Talk:Ethnic cleansing of Georgians in Abkhazia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces (periods and conflicts): Early Modern warfare task force (c. 1500–c. 1792)

Please read this Hi, and welcome. Take a deep breath and relax your eyebrows. If you are about ready to explode it is suggested that you stop for a minute and relax, because that indeed may happen after sifting through these heated debates. This is a controversial topic, and has always been.

Wow! I'm very much impressed by your talents of fictional writer and anti-Georgian demagogue. However, I'm afraid you'll need to provide credible sources for your theories. The article is so far well written and referenced. I'd also suggest not using ethnic slurs so as to prevent yourself from being blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Kober 13:20, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

This is ultra-nationalist and chauvinist post; it should be removed due to provocation nature which was the intent of this user. Wikipedia is not a place for ultra-nationalistic and fundamentalist propaganda. Please use other web sites for such garbage.Ldingley 14:54, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

What's the point in keeping such an inflammatory post here? It should obviously be reomved. I think Ghilrandajo is deeply mistaken when he considers its author a Wikipedian. Although registered in January 2006, Zone has not so far done even a single contribution to Wikipedia, except, of course, slamming Georgians and calling them fascists. --Kober 15:04, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Please review the content of that inflammatory post. Its full of provocative slander which is unacceptable for Wikipedia. If you disagree with the article (and you are very welcome to do so), please help us out and present your claims in civilized way (the way you have done above) and site sources not slanders and anti-georgian propaganda slogans. Ghilrandajo please refrain from personal attacks and lest work together instead of vandalizing articles which took time to research and find sources Ldingley 15:11, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I believe this provocative post should immediately be removed. Ldingley 15:12, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Ldingley, please consider action after Ghirlandajo called you a rabid nationalist, which qualifies under Wikipedia:Civility, as his insultive spree cannot be tolerated any longer. Though there is no use in reporting him to his patron, Alex Bakharev. Truthseeker 85.5 15:18, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Dear Truthseeker, thank you. I would rather work with him and co-operate. I hope he will refrain from personal attacks, However, my patience has boundaries. I’m anything but "rabid nationalist" :) In fact im anti-nationalist and anti so called "patriotic." Thanks again for your help, I appreciate it ! All the best Truthseeker. Ldingley 15:22, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Irpen, im warning you, if you vandilize this article one more time I will report you to admins. The text was not copy righted or protected, and I have contacts with the author whos accounts (he took from UN observers report) i modified and added citations and references. Im still working on this article and taking references from various human rights reports and UN observers protocols (I have about 120 protocols from UN and OSCE concerning this issue). I need more time to modify this article so it can be in full compliance with Wiki regulations. Do not vandilize the article! Ldingley 01:09, 16 August 2006 (UTC) who tells UN is objective? It was georgia who invaded abhazia at first stage can you show a protest of UN against that...Abkhazia is for Abhazians as its been for millenia, so called georgian refugees are descendants of the thieves and genociders of 150 years ago, now calling Abhazians as genociders... abhazians are only defending what they have and UN is the community against this.. why to trust UN which showed its imperialistic intentions in balkany just recently... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.108.42.184 (talk) 01:06, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Ldingley, you are free to report anything to anyone. However, most of the text is a verbatim repetition from the published book that does not disclaim the copyright, thus making the text copyrighted. It is totally OK to use the outside source when writing an article (with acknowledgement). Moreover, using the sources is necessary. However, there is a line between using an outside source and mere copying it or copying with adding some small insignificant changes to the text. The article should be your work rather than someone else's. As for your being in contact with the book's author, this is all good and useful, but please reread Wikipedia:Copyright FAQ. Also note, that in most cases the book publisher rather than the author owns a copyright. Also, the owner should explicitly and irrevocably release the copyright under GFDL (or PD) not just say that "I don't mind if you publish this in Wikipedia".

Even under the circumstances when you obtain all the releases from the cp holders, it is preferable that the articles are our own work. Otherwise, what's the point in Wikipedia. However, without the release, this is simply unacceptable. If you want to bring people to the book you like, post a link to it to a relevant article rather than copy it to Wikipedia.

