Talk:Gulf Oil

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Gulf Oil has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Introduction[edit]

I am the author of about 60% of the Gulf Oil article. My contribution is mainly based on my memories of working at Gulf's "Eastern Hemisphere" office near Marble Arch, London from 1980 to 1983. Initially it was a bustling office with activity continuing on an international and 24/7 basis. Things changed overnight in January 1983, when a lot of the European operations were sold off to KPC. The place suddenly became like the Marie Celeste . I enjoyed working for Gulf and was sorry to leave at the end of August 1983. Bob

BScar23625 09:59, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Bob and work colleague (Lorna) outside GOC (Eastern Hemisphere) office in Portman Street, London - April 1981

Gulf's Comeback[edit]

Just so you know, I was the one who put the info about several Pittsburgh-area Texaco stations switching to Gulf a while back. That pretty much doubled the amount of Gulf stations here. I'm not sure if the remaining Texaco stations are switching to Gulf or not (they have until the end of June to do so), since Shell is just barely in the area, but it would help Gulf's case out. (One Texaco in New Brighton, PA switched to Sunoco--as if we needed another Sunoco here--since there was an existing Gulf down the road, but the rest of the Texaco's that have changed here have changed to Gulf.) The only other case I know of Gulf coming back is at one of the many truck stops in Breezewood, PA where Gulf replaced Union 76, but it's been years since I've been out to Breezewood. If you know of any other examples of Gulf's comeback, list them if you want.

I personally think that down the road, GOLP may eventually be bought out again, whether it be by Chevron again (Chevron seems to be buyout-happy right now) or maybe ConocoPhillips to give them a Northeastern brand.

And one more note: my mom went to Tennessee last summer to see my uncle, and she saw a fully-operational Gulf station down there. I don't know how that would be. I'm not sure if Chevron or BP ended up with Gulf in Tennessee, but it couldn't be supplied by them.Jgera5 00:25, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Jgera5. Thanks for that information, which is very interesting. A couple of months ago I was driving along a minor trunk road in Northumberland, England when I came across a Gulf filling station. I am sure that the station must have been recently rebranded from Thrust. I stopped the car and got out to take a photograph. I will add the photograph to the Gulf article some time.

I hope my constant nervous editing of the article does not discourage you from adding anything. best wishes. Bob BScar23625 06:47, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

ps my outlook is all very Euro-centric, so if you can add anything relating to North America then that will give more balance BScar23625 09:48, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Just passing through. A reminder re: "branding" of gasoline that in North America, gas is still sold as regular/plus/super, etc. Maybe a comparison of the old UK brands to current US ones would be a helpful point of reference? (If something wholly different was meant by the section, I misunderstood it.)72.70.241.211 16 July 2006

72.70.241.211. I'm not too sure about the current position in the US. But in Europe, there are standard grades of fuel (diesel, LRP and Unleaded being by far the most common). However, most supermarket fuel is unbranded and little fuel marketing nowadays seeks to make given brands distinctive. If you go back a few years, oil companies would often claim that their own branded fuel gave better performance and/or caused less wear on engines than other brands. Nowadays, people seem to accept that 95 octane fuel is just the same, whoever sells it. Bob BScar23625 22:35, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Good point, Bob, but I have not seen a station in the US that sells a 95-octane fuel. What 72.70.241.211 means, to thrash it out in octane, is that Regular is 87, Plus is 89, and Super is 93. Regards, SonikkuAmerica 166.248.4.128 (talk) 03:14, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm not too sure if this is still the case, but could someone here do some research on whether or not Gulf still operates the gas stations on the Massachusetts Turnpike in the US? I know they bought ExxonMobil's contract after they left but I'm not quite sure. Regards, SonikkuAmerica 166.248.4.128 (talk) 03:14, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

GA nomination[edit]

This is an exceptionally interesting article to read, I'm being very critical because it should really be nominated for Featured Article Status.

I have added {{Fact}} where a statement is POV but with citation will eliminated

The opening claims on size needs to be cited

The Bantry terminal was devastated by the explosion of a Petrofina tanker (the Betelguese) in January 1979 Theres a potential article here. Gnangarra

Completed history section.

to be continued.... sorry ran out of time will be back within 12 hours Gnangarra 02:50, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Gulf's termination of the Cities Service acquistion resulted in more than 15 years of shareholder litigation against Gulf. story here also more information would be appropriate in the article Gnangarra

During the period 1980 to 2000, Gulf moved from being a monolithic, integrated multinational corporation to being more of a network of allied business interests. This has given the whole Gulf business a high degree of strategic and operational flexibility. - this reads like an opinion piece Gnangarra

The illustration shows a typical Bayford/Gulf service station in the UK. Note that it is associated with garage, restaurant and retailing facilities. It is in an isolated location, being 5 miles south of Wooler in the Cheviot Hills. It caters to both local residents and tourist traffic. It is not vulnerable to competition from supermarkets and provides something of a local community centre. POV - be cautious in tying text to image as the image could be moved, replaced or deleted. suggest that this text is condensed into the image description. Gnangarra

Define jobber having worked for BP(Aust) in their transport/terminal business for I personally understand the jargon but will every reader, suggest a small article to define and explain who and how they operate.

