Wikipedia

Talk:Deepwater Horizon oil spill/Archive 14

< Talk:Deepwater Horizon oil spill
Latest comment: 2 years ago by PrimeBOT in topic Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
Archive 10←Archive 12Archive 13Archive 14
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Deepwater Horizon oil spill. 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 23:19, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Deepwater Horizon oil spill. 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 09:38, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Deepwater Horizon oil spill. 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 05:54, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Spanish language article

Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Dear Sirs, this message is to let you know my atonishment for this article not being in spanish when the oil spill was in Mexico a Spanish-speaking country!!! What this is to be interpreted? There would be many but in such a topic is very suspicious!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aluque2004 (talk • contribs) 14:20, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

There is an article on Deepwater Horizon in the Spanish Wikipedia, but apparently none on the oil spill. You're welcome to start one there of course.[1] I believe also there is a procedure for translating articles from other Wikis, but am not familiar with how that is done. Coretheapple (talk) 15:05, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
just to note, the spill was not in Mexican waters... Gandydancer (talk) 15:38, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

US justice biased in favor of US companies?

Latest comment: 8 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Not know if this in interest for article, but rough calculation of fine pay by BP for spill (10,000$/barrel) compare Exxon Valdez spill (1,000$/barrel) lead me conclude US loves suck blood out foreign business and then take over (e.g. Microsoft destruction of Nokia)

VW you need move Transylvania ASAP! We have many China friends there >;)

Seriously though, the disproportionate hammering of BP compared to US based businesses (*ahum Holyburton*) needs to be more thoroughly addressed in this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1812ahill (talk) 05:24, 13 November 2015‎ (UTC)

No, what BP got was fair under the OPA. One of the maxims of equity is that he who takes the benefit must bear the burden. That is, BP would have earned the lion's share of profits if the Macondo well had been drilled and operated properly, so it's fair to hit it with the burden for making such a huge mess. --Coolcaesar (talk) 22:25, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
Coolcaesar is essentially correct. 1812ahill, the costs incurred from the DWH spill (as established by reliable sources) go beyond a simple "fine per barrel" measurement. Of course the US "loves sucking blood out of foreign business." This is what capitalist countries do, is it not? Comparing the Exxon Valdez spill and Microsoft's dealings with Nokia (not destruction, nor a merger or even a takeover) to Deepwater Horizon is an apples-to-oranges, borderline straw man comparison. Taking into account the British peoples' investments in BP and their understandably reflexive responses to the limp-wristed attempts of the US government for redress, it needs to be pointed out that the Gulf Coast economy is considerably larger and more diverse than the arctic Alaskan coast. Many diverse communities and industries were wiped out, and media blackout (enforced by BP with the complicity of the US government) meant most of the gory details of the event were kept away from the public eye. Alt lys er svunnet hen (talk) 04:48, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

I guess the moral of the story is don't do business in the US. Go to China or Russia, make friends with the grandees and pay a consistant predictable bribe in a stable business environment not encumbered by such niceties as 'democracy'. 1812ahill (talk) 00:11, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Age of the Deepwater Horizon rig

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I'm a bit confused why the article states that the rig was 26 years old, when the wikipedia article about the rig, and the book Fire on the Horizon by Tom Shroder and John Conrad, say that it was built in 2000. That would be 10-years old at the time of the explosion. Can someone explain the discrepancy? I'm going to change it, since I have a reliable source that it was built in 2000.Steve Marethyu (talk) 00:09, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Deepwater Horizon oil spill. 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) 03:32, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on Deepwater Horizon oil spill. 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) 17:39, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Referral Vandal

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I'm just a minor Wiki editor, but I deleted what seemed like someones attention grabbing scam / vandalism in the top line redirect (DH spill vs explosion). Won't mention the name, just look at the earlier edition. What with the new film premiering about now, Wiki editors may have to watch for this sort of mischief.GeeBee60 (talk) 13:19, 22 September 2016 (UTC)


Desperatewater Horizon Vandalism? On a similar note, there appears to be vandalism that has gone unnoticed for some time - the "wikibox" on the right of the page has been edited to read "Desperatewater Horizon Oil Spill, which judging from the edit history, has evaded 11+ days worth of edits and revision. 86.18.97.100 (talk) 14:54, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on Deepwater Horizon oil spill. 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) 15:50, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Deepwater Horizon oil spill. 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) 00:06, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Deepwater Horizon oil spill. 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) 15:42, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Deepwater Horizon oil spill. 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) 21:39, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Court case 'Christopher McIntyre v. BP Exploration & Production' relevance?

