Talk:Economy of Iran

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)

What gives?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

QUESTION: Why is this article written the way it is (i.e. with so many statistics)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.213.240.17 (talk) 19:52, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

"BECAUSE IN SUBSTANCE EVERYTHING WILL BE SETTLED BY THE QUESTION OF FIGURES" (Sarcasm?) :-) (SSZ (talk) 01:56, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

apparently NOT ;-) 99.203.24.145 (talk) 17:05, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

"somebody" has been listening carefully... :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.213.244.236 (talk) 01:55, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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)

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

?? Rouhani to woo business in Davos but Iran hurdles abound(Lihaas (talk) 14:56, 20 January 2014 (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%7CITC 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)

Request For Comments

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard

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 Raamin 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)

The |gdp= parameter comes with |gdp rank=, 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 |gdp=, |gdp rank=, |per capita= and |growth= should cover 2013 for the moment.
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)

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)

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)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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)

"Quantum" economics?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

A new model for economics? (when the word "economic program" takes a whole new meaning!) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.193.140.58 (talk) January 25, 2016

Including "spiritual solution to economic problems" ? 47.17.27.189 (talk) 04:06, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

This is a Baha'i idea, but this is the first time ever that a scheme has been devised that can allow the human SPIRIT/MIND to take control of the economy DIRECTLY locally and globally (through the use of Computer chips/Gates, informational economy, Electronic money, etc.). This work deserves a Nobel prize :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.17.20.247 (talk) 20:23, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"The Occult Technology of Power" - The Initiation of the Son of a Finance Capitalist into the Arcane Secrets of Economic and Political Power (p. 16) states that any technological or scientific revolution in the field of economics - which is a major help for mankind as a whole - is a mortal THREAT to "the international Bankers" at the same time (because it will reduce their power if implemented! As such, this scientific discovery that you have posted here is a unique threat to them and they will try to censor you, [including in Iran]. Kindly, Timetravel12 (talk) 17:10, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

..I googled your name based on your discussion with WP foundation director (as per linked court documents in the title above) and I could not find ANY Baha'i remarks or actions either. STRANGE...($5 trillions used DAILY for YEARS against one Baha'i and proven in US court & undisputed by the FBI). STRANGE! Timetravel12 (talk) 13:28, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

See also here!: "33 in the name and the triangle" & for info, there are also train stations in Iran with massonic symbols :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timetravel12 (talk • contribs) 22:38, 16 December 2020 (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 [1]. --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)

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)

References

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)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on Economy of Iran. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.unesco.org/education/wef/countryreports/iran/rapport_2.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.tehrantimes.com/index.php/economy-and-business/3959-iran-to-boost-power-generation-capacity-by-25000mw
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.irandailybrief.com/2012/05/11/economy-minister-per-capita-income-in-iran-has-surpassed-13000-dollars-per-year-17th-largest-economy-in-the-world-in-2012/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110713020710/http://faostat.fao.org/site/339/default.aspx to http://faostat.fao.org/site/339/default.aspx
• Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601080&sid=aEGZ4sBCjHQE&refer=asia
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761567300_6/Iran.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.atiehbahar.com/Resources/Oil%26Gas.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-01/sanctions-cost-iran-60-billion-in-oil-investments-burns-says.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://store.businessmonitor.com/iran-us-rapprochement-historic-opportunities-beckon.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.austrade.gov.au/australia/layout/0%2C%2C0_S2-1_CLNTXID0019-2_-3_PWB1151550-4_doingbusiness-5_-6_-7_%2C00.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.chicagobooth.edu/alumni/clubs/pakistan/docs/next11dream-march%20%2707-goldmansachs.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://presstv.com/detail/2014/08/20/375967/iran-governments-economic-fight/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://presstv.com/detail/2014/08/13/375130/boosting-international-trade-in-iran/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:54, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• HWL110-2--web64.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:21, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Reason

Please tell a reason Pahlevun https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Economy_of_Iran&diff=980594867&oldid=980453204 Baratiiman (talk) 15:41, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

This article is rated 'Good' and adding a picture that violates MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE is not an improvement. Pahlevun (talk) 15:47, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

PahlevunPoverty=Beggar Baratiiman (talk) 16:16, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

With such an interpretation, you had previously added the same picture to the article Fashion in Iran. This is not an important illustrative aid, at all. Please read MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE once. Pahlevun (talk) 16:22, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

i say it is very very important and i ask you to gain consensus before removing the pic Baratiiman (talk) 16:26, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

WP:BRD applies here, and inclusion needs consensus. Note that this is a WP:GA. Pahlevun (talk) 16:31, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Bonadea you said im harassing pahlevun well you can be of use what do you think of this image in #poverty?

