Talk:Tbilisi

Name of city

Tbilisi [tbilisi] T as tea, B-bee, I-ill, L-luck, I-ill, S-sea, I-ill. There are two most common lines of formation of the name as a continuation of a famous legend with sulfur geysers and boiled birds. 1. In Georgian “Tbili” means warm, Tbilisi - warm place. Suffix ‘si’ is quite common in Georgian geographical names describing belonging to the particular place. Names of many villages and regions follow this pattern. For example Kutaisi, Dmanisi, Bolnisi, Tsavkisi, Tadzrisi, etc. This is similar to suffices like ‘eti’, ‘eni’, ‘ani’, ‘ati’ etc. So name Tbilisi means ‘warm place’ of ‘of a warn place’. 2. Another theory/legend, which I personally believe to be closer to reality, suggests that name comes from two words ‘tbili’ (warm) and ‘lisi’ (water). ‘Lisi’ means water in old Georgian and nowadays this word is not used in this context. Modern Georgian uses ‘tskali’ for water. Word ‘lisi’, however, is not uncommon today, as a famous lake in Tbilisi is called ‘Lisi’, exactly serving its “aquatic” purpose. So, ‘warm water’ (tbili+lisi) formed Tbilisi.

Hopefully sometime we will know the true story of this mane or some ancient living expert from neighboring country will persuade us that everything Georgian [and non Georgian] was created by them.

As for the name ‘Tiflis’… ‘tbili’ always meant warm in Georgian and city was always named Tbilisi. Tiflis is just distorted version of Tbilisi which was used in times of Russian empire and is sill used by some world countries in our times. All in all Tiflis, Tifflis, Tiblisi are all mistakes.85.132.14.38 09:13, 4 July 2007 (UTC) July 2007

Turkish-oriented writings (in the English language, anyway) write the name of the city as "Tiflis". Is this just Turkish usage, or do other languages use this alternate spelling? Ellsworth 22:52, 8 May 2004 (UTC)

Actually this is the real name of the city. It has never been called Tbilisi. Even armenians who formed the majority of the city before the Bolshevik takeover, used to call and still do call the city Tiflis. After 1921 it was renamed Tbilisi to justify the inclusion of Tbilisi into Georgian SSR. Prior to Russian dominance in the city since 1800s during which the city was mostly populated by Armenians and Turks the city belonged to Persian EMpire and its name Tiflis had the similar meaning and origin as Tebriz in Iran. Therefore Tiflis is modified Tebriz. Tbilisi is an artificial and made up name which means warm in Georgian. As if king Gorgasali was a balneologist and discovered thermal sources in the city and called them Warm-Tbilisi. This hypothesis is very inconsistent and non-convincing. Very naive. Armenian_nj I signed under my words and it was not my fault that it did not appear. Yo have no business to delete my words. Whatever I wrote here is not a POW. There are hundred of internet materials proving that Tiflis consisted mostly of Armenians until 1930. I will find also the links towards to version that Tiflis is the modified version of Tebrize. If you disagree then insist on your points of view but do not dare delete my postings. ANd where is the nationalism or chauvinism in my posting. So what, Azeris were the majority of Erivan before Russian takeover in 1828. Armenians were the majority o Tiflis and it is stated in beloved by you Georgians Pushkin's Puteshestvie v Arzrum. All the mayors of Tiflis were Armenian until Noy Jordania"s menshevik takeover and German occupation of Tiflis. Tell me your version, if you delete means you are just angry. It is a sign of weakness. Armenian_nj

The above paragraph was inserted unsigned by ArmenianNY on 16 September 2006, but placed above Ellsworth's signature from 2004, as explained by Kober below. I have moved the original signature back to Ellsworth's contribution. ColinFine 10:48, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Kober removed the paragraph above today (and marked the change as 'minor'). I have reinstated it, as this is not the best way to conduct arguments on a talk page. Kober: it appears you disagree with what Ellsworth says. Please argue the case rather than just deleting what he says. (I don't have knowledge or opinion on the issue: I just think that deleting a comment from a talk page is not appropriate. ColinFine 23:22, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I had removed it because it looked very much like vandalism. It was written today by a POV-pusher User:ArmenianNY who posted his comment under the name of another Wikipedian, namely User:Ellsworth and inserted a false date [1]. The comment itself is a blatant POV and full of nationalistic fantasies. It doesn't even deserve to be commented upon. Thanks, Kober 04:35, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the paragraph is highly POV, and does read like an unsupported nationalistic diatribe. I also agree that it had been inserted above another user's signature, and I have corrected that. But I still believe that on a Talk page the way to deal with such things is by challenging them, not by removing them. ColinFine 10:48, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't deny that at one point Armenians constituted the majority in the city in the 19th-20th centuries, but Tbilisi has always been a historic Georgian capital with great ethnic diversity. Your theory of the etomology of Tbilisi's name is very inconsistent, and your comment that the "inclusion of Tiflis" within Georgia needed justification is ridiculous. The 11th-century Georgian king David IV founded Gori and settled there Armenian merchants, but this doesn't mean that Gori was not a city of Georgia with its purely Georgian name, meaning 'a hill'. --Kober 04:42, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you, but as a city as a big industrial city or a governmental residence, Tbilisi has never been a Georgian capital until the Soviet times. May be there was a settlement, may be a Georgian village or whatsoever named Tbilisi since Gorgasali times. As a big city Tiflis has always been under Russian rule. It has always been called Tiflis even prior to Russian takeover by Georgievsky Treaty, when it was a part of Persian Empire ruled by Azeri speaking Safavid and Qajar dinasties. When Tiflis became a part of Russian Empire, it never became a Georgian capital, since there was no political entitiy named Georgia. There did exist Tiflis Gubernia. As an administrative center of Tiflis Gubernia and a residence of vice-roy Tiflis was an all armenian populated city, the center of Armenian business, trade and merchants. Moreover, Tiflis was the cultural capital of Eastern or Russian Armenians. I am more than sure that Georgians cinstituted the majority of Tiflis Gubernia, but not within the city, in the villages and other settlements of historical kingdom of Qartly, partly Kakhetia etc although there was no and still there is a single place southern of Tbilisi that is Georgian populated: historically Borchaly was Azeri and Armenian populated, places like Marneuli or Dmanisi or Bolnisi can be called Georgian only conditionally. Javakheti and Ajara are even out of question.When Russian Empire collapsed whatever was Tiflis gubernia became a part of menshevik Georgian Republic. And the city could not stay as an Armenian enclave withing independent Georgia, therefore it became the capital of Georgia. Let's not forget that Mtskheta and Kutaisi can be claimed as Georgian historical capitals more than Tbilisi.The independence of the Republic of Armenia was declared by Armenian National Council in Tiflis, not in Yerevan since Armenians were not able to believe that the city where they were absolute majority, and the mayor Aleksandr Khatisyan was Armenian as well, could become a center of Georgian statehood. Even after the establishment of Georgian SSR Armenians were still the majority of the city. There were ethnic clashes over where to built the politechnical university in Tbilisi in early 20s: in Armenian Havlabar or in Georgian Vera even if Tbilisi was the capital of Georgian SSR and not Armenian SSR. You can call Tbilisi multi ethnic you can call Tbilisi multi cultural etc, it is up to you, of you are still in a denial of the role of Armenians in Tiflis or if you want to sound politically correct. Whatever is gone is gone and nothing can be returned. But if I were you I wouldn't be so ignorant towards historical and political data available in non Georgian sources.And this would help you not to be so paranoic and judgemental towards others who do not think through your paradigm. Instead of labeling others' postings or deleting them, it would be nice of you not to be so culturally blind. Be aware of your own worldviews, beliefs. If you think that you are nationalistic or chauvinistic then do not go into wikipedia editing pages and judge people since instead of helping people here you can actually make detremential comments.Thats what we all saw in your treating of my posting. Thats the reason of instead of having a good and healthy discussion with me you started nationalistic demagogia here , first by calling me a nationalist, projecting your views and beliefs onto me, and then by deleting my postings. Making a comment about the majority of Tiflis population before the revolution does not make me nationalistic or chauvinistic. Everybody knows that Georgians used to be the majority of population in Abkhazia. But that didn't stop the rest of the world to call the region Abkhazia and finally it did not stop the minority from taking the political and military control of the region. From the moral point of view I can condemn Abkhaz people for establishing the rule of minority and disregarding the rights of Georgian majority in Abkhazia. This does not make me any nationalistic or chauvinistic. This also does not mean that I do not support the rights of Abkhaz people for liberation or national self determination. I am just constating the facts without judgement or passion. Armenian NY

