bold and fix the article yourself, though!  I'll also be monitoring this discussion page, and will try answering any concerns.
If you want to discuss the entire project, you can do so on my talk page or at the talk page for this specific prject.
(Note: this is the fourth country page I'm trying this on, and I haven't gotten any comments so far, so please let me know what you think about the idea.)
RandomP 20:04, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Economy section: NPOV 

message: According to the edit screen, this talk page is 167 KB in size -- far, far too large for a single page. I propose that we split off the recent requested move debate (including all the ensuing sections) into a new page, something along the lines of Talk:Georgia (country)/Requested move - July 2006. As the debate is closed, there is no need for it to take up so much space on this page, making it harder to add more pressing concerns. Also, a recent editor was apparently unclear about the move status and added an "Oppose" comment; I believe that would be less likely were these sections split out. Please voice any thoughts here. --SuperNova |T|C| 22:41, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with archiving. Prolonging the discussion will be unhelpful, in my opinion. You may use "Archive 1" or "Requested move" or whatever you like as the title of the archive. — Knowledge Seeker দ 06:18, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Totally agree.  With stuff dating back to 2004, this talk page is way overdue for an archive.  Obviously the proposed move and related stuff should probably have their own section, but you might also want to archive the old threads that nobody has responded to in 6 months into another archive and thus clear things up a bit.  --Vengeful Cynic 13:03, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I finally got around to archiving all three move proposals and discussions on this page. They are linked to from their original subheadings as well as from the "Proposed moves" box near the top of the page. I have not archived any other discussions from this page yet, and would welcome any help in doing so. --SuperNova |T|C| 08:36, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Agree that this page needs a major cleanup. It is complex enough for a native speaker of English to be confused as to where to post their comments, never mind second language speakers of English. Nick Fraser 09:32, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request to split page 

message: Let us rename. But not the article but the country. This would solve all problems. Tamokk 15:59, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ...to... Georgia guy 16:17, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: renaming

message: Can anyone help me with some material on this topic? --Georgianis 13:14, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added some material on this topic. -- Georgianis  |  (t) 17:14, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NATO and Georgia

message: Need some help on this topic. I need to expand it. Thank you.  Georgianis  |  (t) 17:47, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: GUUAM and Georgia

message: After being elected Chairman of Parliament in November 1990, Gamsakhurdia continued his anti-communist, nationalist course, as a consequence of which Georgia boycotted the All-Union Referendum on the future of the USSR in March 1991. It held instead its own referendum on state independence two weeks later, in which an overwhelming majority voted in favor of independence. On 9 April 1991—exactly two years after the massacre in Tbilisi—the Supreme Council declared officially the independence of Georgia.
In the following, Gamsakhurdia tried to expand his power position: he introduced the constitutional office of the President on 14 April 1991 and won the competitive presidential polls held the following month with 86.5% of the votes. However, Gamsakhurdia's leadership was soon perceived as too nationalist and aggressive even by his closest allies, and won him an increasingly severe opposition. On 22 December 1991 the conflict took on violent traits: the armed forces, led by ex-Premier Tengiz Sigua, the former Head of the National Guard Tengiz Kitovani and the leader of a paramilitary unit Jaba Ioseliani, attacked the parliament building and forced the President and his remaining acolytes to leave the country. On 6 January 1992, the new power holders installed a provisional government (Military Council). The following month, the government reintroduced the historical Constitution of 1921, whereby a “pure” parliamentary system was established without any kind of presidency. In order to reinstate public control, the coup leaders invited Eduard Shevardnadze, former Secretary of the Georgian CP and Soviet Minister of Foreign Affairs, to chair the State Council, a provisional representative body in which political parties willing to collaborate were co-opted. -- Georgianis  |  (t) 20:08, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Independence

