Talk:Georgians/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

83% of georgians live in georgia

but 4 mil out of 7 mil is not 83%. I would say the numbers of georgians living in Turkey or Afghanistan are a little far fetched. I never heard of 150.000 Georgians living in Afghanistan. Can someone verify this info.

83% of the population of today's Georgia! Thank you! Georgians living in Turkey (more than 1,5 mil.), on the territory of old Georgian provinces - Tao-Klarjeti and Lazeti, are indigenous population of this region. Information about the number of Georgians living in Turkey is the data of the Georgian Society in Turkey. In Afganistan and Iran Georgians were moved in the XVII-XVIII cent. Levzur Sept 2, 2005

Compare these disputed diaspora figures with those cited for Armenians and Norwegians. I don't think there's one single answer for how to realistically enumerate something as elusive as the primary ethnic identity of millions of people after generations of exile or intermarriage. Are sub groups such as the assimilated people in Turkey and Russia whose genetic roots are in the Georgian people to be counted in or out? Are they a subgroup? Are the Ajarians? Tricky, this is.... //Big Adamsky 16:39, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Total population of Georgians living in Turkey, on the territory of old Georgian provinces - Tao-Klarjeti and Lazeti (Lazistan) and not assimilated, is more than 1,5 mil. They have Georgian Associations "Chveneburi" and "Lazebura" (Laszs are one of ethnographic groups of Georgian People). "Chveneburi" is a Georgian Cultural Society in Turkey, not "ethnic group"! Ajarians are muslim Georgians, not a different ethnic group!. In Russia Georgians (about 1 mil.) have own cultural Association also. Georgian Associations are in the USA, Germany, France, Netherlands, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Iran, etc. For mentioned above people "GEORGIAN" is a primary ethnic identity. Unfortunately, you absolutely not know Georgia and history of Georgian People. With kind regards, Dr. Levan Z. Urushadze, Georgian historian. 5 January 2006

I think Big Adamsky's also pointing to assimilated Georgians as well as those of a recent cultural assimilation into say Turkish or Russian society. Also, the usage of the term ethnic groups is tricky. On the Han chinese page we had a discussion about whether the Hui are Han or not. The view was that they are not. Why? Because they are Muslim rather than Buddhist/various others. The Hui have the same origins as the Han and are usually considered a sub-group at least, but not 'real' Han. Ethnicity is often a hazy term that is applicable in many instances that may not be universally agreed upon, but I think has to be left to some concensus of the group involved deciding whether or not they feel they are an 'ethnic' group as such. Tombseye 06:23, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

By the way, who put up 150,000 Georgians in Afghanistan?! This is the first I'm hearing about this. Mostly there used to be thousands of Georgian Muslims in Afghanistan, but they vanished/assimilated into the population probably a century or more ago. Gorgin Khan's the last major Georgian ruler mentioned before the Hotaki revolt against the Safavids in the 1700s.Tombseye 06:26, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Dear Tombseye, I say only about NOT ASSIMILATED Georgians. Ajarians and mentioned above Georgians in Turkey are Muslims, but they are not culturally and linguistically different from the rest of Georgia. They are ETHNIC GEORGIANS. Total amount of Georgians in Afganistan is about 300,000, about 50% of this population identified himself, as Gurjs (Georgians). With best regards, Dr. Levan Z. Urushadze. 6 January, 2006.

I think its fair to say alot of these numbers are somewhat accurate when you consider the traditional definitions of an ethnic group (a common cultural, linguistic, religious, historical/ancestral and/or physical/gentic origin). Just because Georgians were assimilated in Turkey doesn't necessarily not make them ethnically Georgian. If they had significantly intermarried with ethnic Turkish and adopted all things Turkic then they can be consdiered to be ethnic Turkish with some Georgian roots/influence. But if they still have a significant combination of Georgian roots, whether they be cultural, ancestral/etymological, linguistic, religious or physical/genetic, then they can be classified as Georgians just as much as being classified as a Georgian-Turk or citizen of Turkey. Epf 09:29, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Hello Dr. Levan, I'm just wondering though when this figure was taken. I have no problem with it if it's true, but I was under the impression that indeed many thousands of Georgians were placed in Afghanistan and many became rulers such as the aforementioned Gorgin Khan who ruled Kandahar, but I haven't seen census data that points to Afghans who, other than possibly claiming some partial descent from Georgian ancestors they no doubt have since we know some were settled there, still claim Georgian ethnicity. I'm not disagreeing with your view of who ethnic Georgians are as I agree that Georgians regardless of religion are Georgians, but I am wondering where these figures are from as most of the sources I've consulted, including some books I've read about Georgia, including history, economcy, etc. mainly relate to some groups in the Caucasus, Russia, Turkey, while other regions aren't particularly referred to. The Iranic lands such as Iran and Afghanistan, I thought, had assimilated Georgians who no longer identified themselves as ethnic Georgians. Tombseye 09:33, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

My dear friend! Unfortunately, your information is not true! With best regards, Levan Z. Urushadze, 8 January, 2006.

