Talk:South Ossetia/Archive 1

List of unrecognized countries
User:Irakliy81 has made some major changes to the description of Abkhazia and South Ossetia on List of unrecognized countries. Here's the diff:

I'm not sure how NPOV the old and new versions are, so comments are most welcome. -- ran (talk) 22:34, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Tskhinval vs tskhinvali
Dear Author, my compliments to you. Fair and truly neutral article. However, do you agree that you should change the capital to Tskhinvali? Officially, the city name is Tskhinvali and not Tskhinval. By removing the last "i" it still does not take away Georgian meaning. The whole word is derived from Georgian anyway. In National Geographic, Britanica and in many other reliable sources the place is called Tskhinvali and I think you should go by the official name rather than the version offered by separatists. Thanks again, Luis Dingley Noxch Borz 18:40, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Anthem
The anthem of this place should be added to the article. Badagnani 23:10, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Currency
Georgian lari is not accepted as legal tender in South Ossetia. The same is stated in the Georgian lari article. To claim otherwise is a factual inaccuracy. The infobox was edited accordingly. Óðinn 07:48, 15 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, Geo lari is still widely circulated throughout the reigon, especially in the Georgian-controlled villages around Tskhinvali. Furthermore, the term "legal" is not very helpful there as S. Ossetia itslef is not a legal entity. --Kober 08:13, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * As far as I know, US dollar is also widely circulated throughout Georgia. But that doesn't make it its currency, now does it? Furthermore, being a not internationally recognized entity is not akin to being an illegal entity. And South Ossetia's de-facto government does not recognize lari at all when it comes to the budget expenditures, revenues, etc. Óðinn 08:28, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, I edited the infobox using the Kosovo article as a precedent Óðinn 08:48, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Image captioning
The word "boevik" does not exist in English language. Captioning for should be corrected Óðinn 08:06, 15 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Agree. I changed it into "militant".--Kober 08:13, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * "Militant" means fighting or warring. I don't see the subject on the photo in question being either. Perhaps the author of the image could elaborate more on the details Óðinn 08:31, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

South Ossetian Coat of Arms
Why was the image deleted?.. Óðinn 20:49, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

De-facto
Enough with that already. No other article on an unrecognized nation on WP has "de-facto" and "de-jure" in every sentence. Neither should this one. Only Georgian authorities have some sort of obsession in referring to South Ossetian and Abkhazian secessionist governments as "de-facto authorities". To introduce this sort of jargon on WP is an obvious POV pushing. Óðinn 08:04, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


 * You obviously forgot that the UN and OSCE also have such obsessions. --Kober 08:13, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Please respect and comply with Wikipedia policy on NPOV and try stay away from POV implementations. Ldingley 14:12, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Please follow your own advice. Also, unless you are willing to put "de-facto" into the infoboxes of all the unrecognized states on WP, you shouldn't touch this article either. Óðinn 00:55, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


 * These flag and coat of arms are not accepted either by the region’s Georgian population or internationally. The same goes to Abkhazia whence 250,000 Georgians are expelled as a result of ethnic cleansing. So it should somehow be mentioned that these symbols are used exclusively by the separatist regimes.


 * I corrected the language section in the infobox. The status of the Ossetic language has not yet been defined by the Georgian law though President Saakashvili’s peace plan includes a proposal to make it an official language of the region. It also appears that the unrecognized republic’s constitution (article 4; ) makes Georgian an official language alongside Ossetic and Russian. Kober 04:59, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

There is no evidence for Georgians claims


But you need when you claim to be some thing; If it has any evidence and is not POV. It will show Georgian morality in an international scientific encyclopedia like Wikipedia. It is not a war. Please do not confuse.

Please do not erase .Add more references and evidences for your claims.

ZANDWEB T


 * Who gave you a right to speak about Georgian morality? Are you claiming that Georgians don't live in S. Ossetia? Or does it look very dubious that Alans migrated in the South Caucasus after Mongols destroyed their kingdom? This is basic textbook stuff, my friend, and you need to provide credible soucres that would claim otherwise. Please read more about the subject before posting senseless comments. --Kober 13:53, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


 * All offensive and discremenatory comments will be removed. Zandweb, please do not repeat discremenatory offenses and national attacks on Wikipedia. Ldingley 18:02, 17 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Zandweb, please see the map that I posted to the right. One can see clearly that there are Georgians living mostly in eastern SO. &mdash; Khoikhoi 18:32, 17 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Firstly: This map is related to 1995 and after 5 years is not valid for nowadays discussion. (Researchers rewrite all refrencess after 5 years and this document is compiled 12 years ago).
 * Secondly:
 * Your claim: South Ossetia (Ossetian: Республикӕ Хуссар Ирыстон, Respublikæ Xussar Iryston; Russian: Южная Осетия, Yuzhnaya Osetiya; Georgian: სამხრეთ ოსეთის ავტონომიური ოლქი, Samkhret Oseti Respublika (unofficial) is a self-proclaimed republic within the internationally recognized borders of Georgia. Although this former Soviet autonomous oblast (region) has declared its independence and is in de facto control of significant part of the region, its separation from Georgia has not been recognized by any other country and is regarded a de jure part of the Georgian region (mkhare) of Shida Kartli. As Georgia itself refuses to recognise the region as a distinct entity, the government doesn't use the name South Ossetia, but calls it by the medieval name of Samachablo or, more recently, Tskhinvali region (after the republic's capital).
 * This page was last updated on 7 September, 2006 :
 * Ethnic groups:Georgian 83.8%, Azeri 6.5%, Armenian 5.7%, Russian 1.5%, other 2.5% (2002 census)
 * Languages:Georgian 71% (official), Russian 9%, Armenian 7%, Azeri 6%, other 7% .note: Abkhaz is the official language in Abkhazia
 *  Administrative divisions: 9 regions (mkharebi, singular - mkhare), 9 cities (k'alak'ebi, singular - k'alak'i), and 2 autonomous republics (avtomnoy respubliki, singular - avtom respublika) regions: Guria, Imereti, Kakheti, Kvemo Kartli, Mtskheta-Mtianeti, Racha-Lechkhumi and Kvemo Svaneti, Samegrelo and Zemo Svaneti, Samtskhe-Javakheti, Shida Kartli . cities: Chiat'ura, Gori, K'ut'aisi, P'ot'i, Rust'avi, T'bilisi, Tqibuli, Tsqaltubo, Zugdidi . autonomous republics: Abkhazia or Ap'khazet'is Avtonomiuri Respublika (Sokhumi), Ajaria or Acharis Avtonomiuri Respublika (Bat'umi) .note: the administrative centers of the two autonomous republics are shown in parentheses.
 * Disputes - international:Russia and Georgia agree on delimiting 80% of their common border, leaving certain small, strategic segments and the maritime boundary unresolved; OSCE observers monitor volatile areas such as the Pankisi Gorge in the Akhmeti region and the Argun Gorge in Abkhazia; UN Observer Mission in Georgia has maintained a peacekeeping force in Georgia since 1993; Meshkheti Turks scattered throughout the former Soviet Union seek to return to Georgia; boundary with Armenia remains undemarcated; ethnic Armenian groups in Javakheti region of Georgia seek greater autonomy from the Georgian government; Azerbaijan and Georgia continue to discuss the alignment of their boundary at certain crossing areas.
 * Upon this newly and fresh document today, Ossetic language, is not used in any part of Georgia and that regions that you had claimed are inhabitted by Ossetians are not part of Georgia. In other hand Respublika Xussar Iryston is not part of Georgia.
 * Now I am ready to hear Khoikhoi.
 * ZANDWEB T.


 * Firstly, your source doesn't mention SO as part of Georgia because the entity has no official status and the term itself is not officially used. It is de jure part of Shida Kartli province which is properly listed among the regions of Georgia. Secondly, CIA doesn't mention Ossetic language because it is spoken by less than 1% of Georgia's population. FYI, acording to 2002 Georgia census 38,028 Ossetians live in other regions of Georgia (outside SO), primarily in the capital of Tbilisi, also Imereti region and Borjomi district. They are fully integrated into Georgia's multinational society and engage in political and social life. Ossetians are members of Georgian parliament; An ethnic Ossetian officer commands Georgian air forces; the Association of the Ossetians of Georgia is a very active NGO in Tbilisi which promotes Ossetic cultural activities and advocates closer Georgian-Ossetian intercommunal relations.


 * It is obvious that you lack basic knowledge about the subject. Please just do some Googling for South Ossetia, obtain more serious info and then return to the discussion. Hope this helps. --Kober 05:01, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


 * P.S. Here's a map from the International Crisis Group website clearly showing Ossetian and Georgian villages around Tskhinvali.--Kober 05:44, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Project?
I'm just wondering whether the creation of WikiProject Ossetia, Portal:Ossetia, and Template:Ossetia-geo-stub has ever been proposed or disucssed. I think Zandweb's unilateral decisions don't particularly meet Wikipedia's guidlines. --Kober 04:37, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I've left a message on his talk page. &mdash; Khoikhoi 04:43, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


 * OK. Thanks. I have nothing against him or his participation in the project, but his edits are really very questionable. Kober 04:57, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


 * არაფრის. You might consider adding this at Talk:North Ossetia-Alania as well. &mdash; Khoikhoi 05:00, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Sure. Thanks :) Kober 05:11, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I can't see where else to sugg this so I do ti here: Geography sub-heading - this should maybe be further up the page? It comes as sort of random so late in the article.

Kober's last edit
I'm not reverting this one, because it fixed a lot of text that was simply crap, but it also worsened the pervasive pro-Georgian bias in this article. Set out the facts and let people make up their own mind - don't start from the mindset that the South Ossetian authorities are an evil to be expunged. Rebecca 06:21, 2 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Please present evidence of "pro-Georgian" bias, present references and sources for any claims made to contradict or accuse the content as bias. Also show us where in this article the separatist regime in S. Ossetia is identified as evil?

If something does not suit your views or POVs, it does not mean that information or content is biased or inaccurate. Before accusations, it would be more productive if you could follow the proper procedures and offer us a reliable contradiction. Thanks. Ldingley 15:49, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Oddily both of you are right, this is a subject of dispute and you both recognise that, please don't discribe anyones edits as 'crap', even if they are in your opinion. Mark us street Nov22 2006.

Lack of ethnic Georgians voting
Apparently, there has been ethnic discrimination leading to the vote itself: ethnic Georgians residing in the area couldn't vote. Darth Sidious 23:40, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

The Referendum organised by Union for National Salvation of Ossetians (UNSO)
Here is a link. I am not familiar with Osetia, I just put here the link for some other editors who want to use the information for the main space. Pro-Ossetian authorities emerging in South Ossetia--MariusM 15:29, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * This link didn't open for me Buffadren 13:15, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

See This
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Abkhazia#Abkazia_land_of_Georgia —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.72.153.232 (talk) 18:39, 16 January 2007 (UTC).
 * I understand his sentiment but the Abkhazia page is at Abkazia and not here. He needs to make contibutons and not comments. perhepa direct him to simple English Buffadren 13:18, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

POV deletions
This is going out of hand again. Im really tired of anti-Georgian hysteria which devastates Wiki articles based on political views, ideologies, nationalism, POV pushing, personal agendas, etc. This is a neutral encyclopaedia and not some political propaganda tool to enforce the views of some countries expansionist ambitions (Russia for example). If you delete or remove a valid correction which was added, United nations or OSCE recognition of Georgian jurisdiction, territorial integrity and so on, you should provide valid and reliable sources which will contradict the international law (which in my opinion is absurd) and support your claims and political ambitions. Otherwise, do not delete valuable information from the article and do not mislead the reader who has no background in the issue. I have detected for a long time the certain Russian users use their strong pro-separatist sentiments and use it fully to cause harm for this encyclopaedia and integrity of its content. This is no place for politics, nationalist sentiments or expansionist vision against another sovereign country and its territorial unity. Therefore, before I appeal to administrators (Russian admin like Alex Bakharev, who has been an example of NPOV) for mediation, it would be mostly productive if we all work together and avoid deletions which are important for the content. Ldingley 15:38, 2 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Are you accusing Buffadren of being pro-Russian? Look at his user page then :).
 * I mostly support the current edition. The only exception is the phrase 'integral part of Georgia constitution'. How can a territory be part of a constitution?? Regards. Alaexis 16:55, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Alternative Government of South Ossetia
Although we should refrain from showing our emotions and we should be absolutely neutral, I will say that Alternative Government sounds really funny! Does anyone know any Alternative Governments worldwide? -- Taamu. 15:41, 14 February 2007 (UTC). Happy Valentine's Day!


 * The same to you! The funniest thing is that the Georgians themselves don't recognise this "government" they'd created. You know, they refer to S. Ossetia as the northern part of Shida (or Kvemo, not sure) Kartli. Alaexis 15:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I don’t find it that funny. Sanakoyev’s government is referred to as "alternative" in most mainstream media sources. The article just reflects this fact. Moscow doesn’t recognize Kokoity’s "government" either, but this doesn’t prevent the Russians from turning Tskhinvali into a military barrack and a smugglers’ paradise. So, I don’t see the point of Alex’s sarcasm. KoberTalk 07:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Kober, as I understood you don't support any idea of South Ossetia's recognition [as an independent state]. So why then you support so-called Alternative Government of South Ossetia? -- Taamu. 17:12, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Alaexis, for your information. -- Taamu.


