Hi Permaveli! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Doctree (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:15, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Georgian-Seljuk wars may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:17, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When making changes, please consistently use edit summaries. While you may clearly see why a certain image should be changed, or a change made, it will not always be clear to others. You've used them a couple of times, which is good, but if you just say things like "changing to better quality image" or "X displays Y better than Z", that helps everyone else. Regards, CMD (talk) 15:15, 7 June 2013 (UTC) Hi.Thanks for the tip on edit summaries. I did not really write them often since most changes were thematically in line with what was there before. I will be more consistent.--Permaveli (talk) 16:22, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Agrippina, Countess von Zarnekau, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hungarian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think Agrippina, Countess von Zarnekau should be included in the infobox. Don't get me wrong your article is great but reading it I don't see how important she is to Georgian history. No other wikipedias even have an article for her showing how obscure she is. And why can't early Iberians and other Caucasian people, which the modern day Georgians claim descent, be included? The Egyptians article includes Ancient Egyptians who are for the most part ethnically different from modern-day Egyptians but they are included because modern Egyptians identify them as their ancestors and so the Georgian people had ancestors that predated the creation of a state we called Georgia (I am guessing you are using Bagrat III of Georgia as a cut off date). I think a figure connected to early Christianity should be included like Mirian III of Iberia or Peter the Iberian. Georgians#Origins indicate that Iberians and Colchians were the names of Georgians in antiquity. Georgians have been there all along; they didn't just appear after the creation of the Kingdom of Georgia. I am going to bring User:Kober into this discussion. --The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 21:47, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have lived in Georgia for many years and I kept seeing/hearing her name in newspapers, on TV etc to this day. The Georgia-related articles are very much leaning towards male chauvinism and some of the most prolific wiki authors seem to be concerned only with bearded old men, saints and martyrs so I can see why they would not take interest in this lady. We cannot use that as a measure of how important something is.

Moreover, the Georgian people page is not a history page for the country of Georgia. An ethnic Georgian does not have to be important in Georgia's history to be considered important overall. General John Shalikashvili has been to Georgia only a couple of times but I think he is notable. Additionally, Pyotr Bagration has the best article on Georgian wikipedia and had a very shabby one on English wikipedia until recently; this, despite the fact that he had hardly any connection to Georgia other than by blood and at most some visits. Again, highlighting the unreliability of cross-checking personalities on wikipedia to determine their relative importance.

Also, to clarify I see nothing against including Mirian as he is considered a Georgian king, even if Georgian only in ancient sense. I removed him because he has been there many times in the past and for quite some time. I prefer to bring some diversity to the infobox by showcasing new personalities, so that people don't see only individuals that they knew anyway. I have seen some quite insignificant modern violinists and pianists included...--Permaveli (talk) 21:53, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To some degree I would have to agree but impact on history or fame in a field should be a criteria to consider either in the arts, through historical impact, in religion, in politics, in military, celebrities and having equal representation from each period of Georgian history thus my argument for including early Iberians. I don't know about Agrippina's fame since I don't live in Georgia but I will leave that up to you. I just wonder maybe if it would be good to add an early Iberian here. --The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 21:59, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinking of replacing Patriach Ambrosius with Mirian III since the article already has patriarch Antonius, who was both member of royalty and a religious leader in a time of transformation comparable to that of Ambrosius. Additionally, this way we won't be placing too much emphasis on Georgians dethroned by the Russians, a theme that already permeates Georgia-related articles.--Permaveli (talk) 22:10, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I arranged it to look more chronological. --The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 22:43, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it looks good now. I just did not feel like renumbering the list : ).--Permaveli (talk) 22:50, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good job, dear colleagues, but I think the template is still a chronological mess. I also fail to understand why the two refined ladies, Agrippina Japaridze and Mary Shervashidze—in spite of their popularity in the modern Georgian press—are so important to be included here. The inclusion of Stalin is also controversial. His ethnic background is a subject of unceasing controversy and he self-identified as Russian. The selection of images of David IV, Tamar, and Rustaveli is also problematic. All three images are the 20th-century works and, thus, copyrighted, but easily replaceable with older, PD images. I would also cautiously suggest replacing Gen. Abkhazi with his more revered comrade, Kakutsa Cholokashvili, or less popular, but more famous, Noe Zhordania. Thanks, Kober^Talk 16:02, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Permaveli (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I was about to edit a page when I received an error message, saying that I have been blocked for abusing multiple accounts. I tried to contact the user who posted the tags but that page, and all the other pages, are also blocked. I have never abused multiple accounts; at most I may have made an edit or two as an IP when, dealing with my erratic wireless, I had forgotten that I was logged off. Indefinite block for such a mechanical error is absurd, in fact, any kind of reprimand is. :If you look at the IPs I edited from,it was followed almost immediately by edits with my usual login. Anyone could've guessed that was me. There was no deception intended.Permaveli (talk) 04:20, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Declined per behavioural and technical evidence. Further unblock appeals should be made only to the WP:BASC. WilliamH (talk) 22:34, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Hi, and thanks for your work on the English Wikipedia. Just a short note to point out that we don’t normally link:

• dates
• years
• commonly known geographical terms (including well-known country-names), and
• common terms you’d look up in a dictionary (unless significantly technical).

Thanks and my best wishes.

Tony (talk) 08:39, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]