Talk:Economy of Gibraltar

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Economy of Gibraltar[edit]

The idea of this page is to give an overview of the gibraltar economy, including statistical information, and Tax data.

Perhaps someone experienced in Wiki layout could assist in defining the style so its consistent.

I have commissioned an article describing the economy and the tax regime by a leading accounting professional as the latter is particularly missunderstood. These will be added as soon as they are available. In the meantime the inclusion of propaganda is not productive.--212.120.227.126 15:34, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Planned tax haven end at 2010[edit]

Can someone translate and confirm this unreferenced paragraph found at http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibraltar:

En la actualidad, se encuentra en marcha un proceso que terminará con la total eliminacion de este sistema financiero en 2010. En efecto, el 18 de febrero de 2005, el gobierno británico aceptó la recomendación de la Comisaria de la Competencia de abolir para finales del 2010 el régimen fiscal exento gibraltareño.

It tranlates roughly as 'Spanish rubbish'

Gibraltar is not a tax haven. The present system of tax exempt companies is being phased out and replaced with a new system which is being agreed with the EU. The purpose of Wikipedia is to describe the present not to predict the future, so any inclusion or discussion of this is best left until it happens.

Given that you are competent in both languages, quite why you need a translation is mystery.

The best thing is to remove it from the Spanish wikipedia.--Gibnews 08:55, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that a statement about an ongoing process is a description of the present. Any compelling reason why it should be removed from the Spanish Wikipedia? Pablodiazgutierrez 10:40, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Its basically wrong and makes the assumption that the UK Government is responsible for the tax regime in Gibraltar, which it is not. --Gibnews 17:57, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Casinos and Online Gaming Industry[edit]

There should be a mention on this, given the constant growth of this sector. IMHO, the article looks more like a list than a comprehensive text. Maybe a "To Do" for the future, I would say. --Asterion talk to me 20:20, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The guy writing about 'the economy of Gibralrar' has failed to deliver, but will source a fully comprehensive article in due course. The online sector is indeed doing well, and producing the first Gibraltar billionaires - not me though.--Gibnews 20:31, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnic differences[edit]

In the context of Gibraltar its hard to say there is a category called 'White people' Although there are certainly identifiable Indians, and Moroccans. There are much whiter asians in the UK than the average Gibraltarian and locally racial origin is not exactly a big deal. --Gibnews 09:30, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stats[edit]

I reverted all the data on ethnic earnings, as someone has spent a lot of time adding it and it was referenced to the GoG website, if not explicitly, its probably better to improve that rather than just zapping someones efforts as it took him a lot of goes to get the formatting right.

Probably better to change it to GBP rather than the £ sign. I'll pick up the latest Government statistics and use them to check everything and source the info.

--Gibnews 11:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CO2 Emmissions[edit]

The inclusion of flawed statistics on CO2 emissions is mischievous - the statistics are reported as being flawed as they do not take into account that Gibraltar is a busy bunkering port and only reflect oil imports and not exports.

This was included in the Spanish language wikipedia and quickly picked up and used as a suggestion that Gibraltar 'polluted the planet'. --Gibnews (talk) 01:44, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Statistisc are just that, statistics. Please, avoid removing sourced information on the grounds of your personal prejudices. --Ecemaml (talk) 10:15, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As opposed to abusing statistics, ones known to be flawed to justify personal prejudices? Justin talk 21:05, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems[edit]