Look Levan, maybe I'm wrong, but I'm asking for some information here. You can't put up figures unless there is some reliable evidence. Where did the 300,000 Afghans claim to be ethnic Georgians in the 20th century?! I was under the impression that even in Iran, they have been largely assimilated and no longer constitute a viablely separate group as they apparently don't even speak Georgian any more. Tombseye 08:28, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

About 150,000 Gurjs (Georgians) in Afganistan and about 100,000 in Iran claim to be ETHNIC GEORGIANS. Georgians in Iran SPEAK GEORGIAN. With best regards, Dr. Levan Z. Urushadze, 21 January 2006

I'm just asking for a source though. What source or survey or report shows that hundreds of thousands of people still claim Georgian ancestry and speak Georgian Afghanistan and Iran? I'm not against the possibility that you might be correct, but this is the first time I've heard of actualy speakers of Georgian in Afghanistan still. Like I said, I was under the assumption that most had been assimilated by the 19th century and in Iran the actual number of ethnic Georgians, according to most reference books is relatively small (this would again assume that most have assimilated into bigger groups). Now I know there are Armenians still, but as for Georgians, I just wanted some source for this information is all. Thanks. Tombseye 22:46, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

• I think a source is needed for statistics regarding the number of ethnic Georgians residing in Turkey, possibly in Iran and Afghanistan as well. The reason being that Turkey does not allow census data on ethnic minorities (it maintains that there is only one ethnicity/nationality in Turkey--the Turk). I personally would be very interested to see alternative census data. While in the Rizeli region and in Hopi, I conducted a very unscientific informal poll, but very few people claimed to be Laz (or perhaps they just didn't understand my Turkish ;) )--I got far more responses from people identifying as Hemşinli or just Turkish. So, like I said, I'm very interested to find better sources of demographic information on the Laz in Turkey. --Treemother199 01:06, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

The number of Georgians in Turkey (minus Laz), is well above 1.5 million. I do not know where this figure comes from all I can say is that it is wrong, and their is no way of knowing either unless a census would be conducted (which would not happen) even then the data would not be 100% correct because some diaspora Turks are Georgian. The number is at least 3 million if not more Georgians of full/partial decent. Kusca (talk) 22:31, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

DNA

Are there any DNA studies regarding Georgian origins or their relation to the surrounding peoples? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.217.194.201 (talk) 02:06, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Georgian DNA Issue

Hallo Ebizur, I am happy to see you being so interested in genetic origins of so many peoples, including Georgians. On Pages Haplogroup J2 (Y-DNA) and Georgians you claim Georgians to have 72% of J2 Haplogroup that is simply impossible. You also provided Sources that I assume you have not read enough. First of all, you used my Ref. on page Georgians claiming high frequency of G Haplogroup in Georgians to substantiate high frequency of J2 Haplogroup that is utter nonsense.

To be short, the sources you provided -- Ornella Semino et al., "The Genetic Legacy of Paleolithic Homo sapiens sapiens in Extant Europeans: A Y Chromosome Perspective," Science Vol 290 10 November 2000 -- I checked http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.122.2145&rep=rep1&type=pdf and it contains no constantation that Georgians have 72% of J2 Haplogroup. On the contrary i provided credible and respectable source (That u later falsely attached to your dgujments) http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v16/n3/fig_tab/5201934f2.html#figure-title that clearly demonstrates Georgians Having extremely high % of G Haplogroup (NOT J2) and moderately low J2 Haplogroup!!!! PLEASE, double-check your sources and provide cognitive, credible edition of the articles if you still think my position is not persuasive and based enough. BEFORE THAT, I HAVE TO change both articles (Haplogroup J2 (Y-DNA) and Georgians) containing incorrect info. Thnx for understanding and your contributions. Best regards, Niko. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickniko (talk • contribs) 15:02, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

I checked the sources Nickniko mentioned above. As best I can tell, the first source doesn't say anything at all about haplogroup J2 in Georgians, and the second source shows only a very small incidence of haplogroup J amongst Georgians. On that basis, I'm inclined at the moment to side with Nickniko on this issue. If I'm misreading the sources, or if there are other sources that say something different, I hope Ebizur or someone else can clear up the confusion. Simply reverting others' editing in a situation like this without getting involved in a talk page discussion, on the other hand, is not generally considered good practice and is likely to be treated as disruptive edit-warring. Richwales (talk · contribs · review) 02:55, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

I also checked the three sources which Ebizur supplied in his edit (all three of which I was able to find online). I was unable to find anything at all in the first two sources to support a claim of haplogroup J2 in Georgians. The third source (the 2003 Nasidze paper, available online here) does report a 72% frequency of haplogroup J2 — amongst one specific group of Georgians (those from Kazbegi, present-day Stepantsminda). I think we can assume this is where Ebizur got his 72% figure from for haplogroup J2 in Georgians — but I would say this is a misinterpretation as far as the entire population of Georgia is concerned. On this basis, I'm going to go ahead and revert Ebizur's edit (sorry, nothing personal, but your sources just don't seem to substantiate what you're claiming here). As for Ebizur's sources, I'm actually inclined to keep them, since they really do appear to support Nickniko's claim that haplogroup G is dominant in Georgia. If anyone disagrees, go ahead and improve on what I've done, but please come here to the talk page with anything potentially controversial. Richwales (talk · contribs · review) 04:41, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

The following material on Nickniko's talk page is relevant to this discussion. Richwales (talk · contribs · review) 05:22, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Turkish PM Erdogan Georgian?