Begger

your opinion is required Þjarkur Baratiiman (talk) 14:15, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

What does this image of a woman standing in the sidewalks exactly improve in this article? I am also curious to know how the same picture is in anyway relevant to Fashion in Iran, because you added it to that article too. Pahlevun (talk) 14:31, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

I added it here because it shows poverty but you disagree, i put it in fashion in iran because the title of the photo is "Hijab". OK,You made your point and i made my point now it is time for the two other parties who like to participate to give their consensusBaratiiman (talk) 14:33, 28 September 2020 (UTC) You said this pic is not about the text? the text is about poverty the picture is a beggar do you get it? David notMD Baratiiman (talk) 14:41, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

I agree that it's not relevant in a broad topic such as this; nearly every country has some poverty, including most of the countries with the highest GDPs. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:10, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Ohnoitsjamieit is decided im putting it in poverty in iran there is none Baratiiman (talk) 15:38, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

No, it's not decided. Wikipedia operates on policy and consensus. You don't have either on your side at this point. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:50, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Ohnoitsjamie you are speaking of this wikipedia? This wikipedia is not a democracy thank god Baratiiman (talk) 15:57, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

I concur that the image (women in hijab, begging) does not contribute to the article as written. The article mentions that a percentage of the population lives below the poverty level, but there is no referenced mention on the prevalence of public begging. David notMD (talk) 18:07, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

New addition begging

Bonadea whats wrong with the sentence and the pic since these people said the pic should fit the text i brought the text for the pic.Baratiiman (talk) 15:51, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

I added an explanation on your user talk page. The text that was added here is a sentence copied straight from the source with no context – and that is why it reads so oddly. The source (there are two links there but it is the same source) discusses a research study involving a number of beggars in Tehran, which investigated the prevalence of HIV. The sentence "In a survey conducted in Tehran during 2007 to 2008, 4230 men and women beggars were collected by municipality" refers to that study, and apart from the fact that it was copied straight from the source (which is always unacceptable per WP:COPYVIO), it is irrelevant to this article. To try to get around a consensus against inclusion for the picture by trying to find some vaguely related text, just to be able to add the picture to the article, is not really constructive. The images should add extra understanding to the text, the text is not there to serve as background info to the images. --bonadea contributions talk 15:57, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Bonadea what say you help this page In 2015 there were 5000 beggars in Tehran almost.https://www.mehrnews.com/news/3735465/%D8%A8%D8%A7-%D8%B4%D8%A7%D8%AE%D9%87-%D9%87%D8%A7%DB%8C-%D8%AA%D8%AE%D8%B5%D8%B5%DB%8C-%DA%AF%D8%AF%D8%A7%DB%8C%DB%8C-%D8%AF%D8%B1-%D8%AA%D9%87%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%A2%D8%B4%D9%86%D8%A7-%D8%B4%D9%88%DB%8C%D8%AF Bonadea im uploading this pic in wiki common too and then putting in beggars https://www.mehrnews.com/news/3735465/ Baratiiman (talk)

@Baratiiman: How do you know that the photo that's published in mehrnews.com is not copyright protected? --bonadea contributions talk 16:08, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Ah, never mind, I see the CC BY 4.0 notice at the bottom of that page. --bonadea contributions talk 16:11, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

However, just because the image might be OK to upload to Commons, that doesn't mean it should be added to this article since it doesn't directly illustrate or explain any of the content of the article. MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE still applies. --bonadea contributions talk 16:20, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

bonadea i googled beggars prevalqnce for iran got nothing i cant see what is in this.pages https://amp.dw.com/fa-ir/iran/a-45729005 https://en.radiofarda.com/amp/thousands-of-children-forced-to-work-beg-in-the-streets-in-iran/30142546.html Baratiiman (talk) 16:28, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

This addition has been rejected by four other experienced editors. I suggest you drop it and move on. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:26, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Good article doesn't look like anything to me Ohnoitsjamie i suggest you go to pages YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH.in comparison these pages are good articles: Telegram in spanish wikipedia AND THIS PAGE https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ispahan this good article criteria is ajoke for a broken website that is wikipediaBaratiiman (talk) 18:29, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

3 million famlies

because this page is a good article. .As of November 2020 three million impoverished families dont have any transactions in banks https://www.eghtesadonline.com/fa/amp/news-480793 Baratiiman (talk) 11:42, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

I edited Social class in Iran as per above with a source indicating that indeed 3 million people have not been registered with the social security organization. Cheers. Timetravel12 (talk) 22:50, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

I've closed the requested edit template based on the changes made by Timetravel12 above. Orville^talk 07:22, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

USA did not lift most of the international sanctions.

In 2015, Iran and the P5+1 reached a deal on the nuclear program, and it barely removed any international sanctions. Whoever wrote that it removed most of the international sanctions is clearly spreading disinformation.

Sickofthisbs (talk) 14:33, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Please note, Wikipedia is NOT a forum. If you have any issue with cited sources, you can always ask an editor for a second opinion. 172.58.236.105 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 14:27, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

GDP number

I don't know the subtleties of the meaning of GDP, but see that it varies a lot depending on the source. Recently there have been unexplained edits making radical changes to the number. The linked source is dead. Would someone who know's what's what please update the number and include a reliable source. Thank you, SchreiberBike | ⌨  19:53, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi. I was wondering if the gdp given is correct or not. But imf states that Iran's nominal gdp has crossed 1 trillion usd in 2021. Here is the link https://www.statista.com/statistics/294233/iran-gross-domestic-product-gdp/ Thanks Swarnendu Roychowdhury (talk) 22:29, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Some sources are missing

Someone has removed many sources related to PressTV. While I don’t care who report economic data (as long as it is correct), I do care they are now missing for no good reasons, as all the economic data could be find in other newspapers (including in US economic journals!). If you need to find missing sources revert this article to early 2020 to find them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.58.236.24 (talk) 10:09, 31 March 2022 (UTC)