Guy, stop making personal attacks. Calling others culturally blind and ignorant is not civil. If you continue your insults you'll be reported and blocked from editing Wikipedia. I have no time and energy to engage in this useless discussion with you. I'd suggest to look through "Making of the Georgian People" by RG Suny (American-Armenian, btw), an Encyclopaedia of Islam article "Tiflis" by Vladimir Minorsky [2], and a number of Georgia-related articles from the Encyclopaedia Iranica, also works by Cyril Toumanoff, David Marshall Lang, and WED Allen to get more info about the history of Georgia and its capital. As you can see I'm not "so ignorant towards historical and political data available in non Georgian sources" as you speculate in your posts. --Kober 05:07, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

From the sources suggested by me, one can easily draw the basic outline of the city's history. "Tiflis" is a foreign transliteration of the Georgian "Tfilisi" (hence, the modern-day Tbilisi), literally meaning "warm". The city was the capital of Caucasian Iberia, a Georgian kingdom until being absorbed by the Sassanid empire in the 580s. The Arabs established their emirate here in the 8th century, but the Georgians fought back in the 11th century. Since then it was a capital of the Georgian kingdom, and its successor kingdom of Kartli. The 1783 Treaty of Georgievsk was concluded between the Georgian king Erekle II (who ruled as an independent monarch with his capital in Tbilisi) and Russia. The city was sacked by the Qajar khan Agha Muhhamed after the Georgians lost the Battle of Krtsanisi at the outskirts of Tbilisi in 1795, but the Persians did not establish their permanent control over Tbilisi. Erekle II, and his successor, George XII, started to rebuild the city. The Russian annexation took place in 1801, and Tbilisi became a center of the Military Governorate of Georgia, later expanded into Armenia and Azerbaijan and renamed into the Viceroyalty of Transcaucasia. The city always had a historic Armenian community which indeed played a prominent role in Tbilisi's economic and cultural life, but it increased significantly after the Russian wars with Turkey followed by a large tide of Armenians into Georgia. Georgians were traditionally bound to agricultural activities and stayed in rural areas while Armenians, skilled in commerce in urban setting, gradually became majority not only in Tbilisi, but Kutaisi, Gori, Telavi, and even Tskhinvali (see 1911 Britannica ans other contemporary sources for the demographics of the cities of Georgia). FYI, the independence of all three Transcaucasian nations - Georgia (May 26 1918), Azerbaijan (May 27), and Armenia (May 28) - were declared in Tbilisi because these events occured in the immediate afthermath of the dissolution of the Transcaucasian Federation (May 26 1918) whose government was headquartered in Tbilisi.--Kober 08:12, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

First of all nobody is attacking you personally. Second, you are not the one who will decide who has to be blocked and who not. I have no time to go into the details of some pseudo historical data that you are arguing about. We were discussing the name of the city. You mentioned here about king Erecle 2, the battle of Krtsanisi etc etc etc . Even if supposingly we all agree, at least one of the Armenians will say- you guy, I do not believe in what is written in your history books or in ROnald Suny's books (by the way, Suny does not see the history of Tiflis in his dreams in USA or in his sexual fantasies- he just takes the same Georgian sources and translates them into English to bullshit as if he is doing something, the same way he falsificated all Armenian history as well, but thats a different topic),so that single armenian with a common sense will say I believe in what is obvious in folk culture or what is preserved today. The folk culture of Tbilisi did preserve some of the songs of the great trubadour of that time, a real " Tifliser" Sayat Nova, who was one of Erecle the 2's diplomats and was in love with king Erecle's sister Anna. Being a witness of all you described above- Battle of Krtsanisi near " Tbilisi", Georgievsky treaty etc etc Sayat Nova himself never called the city Tbilisi. He calls it Tiflis. Never ever he mentioned even in a single poem or a song or an idiom the word Tbilisi. Remember, he was killed by the same Qajar dinasty's Agha Khan who sacked Tbilisi and demanded the denounciation of the treaty of Georgievsk. Therefore, all whatever is written about the time of Georgievksiy dogovor or Battle of Krtsanisi or Erecle's time is a pure product of Georgian fantasy. There is no way to find a single document of that time when Tbilisi would be named Tbilisi. It is impossible since the real singer of the city who was in love with that city, in love with the sister of the king of Georgia calls it Tiflis. WHy shoud he use the Persian Tiurkic version of the name instead of Georgian name Tbilisi if he was the patriot of Georgia? This means that during the period under Persian rule and much before that period, today's capital of Georgia was really known as Tiflis and not Tbilisi. YOurs. ArmenianNY

Calling one of the most tragic pages in the history of Georgia "fabtasies" is highly offending. You have probably overlooked that I refer not only to Suny, but many other authorities (Minorsky, Lang, Allen). I can give you direct citations from myriads of contemporary and modern accounts (European, Russian, Armenian, Georgian) about the late 18th century history of Tbilisi, but I see no point in arguing with you. Btw, Sayat-Nova also used Tpilisi rather than Tiflis in his Georgian lyrics. Kind regards, --Kober 04:51, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I think Russian language used Tiflis before the October revolution.

