Talk:Economy of Scotland

This article is written in Scottish English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, travelled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Scotland Top‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics 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.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Business Mid‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Economics Low‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics 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.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A summary of this article appears in Scotland.

Untitled

This article was nominated for deletion on 5 January 2006. The result of the discussion was KEEP. An archived record of this discussion can be found here.

Expansion Help?

I appreciate this is already a fairly big article, but I think there is lots of scope for expansion namely in:

Overview of Economic History
Components of Manufacturing
Exports perhaps some tables, graphs etc showing trends.
Banking and Financial Services Standard Life, RBS, the position of Edinburgh and Glasgow as financial centres
Other Services eg telecommunications, sales, retail etc
Manufacturing Industries eg food and drink, capital equipment, electonics, Sillicon Glen etc
Knowledge based industry eg biotechnology, medical research and development

Thanks Globaltraveller 17:51, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Scottish Expatriot

Here's part of what I posted at the Reference Desk, in answer to a question about the British economy:

Economy of Scotland article needs a lot of editing volunteers ... as one who lived there for 15 years, I believe major elements of the economy include: tourism; north sea oil; fishing; manufacturing; education, and last but not least, whiskey. User:AlMac|^(talk) 21:12, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Whisky, yes. ;)

And why the hell are the economic figures given in USD???

We use UKP here!

I'll try and improve on it.

Guinnog 01:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Steel has not been an industry here for decades

Guinnog 21:37, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Geography of Scotland

This has turned into a great article. Could I ask that one of the contributors write a short summary for the 'Economy of Scotland' section of Geography of Scotland? It's about 2 lines at the moment, and could use some expansion with relevant info. Thanks, ::Supergolden:: 11:39, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Third or fourth?

The link to the national statistics says that GDP per capita in Scotland in 2005 was £16,944, this is below London (£27,088) and South East England (£18,976), but after those two is Scotland, closely followed by East England (£16,906). Does this mean it is actually third, or is it fourth when adjusted for PPP or against the RPI or something like that? Doesn't put me up or down really whether it's third or fourth all for the sake of £38 but if it has to be mentioned then it should be correct.

Edits by Ecr33

Hello, I have been going through the contributions of this particular user owing to some edits to biogas. I have been systematically reverting many of the spam edits this user has made, however in this article some of the content may actually be relevant. I am somewhat loath to simply revert the entire contents of the user's edits, can someone who is a bit more familiar with this page please have a look at the diffs and try to untangle the good stuff from the spam? Thanks User A1 (talk) 23:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Scottish bank notes

My own experience does not agree with the claim that "they are universally accepted throughout the UK". Clearly this is just OR, but can anyone show any empirical evidence to substantiate this claim? Markb (talk) 11:38, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Manufacturing

I deleted Weir Group from defence companies,they make pumps and such like, not wepons. Is that figure 28% of Europe's P.Cs still true, I thought it had fallen back but I would LOVE to be wrong. --81.153.247.174 (talk) 16:47, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We export computers?

"Export goods: Aerospace & Naval Systems, Barley, Buses, Business & Financial Services, Chemical Products, Computers, Computer Software, Electricity, Electronics, Fish, Irn–Bru, Oil & Gas, Pharmaceuticals, Potatoes, Renewable Energy, Scotch Whisky, Ships, Shortbread, Textiles, Timber, Water" - From the page

Do we really export a substantial amount of "Computers"? What does this refer to?-86.161.47.16 (talk) 20:59, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

high tech = Scotland. electronics/computers/ATM machines/semiconductors telecom gear & related "now accounts for roughly half of Scotland's total exports. Overseas- based firms operate 158 electronics companies in Scotland, including three of the world's top-ten telecommunications equipment." from Roger Dendinger; Charles F. Gritzner (2009). Scotland. Infobase. p. 62. Rjensen (talk) 01:14, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semiprotection

Page blanking is not a way to argue a point. Have semiprotected so folks can discuss and state their point here if need be. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:48, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The section being blanked, Relationship with the United Kingdom, has been edited extensively by User:Lolm8, who made similar highly questionable changes to the Scotland article between 15th October and 3rd November, with edits overwhelmingly not supported by citations. These citations were largely statistics alone, given interpretation and considerable spin not voiced in the citations. The user marks all their edits as minor, few if any of them fitting the description. The user was blocked twice for warring on this matter. They appear to have been active on the section here since the 13th June so I will revert to the edit previous to this. Apologies if this removes any credible edits made in this period. Mutt Lunker (talk) 16:25, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the rest of the article is unchanged, well spotted. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:44, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think the current relationship with the UK and the potential implications of independence on the economy need to be in separate sections. As of May 2014, we don't know the result of the future independence vote or the effects on the economy of independence if it happens. This section should balance optimistic and pessimistic prognoses with quotes for each position. Past and current good performance can be used to boost both the Nationalist case (Scotland is in a good position to go it alone) and the Unionist case (the good performance happened while Scotland was part of the Union).

