Talk:Kyrgyzstan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Kyrgyzstan is part of WikiProject Central Asia, a project to improve all Central Asia-related articles. This includes but is not limited to Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Xinjiang, Tibet and Central Asian portions of Iran and Russia, region-specific topics, and anything else related to Central Asia. If you would like to help improve this and other Central Asia-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Top	This article has been rated as top-importance on the Project's importance scale.

	After rating the article, please provide a short summary on the article's ratings summary page to explain your ratings and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses.

Kyrgyzstan is included in the 2007 Wikipedia for Schools, or is a candidate for inclusion in future versions. Please maintain high quality standards, and make an extra effort to include free images, because non-free images cannot be used on the CDs.

This Geography article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia. It has been rated B-Class on the assessment scale (comments).

	This article is supported by the WikiProject on Countries, which collaborates on nations and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Kyrgyzstan, or visit the project page for more details.
{{{{{1}}}-Class}}	This article has been rated as {{{1}}}-Class on its quality.

[edit] Proposed Link

Hi, I'm working with The Pulitzer Center, a non-profit journalism agency geared towards providing audience to underrepresented news stories. I'd like to link this page to a related articles on the Pulitzer site; http://www.pulitzercenter.org/showproject.cfm?id=27 concerning the political environment in Kyrgyzstan. Please let me know if I can post this link. Many thanks in advance. Blendus 01:09, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] borat

maybe a sentence or two about borat would be appropriate, i suspect many people look up this page in search of, or as a result of, borat. maybe a section of kyrgyzstan in popular culture?

THIS KYRGYZSTAN!! NOT KAZAKHSTAN!!!

!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.179.20.157 (talk) 03:45, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] chopped sentence?

The name Kyrgyz, both for the people and for the nation itself, is said to mean either "forty girls", a reference to the Manas of folklore unifying forty tribes against the Mongols.

whats going on with that either, has an alternate meaning been removed?

[edit] Traditional Bridal Kidnapping

I am unable to type up a comprehensive synopsis of this practice, but I think that it deserves such mention under the culture heading. For those unfamiliar with the practice, info can be found here:

http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/kyrgyzstan/thestory.html

I agree. This seems to be a unique tradition in the world and should be mentioned.

It's hardly unique if you mean by that "practiced only in Kyrgyzstan". It is not at all uncommon among nomadic and mountainous tribes around the world, and a kind of policy to minimize incest. Cosal 19:34, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

/Temp - page for Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries

Someone never finished their thought: "In the first years of Kyrgyzstan's independence, President Askar ."

Not an expert myself, but this is certainly an interesting development:

Kyrgyzstan Gov't Collapses After Protest http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050324/ap_on_re_eu/kyrgyzstan_2

Also, could somebody add an audio file on how to pronounce "Kyrgyzstan"?

It is pronounced "Kur-Giz-Stahn. --Dtm142 22:04, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Actually it's more like "KEER-giz-stahn," the first syllable rhyming with "ear," rather than "sir." - Hux 18:53, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

(*)The pronunciation depends on whether you are using Russian or the Kyrgyz language. The Russian language leans towards "Keer," and the Kyrgyz language towards "Kur." It can be a sensitive subject. --LPH

Thanks

IPA would be nice. --Tydaj

It's a bit more than an interesting development, it's a full-scale revolution! See Kyrgyz parliamentary elections, 2005 and Tulip Revolution. — Trilobite (Talk) 00:04, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Leadership

New appointed Prime Minister (acting) is also acting President, while the new elected President by the Parliament is interim President. See AP article: http://www.dunnconnect.com/articles/2005/03/23/ap/headlines/d891rbj00.txt. —Cantus…☎ 07:34, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)

Kurmanbek Bakiyev, a major leader of the opposition that toppled Kyrgyzstan's government, said Friday that parliament has appointed him acting president as well as acting prime minister.

Speaking to a crowd that threw stones at parliament and shouted his name in support, Bakiyev said that the upper parliament house had appointed him "acting prime minister and acting president" hours after Thursday's turmoil and that he would seek to form a Cabinet.

(emphasis mine) —Cantus…☎ 07:47, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "-istan" countries -- what's it mean?

Currently Kyrgyz prefer not to use -stan suffix. "Kyrgyz Republic" and "The Kyrgyz Republic" are used instead. Jsx 04:36, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I couldn't really find an article on this naming convention, so I figured I'd ask here. What's with these many countries in this part of the world ending their titles with "-istan" or a homonym thereof? And is that how the residents of these countries know their countries, or are these merely English names for these countries (such as "Japan" for what the Japanese know as "Nihon", which sounds nothing at all like "Japan"). Does it have anything to do with "Istan"bul, the Turkish city and its influence on Islamic culture and politics, or is that merely a coincidence? --69.234.188.156 20:18, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

It's from Persian, which has been an influential language in Central Asia over the years. Our -stan article might help you here. Whether a country's people know it by a -stan name will depend very much on the language they speak. Some will, and some won't, and I don't know enough to be more specific than that. It doesn't appear to relate to Istanbul, which according to this etymology derives from Greek. Hope this helps. — Trilobite (Talk) 23:01, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