I am not Georgian, but I live in Georgia. I read Georgian (Kartuli) and I am 100% certain that the name of the city is Tbilisi. Kartuli is a language where every letter is pronounced as it is written, and it translates directly to Tbilisi. If it was a different name in the past, whoever was running the place (this nationalistic stuff above I find mystifing), is makes no difference now, as current people call the place, and write it down as Tbilisi. Dobbs 08:11, 25 January 2007 (UTC) The inhabitants of Istanbul call the city Istanbul, armenians of Istanbul call that city KOstandnupolis or simply K.Polis, Russians call that city Stambul, some muslim nations call it Astambul but we all now that the name of the city is Kostantinopolis as it was found by Constantine and for 1000 years it was the capital of Byzantine EMpire by the name Kostantinopolis. Leningrad was Petrograd, Peter, Peterburg, Saint Petersburg but initially and finally it was and is Sankt Peterburg.SO my dear Dobbs, may be you read Kartuli and now that Georgians call their capital Tbilisi it is Tbilisi de fact and problably will always be. But 200 years ago that city was not called Tbilisi. And even 80 years ago,the majority of the inhabitants of the city, who were not Georgian but in fact Armenian, kept calling the city Tiflis. That city was very well known in the Russian Empire as the biggest industrial political and transportation center of Transcaucasia under the name Tiflis, the residence of Vice Royal of Caucasus. You can open any map of Russian Empire and you will never see any single mention of the name Tbilisi in any map published in that period. So nobody is arguing that at the moment the city is called Tbilisi but you also should not have any guts to call the nationalistic past of Tbilisi mistifying. The generation who used to live in the city named Tiflis is still alive.--armenianNY 23:46, 31 January 2007 (UTC) Moreover, I read in today's news that Tbilisi mayor Ubilava wants to bring back all the named of Tbilisi streets of 19th century. Thats a very good idea. In that case probably former Shahumyan street in Havlabar will be renamed and will not be Ketevan Samebuli street. Lots of other kartulocized streets will lose their names as well. They will have Russian and Armenian names. But will Ubilava rename Tbilisi as well, back to the version of 19th century?

though there is clearly nationalistic overtones to ArmenianNY's comments, he raises some interesting questions. surely they can be answered adequately and then the fuss will be over. can anyone tell us when the name tbilisi was first used. georgian is an ancient literary language and tbilisi is an ancient city--there must be sources with its name spelled the georgian way from hundreds of years ago, why can noo ne cite them? also, does Tabriz really come from the persian for warm, if so maybe T'b in georgian is a persian borrowing (like many others), though my linguist friends assure me that T'b is a uniquely georgian root. finally, as a resident of this fair city, it might interst ArmenianNY to know that there are a fair few gerogians here who call tbilisi tiflis, albeit with a slight affectation. it is easier to pronounce for foreigners (who usually say tiblisi) and evokes the city's 19th century charm...

We are talking about the toponim Tiflis that came from Tebriz and not Tbilisi. Therefore, Tebriz can not come from Georgian warm since Tiflis is not warm in Georgian, it is Tbilisi that means warm.I do not also think that Georgian language could have such a tremendous influence in Persian life that some cities in Persia could have taken their names from Georgian language. It was Georgia under Persian rule and not Persia under Georgian and so far there are hundred of Persian borrowings in Georgian language and not vise-versa. I got your point about Tbilisi's ancient name. Can you site any medieval or ancient historian or geographer who mentioned somehow, somewhere in his works the name Tbilisi? For example Ptolomeus or Marco Polo or whoever...Please do not cite Georgian mythological works, or Rustaveli's epical works or legends or other colloquial ethnographic remains. --armenianNY 18:33, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello, actually Tiflis is the Turkish version of the name Tbilisi. Tiflis as a name was used by other cultures / languages as well, when referring to Tbilisi. However, the proper Georgian name for the capital is Tbilisi. Hope this helps!

Oh yeah, of course it helps. I wish it was so easy to explain everything. We call it Tbilisi the other cultures call it Tiflis. The same way Russians will say we call it Kaliningrad but some Germanic cultures call it Konigsberg. And everybody is happy and satisfied.... Guy, this is an encyclopedic site, so please, go and express your thoughts in the children's version of wikipedia if it exists. Or you try editing some junior encyclopedia's such as "When, who and where" or " I want to know everything" or "Pochemuchka" in Russian etc. ArmenianNY

`Voyage du ChevalierChardin en Pers.` vol. 2. p. 73. : `This city is called Tibilis Kalaki (Warm city) or simply Tbilis or Tvilis, warm, because of the warm springs that are found inside the city and outside of its walls.` See the same volume, p. 86-87. `They say that it`s the Persians who gave the name Tifflis to the city, but Georgians do not call it Tifliss. They call it Cala which means city or the forteress(Cala is of Arabic origin).... Some Georgians call it Tebilé-Cala, that is warm city, because of the warm water bath or because it is not as cold there as in other parts of Georgia.` I have read read that some believe there were more Armenians in Tbilisi that Georgians. Maybe, but I found something very interesting that I want to share with you. In 1901 edition of Brockhous and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary the page 264 of the voulue 33 reads: the population of Tbilisi district: Russians- 4,4%, Greeks- 2,7%, Ossetians- 8,9%, Armenians- 23,9%, Georgians- 45%, Tushetians- 0,7%, Pshavelians- 1,1%, Khevsurians- 0,8%, Imeretians-1,1%. If you know a little bit of Georgia, you must know that Imeretians (Imerlebi), Tushetians (Tushebi), Pshavelians (Pshavelebi - you must have heard of Vazha Pshavela, at least), Khevsurians (Khevsurebi), Kakhetians (Kakhelebi), Megrelians (Megrelebi), Svanetians (Svanebi), ets. ARE GEORGIANS. So, how come an encyclopedia made such a mistake as to divide Georgians into tribes. Maybe because Kartveli has two meanings: 1) Kartleli (from the region of Kartili) and Geogian. One way or another, if the population of Tbilis district was not counted properly, I have a doubt that we`ve got the correct information about Tbilisi population, which has been diverse. Besides, in 19th century and at the begining of the 20th century people`s nationality was determined by their religion. E.G. 19th century Georgian publisist, Niko Nikoladze wrote in his memoirs about three traders: Armenina Petré Mgebrovi, a French from Gori, Gabriel Endronikashvili and the third Nikoladze, his father. Mgebrovi is in fact a Russian version of Mgebrishivli, a Georgian family name (Mgebavi means painter). He was just Monophysit and that`s why he was concidered to be an Armenian. As for Endronikashvili - he was a Georgian but Katholic but because of his religion considered to be French. Ha-ha-ha! I plan to learn as much as possible about the population of Tbilisi before and after Russia conquered it. Your help will be appreciated. Nina Iberi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.243.254.224 (talk) 20:36, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Population

The main text says it "has more than 1.345 million inhabitants" whereas the basic information bar on the right gives the population as "1,093,000 (2005 est.)". Which one is correct?

The figure I always hear is between the two inhabitants. http://www.eurasianet.org/resource/georgia/index.shtml has a cite for population. Dobbs 08:12, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

yes population is about 1.1 million

tbilisi's population and area ( within the city limits) according to city's official web-site. www.tbilisi.gov.ge

2001--- 1089.7 2002---1081.7 2003---1083.5 2004---1086.4 2005---1092.6

total area-372 sq.km.( 144 sq.ml.) Geller04 04:09, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, and this articles tells us that the area of Tbilisi is aboit 750 sq km...Total lie. Tbilisi has only 20 or 30 thousand more population that Yerevan does. The total area of Yerevan is about 350 sq km. How come Tbilisi became twice as big as Yerevan? 750 is almost the area of Moscow within MKAD. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.189.99.10 (talk) 03:20, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

yes i have to agree tbilisi's area is not 750 but 450 sq.km ( use to be 372 but government extended city's borders) and when it comes to population at this point its 1.093.000 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.192.161.47 (talk) 00:37, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

according to Black Sea Press news agency Tbilisi has added another 26,000 hectares to its already existing 31,000 hectare area. tbilisi's new area has reached 570 sq. km.

taken from: http://www.newsgeorgia.ge/society/20061124/587188.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Geller04 (talk • contribs) 05:59, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Interwiki to ossetian article

