Talk:Georgians/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

This revision

Regarding this revision;

First of all;

• The common consensus on Wiki is that Georgia is a nation in the Caucasus, and thus transcontinental. Changing Caucasia to Europe without any discussion or whatsoever is simply PoV.(done here as well)

• Second; this presents the dominant history of the Georgians for the last 500 years much better;

"To ensure its survival as a Christian kingdom being threatened for centuries by their Safavid, Afsharid, and Qajar Iranian suzerains, the eastern-Georgian kingdom of Kartli-Kakheti, being the most dominant Georgian power at that time, led by Heraclius II found itself able to abjure any dependence on Persia or any other power by signing the Treaty of Georgievsk in 1783, and by this forged an alliance with the Russian Empire, which was viewed as a replacement for the fallen Byzantine Empire, Georgia's traditional ally. Eventually being annexed by Russia in 1801, which was officially ratified with Qajar Iran in 1813, the Georgians briefly regained national independence from 1918 to 1921, and finally, in 1991 from the Soviet Union."

• Than this newly added revision;

"To ensure Georgia's survival as a Christian kingdom, in 1783 the monarch of Eastern Georgia Heraclius II signed the Treaty of Georgievsk, thereby forging an alliance with the Russian Empire, which was viewed as a replacement for the fallen Byzantine Empire - Georgia's traditional ally. This alliance, however, backfired as Russia was unwilling to fulfill the terms of the Georgievsk Treaty, proceeding to annex the troubled country in 1801. Georgians briefly regained national independence from 1918 to 1921, and finally, in 1991 from the Soviet Union." ----- Many crucial events and causal connections were omitted in this revision. "Why" did Erekle sign the treaty that eventually delivered Georgia in the hands of Russia the latter whom would dominate Georgian politics for two centuries afterwards? (incessant encroachments, Iranian domination) How did Russia legitimize its suzerainty over Georgia? (Gulistan Treaty) Etc." Thats very important for the quality of this article.

• Furthermore, putting Erekle's Kartli-Kakheti kingdom as representative for all of Georgia is wrong, as there was also a western part (Imereti, etc) that developed differently. Erekle simply set the tone that would eventually the fate for all of what is modern-day Georgia.

• Lastly, the minimum population given for Georgians living in Greece is much and much lower for any of the other nations. So putting that ahead is odd.

Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 12:13, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Louis, it is apparent from your history that you treat every article as an opportunity to promote Iran/Persia and insert Iran/Persia-related items into everything. It is clear that's the reason why you included the names of every Iranian dynasty in that last paragraph, not caring for the fact that these superfluous insertions created senseless run-on sentences that make the paragraph simply unreadable. Georgia has 2000 years of history, which besides Iran includes Turks, Byzantines, Romans, Arabs, Mongols and so on. Iran is not more important than all others.

As I already explained, and most will find it plausible, in common modern English usage, words "caucasian" and "indigenous" have completely different meaning and connotation than what is probably intended here and will confuse readers. For directional purposes, there is nothing wrong with stating that Georgia is located at/by the southeastern border of Europe because that IS precisely where it is located.

Lastly, by noting that Russian annexation refers to "Eastern Georgia", I think it is clear enough that I was not referring to the entire country as we know it today. But this is not the real problem here is it? You are just looking for way to justify maintaining a confusing and unreadable article leade because it promotes the Iranian topic. --Damianmx (talk) 12:22, 9 December 2015 (UTC) <-- CU blocked sock of User:Satt 2

Then add more information regarding more ancient aspects of Georgian history. The fact that X is incomplete because it lacks Y for a complete version, does not mean X needs to be removed in its entirety (which is what you're doing per the provided revisions).

Second, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia are all mentioned as Caucasus nations aka transcontinental nations. That's the consensus so far on Wikipedia. Such changes need a WP:CON. Please understand that we've had/have numerous editors passing by and changing this without any consensus, and they're always reverted.

Also, Georgians in Greece have a much lower minimum population than in Iran. Putting Greece in front of Iran is therefore also odd.