English has a similar suffix: -land. England, Ireland, Scotland, Greenland, Iceland, Maryland, Switzerland, Newfoundland, Falkland, etc. 141.211.172.204 18:12, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

I forgot Poland. 141.211.172.204 18:13, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm not really sure why Jsx posted his pic up there to the right. Yes, the official long-form name of the country is "Kyrgyz Republic", but everyone here says "Kyrgyzstan", from people in colloquial conversation to local television and radio. I suspect he saw his visa (which is what the pic is from) and drew his own conclusions! -- Hux 04:36, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

My intention was to bring up to the discussion why the "Kyrgyz Republic" form is prefered officially. The picture illustrates this very well. The neighbouring countries always use "-stan" form. Jsx 07:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I would support Jsx on raising this issue. Kyrgyzstan is the only Central Asian country where government avoids using the "-stan" ending. The official long-form name was changed in May 1993 from "The Republic of Kyrgyzstan" to "the Kyrgyz Republic". Bektour 20:47, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Thats Turkish. Like a French " AİS " word. example: Marseille/MarseillAIS ..Also We are saying in Turkish for Bulgaria, "Bulgaristan" Means Country of Bulgars. or Ermenia,in Turkish= Ermanistan. We are using this word for place names. also means ownership,possessor. Then you can Ask What About name of Turkey(Türkiye)... Thats another addition in TURKİSH language " YE,YA ". Türk(i)+ye Rus+ya(Russia),Alman+ya (germany). And another information  Kırk kız-Kırk gız- Kırgız means in Turkish = 40 girl .... Kırgız's have legend. about that (40 girl)....    —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.226.206.142 (talk) 10:54, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Coat of Arms

The COA page is Coat of arms of Kyrgyzstan, but how do you edit that in the infobox? Thanx 68.39.174.91 12:40, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Country code

What is the country code?

You don't say what kind of country code you're asking about. Since most of the time ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 is meant, it's KG. — Trilobite (Talk) 19:03, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Phone country code is +996 --Stywiz (talk) 21:34, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Obviously hacked, inappropriate links

I am unable to remove the links in some sections, this should be brought to the attention of an administrator.

-AZ

What links are these? I can't see a problem anywhere on the page. — Trilobite (Talk) 19:03, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Provinces

There is some inconsistency in this section - the map doesn't show a province number 9 and the locations are different from the locations shown in the individual province articles.

I've done the best I can to match the image with the facts, but we could really do with another image. The provinces are in alphabetical order, but use an alternate spelling of Issyk Kul (beginning with Y) so the order is in a mess. The map was made for the Dutch Wikipedia, so I'm not sure how much we can do about it. We also claim that Osh is a shaar in this article but I can't find anything to back that up anywhere else, either in our other articles or elsewhere, so I'll remove that for now. --Cherry blossom tree 22:54, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

I changed the reference to Rayon as an administrative district to Raion which is where the info can be found since the rayon link is in regards to the fabric.

[edit] Time Zone

As far as i know, the time zone does not switch between summer/winter time anymore. The time stays on summer time (UTC+6) since summer 2005. I think, this should be reflected in the article. Rotsor 10:31, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I can confirm that it's UTC+6 every day of the year over here. I'll edit the page. -- Hux 19:53, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kyrgyz-germans

In Kyrgyzstan there are two German settlement(Bergtal/Rot-Front, look at here, too.... But I would like to know more a bout Ljuksemburg in Kyrgyzstan. There is a German community, too. But I don´t know anything about it. Please, help me, if you will know something! Simon Mayer

I believe that the German community in Kyrygzstan (and the rest of Central Asia) is made up of descendants of ethnic Germans who found themselves in the Soviet Union after the end of WWII. They moved (or were sent, depending on your perspective) to Central Asia as part of the Soviet plan to develop the region as the "breadbasket of the USSR". Beyond that I don't know much about them. -- Hux 19:29, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

At the time of Kyrgyz independence in 1991 there were about 110,000 ethnic German citizens, mainly in largely German settlements in the Talas and Chui valleys, but also in the industrial cities of Bishkek, Kant, etc. Since then, the vast majority have left for Germany, as the formerly state-owned factories and kolchoses collapsed and the jobs disappared. Today there are only a few thousand left in villages such as Bergtal/Rotfront.Cosal 19:54, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I forgot to add that there are only a handful of ethnic Germans left in the village of Luxemburg, there are a few in the city of Kant and in the city of Karabalta, probably also in the mining town of Mailu-Suu in the south, and there are a few in several villages in Talas oblast.Cosal 02:29, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Repository of images

Greetings,

I have made an Asian repository of images, similar to the one that exists for Europe. Please complete the part pertaining to this country as you see fit, preferably similar to those of France, Britain et al:

Wikipedia:List of images/Places/Asia

Thanx.--Zereshk 14:58, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Percentage of ethnic Russians?

On the main page it states that 9% are ethnic Russians, but in the accompying Demogrpahics of Kyrgyzstan article it states that 18% are ethnic Russians.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Littlefatboy (talk • contribs) .

