Talk:Economy of Iran/Archive 5

Copyedit
Upon request, worked through this. Comments:


 * Reduced word count by >10%, mostly be removing dup context. "of Iran", "in Iran",...


 * Sourcing: great!


 * Neutrality: great!


 * Organization: not so great. I didn't do much reorg, because the article has obviously been through so much effort. I found lots of statements in the wrong section, and sections poorly thought through.


 * Put fiscal and monetary policy stuff as part of macroeconomics.


 * "Centralization and privatization" might be better labeled "Structure of firms" or "Ownership".


 * The history section could be much expanded, to include Iran's early roles in trade and agriculture.


 * Five year .... -> National economic planning


 * Labor and welfare -> Labor force. Include info on education here.


 * Sectors. Break out a sub sector for energy, at the level of Manufacturing and services. Leave petrochemicals in mfg.

Feedback welcome. Cheers. Lfstevens (talk) 16:56, 2 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the effort. It looks great. I notice that someone has expanded the Foreign trade section and has added news content (see WP:not). Please keep details in the main sub-articles (i.e. sanctions against Iran). For the petrochemical/energy section, I let you make changes as you see fit. I don't see much content for the petrochemicals to have its own section. Again please look at main sub-article for "details" (i.e. NIPC). 68.199.101.219 (talk) 23:42, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Links
[http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/01/17/us-davos-iran-idUSBREA0G0ZO20140117 ?? Rouhani to woo business in Davos but Iran hurdles abound](Lihaas (talk) 14:56, 20 January 2014 (UTC)).

Request For Comments
There are editors who remove sourced content from this article without any explanation nor does one person (in one instance) want to give ANY explanation as to to why sourced CIA World Factbook (such as "lack of skilled labor", "the Rial was devalued in July 2013" of or trend signs should be deleted for GDP except that "it is not necessary". I must stress this one editor makes otherwise good edits in other articles it seems; but this is strange. I am the ONLY regular editor of this article since 2006 and most of my edits are IP edits such as the present one. Same problem with this article mostly.

2A02:1205:5007:7A80:781E:3EA2:FD56:D7DC (talk) 17:48, 9 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Have you tried to ask why he removed your edit? Have you tried to discuss these problem with other editors? Please do so before raising the matter at this board or at WP:ANI, because both of you are now edit warring. I have notified Raamin, so hopefully he can give a few explanations. Please continue this discussion at Talk:Economy of Iran so you can edit the page without filing a request for protected edits, but also do not revert each other any more or you will be blocked. De728631 (talk) 00:28, 10 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your response. I have tried to ask him (through the edit summary) why he does that and that is the only response i got from him in the past. He refuses apparently to discuss this on the talk page either. For the rest (as i said) before he is a good editor and I appreciate his help on this page in updating economic data! Besides there is NO other editor to discuss this with except admins since (as said before) i am the sole regular editor of the economy of Iran (even though there are about 50 "watchers"). 85.0.119.168 (talk) 10:11, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
 * The reason for those edits were:
 * I saw no benefit in plastering the whole infobox with increase and decrease signs. There are currently numerous articles with no such signs used altogether (see economy articles of Japan, Australia, Brazil, South Korea, Spain or Mexico) or with minimal use (see economy articles of US, Germany, Canada, Russia, Sweden, Argentina etc.). Template:Infobox economy's documentation doesn't promote the usage of increase and decrease signs.
 * For GDP growth rates, achieved numbers are preferred than speculations and projections (from one specific organization).
 * The unemployment note is not suited in this form, becuase the data and source is the Statistical Center of Iran, not CIA factbook. The numbers in these sources are differenta and Statistical Center doesn't mention a shortage; and the CIA note is mentioned as an estimate. Raamin (talk) 16:58, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply (also I would appreciate if you could leave it to the STABLE version while the discussion takes place until consensus is reached, because that is the norm on WP.) Since you are a good editor and out of respect, I leave it "as is" for now.

Secondly, trend signs are ADDITIONAL USEFUL data for readers and that is why they are here. By watching the infobox I can see if the previous year was lower or higher and as an economist this is USEFUL information for me. We impart MAXIMUM information in the smallest amount of SPACE. I don't care if the trend is up or down as long as they are correct. That is all there is to it.

Please remember this article is setting the norm as it is GA and strives to become FA. Only country article on the economy in this category on the English Wikipedia to this day!

