Talk:Arabian Gulf Oil Company

This page has been recently proposed for deletion (23 November 2024) by Imcdc (talk · contribs).

Energy 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Africa: Libya Low‑importance

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa 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.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Libya portal This article is supported by WikiProject Libya (assessed as Low-importance).

It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.

Wikipedians in Libya may be able to help!

The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Arabian Gulf???

What does the Arabian Gulf has to do with Libya??? 95.27.157.84 (talk) 00:06, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Persian Gulf Naming dispute

This company is "Arabian" because it is the Arab state of Libya. The Gulf referred to is the Gulf of Sirte. It is tendentious to tag it as in anyway related to the Persian Gulf Naming dispute. this category should not be added.—User:Maxvermillion

Do you have a source to support your claim that this is referring to the Gulf of Sirte? Also, the name of the company itself is an obvious example of the Persian Gulf naming dispute.--Bijanii (talk) 06:01, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bijanii, the burden is on you to present reliable sources (your opinion doesn't count) showing that the company's name is related to the "dispute". Until then, stop edit warring and trying to push your POV. UCaetano (talk) 18:26, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would argue that it’s actually you who is pushing their POV in this case - the categories should remain as they’re a clear example of the Persian Gulf naming dispute per article and category description.--Bijanii (talk) 05:37, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]