message: The massive military help to both sides (400mio for Georgia) gives the two sides the convidence that they will win the next seperationist war. Declaration to be indepent and the establishing a offical exiled government of Abkhazia in Georgia on the other hand adds another point of conflict. The caucasus was a violent area for very long, but 	representative wars to get influence and access to the stratecically valuable area does not help the area at all. But within near future we will have another war there.--Stone 14:49, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Russia's leaders, dismayed at Russia's loss of status as a superpower, seek to have Russia be at least a regional power. What's wrong with this paragraph? It's the reality we talking here. Everybody knows that Russia lost its status as superpower and now is just a regional one. It shouldn't be reverted.  Georgianis  |  (t) 14:52, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I know you didn't, other user had...can you restore please? -- Georgianis  |  (t) 17:04, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Stone, oh yeaah? How about Russian/Soviet butchery in Afghanistan, Chechnya, helping sides in bloody Karabakh war, supporting Abkhaz separatism, arming Iran with Nukes, selling weapons to Chavez, etc? Ldingley 17:08, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: US-Russia

message: This really belongs in it's own article: Foreign relations of Georgia. We don't want this article to get too long. Perhaps we can give a 1-paragraph overview but include the details in a sub-article. Compare to the FA Pakistan. —Khoikhoi 02:50, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are correct as usual Khoi, but who has time for that? Actually the whole article is a mess :( Ldingley 14:02, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Political relations" section 

message: I am not able to see the spelling in the original language, such as Georgia above the image of the flag and coat of arms.  I tried unicode and some other viewing options, and none of them works.  I am using Safari on Mac. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.150.249.47 (talk • contribs) 17:31, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charecter set? 

message: This article is very biased. It tries to push American influence on Georgia. Look at the edits and the writting. By the way in Georgia all the political opposition is being arrested and attacked by the government. Georgia is becoming more and more totalitarian everyday with American help. The whole issue with Russia was a smoke screen for the elections fraud supported by the U.S.A> in Georgia. I hope the world will wake and see what is happening. The U.S.A. is also trying to use Georgia against Russia and Iran. Georgia's military budget has skyrocketed and it is the fastest militarizing state in the world (in proportion to its capita). - 69.196.164.190 21:08, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Issues

message: ::The Rose Revolution represented a victory not only for the Georgian people but for democracy globally, [It] ... demonstrated that, by aggressively contesting elections, exercising basic freedoms of speech and assembly, and applying smart strategic thinking, a democratic opposition can defeat a weak semi-democratic kleptocracy. Mitchell, Lincoln. "Georgia's Rose Revolution.(Brief Article)(Author Abstract)." Current History 103.675 (Oct 2004)192.240.93.66 19:30, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Academic Article

message: There appears to be some disparity between the use of 'subtropical' to describe the climate of the Black Sea coast area of Georgia (see intro and climate sections) and the Wikipedia article on subtropical, which suggests that such zones are generally between 23 and 35 deg lat.  Georgia is too far north, surely, at between c42 and 44 deg lat, to be considered subtropical?  Or is there another climatological rather than geographical use of the word that isn't alluded to in the main article? Jasper33 15:31, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subtropical 

message: I have to say I have a little problem with the map. Basically, this map of Europe with Georgia on the right near the edge seems politicized -- an attempt to bias the viewer towards considering Georgia to be a European country rather than an Asian one, when most geographical definitions consider it to be the latter. I'm noticing what almost seems a concerted effort on wikipedia to bias readers into considering certain geographically Asian countries (namely Armenia and Georgia) as European ones, and I must say I'm deeply skeptical at what motives might be at work here. Why not a map with Georgia toward the center, as most countries' articles have maps with the country in the center, instead of what's really a standardized map of Europe used in all the articles for European nations that seems to imply Georgia simply as a frontier region of a Greater Europa? 66.99.1.205 20:26, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why do I detect sockpuppetry around here? Anyway, the maps are not shaded, are clearer, are of a significantly higher quality than the alternatives, and do not imply that the countries are in Europe. I don't know if you were here when we had the shaded maps which did show the countries as part of Europe (I'm just being tactful, I know you were here...) - the present maps seem to be a reasonable compromise. If you can provide a map of equal quality, then I have no objection with using that.--Euthymios 21:00, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map 