Thirdly, GDP growth forecast is ALSO VERY USEFUL DATA. I don't know your education and experience in economics, but this is very useful for example in finance (e.g. Tehran Stock Exchange). Look up "buy the rumor, sell the fact" as one illustration of that fact (e.g. in trading). This data is used to make many decisions in the PRESENT. That is HOW economics and financial markets globally work (i.e. through anticipation). Many investment decisions (e.g. FDI) can also be affected by that and even the interest rate Iran pays as a country to foreign lenders (e.g. thru risk assessment).

Regarding your comment about the unemployment note, this is FACT. Iran lacks skilled labor. That does (by no means) signify Iran has not a very talented youth or older engineers etc. You have decided to switch to Iran's Office of statistics and even though this is not the "norm" with other countries, I let it be because World factbook data lags often (even though they are accurate most times). Iran has many college degree workers but many lack vocational skills as per Iranian and foreign media reports that I saw. This is a FACT and it is material. That is why (I assume) CIA world factbook reports this information as well on its website. This does not contradict Iran statistics office data in any way, it intends to complement it. I don't care HOW Iran's economy LOOKS when I edit. What I care is accuracy, neutrality and COMPLETENESS because that is the SERVICE we strive to provide our readers.

I also take this opportunity to tell you that the Rial devaluation is important information that affects all statistics relating to the Iranian economy (in the sense that it makes comparison very difficult through time since the Rial is the unit of account for Iran) and for that reason ALONE it should be be mentioned atop the infobox (including the Central Bank of Iran) so the readers are made aware of it. I see also you have removed the mention "according to the Iranian government" when it comes to employment data. Please note that within Iran itself you can get a variety of numbers depending on the source (see Economic national planning section as example) so both should be mentioned IMHO (as it is the case in the CIA World factbook.) Cheers !67.83.62.34 (talk) 07:10, 2 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Replies to some questions and requests:


 * 1) Each organization has its own forecasts on different subjects (not only GDP growth), and these forecasts are almost always different. The Tehran Times article which you cited mentions the World Bank forecast for 2014; IMF, CBI and SCI should have a different forecast. If users decide to add all these different forecasts from different places on different subjects, the infobox would become very bloated and confusing for normal readers. Wikipedia articles are in the first place for a normal reader, not an economist.
 * 2) I personally find the increase and decrease signs most useful in ranking type inputs, and numbers that can easily be compared by readers when they check the source. Ease-of-doing-business by World Bank is a good example; it is ranking type, and the source provides enough data for readers to compare.
 * 3) Regarding the CIA note on employment data: I personally don't like to mix part of source A with another part of source B for a specific data. When I use SCI as a source for employment data (because it is more detailed, and not an estimate, unlike CIA Factbook's number), I prefer to stick to that source.
 * 4) Rial devaluation didn't happen just in 2013, it happend earlier, and will probably happen in future. The currency has stabilized in 2014. An extra note about such events has no place in the Infobox of a Central Bank IMO. Such information goes to the related curreny article; in this case Iranian rial. Cheers. Raamin (talk) 02:30, 5 January 2015 (UTC)


 * In reference to your point 1. above, I get your point regarding using different sources for forecasts. However SAME HOLDS true for GDP estimates (e.g. IMF, World Bank or CIA World Factbook sources). Yet, we choose to provide a GDP number in the infobox *nevertheless*. So this is not a valid/coherent argument *in this case*. The BEST would be to have a consensus estimate from several reliable sources (e.g. a mean average - Financial news providers can sometimes provide this information for a fee & automatically (e.g. Reuters 3000 terminal).)


 * Regrading your point 2 above, trend and rankings are not the same. Again I don't see ANY reasons to omit this information arbitrarily (and CIA Factbook provides this information as well under a different format, somewhat). What is true is that is going to be a PAIN to keep this information current and up-do-date over time but this is true for *ALL* economic data!


 * Regarding your point 3. above, this is not a "mix" but a complement information regarding the SAME subject. Unless you can demonstrate this information is somewhat erroneous (which you didn't do so far) allow me to suggest to keep BOTH information, as it is a plus for readers.