I tell you once again, making such edits constantly won't get you far here, unfortunately. Wikipedia is a community project. - LouisAragon (talk) 12:31, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

There is no need to add more information about "ancient aspects of Georgian history", there's a separate page just for that. And no, I don't think that for most English speakers of wikipedia caucasia/caucasian is a commonly understood term in geographic sense, it primarily refers to race. That aside, Caucasus has substantial parts in Europe so for directional purposes there's no reason why one cannot say it is located at/on the border of Europe. Nowhere in the article does it say that it is in Europe.

As to your other concern, please note that Georgian figures for Greece have an official government website substantiating it, whereas the Iran source linked does not even mention the number infobox quotes (100,000).

Interestingly, I may add, you seem to care about consensus only when someone else edits your promotional work. When you initially inserted all the superfluous Iran/Persia related items, it did not occur for you to ask anyone as to why one topic has to be given so much weight in an article about a people with thousands of years of history. Since you like wikipedia regulations, perhaps you should consult WP:UNDUE --Damianmx (talk) 12:38, 9 December 2015 (UTC)<-- CU blocked sock of User:Satt 2

- Regarding the Greece reference, ok that's good. It would be great if it could be added in a quote-style reference, as currently the reference is written in Georgian. Just to make sure people in the future dont need to discuss it again.

- That's the whole thing; we use the definition of being transcontinental for all Caucasus nations. I'm sorry, but our opinion that its not a supposedly not a commonly understood term, is irrelevant here unfortunately. Also it needs sourcing that according to you Georgia is an European nation. If you can provide them, no one would have objections I think. You have to understand, such changes have massive consequences regarding many articles, thus they are not taken lightly. They need extensive discussing.

- The Iran source says that they are over 100,000 in all of Iran. I will add it in a quote-style ref next to it.

- The Treaty of Gulistan (which granted Russia rights over Georgia) and the reason why Erekle signed the treaty is very important information. Neglecting the fact that Iran dominated eastern Georgian history (the dominant region of Georgian history) for many hundreds of years, until recently is simply a drop of quality, as would be in a similar fasion the removal of the fact that Russia annexed Georgia, and afterwards dominated Georgia for 200 years. Simply not mentioning anything about the crucial hundreds of years of history prior to 1801 that would form the direct reason as for why Russia would eventually dominate Georgia for an equally long time afterwards, is not a proper argument in my opinion, and regarding the sources we have in our reach. More balancing would be appropriate (and yes, I agree, that includes a tweak regarding the mentioning of three Iranian dynasties).

- I won't comment on the fact that I don't believe you're a new user (113 edits), so I'll leave it at that. Which is irrelevant here (for now) as well.

Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 12:55, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

We've already had this discussion on the Tbilisi page - Georgia and Georgians have 2000 years of history and if you list what every conqueror did there and what long-lasting implications they had, that's all we would be discussing. There is a separate page for history of Georgia precisely for this purpose and such topics are discussed there more extensively. On the second issue you have, why won't you just write that Georgia is "on the crossroads of Eastern Europe and Western Asia"? Why does it have to be Caucasia? In English speaking countries I cannot imagine anyone, with the exception of very small number of experts in esoteric topics, who wouldn't give you blank stare a hearing that word - it is associated primarily with race, period. Stop arguing this nonsensical point. --Damianmx (talk) 13:10, 9 December 2015 (UTC)<-- CU blocked sock of User:Satt 2

Mentioning every conqueror would be undue. Russia and Iran single handedly had the most outside impact on direct Georgian history in the last 500 years. Period. I can drop multiple sources (including by numerous top Georgian historians) here that confirm that, while I believe you wouldn't be able to refute any part of that.

Ok, don't discuss it then if you vehemently believe you're right. But also don't complain later when others revert you and report you at ANI or whatever. The fact that you want to change Caucasia into Europe without any proper basis (and sourcing) reeks of an ungrounded POV in like with your other edits on Georgia-related articles. Please understand that numerous users have tried similar stuff on the Azerbaijan/Armenia pages and it always resulted in reversion and/or reporting of the user. This article is about the ethnic group called Georgians so it would be totally illogical to say "border between Eastern Europe and West Asia".