The question of copyright has been opened at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2009 November 18. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:27, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The summary of the report in English and Spanish was published as a press release and is therefore in the public domain. I don't really see it being a problem, although the content may upset 'Spanish sensibilities' about Gibraltar. --Gibnews (talk) 19:31, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Press releases are not automatically public domain. If you are able to verify that this one is, then certainly we can use it. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:33, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This one most certainly is, and I suspect the complaint has more to do with previous history with the editor involved as it could have been easily resolved as indeed it will be without all the fuss. --Gibnews (talk) 00:45, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you need assistance with the verification process, please let me know. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 02:03, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry Gibnews, but given your history on copyright issues (as when you claimed copyright on a treaty between the governments of the UK and Spain and falsely accused me of copyright violation in wikisource) I prefer to use the aseptic regular procedures. And you see, they have worked (he had a copyright violation and now we have an interesting text released in the public domain). --Ecemaml (talk) 23:32, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent, perhaps you could add the Spanish language version to the es.wikipedia where some editors still mistakenly believe that Gibraltar damages the Campo area economy. I sometimes get complaints about my Spanish being incomprehensible as foreign languages are not my forté. --Gibnews (talk) 23:58, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I also get complaints about my English and keep on trying. You could possibly do the same in the Spanish Wikipedia. --Ecemaml (talk) 21:37, 22 November 2009 (UTC) PS: I assume that your lighthearted comment about some editors in the Spanish Wikipedia is the result of your not so bad skills in Spanish language. I see, see and see again the history of the article "Economía de Gibraltar" and I cannot see any sigh of such accusations of yours ("some editors still mistakenly believe that Gibraltar damages the Campo area economy"). You contributed a copyrighted text without any source and it was asked to be removed on the grounds of being a primary source. It wasn't and when you provided a summary and a source (as usual the one in your website instead of the original one, something that objectively is questionable), the only edition it underwent was an enhancement in the prose)[reply]
For anyone wishing to read the full discourse please see [1]. Just to point out that raising a copyright concern is perfectly valid and is not an accusation. I presume you're having difficulty with your English but there was not a copyright violation as he had permission to publish, the material was in fact already in the public domain. Un abrazo. Justin talk 23:51, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you're completely right and obviously raising a copyright concern is perfectly valid. Maybe you could explain it to Gibnews ("I suspect the complaint has more to do with previous history with the editor involved as it could have been easily resolved as indeed it will be without all the fuss"). However, you know that the process with regard to copyright is first getting the permission and then publishing. Nobody is requested to have telepathy in order to guess whether a copyrighted text has been properly authorized. A mere statement on "I have permission" is, as you know, useless for wikipedia purposes. We have a proper way to handle authorizations and it's through the OTRS system. Before, we had a copyright violation. The regular process to handle it was run and, as a result, we have a proper permission (which, BTW, is rather different to considering the text in the public domain since it does not allows its modification). Best regards --Ecemaml (talk) 21:37, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Easily resolved, as permission to reproduce was available in the public domain, perhaps a little good faith would have been in order before removing the text before the copyright issue had been resolved. The OTRS system in this case was overkill since it was already PD. Either you can now resolve the issue on the Spanish wikipedia. Justin talk 21:55, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Which issue? --Ecemaml (talk) 22:00, 22 November 2009 (UTC) PS: I haven't removed any text (as you know, the text was hidden and my "removal" made no difference, since the text was in the history and it wasn't anyway viewable)[reply]

OECD reports[edit]

It's interesting to note that the information showing that Gibraltar was in the OECD list of jurisdictions not implementing the internationally agreed Tax Standard issued in April (which means that it didn't complied to it for seven years) has been removed. Just another sample of NPOV edition? --Ecemaml (talk) 23:46, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What does the source actually say? Pretty much what is in the article. Curious. Apparently when you like something, we have to say exactly the same thing as the source, almost to the point of copyright infringement. But not when you don't. Indeed....curious. So what does the article say?
And the article says:
Precisely what deserves a POV tag? Perhaps you would like the article to include the unfounded allegations of money laundering made by the Spanish Government? 00:15, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry Justin, but I'm afraid I don't understand anything about your statements. If you could reword them to make them understandable, it would be helpful. Anyway, what the source says is:


Therefore I've included the curiously omitted fact related to Gibraltar's lack of implementation of the "internationally agreed tax standard" from 2002 to April 2009. Why it has been removed and in which ground is far from my understanding? I've reintroduced with a different phrasing to avoid the "copyright infringement". --Ecemaml (talk) 00:33, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As such, my edition is as follows (with appropriate sources):
BTW, the initial edition was this (it has been changed to avoid weird copyvio accusations):
Where is the issue then? --Ecemaml (talk) 00:36, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Which doesn't reflect the source in the slightest, there is no mention of any black list. Curious. Very curious. Justin talk 19:50, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The only curious thing here is your umpteenth reversion, this time on the ridiculous grounds of "copyvio". The "black-list" term was not in my initial phrasing, that which you removed without any valid reason. If you don't like my second edition, you could have simply went back to the first one. --Ecemaml (talk) 23:42, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Which was of course not my objection, I restored text that reflected the source. Curious. Justin talk 00:12, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is rather strange too. --Gibnews (talk) 20:57, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bunkering bunkum![edit]

Most readers don't know what bunkering is - I certainly don't. I've tried reding the corresponding wikipedia page which does not entirely explain it. I get the idea that it is to do with fuel oil for ships, but that doesn't really sit nicely with "delivering bunkers". In addition, the reference given is void.

I will delete the paragraph on bunkering unless it is rewritten in a way which can be understood. Francis Hannaway (talk) 08:18, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 8 external links on Economy of Gibraltar. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 05:36, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Economy of Gibraltar. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 09:45, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Economy of Gibraltar. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 19:10, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Economy of Gibraltar. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 09:53, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Economy of Gibraltar. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 21:19, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:55, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Economy_of_Gibraltar&oldid=1196379177"