The questionable claim that Erdogan is Georgian has been raised many times but without reaching a consensus. Now the IP's trying to insert him in the article are back. I did my best to revert these controversial edits which have been made without discussion but I alonr cannot hold these IP's back. I have requested a protection for the page but this Erdogan matter needs to be resolved regardless. Feel free to join the discussion with whatever you have to say.--ComtesseDeMingrélie 01:21, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Stalin's pic

Regarding this change, I think Stalin is much more notable. The other guy is hardly known internationally at all. The pics should include the most notable Georgians. Nanobear (talk) 11:47, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Of cource, in Russia Stalin is much more notable than the National Hero of Georgia, but in Georgia his reputation has recently been fallen apparently. And by the way, Kakutsa Cholokashvili isn't "hardly known internationally" at all. –BruTe ^Talk 12:43, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, obviously no Georgian would want to be associated with Stalin, including me, but I think the point of that slide is to display the most notable and recognizable Georgians. We are not trying to assort them based on moral judgments. Yes, Kakutsa is a national hero because he fought the Bolsheviks, yet there are many heroes like him who, for practical reasons, we cannot include. As for Stalin being renowned, I do not think he is renowned only in Russia and I would not agree with your implication that somehow this might be an attempt of pushing Russian POV on this page.--ComtesseDeMingrélie 18:13, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

As a non-Russian and Non-Georgian editor (with no particular Stalinist leanings) I can say that Stalin was the only picture I recognized and along with Mikheil Saakashvili the only name I recognized. (Whoops and Katie Melua obviously although I didn't know she was of Georgian birth)I would also suggest to trim the infobox a little since it now takes up much more of the lead space than similar infoboxes in other articles.·Maunus·ƛ· 18:30, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Laz people

Laz people identified themselves as Georgian before the Turkish national identity existed in the region. Now they might consider themselves Turks because of centuries of cultural influence, including Islam. This was not always the case. Laz are not Georgian at this point but they are related people, this should be noted. The fact that Mingrelian and Laz sound very much the same to this day attests to this.--ComtesseDeMingrelie (talk) 16:24, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Argun, if you think that Laz identification as a related group of people somehow undermines Turkey's nationhood you are wrong. Turkey is a mix of Turkic people and indigenous people who were absorbed after conquering the lands from the Byzantine Empire. Just because Turkey recognizes all of the territory's original residents as Turks does not mean that they are Turkic peoples. Moreover, no one is describing Lazs as anything but related group of people.--ComtesseDeMingrelie (talk) 18:45, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Laz people used to identify themselves as Laz, not Georgian. Apswaaa (talk) 13:09, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Ethnographic subdivisions ???

The section "Ethnographic subdivisions" is not neutral. The Abkhaz people (and Megrelians, Laz people, etc.) are not "ethnographic subdivisions" of Georgians. This Wikipedia is not Geogia's Wikipedia! --Kmoksy (talk) 08:14, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Large population of Mingrelians and Svans consider themselves to be Kartveli (Georgian) but Lazs are not and this is not the result of assimilation, Lazs always called as Lazi or Chani (Tzani) in the history but never Kartveli. Arguni (talk) 10:38, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

All Svans consider themselves Georgian. As for the Lazs, they are not included as presently Georgian. They are only included in the history section for time periods when they were not Turkish and in fact, when Turkey did not exist at all. So I am not sure what your problem is.--ComtesseDeMingrélie 17:16, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Lazs in Ajara consider themselves Georgian.Iberieli (talk) 01:59, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Iberieli, If i say to you that "You are Laz" since childhood, you could say that "I am Laz". There is no doubt that this is the result of assimilation or entegration to Georgian community. This is not same situation with our subject. Lazs always known as Laz or Chani in the history, but not Kartveli. Arguni (talk) 04:30, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

There is no such thing as "ethnographic subdivisions" the correct terminology would be to say that the Georgian ethno-national group is a macro-ethnic group composed of several different ethnic groups. "ethnographic subdivision" makes no sense. Either a group is an ethnic group or it is not - but ethnic groups are not mutually exclsuive one can be of Mingrelian/Svan/Laz and Georgian ethnicity. The current definition is not defensible from an anthropological or sociological standpoint.·Maunus·ƛ· 02:20, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

"Ethnographic subdivisions" was an unfortunate choice of words in this article and it has been removed some time ago when I made changes.I am not sure whether this post predates the reorganization or the editor simply did not notice; he is knowing for aggressive copy/paste posts.--ComtesseDeMingrélie 02:25, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Turkefied Laz