Furthermore, Georgians are ethno-linguistically Caucasian speakers, and per Wikipedia's common way of putting it (Chechens are also mentioned as ethno-linguistically Caucasian like Georgians) they are ethno-linguistically Caucasian as well apart from geographically. (See also, Azerbaijanis -> Turkic, Persians -> Iranian/Iranic, Ossetians -> Iranian/Iranic, Germans -> Germanic, etc)

- LouisAragon (talk) 13:38, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Your arguments are becoming increasingly confusing and frantic, as if you are deliberately trying to find fault. This is not an article about Georgians in the past 500 years, it is about Georgians in general, as in forever. So what Iran/Russia did or didn't do is not any more relevant than what Turkey, Mongols and Byzantines did for centuries, which also had very noticeable effects.

And for the millionth time, I did not write that Georgia was IN Europe. The only reason Georgia's location AT THE BORDER of Europe is mentioned is to highlight how a Christian country on the crossroads of continents struggled to maintain its identity. I fail to see what is so controversial about that. Or perhaps that entire paragraph about their Christian identity should be removed entirely just to suit your Iranian/Persian narrative? --Damianmx (talk) 13:46, 9 December 2015 (UTC) <-- CU blocked sock of User:Satt 2

- Damianmx, no one told that nor does anyone imply that. Please don't put words in the mouths of others in order to boost your own WP:JDL arguments. A lede about Georgians should highlight their history as an ethnic group. The most important events that had the most impact on them, etc. The lede needs adjustment no doubt whether regarding the previous revision or your revision. Your revision however brought a whole new extr issue aka the "Caucasian" vs "Europe" point, which you wanted to change without discussion.

- Yeah, right, now it's suddenly "highlighting". Then what was it supposed to represent here? Also to highlight something?;

"Damianx: Countess Mariam Jambakur-Orbeliani (1852-1941) (Georgian: მარიამ ჯამბაკურ-ორბელიანი) was a prominent philanthropist, educator, public figure and feminist in the nation of Georgia, in southeastern Europe. [1]

Your words don't match up with your acts I have to say, unfortunately. Anyway, I've had my say as it's becoming a refurbishment of already said points. - LouisAragon (talk) 14:10, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

What does that article have to do with this article? You changed the Orbeliani article and I did not contested it, so what's the issue?--Damianmx (talk) 14:14, 9 December 2015 (UTC) <-- CU blocked sock of User:Satt 2

@Damianmx: I find your edits much disruptive in many cases so I suggest you to stop. If there is anything, take it to the TP. And no, Georgia does not have only 2000 years of history, it has even bigger, but an established facts tell us that from the very day of disintegration of the Kingdom of Georgia, especially the eastern Georgian monarchies were dominated by the Persians, so removing that is totally unacceptable. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not some kind of news magazine with redundant yellowish content. Jaqeli 12:47, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Jaqeli, it does not matter exactly how many years Georgia has existed. My point is that many other powers had great influence, including Turks and Mongols and we cannot handpick Iran/Persia related items and stuff them in this article just to showcase a subject that you and Louis seem to be fond of. It does not matter who was predominant in Eastern Georgia, this article is about Georgians as a whole and their existence as a whole does not revolve around Persia. Not to mention the intro in its current form is unreadable with run-on sentences. I also find you and Louis' condescending tone rather inappropriate, just because you have been here longer than other editors and happen to be from Georgia does not mean that you WP:OWN this articles or that you have some special knowledge/authority.--Damianmx (talk) 04:44, 11 December 2015 (UTC) <-- CU blocked sock of User:Satt 2

Context and established facts matter, not Persians. Before you have no con you may not rv as your edits are found to be disruptive and nonproductive by two other members what means you're suggested to stop. Jaqeli 18:58, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

I completely concur. Clear disruption on numerous fronts, as well as edit warring. - LouisAragon (talk) 14:58, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Crowding of images/personalities