Why does the interwiki link to Kalak not work? os:калак shows up attached to the Tbilisi Metro link. The link is there, and the article is there http://os.wikipedia.org/wiki/Калак, but there appears to be a prollem getting from one to the other. Tomer ^TALK 01:55, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

Seems the OS wiki was still new, and it just took time for the links to resolve. Tomer ^TALK 02:31, May 19, 2005 (UTC)

Modern Landmarks

Before I changed it, somebody had titled this section "Nowadays". Modern Landmarks may be a poor subheading, so change it as you see fit.--EatAlbertaBeef 02:19, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

Tbilisi Youth City Assembly

Just curious, is this body important enough to be included in the article? --Kober 14:37, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Probably not:). I haven't really checked out the Tbilisi Youth City Assembly page and don't know what it does, but I don't see a problem with its inclusion as long as the text that is being input into the Tbilisi page meets good writing standards. The new edits don't seem to be written well. D.Papuashvili 14:47, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Fine then. I'd like to ask Mr Gegelia if he happens to have an image of the Tbilisi city seal of better quality. --Kober 14:58, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Sport

Sport: surely the fererence to Ruby League in a mistake and it should be Rugby Union, which the article on Rubgy League in Georgia states is the second most popular game.

Water

The side bar lists water as 'Negligible', however there is the large river running right through the center of town (shown on the map directly above - I won't get into the name to avoid the troubles we see above), as well as quite a few large streams and rivers feeding into it, as well as 'Turtle Lake' (in English), a nice park in the city. Not to mention the hot springs that the city is so famous for. This, and all the pictures of water I see throughout the article now that I look through it..... What gives? Dobbs 08:22, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Ministry of Transport

Hi, does anyone know who designed the Ministry of Transport building here: [3] Would you mind replying on my talk page as I notice this page is not frequently used, thanks! Mhicaoidh 10:37, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, the architect of that building(i mean-'The Ministry of Automobile Roads of Georgia') is George Chakhava. Here is his official website. Rastrelli f 05:58, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Tbilisi Picture Galleries

I have removed the picture galleries that have been incorporated into the Tbilisi page. These galleries are overcrowding the page and should not be used unless they are absolutely necessary. In addition, some of the pictures have questionable copyrights. It might be better to create individual articles on Wikipedia that incorporate at least some of the pictures that are included in the galleries below.D.Papuashvili 09:35, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• File:Ambasador Hotel.jpg
• File:Sharden STR.jpg
• File:Rustaveli Theatre.gif
• 
• 
• File:Abano Chreli.jpg
• File:Old Hotel.jpg
• File:Old Tbilisi house12.jpg
• File:Old Tbilisi Houses.jpg
• File:Opera Tbilisi.jpg
• 
• 
• File:Small and Old.jpg
• 

• A Class Business Centre on Chavchavadze Ave.
  A Class Business Centre on Chavchavadze Ave.
• Radisson Hotel Tbilisi
  Radisson Hotel Tbilisi
• Radisson Hotel Tbilisi
  Radisson Hotel Tbilisi
• Park Hyatt Hotel Tbilisi
  Park Hyatt Hotel Tbilisi
• A Class Business Centre, Hotel & Commercial Square
  A Class Business Centre, Hotel & Commercial Square
• A Class Business Centre, Commercial Square and Hotel on Chavchavadze Ave.
  A Class Business Centre, Commercial Square and Hotel on Chavchavadze Ave.

• The Right Embankment of the Mtkvari River at Night
  The Right Embankment of the Mtkvari River at Night
• 
  Abanot-Ubani District
• 
  Kashveti Church in Central Tbilisi
• 
  Svanetian Tower overlooking Turtle Lake
• 
  The Historic Dry Bridge District looking towards the Right Embankment
• 
  The grounds of the National Public Library of Georgia
• 
  Tbilisi's largest park Vake, with the foothills of the Trialeti Range in the background
• 
  Tbilisi from space

Heavy POV

The article contains elements of modern nationalist mythology, including such recently introduced concepts as the "independence of Georgia" between 1917 and 1921. Many villages in of the former Russian Empire also considered themselves independent during the period, and some (like the Don Republic) were even accorded international recognition, something which the Menshevist administration at Tbilisi failed to achieve. Please refrain from revising history. --Ghirla^-трёп- 15:14, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

This comment is just another manifestation of Ghrilandajo's Great Russian nationalist POV. Georgia between 1918 and 1921 was not "an independent Russian village" but an internationally recognized nation. Even you beloved Soviet government recognized it in the Treaty of Moscow (1920). Please refrain from ethnic insults and consult some scholarly sources.--Kober^Talk 15:19, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Please watch your tongue. The article about the treaty should be rewritten. It is ill-advised to recast the ideological clash between the Bolshevik and Menshevik factions of the Soviets under modern nationalist colors and trumpet about "Russian invasion of Georgia". Following this logic, we'll have to rename Sochi conflict into "Georgian invasion of Russia". The point to hold in mind is that the "invasion" was engineered by Georgians active in Moscow, such as Stalin. Please leave Russia alone. This article is not a very suitable place for another round of Russia-bashing. --Ghirla^-трёп- 15:38, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

The image that Kober insists on removing from the article.

I suggest you to apply the same tongue standards to yourself also then. The treaty article is based on credible scholarly sources and documents found in secondary sources. Even Stalin's notorious role in engineering the sovietization of Georgia doesn't make this tragedy a "Georgian invasion of Georgia". Stalin, Ordzhonikidze, Beria and co were banned from independent Georgia, but embraced by the nascent Russian proletariat state. The 11th Red Army was entirely a Russian army, wasn't it? So, please leave Tbilisi and Georgia alone. I presume your resurgent aggression towards Georgia is precipitated by the appearance of Russian translation of the Red Army invasion of Georgia article.--Kober^Talk 15:52, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Btw, the two other articles on fellow "villages" (Baku, Yerevan) in South Caucasia also contain similar Independence sections. They also make references to the Soviet Russian invasion and occupation (sic), but you don't seem to find those articles "modern nationalist fantasies".--Kober^Talk 16:51, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

In the period between 1917 and 1921, the former Russian Empire was a patchwork of about 300 entities claiming "independence". The process was known as the Russian Civil War. I don't see why three entries out of three hundred should be singled out as particularly "independent" on the basis of their current political status. I don't appreciate your incivil comments ("your resurgent aggression towards Georgia", etc) and I will have to apply to the appropriate venue if I see a relapse of incivility on your part. Also, please stop removing the superior Aivazovsky view of the town. Please explain what's wrong with it. You are close to breaking 3RR. --Ghirla^-трёп- 20:58, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Please stop blackmailing me and intentioanlly misleading the reader. I really enjoy Aivazovsky's view, but we've already got two pictures depicting downtown Tbilisi under Imperial Russian rule. Now care to explain what's wrong with the historical photo of the parading Red Army in the street of overrrun Tbilisi? As for the Russian Civil War, it was Russia's internal problem since Moscow recognized Georgia's independence in May 1920. All major powers followed the move and recognized Georgia. This is a textbook stuff. However, I'm not inclined to prove you anything. Just try to look through the scholarly publications.--Kober^Talk 21:11, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

