Talk:Abkhazia

"officially the Republic of Abkhazia"

If its de jure status is that it's part of Georgia, shouldn't official name be "Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia"? What does "officially" mean otherwise? It's obviously WP:POV. Also, there are two articles on Crimea: Crimea and Autonomous Republic of Crimea where first one refers to the general region, and the second one refers to the internationally-recognized jurisdiction. I think this is the correct and most neutral practice when it comes to territorial disputes. — 185.115.4.187 (talk) 16:04, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

The article about Crimea is about the peninsula itself, the administrative division articles are Republic of Crimea and Autonomous Republic of Crimea. Mellk (talk) 16:44, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Adding on to that, the de jure Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia has its own article: Government of the Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia. Yue🌙 21:46, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Absolutely right I wanted to say exactly that Vanikobar (talk) 07:40, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Fully support removal of "official". It is WP:POV. Vnar123 (talk) 05:41, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Saying it is "Officially Independent"is POV,but so is "It is Part of Georgia" UnsungHistory (Questions?) (Did I mess up?) 22:10, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Rayfield on the post-WW2 economy

I've removed some of the information that has been added, so I'd like to give an explanation here. This is what Rayfield writes in his Edge of Empires

“ Life in Georgia was grim: there were only old men, boys and invalids to help the women work the fields and the factories. (The population in 1945, 3,232,000, was 10 per cent smaller than in 1939: it would not return to 1939’s level until 1960.) The produce of the countryside and towns went to feed and rebuild European Russia. For want of goods, or a market economy, money lost its value; inflation soared. Serfdom was now introduced into industry, as well as agriculture: from 1948 workers were deprived of passports, and leaving a job became impossible. (In 1949 Beria proposed giving workers and peasants passports and freedom of movement, but his proposal was rejected on the grounds that labour was scarce.) Reluctant workers could be deported for eight years’ forced labour in ‘remote districts’. Some 9,000 peasant households were resettled between 1947 and 1952 from the highlands to underpopulated areas – Abkhazia, the newly drained Mingrelian marshes and newly irrigated Samgori fields – and left to fend for themselves. ”

Only the last sentence concerns Abkhazia directly. The previous sentences have to do with the general situation in Georgia. The 1948 reforms affected workers (as in factory workers), while peasants, including the ones resettled in Abkhazia, had no passports even before or after that.

I think it would be a good idea to describe the economical situation in Abkhazia in Soviet times in this article, but we should use sources which discuss Abkhazia rather than the whole Georgia or USSR-wide changes, unless they impacted Abkhazia in a major way. The 1948 measures tying workers to their jobs were unlikely to impact Abkhazia since there was very little industry there. Alaexis_¿question? 15:43, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

"Life in Georgia was grim: there were only old men, boys and invalids to help the women work the fields and the factories. (The population in 1945, 3,232,000, was 10 per cent smaller than in 1939: it would not return to 1939’s level until 1960.) The produce of the countryside and towns went to feed and rebuild European Russia. For want of goods, or a market economy, money lost its value; inflation soared. Serfdom was now introduced into industry, as well as agriculture: from 1948 workers were deprived of passports, and leaving a job became impossible. (In 1949 Beria proposed giving workers and peasants passports and freedom of movement, but his proposal was rejected on the grounds that labour was scarce.) Reluctant workers could be deported for eight years’ forced labour in ‘remote districts’. Some 9,000 peasant households were resettled between 1947 and 1952 from the highlands to underpopulated areas – Abkhazia, the newly drained Mingrelian marshes and newly irrigated Samgori fields – and left to fend for themselves."sounds very POV UnsungHistory (Questions?) (Did I mess up?) 22:12, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Coherence in terming

I see that for Kosovo, it is stated that it is a country, while, accoding to UN, it is a province of Serbia. Without entering the partisan discussion, and based on the Wikipedia definition of "country", I assume that the appropriate way to define Abkhazia, is that it is a country:

"A country is a distinct part of the world, such as a state, nation, or other political entity. When referring to a specific polity, the term "country" may refer to a sovereign state, states with limited recognition, constituent country, or a dependent territory".

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.225.12.175 (talk) 07:40, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Wikidata links

Wikidata has one item for the Republic of Abkhazia here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q31354462 and a separate item for the region of Abkhazia here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q23334

It looks like there are only 13 translations of Wikipedia (including the version in Russian, aka Русский) that have a separate article for each of those items. 160 other translations of Wikipedia (including the English version) only have a single article that covers both topics. My question is: should those 160 translations link to the first item or the second item? I'd suggest they should link to the first item, and I'd also suggest that for clarity the second item should be renamed to something like Abkhazia (region). Although I'm ok with having them link to the second item, if that's what other people prefer. But right now it looks like it's some of each. There are 16 translations of Wikipedia (including the version in French, aka Français) that only link to the first item. 135 translations (including the version in Portuguese, aka Português) that only link to the second item. 2 translations (including this version in English) that link to the first item but have a redirect that links to the second item. And 7 translations (including the version in Spanish, aka Español) that link to the second item but have a redirect that links to the first item. It looks like all the wikinews and wikivoyage translations (including the version in Portuguese) link to the first item only. - Burner89751654 (talk) 22:26, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

You likely have to ask this on Wikidata, figuring out how they differentiate the items. CMD (talk) 06:27, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

And don't forget d:Q2914461 which has strange English sitelink. Infovarius (talk) 20:36, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

"Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 30 § Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia until a consensus is reached. kxeo  mailbox 01:38, 30 March 2025 (UTC)