It seems to me that Jaqeli has had a monopoly over the inclusion or exclusion of various personalities in this article. An unfortunate result of this is that the infobox, as it remained, was crowded and included some individuals who pre-dated the very concept of "Georgian" (Rhadamistus, Queen Zenobia etc). It also displayed a profusion of questionable and embellished titles like "the Wolf Head", "the Valliant" and "the Great", including in cases where such usage in English is highly uncommon and unnecessary. The page has to cease being a work of nationalistic puffery, or the personalities must be removed entirely in accordance with a recent consensus.--Damianmx (talk) 21:21, 29 December 2015 (UTC) <-- CU blocked sock of User:Satt 2

Deliberate cherry-picking and POV

I changed this revision back for two reasons;

1) The fact that the ancient Greco-Romans called the people of the region as Iberians and Colchians, has nothing to do with the etymology of the word Georgians. Which is what the section is actually supposed to be about. Nor do any of the presented sources claim, stipulate, or present this in any way. If it does, please provide a reference, and otherwise don't complain that it gets deleted.

2) Deliberate cherry-picking. When Prof. Mikaberidze literally says (Mikaberidze, Alexander (2015). Historical Dictionary of Georgia (e.d. 2). Rowman & Littlefield ISBN 978-1442241466 page 3) that scholars agree that the self-designation "Kartvelebi" is derived from the proto-Georgian tribe of the "Karts", it is kept/favored by Damianmx. But when the same Mikaberidze says (some sentences later on the same page) that the scholarly community agrees that the word "Georgians" is derived from the Persian word "gurg", that becomes suddenly "just a theory" according Damianmx, and he removes the reference and the sentence.[1]

- LouisAragon (talk) 23:45, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

The section in question is not limited just to the etymology of word "Georgians" but rather all terms used to describe the people that this article is about, including how they describe themselves. Also, please stop duplicating the same source to make it seem more numerous. Lastly I may add, Mikaberidze is an unknown author whose only source of notability is a promotional biographical article about himself on wikipedia, which popped up overnight. He does not deserve a paragraph of his own, as if it was some new revolutionary finding. Any insistence on it is WP:UNDUE--Damianmx (talk) 02:17, 11 February 2016 (UTC) <-- CU blocked sock of User:Satt 2

Going to stub?

Older versions were much more interesting and informative. Like as if someone's going to stub this article step by step. Abkhazian1 (talk) 18:44, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Population figures

Given the wildly varying and often unsubstantiated numbers provided in unofficial estimations, it is best that this page follow others on wikipedia and include only official census figures, where available. The list will not be as extensive but outrageous populations figure ranges (like 30,000 to 1,000,000) are not greatly helpful or factual.--Damianmx (talk) 21:38, 9 February 2016 (UTC) <-- CU blocked sock of User:Satt 2

I think that we should mention all figures but putting notes besides them. For example, in Turkey, there are like hundreds of thousands Geogians (like me). But there is/are no offıcıal census figures about minorities. So it is worth to mention. I have found an official body´s estimate, we could add a note like '(official est.)'. kazekagetr 15:39, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Please don't include unofficial information in the infobox. You may not have noticed it, but your source is already in the article. It has been there all along. If someone wants to read more, they can read it there, but the infobox is for official data only.--Damianmx (talk) 13:38, 25 May 2016 (UTC) <-- CU blocked sock of User:Satt 2

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Georgians. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131225192921/http://www.statistics.gr/portal/page/portal/ESYE/BUCKET/General/nws_SAM01_EN.PDF to http://www.statistics.gr/portal/page/portal/ESYE/BUCKET/General/nws_SAM01_EN.PDF
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120208043427/http://rbedrosian.com/Ref/Toumicb/toumicb.html to http://rbedrosian.com/Ref/Toumicb/toumicb.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:41, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Georgians. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131223094809/https://worldview.gallup.com/signin/login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2fdefault.aspx to https://worldview.gallup.com/signin/login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2fdefault.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131223094809/https://worldview.gallup.com/signin/login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2fdefault.aspx to https://worldview.gallup.com/signin/login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2fdefault.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:31, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Reverted changes

I just reverted some changes that 109.252.50.83 made to the header, because they seemed oddly biased and were uncited. If you think those changes are important, I encourage you to 1) make them from a registered account 2) cite substantive changes and 3) explain them here on the talkpage. - - mathmitch7 ^{(talk/contribs)} 22:34, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Georgians in UK and Germany