 * I don't support either of these governments simply because none of them are real decision-makers in the region. I'd like to see a truly democratic government in Tskhinvali that would guarantee the rights of Ossetian and Georgian peoples within largely autonomous Tskhinvali region/South Ossetia within the unified Georgian state. Unlike Abkhazia, there is no real ethnic hatred between Georgians and Ossetians who had lived there in peace for centuries. The problem is purely political and the key to it is in... you know where, don't you? --KoberTalk 17:30, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * BTW, this alternative government is neither de facto nor de jure a Georgian autonomous republic. The South Ossetian autonomy was abolished in 1989 and has not been legally re-established. Óðinn 22:49, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * And since this entity has no de jure or de facto power, why is it even mentioned in the infobox?.. I mean, I can declare myself an "alternative" Duke of York. Should I therefore edit the Duke of York article to reflect that?.. Óðinn 22:56, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Wish you best of luck with your venture. Still, this "alternatives" did not only declared themselves as government, but they were elected in the villages not controlled by the separatists. Sanakoyev has the same level of legitimacy as Mr Kokoity: both of them are "elected", self-declared, unrecognized, and puppets.--KoberTalk 04:55, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Do you seriously believe that Sanakoyev (an Ossetian) was elected by the Georgian population of S. Ossetia? Alaexis 07:11, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, haven't noticed the inverted commas around the word 'elected'. You must believe Kokoity is not really elected by Ossetians then. In this case I have no questions. Alaexis 07:14, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * what are the sources, like media, academic sources, that refer to the strange alternative government? does it provide any services, does it have any functions of a real government like making laws and controlling police, army, or is it like a government in exile that doesnt really do anything except claim to be a government ??? Pernambuco 17:10, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * The alternative government has been formed by the former members of the secessionist camp and its leader had fought Georgian troops early in the 1990s. He served as a prime minister and defense minister under the unrecognized S. Ossetian president Chibirov. Subsequently, he left Tskhinvali as a result of inter-clan conflict in S. Ossetia. With unofficial support from Georgia, the alternative government has now assumed some functions of local administration. It does not posses any army and has not even appointed defense minister. Police and security service are provided by Georgia. The declared aims of this government are to facilitate Georgian-Ossetian reconciliation and negotiate S. Ossetia's future status with the government of Georgia. Here're your sources:, , , , etc. --KoberTalk 17:36, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Where exactly did they establish 'some functions of local administration'? In Ossetian-populated areas or in Georgian-populated areas? Both variants seem very improbable to me, although I can be mistaken. Alaexis 17:47, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Of course, you are mistaken; and mislead by nationalist and irredentist propaganda of Putinite regime.


 * In both Georgian and Ossetian areas not controlled by the Tskhinvali regime. Of course, their authority is quite limited, but they have already started to play more active role in the regional politics. Eg., Sanakoyev met CoE Commissioner for Human Rights Thomas Hammarberg today. Recently, they helped to diffuse the "tangerine crisis" on the road to North Ossetia..--KoberTalk 18:07, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Am I right to deduce from your post that there is at least 1 (one) Georgian village controled not by Georgian government but by alt. SO government? Alaexis 18:13, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
 * No. I think both Georgian and alt. SO governments share the control over some villages in the conflict zone. At least, this is how the situation is reported by media.--KoberTalk 18:41, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, it seems to me 'sharing' is limited to putting Ossetian flag alongside Georgian ones. Alaexis 19:15, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * To Kober: unfortunatly, I don't. But I guess you meant Russia. Russia has all rights to protect her citizens, to be involved in the process. I understand Georgia. She tries to maintain the unity of the state. But by what means? Georgian President once promissed to grand the autonomous status to SO, but as I know, according to the Georgian maps SO doesn't even exist. -- Taamu. 11:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Georgia cannot unilaterally grant an autonomous status to Tskhinvali. It should be a subject of bilateral or multilateral negotiations. However, Georgia's government has recently decided to set up a provisional administrative unit in the region, a prerequisite to autonomy. Mr. Sanakoyev seems to be a reasonable guy even though he fought against Georgians in the early 1990s. He is rapidly gaining credibility among local Georgians and Ossetians. Atavistic mafia clans, eg that of Kokoiti, and their patrons in the Kremlin are clear obstacles to a peaceful settlement to the conflict.

Biased article
Why are there quotes by some US or EU politicians and NONE by Ossecians? It is there counry after all. It is not part of the US and EU. Why only EU view of the referendum is presented and NEITHER Ossecian or Russian views? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.230.36.222 (talk) 02:39, 27 April 2007 (UTC).
 * True enough. Alaexis 05:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll tell you why. Because the one who has power (US and EU) and allies, has the right vision on everything (even if it's not right). And if you try to argue, you will only show that you are a "narrow-minded" person. Taamu

Dumb questions
Sanakoev is now head of the Provisional Administrative Entity of South Ossetia. What's the de jure status of this entity inside Georgia? Is it inside of any mkhare or separate from all of them? What's written in the laws?

De facto is no less important than de jure ). What part of former autonomous republic does this entity control and how is its control exercised? Alaexis 16:21, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


 * De facto can always change (especially in Caucasus), de jure if supported by international organizations will endure for good. Dmitry Sanakoev profited more than any other Ossetian separatist or authority; not only he is facto leader of Ossetians (divided from Kokoity club centered in Tskhinvali only, along with ethnic Georgian population of SO) but now obtained de jure status.  Ldingley 19:06, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


 * BTW, SO is not controlled fully by de facto authorities. Due to resent Sanakoev (former PM and Defence minister of the separatists) split, they only include Tskhinvali and three villages around, the rest: Java (Sanakoev home town), Tamarasheni, Eregvi, Kurta etc are under Sanakoev control. Its more like patches of land all over SO controlled by those camps. Ldingley 19:15, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Java is not controlled by the RSO authorities??? Could you present some proof? Alaexis 10:13, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Here's quote from Georgian source:

The Java district is the secessionist authorities’ stronghold in the north of South Ossetia. The Eredvi-based CEC claimed that it had polling stations in Java as well.
 * So even Georgia admits that Dzau is a "separatist stronghold", while Eredvi CEC only claims to have polling stations there. Alæxis¿question? 17:30, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I'll repeat my questions. What's the de jure status of this entity inside Georgia? Is it inside of any mkhare or separate from all of them? What's written in the laws? Alaexis 10:11, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * "Provisional" means that the status is not yet fully legalized. You cannot write something that is "provisional" in the laws. Rather, the new administration is a transitional step to the restoration of autonomy the exact status of which will be a subject of further negotiations between the Georgian and Ossetian politicians (incuding Kokoity if he is not inclined to continue his reckless politics and the blockade of Georgian villages). Sanakoyev has already gained popularity both among Ossetians and Georgians (in spite of your earlier sarcasm about an "Ossetian being elected by Georgians"). Many Ossetians are still suspicious of Georgia's proposals, but not outrightly opposed to them. It's up to the Georgian government and Sanakoyev to assure the Ossetians that their rights will be guaranteed in a reunified Georgia. The ice has begun to retreat, but I'm afraid Kokoity's clan and his patrons in Moscow will do everything possible to thwart the Georgian-Ossetian reconciliation process. --KoberTalk 10:46, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * No legal status, in other words. Just as I thought. So it has no advantage against RSO here and we should compare de facto status of these entities. Alæxis¿question? 17:26, 13 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Are you saying that the decision passed by the Parliament of Georgia and signed by the President has no legal power? The status of the entity is not written in the organic law/constitution because Sanakoyev's government is provisional. I don't quite clearly understand what do you want to say. --KoberTalk 18:14, 13 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I understand it's not in the constitution. I asked 'What's written in the laws?'. The decision passed by the Parliament is a law, isn't it? I'm genuinely interested what's the current legal status of this entity. Alæxis¿question? 18:22, 13 May 2007 (UTC)


 * My fault… I have not explained clearly enough, I guess. That’s because I am far from being an expert in jurisprudence. The Provisional Government appears to have been set up by the Presidential decree, not by the Parliament’s decision. I’m not quite sure whether this sort of stuff can be qualified as law, but it does have a distinct legal power.--KoberTalk 19:34, 13 May 2007 (UTC)


 * The status of the Provisional Administration is still kind of vague to me. Is the text of that president's decree (or its summary which is even better) available on the internet somewhere? Alæxis¿question? 19:26, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Provisional Administration means:

1. Public-political circles in the conflict zone are invited to participate in the conflict resolution process and the defining of the final status of the former autonomous region. 2. The Georgian leadership signals that it is willing and prepared to temporarily delegate its powers to local public and political groups, which will make up the administration of the “provisional administrative-territorial entity”. 3. Apart from the implementation of the delegated functions and responsibilities, and participation in the conflict resolution process, the provisional administration has to coordinate international and humanitarian programs in the region. 4. The law gives legitimacy to the idea of restoring the autonomous South Ossetian region and paves the way for a reasonable and mutually acceptable compromise on the autonomy’s name.

In a nutshell, the law creates legitimate preconditions for cooperation between the Georgian government and the forces that favour the Georgian-Ossetian political unity and gives the local public a voice in the conflict resolution process. If the goal is achieved successfully, powerful integrated Georgian-Ossetian groups of stakeholders may emerge in the region, eliminating, or at least weakening, the ethnic dimension of the conflict. Subsequently, this will help create social, political and economic preconditions for a final settlement of the conflict. Finally, the phenomenon of Sanakoyev and the president’s new initiative tend to demonstrate that the conflict zone is not clearly divided along ethnic lines. In fact, the picture is much more complex and requires respective approaches from the international community. see also www.civil.ge Ldingley 20:15, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Greater part


Is this map enough or not? If not I'll find something else. Alæxis¿question? 20:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)


 * How can i tell that those Ossetian villages (all) are controlled by Tskhinvali? Im just woundering Alex, nothing more. Ldingley 20:16, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Since then, South Ossetia, with the exception of a few villages controlled by the Georgian government in Tbilisi, has been run as a de facto independent state, although its proclamations of independence have been ignored by the international community.

From here. Alæxis¿question? 20:31, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Attention all who thinks that few dozen people can create countries within countries. It is obvious that these people have emigrated from different parts of the world or nearby mountains and settled down in this country. Some stayed in Russia and some were granted citizenship in Georgia many years ago. Now you tell me what will happen if Armenians declare independence of Avlabar, Kurds Gldani or Romans Navtlugi Bazar and Vagzal.

You know what's funny? Russians do not even call it North Ossitia any more. In today's Pravda they quoted that Kokoiti went to Kabardo Balkaria to see his brother Koko Genocide LOL. If kabardos want to live in Russia why they just do not move there. And who cares how many Russians live there. Millions of Russians live on Brighton Beach in New York, so should we grant independence to Brighton so that they could build a bridge to Russian federation?

I cannot believe that these two pains in one place fool so many people. Do not you see that they are from one special Soviet Institution? - FQUAL!

tags
I use them wherever I feel that citation is needed but absent. I believe it's the way they're supposed to work... Alæxis¿question? 12:46, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Maps
Its a pity no map shows which areas of South Ossetia are ruled by whom

That's not quite true. Look there, please - there are all kinds of maps of South Ossetia in that category. This 2007 map (also from the ICG report), for example, shows who controlled what according to the Joint Peacekeeping forces. Alæxis¿question? 07:18, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Alexis for the map. I never knew one existed. It is not shown on the article for South Ossetia at all. Maybe, someone will add it to the South Ossetia article. Yes, I am the anonymous 24.87.XX.XX user who reworded the South Ossetia article. Sometimes I forget to log in when I make a contribution. Your rewording of my suggested changes to my article was well done! Cheers, Alexis. Leoboudv (talk) 07:25, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

McCain
I also don't understand why was McCain's opinion chosen to be mentioned in the article. Other statements in this section were made by CoE Secretary General and EU Special Representative to the South Caucasus while McCain is just a US senator. Let's replace it with some official US statement wrt SO. Alæxis¿question? 18:14, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Well Alex, according to Mykoyans logic I can remove then tons of data from Abkhazia article which derive from Russian sources. It makes a valid poit and Mr McCain is not a figure to ignore. For the Georgian side, his remarks define the situation in SO close to reality. That passage is sourced and helped others to understand better how others view this conflict (besides Duma statements and Zirinovsky's despotic euphoria). Because it does not suit Mykoyans POV, it does not mean that the passage is irrelevant to the topic, on contrary. And surely you agree with him, lets be frank, you are not here as a NPOV editor :) He is official enough. Thanks for suggestion. Iberieli (talk) 03:56, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * It is already stated that no country recognizes South Ossetia, we don't need to supplement this with cherry picked propaganda opinion that make Georgians like Iberieli feel good. Putting only McCain's quote is POV pushing and violates WP:NPOV, otherwise we would have to put the other side per NPOV. It is better to have no POV pushing opinion quotes at all, from either side, and stick with non-POV things like "no country recognizes South Ossetia". --Miyokan (talk) 04:41, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I don’t think we should get rid of everything that makes Russians like Miyokan feel bad. You seem to be particularly irritated by the senator’s comment on modern Russia’s political idol. Please provide more valid reasons for your stereotypical edits.--KoberTalk 04:49, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I am not the one fighting to keep in a pro-South Ossetian/"Russian" opinion quote. I will post it again for you. Putting only McCain's quote is POV pushing and violates WP:NPOV, otherwise we would have to put the other side per NPOV. It is better to have no POV pushing opinion quotes at all, from either side, and stick with non-POV pushing things like "no country recognizes South Ossetia".--Miyokan (talk) 05:11, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I see that POV pushing by this biased user will go on, he does not present any viable reason for removal of that information. Until then, it will be restored in accordance to 2 or 3RR rule. Until Mikoyan presents viable reasoning behind his blunt POV pushing and reaches consensus among the users, McCain quote stays. Meantime, I added the international reaction section were any quote by any official (from Russia or US) can be attached. This will be helpful for any reader to understand the reality of SO in the context of international community. Thanks. Iberieli (talk) 20:56, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * You can claim that I haven't provided justification all you want just because you cannot rebut it and don't like it. I will post it again for you. Putting only McCain's quote is POV pushing and violates WP:NPOV, otherwise we would have to put the other side per NPOV. It is better to have no POV pushing opinion quotes at all, from either side, and stick with non-POV pushing things like "no country recognizes South Ossetia". It is already stated that no country recognizes South Ossetia, the McCain quote adds no new information and merely serves to violate NPOV.--Miyokan (talk) 03:09, 10 April 2008 (UTC).

