Talk:Caucasus

Azerbaijan Start‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Azerbaijan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Azerbaijan-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.AzerbaijanWikipedia:WikiProject AzerbaijanTemplate:WikiProject AzerbaijanAzerbaijan Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Georgia (country) Start‑class High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (country), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Georgia and Georgians on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Georgia (country)Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia (country)Template:WikiProject Georgia (country)Georgia (country) Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

	Caucasia (inactive)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caucasia, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CaucasiaWikipedia:WikiProject CaucasiaTemplate:WikiProject CaucasiaCaucasia

Russia: Physical geography / Human geography Start‑class Top‑importance

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 Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the physical geography of Russia task force. This article is supported by the human geography of Russia task force.

Archives
Archives: Archive 1

Iran is not a Caucasian nation, the Caucasus ends at the border with Iran.Azerbaijani 21:49, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I took Iran out, because as far as I know, no part of Iran is in the Caucasus. The border with Iran marks the end of the Caucasus and the beginning of the Iranian plateau (relatively ofcourse).Azerbaijani 21:24, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone who considers Greece, the Caucasus or anything in that region European, seriously needs to actually live in these places to appreciate their profound ignorance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.254.81.209 (talk) 14:05, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greece not European? What the heck do you mean by that? It was the Greeks who came up with the concept of Europe in the first place! Wardog (talk) 15:41, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Europe is an invented continent. It's really just part of the larger Eurasian land mass. But based on conventional definitions Greece is clearly European. In fact, it was the Greeks who invented the idea of Europe as a separate continent. They considered themselves Europeans back then and still do today. So by all accounts, they are more "European" than anyone else. They symbolize the origins of the concept of Europe. Now do tell us how Greece is not European and how one can realize this by living there? What, just because it has some cultural differences than other parts of Europe? Do you think all European cultures are the same? Europe is not a monolith. Of course there is going to be differences between regions. It's a highly diverse and fragmented place. Is France like Latvia? Is Ireland like Romania? Is Finland like Italy? By your logic Hindu India is not part of "Asia" because it doesn't adhere to the Islamic and Confucian traditions that dominate the continent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheyCallMeTheEditor (talk • contribs) 22:31, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ethno-Linguistic groups in the Caucasus region- that map is totally wrong. It shows in eastern Turkey language is Kurdish. But in East Turkey there are 3 million Kurdish, and 25 million Turkish. So, what is it? just a biased map... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.228.61.2 (talk) 12:49, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A more recent map should be used here to show current countries BigEyedFish (talk) 07:46, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the proposal and think this image is suitable. As caucasus is a geographical region this picture is more suitable for the article that the other images on the wikicommons which are political maps mostly.

-ArazZeynili_talk^contrib_{19:21, 12 January 2008 (UTC)}[reply]

To the author - since when Abkhazia became southern Russia and is disputed? It's de facto independent, but for the entire world, it's still part of Georgia.

"The Caucasus or Caucasia is a region in Eurasia bordered on the north by Russia, on the southwest by Turkey, on the west by the Black Sea, on the east by the Caspian Sea, and on the south by Iran." I think the defintion is not correct. The region is not bordered with Turkey's and Russia's borders as it is bordered with Black Sea, Caspian and Iran. So a reader may get a meaning that Caucasia ends with border of Russia and Turkey, which is not correct part of these countries are included in Caucasian region. We should rephrase the first definition sentence.-ArazZeynili_talk^contrib_{19:43, 12 January 2008 (UTC)}[reply]

An image of this particular region would be swell... not just maps. - tbone (talk) 14:43, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You should remove the biblical references. The human genome project proves where modern man originated from over almost 200,000 years ago. From Adam to Noah there was only a thousand years. Anyone living in the Caucus region would have been far removed from the geneology of Noah by at least 190,000 years. Even the ability of humans to speak and spread oral history is relatively new, and the ability to write is even newer. The Garden of Eden was located at the convergence of three rivers near southern Iraq, which is where the Sumarian civilization first began to write. The migration from there to the Caucasus region would have taken thousands of years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.110.172.227 (talk) 06:58, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I accidentally posted the following question in South Caucasus' talk page, but meant to have it here:
"Does this article need to address whether or not South Caucasus has any link at all, direct or indirect, to the nationality known as "Caucasian"? (I confess that I have no idea.) Thanks." 98.202.38.225 (talk) 15:19, 31 May 2008 (UTC) There's no such a thing as nationality Caucasian. Maybe you meant race? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mchedela (talk • contribs) 07:05, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm perplexed how the article jumps from the Georgians to the Chechens in terms of largest ethnolinguistic groups. I think you missed the Armenians and the Azeris. I suggest a little research an re-writing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.205.53.50 (talk) 01:26, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article says "The largest peoples of the Caucasian language family..." — Armenian and Azeri don't belong to the Caucasian languages. Of course, there's no such thing as "one Caucasian language family", but it's very probable that it refers to people with languages indigenous to the Caucasus region. — N-true (talk) 12:59, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Although, Armenian is classified as a Indo-European language and Azeri, Turkic, it's still misleading not to discuss them when the page is a discussion of the whole territory of the Caucasus. I quickly found this link for info, but there may be others: http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Caucasian-languages —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.205.53.50 (talk) 15:24, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any idea what the etymology of the word Caucasia or Caucasus is? I couldn't find anything in dictionaries. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.106.83.224 (talk) 05:13, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there this part of the article has some syntax issues both in English as well as Persian (where you read kuhkāf in stead of kāfkuh). Wikijamin (talk) 00:15, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And what is this malarky? "Etymology The word Caucasus derives from Caucas, the ancestor of the North Caucasians.[2] He was a son of Togarmah, grandson of Biblical Noah's third son Japheth. According to Leonti Mroveli after the fall of the Tower of Babel and the division of humanity into different languages, Togarmah settled with his sons: Kartlos, Haik (Georgian:ჰაოს, Haos), Movakos, Lekos (Lak people), Heros (Kindgom of Hereti), Kavkas, and Egros (Kingdom of Egrisi) between two inaccessible mountains, presumably Mount Ararat and Mount Elbrus." Come on religion based hearsay as an etymology?