It says there are 15,000 Georgians in UK and 4,000 in Germany which isn't displayed in the box of this page(Wiki/Georgians) can someone add those numbers/countries? thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.134.227.183 (talk) 04:32, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

# of Georgians in the world

Friends, we keep seeing number changes of entire population of Georgians in the world. We have to come up with more protection and get more sources for overall # of Georgians in the world. Please do not wage editorial wars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.178.5.128 (talk) 14:12, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Number of Georgians in the world

Number of Georgians in the world is more than 7 mil at the very least. Will bring the official data from the Diaspora ministry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.178.5.128 (talk) 13:17, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Added historical image of Georgians on a hunt

Hello Wikipedians! Please do not revert in case you disagree and please discuss. Thank you.

A 14th century Western European drawing of one individual (a Georgian king) does not represent the entire ethnic group. - LouisAragon (talk) 14:20, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi User:LouisAragon I agree with you about that picture with a Georgian king cannot be placed here. At the same time, can we add some image which best describes and shows somehow Georgians? Please see Hungarians and Jews pages have images instead of flags :)

Hello fellow Wikipedians! I've put the mural/fresco of Georgians (it's Kings, Queen and a patriarca) that would describe the best more or less. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.178.5.148 (talk) 00:06, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

wording

"The eighteenth century German professor of medicine and member of the British Royal Society Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, widely regarded one of the founders of the discipline of anthropology, regarded Georgians the most beautiful race of people." Isn't that phrase a violation of WP:WORDS? It should be at least put in inverted commas. Also why an 18. century subjective description matters for anthropology of Georgians? --Gogolplex (talk) 14:36, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

1832 plot

Hello User:LouisAragon

1832 plot was defining moment for future resistance of Georgians against the Russian occupation and annexation. I respectfully disagree that its just Bagrationi issue. It was very issue for Georgia's independance. Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.113.66.100 (talk) 14:54, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Problematic statistics and number

Greetings. I think the article clearly has a problem with statistics and number of the people. Most of the sources are absolutely useless, many of them just note how many people from Georgia reside or have a status abroad. To make it clear, most of these sources doesn't necessarily list them as ethnic Georgians but just people from the country, which is not the same thing. I want to ask and suggest my solution to this issue to you fellow friends that it would be much better if we simply clean the statistics totally by just leaving the official statistics from the Georgian statistics department that give us an exact number of the people from 2014 Census. As for the total population we can use the unofficial statistics from the Georgian ministry of Diaspora. This will solve the problem and we'll avoid adding and bulking the bar with sources that just simply does not work in exact statistical description for the people. Please take part in discussion, much gratefully. An emperor /// Ave 19:10, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Colleagues! I've corrected the data on verifiable sources, removed dead links. An emperor /// Ave 19:13, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Colleagues! Imported some verified data. Gratefully. An emperor /// Ave 09:44, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Colleagues! We seems to have a comprehensive list of population that resides outside of Georgia. Linked it to the article Georgian diaspora. Gratefully. An emperor /// Ave 00:16, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

I do agree with you. Also, population figures are frequently changed by anonymous users and need to be monitored closely.--Kober^Talk 15:47, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Untitled

I don't think the Ajarians are an ethnic group, but I could be wrong. I thought the term just applied to the inhabitants of Ajaria. They are culturally different from the rest of Georgia because they're Muslim, but I don't think they were ethnically distinct. Isomorphic 00:51, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Ajarians are ethnic Georgians (one of the ethnographic groups of Georgian people). Ajarians are Muslim, but they are not "culturally different from the rest of Georgia". Levzur 19 Apr 2005

Page protection

Dear colleagues! An article saw high disruption recently and now it is semi protected. It seems the number of the population continues to be the main motivator of such disruptive editing. As you've noticed I've placed the number at 5 million which is the maximum extent, but certainly 4 million seems more reasonable per an actual data. I'd appreciate all of your feedback. Regards! An emperor /// Ave 01:20, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Map of the Georgian Diaspora

