Talk:Georgia–Russia relations

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Georgia (country) High‑importance

	Georgia (country) portal 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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Russia: History / Politics and law High‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the history of Russia task force.
	This article is supported by the politics and law of Russia task force.

Image

I fully agree that the problem of Abkhazia and South Ossetia is the biggest one in Rus-Geo relations. However the image is clearly pov (aside from other issues) and cannot be used as the only illustration. Alæxis_¿question? 07:20, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Being the only illustration is not a big deal. You can add others whenever you want. If you consider the image to be a Georgian POV, try to find a Russian POV pic to balance it. I don't have any objection to it.--Kober^Talk 07:26, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't agree with you here. If you see an article with POV illustration you are not obliged to find another one that would present the opposite POV. Alæxis_¿question? 07:44, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a POV image, but just a illustration of the Georgian view of the current developments. I also added the pic depicting the Putinist youth organization rally in Moscow. --Kober^Talk 08:03, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update to Missile incident (experts opinion)

Got this link here: [1]. News released after experts have finished the study of material. Anyone who can read russian (or georgian) better could update the article. Suva 08:41, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

explanation

The paragraph in question has nothing to do with the section it was inserted to (post-independence relations). As this article is only about post-1992 relations I don't think it should be here at all. Alæxis_¿question? 17:08, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Georgian Embassy rally.jpg

Image:Georgian Embassy rally.jpg 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) 22:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Moscow rally 8.10.06.jpg

Image:Moscow rally 8.10.06.jpg 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 ensure 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) 14:49, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Drone Affair

I read a Russian article about the MiG-29 video (couldn't find the same information in the English language). The Russian ministry of the interior says that the video is a bad fake, and here are their reasons:

- The UAV is equipped with a look-down camera, and can't see much higher than the horizon. Any pilot recognizes this, and if he didn't want to be videotaped, would not approach the UAV from below.

- In the video, the airplane launches the missile from the wing extremity. The MiG-29 design doesn't mount weapons on the end of the wing, only in the middle.

- The propellant in Russian short-range air-air missiles apparently doesn't produce a smoke trail, like it does in the video.

- The location in the video is hard to recognize. The Abkhazian coast has a wide sandy beach which isn't seen in the footage. Also, two roads are seen parallel to the water which are not present in real life.

(And the delay of the release of the video itself raises suspicion to its authenticity. It's like someone took the time to render it before releasing.)

http://www.rian.ru/defense_safety/20080429/106156678.html

Date: Apr. 29 2008

Commentary: I'm suspecting that distrust of Russia in the western world is obligatory. I've looked and couldn't find a single article in news.google.com or cnn.com discussing the video's veracity. But all the news on the subject are the same tone of supposed Russian aggression and involvement in internal affairs of Georgia. This kind of "silence" in the English-speaking news sources, and the readiness of people to believe a sloppy video, are troubling. I've given up on objectivity in the news (English or Russian), but I hope wikipedia would not go the same way. And I'm not trying to take sides -- I do feel for the Georgian situation (just like I feel for Serbia).

140.211.139.171 (talk) 23:24, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pov in section "military buildup in abkhazia"

I believe that section is POV as it only shows the Georgian POV. The number of peacekeepers are being increased from 2k-3k, I hardly see this as a "military buildup". Russia says that this is in line with the agreements it signed with Georgia. Also, Russia claims that Georgia is increasing it's military along the border with Abkhazia. I will make these modifications and add references when I get a chance. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 02:25, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"military buildup" refers not only to Georgia's view of the increase of Russian "peacekeepers" number, but also Russia's blubber regarding a "Georgian-NATO invasion". And the section begins with Russia's accusations. You have a strange ability to see a "Georgian POV" in the texts actually tilted towards a Russian POV. --Kober^Talk 05:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New article with info from relations page

I've created a new article for the recent tensions titled 2008 Georgia-Russia crisis. I included information from this page and added other information. Any improvements that can be made to the article would be welcome.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 18:19, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poorly organised

In fairness, this article is a bit of a mess, no? A lot of the sections contain only links. It's got a major "TL;DR" factor too. It could do with some streamlining and better organising. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.113.15.69 (talk) 13:50, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possible copyright problem

This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. MkativerataCCI (talk) 21:26, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Georgia–Russia relations. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20081019224234/http://articles.latimes.com/2007/aug/08/world/fg-georgia8 to http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-georgia8aug08,1,1008652.story?coll=la-headlines-world&ctrack=1&cset=true

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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

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

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:42, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Georgia–Russia relations. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:49, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Georgia–Russia relations. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:15, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New additions

Silveresc, can you please add sources for the information you've added to the article? Alaexis_¿question? 17:38, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]