 * The devaluation of Rial happened over a period of 1 year approximately, correct but we are talking about official rates here. But this is beyond the point. My point is that it skews statistical data year-over-year and should be mentioned in the infobox of the Central Bank of Iran (as well) since this article has lots of statistics, so that readers are made aware of this potential problem in their comparisons.67.83.63.86 (talk) 19:24, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Data that comes with an increase (decrease) sign, should be easily comparable by the reader (the example I mentioned); otherwise it's just a sign beside a number without real meaning. I also mentioned that numerous articles exist with minimal usage of such signs; this shows that there is no consensus to encourage the use of these signs extensively and for every number in the infobox. Infobox central bank should provide basic information about a specific organization. Rial devaluation in 2013 is not such an info, and its place is not in that infobox. Raamin (talk) 16:58, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
 * The  parameter comes with , which links to List of countries by GDP (nominal) and List of countries by GDP (PPP); both cases have currently IMF and World Bank data and rankings for 2013. Related numbers in the Infobox should logically reflect these to avoid confusion, so  ,  ,   and   should cover 2013 for the moment.


 * As a compromise I suggest 1. add "Lack of skilled labor" as per World Factbook data. 2. add trend sign for inflation (alone) since this is not affected by any of your comments above. 3. Ask WP:Request for Comments in order to obtain consensus on any issues left. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.87.53.173 (talk) 04:45, 8 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I was invited here by a bot. Not sure what the question is. Elinruby (talk)

Hi Elinruby,

The questions left for ideas are:
 * 1) do we need (or is useful to have) trend signs (year-over-year) for GDP growth and inflation in the infobox? (so people will know if the previous number was lower or higher)
 * 2) do we need to add GDP growth prediction data in the infobox? (as it affects present and important economic decisions - please see detailed above arguments.)
 * 3) do we need to add "according to the Iranian government" and "lack of skilled labor" notes for employment and labor data respectively in the infobox? (as given by the CIA World factbook)
 * 4) do we need to add "devaluation of the Rial" in the infobox of the CBI (in addition to here) to make readers aware of the issue in comparing economic data over time? (for details please see above explanations)
 * 5) this one was not discussed above but I would like to add it here: do we need to add "SH" in the infobox after dates/years? (since the Iranian fiscal calendar is already defined atop the info box, and other countries do not add this info either, e.g. economy of China.)

In advance, thanks for any input! 67.87.51.51 (talk) 21:36, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Can anyone fix Iranian Export numbers?
In Iranian Exports numbers there are wrong numbers. Would you please fix it.

The current $61b mentioned in "Economy of Iran" page is not correct.

Iran had $61b of non-oil exports in 2014 (1393 Iranian Calendar)as it is announced officially many times:

http://www.ghatreh.com/news/nn26313667/%D9%85%DB%8C%D8%B2%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%B5%D8%A7%D8%AF%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%BA%DB%8C%D8%B1-%D9%86%D9%81%D8%AA%DB%8C-%D8%B3%D8%A7%D9%84 http://khabarfarsi.com/ext/13200725 http://www.mashreghnews.ir/fa/news/431230/%D9%85%DB%8C%D8%B2%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%B5%D8%A7%D8%AF%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%BA%DB%8C%D8%B1-%D9%86%D9%81%D8%AA%DB%8C-%D8%AF%D8%B1-%D8%B3%D8%A7%D9%84-93

In addition to above mentioned non-oil exports, Iran had an official oil export number of $61.9b for 2013 and $53.6b for 2014.

http://www.opec.org/opec_web/static_files_project/media/downloads/publications/ASB2015.pdf (page.17 - Tabel 2.4)

Therefore,

with a simple calculation total Iranian exports will be at least 61 + 53.6 = $114.6 billion (for 2014)

Can anyone here fix this numbers. I would really appreciate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielaram (talk • contribs) 19:07, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Featured article
Should we candidate this article for featured article? (again) Lbertolotti (talk) 15:12, 12 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I note hat the exact translation of the present artcile has been WP:FA promoted for several years already. 24.191.23.43 (talk) 11:09, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Updates
I updated the numbers regarding GDP based on the links it already was using... There are wrong numbers in the article... I updated them based on the old references (that updated their numbers)....

Look at here:

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2014/02/weodata/weorept.aspx?sy=2010&ey=2015&scsm=1&ssd=1&sort=country&ds=.&br=1&pr1.x=39&pr1.y=8&c=429&s=NGDP_RPCH%2CNGDPD%2CNGDPDPC%2CPPPGDP%2CPPPPC&grp=0&a=

The GDP is far exceeded $1.336 trillions while the article says $1.26 trilions!!