It was you who chose to politicise the Bolshevik-Menshevik conflict (an internal ideological conflict between the Soviets) as "Russia's invasion of Georgia" and to trumpet it as such on this page. It was you who conducted a sterile revert war removing the superior historical image in favour of a politically motivated photo with an inflammatory caption. Does it have anything to do with the fact that the Armenians like Aivazovsky were the predominant population of Tiflis in the 19th century, one point that does not readily square up with the nationalist rewriting of the history of Georgia? --Ghirla^-трёп- 21:21, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

My statements are supported by scholarly sources while your accusations and assumptions are as false as ever. Nobody in Georgia denies that Armenians were a largest single ethnic group in 19th-century Tbilisi due to several reasons including a preferential treatment of Armenians over Georgians at the hands of Russian authorities: please refer for a detailed account to A Making of the Georgian Nation by the Armeno-American historian Ronald Grigor Suny. Here's an article about Armeno-Georgian relations by an Armenian expert which agrees to what Suny says. I hope you don't consider him "a nationalist rewriter of the history of Georgia". As for the Bolshevik-Menshevik conflict, I agree that it was an ideological conflict (but nor between the Soviets as there were no Soviets in Georgia), but most importantly it was a conflict between two independent nations - Georgia and Russia. Next time you decide to waste my time and energy, please consider providing some sources for your claims and please wash your mouth when you talk about Georgia.--Kober^Talk 04:31, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I added the Aivazovksy work to Old Tbilisi to make you happy.--Kober^Talk 21:15, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Kober, it's not a matter of my "happiness" as you seem to think. It's a matter of historical integrity. Removing the inconvenient image to a low-traffic page is never a solution. --Ghirla^-трёп- 21:26, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not an image gallery. We've got commons for that. If you want we can substitute Leromontov's painting with that of Aivazovsky.--Kober^Talk 04:31, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Your actions only demonstrate extreme Russian nationalistic POV pushing and agenda here. This should be taken into consideration when reading your comments. None of your arguments seem NPOV and can outweigh scholarly sources used by Kober. Iberieli 01:59, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Generally I agree that those events in Georgia were part of Russian civil war, and Soviets occupied Menshevik Georgia, not too differentrly from as did they other parts of the former Russian empire. The "conflict between two independent nations - Georgia and Russia" and the spirit is also bit fancy. But, "independence of Georgia" between 1917 and 1921 is not a myth, and tagging the statement that Tbilisi was the capital of the country is an inadequate reaction and quite evil. Btw here --> Estonia they speak of [Soviet] "colonization". Tamokk 05:45, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Basically I agree (with Tamokk, not with Estonians, obviously). Alæxis_¿question? 06:15, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Entered\invaded

We are talking only about Tbilisi here. I think that the word 'entered' more adequately describes what happened. Alæxis_¿question? 06:14, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, we are talking about Tbilisi. Please read Red Army invasion of Georgia#Battle for Tbilisi. Tbilisi was invaded, looted and people were executed en masse.--Kober^Talk 06:19, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Btw, are going you to invade any article I edit? --Kober^Talk 06:20, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I could ask you the same question (see Telavi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), for example). If you are going to say it was in your watchlist I can assure you that Tbilisi is also in my watchlist and I also monitor new articles about Georgia. Alæxis_¿question? 06:35, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Is it really surprising to you that Telavi is in the watchlist of a major contributor to Georgia-related articles? I'm sorry but Tbilis is not a new article but predated your arrival here. You don't seem to have questioned anything in the article until you spotted the current discussion.--Kober^Talk 06:39, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Ghirlandajo's double standards

After ru interwiki appeared in the Red Army invasion of Georgia, for the first time in my Wikilife, I got interested in Russian Wikipedia. There's an ongoing discussion about the article's title there and, to my surprise, I found Ghirlandajo's comment which absolutely contradicts his principal claims on this talk page:

Советую изучить en:Treaty of Moscow (1920). По этому договору Советская Россия признала независимость Грузии и обещала не вмешиваться в дела этого независимого государство. [Попытки задним числом «запамятовать» про этот юридический акт признания не имеют ничего общего ни с Саакашвили, ни с Бурджанадзе.] Вооружённый конфликт двух государств, взаимно признающих друг друга независимыми, — это как раз и есть война, а не установление чьей то там власти. —Ghirla -трёп- 15:34, 29 августа 2007 (UTC) [4]

This is yet another testimony to the provocative character of the current discussion initiated by Ghirlandajo.--Kober^Talk 06:54, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

If I were you I'd be happy Ghirla opposes anti-Georgian pov in ru-Wikipedia. Alæxis_¿question? 07:05, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, really? LOL. You gave me a good lough. And what about English Wikipedia where I live? --Kober^Talk 07:09, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Football Club Dinamo Tbilisi.gif

Image:Football Club Dinamo Tbilisi.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:24, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Population table

I looked at table showing Tbilisi' population through time - WTH? The first line doesn't make sense. See: 28,000 Georgians + 11,200 Armenians + some minorities + 15,000. Smn made a mistake here... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tizoc (talk • contribs) 15:46, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, I see someone "didn't like" source data, so he made Georgians amount ten times bigger —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.177.172.45 (talk) 09:57, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Ethnic Groups Table (Removed)

I removed the ethnic groups table on the Tbilisi page because the table appears to have been a part of a larger attempt to portray the city as having "non-Georgian" historic roots (or by its population demographics at least...) The census figures provide data from the 19th century onwards, a period which was marked by the Russian annexation of Georgia and following the destruction of Tbilisi in 1795 by the Persians. The census is trying to portray Tbilisi as a town that had a very small Georgian population (minority) a couple of centuries ago, with that minority somehow gaining majority status during the "Soviet" Era. An analogous claim has been voiced over the years by the Abkhaz Separatists backed by Russia in connection with Abkhazia and its respective population, trying again to portray that region of Georgia as "not Georgian." In the case of Tbilisi, the census simply ignores or blurs the fact that the Russian annexation of Georgia and the following period of migration of other ethnic groups which was endorsed by the Russian Empire, altered the demographics of the city considerably in the 19th century. In addition, the census does not incorporate older, Georgian sources (17th century and earlier) about the population of the city which depict a completely different demographic picture. The table in question, again provides a publication that was published in Moscow ("Old Tbilisi"), in Russian, as its source. These claims which try to illustrate the "non-Georgian" roots and background of Tbilisi, that are in essence, quite similar to the claims and portrayal of Abkhazia as "not Georgian" and somehow becoming "Georgianized" in the 20th century seem to be stemming from the same propagandistic roots. Therefore, politicisized tables that are pushing particular interests of "certain groups" that are incorporated into Wikipedia, which is a neutral encyclopedia, should not be included within its articles... D.Papuashvili (talk) 16:45, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

OK, I'll bring data from before 19 cent period. Anyway, you had no right to do this only according on your relation to this table. And what you wrote - you are trying to politize demographics - which is unacceptable. I call all Wikipedia users to research this case - has or not this Wiki user right to remove and politize demographics history —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.241.165.148 (talk) 08:59, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I am an administrator who first saw this page a couple of days ago by sheer chance (reverting petty spam). Thus I have put the article on my watchlist and noticed the recent edit warring. It must stop and all discussions confined to this talk page rather than reverting summaries. What is crucial here is whether the cited sources are reliable and unambiguous. They do seem so (and they were published before the recent tensions). The table contained some math errors in percentages, and thus I went to some extra sources. They roughly agree with the previous numbers. The data are interesting (to me at least, as I never knew this before), and whatever someone might think about them is irrelevant. Materialscientist (talk) 03:27, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

I do not in any way approve of the edit warring which took place but I sense nationalistic propaganda here. The paragraph in question is four lines long and I hardly see how it would merit a giant chart like this, especially knowing that it relies entirely on questionable Russian websites and considering that according to most sources, the first Imperial Russian census did not occur until 1897.

the 1897 All-Russian census was the first Imperial survey which aimed to interview every household head and relied upon solicited interview data rather than the lists compiled by local authorities.

the 1897 all-Russian imperial census did not contain a question on nationality, nationality was attributed to populations often through...local analysis of data on mother tongue, social estate and occupation.