Greetings dear colleagues! Map of the Georgian Diaspora may be misleading as the article is about the ethnic Georgians and not all citizens of the country residing in the world, so I think removal of a map is better to avoid this confusion. The map is well presented in article Georgian diaspora. All of your feedback will be appreciated. Regards, An emperor /// Ave 23:35, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Georgians in Turkey

There living around 1.5 million Georgians in Turkey, notables like the Turkish President Erdogan is of Georgian origin. Here source:

References

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:871:210:5595:B9C5:A5AC:A983:EC90 (talk) 23:36, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

The first source you give says that the number is 91,000, not 1.5m. The second source is not accessible online so I can’t comment but given the first source says only 91k I’m not inclined to investigate that further. the third source is not reliable and can be ignored. From that, I’m not sure wh`at you want changed in the article. DeCausa (talk) 00:21, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Georgians in EU

Greetings User:Mr. Guye. I reverted your edit removing the EU from the lead. You have adressed it as "misleading". Can you please elaborate what was misleading? I appreciate your feedback. Regards, An emperor /// Ave 02:21, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

European categorization

Greetings @GenoV84, categorization of Georgians as simply “European” is very problematic and may trigger edit wars and never ending discussions, as the nation is very complicated to put into one and only major cultural civilization or society, be it linguistics, history, location etc. So we’ll be better off if the article sticks with factual data only, in this case “Caucasian” is the best option. Regards, An emperor ✖ 14:16, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Request for category: Notable Georgians

Every other ethnic group has a similar category.

King Tamar

It really bothers me that King Tamar (Tamar Mepe) it refered to as Queen Tamar. This is incorrect. Tamar Mepe made everybody call her King Tamar because she felt she was on the same level as men.

Just a thought.

About the picture on the "Part of a series on Georgians" sidebar

Who is the youg woman in the bottom right corner? -Leodmacleod, 23 December 2008, 23:36 (UTC)

Are Georgians related to anyone?

Is there any nation that the Georgians are related to???

Stalin in genetics section

Greetings User:NyMetsForever, adding Stalin in the genetics section will be treated as highly offensive and controversial to single him out as representative of the Georgian ethnicity. It may disrupt the stability of an article that may lead to constant edit wars. Please, reach CON respectfully in case you disagree. Regards, An emperor ✖ 11:46, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

5 million

its close or more than 5 million. last source also says 5. 2603:7000:3700:87E3:75F4:6DE9:DBE8:4215 (talk) 16:30, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Featured picture scheduled for POTD

Hello! This is to let editors know that File:Old peasant with dagger and long smoking pipe, Mestia, Svanetia, Georgia (Republic).jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for November 6, 2023. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2023-11-06. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you!  — Amakuru (talk) 15:49, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Georgians are an ethnic group native to Georgia and the Caucasus, with diaspora communities throughout Russia, Turkey, Greece, Iran, Ukraine, the United States and the European Union. Georgians arose from Colchian and Iberian civilizations of classical antiquity. In the early 4th century, the Georgians became one of the first to embrace Christianity and now the majority of Georgians are Orthodox Christians. The Georgian nation was formed out of a diverse set of geographic subgroups, each with its characteristic traditions, manners, dialects and, in the case of the Svans and Mingrelians, regional languages. The Georgian language, with its own unique writing system and extensive written tradition, which goes back to the 5th century, is the official language of Georgia. According to the State Ministry on Diaspora Issues of Georgia, unofficial statistics say that there are more than five million Georgians across the world. This photograph, taken around 1888 in Mestia, shows an elderly Svan peasant with a dagger and smoking a long pipe. The image is in the collection of the Library of Congress in the United States.