I do not need to be familiar with Georgian history to realize that it is unnecessary to describe Laz as "Turkefied" and completely impossible to include without providing a source. There are Laz people who are Turkish citizens and Laz who are Georgian citizens, there are Laz who are Muslims and Laz who are christians. They all speak the Kartvelian Laz language. Insisting on referring toto them en masse as "turkefied" and downplaying Laz presence in Georgia seems fairly close to using wikipedia ethnic cleaning. The section is about linguistic diversity in Georgia - it doesn't matter for the description of languages in Georgia whether LAz are tiurkefied or not.·Maunus·ƛ· 16:03, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for helping to finish vandalism of some users. Some users want to spread their own ideologies with using English wikipedia, pls stop it and see the reality that how they are efforting to change this kind of articles as their ideology. English wikipedia must not be a playground of these people. Arguni (talk) 20:37, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Arguni, are you Laz? Apswaaa (talk) 21:22, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, i am a Laz Arguni (talk) 00:11, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Improvements

The current version of the article is in a deplorable state and needs some major improvements. Let's first start with the gallery. Not only it is a chronological mess, there are some persons who can hardly be regarded as notable representatives of the Georgian people. From what I can see from the article's history, WP:IDONTLIKEIT logic has been frequently applied in this case. However beautiful Princess Mary Eristavi, she has nothing to do here. The portrait of Vazha-Pshavela, the crowning merit of modern Georgian poetry, has been removed just because he looks "untidy" in the portrait. When it comes to international recognition, Erekle II is far more notable than George V of Georgia. The inclusion of Pyotr Bagration and Joseph Stalin is also questionable as none of them identified himself as Georgian. Ekaterine Dadiani is also marginally notable, but can be included in the gallery to represent the 19th-century aristocracy. The current Patriarch Ilia II is far more notable, both domestically and internationally, than the venerable Ambrosius. Any thoughts? --Kober^Talk 06:16, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

1.As for Illia II, I personally do not have anything against including him. Ambrosius was here for a while and that is most likely why he stayed.

2. Because this article is about people of ethnic Georgian origin, and not merely Georgian nationals, I cannot agree with your claims on Joseph Stalin and Pyotr Bagration. If I come out tomorrow and say that I am French because I have lived in France and built my entire career there, that will not prevent me from being an ethnic Georgian, regardless of what I think. We cannot base this article on peoples self-perception.

3.Princess Mary, while not the most famous of all Georgians, brings a much needed diversity and lightness to a page previously dominated by insipid, old/middle aged men. This is especially true given the past comments in the talk section which alleged that the page presented an unfavorable, patriarchal image of Georgia. This may not be a problem for you, since I am thinking you are a male, but it is for many other people. I think Mary, along with Princess Dadiani, alleviates the aforementioned concerns

4.As for Vazha-Pshavela, I do agree that he is as far from being "tidy" as one can get, but at the same time I want to stress that while he may have been a notable poet, so were others, like Galaktion Tabidze and Grigol Orbeliani. I am not sure why so much emphasis on Vazha and his untidy looks.

5. As for Erekle II, I would say that outside of Georgia, Russia is probably the only place where he and his turban are more notable than George V. And that is largely because of the period leading up to the annexation of Eastern Georgia in 1801.--ComtesseDeMingrélie 07:17, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

1. My comment was not targeted at you, so no need for such defense arguments.

2. Ok, I see your point. What can Georgians do without their notable bad guys? :(

3. I don't think that my gender has anything to do with this discussion. That's not my fault that Georgia produced more notable males, than females. This is an encylopedia, not a fashion magazine. Princess Mary should go, imho. Was not she an Abkhaz on her father's side, btw?

4. Galaktion Tabidze is, without any doubt, comparable to Vazha-Pshavela, but we have no copyright-free image of him. Grigol Orbeliani... em.. cannot be compared to the magnitude of Vazha's poetry. Nikoloz Baratashvili can be an option, but again we have no free image of him.

5. "Russia is probably the only place where he and his turban are more notable than George V". Actually, no. Heraclius was well-known to the 18th-century Europe and Asia as suggested by several contemporary accounts. George V was hardly known to anyone else either in Russia or Europe until Brosset's translation of the Georgian chronicles. Even after that I cannot see how he is more notable than that unfortunate king with turban. If his turban is the problem here, I have to reiterate that Wikipedia is not a fashion magazine. --Kober^Talk 07:57, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

To the best of my knowledge, Prokofi Shervashidze was as Georgian as they come. If you have a reliable source that claims otherwise, then I will have to reconsider my position.

I do not believe there is anything Georgians can do with their bad guys. I think, however, that Stalin is the only one of those bad guys whose importance outweighs whatever bad associations he may bring. For example, someone was trying to stuff Ordzhonikidze in and I am against that. Moreover, I was thinking about replacing Petre with his brother Roman - at least he is buried in Georgia - but I'm afraid Petre is much more notable.

