Talk:Chechnya

Your Ignorance and biased of this artctle is very wrong. The rebel are not of Chechen decent but outsiders from the middle east. Who Came here and ethically cleansed Muslims who would not convert to there radical faith. They are considers enemies of Islam for radical believes.

Drink section

"Chechens are muslims and common sense should be taken when drinking alcohol", what the hell is that suppose to mean? —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 130.208.135.138 (talk • contribs)

In my estimation, that statement would qualify as fatuous blather. But our philosophy is, if you see something wrong, fix it! --(WT-en) Peter ^Talk 16:32, 25 February 2008 (EST)

In my estimation, it would qualify as a caution to keep in mind the sensibilities of muslim persons who might be potentially offended by your open consumption of alcohol, which is haram. Furthermore it would be wise to mention that the persons you would most take care not to offend are the well-known radical militants who have historically enjoyed cracking down on liberal behavior in a most unpleasant fashion. I don't think it's outlandish or insensitive to suggest one take care not to flaunt or make a point of their consumption of alcohol in this or any other conservative locale. Enjoy it if you like, but do so discreetly and with respect to the locals. --173.166.45.177 16:15, 15 June 2011 (EDT)

Safety in Chechnya

The following statement was added to the article (and reverted by another IP user). I thought interesting to put on the talk page at least --Andrewssi2 (talk) 21:13, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

dear Editors,,

Greetings,,

I have no idea since how long this statement was published. But what i know is that it is base less. The information there is out dated and not an inch close the reality. It is certain that the information was gathered through rumors and the reputation that the Chechen Republic has gained out of wrong but directed false propaganda. You are not in the position of presenting any evidence of kidnapping for Ransoms or foreigners disappearing or the presence of Mafias in the streets of Grozny. I have worked there till 6 months ago and during the previous three years. During the three years i was there,m i was not stopped a single time ,,, well,, I was by the traffic police. otherwise i was not stopped nor for my ID, nor for my residency permit or for my passport check. As measures of security, and on Fridays, or during Football Matches there are control check points,, to check bags and ensure public safety and security. It is not fair to publish this kind of information and to generalize it. this is a Baby republic, raising out ot the ruins of war. A war that has destroyed the land, the air, the water and the people. You should have rather put an emphasis on the reconstruction that took place in Chechnya,, on the peaceful life the people are living. The Chechen people are a sample of free people who love freedom,,they are the symbol of generosity and fidelity. Three years and each Chechen door was open to me without being invited Three years and i did not see anything but respect to me as foreigner.

it is the least right for Chechnya and its people that you change the header of your page,, or at least have these information checked out. Send your people there and find out by yourself.. I guarantee you,, dont be scared ,, you will not be kidnapped.

Thank you

As for the last visit of the Region, Chechnya is the most safe place within Russian regions. The Warning banner will be removed (talk) 13:56, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, no can do:

"The FCO advise against all travel to Chechnya" (updated 28 September 2016 and still current)

"Global Affairs Canada advises against all travel to to the following areas [Republic of Chechnya is the first listed]" (Last updated: September 14, still valid)

I could look up other countries' travel advisories and will - in order to update the warningbox. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:19, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikivoyage is the International Portal, where we shouldn't strictly follow of one or two official governments advises, at least such info can contain questionable validity. Such information brings politics for the portal and strongly misinforming travelers. But if we will keep doing that, In this case I will add warningbox for USA according to recommendations of Turkish Foreign affairs [[User:Ismail Khatai|Ismail Khatai]] ([[User talk:Ismail Khatai|talk]]) 15:44, 14 November 2016 (UTC+3)]

Please go ahead and add the warningbox to the USA guide. It's not just one or two countries warning their citizens not to travel to Chechnya. You are perfectly free to contradict this, but it would be irresponsible for us not to mention those travel advisories. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:50, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Guys, I am going to add more warning boxes just to show you how many restrictions different government authorities issue everyday. I think, it is better to initiate changes to the policy of the website regarding using of such warning boxes. Ismail Khatai</nowiki> ([[User talk:Ismail Khatai|talk]]) 15:44, 14 November 2016 (UTC+3)]

So, Ismail Khatai, in other words you think it's a problem that we provide travel warnings and we should better stop? Are you serious?

