Talk:Georgia–European Union relations

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 16:53, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update?[edit]

I noticed that while Ukraine seems to move slowly to EU membership I never hear any news about Georgian membership of EU but a lot of news about Georgia's NATO membership. Could that mean EU membership for Georgia is extremely unlikely? Mariah-Yulia (talk) 17:08, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not the case here. Georgia is much more advanced both in NATO and EU membership than Ukraine. But NATO will be first, and this will bring EU membership fast as few years later. Recent info (talk) 19:03, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 08:38, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]


– The prevailing naming convention is alphabetical order. If anyone knows where this was decided, that would help. --Relisted. Steel1943 (talk) 09:41, 4 November 2013 (UTC) Relisted bd2412 T 14:06, 21 October 2013 (UTC) Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 05:52, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. I'm confused as to why you've used (country) in your RM (at least that's how it shows on the main RM page). The current title is simply Georgia–European Union relations, are you suggesting as well as alphabetizing that we disambiguate Georgia? If so I would strongly oppose as there is no way there would be an article about the foreign relations of a U.S. state. If that was just a formatting issue and you propose moving Georgia–European Union relations → European Union–Georgia relations, then support on the basis of listing alphabetically. Zarcadia (talk) 12:40, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I had it that way for four minutes before I realized the talk page also needed to be reunited with the present location of the article. That was accomplished with CSD. The move request above is current. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 15:18, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment the "country" should be reinstated. The page was moved without discussion, things concerning Georgia need full-up requested moves to remove "country" -- 76.65.129.3 (talk) 05:40, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose "Georgia" it should use "Georgia (country)" per standard for Georgia, whichever order is being used. -- 76.65.129.3 (talk) 05:40, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why? Why move? Can somebody explain why one name must come before another? Do sources prefer one order over another? If changes to titles are not based on sources, we have a different problem. bobrayner (talk) 17:37, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Alphabetical order is politically neutral. Its consistent use in titles on topics such as bilateral relations and borders provides an answer for nationalistic disputes that otherwise would have no clear solution. --BDD (talk) 17:29, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support all, without the "country" disambiguation for Georgia, as per the WP:CRITERIA, especially consistency with the pattern of all other articles on relations between countries. It isn't standard to disambiguate Georgia when term isn't ambiguous. See Category:Bilateral relations of Georgia (country): none of these articles have disambiguators. The primary topic of Georgia–European Union relations is the relations with the eurasian state. Does the EU have any relations with the US state? TDL (talk) 17:46, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Does the EU have any relations with the US state? Not sure, but with the U.S. state being more than twice as large by population, it doesn't seem too far out. Oh, and there is one exception: Georgia (country)–NATO relations. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 07:05, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support While I dispute that there could never be an article about the foreign relations of a US state, there aren't any for now, and Georgia isn't particularly likely to be among the first anyway. Alphabetical order is a good principle that's supported by the consistency criterion of WP:CRITERIA even if it isn't formalized elsewhere. --BDD (talk) 17:31, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd be interested to read an article about the U.S. state of Georgia's relations with the European Union! Until that article is written... Support all without disambiguation for Georgia. 172.56.21.69 (talk) 02:43, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose all - the European Union is not a country, so the rule about alphabetical order doesn't apply here. Each of these articles is of more relevance when considering the country in question, rather than when considering the European Union, hence it makes sense to list country first. This is similar to United States and the United Nations.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:56, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose all. I was going to support things until I read Amakuru's statement: we should put the EU second because of its unique position in international relations, and because we should focus on the country with which it's relating. Meanwhile, we also shouldn't have (country) after Georgia, because this is a situation in which it's unambiguous: US states aren't able to have foreign relations, so the only time when Georgia could have foreign relations was before the United States existed, and there wasn't an EU at that time. Note that we have many other articles in which the disambiguator isn't present because of the context: List of Governors of Georgia and President of Georgia are undisambiguated because the country has no governor and the state has no president; National Register of Historic Places listings in Georgia is undisambiguated because the US government's historic preservation program doesn't include places in the Caucasus; and Coast Guard of Georgia is undisambiguated because the state doesn't have its own coast guard. Nyttend (talk) 20:41, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose all The EU is not a country and so it should be treated like other organisations such as NATO and always put second. No opinion on "(country)". Timrollpickering (talk) 00:01, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Links[edit]

[1](Lihaas (talk) 19:02, 30 November 2013 (UTC)).[reply]

New article?[edit]

Any else think that there should be an article titled "Accession of Georgia to the European Union", they're obviously intrested and so is the EU. Charles Essie (talk) 17:14, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's no application by Georgia! If you want to start an article you may start Georgia–European Union Association Agreement. --2A02:908:DB25:EB00:C8FE:DC2E:96A3:37FE (talk) 20:47, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I hid the map[edit]

on ratification because its with errors: As http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/documents-publications/agreements-conventions/agreement/?aid=2014007 says neither Hungary nor Ireland nor Croatia did deposit so far! --2A02:908:DB2A:E200:A962:D47C:834A:F99C (talk) 22:16, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Georgia–European Union relations. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:45, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Georgia–European Union relations. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:09, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary[edit]

Hello there. I was just wondering as to whether [map] is really needed in the 'Association Agreement (2013-present)' section? All EU member states ratified it, so I'm not sure the usefulness of a map that is practically trying to highlight which member states did when, again, all have. ArbDardh (talk) 13:34, 3 November 2019 (UTC)ArbDardh[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:21, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Georgia–European_Union_relations&oldid=1207390322"