The truth is that many men previously displayed on this article were not all that notable. Gia Kancheli is an example of that. I agree that Georgia produced more notable males than females and that is largely because of systemic inequality in the Georgian society; chivalrous as many in Georgia may be, chivalry does not make up for equality.I think we must attempt to balance.

I understand what you are saying about lack of suitable photographs for Galaktion but it seems that all images displayed, including those in other language versions of his page, have that problem. If we take a photograph of him at a younger age, we may get way with the life +50 years copyright tag. I am not sure about more recent photographs.

In summary, I am flexible with the replacement of Ambrosius and George V, but not Ekaterine, Mary, Lamara, or Ketevan.--ComtesseDeMingrélie 08:53, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

New Changes

The article originally lacked a missing image which I replaced. I fixed the dead hyperlinks to their proper Wikipedia sister pages. I added new content all cited and without synthesis (check it out and let me know if you disagree, or change according to source.) I also felt that the overall article read more like a piece of praise which is not in conjuction with WP:NPOV so I did my best, without changing the content, to convey the content without having to deal with weasle wording. For instance "so and so was definitely one of the greatest figures in the history ever" is a weasle type statement. Such statements need sourcing. For material that were not supported I added CN tags (x3) of which I actually found data on one, so there are yet two cn tag that beg somebody to find data on and to support it (or reword if false). I felt the modern history section was also short, so I added material from relevant sources. (feel free to check against sources and critique!) Again feel free to comment and Thank you! Dr. Persi (talk) 06:18, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree with most of the changes, I just think it would be nice to get more reliable data for their international presence.

Edit request from Diynarg, 19 July 2011

"Georgians have historically been classified into various subgroups based on the geographic region which their ancestors traditionally inhabited:

The Megrelians (მეგრელი) The Svans (სვანი) The Imeretians (იმერელი) The Gurians (გურული) The Ajarians (აჭარელი) The Meskhetians (მესხი) The Lechkhumeli (ლეჩხუმელი) The Georgian Lazs (ლაზი)*See Below The Rachveli (რაჭველი) The Kartlians (ქართლელი) The Kakhetians (კახელი) The Khevsurians (ხევსური) The Tushi (თუში) The Pshaveli (ფშაველი) The Mokhevians (მოხევე) The Ingilo (ინგილო)"

here are omitted a lot of Georgian subgroups for example here are not Javakhians - one of the oldest and importand Georgian tribes. They must be added also here are not Mtiulians and other Georgian tribes Can you add Javakhians?

Diynarg (talk) 12:52, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Done Jnorton7558 (talk) 03:34, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Georgians: nationality vs. ethnicity

Georgians are an united republic made up of differential regional groups and those who lived as separate ethnic groups (ethnicity definitions varied wherever Georgians lived) such as the Laz and Ajarians. But there are Georgians by nationality such as Abkhaz and Ossetians in their respective republics not recognized by most of the world, except for Russia and two Latin American nations Nicaragua and Venezuela. It is not widely known, but Georgian immigrants went to Central and South America in the turn of the 20th century to flee both Ottoman Turks and Tsarist Russia. Not a coincidence for the two governments also backed by Russia and their current Leftist leaderships: Daniel Ortega (Nicaragua) and Hugo Chavez (Venezuela) decided to recognize the two renegade republics in favor of Russian diplomacy and the Georgian ethnic communities in Latin America. I want to include Nauru, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu had recently recognized Abkhazia and South Ossetia to open real diplomatic ties, in defiance of Georgians worldwide. The Georgian people live across the former USSR, the Americas, the European Union, Australia and even in East Asia or the Middle East (the Georgian Iranian presence along with Chechens in Iran of similar ethnolinguistic origin). 71.102.1.101 (talk) 23:47, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Who is a Georgian

Seeing as my edits were reverted, I'd like to ask this question here: which groups are considered Georgian? I believe that David Marshall Lang (I can produce quotes & references on Monday) includes the Kartveli, Laz, Svans, and Mingrelians as belonging to the "Georgian" ethnicity, or at least nationality. This presents some problems for the article as it is written. First of all, the leader conflates "Georgians" with "ქართველები," although I believe we can all agree that the Laz, Mingrelians, and Svans are not considered by any source to be "ქართველები." I still think this should be removed, but Khoikhoi has reverted my initial edit--I greatly prefer discussion to reverts ;). I am not, however, familiar with the term "ქართული ერი," which I take to mean Kartuli nation. Is this a broader term that would include other Georgian ethnic groups?