Photograph credit: unknown; restored by Adam Cuerden

Recently featured:

• Pontia edusa
• Ruth Handler
• Warming stripes

Thank you User:Amakuru for letting us know! Regards, An emperor ✖ 00:42, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Unexplained removal of related ethnic groups

@Emperor of Emperors: Is there any particular reason why you removed the related ethnic groups section of the infobox? Your edit summary just says "RV", which isn't exactly helpful. Arctic Circle System (talk) 04:04, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Greetings Arctic Circle System! Lazs are part of the Kartvelian group and a subgroup of the Georgians; for more context you may see the respective article, where the Georgian Jews are the Jewish people in Georgia who are not related to the ethnicity. Regards, An emperor ✖ 09:22, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

@Emperor of Emperors: Apologies for the late response, but while the Laz people article states that Lazs in Georgia consider themselves to be Georgians, it does not say the same about Lazs in Turkey. In addition, while the Georgian Jews are related to Iraqi Jews and Persian Jews in terms of genetics and parts of their culture stemming from Judaism, it should not go unsaid that the Georgian Jews also underwent significant assimilation into Georgian culture, with their traditional language being a dialect of Georgian. Arctic Circle System (talk) 15:40, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your response Arctic Circle System. The Laz being an indigenous group/subgroup in the Kartvelian family is well-extablished and predates Seljuk/Ottoman/Turkish expansion in Anatolia and their self-identification in the modern Turkish nationality cannot be used to even out in Georgians case. Lazs are grouped alongside the Mingrelians and have always been part of the Georgian ethnic grouping. As for the Georgian Jews, the assimilation is definitely a case but that cannot be an argument to make them as related to Georgians per ethnic sense. There are hundreds of thousands of Georgians historically assimilated with different nation, states, empires during its history (be it with Ottomans, Persians, Russians etc.) but that very assimilation does not make them related, be it linguistically or ethnically. Regards, An emperor ✖ 18:44, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

@Emperor of Emperors: What does "related" mean to you, exactly? Arctic Circle System (talk) 18:48, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Arctic Circle System, the matter in question adressed here is regarding "related ethnic groups" and such classification and categorization of Lazs and Georgian Jews towards ethnic Georgians does not meet the ethnic or linguistic criteria. Regards, An emperor ✖ 18:58, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

@Emperor of Emperors: What do you mean by that though? Is there anywhere on this site that explains what the criteria is? Arctic Circle System (talk) 19:58, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Arctic Circle System, please refer to linguistics and ethnicity. Regards, An emperor ✖ 01:31, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

@Emperor of Emperors: I mean what "ethnic or linguistic criteria" for one ethnic group to be considered related to another ethnic group are you talking about? Arctic Circle System (talk) 01:33, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Arctic Circle System, Jewish people are semites and Lazs are Kartvelian being a subgroup of Georgian grouping. Semites are not related to Georgians and Lazs are part of the Kartvelian family. Please refer to articles about linguistics and ethnicity. This is an established fact how language families etc. work. Regards, An emperor ✖ 18:16, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

So... I guess we're just ignoring the fact that Georgian Jews have traditionally spoken a distinctive dialect of Georgian, that being Judaeo-Georgian? And as for Lazs being considered Georgian because the most common name for the language family their language is in is Kartvelian, another name for Georgians, a common name for a given language family can imply, but does not prove on its own that a given group is a subgroup of another group. For instance, the Iban people of Borneo speak a Malayic language, but they are not Malays themselves. And you still haven't answered my question about what the criteria for one ethnic group to be related to another is. How closely related their languages are? Genetics? Cultural attributes? How many of those criteria need to be satisfied to meet the threshold required for a group to be featured in the related groups section of another group's infobox? Arctic Circle System (talk) 22:51, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

@Emperor of Emperors: Forgot to ping, whoops. Arctic Circle System (talk) 02:51, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Greetings Wikaviani & Arctic Circle System I understand that there is Judaeo-Georgian, but fact remains that the Jewish people are not related to Georgians. If we are to assume just an assimilation a factor for their related bond then we should have all the nationalities of Georgia under that category: Georgian Armenians, Georgian Greeks, Georgian Russians etc. Regards, An emperor ✖ 02:16, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

In essence, you're claiming that no ethnic mixing of any sort took place between "Semitic" Georgian Jews and the Kartvelian population? Moreover, can't "related ethnic groups" also point to culture rather than genetic markers? Shoshin000 (talk) 14:50, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Ethnic mixing has happened with many different groups (e.g. Armenians, Greeks, Russian) but that doesn't make them "related" nations. With this logic everybody is "related"...It stretches meaning of what that section talks about.--LeontinaVarlamonva (talk) 17:17, 31 March 2024 (UTC)