Provisional Administrative Entity of South Ossetia
Far too much emphasis is give to the above entity in this article. That entity has about four times the space of the actually Govt. of South Ossetia. There is no evidence that the above entity has any sort of jurisdiction and legitimacy. Last I checked, South Ossetia isn't being offered the same sort of autonomy as Abkhazia and it has been absorbed into Shida Kartli as far as the Georgians are concerned. Per WP:WEIGHT this entity should be removed from the opening paragraph, the section describing this entity needs to be reduced in size. I don't see the need for quoting Sanakoev's acceptance speeches in that section. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 02:07, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Heh any time there is some dispute, you suddenly appear with your POVs and deletion policy. Thanks Proco but you are wrong, there are plenty of sources for that and if there is not enough information about so called "republic" its not our fault. Nothing will be removed from any paragraph and if you do so its simply POV pushing and vandalism buddy. PAE of South Ossetia exists and represent the official body of South Ossetia, unlike Kokoity regime. p.s more refs were added and more will come soon. Iberieli (talk) 02:11, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Just look at the article itself: "Per Eklund, Head of the European Commission Delegation to Georgia said that “None of the two alternatives do we consider legitimate [in South Ossetia]" Sanakoyev isn't considered legitimate internationally and is there even a source that Georgia considers him legitimate? Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 02:32, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree. Georgia has no authority over South Ossetia and never will with 99% of South Ossetians wanting independence, with each year it remains independent is less and less likely to be incorporated into Georgia. Start living in the real world, per WP:WEIGHT it should be reduced to reflect this accordingly.--Miyokan (talk) 03:32, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Miyokan, this is supposed to be encyclopedia not a crystal ball. Please bring your prophecy to Russian nationalist chatrooms and adhere to NPOV insteaed of delivering lectures on how we should live. As for Poco’s mass deletions, they typically reflect the Kremlin’s current grievances and thus are a promotion of one-sided POV.--KoberTalk 03:49, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Of course I was not for adding that "South Ossetia will never be part of Georgia", that is my opinion. I am quite sympathetic to Georgia's predicament, as am I to Serbia's, and Russia had its own situation with Chechnya, but I live in the real world. My point was that the Provisional Administrative Entity is a joke with no legitimacy and everyone knows this, artificially created to make it look like theres a schism between Ossetians.--Miyokan (talk) 03:52, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


 * You can't speak for “everyone”, so don't attempt to. You are naturally recapitulating what your government says. We all have our opinions, but Wikipedia talk pages are not the right place to discuss them, especially when they are expressed in an inflammatory tone.--KoberTalk 04:06, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Mikoyan, your argument are typical anti-Georgian POVs and m not going even to answer them. Proco, i havent seen any reference where international community does not recognize Sakavoevs authority as legal. Please provide sources other than Russian. I provided 5 sources so far, you NONE. Also i would suggest you to move into constructive attitute rather than disruptive. Anti-Georgian blabber like that of Mikoyan is not a way solve things Proco. Present sources with specific indications and we'll act accordingly. Iberieli (talk) 21:46, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I already pointed you to Per Eklunds statement that neither goverments are considered legit. I haven't even seen a single source that shows the "Provision Authority" has a mandate to do anything, has any authority whatsoever, or is even considered legit by Georgia. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 01:16, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I statement not enough, more sources are needed to support your POVs. That article was just an opinion. Its not a supportive source. Sorry. Iberieli (talk) 21:56, 11 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Are you saying that Civil Georgia is not a reliable source? Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 15:28, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

What this article is missing
This way we'll achieve NPOV without deleting anything. Alæxis¿question? 19:47, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * excerpt from Kokoity's presidential oath
 * at least five Kokoity's statements
 * words of some Russian mp or senator about Sanakoyev


 * Sure go ahead Alex nobody is preventing you from editing. I'll add more references, please give me time. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iberieli (talk • contribs) 21:43, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

As mentioned this article is blatantly skewed towards Georgian POV. Here are some numbers from searches: From Google:

Dimitry Sanakoyev 451 hits Eduard Kokoity 16,600 hits

Provisional Administration of South Ossetia 121 hits Salvation Union of South Ossetia 6 hits Republic of South Ossetia 20,000 hits

As I mentioned before this article needs to greatly reduce the amount of space dedicated to the "provisional authority". I edited the infobox to correctly reflect that the provisional authority has no recognition but on second thought that infobox should be removed as you can't talk about this entity as a government when it's not governing anything. It can't even be considered a government in exile. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 02:12, 11 April 2008 (UTC)


 * No this is your POV and has nothing to do with reality. They do govern Georgian villages in South Ossetia and they were also elected. If you remove the info box, I'll be obliged to remove Kokoev info box due to the same logic you have presented. The google hits have nothing to do with the reality in South Ossetia. I included source and you can not ignore or discredit this authority simply because you dont like Georgians. It does not work like that. Whatever you said should be supported by sources, if not than this will lead into rv wars. None of us want that, so as I said before, instead of disruptive role on Georgian articles (please dont event attempt to downplay your anti-Georgian attitude here) you should learn to play a constructive role. Again, no sources, your claim are empty words and POVs. Iberieli (talk) 21:55, 11 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Do you have anything else to contribute other than reverts and ad-hominem arguments? Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 15:30, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Well right now I dont have any time. Too much work and exam preps. However, after series of POV deleting on this article by Mikoyan (removing Sanakoev quotes). I will come back to this article and fully edit it. If I find any sentence unsourced or with invalid source, it will be removed per Neutral point of view. I will review all sources and their background. However, not at this moment, until than this article is disputed and unsourced. Thanks to everyone for your contributions.Iberieli (talk) 16:31, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the opening paragraph
I have changed the opening paragaph because it described what South Ossetia was (an autonomous oblast) and I have changed it to describe what South Ossetia is. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 03:52, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Medieval and early modern period
Ossetians were not under the Mongol rule. Yes, they were pushed out of their homeland, but it doesn't mean that Ossetians were ruled by Mongols. Concerning the territorial entities: Kudar is in the south (what is now South Ossetia). Tualläg is predominantly south of North Ossetia.Taamu (talk) 06:13, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Category "Divided regions"
My proposal is to add category “Divided regions” to the article South Ossetia.Taamu (talk) 13:06, 17 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Why? how is it divided? by whom? when? says who? geographically Georgian Russian border (between North Ossetia-Alania and Georgia's South Ossetia) is divided naturaly by Caucasus mountains. There never have been united, or divided Ossetia as such. If you have references (im not asking specifically UN) from geographical publications or other which indicate that this region is divided, than we can surely include that category. What do you mean by divided? the division in South Ossetia which i see is the Ossetian-separatist controlled territories and Georgian controlled territories, which divide territory of this autonomous oblast into different zones. If you mean this division, than its more clear. Also I dont see any similarities between Kurdistan and South Ossetia :) Also I want to remind you that North and South Korea were united before the civil war, when Ossetia never has been united or divided by anyone. Iberieli (talk) 14:59, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not talking about South Ossetia's zones that are being controlled by Ossetians and Georgians. My point is that because of SO and NO form Ossetia region there is need to add category to all three articles. Ossetia - is a region - consists of 2 parts: SO and NO. Why do you oppose to admit obvious things? Taamu (talk) 10:10, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Because it was never divided or never has been united Taamu. There is a large Chinese community in Vancouver Canada. As I mention in your talk page:: should we label Vancouver article divided region, just because there are many ethnic Chinese on the other side of the ocean from the mainland China? I didnt really get your point so far. I'm not opposing that category because I have stubborn anti-Ossetian bias, on contrary, I love and respect Ossetian people and their ancient culture (and have many friend among them). But so far, I cant find it anywhere in any source which indicates that Ossetia is a divided region just like N and S Korea. Again it was never divided by anyone and never united as a single entity. Iberieli (talk) 17:45, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

POV pushing
Rebecca, cease implementing pro separatist/pro-Russian POVs on the article. By adding Russian as official language and calling the region as ‘Republic” you demonstrate:

1. Russian nationalist POV 2. Promoting Separatist agenda by labelling the region as "Republic" which is not internationally recognized (please respect the notion of international recognition and resolutions of UN, OSCE, and EU council) 3. You don’t have any respect for NPOV and make POV pushes based on your views, claims and un-sourced materials. 4. You are biased against Georgian side

Therefore, please review NPOV policy of Wikipedia and respect the 4 pillars which govern this web site.

I will not tolorate POV pushing for any agenda.

Thanks. Noxchi Borz 17:18, 11 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Please don't make assumptions - I'm an Anglo-Australian not known for being sympathetic towards Russia. The current regime in Tshkinvali, whether rightly or wrongly, calls itself the "Republic of South Ossetia", and the article mentions this accordingly. This makes no astertions concerning whether it should or should not be a republic, and to this extent the article does mention quite clearly that it is internationally unrecognised. It also, as it should, mentions that the disputed territory lies in the Georgian province of Shida Kartli.


 * As for the language issues, the article is not about Shida Kartli. The infobox states that it is the "de facto official languages" - those of the self-proclaimed entity in Tshkinvali, not the official languages of Shida Kartli, which would go in that article. As such, the official languages pertaining to this article are Ossetian and Russian.


 * Kober's edits, on the other hand, are great. He's cleaned up a lot of badly written text, and done so in a relatively neutral manner. Rebecca 04:20, 12 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Rebecca Im sorry, I might have over reacted but the whole article seemed to me as Separatist POV promotion. There is no such thing as Republic of South Ossetia officially and her existence is contradicted by many resolutions of UN, OSCE, etc. I respect and maintain my allegiance to United Nations and her resolutions. It is very important to keep these resolutions effective. You can not have two articles talking about one region or republic. This is redundancy. If you want to be fair and maintain NPOV, there should be one article on Shida Kartli which will have section of De facto regime of S. Ossetian Republic. Being involved in Caucasian affairs at York University I have some background on this subject. I’m ready to co-operate too and make a constructive dialogue, which will help us to create a fair and NPOV article for Wiki readers. I will rv my changes and we can start editing together. I hope Kober can join us. My apologies again. Regards. BTW what do you like about Canadians?:) Noxchi Borz 13:51, 12 May 2006 (UTC)


 * You're getting a couple of things mixed up there. There is verifiably a separatist regime in Tshkinvali that calls itself the Republic of South Ossetia. It is not, however, recognised by the United Nations - and that is why the article mentions quite prominently that it is in fact an unrecognised regime.


 * We can and do have many articles concerning overlapping regions (c.f. Basque Country, Kurdistan), and this instance is a prime example of why. Shida Kartli and South Ossetia do not cover the same territory, and it would be taking a pro-Georgian perspective to merge the two. Rather, it is quite possible to have a perfectly neutral article discussing the South Ossetian situation, and a much less controversial article on Shida Kartli discussing the broader Georgian province. Rebecca 03:04, 13 May 2006 (UTC)


 * No objections to that. Thanks a lot Rebecca for your input. All the best. Noxchi Borz 18:47, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


 * What a breakaway territory calls itself and what it is considered de jure are two different things. One is wishful thinking, one is fact. The intro text about it being a "republic" cannot stay. &mdash; Pēters J. Vecrumba 00:25, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Calling it a "breakaway republic" is already a POV issue - can we establish that it is really a republic? We're talking about a "region" with 70,000 people in it - smaller than many American suburbs, though more than twice the population of San Marino.  I'm not sure what a good nomenclature would be, perhaps "breakaway province" - though that is also misleading because most of the province/region/mkhare is not South Ossetia.  The last official designation was by Georgia, and they are the District of Java, District of Kareli, City of Tskhinvali and Municipality of Java.  I think the NPOV way to describe it would be the last internationally recognized name, which is the Georgian name.  Including context is also necessary.  Thanks to everyone for putting in good, fast work on this article.  164.67.237.253 (talk) 23:11, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Redirect
Could someone who knows organise the redirects between Samachablo and Takhinvali? I'd do it but not sure if this is true, but if the Georgian Govt use those terms, surely... "But Georgia rejects even the name, South Ossetia, preferring to call it by the ancient name of Samachablo, or Tskhinvali, after its main city." (BBC) Hrcolyer (talk) 16:42, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

About map scales
A map that indicates its scale only as a ratio, as does the first map here (1:570 000) indicates nothing anymore once it's not on paper. A physical scale, as on the second map, is the only tool that, er, scales. Phranger (talk) 17:49, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Infowar
Right now this article is a part of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.84.99.115 (talk) 20:11, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

THis article completely lacks credibility. Thousands of civilians killed? Where are the independent reports? Hadn't seen any false stuff in Wikipedia until today. ..

The Declaration
The declaration of Arbroath of 1320 states that the Scots came to Scotland from Greater Scythia: "Most Holy Father and Lord, we know and from the chronicles and books of the ancients we find that among other famous nations our own, the Scots, has been graced with widespread renown. They journeyed from Greater Scythia by way of the Tyrrhenian Sea and the Pillars of Hercules, and dwelt for a long course of time in Spain among the most savage tribes, but nowhere could they be subdued by any race, however barbarous. Thence they came, twelve hundred years after the people of Israel crossed the Red Sea, to their home in the west where they still live today. The Britons they first drove out, the Picts they utterly destroyed, and, even though very often assailed by the Norwegians, the Danes and the English, they took possession of that home with many victories and untold efforts; and, as the historians of old time bear witness, they have held it free of all bondage ever since. In their kingdom there have reigned one hundred and thirteen kings of their own royal stock, the line unbroken a single foreigner." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.148.100.127 (talk) 07:21, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Economist article link
Don`t you think the style of Economist is a bit out of place here? All this american "enjoy the fruits of your new post-soviet freedom" crap is quite irrelevant to the actual way of perception of former Soviet bloc people. The articles in the Georgia and Caucasus section are all superbly written and after I clicked on that link the text was really irritating. It`s just too gullible. Any arguments against removing it? Koliokolio 19:38, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes. It's a detailed and interesting article, and removing links because you disagree with them is not on. Ambi 00:33, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Well the Economist is American propaganda - but what is Wikipedia's policy re: POV links? Why not add some other POV link? ` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Canuckistani (talk • contribs) 16:03, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Unconfirmed casualty reports
"During the first day of military actions Georgia forces killed 1400 civilians and 15 Russian peacemakers by heavy artillery, aircraft and rifle-gun fire. In response, Russian forces moved into South Ossetia and began combat operations against Georgian military forces."