There is a lot of information here about the current economic relationship between the Scotland and the UK - amount of exports, sectors etc http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0041/00412570.pdf FScot2 (talk) 14:23, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Subsidy?

Should we not address the widely held myth of Scottish subsidy by the UK? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.70.199.231 (talk) 14:32, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If the subject of whether there is a subsidy either way is to be covered it must be reliably sourced, not from original research interpretations of statistics, as was the case for the section discussed above. Mutt Lunker (talk) 16:13, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The figures relating to Scotland's financial position have been quoted from data supplied by the SNP-led Scottish Government in support of their case for Scottish independence, and so can hardly be considered impartial. Strictly speaking, North Sea oil does not "come from Scotland" but from a part of the seabed which lies in International Waters and for which extraction rights were ceded to the UK government. Moreover, the oil is taxed at various points, including garage forecourts, most of which are not in Scotland. To allocate oil revenues purely to Scotland is somewhat disingenuous, not least because it is far from certain how the oil (and national debt!) would be divided at any future settlement. Once oil is stripped out of the equation, Scotland's economic performance becomes vastly more precarious, and this is surely a point which should be noted in the article. Some comentators have suggested a budget defecit of 23% of GDP! If nothing else, it is fair to point out that Scotland's economy is hugely dependent upon oil, particularly given the parlous state of her "Scottish" but UK-owned and UK-guaranteed banking sector. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.176.105.150 (talk) 16:19, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Decrease" indicates a decrease

In editing the stats section of the infobox, the word "decrease" indicates a decrease. It displays as a down arrow which indicates a downwards trend. The citation attached to the unemployment statistic is entitled "Record fall in unemployment", so a decrease. The change by the IP editor to the word "increase" and its resultant up arrow plainly contradicts this. Perhaps the trend should not be indicated in the box but if it is it should be indicated correctly. Mutt Lunker (talk) 06:59, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The arrow points in the direction of the trend; this a very plain and obvious way to indicate direction. If you see my point, why on earth do you persist in introducing an error which makes the arrow point in the wrong way? The attendant colour is not a value judgement on whether the trend is a worsening or improving one, it is just the convention here that an increase is indicated by a green upwards arrow, a decrease by red downwards one. If you have picked up somewhere else that green=good, red=bad, forget it, that is not the convention here. If you think you have a point to make, address it here but do not persist in making the same erroneous edit. If you make the edit again I will address it as Wikipedia:Vandalism, whether this is intentional or an issue of WP:Competence. Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:17, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 13 external links on Economy of Scotland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:58, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Economy of Scotland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:45, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Economy of Scotland. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140607224146/http://www.economicsurvey.org.uk:80/ to http://www.economicsurvey.org.uk

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 11:32, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Economy of Scotland. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 20:35, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 15 external links on Economy of Scotland. 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:

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) 02:28, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Flag of the African Union (free).png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:37, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Inconsistent GDP figures

The lead gives an undated figure for GDP in pounds and the infobox gives a 2018 figure in dollars, that I can't seem to find in the source (but can't see where I should be looking). Yes, it is conventional to give GDP in dollars at nominal rate and purchasing power parity rate, in addition to the local currency. Could someone more local resolve, please? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 23:27, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Possible impact of COVID

Two recent edits, the latter mine, have pruned material and a press release source about the impact of the pandemic on the economy. This seemed too much a piece of Wikipedia:Recentism and speculation for the article introduction, but I'm happy to restore if others can identify a specific need for it here. AllyD (talk) 06:30, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oil

Does GDP include offshore oil extraction that is closer geographically to Scotland than to other parts of the UK ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.144.245.205 (talk) 04:45, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relevance of photo

I have removed a posed photo-op as it doesn't seem to illuminate the industrial history of Scotland with which it had been placed. I am not really seeing an alternative placement for such a photo in the article but happy to discuss further if someone identifies a placement and role for such a photo in this particular article. AllyD (talk) 20:34, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]