I will change it to this: Kyrgyz 64.9%, Uzbek 13.8%, Russian 12.5%, Dungan 1.1%, Ukrainian 1%, Uygur 1%, other 5.7% (1999 census)[1] --MarsRover 20:02, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi! Why is the population in Kyrgzistan, classified into different groups like Krygs, Uzbeks and Russians. I can understand the Russians but as far as I know, both Krygzs and Uzbeks share the same backgrouns. They are both turkic people. It is like classifying Germans into Wesfalians, Berliners, Saxonians etc. --malcolmriver

Uzbeks and Kyrgyz are certainly related ethnically (and both are also related to the Kazakhs and Turkmens), but they are in fact also quite different from each other in a number of ways and certainly speak different languages. Uzbeks have a long history of settled crop-agriculture and urban development, while the Kyrgyz were almost entirely nomadic, or at least transhumant, livestock herders until being forced to settle by the Russian occupiers after the 1860s. The Kyrgyz historically never had the kind of centralized states that the Uzbeks did (Samarkand, Kokhand, Bukhara, etc.), but rather organized themselves in clans that roamed with their herds over their ancestral grazing territories. The Kyrgyz were mountain people, the Uzbeks valley dwellers. Many social customs also differ significantly between Kyrgyz and Uzbeks. Cosal 00:09, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

And to add to what Cosal said, Kyrgyz and Uzbek people look quite distinct from each other, much more distinct than the visual difference between native Germans. In fact I'd say that Kyrgyz people look more different from Uzbeks than any Europeans do from each other (Turks excepted). -- Hux 05:53, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What is the official name of the country? Kyrgyzstan or the Kyrgyz Republic?

The article is called Kyrgyzstan. The general presentation claims that it was previously the Kyrgyz Republic.

However, the coat of arms to the rigth indicates that the present name of the country is The Kyrgyz Republic. That is what you would find out if you had the curiosity to go to Bishkek. The history section of the article indicates

"In December 1990 the Supreme Soviet voted to change the republic's name to the Republic of Kyrgyzstan. (In 1993, it became the Kyrgyz Republic.)" - Does this mean previous, as claimed in the header of the article?

It gets worse. In the list of member countries of the United Nations, the country is presented as Kyrgyzstan, (consistent with the UN site). The official name of the country was the Kyrgyz Republic when it joined the UN. When did the Kyrgyzstan name show up. An explanation would be required, for instance like the explanation for the change of the name of Belarus.)

Can an article about a country have any credibility, if even the name of the country is fuzzy?

Afil 15:53, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, I live in Bishkek (though I'm not Kyrgyz) and I can tell you it's as fuzzy here as it is outside the country! From everything I've seen and heard the official name is "Kyrgyzstan" even though a lot of official documents still say "Kyrgyz Republic". I don't know exactly when this last change occurred though. Things in this region can change sporadically for reasons that appear very odd to foreigners (e.g. the change in spelling from "Kazakhstan" to "Kazakstan" and back again), but if the UN thinks it's "Kyrgyzstan" then I'd go with that until better info shows up. Sorry I can't be more helpful than that at this point. -- Hux 18:48, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

The UN lists Kyrgyzstan as joining in 1991, which would be correct as the name of the place at the time. Presently the country calls its mission to the UN "The mission from the Kyrgyz Republic" and published addresses from the president are also using "Kyrgyz Republic" as the name, though not very consistently if you look at the content! Same with UN internal naming, like this site for one of their own departments http://www.undp.kg/english/?l=0&p=s or http://www.un.org.kg/english/cca.phtml. Whilst it might be intended to be used as mentioned below it certainly doesn't seem to happening that way in practice. Maybe someone should call at that office down near the Beta store and ask them ... - BC —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.44.88.253 (talk) 11:20, 6 January 2007 (UTC).

It's not all that complicated -- and quite similar to the case of various other countries. The COUNTRY is called "Kyrgyzstan", and the STATE is called "Kyrgyz Republic". It is similar with "France" and "French Republic". Cosal 19:30, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't really get the distinction between country and state that you're trying to draw. Are you just noting the difference between geographical and political names? In the case of Kyrgyzstan, like I said, as far as I'm aware the official name is in fact "Kyrgyzstan", whatever you may see from time to time on official documents leftover from the time when it was called "Kyrgyz Republic". Also, I thought the official name for the political state of France was..."France". Where does "French Republic" come in? -- Hux 05:40, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

"Republique Francaise" is the name of the state as established in the constitution of that state. That state, incidentally, covers the territory of the country of "France" plus a number of overseas territories. Cosal 16:40, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Ah, of course. I remember that now! -- Hux 20:08, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

But the UN, for instance, has member states not countries ... in this example listed as Kyrgyzstan and France respectively. Yet the site for the government of the Kyrgyz Republic describes the "COUNTRY NAME" as Kyrgyz Republic. http://www.gov.kg/index.php?name=EZCMS&menu=33&page_id=64. - BC —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.44.88.253 (talk) 11:33, 6 January 2007 (UTC).

Earlier today I spoke to my Russian teacher (ethnically Russian but she was born in Bishkek and has lived here all her life) and she said that in Russian it's "Respublika Kyrgyzstana" ("Republic of Kyrgyzstan"). However, just to make things even more fun, the stamp on my visa says, in Kyrgyz, "Kyrgyz Respublikasi" ("Kyrgyz Republic") and in English, "Kyrgyz Republic". Unfortunately I can't find any official Russian language documents to see if my teacher was correct about the Russian, but I suspect she's wrong.