---I find the above comment funny. Seriously though, the statement of the name descended from a folkloric person should not be presented as a cold hard fact unless there is other evidence to support it. I am surprised this got by. Few English speaking people probably read about the Caucasus. I read a little Russian, but not much. It looks like the Etymology section of the Russian wiki page mentions Herodotus. 74.101.163.144 (talk) 22:11, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Etymonline says: "Caucasus: mountain range between Europe and the Middle East, from Gk. kaukhasis, said by Pliny ("Natural History," book six, chap. XVII) to be from a Scythian word similar to kroy-khasis, lit. "(the mountain) ice-shining, white with snow." But possibly from a Pelasgian root *kau- meaning "mountain."[1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.91.190.226 (talk) 19:11, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It surely isn't between these places. It must surely be in one, some or all of them. Also, the middle east is in Asia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.140.57.113 (talk) 11:43, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

first politologia should explain this edit.--Bouron (talk) 08:16, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And please explain this edit. --Kober^Talk 08:16, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why I should explain it. File:Caucasus-ethnic en.svg was put to the article earlier. compare there dates.

Lets not to start edit war. we have talk page to discuss new edits what is politologias edit.--Bouron (talk) 08:53, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Politologia's edit does not contradict any of Wikipedia's policies, while your's does. You have reverted him/her several times without any explanation given on talk.--Kober^Talk 08:58, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted her one time. see history.--Bouron (talk) 09:47, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was waiting for explanations for politologia's map is better CIA's map. --Bouron (talk) 17:49, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An image used in this article, File:Bandera de Nakhitxevan.svg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests October 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 05:13, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An image used in this article, File:XinaligAZE.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:30, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An image used in this article, File:Caucasus.png, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Caucasus.png) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:09, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The map used in this article, claiming to show the Caucasus, shows only the North Caucasus plus Georgia. In addition, it appears that it is a copyright violation, and likely to be deleted. Can anyone find a suitable map that covers the whole region? Skinsmoke (talk) 23:05, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Map substituted. It's not exactly the best map, but is better than anything else available on Wikimedia Commons. Skinsmoke (talk) 23:13, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Nagomo Karabakh are not independent states and should not be listed as such at the beginning of the article. I realise they've been put in italics to indicate that they are partially recognised, but they should also be listed under the countries they officially belong to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.102.43.72 (talk) 23:03, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They're all functionally independent. It makes more sense to put them as italicised states than italicised autonomous regions, especially as both Nagorno-Karabakh and South Ossetia don't at all match administrative divisions of their claimant. CMD (talk) 17:06, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter if you consider them to be functionally independent. These areas are officially part of Georgia and Azerbaijan and this is not acknowledged in the list. It's fine to mention that they are partially recognised as independent states but to have no mention of the countries these places officially belong to is ridiculous. 86.17.19.215 (talk) 09:46, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. We should add that to the note at the bottom. CMD (talk) 10:15, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The note at the bottom doesn't tell us which countries these areas officially belong to. The only sensible (and neat) way to include all the information is to list the areas under their respective countries and mention in the footnote that they are partially recognised as independent. There is also an NPOV issue in listing unrecognised countries as sovereign states in the main list and only mentioning their disputed status in a footnote. It should be the other way round. The official information should be in the main list and the unofficial recognition should be mentioned in the footnote. Seems pretty obvious that the official info. should take precedence. 86.17.19.215 (talk) 11:45, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hence "we should add". I've now done this. Official information is not more neutral than unofficial information, and actually has far more reason to hold a POV. CMD (talk) 17:23, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not in an encyclopaedia. I still think it's dumb (and far less neutral) to have unrecognised states listed as sovereign nations with their true status only mentioned in a footnote, but I don't care sufficiently to change it.