Now I wonder what the Turkish foreign ministry says about travel to Chechenya? For that matter, can you find one foreign ministry that issues travel warnings that does not advise against travel there? I would assume even the Russian authorities don't recommend going there. ϒpsilon (talk) 13:47, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

ϒpsilon, i am about to review usage of warning boxes, not abandon them. Regarding to Chechnya, you should visit this region first. It is most peaceful and one of the top destinations in Russia. It used yo be danger, but now region is the one of the leading and well developing in Russia. So the Russian authorities activly promoting Chechnya, and making restrictions for other regions....check India and United Kingdom pages Ismail Khatai</nowiki> ([[User talk:Ismail Khatai|talk]]) 15:44, 14 November 2016 (UTC+3)]

Everyone is glad that the situation in Chechnya is improving. However, we simply can't and shouldn't decide on the need for warnings based on local experiences. It is obviously possible to travel through Chechnya or any other supposedly dangerous region without encountering any problems. That doesn't mean that there isn't an enlarged risk, especially for foreign (often particularly western) visitors. To avoid this kind of discussion, we follow the expert advises of some leading English language government websites. One other and very important reason for this is, that travelling to countries despite governmental warnings often means that travel insurance and consular support is invalid or very limited. That's not only relevant in case of major problems like a kidnapping, but also in the simple case of lost luggage, accidents or stolen passports. JuliasTravels (talk) 14:56, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Julia, what are you arguing about ? If you want to keep red box for Chechnya, we are OK already, we have held discussion on this point and agreed that tourists ( no matter westerners or not ) must be provided about threats in the regions. As we say in Russia, "They smach on your face, not passport". Lirically, it means that you can be from the Wesrn country but LOOK LIKE ASIAN OR OTHER RACE AND BE ENGAGED IN TROUBLES BECAUSE OF THE WAY YOU LOOKING. Please, don't ever segregate the users. From the beggining, my point was that all official info can be very subjective and depends from its origin, and my purpose was just to review policy of using warning boxes ( for example, if there are epidemics or ongoing conflicts or riots - 100% subjected to warning box). IMPORTANT! The most of insurences are NOT valid in the ongoing areas of unrest (it calls force-majeurs), no matter is it Cambodia, US, Chechnia. And definatelly Wikivoyage is not main or official source and normal traveler check all info in advance. And please don't delete Warining box from US article, as current riots unfortunatelly can make troubles for some of our users ( including from western countries) talk, can you please treat our discussions fearly and monitor situation? Ismail Khatai</nowiki> (talk<nowiki>

Well, Ismail, the thing is, the travel advisory from the Turkish government is not a warning not to travel to the U.S. or even not to travel to any specific place in the U.S. (other than whatever part of a city an anti-Trump demonstration is taking place), so it doesn't merit a warningbox. I think it merits a cautionbox, but a consensus will have to be persuaded of that. If it isn't, perhaps at least some of the information in the advisory could be paraphrased into the "Stay safe" section of the USA article and articles for cities mentioned in the travel advisory. In any case, I think it's totally fine for you to make any kind of reasonable assertion about the current security status in Chechnya that you like, but we just can't ignore it when a bunch of governments are telling their citizens not to go to Chechnya, period. They may be wrong, but that's certainly a strong statement. And do you really think New Zealand would be making such a statement for some reason other than that they believe that by so doing, they are protecting their citizens? Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:40, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Ikan, I got you. Thanks for advise. Honestly, only one thing pissing me off..."Most foreign governments advise against traveling to Chechnya"....but there are only four :) can we do something with it ? Ismail Khatai (talk) 19:59, 14 November 2016 (UTC+3)

I added a link to Australia's travel warning. Do you know how many governments that issue travel advisories don't advise against traveling to Chechnya? I am going to look for more government's travel warnings... Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:02, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

I don't think we need an exhaustive list, really. What we need are several trusted, English language sources - and we have those. The Dutch, French and German advises are all against travelling to Chechnya, but linking there has no added value. Even a complete list of English language advices has no added value, and only makes the warning box bigger than it needs to be. If the word "most" is really a problem, I'm sure we can rephrase it somehow? JuliasTravels (talk) 17:11, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

I added travel warnings from Ireland and Hong Kong. All of the linked governments urge their citizens not to travel to Chechnya. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:14, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Instead of most, we could say "many". Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:15, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

I plunged forward and made the change. I think it's fine, because it's followed by a rather long list that in this context is meaningful, since it goes to what "many" means. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:18, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

If that helps, "many" is fine for me. JuliasTravels (talk) 17:23, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

"Many" also fine. Ismail Khatai (talk) 20:26, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

For the record, Finnish foreign ministry too specifically advises against "unnecessary" travel to places in Russian Caucasus including Chechnya. Admittedly we Scandinavians have a tendency of erring on the side of caution, but Formin also has a handy section with links to travel advisories from other countries' foreign ministries (admittedly all 13 are western countries). If you open these and look for travel advisories on Russia, one will run into warnings against travel to Chechnya. ϒpsilon (talk) 17:29, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Guys, thanks as we can see, there are only western countries making warning for their citizens. Agree to remain warning box. On weekend i will get deep in details about such notices of official bodies.