So, ordinarily I'd say we should leave the title as is (for the same reason that we call the article for France, "France"), but since this does appear to be a conscious move on the part of the government to ditch the Persian "-stan" suffix, is there a case for changing the article title to "Kyrgyz Republic"?

In the meantime, I'm going to change the lead text to reflect it's official name. -- Hux 20:08, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

It still reads a bit inconsistently in the article, surely if it is officially known as the Kyrgyz republic some revisions should be made to reflect that?

The official documents I see (including passports and so forth) say Kyrgyz Republic. I have visas in my own passport issued over several years referring to it as "The Kyrghyz republic" (older ones) and then in a new fresh version of their visa (from a few days ago) "The Kyrgyz Republic" (The russian name used there seems to be Kyrgyz Respublika, "Kyrgyz Respublikasi" is in the Kyrgyz language). I haven't personally seen (new) official documents referring to Kyrgyzstan, but I don't doubt they exist.

The explanation distinguishing country and state is interesting, but needs a citation of some sort ... I can't see any evidence it wasn't simply an attempt to rename the country and state as one that has not really caught on. There is a lot of confusion around the distinctions between nationality and ethnicity in generally, but particularly here. Very evident if you look at a Kyrgyz Republic passport for an ethnic russian, where there nationality varies according to the language of the page you are on! (or at least the ones I've seen) --- BC

Not strictly a relevant argument in support of anything, but you'll find a lot of people with connections to the country who spend time elsewhere (Europe & US for instance) say "Kyrgyz Republic" because we get tired of saying "no, not KURDIstan, KYRGYZstan" repeatedly. That particular frustration is common! - BC

In 2007 my passport carries an official visa for Kyrgyz Republic, and that is what I saw and heard all the time I was in the country. The official seal on the visa also says Kyrgyz Republic [both in Roman and Cyrillic letters]. I think it is time to get updated, and to reverse the cross reference so that it reads correctly with the name the country uses for itself: Kyrgyz Republic NOT Kyrgyzstan. Orangorang 17:33, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia article titles for countries are generally not the same as the official name for that country. Instead they reflect common usage so as to be more useful for the reader. Thus, the article for the UK is "United Kingdom", not "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland", and the article for the country where French people live is "France", not "French Republic". Following that convention, this article should be called "Kyrgyzstan", not "Kyrgyz Republic", and we should simply note that the official name is "Kyrgyz Republic" in the lead section...which is what we do. :) -- Hux 05:50, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

As the only Kyrgyz Republic citizen in this discussion, I would like to clarify a bit. :) As I mentioned earlier in this discussion, the official 'Kyrgyz Republic' name was adopted by the government in May 1993, the same time the first constitution was adopted. The official long-form country name is written the following way: Кыргыз Республикасы (Kyrgyz Respublikasy) in Kyrgyz and Кыргызская Республика (Kyrgyzskaya Respublika) in Russian. The name 'Kyrgyzstan' is used informally. So, it is not actually correct to compare it to the United Kingdom, but the case is more similar to the one with the Czech Republic, where the name 'Czechia' is used only informally. Bektour 20:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Official Language

The article says, "The Kyrgyz language replaced Russian as the official language in September 1991." However, the infobox correctly notes that currently both Kyrgyz and Russian are official languages. This suggests either that the article is wrong about what happened in 1991, or that it is correct and that Russian was added back in as an official language sometime after 1991. Can someone shed some light on this and make the necessary changes? -- Hux 05:00, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Your supposition is correct, AFAIK, after trying to nominate Kyrgyz as the official language difficulties emerged as many of the younger urban populace simply didn't know Kyrgyz well, and years of compulsary Russian had resulted in regional variation that made dialects that weren't understanding each other. If that makes sense. I'd need to find a proper citation for you as my knowledge is based on what people have told me and second sources (books people have written about the place). I'll note up here if/when I find something. At the moment I have an secondary reference telling me in May 2000 Russian was (re)introduced as a second official language to halt the Slav exodus, followed by the introduction of a Kyrgyz language exam to make the president was 'acceptable' (Kyrgyz Republic, Rowan Stewart). -BC

The article says

Kyrgyzstan is the only one of the five former Soviet republics in Central Asia to retain Russian as an official language.

But the article of Kazakhstan says Russian is one of its official language? --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 04:26, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

The text follows: "It added the Kyrgyz language to become an officially bilingual country in September 1991", suggesting that initially only Russian was official, so the sentence makes some sense, only constructed improperly. Someome has to look in this piece of history more closely. `'mikka 04:41, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Unless Kazakhstan removed Russian's official status at the time of independence, that statement is wrong. I am no expert of this domain. If nobody fix it, I will have no choice but to leave a {{contradict}} tag. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 05:49, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

The statements aren't right. Kyrgyz replaced Russian as the one official language in 1991, Russian was then added in 2000 to make two official languages. As far as I know Russian was not "retained" it was reintroduced later on, and the country did not become "officially bilingual" in 1991, that happened in 2000. I can't comment on the other Central Asian states. -BC

[edit] ROC

In addition, the suppression of the 1916 rebellion in Central Asia caused many Kyrgyz to migrate to the Republic of China.