Khoikhoi also wrote that "some Laz do not consider themselves to be Georgians," in justifying the inclusion of the Laz as a "related ethnic group" rather than a part of the broader Georgian ethnicity. This makes the article contradictory--within the text of the article we say that the Laz are a Georgian ethnic group, but in the fact box we consider them a separate, but related group. I believe that we should go with the general scholarly consensus on this matter--are the Laz considered Georgian or not?--irregardless of what some Laz think. Thoughts? --Treemother199 06:16, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, linguistically and culturally laz have sticking seminaries with the rest of the Georgian sub ethnic groups (Mingrelians and Svans). Most scholars identify Laz people under the umbrella of the kartvelian ethnic group to which Georgians belong to. Laz are the only ethnic group closely related to Georgian. There is a broader confusion that Laz having its cultural ties and similar ethnic composition as Mingrelias can differ from the rest of the Georgian people. Mingrelians are the sub-ethnic group of the Georgian nation and therefore, there is no point separating these kartvelian groups from each other. Now there has been strong nationalistic and pan-Turkish strive among some Laz who intended to isolate the historic and ethnic reality surrounding the Laz and their Georgian counterparts. This has been due mostly to political and religious reasons and had nothing to do with ethnographic dispute. Referring to scholarly work is the great way to verify the claim. Ldingley 19:34, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

An Interesting discussion. I'm half Laz. I know that, there are two seperated ethnic groups as Laz and Georgian in the point of view of a Laz person. They call themselves "Laz" and they call Georgians "Gurcu" (like Turkish spelling). I'm confused why people needs talk about Laz, Mengrel and Svan people as "sub-ethnic group" (?) of Georgians. Laz and Georgian languages are related by genetics, but there is no any mutual communucation. Even, there isn't almost a single word in common. So, according to this article; should we assume that Portuguese People are a sub-ethnic group of Spanish People? I think Ingush and Chechen people are more closer to each other, than Laz and Georgian are. But nobody talks about "Ingushes are sub-ethnic group of Chechens". Farnag (talk) 09:56, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

What happend to the previous text?

All the text pretaining to historical origin, Russo-Gerogian relations, Economy and corruption in Georgia, and pretty much a big chunk of data has been cut out. Also the article looks chunky and disorganized. I leave it to the interested editors to sort it out but to me seems like the article has been stripped of its "uncomfortable" data only to include a certain view point. I am not going to change anything because I do not know much about this article but I leave it to whoever feels certified enough to include the data that were previously presents like the data about economy, history and independence, geographical changes, and also economy and current status. Dr. Persi (talk) 01:13, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I think brief history [1] should be restored. My very best wishes (talk) 16:16, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Ibero-Caucasian People???

--85.117.56.99 13:43, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I think the term "Ibero-Caucasian People" is inappropriate, as it is not scientific and is purely theoretical and even more than that - it is nowadays considered to be wrong , as North and South Caucasian Languages show no linguistic relation. Georgians are not an Ibero-Caucasian people, but just South Cacuasian (Kartvelian) people...

Actually they are. Many sources use the term "Ibero-Caucasian people" which identifies kartvelian (ei South Caucasian people: Lazs, Chans, Svans, etc). Ldingley 20:04, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

There are obvious signs of Georgians were ancestral peoples of Indo-Europeans, esp. of the Mediterrannean and southern Europe (i.e. the Basques, Corsicans, Sardinians, Albanians and Illyrians) and namesake similarities of North or South Caucasian peoples with those in Eastern Europe (i.e. Chechens with that of Czechs, the Ukrainians with that of Iranians and so on) and even the British Isles or ancient Gaul of France (the hypothesis of Armorica were possibly linked to ancient Armenia and Armenians). The so-called Iberians in western Europe and the "Iberians" of the Caucasus region where the Georgians and modern-day Georgia sits in are thought to been one race of people in ancient European times about 5000 years ago, so I expect more research and open discussion on the ethnological connections of Georgians, ancient Iberians and Illyrians, even Dacians and Thracians and Indo-European peoples. 71.102.1.101 (talk) 02:18, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

"The so-called Iberians in western Europe and the "Iberians" of the Caucasus region where the Georgians and modern-day Georgia sits in are thought to been one race of people in ancient European times about 5000 years ago". Nonsense. Spain was never a vacuum and was obviously not populated by Georgians, who magically flew over populated Europe without war. Mods needs to watch this user for more attempts at historic revisionism.89.166.241.231 (talk) 13:26, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Selection of "iconic" Georgians

Shevardnadze

I was wondering what Georgians on Wikipedia think of portraying Shevardnadze as one of the "iconic" Georgians. Despite the fact that he is known to be a liberally-minded bureaucrat of the Communist Party, I would say that he is a controversial person in Georgia at best. 193.47.148.33 (talk)

That table lists prominent Georgians rather than good Georgians.--Dixtosa (talk) 11:05, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Where is Stalin?

