Talk:Kingdom of Georgia

Template:Vital article

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Georgia (country) B‑class Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (country), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Georgia and Georgians on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Georgia (country)Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia (country)Template:WikiProject Georgia (country)Georgia (country) articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Former countries B‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Caucasia B‑class (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caucasia, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CaucasiaWikipedia:WikiProject CaucasiaTemplate:WikiProject CaucasiaCaucasia articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Middle Ages B‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The present article claims that the kingdom was established in 888, 975 and 1008. Any idea of what is the correct one?--Menah the Great (talk) 15:38, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As regards the caption beneath the map portraying the peak territorial expansion of the Kingdom of Georgia, what do people feel is more appropriate for Wikipedia from a language perspective:

"Kingdom of Georgia in 1184-1230 at the peak of its might"

or:

"Kingdom of Georgia in 1184-1230 at the peak of its territorial expansion"

I think that "at the peak of its might" is severely unencyclopedic, and weirdly nationalistic and politically biased. I do not see any argument against the far more accurate and appropriate "at the peak of its territorial expansion" - please do not revert, rather demonstrate what that argument might be and wait for a consensus here. thanks. Bdog Drummond (talk) 15:31, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the burden of "gainning consensus" is on you, since you want to change a stable version of the article, but let's wait for other contributors opinion (however, i've seen that you added back your edit without consensus). Regards.---Wikaviani (talk) 15:42, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wikaviani - I think you'll find that not only was it a different user who made the original edit this is a reference to, but also a different user who "added back [the] edit without consensus" as you put it. Your edit war is being held with somebody else entirely, thankyou very much, and I accept your apology. Bdog Drummond (talk) 15:51, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, i know this was another editor, but quite strangely, you made (partly) the same changes. Anyway, as i said above, just wait and see, if this edit is endorsed by other editors then it's perfectly fine for me. Also, you should take a look at my comment, for now, i did not present any "appology". regards.---Wikaviani (talk) 16:00, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that strange that we've both reached the same conclusion; I'm sure we'd both agree that an apple was different to an orange as well, or that red and blue are different colours. Also, just to clarify, you've made two eccentrically spelled quotations above ("gainning" and "appology") which seem to incorrectly imply that it was I who misspelled those words. Was this a mistake on your part or did you intend it to be a sleight? Regardless, I do accept your "appology" and you're very welcome. Bdog Drummond (talk) 16:34, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

it's just a typo because I have a lot of screens in front of me. Also, i have no comment about your "apple and oranges" babble. regards.---Wikaviani (talk) 16:40, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was the one who originally changed "peak of its might" to "peak of its territorial expansion" for reasons that Bdog talks about. The second one is more neutral, "might" implies other things besides size.--Bencemagyar (talk) 21:39, 14 June 2018 (UTC) <-- blocked sock of User:Studiawschodnie[reply]

And i'm the one who said above that if your edit is endorsed by other editors, then it would be perfectly fine for me. Regards.---Wikaviani (talk) 21:45, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There are some tiresome edit wars going on here that are transparently politically motivated. The Kingdom of Georgia (much like the country of Georgia today) was both European AND Asian, it was not either European OR Asian. The term Eurasian is the perfect descriptor and should be included initially in the lede to establish this fact and to dissuade any misleading, politicised efforts to paint the picture as being entirely European or entirely Middle Eastern (and this includes weasel words, structure and context). The lede should make it clear that the Kingdom encompassed both Eastern Europe (and Eastern European culture) and the Middle East (and Middle Eastern culture), and should not imply that it is merely one or the other, or that it is predominantly indicative of one or the other. Bdog Drummond (talk) 15:38, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Text already says that Georgia stretched from Russia to Iran, so it is clear that it was on both continents. But if you want to be specific and say that it was both in Eastern Europe and middle east, that is also ok.--Bencemagyar (talk) 16:13, 14 June 2018 (UTC) <-- blocked sock of User:Studiawschodnie[reply]

User:Vif12vf please stop edit war and removing credible COA by Conrad Grünenberg.

Simply linking to an article about a historical person is not attributing a source. Also neither of these CoA are wrong, but there is no need for a change unless it is a modern version of the CoA already in place. If you really want that other CoA in the article so bad then put it somewhere else in the article! Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 23:18, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Conrad Grünenberg was a person famous for his armorial as this person was dedicated and working on them. Not the case with Prince Vakhushti. Conrad takes precedent over Vakhushti as his armorial is more credible in all senses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1017:B417:1BFA:7D20:8A62:19DB:BC2 (talk) 17:32, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds highly like POV and seems almost completely irrelevant. The current CoA will remain in place! Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 18:42, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

" The current CoA will remain in place! " - it shows clearly how biased and noncompromising you are. Your behavior will be addressed.