Was it the Republic of China in 1916? Dan Carkner 15:57, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

And did they go there or what is now the People's Republic of China? Thanks, Dan Carkner 15:58, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

The article is accurate: the Kyrgyz migrated to what is now the western part of the PRC, which at that time was the RoC (which came into being in 1911). Come on folks - there's an encyclopedia right at your fingertips. ;) -- Hux 18:13, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kirghizia/Kirgizia?

An anonymous editor added the sentence, "also known as Kirgizia", to the top of the article. I have two questions about this and I'm hoping someone more knowledgeable can help me out:

As far as I'm aware, the most accurate spelling for this variant is "Kirghizia". Is that correct?
Is it accurate to say that the country is also known as Kirghizia today? I thought that was a historical spelling from the early Soviet days that fell out of use decades ago. For what it's worth, I've been living in the country for a year and have never heard anyone say "Kirghizia".

Any help on this would be appreciated. -- Hux 19:36, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I have NEVER heard anyone refer to his/her country as Kyrghyzia (however spelled) in writing or in conversation. That was a Russia-imposed term. The Kyrgyz speak of their country as Kyrgyzstan and of the state as the Kyrgyz Republic. Cosal 14:36, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Kirgiziya - is a very widly used name of the country in Russian language. Although Kirgiz prefers to say Kyrgyzstan (as it is in Kirgizian) for Russians it is Kirgiziya as it was for years. As not a single Russian can spel Kyrgyzstan fluently :) In 1995 there was an offisial Statement of Russia President's administration that in all Russian documents (I only mean inside Russia) the name should be Kirgizskaya respublika (republic) or Kirgiziya for short, not Kyrgyzstan, so if it is written in Russian there should be Kirgiziya. Of course it doesn't change English or Kirgiz name, only Russian. 212.46.246.133 20:34, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Some people outside the country refer to it as Kirgizia, which I think is a hang over from its former status within the USSR. Whether one says it is "also known as" depends a bit on how that is defined ... I've heard the odd old russian use the term round Bishkek, but then you'll find some (few) people still doggedly hanging on to calling that place Frunze.

As for spellings, use of the letter h, use i or y, s or z, can be a bit tricky as the country (as with the other ex-USSR members) uses cyrillic and I'm not sure an "official" way of trans-literating letters exists, the term is not 'official' but is a proper noun so I suppose it will always a bit subjective and based on phonetics. - BC

[edit] Spelling

One vowel in ten letters? Am I the only to notice how unique that is? VolatileChemical 18:57, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Seems to me that the "y" is a vowel here. Cosal 21:52, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Blasted context conventions. VolatileChemical 05:59, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

More like, "blasted transliteration conventions" - the "y" in "Kyrgyzstan" is "ы" in Cyrillic, which is a vowel sound. :) - Hux 05:52, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Worldbank links

This section:

[edit] Data resources

Doing Business in Kyrgyzstan The World Bank Group guide
Kyrgyzstan Enterprise Surveys
Kyrgyzstan Privatization Database
Infrastructure Projects of Kyrgyzstan

Was added by an IP address registered to the World Bank Group (doingbusiness.org is a World Bank Group domain). In keeping with our conflict of interest and external links guidelines I've moved it here for discussion by regular editors of this article who are unaffiliated with the site.

My personal opinion is that all four links are way too much for the article and don't provide enough context for linking directly from this article. Though the links look like they could be useful in more focused circumstances and might be good sources. -- Siobhan Hansa 13:31, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Origin of Karakol

I'm updating the Karakol page and would like some background on the name Karakol. Does it mean "Black Lake," "Black Arm" (as in the police), or both? What is the origin of the name of the city? How about karakul sheep? Thank you, Twalls 21:04, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Both "kol" and "kul" appear in names for Kyrgyz lakes (e.g. Issyk-Kul, Song-Kul, Kol-Ukok) and both mean "lake". The different spelling is a transliteration artifact. Although I don't know for certain, the location of Karakol (at the Eastern end of Issyk-Kul) suggests that "black lake" is the most likely translation. No clue on the answers to your other questions though. -- Hux 16:59, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

No-no, you are wrong! These are two different words. Kol ('qol' in Kyrgyz Latin version, 'кол' in modern Kyrgyz Cyrillic) means hand, while kul ('kөl' in Kyrgyz Latin version, 'көл' in modern Kyrgyz Cyrillic) means lake. Karakol means black hand. Bektour 21:03, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your input! I appreciate it. Twalls 20:10, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Kara is black, as you obviously know but didn't say! My father-in-law is from the place so I can ask him more detailed questions, although I suspect he'd insist on calling it preswalsk ... mumble mumble Wiki benguin 22:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC) wiki_benguin