Please read the content of the copyvio template too. --Irpen 01:16, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Listen, 80% of that article is writen by me. Do not delete anything before i start to investigate and attack proper copyright tags. I repeat, I wrote 80% of that article, from various sources and references. Ldingley 01:18, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Should I list the comparison with the source paragraph by paragraph? I suggest you write your own article in using the link provided in the template and calmly reread the whole discussion and the links I gave you. --Irpen 01:21, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

If you did recieve permission to use the material please use follow the proper procedure at Wikipedia:Boilerplate request for permission --24fan24 01:21, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I believe it's ok (although not encouraged) to copy & paste from websites as long as you have permission. See Tats, Mountain Jews and Derbent. If there is material in this article that Luis does not have permission to copy, then it should be removed. —Khoikhoi 01:22, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Give me time, I'll do everything. All those quotes and all those numbers i took from variosu reports. all of them were trabslated from French and so on. I give up. Ldingley 01:24, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

It's fine to copy & paste quotes, btw. It's just the paragraphs that can be the problem. —Khoikhoi 01:27, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Ldingley, I repeat that I don't mind that you use your sources. I also think that being in contact with real scholars is extremely useful. We may even end up with them helping us editing and improving articles. I am not accusing you in the willful cpr infringement. I am only accusing you in being stubborn and trigger happy. I found long pieces in the article that merely duplicate the stuff written elsewhere. You might have thought that this is OK. The copyvio template has all the links you need to find out what the procedures are and how you can comply. You instead jumped to silly accusations (in vandalism) and revert warring. Please calmly set aside writing the article for 20 minutes or so reading on the copyrights. Once done, please get back on the train and cool your temper when you disagree with other editors.

The article and its history contain the verbatim repetitions of the copyrighted info and I explained to you why it is unacceptable and the author of the book in most cases has no authority to allow you to use his book directly. It needs to be reworked from scratch. If you take it upon yourself, good luck to you in this noble goal. But instead of badmouthing your opponents, learn to work with them. --Irpen 01:31, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll fix that, im not a bastard who steals other peoples work. I'll do it tomorrow, i swear. Let me work on it before you delete anything. I didnt copy the quotes. I took them from reports. I can send you the scanned versions of them if required. Many of them are in french. Ldingley 01:32, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I removed text, I will provice all proper emails and so on for proper licencing and will review the Wikipedia policies. However, the text will be added after I start proper tagging or start writing new text witht he help of sources and references, see Bibliography. Ldingley 01:39, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Look, I am not the one who you have to send anything to. Simply understand the difference between writing relying on the other people's work (that is with quotes in quotation marks properly referred to and not excessive, giving all the refs you used and all the links that are available, etc) and copying other people's work. The article would not have been deleted, at least not at once. The template I placed clearly says that there is going to be at least seven days before any action is taken with the article. You could have worked from the latest version in article's history in the temporary space provided in the link. You should have read the text of the template and take some time browsing the useful links given in the template instead of "blindreverting" and accusing me of vandalism. --Irpen 01:41, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll fix it irpen, i'll fix it. I removed those paragraphs. As you recommended I will write a new text with full of references and proper sources and the author shall be 100% Luis Dingley and I hope others will join. Ldingley 01:46, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV

This is a clearly anti-Abkhaz and anti-Russian article. No background for the Abkhaz agression towards Georgians is given. The Abkhaz people were constantly discriminated by Georgians during the Soviet era. Most of Georgians living in Abkhazia by the 1990-s also moved there also during Soviet times.