Hitler is on the Austrian people page and the List of Austrians page. Hitler is also on the German people page and the List of Germans page. Mussolini is on the Italian people page. Pol Pot is on the Khmer people page. Stalin is not even mentioned on this page, but he is on List of Georgians. He does not need to be in the picture area, but he does need to mentioned somewhere. Please pardon me for placing this above other comments, but I don't believe there is any disputing the facts I just stated here. von Harris (talk) 18:31, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

He is by far the most recognized and known Georgian worldwide. Why is he not among the representatives of the Georgian people in the infobox? --Voyevoda (talk) 23:11, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

so is Hitler, why is he missing from Austrian people page? same reason. Iberieli (talk) 02:49, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, Hitler should also be there. The infobox' function is to show the most influential and prominent people of a nation, not the most morally ones. --Voyevoda (talk) 17:56, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Hush! Of course he shouldn't. The infobox' function is to show those people, whom the nation is proud of. Neither Austria, nor Georgia are proud with Hitler and Stalin.--Gaeser (talk) 16:43, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Actually (and possibly surprisingly), some Georgians still revere Stalin. (See, e.g., Gori, Georgia#Landmarks.) When monuments to Stalin were removed from public places earlier this year, the Georgian government had to act discreetly so as not to cause unrest (such as by removing at least one statue in the middle of the night). Richwales (talk · contribs) 17:22, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

And what's with that? Are there no Neo-Nazies in Russia or Germany? The statue was removed then, when the government decided to do that. I don't think, that they should ask Communist party of Russia, should they? --Gaeser (talk) 09:56, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Most Georgians are proud of Stalin. It's not some minor fringe group, like neo-nazis in Austria. In Georgia, a Reverence for Stalin --DonaldDuck (talk) 04:24, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

"...he was the most famous Georgian who ever lived..." Huh... and who did say this? Mr. Ziyadaliev who is himself from Azerbaijan. And btw the author of the article doesnt say most Georgians are proud of Stalin. The article should show that person whom the nation is proud of. Nowadays Stalin is a cult of tyranny. –BruTe ^Talk 06:14, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Was Stalin even completely Georgian? Yes, he was Georgian by birth (though nowadays, had he not been a monster, I'm sure the South Ossetians would be claiming him as he was part Ossetian and from South Ossetian...). But did he consider himself a Georgian his whole life? No, he alternatingly considered himself Soviet, and many think he was actually ashamed of being Georgian by birth, preferring to associate more with Russians. Other evidence supports this. He rarely spoke in Georgian, even to his own family, preferring Russian, a language with which he spoke with a heavy accent. He gave his children Russian names. Even very early on in his career, in the early 1920s, he is quoted to have made disparaging comments, singling out Caucasian peoples (including Georgians) as being uniquely wretched. For example, while Stalin agreed that most regions of the Soviet Union should have cultural autonomy, he did not believe this should be applied in his homeland (thankfully, it was, despite his feelings on the matter)- he stated "national cultural autonomy is meaningless and nonsensical in relation to Caucasian conditions" in his Marxism and the National Question script. He rejected Georgian (and Caucasian in general) customs and morals. He didn't even attend his mother's funeral. Stalin rejected his Georgian roots. Ethnicity is determined by self-identification, is it not? And yes, it is true that some Georgians during Stalin's lifetime were proud of him, but that's only because they didn't know what he had done, and furthermore, even if they had, he did not CONSIDER HIMSELF a Georgian, and therefore wasn't one. Stalin, while born a Georgian, did not live most of his life as one, and did not die a Georgian. --Yalens (talk) 01:27, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

(as a sidenote, let me note that Hitler actually didn't consider himself Austrian either, he considered himself German =P)--Yalens (talk) 01:29, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Well, he was an ethnic Georgian, what he considered himself is irrelevant in this case. Hitler had some base for his belief that Austrians were Germans because after all they share the same language and culture. In case of Georgia and Russia, none of that is true.--Polgraf (talk) 01:00, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Except that both Georgians and Russians share them same Eastern Orthodox Christian faith. This is very true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.218.38.155 (talk) 10:50, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Mistake?

In article The majority of Georgians are and most follow the national autocephalous Georgian Orthodox Church, which originated in the 4th century. There are also Georgian Tbilisi and Adjara. Should it be: The majority of Georgians are and most follow the national autocephalous Georgian Orthodox Church, which originated in the 4th century. There are also Georgian Muslims in Tbilisi and Adjara.? Ali-al-Bakuvi (talk) 14:40, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey there. Yes there was a mistake. Catholic and Muslim communities was cut out from the article. Thanks for letting us know. GeorgianJorjadze 15:04, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Requested move to Georgians

Hi all, there is a request to have this page move to Georgians. If there are any objections, please let me know here/my talk page. Elockid ^(Talk) 23:17, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

A proper Wikipedia:Requested moves (usually it takes a week) would be more appropriate and give people enough time to respond.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 02:56, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

where in georgia do georgians live?

i know georgians live in georgia but where in georgia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gman10123 (talk • contribs) 12:31, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

"Regions with significant populations" omits Georgia

Let's say I want to know how many Georgians are in Georgia. What do I do? I look in the able at the top of the page. This table doesn't list "Georgia", so I look under "European Union" and conclude that there are about 250,000 Georgians there. But this contradicts the "Georgia" article according to which there are about 4M Georgians in Georgia.

This is certainly a mystery. An investigation of mine reveals the error: The "Regions with significant populations" table *does* list "Georgia" but as a centered header (it's the first row), so the eye automatically skips it.