However I wonder what Russian authorities and Russians in general think about traveling to Chechnya (they should know). I believe they do not recommend it either but I might of course be wrong. Alexander maybe can enlighten us? ϒpsilon (talk) 18:03, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

(indent) The Russian authorities will, of course, refrain from not recommending travels to Chechnya, because they pretend it is a safe region. On the other hand, I don't remember any travel alerts even in the hardest times in the end of 1990s, so it does not tell you much anyway.

I have never been there, and I think it is hard to gauge the possible danger. I believe it is fine to fly to Grozny, walk around the city, and buy a tour into the mountains. We received beautiful pictures from Chechnya during Wiki Loves Earth last year, and I know some people who did this kind of traveling recently. If there is any risk, it hardly exceeds the typical risk of going to places like Turkey or Israel. On the other hand, I would not consider Chechnya and Dagestan as good places for independent traveling (e.g., with a rental car) or mountain trekking, because there may be issues outside of the big cities. Those are not directly related to the recent war and in fact exist since ages, arising from peculiarities of the local population, especially high in the mountains. It's a little bit dodgy area in general, and it was also like that 30 years before the whole thing started. --Alexander (talk) 18:16, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Alexander. Side point to the unsigned poster (Ismail?): Hong Kong is not a Western country. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:44, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Guys, why you took so personal our discussion? Ikan, be fair, you was developing US' warning box after me and extend it. The hole point was to learn how to use warning boxes in correct and reasonable way. Examples with Turkish and Russian Gov. notices showed us that warning and safety measures can be used for any country. This is not about remaining or removing banner from Chechnya page at all ! By the way Zamboanga Peninsula has good example of well designed warning box with objective and brief info. P.S. Hong Kong has pro-western politics and system and stayed under UK till the almoust all XX cent., so yes - it is "the west" of China. Ismail_Khatai (talk) 8:28, 15 November 2016 UTC+3

I lived in Hong Kong for a while. It is certainly not a western country. Andrewssi2 (talk) 05:44, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Nothing personal at all, Ismail. Yes, I was editing the warningbox. I still think the language in it is valid and fine. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:21, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

I also don't think anyone is taking this personally, Ismail_Khatai . We're all just giving opinions and applying policy. I also wouldn't consider Hong Kong western, even though it's different from the rest of China. I agree however that Zamboanga_Peninsula-way of linking the travel advices (which is the standard) is much neater. I've gone ahead and adapted the layout, so the warning box becomes a bit more subtle. I'll see if I can include the Irish and Hongkong one in the template (it's not there, normally). JuliasTravels (talk) 13:43, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, JuliasTravels . Now wording much better, and not misinforming travelers. Ismail Khatai (talk) 16:54, 15 November 2016 UTC+3

Hmm.. the template is not willing to work with me today (read: I'm not very good with templates) so I've asked for some help to get the Hong Kong layout fixed ;) I have to go out, but I'm sure someone will jump in and fix my mess soon enough. JuliasTravels (talk) 14:14, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

History

ALL JuliasTravels, Ikan Kekek, Andrewssi2 Ypsilon, Texugo ! It is very important to provide fair and objective information. The most current content of article seems like partial opinion. Please, don't restore content after I have started to develop History section part by part due to lack of time. For bloody scene lovers the war will be described, but you can check wikipedia page of First and Second Chechen Campaigns to get more information. And there are no gangsters in city (who is this smart guy, who published this trash?) Here we are describing travels and facts, not war and opinions. Thank you for understanding. Ismail Khatai (talk) 16:54, 15 November 2016 UTC+3

Please also understand, Ismail Khatai, that a wiki article is always a matter of collaboration and compromise. Feel free to edit and explain why you think certain sections should be different, but you can not expect or ask that others leave it up to you and don't interfere. If you want to take your time to develop a new history section, it might be a good idea to do so in your user space, for example at Ismail Khatai/Chechnya or some similar page. Again, feel free to expand and update, but keep in mind that you'll need to find a consensus first when you want to rewrite the history section in a way that paints a different picture. The history section of our articles is one of the few sections that are not focused on travel; it provides some background information. For a region like Chechnya, famous for the armed conflicts that have take place there, it must discuss the past wars to be objective. It's just one part of a complete article, in which also the current situation has plenty of place to be described. JuliasTravels (talk) 14:17, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia is collaboration, and wikivoyage is trash. I understand your point. Human being must prove proove that there are not zebras. Clear Ismail Khatai (talk) 14:22, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

