This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Royalty and Nobility This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility. This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter. Georgia (country) Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (country), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Georgia and Georgians on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Georgia (country)Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia (country)Template:WikiProject Georgia (country)Georgia (country) articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

References on English Wikipedia to the House of Mukhrani, the senior branch of Georgia's former Bagrationi dynasty, as dynastic princes are being minimised by Jaqeli despite the fact that he asked and was told here that the standard English translation of Mukhranbatoni is "Prince of Mukhrani". Jaqeli and I disagree about the dynasticity of the Mukhrani in Georgia, which is why instead of substituting "dynast" for "nobleman" as I think it should be, I've compromised, restoring NPOV by simply omitting "nobleman" and leaving "Georgian" -- a term on which we both agree. FactStraight ( talk) 05:55, 29 May 2014 (UTC) reply

Nobility can also be dynastic. Many Georgian noble families were dynastic, some even predating the royal dynasty. So, I'm having a hard time understanding what the dispute is about. -- Kober ^Talk 09:33, 19 January 2015 (UTC) reply

Dynasts are almost always also noble, whereas most nobles are not dynasts. As you will recall, at least one contributor edited several articles on the House of Mukhrani to describe its members as Georgian nobles on the contention that, as tavadi, they were non-dynasts despite their legitimate male line descent from kings of Georgia and the historical fact that the Mukhran-batoni succeeded to the Kartlian throne upon extinction of the senior branch of the Bagrationi (This is as if the fact that Henri de Bourbon, Duke of Vendôme was a ducal noble, French peer and only a remote kinsman of the Valois Kings of France meant that he was not also a dynast of the House of Capet). These edits explicitly emphasized an interpretation of Georgian monarchism that only descendants of the Gruzinsky branch of the Bagrationi dynasty may be deemed eligible to claim the Kingdom of Kartli and Kakheti and royal rank, whereas I and others have argued that this is one royalist position among several, since other historians and Georgians have recognized the claim of the Mukhrani line, diverse views which drove the marital merger of those two branches in 2009 and between which Wikipedia must remain neutral. FactStraight ( talk) 00:08, 20 January 2015 (UTC) reply