[5] Anderson, David. The 1926/27 Soviet Polar Census Expeditions. 2001, p.29.

So I guess if you were a merchant or a tax collector,stereotypical Armenian professions in Georgia, you would probably count as an Armenian as well. To summarize, the data before 1897 came on those Russian websites from god knows where, and the first "real" census is not itself in a much better shape.--Tremer11 (talk) 05:03, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

(ec) Can you provide evidence for "questionable"? How questionable (1%, 10%, 100%, 300% error)? I thought those are official government reports, and somehow the data seem consistent though they come from different sources and years. Wasn't Russian the official language then? Materialscientist (talk) 04:51, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

See the above post.It does not matter what year they say they came from. The only book from the list that I can verify is the one that has ISBN number, the other ones could exist or not, or they may be from the stated year or not.--Tremer11 (talk) 05:03, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

You bring up several interesting facts. The source that the table allegedly came from, even if it exists, is questionable. I wouldn't be surprised if a publication like this was the work of one of the directorates of the KGB. In the history section of this page, there's a reference to the demographic makeup of the city of the 19th century already. I don't know who inserted the text about demographics in the history section since it wasn't a part of my text when I wrote the history section for this page, but I think this reference needs to be checked for accuracy too. At this point, I suggest that we remove the ethnic groups table because it is neither neutral nor accurate. D.Papuashvili (talk) 09:11, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

How referenced numbers can be "not neutral"? I can verify another book without ISBN. It is a 1003-page scanned manuscript written and printed in old Russian style and known on the web. It is hardly possible that it was fabricated. The point is that all those 6 sources of various origins roughly fit together. Materialscientist (talk) 09:26, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

If "the 1897 All-Russian census was the first Imperial survey which aimed to interview every household head and relied upon solicited interview data rather than the lists compiled by local authorities", how can there be reliable data on the ethnic makeup of the city from the Russian sources, unless other official surveys were conducted prior to 1897? Are you suggesting that the data that are included in the table come from official demographic surveys that were conducted prior to the first Imperial census of 1897? D.Papuashvili (talk) 10:26, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Sure. 1897 was merely the date of the first all-Russia census. Local authorities conducted censuses much earlier, and that djvu book of 1885 reads like one of those. Materialscientist (talk) 10:56, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

OK. If you've checked and verified the numbers already across several different sources, there's no need to go deeper into the accuracy of the numbers. What I have an issue with is that unfortunately, this table looks like it is politically motivated. First of all, cities usually have data about the modern demographic situation of the location in question. There are no time series associated with the ethnic makeup of cities from the past. Also, 19th century demographic data is taken arbitrarily to form a time series as to what the ethnic makeup of the city was from the 19th century onwards. The edits from the anonymous user who inserted this table into the demographics section of the page resemble very much the comments made by the user ArmenianNY from several years ago, who was in essence insisting that Tbilisi was not a Georgian city at all. Therefore, I insist on a very thorough review as to why this table should be included on this page at all considering that most other cities do not have any tables even resembling what has now been inserted into the Tbilisi article. D.Papuashvili (talk) 11:18, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

The neutrality of interpretation of these data is a completely separate issue. Including demographic history into WP articles on localities and regions is a common practice, and I have first-hand experience with that. It is usually easy to find data for total population vs. year or nationality composition for one-two points in time. This might explain lack of demographic data vs. time in other articles. Materialscientist (talk) 11:27, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Somehow I don't see ethnic tables like this on the pages of New York City, Moscow, London, Baku or even Yerevan. I do not believe that it is appropriate to include an ethnic table on the Tbilisi page either. The ethnic time series should not be emphasized on this page. If someone wants to, they can look up the ethnic data, in the form of time series from a secondary source but not from the Tbilisi page itself. D.Papuashvili (talk) 11:37, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Since there have been no responses on this subject, I again suggest that the ethnic time series be removed from the main Tbilisi page. This is a politicized chart and it is not appropriate to include an ethnic table like this within the Tbilisi article. D.Papuashvili (talk) 18:00, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

No valid reason provided, thus no reply. Absence of something in some other articles (not all, by the way) is by no means a reason for removal of statistical information. Materialscientist (talk) 22:36, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

No, you have it wrong. It is not an absence nor coincidence that the city pages on Wikipedia do not have designated ethnic tables, especially in the form of time series. This is a biased table trying to push a particular POV and cannot be considered to be neutral. On the contrary, it can be viewed as discriminatory in many ways to quite a lot of people. And no, this table is not accurate in the sense that it completely omits the Kurdish population of Tbilisi which is very sizable now and was significant throughout the whole period that this table tries to capture. In this case in particular, the user who uploaded the data (who btw has been banned from editing Wikipedia) resembles the user ArmenianNY, who was claiming that Tbilisi was not Georgian at all. Therefore, POV tables like this are not acceptable on Wikipedia. This table will be removed. D.Papuashvili (talk) 09:25, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Collage

As this is the capital and largest city of a nation, I suggest that we put in a collage, showing a panorama and some other sites.--RM (Be my friend) 16:41, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

• Support:

• Oppose:
•  Done.--Gaeser (talk) 06:10, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Renovations and controversies

In this source, for any interest: [6]--Dans (talk) 23:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Romanisation of the name.

The CIA and the UN both Romanise the city name as T'bilisi, not just Tbilisi. Just want to know whether there is a reason the article is at the current romanised form, and if there is a good reason if this version of romanisation can be noted as an alternative. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 17:41, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Climate in Tbilisi

There is simply no way that climate in Tbilisi is Humid Subtropical. Humid Subtropical is Batumi. I will concede if there a reference. Makes sense? Bars77 (talk) 03:29, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Redundancy in Education

There are two different sections in this article about education in Tbilisi. Please edit this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Streetballer510 (talk • contribs) 07:28, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I have merged those sections and removed one image of the Freedom Square (there were 2, not sure which one is better though). Materialscientist (talk) 07:58, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

File:GEORGIAN KING GORGASALI.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:GEORGIAN KING GORGASALI.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 01:42, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

1801-1803 figures

A user without any explanations removes the double sourced figures as he/she believes there wasn't a census in that period. Clear WP:OR. Rast5 (talk) 18:49, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Exactly, the cited source does not state anywhere that a "census" took place, which is exactly what one would expect considering that Georgia was just being annexed in 1801 and in times of upheaval and revolts I doubt there was census of any kind. The first census occurred in the late 1900s, which is shown on the comprehensive chart in the demographics section.--Andriabenia (talk) 20:11, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

At first, it is not a source, but sources (I cited two, I can cite more). Then, during the annexion Russian tzar made a census and collected other statistics, you can read the same book of Vladikin to ensure. And the word of 'census' is not so critical here (even the Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary mentions Armenian majority in Tiflis as an obvious fact [7]). There is a sourced information on anti-Armenian demographic policies in Tiflis, and you're trying to remove it. Rast5 (talk) 04:45, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Files listed for deletion

• File:Freedom square.jpeg
• File:Lamazi shenoba.jpeg

The above files used in this article are being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy.