Some other resources of IMF and UN already updated their numbers.... I tried to fix the values with referring them to the existing links but somebody reversed all of my updates!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielaram (talk • contribs) 10:52, 8 June 2015 (UTC)


 * User:Raamin and User:Danielaram seem one and the same person. 2A02:120B:2C18:C3A0:FDC5:8633:59ED:62A5 (talk) 18:51, 7 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi, I reverted you because some references were missing such as for your refname "Iranian_Ministry_of_finance_db_2015_05". Also it is customary NOT to link to WP cos. articles in the infobox (e.g. See economy of the USA). If you need help, please let me know. 67.83.61.246 (talk) 02:20, 11 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Also your quote for 2015-GDP is only a staff estimate (i.e. it is only a statistical regression/projection) and as such cannot be included in the infobox (see WP:CBALL and above discussion for details). 67.83.61.246 (talk) 03:00, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

External link to tariff data
Hello everyone, I am working for the International Trade Centre (ITC), a UN/WTO agency that aims to promote sustainable economic development through trade promotion. I would like to propose the addition of an external link (http://www.macmap.org/QuickSearch/FindTariff/FindTariff.aspx?subsite=open_access&country=SCC364%7cIran+(Islamic+Republic+of)&source=1|ITC Market Access Map) that leads directly to our online database of customs tariffs applied by Iran. Visitors can easily look up market access information for Iran by selecting the product and partner of their interest. I would like you to consider this link under the WP:ELYES #3 prescriptions. Moreover, the reliability and the pertinence of this link can be supported by the following facts 1) ITC is part of the United Nations, and aims to share trade and market access data on by country and product as a global public good 2) No registration is required to access this information 3) Market access data (Tariffs and non-tariff measures) are regularly updated

Thank you, Divoc (talk) 13:45, 16 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I am afraid this link you provided does not meet WP:EL for this topic (not broad enough in its scope). Taxation and customs in Iran seems a better fit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.191.23.43 (talk) 11:12, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I can see your point. Divoc (talk) 09:40, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Post JCPOA economy
Hello all, I think that this article needs a major top-to-bottom overhaul in regard to the current conditions of economy of Iran, that is, post JCPOA. 3/4 of information in this article is clearly outdated and based upon old news. Take for example the newest IMFs report (3rd of October, 2016) written based upon IMF's visit on the ground. --Szalony Mnich (talk) 02:00, 5 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Nothing new here. I have read similar reports in 2012 on the same topics with same recommendations. The article is up-to-date as is. 47.17.27.232 (talk) 05:35, 11 October 2016 (UTC)


 * You have to be joking. Iranian economy already changed from January 2016, otherwise IMF wouldn't release any reports on the country's economy. Iranian economy differs now radically from the previous years when it was crippled under the economic sanctions. Please, don't spread nonsense, Wikipedia is not a self published blog. --Szalony Mnich (talk) 03:45, 14 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your feedback. I don't see much new information in the above IMF report. They talk (for half of the report) about the "re-capitalizing of Iranian banks" (the other half is mainly about predictions). For the rest all facts are updated/reported in this only FA/GA article. please note: sub-sections here are merely "teasers" of "main"-linked more detailed articles. Now if you have any specifics please do share so we can improve this article. Cheers:) SSZ (talk) 21:28, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

New Five-Year economy plan
Can anyone give me reference(in english) of 6th Five-year Development Plan (2016-2021) of Iran. I think we should remove Fifth Economic Development Plan (2010–15) from Economy of Iran. 45.116.233.29 (talk) 03:40, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

IMF report October 2016.
I added figures according to latest IMF October 2016 report and removed old figures. also i updated latest rest of figures via CIA World Fact book. but this 47.17.27.96 ip address is reverting my edits. SpidErxD (talk) 07:26, 7 January 2017 (UTC)


 * This looks like a content dispute that should be discussed here. It's not vandalism. I'll also note that changing the two links was hardly the only thing you did, so maybe those weren't why your changes were reverted. Huon (talk) 13:50, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Please note that you got 2 warnings on your talk page. The reason is there also given. SSZ (talk) 19:59, 7 January 2017 (UTC)


 * i have restored that mistakenly removed paragraph and added current values from IMF Oct 2016 report and CIA world Factbook. You shouldnt have remove all edits based on one mistakenly removed paragraph. You could have just restored that paragraph.SpidErxD (talk) 23:02, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

You have obviously misrepresented my talk page response (reproduced below):

1. First, you have removed an entire paragraph worth of long standing information (mainly World Factbook data) in the lead section without any discussion. Lead sections are intended to summarize content of the entire article. This removal does not help with that.