The 1400 casualty number has not and cannot (at this time) be independently verified. In fact no news agency really knows what actually led to open hostilities, this just happened today and apparently someone here isn't sticking to the facts as they are, at this time. I smell another biased article. --Kfedup (talk) 05:39, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

As of 8/9 12:40pm EST, neither NPR nor the AP has been able to confirm the number of casulaties. If there is a news source reporting that 1400 civilans were killed, there really should be a reference. The number of peacekeepers killed comes from the Russian government and if they provided the number of civilians, that really should be noted, since Russia is hardly a disinterested party. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.228.200.71 (talk) 16:44, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

The number 1400 comes from the separatists. I don't see a single reason why the number including the source shoudn't be on this page. The guys who keep deleting it obviously wish to hush up that it's not that black and white as they see it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kephalonikos (talk • contribs) 14:29, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Pronounciation?
I've for some reason always pronounced the word "O-setty-ah". Tonight I heard someone pronounce it "O-seechy-ah." Which is correct? --Golbez (talk) 19:50, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Some discussion at Talk:Ossetia —KCinDC (talk) 21:15, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Salvation_Union_of_South_Ossetia nominated for deletion
If you have something to add to this deletion discussion, please add it here. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 21:09, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

yes, as regards "salvation union of south ossetia) to kokoity. what the ? is "to kokoity" Mmuldoor (talk) 07:09, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

mistake in 'Political Status'
The authors obviosuly confuse 'The Council of the European Union' with the 'Council of Europe'. Only the latter actually does exist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by David joshua (talk • contribs) 15:02, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

early history
I think this article needs a good deal more background. What is the evidence for associating the Ossetians with the Alans? What sort of language do they have? Which branch of the Christian (Orthodox) church do they belong to? What was the relationship between the South Ossetians and the Georgians before Russian annexation, and did it change over time? What were their traditional legal structures? What have been the changes in the settlement boundaries of the South Ossetians over time as recognised by neighbouring peoples? Is there a Georgian ethnic minority in South Ossetia, and are there South Ossetians elsewhere? Deipnosophista (talk) 16:59, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Agree to above, but when you add something here from Professor level source of the BSE nonsense of the history of Irons, it is removed at ones by one hot head, who do not tolerate anything which goes againsts of his / her opinions which seems to be as in the good old communist times the absolute truth. Russian offical history claims the Irons (Ossets) are of Iranian origin, but the Türkic sources prove that they are not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.113.116.165 (talk) 17:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Map of control
Article contains this map that show Georgian-controled areas in South Ossetia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:SO2.jpg I understand that this map show pre-war situation, but article should be updated with info about post-war situation on the ground. Does anybody have information about this? Are Georgians in control of any part of South Ossetia after this war? 81.18.58.234 (talk) 21:27, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It's far too early to say. Let's wait a few days and see what new information is released. -- ChrisO (talk) 21:39, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, but at least, description "Areas claimed to be controlled by the Georgian government are colored grey" should be changed into "Areas claimed to be controlled by the Georgian government before 2008 South Ossetian war are colored grey". 81.18.58.234 (talk) 09:40, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I think we have answer now: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8e/Georgia-War-2008-08-11.jpg 81.18.58.234 (talk) 09:49, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I've moved the map further down and changed the caption to: "Hatched shading shows Georgian-controlled areas in South Ossetia in June 2007 (according to Tbilisi, Georgia)." Khoikhoi 20:41, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

independence
this article states the country declared independence, when the BBC stated that to Saakashvili he was adamant that South Ossetia did not declare independence, but rather declared itself as part of Russia. It hardly sounds unrealistic, so can someone find a reliable source for this either way?- JLogant: 10:15, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


 * To quote from "The Foreign Policy of Russia: Changing Systems, Enduring Interests", In August 1990 the Abkhazian Supreme Soviet declared its independence (at the same time as South Ossetia). Khoikhoi 20:40, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments - The Introduction - Last Paragraph
From the introduction: "North Ossetia (currently part of Russia), and South Ossetia (currently part of Georgia) The south want to be part of Russia and there Federal government won't let them. So the Federal government went to war with the state army of South Ossetia. Russia seen this and also claim that the south should be part of Russia and sent there own troops to stop the Georgia government from invading the State."

Though I am unsure of the facts of this paragraph, I think the professionalism and correctness of it should probably be fixed, especially since it's the opening section, and a locked topic.

Essington (talk) 10:14, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Fixed. Khoikhoi 02:59, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

POV Map
The POV map which has been incerted by Russian User "BestAlex" is unacceptable for this article due to its POV content. He intentionaly changed the city names from Tskhinvali to Tskhinval, Znauri to Znaur, and even inserted Russian version of the name for Akhalgori. None of these names are official or in english. We need neutral users like Chris0 (who already created NPOV map but was taken by Russian user and modified to suit his POV and of his President in Moscow) to insert the NPOV map which does not chop the "i" from the names of the cities and changes it into Russified version. Iberieli (talk) 14:22, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Understood now. Yes, all the mainstream sources, e.g. UN maps and other relatively objective sources, appear to use the established names such as Tskhinvali and not Tskhinval. Thanks for explaining. ... Kenosis (talk) 16:37, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Intro
The intro should probably mention the 2008 South Ossetia war instead of having a link to it at the top of the page. If not, then we should remove/update the following:

"Georgia has retained control over parts of the region's eastern and southern districts where it created, in April 2007, a Provisional Administrative Entity of South Ossetia  headed by ethnic Ossetians (former members of the separatist government) under the leadership of Dmitry Sanakoev which would negotiate with central Georgian authorities regarding its final status and conflict resolution."

In particular, the first sentence ("Georgia has retained control over parts of the region's eastern and southern districts where it created") needs to be updated. AFAIK, Georgia does not have any control over any part of South Ossetia. In addition, the current status of the Provisional Administrative Entity of South Ossetia needs to be mentioned. Khoikhoi 03:02, 16 August 2008 (UTC)


 * There is no reason to spill the current state of the conflict into the intro. The intro is not the place for observing Russian troops control one third of Georgian territory and burned Georgia's coast guard fleet, for example, either. The link is the correct solution. —PētersV (talk) 15:48, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
 * P.S. I put in a notation which addresses your concern without otherwise changing the content, hope you agree. —PētersV (talk) 15:56, 16 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks, but that's not quite what I meant. I meant that the current status of the Provisional Administrative Entity of South Ossetia should be mentioned, whether is still exists, etc. The readers of this article will probably want to know this. If not then we can remove the whole paragraph and have this covered further down in the article. Khoikhoi 20:13, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I've reorganized a bit, moved some of the intro further down, as Georgia no longer has control over part of South Ossetia's eastern and southern districts. South Ossetian separatist troops also appear to have control of the town of Kurta (see ), the residence of Dmitry Sanakoyev according to his article. Khoikhoi 04:40, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

2008 war section
208 war section is unbalanced and does not present Georgian version of events, just Putins quotes are used and not more than that. Therefore, it has POV problems. Hence, the tag. Iberieli (talk) 14:26, 17 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Please cite sources for 2008 census figures. Grandmaster (talk) 05:58, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Here's a source on the population of the region at various times (in Russian): Grandmaster (talk) 07:04, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Confused sentence in lead paragraph
This sentence in the locked article's lead graf needs changing: The independence has not been diplomatically recognized by any member of the United Nations except former Soviet nations, – which continues to regard South Ossetia as part of Georgia. I suppose it was intended to say that the UN continues to regard, etc., so a new sentence should begin after nations: "The UN which ," etc. This can be done without waiting for a resolution on whether "former Soviet nations" have recognized South Ossetia as independent. -- 68.220.194.63 (talk) 14:20, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The "except former Soviet nations" bit was unsourced; I've removed it. Khoikhoi 20:36, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure which countries have formally recognized South Ossetian independence, but Russia has begun the process. From the New York Times, August 10, 2008, in an article by James Traub, "Taunting the Bear:"
 * "Soon afterwards [after the US and EU recognized Kosvo's independence], the Russian Duma held hearings on recognition of Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Transnistria, a pro-Russian breakaway republic in Moldova. Moscow argued that the West's logic on Kosovo should apply as well to these ethnic communities seeking to free themselves from the control of a hostile state. And then, in mid-April, Mr. Putin held out the possibility of recognition for the breakaway republics."
 * Whether Russia now officially recognizes South Ossetia or not, I'm not sure. It will likely do so soon.
 * --Gregor Samsa (talk) 21:00, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Indeed, also see . Khoikhoi 03:40, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Interesting new info: Триалетская Осетия
I just found and interesting map: and article:, both refering to territory named "Триалетская Осетия". Since I do not understand Russian very well, could somebody with good knowledge of Russian to translate this text and perhaps we can have new Wiki article about Триалетская Осетия? 81.18.62.141 (talk) 15:58, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It's a pity he doesn't quote his sources... It's well known that Ossetians lived not only in South Ossetia but also in Trialeti - see this map from CIA world book, for example. However many of them left Georgia in 1991-1992 due to the conflict in SO - "Approximately 100,000 ethnic Ossetians fled Georgia [proper] and South Ossetia" (HRW report). There were 94 thousand Ossetians in Georgia proper (without South Ossetia) in 1979 and about 38 thousand in 2002(Census results). Alæxis¿question? 16:29, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * However, Ossetians weren't a majority there (unlike in SO) - in no district of Georgian proper they accounted for more than 20%. Alæxis¿question? 16:37, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, maybe more about Триалетская Осетия could be found in some of these pages: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%D0%A2%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D1%82%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F+%D0%9E%D1%81%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%8F&btnG=Search My native language is Serbian and therefore I am able to understand basic meaning of Russian texts, but I do not understand these texts good enough to translate them into English, so I think somebody with good knowledge of Russian should translate them for English Wikipedia. Anyway, the title of our new article would be something like Trialetian Ossetia? 81.18.62.141 (talk) 16:36, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, most of these links are not even remotely scholar. Currently I know of no reliable sources to begin writing such an article with. Alæxis¿question? 16:45, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Comment
I'd like to know where the census information came from? Right now it is unsubstantiated - could be any old data. And since Georgians claim that Russians seed these areas (S. Ossetia and Abkhesia) with their own citizens accurate demographic data is an imperative. If someone doesn't find a bibliographic reference to that census data - I will remove it. ` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Canuckistani (talk • contribs) 15:55, 10 August 2008 (UTC) Canuckistani

Double standards: Kosovo and South Ossetia, any difference? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.151.71.18 (talk) 15:30, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

This country has not been recognized as independent by any other nations, yet it's been given as an entry as a separate country. Also, the declaration of its indpenence is listed as coming in 1944. Also, the map shown is that of Iceland, although this region is in Russia. Moncrief, 7 Mar 2004

The Iceland stuff want remain. I just use it when adding the tables to the unrecognized countries. South Ossetia is at independent as Chechnya or her East African counterpart Somaliland. They have succesfully fought the goverment of Georgia and that gives there decleration of independence some truth. She has fought a civil war and was not demolished and thats why her "independence" holds water. Vital Component, 7 mar 2004 3:40 pm U.S. Eastern Standard Time.


 * I can't see the harm in having the table there. It's a defacto state, and I don't think a table specifies it as an independent country - especially when it says "Recognition - None". Perhaps recognition could be linked to an article on international recognition of states. Ambivalenthysteria 22:18, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)


 * It makes it pretty clear that the country isn't yet recognized by other countries, and like the previous poster said, its de facto independence is valid. I don't myself think that recognition is in the cards but as long as the situation remains like this I think that they deserve the box that widely recognized countries get.


 * The article is well-written, and remarkably neutral for a subject that might otherwise be really hot, so...my compliments to the authors.Adam Faanes 21:01, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)

South Ossetia has de facto recognition but regardless of how well they are known. It appears that Ossetians have won the conflict and i fell to see the point in widtholding recognition when South Ossetia won the conflict. Why claim what you cant control if you cant control what you claim? I think South Ossetia is deserving of a box .Vital component 05-19-2004 4:40 AM (EST)


 * Personal opinions are frankly irrelevant here - South Ossetia is not a recognised independent state. However, I agree that it deserves an infobox, as a national subentity - I think the current box is fine. -- ChrisO 10:20, 20 May 2004 (UTC)

South Ossetia is not an independent state and will not be for a couple of reasons: --128.174.155.119
 * First of all, Russian supported separatist government in Tskhinvali does not ask for independence, instead they want to become a part of Russia;
 * And, second, it is a historical Georgian territory, still partially populated by ethnic Georgians and controlled by the Georgian government. Therefore, for Russians to annex South Ossetia, they may have to ethnically cleanse the remaining Georgian population there, which, hopefully, the international community will not allow them to do so, nor the current Georgian government will surrender without putting up a fight like they did in 1991 after Yeltsin’s threats to bomb Tbilisi.