Please share your thoughts on the matter at Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2012_January_12#Uploads_by_user_Gia_Gvilava

Thank you. -- Orionist ★ talk 07:13, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Isani Metro Station.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Isani Metro Station.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Isani Metro Station.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:03, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Lego building.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Lego building.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Lego building.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:03, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Suggestion

I suggest that we add a small chart that would list the states that Tbilisi was part of throughout its history. Something like this.

302 BC–580 AD	Caucasian Iberia
580-627	Sassanid Empire
736/738-764	Umayyad Caliphate
853-1050	Abbasid Caliphate
1068-1122	Great Seljuq Empire
1122-1236	Kingdom of Georgia
1236-1320s	File:White Sulde of the Mongol Empire.jpg Mongol Empire
1386	Timur's invasion
1801-1917	Russian Empire
1917-1918	Transcaucasian Commissariat
1918	Transcaucasian Democratic Federative Republic
1918-1921	Democratic Republic of Georgia
1921–1991	Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic within the Soviet Union
1991–present	Georgia

--Yerevanci (talk) 19:26, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Tbilisi vs Tiflis

Just an interesting graph here at Google Ngram Viewer Tiflis vs Tbilisi The use of Tbilisi overrun the use of Tiflis only in the mid-1970s. --Երևանցի ^talk 01:42, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Population

Geostat.ge has a population of 1,172,700 for 2012 and 1,171,200 for 2013. Where are the population figures used in this article from? Peter James (talk) 20:57, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Timeline of Tbilisi

What is missing from the city timeline? Please add relevant content. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 11:14, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Pronunciation of Tbilisi

Pronunciation please? Preferably IPA? —Keenan Pepper 20:31, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Nobody knows? Come on, people! —Keenan Pepper 20:32, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Pronounciation should probably go in the first paragraph, and should be in IPA. This is typically the style. Doyel 14:08, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

• Hate to whinge, but no one in the English language world says Tbilisi. They're not able to. Instead they say Tiblisi, obviously technically incorrect but we should be descriptive not prescriptive. Thoughts?

Well, some do try. It's not impossible. However, I've been led to understand that the "t" is not given its full value, and "Bil-EE-si" is closer to the money than what most journos are saying these days. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:15, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Please provide the original pronunciation, IPA or a simple romanisation. --Atitarev (talk) 23:39, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

The pronunciation is given in IPA now and an sound file is attached. But the two are quite different. Whereas the IPA version puts the stress on the second syllable (-li-), the sound file suggests the stress is on the first syllable (Tbi-). What is correct? — N-true (talk) 16:07, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

You were right - the IPA pronunciation has been corrected to reflet the correct pronunciation of Tbilisi in Georgian. The Georgian pronunciation of Tbilisi is t'bilissi, with a stressed "bee" sound and a semy-stressed "see" ending. As seenon https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tbilisi.ogg and on http://pt.forvo.com/word/tbilisi/ and on http://pt.forvo.com/word/%E1%83%97%E1%83%91%E1%83%98%E1%83%9A%E1%83%98%E1%83%A1%E1%83%98 179.176.182.5 (talk) 18:57, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:06, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Crowding

I attempted to clear a number of crowded items to make the article more readable and was reversed. Some paragraph-sized sections have 2-3 different multimedia on all sides, with text squeezed in between, which does not look right. How essential are these items and why are they thrown together like this.--Damianmx (talk) 11:11, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, Damianmx. I am not necessarily against your edits, just wanted them discussed (you know, if an editor with 6 hr tenure comes and makes large-scale edits, it is sometimes suspicious). Let us wait a couple of days and allow users to discuss.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:17, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

My own 2 cents. First, from the demographics you deleted the historical data. I have no opinion on whether they are appropriate there (rather yes than no, but this is debatable), but my problem is that now the section is completely unsourced. May by even if the data does not go back, it might be good to bring the references back. Second, pictures are usually very sensitive, and people often do not like when their photos get removed and replaced. It should be only done if the quality of a new photo is clearly superior. Another issue to take into account is that Georgia currently has no freedom of panorama - all pictures of modern buildings and monuments will eventually be deleted. I did not check the pictures, but if you want to proceed, please mind these things.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:17, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

There's only so much space in an article and crowding it out of concern that a photographer will be offended seems like a silly reason. Same for the chart, if its historical data as you say, why can't it just go to History of Tbilisi, instead of being squeezed in an already tight place.--Damianmx (talk) 11:32, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

This is fine, move them to the History of Tbilisi and keep the refs here, we do not want to have unreferenced sections. For the photo, this is a matter of taste. You may think it is silly to have many photo, and other people would say it is silly to remove their photo which was illustrating the article. There is no policy which can be strictly applied at this point, and it is always better to be careful.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:50, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

@Ymblanter:, giving him a full pack of WP:GF as were supposed to, in the few edits he's made so far, he's pushing for several clear agenda-loaded povs, such as posing Georgia as a de facto European nation, even though the concensus on Wikipedia does not follow such a thing. Second, he tried to hide Georgia's abundant historical ties with various Near Eastern nations (deletion of pictures or crucial information). Not though a consensus or sourcing, but clear removing.[8] I think it's important to keep for others in mind while observing the edits. - LouisAragon (talk) 12:13, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

I do not think he is a PoV pusher, just an unexperienced user.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:20, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

LouisAragon, I'm sorry if I somehow hurt your feelings, I removed a number of crowded items, including a church and a classical-era building, so I don't see how I'm picking on or oppressing near eastern cultures. Not to mention, these items are already displayed on the history page, where there is ample space.--Damianmx (talk) 12:22, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, right. I wonder then why only the picture of Agha Mohammad Khan is removed out of all pictures, while all other pictures on the Tbilisi page are also represented on the History of Tbilisi page (going by your own reasoning) This in line with your previous edits I've linked above, your statement does not really hold much credibility. - LouisAragon (talk) 12:26, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

I don't know what chip you have on your shoulder but it is telling that your very first edit on this website was a complaint against Eurocentrism and you seem to have have been sticking middle eastern this or that at every opportunity. Whether that Khan was Persian or not, he was just one page in Georgia's 2000 year history, so tell me why does he deserve a huge painting in a section that's only several lines long itself? Are there photos of Georgia on Iran/Persia pages?--Damianmx (talk) 12:32, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Agha Mohammad Khans invasion is of huge significance to Tbilisi's history. Not did it only devastate it completely of which the city didn't recover for decades, it also was the direct reason as for the Russians to annex Georgia, after which it came under Russian rule for some 200 years. It's one of the most noteworthy events, though tragic, in Tbilisi's and Georgian history, with huge century-long consequences. And that's backed up with numerous sources by the most reliable scholars. - LouisAragon (talk) 12:26, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Neighboring empires pillaged and massacred Georgia countless times, and each event led to something, should we hang up their paintings too? Mongols were there for hundreds of years, so were the Arabs and the Turks, we'll never see the end of it here, that's why there's a separate page just for history, where that painting already resided.--Damianmx (talk) 12:44, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