That header ought to be converted to a normal row. There's no reason to display it in a special way and confuse the readers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.172.12.189 (talk) 04:30, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Occult nonsense

"Georgians call themselves Kartvelebi (ქართველები), their land Sakartvelo (საქართველო), and their language Kartuli (ქართული). According to The Georgian Chronicles, the ancestor of the Kartvelian people was Kartlos, the great grandson of the Biblical Japheth. "

Georgians do not speak semitic languages, either they do not come from any "Japhet". Japhet is a mythological character from the book called Leningrad Codex, written in 1009 AD (not BC) and it should be considered as part of fairy tales, like Lord of the Rings (Frodo or Gandalf for example) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.182.65.29 (talk) 19:25, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Svans, Megrelians, etc

Megrelians related to Laz people rather than Georgians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.140.249.31 (talk) 06:13, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Stalin's prominence is offensive

yes, i get it - the man was the most famous (or rather infamous) Georgian of all time, but as much as many older Georgians cherish his memory, I think his prominent presence on the main pic tab is offensive , especially considering that most Georgians nowadays seem to support European integration. That picture shall be removed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.114.226.188 (talk • contribs)

Not without consensus it will not be. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 03:51, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Edit-warring and disruptions by KazekageTR

KazekageTR keeps deleting Russia from countries where Georgians live, and keep deleting it in spite of WP:BRD. These repeated blankings look rather disruptive, especially as the user does not provide any reasoning, instead insisting they are "adding" content when it's clear for everyone to see that they are just deleting [2], [3]. Given that Russia is the country with either the largest or second largest Georgian diaspora, it seems obvious to mention it, rather than just hiding it away under "post-soviet countries". As KazekageTR refuses to provide any explanation for their edit apart from their blatantly false claim that they are "adding" something, it's hard to know what they are edit warring about. Such content removal normally constitutes vandalism, especially when performed in this disruptive way. I would encourage the user to revert their deletion and to start discussing instead of just disrupting.Jeppiz (talk) 18:29, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

I've looked to your talk page, you just threaten and accuse people without talking the issues out in moral grounds so i get who you are and im not gonna dogfight with you, I am going you ask you just one question and after that i am done with talking to you, which sentence the 'smart' way to write: "Germany, France, the European Union, China and the United States" or "the European Union, China and the United States". Oh yeah and also, you could just re-add Russia but you have reverted the 'whole' edit which adds Turkey to that list(the country which allegedly has the 'largest' daispora of Georgians). Instead of improving the article, you are reverting the whole edit because, it seems, you just don't like it. Cheers, have a nice one. kazekagetr 18:39, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

No, I don't threaten users (and cI remind you I'm the one who started the discussion here, you just kept deleting) but I do dislike edit-warring, and I dislike being lied about even more. And unfortunately that's what you do, you keep lying all the time. You've claimed several times that you "add" things. Not true, you didn't add a word, just deleted ([4], [5]). And now you claim I've reverted the edit that added Turkey. Another lie, as anyone can see that I never removed Turkey in any of my edits [6], [7]). So despite all your big talk about me threatening and accusing, the facts speak for themselves. You keep deleting content while falsely claiming to add, and you falsely accuse me of deleting, while I haven't deleted a thing. So that's edit warring, deleting content, lying about your own actions and lying about my actions. Pointing out that that kind of behavior in unacceptable has nothing to do with "threatening".Jeppiz (talk) 18:48, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

(I don't accuse people of lying lightly, and I could understand someone making a mistake once. But this is a bit too often. If you really believe what you say, then I recommend you start to check edits before accusing others of deleting.)Jeppiz (talk) 18:51, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

I asked a simple question and you attack me again. You showed your color again mate, we are done here, have it your way. I'm not gonna argue and play your game by simply escalating this nonsense issue. Have a good day. kazekagetr 19:27, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

KazekageTR, we have probably both been over-reacting a bit, my apologies for my part in it. Let's look at this constructively instead. We both agree that of course Turkey should be mentioned. My suggestion is that we also mention Russia, as so many Georgians live in Russia. What do you think of that?Jeppiz (talk) 20:32, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

well then i apologise too, mate. as a gratitude for your kindness, i do support that edit of youurs. kazekagetr 20:43, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Great! Edit done, have a nice day!Jeppiz (talk) 20:47, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Georgians. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131113151005/http://www.stat.kz/p_perepis/Pages/default.aspx to http://www.stat.kz/p_perepis/Pages/default.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:46, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Georgians. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131022062046/http://www.diaspora.gov.ge/index.php?lang_id=GEO&sec_id=64&info_id=177 to http://www.diaspora.gov.ge/index.php?lang_id=GEO&sec_id=64&info_id=177

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:26, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Proposal for the deletion of all the galleries of personalities from the articles about ethnic groups

Seemingly there is a significant number of commentators which support the general removal of infobox collages. I think there is a great opportunity to get a general agreement on this matter. It is clear that it has to be a broad consensus, which must involve as many editors as possible, otherwise there is a big risk for this decision to be challenged in the near future. I opened a Request for comment process, hoping that more people will adhere to this proposal. Please comment here. Hahun (talk) 14:01, 12 December 2015 (UTC)