Talk:American Petroleum Institute
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Doesn't this article seem a bit too... "sanitized" to you? What's the name of that software that tracks where edits to certain pages came from? I wouldn't be surprised if there were a few edits to this page from your friendly neighborhood ExxonMobil station, if you know what I mean.
- Yes, it was clearly by industry promoters with only a few minor nods to the organization's huge influence and plainly false claims in TV ads. Now has an NPOV notice. Needs more work on the API's efforts to hide negative health and environment effects of its "industry".
- I thought this article would be more in-depth than it is. At the very least I thought I'd find info on their recent greenwashing ad campaign on TV (specifically who that "Thank You For Smoking"-ish spokesperson is). Someone needs to come back here, put in all the relevant data that would flesh this article out and then request a lock from further edits because obviously someone is keeping this article small and sanitized for a reason. --ThePenciler (talk) 10:07, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
- Now has some note of that, and the new 2011 campaign. More dirt and dirty oil references needed.
This article claims that "The API was also active in public relations efforts that claim that the greenhouse effect and global warming in general will be beneficial to society..."
I can find no evidence to support such a claim and believe it should be removed.
126.96.36.199 15:47, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- I have removed the unsourced claim.Cyrusc 19:22, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- Didn't they promote Fred Singer who made exactly that claim?
I added the NPOV tag because I felt that the general tone of this article did not seem very objective. It seems to me that the article has had various sentences added at whim by those who hate the API, and by those who adore it. I also added the stub tag - and thus until this article is expanded further, and until it cites more comprehensively its sources, i think its neutrality should remain in question. This is especially true considering that it is THE primary institute that gets referred to when people mention (especially in the media) the "oil lobby". It would be unfair for users, when searching for who this amorphous "oil lobby" is, to stumble upon this article and not be clued in to the fact that there are diametrically opposing points of view on the matter. EvanClifthorne 23:33, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
- I agree. I expanded the article and added sources citing both API and opposing positions.Cyrusc 19:22, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- Agreed. NPOV tag is back. Terms like "leading" don't belong, obviously, or even "main", when it's fair to say "largest" or "prevalent", etc.
Role in settings specifications
This needs more work. API sets standards in several different areas of the industry, including drilling and production equipment, refining, lubricants, offshore engineering and construction. There is a spec for centrifugal pumps in refinery and flowline service, but the standard centrifugal pumps used on drilling rigs are not controlled by API (although they may be surrounded by other drilling equipment that is governed by an API spec). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marzolian (talk • contribs) 04:22, 11 December 2012 (UTC)