Condense sub section Pennsylvania Turnpike reword to remove POV Gnangarra

redundant statement at the end of article GOI still produces and sells a wide range of oil based products including lubricants and greases of all kinds merge within paragraph above or remove completely Gnangarra 03:41, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I have failed GA, hopefully the above explains why and what would improve the article. Suggest as I said earlier this article should achieve FA work on what I have suggested then use Peer review for broader input when you have the time nominate for FA. At anytime if what me to revisit, make any suggestions just drop me a message Gnangarra 03:41, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Gnangarra. Thakyou for your feedback, which is most welcome. I will continue chipping away at the Gulf article whenever I have some free time and will renominate it for Good Article status when your points have been addressed. I was a very minor bit-player in the story for a while and much of the article is based on my recollections rather than published sources. As far as I can recall, "the Betelguese incident" was a catalogue of human and equipment failure which left about 70 people dead. The clean up and salvage operation took about 5 years to complete. Bob BScar23625 07:26, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

GA Promotion[edit]

I have recently reviewed this article & found that it meets the criterion for being a good article. So I have promoted it to GA status. My congratulations BScar23625 & all the other contributors for doing a fine job.

Cheers

Srikeit(talk ¦ ) 08:06, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I not sure about which category this article should be listed in as a GA. I have currently listed this under category History & subcategory Americas. If this is incorrect, please correct it. Thanks Srikeit(talk ¦ ) 08:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Srikeit. Thankyou for promoting Gulf Oil to Good Article status. I will take a look at the GA categorisation in the next few days. Bob BScar23625 08:16, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Weather Underground Attack[edit]

According to their article on Wikipedia, Gulf's HQ was the target of a bombing attack by the Weather Underground terrorists... isn't this notable enough to add to the article? Normally I'd just throw it in there and let the court of public opinion decide if it should stay, but since this article has just been promoted to Good Article and is being considered for Featured Article status, I'm leery of editing it.

Thanks, Tmorrisey 15:55, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

The Weathermen page contains the following statement :

17 June 1974 - Gulf Oil's Pittsburgh headquarters is bombed to protest its actions in Angola, Vietnam, and elsewhere.

I never knew that before. Gulf was funding the Portugese colonial authorities in Angola up to 1975, so I can see why the Weathermen might have launched an attack on Gulf. As to how notable this bombing was in the whole scheme of things, well .... Bob BScar23625 16:40, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

if there enough info then it should be there also check that the page and links back to here as well Gnangarra 08:27, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

1985? answer to the Gulf Tower question, and the Harmar Labs appeal[edit]

Hello everyone, I was the anon IP that made the update about the company being founded in 1901, I have not really studied the units of the company post-1985 but am a huge fan of everything Pittsburgh especially the business and sports aspect of the region. From all of my info the companies that still sport its brand have claimed 1901 and Pittsburgh as the starting point. Please fill me on any further details or any wiki standard that would only include a companies current struture. == The Gulf Tower (actually the tallest and largest tower in the state of Pennsylvania until 1970 not just the city) still bears the Gulf name and last I checked a few logos on the mezzanine. Today it is occupied by a mix of law firms, accountants and and public/private group fostering young IT companies in the region, almost like a vertical technology park for dozen of floors. There was actually a local article on the tower recently I'll try to find the link. == Finally, I have a keen interest on the (at one time) world-famous Gulf Labs in Harmar, Pa. right up the Allegheny river from downtown Pittsburgh, if anyone has worked there or remembers it well I'd love to glean as much info as possible about the place (it is now a tech incubator for the University of Pittsburgh and other regional tech alliances). Thanks and all this former Gulf info is wonderful! Hholt01 01:41, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I think your date was changed back simply because the info box refers specifically to Gulf Oil International, the newer company, so the 1985 date is appropriate there. 1901 is given in the history section of the article. For Harmarville info, you might see if you can find copies of The Orange Disc, the company newsletter. It often had things about the Harmarville labs. I was only there once, I worked for the tech services center in Houston. Cheers Geologyguy 02:28, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the insight on the date geologyguy, I would think we would want to at least note a 1901 date in the infobox even if it was in ( ) or asteriked, if GOI claims 1901 then the infobox shouldn't omit it totally, jmho.