During the Soviet period (especially under Stalin), Abkhazia underwent "Georgification", and Abkhazians experienced discrimination. Lavrenty Beria, the head of the Georgian Communist Party in 1930, played an active role in implementing this policy. As a result, the population of Abkhazians sharply changed during the life of two generations. By 1989, the number of Abkhazians was about 93,000 (18% of the population of the republic), while the Georgian population numbered 240,000 (45%). The number of Armenians (15% of the entire population) and Russians (14%) also substantially grew.[1]--Shakura 09:43, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

No propaganda, please. --Kober 11:38, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

I have seen many similar remarks on Holocaust, Rwandan Genocide and Armenian Genocide articles. Denial is an ugly thing. Ldingley 14:17, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Denial is an ugly thing, but so is bias. The discussions of the above three make no sense without noting the issues which led to their occurrence. Rebecca 01:52, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Bias? of which rebecca you are guilty as charged. Im sorry but I judge based on your contributions and edits. The article is very well referenced with reliable sources. However, the background shall be drafted as time will allow. Use references and books to review the subject further. Thanks. Ldingley 14:32, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 1989 census

Could someone give a link to 1989 population census, which would include the minorities like Greeks (how many?), Jews or Estonians (around 2000)? I only managed to find a table of the 19th century (1886 if I remember correctly).Constanz - Talk 14:04, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately I haven't seen any census on Abkhazia population but as I know from traveling there before the war, appr: 120 (only in Sukhumi) Estonian families lived in Abkhazia. Im not sure about the Greeks. During the war, most of those Estonians were expelled along with the majority population of Abkhazia (although some stayed) which was composed mainly of ethnic Georgians (Mingrelians and Svans). During the war, some Estonians and Greeks were killed during the ethnic cleansing. I say that because of the old Greek grandma told me that her son was shot by Abkhaz because they confused him for a Georgian. She even added that some other Greeks in Sukhumi were killed by the "liberators" in Sukhumi after September 27, 93. I also read th einfo on the killing of Estonians during the war in Gagra and in Sukhumi. However, I didn’t find anything in UN reports, Helsinki files or UNOMIG protocols. Its all based on witness data compiled by OSCE, Report on Abkhazia GN-982-Revision 01, I only have it as a hard copy. Cheers. Ldingley 20:43, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hugue tribunal

It's written now that "ICTY made the almost unprecedented decision to launch an investigation about genocide and crimes against humanity in Abkhazia." with this article as a source. However there's no mention of Abkhazia or Georgia in the 2004, 2005 and 2006 reports by ICTY (the article was written in 2004). Is the ICTY really investigating these events? Alaexis 09:20, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Oops, I didn't notice this paragraph

On March 2006, the Hague War Crimes Tribunal announced that it had reviewed all the documents submitted by the Georgian side. After a full-scale investigation, the Tribunal concluded that it would prosecute and start hearings against the campaign of ethnic cleansing, war-crimes and terror inflicted on ethnic Georgians in Abkhazia.

There are no references supporting it though. Alaexis 09:26, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

references are available in these books: The conflict in Abkhazia: dilemmas in Russian 'peacekeeping' policy, Lynch, Dov, pp 36-37 and Challenges to peacebuilding : managing spoilers during conflict resolution Newman Edward, p 282 Ldingley 14:22, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Its the International Criminal Court that's investigating not the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. Easy to confuse the 2 - they're both based in teh Hague and both try the same crimes. However, Abkhazia is not in Yugoslavia. AndrewRT(Talk) 22:02, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] sources

Could someone present more sources confirming that the soccer with heads events took place (per WP:Exceptional_claims#Exceptional_claims_require_exceptional_sources? Particularly, does Mr. Murphy give some refs in his book? He wasn't an eyewitness to these events, wasn't he? Alaexis`

Do you also use exceptional sources when selectively picking up anti-Georgian slurs from the outdated HRW report?

That's just because all the anti-Abkhazian slurs from it had already been picked )) Alaexis 10:23, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

As for Murphy, his account is based on the reports by eyewitnesses. Check also Chervonnaya's much more detailed info on the events. --Kober^Talk 08:20, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Do you mean "Conflict in the Caucasus: Georgia, Abkhazia, and the Russian Shadow" or some other work of hers? Alaexis 10:22, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit]  ???