 * That doesn't really matter in the context of a discussion that seems to be based around whether South Ossetia is worthy of an article or not. DMcMPO11AAUK/Talk/Contribs 13:46, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Does anyone kno the political parties of the presidents kokoity or Chibirov or Torez Kulumbegov or Znaur Nikolayevich Gassiyev ? ANY info on the latter two would be nice..Vital component
 * Kokoity leads the Unity Party, and Gassiyev belongs to it. Kulumbegov led the South Ossetian Popular Front.  I don't think that Chibirov had a party, as such. --Jonathan Kulick

Hi ChrisO, Could you please reference the source of "In April 1922, following fierce fighting between White Russian and Soviet forces the "South Ossetian Autonomous Oblast" (i.e. district) was formed." Something wrong there in terms of the timeline. Also, "fierce" sounds to me like POV and translation from embellished Russian (Soviet) textbooks. Kober's formulation seems more logical and clear to me as I remember Ossietians got an autonomy status thanks to a red army installed Bolshevik government in Tbilisi, in particular the guy named Sergo Orjonikidze. They might have supported Reds against Whites, and that eventually helped them to lobby for an autonomy status like in the case of Lakoba and Abkhazians, but again they could not achieve an autonomous district status without Bolsheviks sitting in Tbilisi. I'd suggest to remove the reference to "fierce fighting" and have a neutral formulation - In April 1922 South Ossetian Autonomous Oblast was formed. Thanks, bjs. thanks, bjs

Population numbers discrepancy We see theses sames numbers reappear from publication to publication, yet no one is ever surprised that the announced number of ethnic Ossetians who fled the initial conflict in 1991-1992 is (far) superior to the total Ossetian population in 1989. This should be corrected once and for all with a phrasing such as "tens of thousands of ethnic Ossetian (...)" Condor —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.69.91.101 (talk) 09:46, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Citations used to justify Russian aggression against Georgian territory and its military cannot be factually verified since they are only in Russian. When discussing "reports" of Russian deaths which preceeded the Russian invasion, please use reputable news sources written in English, since Wikipedia is an English based site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.217.42.91 (talk) 22:51, 8 August 2008 (UTC) Wikipedia pretends to reflect not the truth (that is opinion), but what is accepted as that. As it is, I find it acceptable to include references in russian, as most references in english will only reflect the opinion of western media, witch is the other part fo the dispute. In order to be balanced, russian sources are a "must". The pravda website has references in english (as balanced as NBC ;) ), but I really can't find that site to be reasonable, and quality should be the priority.

Aitorbk (talk) 13:08, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Sanakoev
I don't see how the info was "removed", it was just moved into a different section. See the third paragraph from the "Political status" section:

"In April 2007, a 'Provisional Administrative Entity of South Ossetia'  headed by ethnic Ossetians (former members of the separatist government) under the leadership of Dmitry Sanakoyev, was created by Georgia, which had retained control over part of South Ossetia's eastern and southern districts. This provisional administration would negotiate with central Georgian authorities regarding its final status and conflict resolution. On May 10, 2007, Sanakoyev was appointed by the President of Georgia as the Head of South Ossetian Provisional Administrative Entity."

Khoikhoi 03:12, 26 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Maybe Ibirieli did a search for "Sanakoev" and didn't find the duplication because it uses "Sanakoyev". —KCinDC (talk) 03:44, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Georgia has never been annexed by Russia!
To the best of my knowledge, in 1801, both Georgia and South Ossetia joined Russian Empire voluntarily, seeking protection from Ottoman Empire. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.86.161.246 (talk) 03:46, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The situation is rather complex here. Different parts of Georgia (Kartli-Kakheti, Imereti, Guria and Mingrelia, Samtskhe-Javakheti, Ajaria) became parts of Russian Empire in very different ways. Alæxis¿question? 06:23, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Aitorbk (talk) 13:04, 27 August 2008 (UTC) I fully agree: it is complex. Most oarts were annexed by force, and by force I mean not only an armed invasion, but a huge army near your borders.. and "suggestions". In fact, the part of Georgia that was still not under otoman control was annexed against its will. Aitorbk (talk) 13:04, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Georgian controlled areas
What is the current situation as regards those areas of South Ossetia that have been under Georgian control? Were these taken back by S. Ossetians or does Georgia still hold control? There is some info about the Upper Abkhazia, where the Abkhazians are now in charge.Wikiturk (talk) 05:05, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * As far as I know, S.Ossetians are controling the major part of SO, even the Georgian-populated villages to the North of Tskhinval. I'm not sure about Leningori area (East of SO). Taamu (talk) 06:00, 26 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The Georgian-populated villages to the north of Tskhinvali have ceased to exit as the separatists have self-admittedly burned them to the ground "to make sure that the Georgians will never return". As for the Akhalgori district, this is currently divided between the opposing factions and as far as I know from locals the separatist militias have failed to gain a foothold there although 4 or 5 Russian APCs are still there and the local brewery was razed to the ground yeasterday.--KoberTalk 06:08, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Akhalgori itself seems to be under SO control . Alæxis¿question? 06:12, 26 August 2008 (UTC)


 * ...but the SO control over it seems to be nominal. Unlike other Georgian areas, it has not yet been ethnically cleansed and people are largely unaffected. I presume the reason is the presence of a pro-Georgian Ossetian minority in the town and the administrator appointed by Kokoity has close ties with Georgians. It is a small detachment of Russian hardware that actually exercises control over the roads, but the settlements are largely unaffected although as I have already mentioned a famous local brewery was destroyed yeasterday.--KoberTalk 06:18, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, let's hope the situation won't turn to the worse there.. Alæxis¿question? 06:20, 26 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Hmm... High hopes. --KoberTalk 06:27, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

"I just want to say, here’s the map of South Ossetia, and here’s a town called Akhalgori, and I’ve been told that tonight Russian troops are sweeping through it pushing Georgians out and over the border. It’s ethnic cleansing, creating a homogeneous South Ossetia. That is unacceptable, we can’t accept everything," - Bernard Kouchner.--KoberTalk 15:21, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Recognition
When did Russia formally recognise South Ossetia? There is only one news about this on BBC, which goes as "Russia's parliament has backed a motion urging the president to recognise the independence of Georgia's breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia". So the Parliament has just urged the president to recognise the breakaway region, but there is no mention of official recognition by Moscow.Wikiturk (talk) 19:40, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, you are right. Alæxis¿question? 19:44, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * BBC: Russia recognises Georgian rebels - President's made it official now. - JVG (talk) 14:59, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Samachablo, labeled by russians as South Ossetia can never be independet from Georgia, since it is an integral part of Georgia. Samachablo means property of Machabeli, Georgian Nobelity who owned the land today called S. ossetia. Thousands of Ossetians live in all parts of Georgia peacefully next to Georgians. How is it possible that they cannot do so on the border? You cannot immigrate to the country and later on grab their hunk of land. It is illegal and International law has codified it in many cases Quebeq and Aaland cases among them. International law cannot be undermined especially when the disputed terrtories, in case of both S. ossetia and Abkhazia, contain patchwork of villages. there are few Ossetian villages in Imereti(undisputed Georgian territory) too, which means that cecession is illegal and will be reversed by all means. On a personal note: when Georgians saved Ossetians from Mongols and opened doors to them it did not mean that they cut their peace of land and gave it to the intruders. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.14.241.214 (talk) 06:38, 29 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Nothing was labelled. Back in the Soviet times, there was a South Ossetian autonomous republic, which was part of Georgian SSR. And it was only integrated in Georgia as part of different regions only when Gamsahurdia(sorry if spelling is wrong) came to power and started etnic genocide. This is when major conflict started, and it continues for now.195.182.143.44 (talk) 07:35, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Belarus promise to recognize South Osetia and Abhazia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.193.164.28 (talk) 02:54, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

1500 russian tanks
The article says George attacked Tsinhvali in response to Russia's deployment of 1500 tanks in Northern Georgia. What is the source of the information? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.80.202.203 (talk) 13:45, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The Tie-eater said that there were even (!) 2000 Russian tanks. I belive he confuses it with Battle of Prokhorovka. Taamu (talk) 07:48, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

There is a source (paragraph 7 of Transitions Online, source from BBC Monitoring) that states that 5 battalions of the Russian 58th Army were moved to the north of the Roki Tunnel on 4 August 2008. This is referenced article from source http://www.tol.cz/look/TOL/article.tpl?IdLanguage=1&IdPublication=4&NrIssue=281&NrSection=1&NrArticle=19821 (Talking Through Gritted Teeth. BBC Monitoring, 6 August 2008).Unfortunately the user Taamu has been completely removing this reference stating that the article does not talk about this movement (although it is in paragraph 7), and is not referenced (despite the URL above being cited). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.97.221.19 (talk) 22:12, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

recognition?
"The United Nations, European Union, Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), Council of the European Union, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and most of the countries around the world recognize South Ossetia as part of Georgia. "

Does any nation or treaty organization recongnize South Ossetian independence? Kingturtle (talk) 16:06, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * None that I know of. Maybe Abkhazia. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7549736.stm Hrcolyer (talk) 16:39, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Some unrecognised countries (Abkhazia, Transnistria, Nagorno-Karabakh) recognise South Ossetia, as far as I know. No country recognised by any UN country recognises any of those "countries", though.(212.247.11.156 (talk) 17:15, 10 August 2008 (UTC))

Russia have recognized this coutries. Belarus promise to recognize them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.193.164.28 (talk) 02:50, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

So far only Russia has recognized the independence of South Ossetia, while Belarus and Venezuela have both said that they would at some point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.117.44.104 (talk) 19:50, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

objectivity (lacking)
This article lacks objectivity in that it supports the contention that South Ossetia and Abkhazia are independent states. Below a featured map is the text:

"South Ossetia (purple), Georgia (tan), and Abkhazia (green)."

The wording of this text presupposes that theses areas are not a part of Georgia. I would refer readers to the 1933 Montevideo Convention which supplies the four tests for determining sovereignty. As these areas are not recognized by any state other than Russia, they fail the fourth test of sovereignty.

I removed this POV in the article, and it was promptly removed by user:Kwamikagami with the simple explanation, "no, it is what it is." Surely more debate on this matter is deserved - both as a matter of common courtesy, and as a means of achieving an article which is not simply a soapbox for other's political crusades. 98.218.243.122 (talk) 11:56, 28 August 2008 (UTC)


 * This isn't a crusade, it's simply reality on the ground. These are independent states, and have been for a decade. So for that matter are Transnistria and Somaliland, which no-one recognizes, and, for a few years, Chechnya. (I almost said the main Serbian enclave of Kosovo, but I'm not sure that's not part of Serbia.) This has nothing to do with whether they should be independent. By wording it as "in Georgia", you're claiming they reside in Georgia, which they do not. Maybe you can come up wording that suggests neither that they are independent nor that they are part of Georgia. kwami (talk) 18:11, 28 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I think we're talking past each other. I mentioned the Montevideo Convention which is used by International Relations scholars to ascertain the existence of sovereignty.  South Ossetia fails this test.  Many political divisions have varying degrees of autonomy, yet they are not considered one of the 193 (or so) *recognized* sovereign states.  I'm not interested in what states *should* be considered independent - whether by Russia, the US, or anyone else.  I'm concerned that the article present, as objectively as possible, the realities of the international state system.  The overwhelming consensus is that these areas are within the state of Georgia.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.218.243.122 (talk) 01:55, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

He's right. According to international law, neither regions are States. The idea that these regions are sovereign states should be taken out of the article. This article needs to be objective, and the most objective test of statehood is based upon the Montevideo convention.

Honans (talk) 20:08, 30 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Where does it say that they're sovereign? <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">Khoikhoi 20:09, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Exactly. The map identifies geographical regions, not sovereign states. Having a map like that is equally valid to, in an article on Quebec, having a map that shows "Quebec (purple), New York (green), and Canada (tan)" In know way does that imply that either canadian provinces or american states are sovereign nations. Random  89  23:34, 31 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I think Kwamikagami is confusing autonomous regions with independent states. This is partially due to the language the Russian/separatist side uses to try and frame the debate. There is no question the regions are autonomous, and I believe they were this while under full Georgian control. They have never been internationally-recognised independent states (except in Russian rhetoric). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.21.136.199 (talk) 20:30, 1 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Again, where does the article actually say that south Ossetia and Abkhazia are "internationally-recognised independent states"? <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">Khoikhoi 20:43, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Attaining NPOV
I came to the "South Ossetia" article looking for background to what I read in the news. In one read of the article and discussion page, it seems to me that the difficulty in attaining NPOV stems from the fact that "South Ossetia" is a contested term, used in a contest about the political status of a patch of land and its inhabitants. The contest has historical, linguistic, legal, and other aspects. Wikipedia can't settle the contest--not even the contest regarding the term "South Ossetia". Can it attain NPOV by describing the contest? Tombird (talk) 16:48, 31 August 2008 (UTC)


 * According to OED, Ossetia is "a region of the Central Caucasus partly in Russia and partly in Georgia." According to the BBC, "But Georgia rejects even the name South Ossetia, preferring to call it by the ancient name of Samachablo, or Tskhinvali, after its main city." <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">Khoikhoi 03:07, 2 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Georgian Wikipedia has called it "South Ossetia" since the creation of the article in 2006, and still calls it that today, despite the fact that most of its few edits were made after Aug. 9. kwami (talk) 06:02, 2 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I think the Georgian article is about South Ossetia as a de facto republic, not as a region. Also, I recently found out that the terms SO and Samachablo cannot be used interchangeably. SO is apparently larger than Samachablo which includes a dozen or so villages. There were several other Georgian princedoms which now make up SO, but Samachablo was incorrectly generalized to refer to the whole SO early in the 1990s. <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">Khoikhoi 10:06, 2 September 2008 (UTC)


 * the term "South Ossetia" reentered the official usage after Saakashvili came to power in 2004 and promised to give the Ossetians autonomy. It is used interchangeably with the Tskhinvali region, but the pro-Georgian Ossetian administration is definitely called the Provisional Administration of South Ossetia which was legitimzed by the Parliament of Georgia in 2007. I think SO is a valid political term regardless of its historical correctness.--KoberTalk 10:17, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Split article?
On other breakaway country issues, Wikipedia often divides the article so as to avoid POV. Examples of this include:
 * Ireland/Republic of Ireland/Northern Ireland
 * Taiwan/Republic of China/Taiwan Province, People's Republic of China
 * Nagorno-Karabakh/Nagorno-Karabakh Republic