The thing is, Georgia =/= Tbilisi and vice versa. This article is about Tbilisi; a part (capital) of the country Georgia. The fact that Turks/Mongols/X invaded the country of Georgia doesn't hold ground here. Were talking about Tbilisi. If any of those invasions had immense lasting effects as well on Tbilisi and if we had a picture (speculations) there should be a possibility to include them here as well, if the voice of the majority would theoretically want that. Also, I think you see it as some kind of glorification of the victor, which it is absolutely not meant to represent. It depicts the capture of the city this very article is about; an event of huge, I stipulate again, huge significance to the history of this city and on top of that Georgia as a whole, which had lasting events for centuries afterwards on the city and in turn the entire country. As a direct result of that invasion/sack, Georgia became part of Russia for some 180 years. Thus, it has to be kept. - LouisAragon (talk) 12:58, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Battle of Krtsanisi by Valerian Sidamon-Eristavi

Mongols and Arabs were indeed in Tbilisi for a long time and massacred countless people, so they are very much part of the storyline. That aside, the Iranian painting itself, which depicts the aftermath of the Battle of Krtsanisi is not contemporary of those events in any case and was created many years after. So what is its value? Why is it that you favor that image and not something painted by a local Georgian author? Because this is not just about illustrating events is it?, its about pinning victory trophies, promoting Persia and its culture with spam-like copy and paste jobs.--Damianmx (talk) 13:16, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

I won't comment on certain points of thought of yours, which clearly present your rather hostile point of view/tunnel vision, but sure I have absolutely no objections against using a picture by a Georgian artist either. I don't think anyone would have. We can replace it with that one you linked here. - LouisAragon (talk) 13:22, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

That would be a step in the right direction, I can just place it to the right so it does not mess up the title page. But what about removing all the other extraneous material (Aghmashenebeli avenue classical building, cathedral, chart etc). I fail to see why you keep reversing them, what is your issue with those items?--Damianmx (talk) 13:29, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

As long as it shows at the section where it's supposed to be, it doesn't matter whether it's on the left or right. Aghmashemebeli I think is one of the most prominent avenues of the city, why should that be removed? Is it not well-known enough? If there are better alternatives for city lay-out pictures (churches, avenues, etc etc) it's no issue changing them ofc.(@Jaqeli:, just pinging Jaqeli here as he's Georgian and lives in Georgia, and would probably have a valuable opinion regarding the lay-out pictures of the city itself) - LouisAragon (talk) 13:39, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

It is a very pretty street, I've been there plenty of times, but there are many pretty streets, we can't include them all. The street has its own page so perhaps it should go there. In the meantime, I will give this painting a try.--Damianmx (talk) 13:48, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

I've updated the demographics section with a neat photo collage to deal with crowding. Let me know if this works.--Damianmx (talk) 14:50, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Pls have in mind that Sameba is an unfree building; it is safer to replace it with one of the free ones (e.g. Sioni, Metekhi, or Anchiskhati).--Ymblanter (talk) 15:33, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Whitewashing

Congratulations to chauvinistic users who have succeeded in removing any in-depth mention of the city's Armenian population from the Demographics section. Also good job in not featuring a single Armenian church in the collage. --Երևանցի ^talk 10:03, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

When was it there before it was removed? Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 00:35, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

I noticed this as well. The demographic table was removed, despite so many other major cities in the region having demographic statistics. Someone had a clear agenda here to pretend Armenians had no involvement in the development of modern Tblisi. Tigernose (talk) 04:04, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

I have restored the data, renaming the table Historical demographics of Tbilisi. This edit [9], the most recent deletion of the demographics content, has a very deceptive edit summary. The content is sourced, and there is no talk page discussion agreement to remove it (in fact, as the above posts show, there is unquestionable support for its inclusion). Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 01:29, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

And I see from an earlier discussion that this same deleting editor deleted the same content before, that time claiming "crowding", perhaps the most invalid deletion reason ever! And he replaces it with an OR synthesis collage of churches, synagogue and mosque (with, revealingly, not one Armenian church). This collage is not valid content - illustrations are required to support sourced article content, not to be used as a replacement for deleted sourced content. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 01:36, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

The replacement of the original content was discussed months ago with another set of users. It was replaced due to several reasons, prime of which was that most of the sourcing (such as this dubious link) was not in line with WP:RS. Another plausible reason is that inserting huge charts in a tiny paragraph screams of WP:UNDUE. The presence of Armenians in the city has been and continues to be clearly reflected in relevant parts of the article, such as this: "In the course of the 19th century, the largest ethnic group of Tbilisi were Armenians, who, at some point, formed 74.3% of the population." Repeating this over and over and over again is just agenda pushing.--Damianmx (talk) 17:16, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

We have the two editors above, User:Yerevantsi and User:Tigernose, expressing dismay that this content has been deleted, and of the three editors involved in the earlier "Crowding" discussion, two - User:LouisAragon ("it has to be kept") and User:Ymblanter ("rather yes than no") - supported the retention of this content. Only you wanted it removed, and you gave not one word of valid reasoning to support that deletion. You have been deleting content that is valid content, that is adequately referenced, that is on-topic for the section it is in, and that consensus wants retained. And you replaced it with an OR SYNTHESIS collage of pov photos that has no relation to any content in the article. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 19:14, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

I don't care about the collage, it was placed there for illustrative purposes. Since it bothered you so much, I went ahead and replaced it with an image of a historical church in Avlabari. Notwithstanding, the chart with non-WP:RS sources has no place here, especially in an overview as small as this. Again, I prefer to assume good faith, but one has to note that complaints by these select editors concern exclusively Armenians, which makes me think that this is some type of nationalistic agenda pushing and original research. The named topic is more than adequately covered in the article. Repeated insertion/regurgitation of the same thing is just an attempt to make a POINT, and an encyclopedia is not an appropriate venue for that.--Damianmx (talk) 19:35, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

The partisan editing seems to be all from you - you don't like this content, it offends your agenda, you want it gone, and to hell with anyone else's opinion. You are in a minority of one here and are edit warring. I have pointed out your earlier deceitful edit summary, the one falsely claiming there was talk page consensus for deletion. Now you make a new but equally deceitful edit summary to "support" the same deletion [10] "original research with non-WP:RS content" - there is no original research, all of the data has references, and you do not just make sweeping unsupported claims of non reliable sources without presenting the evidence. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 21:22, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Yes, the data does have references, but they are not WP:RS. runivers.ru and spam-ridden kavkaz.narod.ru, which form the majority of the sourcing, are not authoritative sources. In fact, according to Dr. David Anderson of the University of Aberdeen, the 1897 all-Russian imperial census did not even contain a question on nationality - "the 1897 all-Russian Imperial census did not contain a question on nationality, nationality was attributed to populations often through the local analysis of data on...social estate and occupation..." - that can hardly be described as reliable data.--Damianmx (talk) 23:17, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

These substantive doubts aside, I am comfortable including estimates by Roland Suny, since Suny is at least somewhat reputable. But as I noted above, Suny's text is already incorporated into the article very clearly and I can't see a good reason why it would deserve a chart of its own. Everything the reader needs to know is already there. You are causing an uproar over nothing.--Damianmx (talk) 23:08, 31 May 2016 (UTC)