Talk:Kingdom of the Iberians

	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
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Turkey

	Turkey portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics 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.TurkeyWikipedia:WikiProject TurkeyTemplate:WikiProject TurkeyTurkey articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Former countries C‑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
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

Middle Ages Mid‑importance

	Middle Ages portal 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Can anyone point me towards evidence of Tao and Klarjeti as separate entities - ie not an area known as "Tao-Klarjeti"? All the evidence I can find on and off line indicates that there only ever was an entity with a hyphenated name. And if that is the case both Tao and Klarjeti can redirect here.--Silver149 12:59, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to note non-neutrality of this article. Both Armenians and Georgians dispute historical inheritance to the land. At least some of the area is unquestionably historically Armenian (Karin/Erzerum) and some of the rulers were Armenian natonals of the faith(Ashot, Smbat, Gurgen ...- All Armenians). Area was part of one of the Armenian vilayets in the Ottoman Empire. This article should be made more neutral, it ia innacurate and offensive to some.

Could anyone write the Armenian history of the Armeno-Georgian marchlands in Northeastern Turkey? This would be excellent! I completely agree that two versions are needed, and I am looking forward to see the results. Please state your sources.

For a start, I could propose the following (it could be subtitled "The Armeno-Georgian marchlands in Late Antiquity"): Throughout Antiquity, the region belonged alternately to the Persian and Roman-Hellenistic sphere of interest, while Georgian and Armenian kings, usually as vassals of the Persians and Romans, ruled over it by turns. Christianity came to Tao-Klarjeti in the beginning of the 4th century AD; at least we are told by the Georgian chronicler Leonti Mroveli that Bishop Iovane founded a church at Erusheti on his way home from Constantinople, where to he had been send by King Mirian, the first Christian ruler of Iberia (i.e. Eastern Georgia). Towards the end of the 4th century, the Georgians lost Klarjeti to the Romans, while Tao or Tayk, which had belonged to the Armenian crown since the Artaxiad dynasty, came under Persian control as a result of the partition of Armenia in 387. After the uprising in 451, which was led by Vardan Mamikonian, a noble from Tayk, the province was occupied and looted by Persian troops. - I am looking forward to read your comments!

Im sorry but you are mistaken. To claim that Ashot, Sumbat and Gurgen were Armenians are just simple POVs. There are many sources which claim otherwise. Noxchi Borz 17:15, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is your opinion, until soeone non-pov and not a sock puppet will come in, no one will believe your pov ...And these are armeinan names, as armenian as it gets .... Ashot? Gurgen(Kiurike)? Smbat? who are you kidding? I would advise you to try to prove the sky is green while you are at it!

You seem to be a sock puppet yourself. Armenian chauvinistic attacks on Wiki articles have demonstrated direct violation of NPOV. I do maintain NOPV. Georgian kings also had names like David, Solomon and it did not mean they were Jews. Ashot, Gurgen, Sumbat were Georgian nobles and there are vast among of sources both historic and scholarly which conform that (please refer to reliable primary and secondary sources). Claiming that they were Armenian is POV. I would advice Armenian users to maintain NOPV and use ultra-nationalistic rhetoric somewhere else. Please present sources for any changes you make to an article. Noxchi Borz 00:13, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For the moment

Thank you for the comments. Obviously, Vardan Mamikonyan was one of the most famous of the Armenians, and coming from this region, very errenous to simply label this are as Tao-Klarjeti, and call it Georgian. I suggest for the moment to label this as a disputed article, and refer to the discussion. Title should be changed from Tao-Klarjeti to Tao-Klarjeti/Tayk.

First of all: I am very happy that we have a constructive discussion about this subject, and I am sure that it will develop in a positive way. The Armenian perspective is very important. Apart from the above stated, the era of Catholicos Nerses should be included in the article, and there should definitely be links to both "Tayk" and "Armenian history". Because of practical reasons, however, I would suggest that the title of the article remains "Tao-Klarjeti". But it certainly needs adjustment. Let's work on this. Best wishes!