It would be editorially prudent for us to apply the same precedent here. By distinguishing between the geographic region of South Ossetia and the proclaimed Republic of South Ossetia, we can avoid any determination one way or another as to whether or not South Ossetia is an independent nation, a rebellious province or whatever else POV warriors may wish to call it. This outcome has worked extremely well in the other instances the community has implemented it. It would be the responsible NPOV choice to make for this article as well. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 21:03, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Not a good idea for the same reasons its not a good idea to split Abkhazia, and also because we already have a Samachablo article. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 02:21, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Taiwan is not exactly break away, as it never broke away from anything. The government of the Peoples republic of china never had control over Taiwan, so how can it have broken away from something which never controlled it?Guitar3000 (talk) 16:56, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Edit: moved text to correct section (above). Mu apologies 203.97.221.19 (talk) 00:58, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: South Ossetia as a part of Russia and the Soviet Union (border changes)
Why did Georgia change the administrative borders / boundaries when the former South Ossetian Autonomous Oblast ceased to exist? Was is it a divide and rule policy? Whatever the reason, surely it deserves some explanation in the text (if I haven't missed it). A series of maps showing administrative changes and comparing them with a map of the declared republic and perhaps even ethnicity maps would add significant information. Apalomita (talk) 08:19, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't "Хуссар" be Romanized as "Hussar" rather than "Xussar"?
ProudPrimate (talk) 02:48, 5 September 2008 (UTC) or preferably as Khussar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phil Ian Manning (talk • contribs) 23:29, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I was wondering about that too. With the Russian transliteration used in English Wikipedia, it would be "Khussar", which is what this article had until recently, but then it's not Russian. I don't know if there's a transliteration method that's both usable for Ossetic and compatible with the one being used for Russian. That's because Ossetic has more phonemes, and the digraphs with "h" seem to usually be used for something else in Ossetic transliterations — so "kh" would be used for къ, not х. But there might be another way to transliterate the Cyrillic digraphs that would be compatible. All I know about Ossetic is what I've found on the web. —KCinDC (talk) 03:28, 6 September 2008 (UTC)


 * When Ossete was written in the Latin alphabet, this sound was <x>. That's also seen in some current transcriptions. The letter <h> was used for a sound closer to French R, and <kh> for ejective [k’]. kwami (talk) 04:36, 6 September 2008 (UTC)


 * "Celts" sounds like "k..." right? So, I guess it's a matter of liking. But if you want to give a romanized equivalent of the word, I think it should be "Hussar". Taamu (talk) 14:01, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

state, republic, country; de facto, de jure
Pace our edit warrior, a republic is not "smaller than" a state. Both words are accurate, but republic is more precise. A "country", on the other hand, does not entail a govt., which SO has. Ajaria is a country. SO is something more than that.

By saying SO is de jure independent, we're saying it is not de facto independent, which it is. We could also argue that SO is a de jure part of Georgia, so saying it is "de jure independent", besides being misinformative, is also POV. I think "SO is a de facto republic" is well worded, though maybe someone can suggest something better here? kwami (talk) 17:35, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Breakaway territory, effectively independent, self-administered with overt Russian assistance and intervention in affairs predating current military conflict with Georgia. (For example, Russian passports.) 'De jure' part of Georgia.
 * None of the frozen conflict zone territories are countries. SO does not have enough relations or recognition to be 'de facto' anything as a state. More than this is POV. —PētersV (talk) 23:09, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Recognition has nothing to do with being de facto independent. Almost all of the conflict zones are countries. That has nothing to do with independence. kwami (talk) 23:35, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Russias role
Does not Russia recognize South Ossetia? --Oddeivind (talk) 18:10, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Nope, not that I'm aware. They are concerned that if they recognized THIS breakaway republic, it would be seen as hypocritical considering their dislike of the independence of Kosovo, and people would say, what about Chechnya? So, much like Armenia not officially recognizing Nagorno-Karabakh, wider geopolitical considerations rule out recognition (at this point). --Golbez (talk) 22:31, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * So, what is Russias excuse for invading South Ossetia? This means that they in fact invade what they themselves consider Georgian territory. --Oddeivind (talk) 09:17, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Their excuse is in the article - protecting Russian nationals. --Golbez (talk) 21:04, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It seems that Russia has decided to be hypocritical after all... --Oddeivind (talk) 17:22, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The excuse is Georgia's breaking a ceasefire, 14 hours salvo missile bombardment of Tskhinvali, which was reported by both HRW and Amnesty International, and killing 12 Russian peacekeepers with UN mandate as well as hundreds of civilians (SO authorities say up to 2000) during one night on 08.08.08, when the Olympic games began. This is not quite an excuse, a reason. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.202.113.34 (talk) 03:33, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

2008 War
This section under the 1989-2008 conflicts is very biased towards the Russians, it contains no information about the Russians continued advance even though Georgia has withdrawn from South Ossetia and their refusal to accept any peace treaty until the Russian army has "completed its mission". Request an objective rewrite. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pongley (talk • contribs) 20:07, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Mobody talks about huge crme by russian troups on Georgian teritory. The damage that they've done and killed and kidnaped people! And that the war is not only on teritory of defakto south ossetia it's in wole georgia! Main cityes are invased by russians. and that it's a danger for the whole world   —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dedisnato (talk • contribs) 13:36, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

So what? This is real war, not play video game. You should blame Mikheil Saakashvili, poor Georgia people pay the price. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.145.115.3 (talk) 19:54, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

And when Georgia invaded South Ossetia, and killed hundreds civilians and UN mandate peacekeepers in one night, it was not a threat, only some inconveniense, right? You better discuss your government propaganda with some fellow Georgians... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.202.113.34 (talk) 03:38, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Readability: language, style, and structure cleanup
It seems to me that, under the storm of (very important) factual discussions, readability of the article has been neglected. Would somebody mind taking a pass on language, style, and structure cleanup? E.g., even the first paragraph of the text body: 'The United Nations, European Union, Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), Council of the European Union, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and most other countries in the world recognize South Ossetia as part of Georgia. However, the de facto republic governed by the secessionist government held a second independence referendum[12] on 12 November 2006, after its first referendum in 1992 was not recognized by the international community as valid.' Two sentences are not parallel and not contrasting but are connected with "However". In the second sentence, two thoughts are artificially joined in one sentnce with the second part looking like a POV response to the first part. ...Etc etc Speaking fish 14:27, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Video
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=856_121874073624.36.56.26 (talk) 04:41, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

A part of Georgia
South Ossetia and Abhazia as legally within Georgia and it should say so. The international community (union of democratic states) all recognize the presence of these lands within Georgia. They were part of the Georgian socialist republic and Georgia had the right to break away from Russia. I am sick to death of hearing comparisons with Kosovo as there can be none. Kosovo was invaded by the Serbian army back in the 1980s with the hope of Milosevic creating Greater Serbia but it otherwise had the same rights as the other Yugoslav republics. That is the reason why the international community recognizes Kosovo. Until democratic states such as the UK, the US, Australia, France and Germany formally recognize South Ossetia and Abhazia and Transdinister, please all refrain from putting any form of independent on the article, it is becoming vandalism. Billy Bollox (talk) 11:32, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Furthermore, Kosovo was the scene of horrific genocide and ethnic cleansing carried out by Greater Serbia militiamen. I bet nobody who calls Ossetia independent saw the millions of innocent civilians flung out of their homes followed by seeing their houses burnt in front of their eyes before others were killed and so on. Why? Because they were Albanian. Kosovo had a right to be independent. In Ossetia and Abhazia, it was the ethnic Georgians who were victims of atrocity thanks to Russian imperialists, communists and local traitors. Billy Bollox (talk) 11:35, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It's already written in the intro that most of the countries consider Abkhazia & SO as parts of Georgia. Alæxis¿question? 11:46, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Billy Bollox, even if you are ...sick to death of hearing comparisons with Kosovo... there is a big connection between Kosovo's and SO's precedents. Please also note that SO is de facto independent and you cannot do anything about it, except one thing - vandalising. Taamu (talk) 13:08, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Billy Bollox, even if you are ...sick to death of hearing comparisons with Kosovo... wikipedia has it's rules forbidding soapboxing.-- TheFE ARgod (Ч) 12:10, 21 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Billy Bollox, you forget to mention that about 55,000 Ossetians were driven from Georgia proper in the 1991 conflict and they have never been able to return. So Georgia did commit ethnic cleansing. If you consider the percentage of the Ossetian population involved and the fact that they haven't been able to return for 17 years you could well argue that the Georgians did worse than the Serbs.Roffel (talk) 12:25, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Almost every nation considers South Ossetia to be part of Georgia. Surely the flag displayed on this Wikipedia article should be the flag of Georgia. Even given that the flag displayed is recognised as that of the Georgian autonomous republic of South Ossetia, shouldn't Wikipedia at least display two flags, the Georgian national flag alongside the regional flag? Graemedavis (talk) 22:43, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

South Ossetia and Kosovo are exactly the same, with 90% similarities. Kosovo is somewhat independent, i see no reason why S.O. shouldn't be any different. I understand the Georgian anger over the issue.24.36.56.26 (talk) 04:37, 16 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Agreed here, but while we're at it, does the need to mention every recognition seem important? It is mentioned elsewhere. Obviously the first is important, especially when more isolated. But see kosovo, the infobox doesn't mention any recognition, only declared independence. Lihaas (talk) 10:33, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Same starting descripton as Kosovo
Am i the only person here who thinks that the introduction to S.O and Kosovo should be the same? They are both partially recognised, Defacto independant nations.

Unless there are any objections, I will update accordingly in 7 days. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.68.51.2 (talk) 14:30, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I wanted to suggest just that. Should stem the incessant lead revert warring somewhat. --Illythr (talk) 17:07, 17 November 2008 (UTC)


 * My hands go up too. They are much the same. If one can be an indep. country so can the other. I tried doing the same on Abkhazia too. Lihaas (talk) 17:19, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Kosovo and the frozen conflict zone "states", South Ossetia, Transnistria in particular, are in no way equivalent. The dynamics in Abkhazia are somewhat different where Russian provocation and support are concerned, but neither is Abkhazia like Kosovo. PētersV (talk) 04:25, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * This discussion concerns the political status of these entities - they all (Northern Cyprus, Kosovo, Abkhasia, South Ossetia) are self-declared non-UN member states that have been recognized by at least one UN member, but not the majority of them. That is all that matters for the first few intro sentences. This is not a call to delete the differences between them, only to standardize the (first part of the) intro for states with the same political status. --Illythr (talk) 14:28, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Alleged NPOVification
The following edit was reverted for being NPOV. I don't want to get into an edit war, so I will wait for consensus here. But see the above conversation, too quote me "one can be an indep. country so can the other." South Ossetia's independence has been acknowledged and recognized, as per kosovo, and regardless of the fact whether it is liked or not, the truth is reality.

Elsewhere, there are many regimes, states and non-state actors who don't like other regimes, but the reality stays. kosovo has become indep and recognized, even though Serbia and Russia don't want it. I'm sure the usa would like to see an Iran governed by the shah, but that is not the reality and they work their interests through the swiss embassy on Tehran. The point is, under what grounds should Wikipedia allow South Ossetia to be "within georgia?" Lihaas (talk) 17:18, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * This is a valid POV as well, as most countries do consider S Oss part of Georgia. I think the lead from Kosovo would fit well here, first mentioning is as a disputed region in the South Caucasus, then that it's under control of the Rep of S Oss, then its non-recognition by Georgia, eventually clarifying the recognition status. --Illythr (talk) 18:40, 17 November 2008 (UTC)


 * That's fine, i agree with on the consideration that kosovo has to have the same too. neither is kosovo recognized by most states. Lihaas (talk) 23:35, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Eh, "independent republic...located in Georgia" kinda sucks. I still think the Kosovo formulation would be better here. Actually, I can understand Kober's edit - this version underrepresents the Georgian POV in the lead by not mentioning that, first of all, Georgia considers S Oss to be its constituent part. The lead style of the Kosovo article would address that. --Illythr (talk) 01:28, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with you here. I was trying to [poorly (I admit)] to balance a POV. But kober's edit was a good one to balance with the precedent set by kosovo.
 * I would also like to add a further balance in the georgian favour. (and to show i'm not some pure Russified propogandist) As kosovo has both it's independent infobox and one as a constituent part of Serbia, South Ossetia can have a regional infobox as part of georgia, we can tag it on below this this so as to cover both perspectives. (better than having 2 pages for south ossetia) Though, I don't know if there is one for georgian provinces. Lihaas (talk) 03:36, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * This is a problem, because, AFAIK, there is no entity (even roughly) equivalent to South Ossetia in Georgian law. Its territory is divided between 4 (?) regional districts and I can't think of a way of gathering them into one infobox. Otherwise, I guess the "multiple infobox" solution is probably the most neutral. --Illythr (talk) 13:41, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know about the georgian details, but what this oblast the lead talks about. Isn't there something in that regard within georgia? some sort of unit within (As recognized by tbilisi). Lihaas (talk) 03:09, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * This was the part of the Georgian SSR that was dissolved along with it. There are some informal Georgian names for the territory, like Samachablo. I think "Tskhinvali Region" is also a loose official reference to S Oss, but am not sure about its exact meaning. --Illythr (talk) 14:32, 28 November 2008 (UTC)


 * That's correct. "Oblast" - is a territorial unit. Usually associated with a city. "Region" seems like the closest translation. I think "South Ossetian Autonomous Region" would be valid here. -- 91.77.55.44 (talk) 12:34, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

...So I went ahead and made the first paragraph a bit closer to the one in the Kosovo article. --Illythr (talk) 21:50, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Recognition Issue
I consider the need to reflect that there are many countries that have taken a nuetral position in regard to recognition, and that non recogition does not imply support for Georgia's territorial clam on the region. There are some countries that have clearly supported S.Ossetia's territorial and political independence but have not opened diplomatic relations by way of embassies. The article does not reflect this. Tommyxx (talk) 14:30, 5 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Sounds good, Tommyxx. Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 10:27, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

This article should stay as it opens up a ligitimate question on independence. If Russia says that S. Ossetia and Abkhazia should be recognized on the basis of the Kosovo question, then they must also recognize the independence of Chechnya, Dagastan or others that wish to leave the Russian Federation including North Ossetia, so as long as the break up of Russia still continues this really is a more important article of history if nothing else, as it also effects other states that would like to seperate from their parent countries as well as an arguement for the retention of breakaway states. so I would have to agree with tommyxx on this issue of recognition but state that it is more important than anyone realizes. User:Utahdragon Utahdragon (talk) 06:58, 12 January 2009 (UTC)


 * you are tottally and utterly misinformed: Russia never stated that "S. Ossetia and Abkhazia should be recognized on the basis of the Kosovo question" Their reason for recognition is the protection of citizens. Secondly, there is a legal precedent, giving S.ossetia&abkhazia a right to independence in the soviet union which you ignore(they voted to remain in the sovite union, after georgia declared independence, so when th e soviet union was dissolved, they could legally declare independence). Chechnya don't have this right as per the Russian constitution: nor does kosovo as per the serbian constitution.