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The appeal process in the legal case of Christopher McIntyre v. BP Exploration & Production seems to be complete and the relevance to the subject article now appears to be low. Can somebody either remove this section or update it? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.175.145.21 (talk) 12:19, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Additions

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I plan to make some additions to this page, namely adding some photographs and also direct quotes from Coast Guard Captain Roger Laferriere about the response efforts in St. Bernard Parish. I responded to the spill and was on a ship at the surface of the well head when it was finally sealed. I believe Capt. Laferriere's comments about the spill and oil spill response strategy in general can help paint a better picture of the challenges that those leading the response (non-BP) faced. This spill had many instances where he was faced with a decision between two bad choices; and how he decided which tactics to use. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aeggers01 (talk • contribs) 02:37, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Environmental Impact

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Corexit oil dispersant was used to break down oil. This toxic chemical that can cause cancer should be updated more information and literature studies.Thachng88 (talk) 23:43, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. 💵Money💵emoji💵💸 16:23, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Update for long term impact?

Latest comment: 4 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Much of the text is from the time of the oil spill or the immediate few years afterward. And much of it is forward looking from back then, e.g.:

  • "Methane can potentially suffocate marine life..." (but did it?)
  • "...developed deformities of the heart and other organs that would be expected to be fatal or at least life-shortening..." (so were they fatal and did they shorten life?)
  • "Dispersant and PAHs from oil are believed to have caused "disturbing numbers" of mutated fish ..." (ok, so did somebody show that those things DID cause the mutations? Or did someone disprove that belief?)

and that's just three examples from the "Environmental Impact" section. Citations about potential, unproven, possible, maybe future harms were the best we had back when they were written. So now, can we update the article after there is better information, and either delete the old predictions about what might happen, or describe them and say whether they came true or not (it's a pretty long article already and they might best be cut unless particularly notable).

I think I have read brief news articles that said that the environment became much cleaner than people had expected, sooner than expected for such a large spill. Perhaps that marine microbes that eat oil became more active and reproduced more and ate a lot of it. Do we have any citable refs about that?

It is now nine years after the spill was capped. What do we know now about the impact of the spill, that we didn't know between 2010 and 2014? Thanks!

-- Gnuish (talk) 09:03, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

EXCELLENT POINT...

But I also picked up some allegations that BP and the US Government are restricting the survey of the area.

I think as the chief winner if your oil eating microbes came to their aid quicker than we were led to believe, then they could easily provide the proof thereof. Do note important impact of those marine microbes to the whole industry here!

I will try to dig an email of their corporate communications department and ask relevant questions.

If, they don't come back to me, know that things are still bad... and the allegations about the restricted access might just be true after all, even if I don't remember where I picked up the allegations... and get worried! Rangoane Mogosoane (talk) 08:01, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

South Park has a three-episode story arc based around it. Coon and Friends, Mysterion, Cthulhu, Captain Hindsight etc...

Also Community, Season 2 Episode 3 subplot.

Drsruli (talk) 06:18, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Article Evaluation

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Overall, this article did an excellent job at presenting a multitude of facts on the deepwater horizon oil spill and the various sub topics of it such as the environmental impact, legal consequences, and public response/opinion. It takes a tone that is for the most part unbiased and easy to read although at times the information seemed very dense and hard to read. One potential improve I believe could be made is that some of the scientific predictions that were made in the article seemed to be loosely backed by scientific reasoning. Either these predictions should be updated with current research as citations or they should be removed to detract from overstating the environmental impact and potentially creating a tone that seems biased. Is there any information on the effect on the workers and their viewpoint to create a more well-balanced article? Gobears15 (talk) 07:31, 5 February 2020 (UTC)


This article was excellent in relaying substantial and thorough information to the reader. I was able to read it in its entirety feeling engaged and eager to finish, and felt it had great citations and really conveyed information well.Aswanby (talk) 03:55, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

  This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Markymark28.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:12, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Deepwater_Horizon_oil_spill/Archive_14&oldid=1186146396"