[edit] Religion

Unless another contributor knows better, I very much doubt that any of the 0.5-1% of the population of Ukrainian ancestry would describe themselves as "Ukrainian Orthodox" as opposed to "Russian Orthodox" or more likely simply "Orthodox", ie "Praslavie", or that they would attend an institutionally separate church from that Russians would attend. Should be changed from "The main Christian churches are Russian Orthodox and Ukrainian Orthodox" to "The main Christian church is the Orthodox Church." Cwmacdougall 00:50, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I won't speak for the Ukrainian population of Kyrgyzstan, but I will point out that in the years since the break-up of the Soviet Union, the idea of Ukraine as culturally distinct from Russia has become significantly more popular, so I don't think you can make the argument that all the religious Ukrainians in Kyrgyzstan would self-identify as Russian Orthodox or go to Russian Orthodox churches. I think the article should remain as-is for now, unless we have any Kyrgyz-resident Ukrainian editors (or other, similarly qualified people) who think it needs to change. -- Hux 05:58, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I would agree with Cwmacdougall. During last two years, I had two ethnic Ukrainian girlfriends, so I know a bit more about it. :) While both of them were not religious at all, their relatives visited (if visited) the local Orthodox Church. I am not sure that a separate Ukrainian Orthodox Church branch exists in Kyrgyzstan. Bektour 21:09, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] City of Osh as administrative subdivision

According to the Russian edition of Wikipedia, the city of Osh constitutes an administrative subdivision of Kyrgyzstan separate from Osh Province. It would be an independent city, similar in status to Bishkek. Backspace 19:48, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New external link

Someone added a new external link to http://tokmok.strana.de, and I have a hunch its not apropriate. But its in cyrilic, so I can't read any of it to find out! Any Russian (or Kyrgiz?) speakers who could take a quick look, and maybe provide a more descriptive description if its ok to stay? Cheers, Eve 11:51, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

It's just a short description of the town of Tokmok, so I don't think there's much point in having the link on this page, especially when we have a Tokmok page that already has better information. I'll delete it. -- Hux 13:40, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cyrillic used in Kyrgyz

I noticed in the Kyrgyz text for the national anthem one letter that looks off: second letter in second word Ак мөңгүлүү. Is this just a bad 'ë'? It looks more like a fat theta142.68.41.248 19:21, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

It's not a mistake. 'Ө' is the 17th letter of Kyrgyz alphabet. See this page for info. -- Hux 10:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

excellent! thanks. Is it possible to modify the link on the word Cyrillic in the text to have it point to the same place on the page as the link you have provided? I don't know enough about stuff to make such a change. Also, is there any etiology of this letter?142.68.44.156 02:15, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I don't see any reference to the text you're talking about in this article. Are you maybe referring to the National Anthem of the Kyrgyz Republic article? If so then I made the change here (linked so you can see how it's done). :) -- Hux 06:16, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

You're correct, I was confusing the main article with the article on the National Anthem. I see what you've done. I didn't want to be presumptuous, but I've tried changing the link to Cyrillic script on the main article about Kyrgyzstan to go directly to the Kyrgyz Cyrillic part as you did for the Anthem. If you think it should be changed back please do so or let me know and I will do it - I recognize expertise when I see it! thanks for the help142.68.44.156 15:26, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

No need to offer an apology on the basis of presumption - as this article suggests: be BOLD in your edits! :) -- Hux 05:57, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Issyk Kul excavations

Just in case anyone hadn't heard about the recent underwater excavations, there seems to have been a metropolis at the bottom of what is now lake Issyk Kul 2500 years ago. I'm no expert on Kyrgyz history, but perhaps someone can add something to this article and the main history article... Esn (talk) 21:48, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Demonym Kyrgyzstani

I'm placing a "verify credibility" tag next to the source on this (CIA World Factbook). Please see my remarks at Talk:Uzbekistan#Uzbekistani?, as entirely analogous considerations apply here. Joeldl (talk) 17:12, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

From what I can tell, "Kyrgyzstani" is a recent development that is tied in with the independence of Kyrgyzstan, whereby western observers desire one term for nationality and a separate one for ethnicity. For what it's worth, in my experience nobody in Kyrgyzstan makes this distinction (in the variety of Russian used in Kyrgyzstan, people say "Кыргызский" and in English, "Kyrgyz"). At the same time, westerners routinely don't make this distinction for plenty of other countries and peoples (e.g. we say "French" for both the nationality and the ethnicity). At the same time, all the major news outlets use "Kyrgyz" and rely on the context to illustrate whether their talking about nationality or ethnicity. So imo, "Kyrgyzstani" shouldn't be in this article (unless it's a section specifically discussing the use of the word). We should just stick to "Kyrgyz". (This argument would also apply to "Uzbekistani", "Tajikistani", etc.) -- Hux (talk) 22:46, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