And, also, Georgia broke a peace agreement that had been in place: where as serbia upheld it's end of resolution 1244. you clearly ignore the facts here, and are just putting forward your point of view, there are obvious differences between kosovo and this issue.218.103.230.166 (talk) 07:04, 17 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Tommyxx's suggestion seems to be a fair compromise. Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 09:09, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

TimeLine
1237-40 - Mongols invade Russia, forcing Ossetians to migrate out of their medieval homeland south of the Don River in present-day Russia. Digor in the west came under the influence of the neighbouring Kabard people, who introduced Islam. Iron in the north became what is now North Ossetia. Tualläg in the south became what is now South Ossetia, part of the historical Georgian principality of Samachablo.

1774 - For negotiations about joining of Ossetia (today's North Ossetia) to Russia, in Mozdok there has arrived special Osset delegation and has met there the plenipotentiary of Russian government — the Astrakhan governor Krechetnikovym. In Mozdoke the question on definitive joining of Ossetia (today's North Ossetia) to the Russian empire has been dealt with.


 * Krechetnikov, not Krechetnikovym. This is Russian grammar, Krechetnikovym is the spelling in genitive. FeelSunny (talk) 08:30, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

1782 - Tsar of Kakheti (state of Georgia) Irakl II addresses to Russia with the request for acceptance of Kartli-Kakheti (2 states of Georgia) under protection ;

1783-July-24 - The Treaty of Georgievsk is signed between the Imperial Russia and the Kingdom of Kartli-Kakheti (2 states of Georgia) about transition of Kartli and Kakheti (2 states of Georgia) under protectorate of Russia. (Today's "South Ossetia" is on territories of the Georgian kingdom of Kartli of that time ). After joining of Ossetia (today's North Ossetia) and transition of Kartli and Kakheti (2 states of Georgia) under protectorate of Russia, formation of Osset settlements on plain of the North Caucasus and in a foothill strip of Georgia (which later and becomes "South Ossetia") has begun. This process, proceeding the long period, has come to the end only in a Soviet period, after mass resettlement of mountaineers on plain.

1800 - Pavel I Manifesto on abolition of Kartli-Kakheti kingdoms and joining of East Georgia to Russia ;

''By the 1770s census, 2860 ossetian families lived in Machabeli principality. By 1804s statistics, 12 ossetian families and by 1922s statistics 613 families lived in Tshinvali. In 1989s population of South Ossetia reached:''

65,200 (66.2%) Ossetians (1.4% of all Georgia population)

28,700 (29.0%) Georgians

2,128 (2,1%) Russians

871 (1,21%) Armenians

648 (0,9%) Jews

5,100 (4.8%) Others

1802 - Population and princes of Kakheti protests against Russian occupation ;

1804 - Revolt in Kartli (Today's "South Ossetia" is on territories of the Georgian kingdom of Kartli);

1918-May-25 – Georgia declares independence following the Russian revolution.

1921 – The Red Army invades. The South Ossetians are accused of siding with the Kremlin.

1922 - Georgia becomes a founder member of the Soviet Union. The South Ossetian Autonomous Oblast (district) is created within Georgia in April 1922.

1989 - Demands for more autonomy in the South Ossetia region lead to violent clashes between Georgians and Ossetians.

1990-91 – South Ossetia declares its intentions to secede, leading to more clashes.

1991 – The Soviet Union collapses.

1992 – South Ossetians vote in favour of independence (95%) in an unrecognised referendum. (Please note that 29% of "South Ossetia" population are Georgians - 95% for independence from Georgia - unrealistic number). Hundreds die in sporadic violence, which continues until June when Russian, Georgian and South Ossetian leaders meet to sign an armistice and agree the creation of a tripartite peacekeeping force.

1992-1993 - More than 25,000 Georgians were expelled from Tskhinvali as well, and many Ossetian families were forced to abandon their homes in the Borjomi region and move to Russia.

November 1993 - South Ossetia drafts its own constitution.

November 1996 - South Ossetia elects its first president.

December 2001 - South Ossetia elects wrestling champion Eduard Kokoity as president in unrecognised elections.

2002 – Kokoity asks Moscow to recognise the republic&#39;s independence and absorb it into Russia.

2003 – The Georgian president, Eduard Shevardnadze, is toppled in the rose revolution.

2004 - Mikhail Saakashvili wins Georgian presidential election and declares his intentions to bring breakaway regions of South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Ajaria back into the fold.

2006 - South Ossetians vote overwhelmingly in favour of independence (99%) from Georgia. (Please note that 29% of "South Ossetia" population are Georgians - 99% for independence from Georgia - unrealistic number).

The present composition of the population is unknown, although according to some estimates there were 45,000 ethnic Ossetians and 17,500 ethnic Georgians in South Ossetia in 2007


 * Please note that 29% of "South Ossetia" population are Georgians - 99% for independence from Georgia - unrealistic number - 99,9 was the percentage of those who came to the referendum in SO and voted in favor of independence. Quite obvious most Georgian just did not come to the referendum, just like Serbs did in Kosovo. FeelSunny (talk) 08:25, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

= References =

Moscow Defense Brief
It is a reliable source according to WP:RS. It is an independent publication published by an independent think-tank. It doesn't have any relation to the Russian government. Georgian Defense Ministry is not a very reliable source when it comes to the war, since it's part of Georgia's government, which was a belligerent. But it's use should also be allowed, although use of a third-party source should be preferred. Offliner (talk) 16:52, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I think you are being unreasonable. This source is also heavily used in 2008 South Ossetia war, BTW. Offliner (talk) 17:01, 10 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Besides, your sentence ("russian prespective" means that the source is biased no matter how that website describes itself) contradicts itself. According to you, it doesn't matter how the source describes itself, it is biased anyway. But according to you it's biased because it describes itself in a certain way. Contradiction. In the same way, I could argue that it is unbiased because it says so itself. Other than that, it doesn't matter how it describes itself, since "we are unbiased" means the source is unbiased no matter how that website describes itself. :)


 * IMO, "Russian perspective" simply means it discusses mostly Russian defense matters, in contrast to most international publications, which mostly concentrate on discussing the US or Britain. Offliner (talk) 17:08, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Interview with Mikhail Gorbachev and interview of South Ossetian US citizen on FOX news
In an interview with CNN's Larry King, the former soviet president Michail Gorbachev stated that he believed Georgians initiated the hostilities with overwhelming force, although he did not cite any refrences but given his credit it is not immidiately clear why he should not tell what he thinks is true. Also in an interview with FOX news channel, 12 Year Old Girl Tells the Truth about Georgia a South Ocetian US citizen who was there when hostilities broke claims being bombed by Georgians and thanks Russians for saving them.

COMMENT: It's quite interesting what was this girl doing there on 7 of august, when evacuation of ossetians from that region began on 2th of August? Oh, and quite interesting to see what Gorbatchev saw and compare to what really was shown on Fox News http://www.liveinternet.ru/users/1057023/post83818217/


 * COMMENT ON COMMENT: so the girl is guilty of not evacuating before Georgians came and bombed her house? Your last message simply shows just how much Georgians want to undermine her credibility. FeelSunny (talk) 06:11, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Political status
It says: The European Union, Council of the European Union, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and most UN member countries do not recognize....

Shouldn't it better say: The European Union, <U>Council of Europe</U>, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and most UN member countries do not recognize... ? --Anna Lincoln (talk) 08:32, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, that makes much more sense. — Emil J. 11:48, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Administrative divisions of Georgia
I think we should remove Administrative divisions of Georgia template. Reasons:
 * 1) it doesn't link the article;
 * 2) there is no such thing as South Ossetia according to the Georgian Constitution. Georgian officials call it "South Ossetia". — Taamu (talk) 14:49, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed and done. --Xeeron (talk) 15:32, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Dispute tag
please see File talk:Alania 10 12.png. --KoberTalk 04:44, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Map of SO
please delete the village of Kurta from the map of the "south ossetia". This former georgian village does not exit since August 2008. It was 100% burned down and russian army is constucting now the military airport on this territory. 78.139.159.46 (talk) 19:41, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Evidence of illegal state
I have provided evidence that this state is illegal, above the fact that the US/Nato and international community including the UN fail to recognize South Ossetia & Abkhazia. A distinguished and highly revered and respected historian who is an absolute genius and knows everything about everything on the Balkans (better than locals even) published this report. If you read it, he weighs out all the evidence as to both how Kosova is legal and the two Georgian states are not. It is now on the article and it is fully reliable and true. When I find more as such, I'll add them. A Balanced View (talk) 12:03, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Caucasian Region isn't the Balkans. Tell me, do you also read Svante Cornell? Do you come from Fox News' Fair and Balanced? Also, the UN hasn't recognized Kosovo as an independent country, and stated that it won't. The EU hasn't recognized Kosovo as an independent country, and stated that it won't. I'm sorry your "Brilliant" politician missed those. The whole argument, asking for validity of states, based on a UN mandate, that can be interpreted both ways, and is interpreted both ways, is a joke. In addition, they aren't Georgian states, they were autonomous republics within Georgia, and currently their De Jure status is disputed by Russia and Nicaragua, and De Facto, South Ossetia is with North Ossetia, and Abkhazia is independent. HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 20:28, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

What ? Again muslim propaganda ? Forget it ! Why shouldn´t something that is called ossetia belong to ossetians ? And one is for sure siptar: only albania belongs to albanians, stay to this wisdom or you´ll loose everything tells history... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.137.30.107 (talk) 19:51, 2 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Because Ossetians being together would prevent conflicts in the Caucasian Region, and that means certain companies wouldn't be able to make a profit. HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 20:28, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, term "illegal state" is IMHO pointless. Interpretation legal/illegal is relative. Term "illegal state" assumes existence of superior normative system. Is wikipedia subordinated to some point of view (for example USA law system)? --88.83.178.2 (talk) 08:17, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Nope. There is no such thing as an "illegal state". There are recognized states, unrecognized states, and partially recognized states. South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Kosovo, as well as Taiwan, fall under under partially recognized states. HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 20:28, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Numerical Problems in the Demographics Section
There seem to be some numerical inconsistencies in the demographics section. Someone should go through the demographics table at least and do the math. Because the percentages are off from the numbers they come from (800-something is definitely less than 1% of 99,000). --Nogburt (talk) 06:31, 3 August 2009 (UTC)


 * And if you add up the percentage points, it goes over 100%. That is odd. Where did the census come from? I think someone just made a mistake when calculating percentage points, it seems very consistent to me. HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 05:00, 16 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Hah! Found the census! Actually I needed it for my research paper, but here you go: http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/South-Ossetia

Before the Georgian-Ossetian conflict about two thirds of the population of South Ossetia were Ossetians and 25-30% Georgians. The present composition of the population is unknown. This article or section does not cite its references or sources. ... The Ossetians (oss. ... census 1926 	census 1939 	census 1959 	census 1970 	census 1979 	census 1989 Ossetians 	60,351 (69.1%) 	72,266 (68.1%) 	63,698 (65.8%) 	66,073 (66.5%) 	65,077 (66.4%) 	65,200 (66.2%) Georgians 	23,538 (26.9%) 	27,525 (25.9%) 	26,584 (27.5%) 	28,125 (28.3%) 	28,187 (28.8%) 	28,700 (29.0%) Russians 	157 (0.2%) 	2,111 (2.0%) 	2,380 (2.5%) 	1,574 (1.6%) 	2,046 (2.1%) 	Armenians 	1,374 (1.6%) 	1,537 (1.4%) 	1,555 (1.6%) 	1,254 (1.3%) 	953 (1.0%) 	Jews    	1,739 (2.0%) 	1,979 (1.9%) 	1,723 (1.8%) 	1,485 (1.5%) 	654 (0.7%) 	Others 	        216 (0.2%) 	700 (0.7%) 	867 (0.9%) 	910 (0.9%) 	1,071 (1.1%) 	5,100 (4.8%) Total 	         87,375 	106,118 	96,807 	         99,421 	97,988 	        99,000

(If you click "edit" you see the actual numbers much better. They become aligned. Wikipedia is weird.) HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 05:36, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Start of 1991 war

 * Xeeron's version: Violent conflict broke out towards the end of 1990, when Russian and Georgian interior ministery troops were dispatched to South Ossetia, with war starting on January 5 in 1991 when Georgian troops entered Tskhinvali.


 * However, the source he used says: Now the scene was set for direct confrontation. Following violent incidents in and around Tskhinvali, a state of emergency was declared by the Georgian parliament in the Tskhinvali and Java regions of South Ossetia on 12 December 1990. Troops from Russia's and Georgia's MVD (Interior Ministry) were dispatched and the commander of the Georgian MVD troops was appointed as the mayor of Tskhinvali. According to South Ossetian sources, the Georgian militia started disarming the South Ossetian militia with the consent of Moscow.

So how did the "violent conflict" begin with the dispatchment of Georgian and Russian interior ministry troops? The source clearly says that the main conflict began on 5 January. Furthermore, Xeeron's version is implying that the dispatchment of the interior ministry troops was the reason why the conflict broke out, which is not at all what the source says. I really don't understand why Xeeron wants to use this wording. Offliner (talk) 19:41, 15 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Violence does not start with the dispatchment, but the dispatchment is made because of the violence, yet does not stop the violence. Then it escalates until it is heated enough to warrant the label "war" (when the troops enter Tskhinvali). You can see this is you read the part in its context: The driving force behind the conflict is the regional election. Your version implies that there was no violence before January 1991, which is proven wrong by the source. Furthermore, it is (as the version before) ambiguous on the nature of the troops, since "armed forces" is almost always used to relate to an army, which in this case is untrue as well.