What is this supposed to mean? I think the removal of sourced information should be first proposed at the talk. Alæxis_¿question? 20:31, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

This sentence has no relevance to the campaign of ethnic-cleansing in Abkhazia. Germans had many available excuses for war crimes in WWII but they are not relevant to Holocaust . Ldingley 14:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

It's your POV that it's not relevant. Since it's true well referenced let the reader decide whether it's relevant or not.

ps. if you think Germans have many excuses for Holocaust you could add them to the appropriate article. Alæxis_¿question? 15:26, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Nop, it’s your POV. You can add that in War in Abkhazia and not on this article. The ethnic cleansing of Georgians did not start because of Georgian policies in Sukhumi and in the reference it does not say so. And this sentence is provocative, just like in many other things you do here.Ldingley 17:08, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Removed the sentence which does not match anything on page 26, 27 or 28 of the Human Rights report, especially on Georgian ethnically based politics in Sukhumi, etc. Ldingley 21:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

My mistake - it's page 23, Lawlessness and accountability chapter. Alæxis_¿question? 05:32, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Great, now i can add many quotes from that document which show Abkhaz extreme brutality and sadism. Thanks a lot, especially the one: "show us your young, we will kill them" or "where are your young girls" so they can rape them.Ldingley 15:35, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Post 2002 actions

The International Criminal Court only has jurisdiction over war crimes committed after 2002. This article all seems to pre-date that. In that case, what are the events that the ICC are considering? AndrewRT(Talk) 22:04, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Mamao andria da youri anuaa.jpg

Image:Mamao andria da youri anuaa.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 08:04, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Genocide of Georgians in Abkhazia

Regarding the term "genocide" - from my research I found that only Georgian sources are using this terminology. So I propose to state that fact in the article. Basically no organizational or political or historical entity in the world (other then in Georgia) recognizes it as genocide, right? Steelmate (talk) 22:20, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

And by the way what russian transliteation of genocide is meant to indicate : to indicate that russians made that genocide? Steelmate (talk) 22:24, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Mr Steel, there are no bad intentions or any attempts to mislead the public reader. Indeed, i am also researching this topic and will gladly change accordingly after i review that none of the "neutral" sources claim so. You are correct Mr Steelmate that so far the Georgian side maintains on that term, in comparison with term ethnic cleansing which had been supported by international organizations as such (there are tons of sources for that). I dont know about the Russian term but I dont think that makes any difference, in fact yes Georgian do believe that Russian played a key role in Abkhaz tragedy. Alas, the politics, i shall search for further references. Many thanks. Iberieli (talk) 22:32, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

p.s exampel of neutral source in the book Federalism and Decentralization: Perspectives for the Transformation Process in Eastern and Central Europe, by two authors: Jürgen Rose Johannes Ch Traut from the George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies write on p 352 the following: "Eventually, a war of secession began in Abkhazia, which resulted in thousands of victims, the genocide of Georgians, more than 300000..." Iberieli (talk) 22:36, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Is that it? Well, 1 time mentioning is not much... I would say it is still a minority view amongst non Georgian population, vs Georgian population which we can find hundreds of sources mentioning the word "genocide". Steelmate (talk) 22:45, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Well i see that you are concerned about integrity of Armenian Genocide (of which im also devoted to and share its tragedy) and in the same wat you have to understand the tragedy and calamity of other people. Although, i do look into the issue and as i do i find more references than 1. Iberieli (talk) 22:49, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

I am concerned about integrity in everything and would advice this to everyone who is editing Wikipedia. Do share pain of every innocent death - be it death of Georgian, Russian, Abkhaz or Armenian or ever Turk. Please post your resources. It looks like still this term is predominanty used only in georgian sources. Steelmate (talk) 22:56, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Well not only by Georgian now, in Mrs Chernovayas book the term is used numerous times, however i will add your sentence plus soem western scholars who supported this claim. Thanks. Iberieli (talk) 23:04, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Looks better, thanks. I would also put this section after the name of Massacres, as Massacres are much more known wording. Steelmate (talk) 23:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

By the way you can remove the "Human Rights Watch report 1997" as it says so in regards to the action of georgian officials that are investigating the acts of genocide, it didn't say we think it was a genocide. It is still a georgian source in that way. Steelmate (talk) 23:15, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

yeah you are correct. Thanks Iberieli (talk) 23:19, 3 February 2008 (UTC)