There have been several discussions about this throughout Wikipedia (see here, as well as the links mentioned in that discussion). I agree it's not used much in everyday speech, but that doesn't mean they are not valid terms. Also, these are not only "western" terms, but exist in Russian as well. Having separate terms to denote ethnic and political affiliations is helpful and avoids having to constantly rely on context. Otebig (talk) 23:10, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree that it's helpful in that it's more precise, but I don't necessarily think that it should be the major deciding factor in what we do here. The more important question, imo, is whether or not "Kyrgyzstani" is sufficiently notable to be used as the standard nationality descriptor here and I'm not so sure that it is, given how rarely it appears to be used. I'm interested to hear that the two forms exist in Russian though. If it's "Киргизский" for the ethnicity in Russian, can you tell me what the word is for the nationality? I only ask because I can't find anything other than "Киргизский" in either of the Russian-English dictionaries I have. -- Hux (talk) 06:04, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to emphasize that before we decide which word to use ourselves in articles, we need to decide whether the information in the infoboxes is correct. Unfortunately, I don't have any recent enough dictionaries, but dictionaries would be more authoratative sources than the World Factbook, and given time, we'll surely be able to find out what they say. The reason I'm dubious about the World Factbook information is that, for example, a Google Scholar search for "Kyrgyz economy" yields 180 results, and "Kyrgyzstani economy" only 3. It's enough to make one wonder if it's anything more than a mistake when they use Kyrgyzstani. (I've even seen Senegali in newspapers for "Senegalese".) I think this is a legitimate question, and I'm sure Otebig will recognize that since there is a good faith disagreement (or more accurately, uncertainty on my part), the dispute tags I placed by the references should be restored and left in place until the disagreement is settled. Joeldl (talk) 23:46, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I initially removed them because I simply thought that you didn't know there was a consensus. Since it's still unresolved, I've placed the tags back. What measure of references/sources would help you resolve your "uncertainty"? Both terms (Kyrgyz and Kyrgyzstani) are used by different sources when referring to national issues. The consensus on Wikipedia was to use the more specific Kyrgyzstani. I understand you want to have the "correct" version, but since sources exist for both terms, what exactly would make one term (either one) more "correct" that the other for you? Otebig (talk) 00:08, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, thank you for replacing the tags. On my talk page you gave me a link to the what was supposed to be the website of the Uzbek embassy in the UK. I know there are phony websites out there because I've come across websites masquerading as Russian consular websites in the past, so I understand how you could have made that mistake. Here is the real website of the Embassy of Uzbekistan in the UK: [2] Note that it mentions "Uzbek-British relations."

The consensus you're referring to may well exist, but it can only go as far as deciding what words Wikipedia should use, for example, whether to have an article called Kazakh hockey team or Kazakhstani hockey team. What factual information is presented about what the demonyms are has to be sourced and accurate. We need to, as best we can, give readers an honest sense of the relative frequency, among informed people such as scholars, of the alternatives.

Ultimately, what I would like would be dictionary citations so we can see how much support "Kyrgyzstani", etc., actually have. Since you already have the CIA Factbook on your side, I concede that in theory I should at this point already be able to tell you that the words Kyrgyz and Kyrgyzstani are or aren't in such or such a dictionary. If, ultimately, it turns out that none of the reputable dictionaries we consult accept Kyrgyzstani, and they instead prescribe Kyrgyz, then I would say that overrules the Factbook. If dictionaries give both, then we give both. If most dictionaries give only one of the two, we give both but indicate that that one is more common.

Apart from the question of whether the words are used at all, if no reputable sources reflect this Kyrgyz/Kyrgyzstani distinction you're claiming, then we can't report it as a fact. My hunch is that such a distinction exists in Russian but is at best marginal in English - we'll see.

As a practical matter, that might take a few days. The reason I feel justified in disputing the information right away is that the 60-to-1 Google Scholar evidence I quoted above in favour of Kyrgyz makes it clear that at the very least it's misleading to state, "the demonym is Kyrgyzstani, period," which is pretty much what it looks like now. So there's definitely something to be cleared up.

In the meantime, if you have access to reference works supporting the existence of Kyrgyzstani, etc., then please quote them.Joeldl (talk) 00:58, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

For what it's worth, a search for "Kyrgyz" on Google's book search yields 2,830 hits, while "Kyrgyzstani" brings up only 167. I don't know how many books Google indexes, but that's a difference of almost 17:1. Meanwhile, a general Google web search produces 4,520,000 hits for "Kyrgyz" and 58,700 hits for "Kyrgyzstani" - a much larger ratio of 77:1. Now obviously these results shouldn't be taken as cast iron proof of which one is "correct" (after all, if you relied on Google to tell you the name of the country, it would overwhelmingly inform you that it was "Kyrgyzstan" as opposed to the correct answer, which is of course "Kyrgyz Republic"), but I think the difference is significant. Ultimately, if we're going to go with one or the other I think that it's safer to reflect what the media and published works go with the vast majority of the time. We have to remember that, as an encyclopedia, our job is to inform not just accurately but also in a way that won't leave users scratching their heads and wondering why we use terms that a very large majority of other serious sources don't. On that basis I think that "Kyrgyz" is the better choice. -- Hux (talk) 06:23, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with you. And I have a hunch that when all is said and done, we'll find that reference works favour "Kyrgyz". The trouble in the meantime is that at the moment we have a source which in most circumstances we'd expect to be accurate and that says "Kyrgyzstani." So it's probably safest if all of us do our best to bring a few reliable references to the table first.Joeldl (talk) 08:01, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

First, for the Google search, comparing Kyrgyz and Kyrgyzstani doesn't work, since they don't refer to exactly the same thing. For example, when searching Kyrgyz, the second hit is Wikipedia's article on the Kyrgyz language. Since that's an ethnic, not political label, it would never be called "Kyrgyzstani". Obviously Kyrgyz, being used for both ethnic and political purposes, will have a higher amount of hits than the more limited "Kyrgyzstani".

