Wikipedia

Talk:Unocal Corporation

Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Learn more about this page

Afghan Pipeline

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

No mention of Unocol's role in the discussions with Turkmenistan, about building the pipeline through Afghanistan, before the talks between Washington and the Taleban over the pipeline broke down and the US subsequently invaded Afghanistan instead?

Isn't it important, as a key role in oil politics which (arguably) helped lead to two countries collapsing?

Oooh, another 9/11 conspiracy! Just what we needed! 216.37.253.152 (talk) 03:52, 4 May 2008 (UTC)Reply
If you have information to add to the article, I encourage you to help write it. Kingturtle 20:41, 20 May 2005 (UTC)Reply
Ok, I tried, but, my addition is probably poorly structured. Also, I'm sure Unocal has been involved in many other dealings, and the paucity of other history makes its role in the tawdry US/Afghanistan dispute seem overemphasized by comparison, I think.

That paragraph on Unocal and Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline is oversimplified at best, and arguably misleading, but I've not time to try to fix it. I'm also not sure if wikipedia has an article on CentGas somewhere -- searching on CentGas doesn't find it. Slitim 19:12, 31 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

I think we should add in that there was a documentary made on this topic called Total Denial which won a Vaclav Havel Special Award for Human Rights in 2006. Agreement? (Radokapi 16:56, 15 December 2006 (UTC))Reply

Fair use rationale for Image:Unocal Logo.svg

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Image:Unocal Logo.svg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 02:39, 12 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Paul Calonico

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Paul Calonico article claims this person founded (or at least funded) one of the companies that became Union Oil; and indeed asserts that his son and grandson ran it.

As an employee of Unocal for the last 45 years I can assert that the Calonico Family, while strange, does have a very large influence in the company, but haven't been involved for year. In the Unocal archives there is documentation of their role. I am retired, but will contact the person who took over my role as Document and Records manger and see if he can track it down. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.80.182.130 (talk) 15:52, 25 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Remove "needs additional citations..."?

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I believe we now have enough references from reliable sources. Can we remove the "article needs additional citations for verification" box at the top?--CurtisSwain (talk) 23:41, 18 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Neutrality

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

There seems to be some disagreement re: the article's purpose and factual quality, which is fine. It should be neither unduly weighted toward controversies, nor whitewashed. However, I don't believe that these edits aim for a neutral presentation [1], [2], [3], and given that a WP:SPA is involved, suggest a possible WP:COI. 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 21:22, 30 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

CityOfMirrors (talk) 21:24, 31 December 2015 (UTC)CityOfMirrorsReply

I don't appreciate your allegations. The tone of the article (admittedly a work-in-progress) was vastly improved by my changes and began to add verifiable facts surrounding Unocal's global operations. The sources were much more factual. As a purely factual matter: Unocal was a sizable oil & gas producer in Louisiana via the offshore US Gulf of Mexico, yet the existing page does not even list this. Similarly: adding its Fortune 500 ranking begins to help an uninformed reader understand how large Unocal was and how that changed from 1985 to 2005. I was trying to improve the article and removed information that I could not immediately verify. Perhaps I was over-cautious in removing information while conducting further research, but the article as is demonstrates a clear and unequivocal bias towards controversy, factual non-events, and incidents where unlisted sources are the currency of facts. It looks unlikely that prior authors conducted the work necessary to verify their information. It is very well possible that these individuals had and/or have a conflict-of-interest.

Wikipedia should be a repository of demonstrable facts for individuals seeking to research companies, not a political message board. For example: compare the quality of the following page to the Unocal one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BG_Group

BG is very similar to Unocal, yet its article is much clearer and factual.

As a factual matter with respect to "conflict-of-interest" allegations, there are numerous entities and sources here that have clear and demonstrable conflicts-of-interest. The article does not explore them in any detail deserved. I think that all the opinions in this article should be clearly identified as such and placed in a separate heading entitled "Opinions Surrounding Unocal". For example: "The Nation" should never be used as an unbiased source. It is a partisan magazine and is well-known for its biases. No link is provided to an accurate description of its agenda. Similarly: the article does not even try to explain who EarthRights International is and whether it has a conflict of interest. As a purely financial matter, my preliminary research would suggest that it is an organization that could not exist without legal settlements and the finding of corporate guilt. As such, it has a clear financial bias towards the finding of corporate guilt in a very vague area of the law.

With respect to "whitewashing", the existing article lists allegations and disputed facts as if they are facts. For example: who is Julie Sirrs (there is no link to her bio and conflicts-of-interest) and does she have a conflict of interest? Similarly: who is Richard Labeviere (again no bio and listing of conflicts-of-interest)? For example: how does one even begin to verify a source where the individual is legally defined as "Doe"? Logic would suggest that someone known as Doe might have an undisclosed conflict of interest. Similarly: how does one even begin to verify highly secretive meetings in rural Afghanistan?

Unocal is a company that existed from 1890 to 2005, yet the summary description lists two sentences where an uninformed reader might conclude upon reading this article that Unocal was a company with principal operations in Afghanistan. As a purely factual matter, this is very inaccurate. As an example stated in the edit prior to this reversion: Unocal actually owned a pipeline in Argentina in 1996, whereas no pipeline ever existed in Afghanistan. As a parallel example: Apple and/or Google no doubt have countless secretive projects that never come to fruition, yet its Wikipedia article would never list these projects as if they were the company's main purpose.

Again, to an uneducated reader trying to learn about Unocal, the existing article is highly biased towards non-events. The CentGas/Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline is (a "pipeline" that as a factual matter never even existed) Doe v. Unocal (a case that as a legal matter was vacated and no legal facts were ever formally proven to the public and ended in a "confidential settlement")

As a factual matter: the links are broken for the following sources, which suggested to me serious issues with the claims and the overall thrust of the article. 

Gail Sheehy, "Ex-Spook Sirrs: Early Osama Call Got Her Ejected", The New York Observer, March 14, 2004.

Eviatar, Daphne (May 9, 2005). A Big Win for Human Rights. The Nation. Howard, John E. (Oct. 2002). The Alien Tort Claims Act: Is Our Litigation-Run-Amok Going Global?. Retrieved Oct. 6, 2005. Unocal. The story you haven't heard about. . . The Yadana Project in Myanmar Retrieved Oct. 6, 2005. 

Brief Oil and Gas History of Santa Barbara County: Santa Barbara County Energy Division

Le, Phuong (August 10, 1999). "Beach town forced to scrape away oil leak -- and a chunk of its past". Seattle PI. Retrieved 09/12/09.

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Unocal Corporation. 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) 21:59, 14 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Unocal Corporation. 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) 07:54, 9 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Unocal Corporation. 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) 04:41, 13 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Unocal_Corporation&oldid=1210360492"