I propose creating a separate page directed for Tayq :

Tayk (Tayq)

Throughout Antiquity, the region belonged alternately to the Persian and Roman-Hellenistic sphere of interest, Armenian kings, usually as vassals of the Persians and Romans, ruled over it . Tayk, which had belonged to the Armenian crown since the Artaxiad dynasty, came under Persian control as a result of the partition of Armenia in 387. After the uprising in 451, which was led by Vardan Mamikonian, a noble from Tayk. Later on this region compromised one of the Armenian Bagratuni Kingdom of Tayk. It was occupied by Byzantines in about 1000 A.D. After this the are was occupied by succesive foreign dynasties. Are now part of Northeastern Turkey.

Links

It would be wonderful, if there were one or two more accurate articles on the Bagratid rulers of Armenia and Georgia. For the moment, it is not functioning at all: the searches for Bagratuni and Bagratid are automatically redirected to Bagrationi. I have therefore decided to delete the link in this article to Bagratuni/Bagrationi. The article should be listed as Bagratid rulers and it should have two sections: one on the Armenian Bagratids and one on the Georgian ones. I will be happy to re-establish the link any time in the future, when there is an article which considers both sides.

Inline citations are missing

Plus, there's no contemporary literature in English listed in the Sources-section.--Omnipaedista (talk) 02:29, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

I think the article should be more neutral.Aram-van--Aram-van (talk) 17:38, 8 February 2011 (UTC) It's not properly mentioned that Tao-Klarjeti had a mixed population: Armenians and Georgians. And that it didn't include Kars or Erzurum. The map isn't correct either, territories cede to Tayk in 992 or 994 were long ago included in Vaspurakan Kingdom.Aram-van--Aram-van (talk) 13:03, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First off, "Should be more neutral" is not an explanation. You should list all statements you deem not neutral. Please refer to WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Second, I'm being patient enough to explain you that Tayk and Tao-Klarjeti are not the same. Third, I'm afraid I don't quite understand why you mean by "territories cede to Tayk in 992 or 994 were long ago included in Vaspurakan Kingdom". --Kober^Talk 11:48, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Principality of Tao-Klarjeti & Kingdom of Kartli

Valeri Silogava, Kakha Shengelia. History of Georgia, Caucasus University Publishing House, 2007, p. 62-63. Principality of Tao-Klarjeti & Kingdom of Kartli. There's no this version ~~Kingdom of the Kartvels~~ . This is a falsification 62.122.135.161 (talk) 14:38, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

It's not properly mentioned that Tao-Klarjeti had a mixed population: Armenians and Georgians. And that it didn't include Kars or Erzurum. 62.122.135.161 (talk) 14:52, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article does not say that the principality include Kars and Erzurum, but it did include parts of what are now the provinces of Kars and Erzurum. The article does not mention ethnic composition at all, either Georgian or Armenian. --Kober^Talk 19:10, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kober invalidity removed the article's npov tag. I have restored it. There is clearly an ongoing dispute about the neutrality and correctness of the entire article's content (just look at almost all the talk page comments, covering over a decade). Tao-Klarjeti was a border region with a mixed Georgian and Armenian population. How that should be appropriately conveyed in the article's content should be a matter for discussion but at the moment the region's Armenian population and Armenian history is not mentioned at all in this article except in passing in the brief context of 20th-century history. That all of the article's content currently has no inline citations just adds to suspicions of pov content. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 15:19, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Be more specific. References to decades-long comments are not relevant and don't justify tag abuse. The article does not discuss the region's ethnicity at all which may be a pitfall but not the reason for POV tagging. --Kober^Talk 18:58, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The lack of any inline citations and the lack of any mention of the region's Armenian population and history is sufficient for pov tagging. The article is full of references to "Georgia" and "Georgians" so I do not understand how you can say the article does not discuss the region's ethnicity at all. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 21:53, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Principality of Tao-Klarjeti. 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) 02:44, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]