message: The infobox says March 11, 1990; the text says April 9, 1991. I think the latter is correct. What is the basis for the 1990 claim? Biruitorul 07:53, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Independence

message: I am kind of mystified why Luis thought that the new map was great. I think it shows Georgia from a wrong socio-georgraphic point of view. Only other country that has similar kind of mao is Spain, which shows North Africa in it. I understand that official geographic classification of Georgia as Europe is a shaky argument, but we can also look at other European nations, like Greece, Cyprus and France. Let's start with France: France has cultural ties with North Africa and ALgeria, but the Map does not show those countries on it. Map of Greece also does not show any Asian countries and the map of Cyprus brely shows any of her neighbors on the map. I really do nor care about the map that much. I am just saying that the map by Clevelander made a better sense to me. Regards, SosoMK 11:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Dont be mystified :) Its a great map, showing all neighbours and European continents near by. Its has nothing to do with European argument. It zooms on Georgia in order to show the closer image of its boundaries and neighbours. Georgia is so small that on a previous map, we had problems detecting it :) However, if you insist, we can reinstate the map by Clevlander :) Ldingley 15:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: the new map

message: —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Treemother199 (talk • contribs) 01:35, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes

message: I noticed that demographics are messed up.  What are ethnic Svans and Mingrelians? SosoMK 17:36, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Demographics are messed up

message: FYI: After the recent edit to the GDP number by User:Geller04, I did a search and found this webpage <http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/5253.htm> from the US Dept of State and changed the overall GDP and the per capita GDP numbers to reflect what I found.  Figma 20:33, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GDP numbers 

message: How is Georgia a unitary state, when it has two very autonomous regions within it, with their proper elected governments, consitutions, flags and military forces?
there " independence", "proper" elected governments, constitutions, flags and armys are not internetionaly recognised, because  they represent georgias historical regions. Geller04 02:36, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To clarify, the two autonomous regions in Georgia are Abkhazia and Adjara.  South Ossetia is not an autonomous region; it is a secessionist region not recognized de jure as an administrative region of Georgia.  Adjara has neither a separate constitution nor separate military forces from the central government.  That being said, the previous unsigned comment is right to point out that this "unitary state" phrase is weird and inappropriate.  In political science, the term "unitary state" is a theoretical abstraction only ever used to apply to an empirical reality when talking about totalitarian dictatorships.  It is therefore incorrect to refer to a presidential republic, such as Georgia, as a unitary state.  My best guess is that this phrase was included in the article as a sort of political jab at Georgia's secessionist governments and as such constitutes a political bias in violation of Wikipedia's NPOV policy.  This is, unfortunately, only one of many soft violations of NPOV on the page that are contributing to controversy.  --Treemother199 22:56, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  A state could be unitary (like France or Georgia), federative (like Russia, Spain or Germany) or confederative. It has nothing to do with the the fact that Georgia is a presidential republic. There is nothing POV in calling Georgia unitary state - look at France, it's also called unitary republic in the article. Alaexis 06:17, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, maybe South Ossetia is not recognised de jure, but Abkhazia actually _is_. Even though the de facto government is not considered legitimate, there is a pro-Trbilisi "government in exile" ruling over a small part of Abkhazia - so even de jure Georgia is not unitary. France is a unitary republic, because the central government has full power legal, and actual, to supercede any and all decisions made by the local governments. Government in Tbilisi is completely unlike the government in Paris. Not only does it have very little actual power in Abkhazia and Ossetia, but legally, in the law of _Georgia_, Abkhazia does enjoy special status - that clearly makes Georgia federative. See this article De-jure_Government_of_Abkhazia. A unitary state cannot contain an "autonomous republic" within it 158.143.165.225 12:52, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A unitary state?