I want to know who is the admin of en wikivoyage, please. Ismail Khatai (talk) 14:28, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry you feel that way. In reality, the collaborative way of working is quite the same on Wikipedia and Wikivoyage, but the goals and policies are different. You can find a complete list of administrators here. Of the people who have been involved in this topic so far, Ikan Kekek, Andrewssi2, Whr2 and I are all admins, for example. However, admins' voices don't have any more weight in content discussions than those of other users, so it doesn't really matter in a discussion like this. It's not up to an admin to decide who's right or wrong in content development; that is simply a matter of discussion and consensus. JuliasTravels (talk) 14:37, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for information. All i want is to fix the content of the article, as it has described by some of the "bots" and not relates to the reality. Ismail Khatai (talk) 14:45, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

It would be great if you can add content to the article, and I do hope you will. Everyone wants the article to be correct and up to date. I know it can be a bit difficult and confusing to work on it in a collaborative environment, but I think you'll find that people are not against you; they just want the article to develop the "wiki-way", so in consensus. The middle way is typically the most neutral one, so in the end, we all benefit. Best of luck, JuliasTravels (talk) 14:52, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

If interested in who has added what to the article (and when they added it), you can look at the edit history of the article. ϒpsilon (talk) 15:22, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Ypsilon. All, this is interesting to read, because there are lots of attention of former admins on using strange oppinions (not facts). I don't know why and by whom, but this article defimatelly has been attacked. Does this article can be protected from editing ? Ismail Khatai (talk) 16:50, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Ismail Khatai. I have taken a look at Wikipedia w:Chechnya and the history section doesn't look inconsistent with the text you deleted. You may not personally like the history section, but unless it is 100% false then you just don't get to delete it. If you want to improve it then fine, but I would urge you to keep away from hyperbolic statements just because something doesn't completely align to your own worldview.

The security section is also valid. There are blanket travel advisories against travelling to Chechnya by many governments. Again, improve if you like, but don't claim this has been "attacked" (implying vandalism) unless you have some proof. Andrewssi2 (talk) 20:51, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Andrewssi is right; rather than simply claiming attacks or misinformation, you should try to point out which facts exactly are not correct. You haven't made that clear at all. Protection (which is not an option) would have the opposite effect; it would make it impossible for you to improve the information or correct wrong facts. I've taken a first stab at an intro (which was a copy of the encyclopaedic Wikipedia intro). Please have a look and see if you find it fair and accurate, and improve it if you can. JuliasTravels (talk) 22:54, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

I will keep improve this article. Please note, when editing this article by restoring unproved information, you contradicting yourself. I suggest to keep article clean, because current info is doubtful veracity and misinforming users. I will provide very clear and brief facts throughout history from ancient to modern, including 2 wars(! there are no others) to the talk section and then, after joint discussion someone from admins will publish it Ismail Khatai (talk) 10:04, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

You seem to still be incorrectly asserting that the history section as it stands in completely wrong. I believe the current history section is broadly correct and therefore the only thing being contradicted is your own knowledge on the subject.

Nevertheless do feel free to propose a better history section. I won't object as long as it follows the facts that can be verified on Wikipedia. Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:58, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Wholesale copy of history section from Wikipedia

The new text in the History section was basically directly copied out of Wikipedia. See w:History_of_Chechnya

How should we deal with this? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 09:53, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

I'ver reverted that edit. I'm sorry, Ismail, I know you mean to improve the article and Wikipedia is a good source to find information on history, but simply copying the text from there is typically not accepted. First of all, the way you did that now violates both our and Wikipedia's copyright regulations. If you simply copy text, you make it look as if you wrote it yourself, thus denying the original authors their rights. For more information on this, see Wikivoyage:Copyleft. Even when you do follow proper attribution rules however, copying large pieces of text from Wikipedia (or other compatible websites) is strongly discouraged. First, we are not an encyclopedia, but a travel guide. We prefer to have lively, non-encyclopedic and original writing with the traveler in mind. For history sections, that typically means that they should be significantly shorter, with more attention to travel-relevant parts (e.g. recent, well-known wars, but also periods of which a lot of architecture or other sights remain). That's especially true for otherwise underdeveloped articles like the Chechnya one. We should avoid creating an article where the encyclopedic information is the bulk. The original content question is another a vital one. We avoid copied information to improve our visibility in search engines.

In conclusion; we often use Wikipedia as a source, but we re-write and summarize the text to fit our goals (and still use attribution when needed). Hope that clarifies. JuliasTravels (talk) 12:46, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Ok, delete it, then.

If you can point out which facts you think are wrong in the current section, I could try and help rewrite it in a joint effort. You keep saying the information is not correct, but you haven't said which information exactly. JuliasTravels (talk) 12:54, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Update on safety in Chechnya

Here are some videos about visiting Chechenya: [1], [2], [3]. I think it suffices to say that the political situation has stabilised, and it is no longer a warzone. And in fact, Gronzy appears to have been rebuilt and now looks very modern. The dog2 (talk) 22:07, 2 February 2022 (UTC)