Talk:2007 gasoline rationing plan in Iran

Iran Low‑importance

	Iran portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Energy C‑class Low‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy 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.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.
	This page has been marked as needing an image.

Untitled

This is really dubious. Gas rationing in Iran is a response to a bill proposed in the US House (not even voted on in committee mind you) two days AFTER the gas rationing began? Sounds like propaganda to me. GabrielF 21:42, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The news was around long before the bill was officially proposed. There is no doubt that Iran's action was a pre-emptive measure. The issue has been widely covered in Persian language media. US plan was not a secret one. Please do not forget that the Iranian conservatives were against this plan over the last few decades. How come did they suddenly change their mind? It is clear that their main concern is politics and not economy. Sina Kardar 12:04, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Iranian president's quote that clearly refer to US plan and also the nuclear issue. Sina Kardar 12:31, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I must agree with Gabriel. There is no reason to mention this bill here. Moreover, it is news (See WP:NOT). I am not sure also WHO wanted to maintain these subsidies and who didn't. The subsidies were a big "cash cow" for the rulers, please see Ministry of Petroleum of Iran for explanations. Dr. Ahmadinejad tried to change that before and after he was elected by referring to "the oil mafias" running the oil industry in Iran. His choice for Minister of petroleum was rejected several times by the Parliament because of it.69.116.234.208 10:39, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also the section about gas rationing is good & useful and I would keep it "as is".69.116.234.208 10:47, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the material on the rationing itself is good, however, the explanation of why the rationing is taking place is completely OR and POV. In the first sentence, rationing is attributed to "foreign threats", but there's no context beyond that. Here's what the BBC says:

“

She [BBC correspondent] says the government is trying to rein in fuel consumption over fears of possible UN sanctions over its nuclear programme.

”

Yet instead of mentioning the UN, Sina makes unsourced allegations of American involvement and does not mention the reasons for sanctions except in a quote from Ahmadinejad referring to "nuclear energy". Wikipedia cannot cite the President of Iran's opinions as fact. We can't state one editor's unsourced assumptions about how a particular piece of US legislation influence Iranian policy as fact. GabrielF 13:48, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"except in a quote from Ahmadinejad" !!!! What else do you need??! He is the Iranian president and Gas rationing is his plan! Sina Kardar 17:28, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the reason to ration fuel in Iran is mostly internal as explained on the Ministry of Petroleum of Iran page. The related pollution, waste and smuggling could not continue like that forever. US sanctions are only one additional national security concern for Iran but not the main reason for fuel rationing, at the present time, in my opinion. 69.116.234.208 14:16, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that there are many reasons involved. The president who launched the plan directly connects it to nuclear program and the US plan too. We have to include his statement. No excuse for deleting his quote! Sina Kardar 17:24, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

figures on Iranian imports

The BBC and the AP have different figures on Iran's gas imports: 40%/$5 billion vs. 50%/$10 billion. Is there a definitive source or is it best to quote a range of estimates? GabrielF 14:23, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the number is somewhere between 30% and 40% at the present time (not 50%).[1]. I think 40% is good enough. 69.116.234.208 14:43, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Better title?

To make the title more meaningful to non-North Americans, I suggest renaming the page to "fuel rationing" rather than "gas rationing". In British English, "gas" would more likely be taken to mean "natural gas" rather than "gasoline" (i.e. petrol), which is what is being discussed here. Thus "fuel" seems a sensible compromise. --RFBailey (talk) 05:48, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]