With over 58,000 hits, obviously the demonym Kyrgyzstani exists (Кыргызстанец, Кыргызстанцы in Russian) and obviously people use it, so it can't be removed from the article (regardless of whether you consider generic dictionary writers or regional CIA analysts more authoritative). Why is it used? Because it helps to denote a specific political allegiance to Kyrgyzstan regardless of ethnicity (as opposed to "Kyrgyz", which has an ethnic aspect tied into it). For example, Kyrgyz who live in China are not Kyrgyzstanis, while Russians who live in Bishkek are. Note that if you type Uzbek into the search bar here, you go to a disambig page about the ethnic group (read the note at the bottom), while Uzbekistani takes you to the Uzbekistan article - this happens because those words have two different affiliations - slight, but important. If there is any place where such subtle differences in terminology should be utilized, it is an encyclopedia. Given the fact that much of the mass media isn't interested in such minute distinctions, they usually just use the ethnic term "Kyrgyz" as a national/political affiliation - perhaps they should come here and learn about the differences (the dictionary writers too, for that matter).

It is true, though, that having just "Kyrgyzstani" can confuse some people who don't know/don't like the distinction (especially since it's not used in everyday speech). As such, it would probably be best to not only list both terms (in each article for for all five republics), but also have a footnote mentioning the different meanings between the two (along with the fact that the general public uses one more than the other). Taking that a step further, maybe it would be helpful to have a separate article about Central Asian Demonyms? This could cover the meanings and uses of the different demonyms both in the Central Asian republics and Afghanistan (which, from the conversations I've seen on Wikipedia, has its own problems with the demonym issue). That would help clarify things, hopefully, and could also avoid repeat conversations and possible edit wars over naming conventions every time someone comes along and is confused/concerned about the naming issue. Otebig (talk) 08:14, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not saying that it shouldn't be mentioned. Why don't we see what reputable sources we can find first, and then worry bout the rest.

About the Kyrgyz/Kyrgyzstani distinction you're talking about, so far no sources have been found that detail it. That fact will also have to be established.

I understand your objection that (if your claim is correct about the distinct meanings) many of the references to "Kyrgyz" might be to the ethnic group or language. That's why I did my Google Scholar searches for "Kyrgyz economy" and "Kyrgyzstani economy". That way we're sure it's talking about the state and not the ethnic group in all search results. We could certainly think of other examples like government, president, foreign minister, etc.

I think that we have to bear in mind that brute Google searches will turn up a lot of things ordinary people write. And they can be confused because they already know words like Pakistani. So Google Scholar and Google Books seem better to me.

Having said all this, we can take a few days to find references before moving forward, can't we? Joeldl (talk) 08:25, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Otebig:"Why is it used? Because it helps to denote a specific political allegiance to Kyrgyzstan regardless of ethnicity (as opposed to "Kyrgyz", which has an ethnic aspect tied into it)." - I think we're all well aware of why it is used in some places; that's not a bone of contention. The point is, should it be used on Wikipedia? Given how rarely it appears to be used in general, I am concerned that if we standardize it here it amounts to original research since there appears to be no such standardization anywhere else, plus in the vast majority of places where the dominant ethnicity matches the name of the country there is no such distinction, and it doesn't seem to cause any problems. "Kyrgyzstani" (and similar variants from elsewhere in the region) as the standard political descriptor appears to be gaining traction but the mere fact that it is used in some places should not immediately mean that we should use it here, even if it is more useful. Wikipedia is not in the business of defining terminology, only reflecting what is out there.

"it would probably be best to not only list both terms (in each article for for all five republics), but also have a footnote mentioning the different meanings" - I would suggest the following: list both "Kyrgyz" and "Kyrgyzstani" in infoboxes and link to a footnote explaining the difference and noting that the former is most commonly used. Then, as a matter of style, pick one over the other for all articles and stick to it, and I would submit that if we're picking one over the other then I would submit that it makes the most sense to use "Kyrgyz" since that appear to be by far the most used. There's really nothing wrong with relying on context to illustrate whether its use is in reference to ethnicity or nationality. After all, we don't seem to have any problems doing this in all the articles where the ethnicity and the nationality are described with the same word.

"maybe it would be helpful to have a separate article about Central Asian Demonyms" - I think that's a good idea. -- Hux (talk) 21:41, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Kyrgyzstani would seem to be an anglicisation of the russian Kyrgyzstanitz/Kyrgyzstanka, which is valid and used, if rarely. It serves the purpose of distinguishing between ethnicity and nationality where that is required, as has already been discussed. Traditionally a second or third generation russian in this country is still called a russian, even though someone in, say, Moscow would vehemently deny that person could possibly be russian. They can't really be Kyrgyz as that is an ethnic designation and I would simply be laughed at in Bishkek if (with my facial features) I were to say I was Kyrgyz. The alternative is saying you are kyrgyz russian or something, which probably only adds more to the potential confusion. Even more troublesome is this becomes entangled with the debate about the name of the country which, whilst we all say Kyrgyzstan, we all know to be the Kyrgyz Republic. So the correct term should probably be something like Kyrgyzitz/Kyrgyzska, translating to Kyrgyzsian. Don't see that ever catching on!. Wiki_Benguin