 * The source with context (note how the escalation follows the elections): On 20 September 1990, the South Ossetian Autonomous Oblast declared independence as the South Ossetian Democratic Soviet Republic, appealing to Moscow to recognise it as an independent subject of the Soviet Union. When the election of the Georgian Supreme Council took place in October 1990, it was boycotted by the South Ossetians. The election resulted in a victory for the "Round Table - Free Georgia" coalition headed by the nationalist Zviad Gamsakhurdia.


 * In response to this and as a manifestation of their independence from Tbilisi, the South Ossetians held elections to their parliament in December 1990. According to Ossetian sources, 72% of the population of the republic took part in the election, which exceeds the percentage of the Ossetian population. The Georgian response was swift. Within days the Georgian Supreme Council cancelled the results of the election and voted to abolish the South Ossetian Autonomous Oblast as a separate administrative unit within the Republic of Georgia.


 * Now the scene was set for direct confrontation. Following violent incidents in and around Tskhinvali, a state of emergency was declared by the Georgian parliament in the Tskhinvali and Java regions of South Ossetia on 12 December 1990. Troops from Russia's and Georgia's MVD (Interior Ministry) were dispatched and the commander of the Georgian MVD troops was appointed as the mayor of Tskhinvali. According to South Ossetian sources, the Georgian militia started disarming the South Ossetian militia with the consent of Moscow.


 * In the first days of 1991, the Supreme Council of Georgia passed a law on the formation of the National Guard of Georgia. A few days later, on the night of 5 January (in the days of the Orthodox Christmas), several thousand Georgian troops entered Tskhinvali and committed atrocities. According to the South Ossetians, this was apparently in agreement with the local Russian troops. --Xeeron (talk) 20:39, 15 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I removed the "when" that seems to have been the source of the confusion, since it could be interpreted as "because". --Xeeron (talk) 20:43, 15 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Can you provide another source that says Russian MVD troops were dispatched? All other sources only talk about Georgian interior ministry troops. Are you sure your source is 100% reliable? It's only a dissertation and not published in a respected journal. Also, why is the dispatchment of interior ministry troop so important you have to mention it? What was their task? No other source I've seen puts any weight to that event. Most do not mention it at all. Offliner (talk) 20:59, 15 August 2009 (UTC)


 * See my response at Talk:1991–1992 South Ossetia War. --Xeeron (talk) 21:04, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Borisov
Can you please show me the exact place, where Borisov, states that they trained in South Ossetia? Because here's the thing: Borisov is an experienced general, and Russians don't usually give out their training locations.

Here is the whole conversation:

"С.БУНТМАН: А вот я только об уроках. Вот увидели вы этот Т-72, который только совершенно другой.

B.БОРИСОВ: Ну, у нас хорошие танки. Сейчас, между прочим, сегодня, вот, мы смотрим, еще продолжается идти в Омске большая выставка наших современных вооружений, где и Т-80, Т-90. Это хорошие танки, но вы об этом сами сказали – он очень хороший, но их поставляют очень мало в войска. То есть самые лучшие вертолеты, вы знаете, Акула, КА-50, КА-52 - хорошие, ну а где? Где они, вертолеты? Мы ждем их. Так же и это. Понимаете, у нас все в разработке одно из лучших, но в войсках мы бы желали это видеть быстрее, как в других странах, где от разработки до исполнения бывает от полугода до года. Но мы надеемся, что пойдет это дело.

А.ЕРМОЛИН: Ну вот, в таких локальных конфликтах, конечно, опираясь, пусть на опыт прошлого столетия, наверное, мы умеем что-то делать, побеждать в том числе ценой потерь. Но, вот, скажите, обсуждается ли угроза нашего отставания в высокоточном оружии, в самом современном? Ну вот, ни для кого не секрет, что наши самолеты – самые лучшие в мире по аэродинамике. Но в то же время мы знаем, что их гроздьями можно сбивать, используя современную навигационную систему, которая есть у нашего противника.

В.БОРИСОВ: Ну, я понимаю ваш вопрос.

А.ЕРМОЛИН: Не перебьют ли на дальних подступах?

В.БОРИСОВ: Довольно-таки подготовленный в военном плане офицер, потому что закончил 4 и 2 военных училища, военных академии, но этот вопрос, конечно, надо задавать представителю авиационного командования, а я воздушно-десантное командование, и я больше, конечно, по вопросам нашей компоненты. Хотя, да, я скажу, что я 2 полных года прослужил в Афганистане, и вот тогда летчики у нас были асы, поддерживающая авиация и транспортная авиация, и вертолеты, и самолеты. Были и был опыт. Я считаю, что на данном этапе он, может быть, утерян или, как бы так, мало используется. Это всегда наша беда. Я считаю, что все опыты предыдущих войн мы слабо учитываем.

А.ЕРМОЛИН: Управление знаниями не работает.

В.БОРИСОВ: Да. Мы-то знаем это все, поэтому, может быть, и успех воздушно-десантных войск, потому что был генерал Шаманов, который сейчас наш новый командующий, на Абхазском направлении возглавлял группировку. Я возглавлял на южноосетинском и грузинском направлении. Вы понимаете, мы даже в тех районах учения даже постоянно проводим. И наши войска получили полную практику, за неделю до этого проводя учения именно там, в тех же местах. И только убыли и шли. Поэтому марш совершая в сторону Цхинвала, мы его совершили намного лучше, чем те части и подразделения окружного и центрального подчинения, которые были сняты с хранения, понимаете? Для нас это не было никаким препятствием. И ряд других задач мы выполняли, как оценило нас командование вооруженных сил, начальник Генерального штаба, министр обороны, более успешно. Может быть, это повлияло сохранить наши воздушно-десантные войска в том же состоянии именно без большего реформирования с переходом на бригадную систему. Потому что дивизионная система ВДВ показала свою управляемость. Нет такой острой необходимости нам переходить на бригадную систему. Потому что это у нас аэродромная группа, как основа – это батальон, а дивизия – это несколько аэродромных групп, полк. Понимаете? И бригада, уйдя на аэродромы, которые в районе сосредоточения 100 квадратных километров, все-таки, это командир батальона от капитана до подполковника, возможно, и без академии, без уровня. То есть уровень дивизионного звена – это намного выше уровень управления именно по уровню офицеров, подготовленных. Сколько выпускников Академии в дивизии и сколько в бригаде – большая разница."

Borisov was responding to this: "А.ЕРМОЛИН: Управление знаниями не работает." Basically what Ermolin is saying, is that mere theory doesn't work in warfare, and practice is required. They're not talking about where the battle took place, they're talking about training methods. The way you train, is that you have a satellite and photographers, take snapshots of the place where you think there will be a war. And then you recreate the scenery. You don't actually train in the place where a war might happen, because you will get hit during training. You don't ever give out your training locations, or make them obvious. The discussion is about theory vs. practice, it has nothing to do with location, it is horrendously quoted out of context.

"Я возглавлял на южноосетинском и грузинском направлении. Вы понимаете, мы даже в тех районах учения даже постоянно проводим. И наши войска получили полную практику, за неделю до этого проводя учения именно там, в тех же местах."

"I led the troops attacking against the South Ossetian and Georgian Direction. You understand, even in those regions, we constantly train. And our forces received full training, a week before this, conducting military exercises right there, in those places." In other, Borisov is merely admitting that the training exercises took place in the Caucasian Region. I could've told you that. He's not talking about specifics, because he isn't allowed to say the exact place the Russians trained at. And he's saying in those places, meaning that if one states that Russians trained in South Ossetia, that means that one has to state that Russians also trained in Georgia Proper.

"И только убыли и шли." - We just left and walked. He says "shli" not "vernulis" "вернулись". That means that they didn't return to the place where they conducted the exercises, thus it cannot be in South Ossetia. They have completed their training, didn't return to that place, and went into South Ossetia on August 8th. Borisov's Russian is very good. If he wanted to "admit" that Russians trained in South Ossetia, he would have said "we trained in South Ossetia and came back to South Ossetia. Instead he said "We trained in a location I cannot disclose, in the Caucasian Region and then we left and walked". There are no indication of him giving out the location where they trained.

So yes, Borisov admitted that he led Russian troops into South Ossetia and Georgia Proper. He also admitted that Russian soldiers have trained in the Caucasian Region. But nowhere did he say the exact location. He was trained not to do so. And those arguing but he said "South Ossetia" - well according to that logic, he also said "Georgia Proper" i.e. "Я возглавлял на южноосетинском и грузинском направлении". So those stating that the Russians were training in South Ossetia, using the same exact quotes and interpretation, that means the Russians also trained in Georgia Proper. Anyone up for making that argument? If not, then I'll just remove it. HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 20:18, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and for the other account, the soldier claimed that the entire 58th Army entered South Ossetia. Seems to me like someone's boasting. Got other proof for the entire 58th Army going into South Ossetia? HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 20:30, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

"за неделю до этого проводя учения именно там, в тех же местах" means that they were in South Ossetia, not in North Caucasus. Bjs (talk) 23:13, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * He says "Я возглавлял на южноосетинском и грузинском направлении. I commanded in the South Ossetian and Georgian direction. Вы понимаете, мы даже в тех районах учения даже постоянно проводим. You understand, we even conduct constant exercises in those same regions. И наши войска получили полную практику, за неделю до этого проводя учения именно там, в тех же местах. And our forces got full practice, a week before that training there, in those parts."
 * In other words, what Borisov says is that they trained in the direction going to South Ossetia and Georgia, ie, in the regions close to South Ossetia and Georgia. Where does he say "in South Ossetia"? Why does he say both in the direction of South Ossetia and in the direction of Georgia? Does he mean that South Ossetia is Georgia? Then why distinguish? What you're driving at takes some straining and really makes no sense here. Why don't you just say that he constantly trained in Georgia proper? PasswordUsername (talk) 23:42, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No, Borisov says they trained in the area. It's your translation that направлении in this context means the most literal "direction" and not more appropriate "area" that is strained. If what is being stated sounds completely confusing, it's the translation not the statement that are at fault. <span style="color:#a12830; font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;">V ЄСRUМВА  ♪  00:38, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * He does not say "in South Ossetia." Therefore, it doesn't support the Georgian claim that his troops were there before the war. Offliner (talk) 00:51, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I hadn't completed NPOVing the characterization, you'll also note that I use "area" per Borisov's statement and the possible support of Georgia's position whereas the prior characterization said "in", which was technically not what Borisov said, though that is one possible interpretation. <span style="color:#a12830; font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;">V ЄСRUМВА  ♪  01:15, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * "Napravleniya" means "direction". It never meant "area". If it means "area" - then your argument states that Russians trained in Georgia Proper, which isn't substantiated by any sources. At all. What's next, Russians training in Tbilisi? "Napravleniye" has always meant "direction". Always. You don't get to make stuff up to support your position. http://translation2.paralink.com/ Even if it means area, that means that the Russians trained in South Ossetia and in Georgia Proper. There were no records of Russians training in Georgia Proper. None. Zero. Nil. Nada. Zilch. 0. So "napravleniye" can only mean "direction". HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 07:48, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * (od) I know very well what the primary dictionary meaning is of направлении. That makes no sense in the translation of what Borisov said, which is "in the South Ossetian and Georgian area". That can mean inside or nearby or both, I indicated as much in my edit by
 * stating "area of" as opposed to the prior "in" and
 * stating "potential" support for the Georgian position.
 * So, on the one hand, we have editors here (speaking of PasswordUsername and HistoricWarrior007—Offliner is off the hook because he reverted before I completed my edit):
 * deleting Borisov's statement on the basis that in (et al.) South Ossetia/Georgia is not possible because Russia never publicizes its training missions, and
 * deleting Borisov's statement on the basis that in (et al.) South Ossetia/Georgia is not possible because Russia hasn't publicized its training missions (no record of).
 * Your little tag team can't have it both ways. Yours, and PasswordUsername's bases for content deletion, being in logical opposition to each other, are what is "made up" here, not what I've edited to represent what was said fairly and accurately by leaving it open as to whether Russian troops were training inside or merely nearby sovereign Georgian territory. You go on about my arguing Russian training was in "Georgia Proper." If you examine the edit history, you will see that contention ("in") is the first thing I REMOVED from the prior version of article text. Please don't contend that I say "X" when I explicitly (and per talk here) deleted "X" and replaced it with "Y"—and then delete content based on your complete misrepresentation of my edits. 13:25, 17 August 2009 (UTC) <span style="color:#a12830; font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;">V ЄСRUМВА  ♪
 * The word "направление", from which the prepositional case form "направлении" comes, has only one primary meaning: "direction." For less literal translation, it can be rendered as "way," "path," or "course." (For instance, when designating the direction or flow of a river, etc.) There are various other meanings, corresponding to more idiomatic or abstract use, such as these (see online dictionary link). Yet nowhere does the word mean "area," and if you argue that it does, do provide something like an actual dictionary to back up your claims here. Please respect WP:DIGWUREN and stop attacking content editors. Simple rationality would demand that if our bases for deleting the material are opposite of one anothers' as you allege, hardly can we be acting as some sort of "tag team." PasswordUsername (talk) 16:35, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Briefly, this interview is widely quoted as why Russia did so well at the start as they had just trained there. When I have a more reasonable translation as opposed to the stilted wordings above and then Victorian-length personal interpretations on how Borisov couldn't be there if he then was there afterwards he had to come from elsewhere, etc. or the 1,001 ways I am wrong per PasswordUsername and HistoricWarrior007, I'll pursue further, my time right now is limited. <span style="color:#a12830; font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;">V ЄСRUМВА  ♪  03:04, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Once again, if your interpretation is to be taken into account, that means that Russians trained in South Ossetia and in Georgia Proper. There have been no records of Russians training in Georgia Proper. Therefore your interpretation is incorrect. For that reason, and several reasons that are already listed above. HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 00:07, 21 August 2009 (UTC)