Talk:Said bin Taimur

message: I'm sorry, but I think this does not do the man justice:
"Despite the wealth that Oman accumulated through its vast petroleum reserves, the Sultan refused to use this money for the benefit of his subjects, and the country essentially remained a feudal monarchy, run at Said's whim."
* 1. I do not believe the Omani petroleum reserves were ever 'vast'. Modest to moderate would be more accurate.
* 2. I also do not believe Oman was run at his 'whim'. It implies that he did as he pleased at random. The author fails to take into account the 'type of Oman' that Said inherited, namely a country in debt which could not make ends meet. Because of this, indeed, he did not spend much and certainly not on his subjects, because his main concern was keeping his country 'in the black'. There simply was no money to be spent.
* 3. Which brings me to my third point. In addition to the supposed 'vast' reserves, which I believe to be untrue, wealth had not been accumulated until very, very late in Said's reign. Serious oil drilling did not occur in Oman until the mid to late 60s, just a few years before his reign ended. The author makes it seem as if Said had all this wealth for decades and just sat on it. 
I do however agree, that in that short time that he did have wealth, he did not spend it. Again, looking at him simply as an invidiual who starts his 'career' in debt, it is plausible that this would mark a person and make one cautious in spending.
So, I believe that section should be nuanced a bit, taking a broader perspective of the economical context of 1930s Oman and Said as a person. 
(I'm afraid I don't have any sources to quote for you, but if I'm in the library again I'll give you the names of some books. I'm not planning to edit the article, I only edit discussion pages, thanks, Vince (talk) 09:31, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: And, I think there is also room to doubt wether Qaboos staged a coup, as is claimed. There are eye witness accounts from that era, which suggest that Qaboos was merely a participant in the coup, not the instigator, and that in fact it was a British Army Major who helped put Qaboos on the throne. Again, that's just another claim, but just as unfounded as the entirety of the current article. If noone re-writes the article soon, I'll scrap all unverified information and stick purely to objective facts. Vince (talk) 00:10, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "run at Said's whim."? 

message: I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
::This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
::#There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
::#It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
::#In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:37, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]] 

message: If Said bin Taimur was exiled in 1970, and lived two years after, how did he die in 1970, as well? Time machine? --Agamemnus (talk) 07:36, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of death