2. You have removed material economic information from the infobox section such as "Iranian devalued its currency in July 2013" (sourced to World Factbook) without any discussion on the talk page.

3. You have added (non-IMF source) from gfmag.com (and replaced CIA world factbook data) without any consensus (as for public debt).

4. You have replaced latest IMF current data AND estimates with IMF forecasts figures only (e.g. for GDP and per capita GDP). IMF forecasts are not actual confirmed figures. They are only staff estimates (i.e. only statistical projection/prediction of what might (or might not) happen). See WP:CBALL, as explained also on the talk page.

5. You have removed sourced poverty data (from the infobox) also without any prior discussion.

6. Also please see WP:CT when formatting citations.

If there is anything I can help you with or you have questions regarding the above, you can ask on the article's talk page. 47.17.27.96 (talk) 07:38, 7 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Please state clearly what you are disagreeing with and why so we can find a common ground may be. Thanks. Please also note that anymore reverting will get you blocked without prior consensus with me and/or other WP editors. 47.17.27.96 (talk) 23:22, 7 January 2017 (UTC)


 * All Economies page contain estimates figures from IMF Oct 2016 report. see example : Economy of Brazil, Economy of China, Economy of Philippines, Economy of Japan etc. but you don't revert those, maybe because you are just anti iran. Also i just not only updated according to IMF. I also updated latest figures from CIA World Factbook and updated summary. I will revert all my edits. promise me that you will update infobox of Economy of Iran according to latest figures from CIA World Factbook and IMF latest report yourself?. SpidErxD (talk) 11:44, 18 January 2017 (UTC)


 * First, you as SpiderXD and IP are edit warring again, which is not allowed on WP under ANY circumstance.


 * Second, You decided willfully, despite warnings and report to 3RR by another IP editor to continue your disruption of this article. For someone who had no interest in economy according to previous edit history (from Pakistan) we might see this as STRANGE.


 * Third, for unexplained reason, YOU decided NOT to respond to my early arguments above (Points 1-6). Instead you refer to other economy article (which I do NOT edit and have no responsibility to edit); call us "anti-Iranian" which is a personal ad hominem attack. This article is FA candidate (and ONLY GA article in the national economy category in WP - English). Understandingly the STANDARD is HIGHER here. If for any reason YOU, as editor, do NOT understand; YOU need to ask more questions (as I have volunteered to answer them before politely). 47.17.27.96 (talk) 04:06, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

GA status
This GA article needs to be demoted AUTOMATICALLY within 1 year from now. Reason: the WP author/editor who took care of it is gone. This article needs updating. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.212.23.45 (talk) 17:49, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Revolutionary idea? - Possible parity between the Iranian crude oil & gas and the Iranian Rial
In the series "ask more", does anyone know why there is no authoritative source or research on this subject (i.e. creating a parity between crude oil & gas and the Iranian Rial) same as between the Swiss Franc and gold years ago. Iran has plenty of "black gold" reserves. Would it boost the value of the Rial? I think so. Are there down sides? Why Iran is not doing it? WP is not a forum, but this subject is central and sources are needed to make note of it in this article. The Iranian oil bourse is yet something else (they trade in Iranian Rial but no parity is established). Thanks for any answers or direction on this important topic. SSZ (talk) 15:26, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * May be because Iran's government would not be able to "play tricks" with domestic loans anymore? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.83.62.34 (talk) 22:34, 24 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Iran sees your posts and may lead the way... (Now read below section titled "Quantum economics?") — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.87.30.207 (talk) 16:28, 15 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Same question should be asked for Russia and its gas reserves..-DEB.


 * The plausible response is that BOTH governments are under the hidden influence of this. See document no. 1, 11 & 12 in court docket (A conspiracy that is NOT supposed to exist!) 99.203.55.88 (talk) 12:57, 20 June 2019 (UTC)