Talk:Georgia–European Union relations

WikiProject class rating

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)

Update?

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)

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)

Proposed move

• Georgia–European Union relations → European Union–Georgia relations
• Greenland–European Union relations → European Union–Greenland relations
• Holy See–European Union relations → European Union–Holy See relations
• India–European Union relations → European Union–India relations
• Indonesia–European Union relations → European Union–Indonesia relations
• Iran–European Union relations → European Union–Iran relations
• Iraq–European Union relations → European Union–Iraq relations
• Israel–European Union relations → European Union–Israel relations
• Japan–European Union relations → European Union–Japan relations
• Jordan–European Union relations → European Union–Jordan relations
• Kazakhstan–European Union relations → European Union–Kazakhstan relations
• Lebanon–European Union relations → European Union–Lebanon relations
• Liechtenstein–European Union relations → European Union–Liechtenstein relations
• Mexico–European Union relations → European Union–Mexico relations
• Moldova–European Union relations → European Union–Moldova relations
• Monaco–European Union relations → European Union–Monaco relations
• Morocco–European Union relations → European Union–Morocco relations
• Nepal–European Union relations → European Union–Nepal relations
• North Korea–European Union relations → European Union–North Korea relations
• Norway–European Union relations → European Union–Norway relations
• Pakistan–European Union relations → European Union–Pakistan relations
• Palestine–European Union relations → European Union–Palestine relations
• Philippines–European Union relations → European Union–Philippines relations
• San Marino–European Union relations → European Union–San Marino relations
• South Africa–European Union relations → European Union–South Africa relations
• South Korea–European Union relations → European Union–South Korea relations
• Switzerland–European Union relations → European Union–Switzerland relations
• Syria–European Union relations → European Union–Syria relations
• Ukraine–European Union relations → European Union–Ukraine relations
• Yemen–European Union relations → European Union–Yemen relations

– The prevailing naming convention is alphabetical order. If anyone knows where this was decided, that would help. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 05:52, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

• 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)

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)

• 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)
• 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)
• 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)

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)

• 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)

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)

• 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)