I have seen the Orange Disc, great source! I noticed you typed "Hamarville" lol, just one of those quirky NE things, the labs are actually in "Harmar Township" with Harmarville being the name of a nearby crossroads. Interchangable names pretty much though. I actually have a few pics of the labs today I'll see if I can upload them and start its own article. As a local history buff the power and prestige that the tower downtown was witness to as well as the labs is somewhat stunning when you think about it. At one time (30's to 50's) it was arguably one of the world's greatest industrial labs. Any other thoughts or resources on it would be appreciated! Hholt01 04:28, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

"Bringing home the oil" - YouTube video[edit]

Geologyguy. I can view the video fine - it is two minutes of jerkyvision from the early 1970s plus a scratchy audio of the Tommy Makem song. My guess is that there is some problem with your system or system settings, so try again on another PC.

As regards copyright violation - I think that is questionable. I will be happy to discuss the point, if you wish. YouTube is owned by Google, which has a lot of experience in this area. There is some WP policy against putting in links to blatant copyvios (see 'Linking to copyrighted works' in Wikipedia:Copyrights), but I am not aware of any blanket prohibition on YouTube. Bob BScar23625 09:16, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Here is what I get -
Server: Apache
Set-Cookie: ::AXT=149038309a259d63c186adcb430fbca3cywAAABteXc1ZkJVWnhvY3VQemFjUUx2RFVuYnlNalY4TVRFNE5qa3lOelUxT0E9PQ==; ::path=/; domain=.youtube.com; expires=Tue, 14-Aug-2007 14:05:58 GMT
Set-Cookie: LOCALE_PREFERENCE=86d1d09eefe6b79b4068000ce05518a4dAUAAABlbl9VUw==; path=/; ::domain=.youtube.com; expires=Wed, 09-Aug-2017 14:05:58 GMT
Set-Cookie: user_omniture=3756d44ab2f6fdee26892cc5805390c2dAEAAAAw; path=/; domain=.youtube.com
Set-Cookie: watched_video_id_list=df26550e0051398e6764e9eeb838c0b9WwEAAABzCwAAAEJFRGhmNVpqdjZB; ::path=/; domain=.youtube.com
followed by pages and pages of html code. There is not a prohibition about linking to YouTube, but WP:EL points out that links normally to be avoided include Sites that are only indirectly related to the article's subject, Sites that are inaccessible to a substantial number of users (I rarely have access problems, and my access settings are nothing special or prohibitive), etc. Frankly, I think that the quoted lyrics in the article are of highly marginal value to the article, and I cannot see how a video of the same thing enhances the article at all, so the issue would mainly be the one of "only indirectly related to the article's subject".
I obviously did not remove the second link to the video, since I could not see it - I will leave it to someone who can to evaluate its value in this article, and/or its potential copyright violation. Cheers Geologyguy 14:16, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Geologyguy. As I say above, try on another PC. I cannot see any reason why you cannot access the site. My guess is that the problem lies with the version of Windows you are using or your security setting. I think the audio and video clips are highly relevant to the article. But, please reserve your opinion on that until you have seen them. best wishes. Bob BScar23625 16:59, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Top of the Building[edit]

There seems to be some confusion about the top of the former Gulf Building in Pittsburgh, which is now the Gulf Tower condos.

Having grown up in Pittsburgh during the '50's and '60s, and having lived there through the '70s, I can tell you that the entire step-pyramid structure on top of the building was illuminated and changed color with changes in barometric pressure -- not just the beacon at the pinnacle. I've added this fact to the article, along with a supporting link.

At some point, probably in the late '70s, they stopped illuminating the entire pyramid structure -- but kept the color-changing weather beacon at the peak. More recently, they've apparently resumed illuminating the entire pyramid, but it may be only standard floodlights (I haven't been back there in many years).

In any case, many Internet links mention the beacon, but not the fact that the entire pyramid structure (several stories tall) was illuminated and changed color. The link I added supports it, but someone might want to do some additional research. I'm sure there are many archive photos out there showing the entire top illuminated in red or blue. --NameThatWorks 17:58, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Universe class tankers[edit]

Guys. In the late 1960s, Gulf added 6 "Universe class" tankers to its fleet. These were each about 300,000 tonnes dwt, making them the biggest vessels in the world at that time. They were chartered from the shipping company D.K.Ludwig and were Liberian registered.

I know the names of 5 of them - Universe Ireland, Universe Kuwait, Universe Japan, Universe Portugal, and Universe Iran. What was the name of the 6th?.

I believe that after the Suez Canal reopened in 1975, most ULCCs including (presumably) the Universe tankers, were made redundant since they were too big to pass through the canal. What happened to the Universe tankers?. Any answers to my 2 questions will be appreciated. Bob BScar23625 12:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

This page lists the following as part of the Gulf fleet: Universe Apollo, Universe Guardian, Universe Iran, Universe Ireland, Universe Japan, Universe Korea, Universe Kuwait, Universe Leader, Universe Portugal. Universe Korea appears to be the one of 300,000+ dwt missing from your list. Cheers Geologyguy 15:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Geologyguy. Yes, it looks like the Universe Korea is the missing one. Universe Apollo, Guardian and Leader appear to be 1950s generation tankers of around 100,000 tonnes. Any idea what happened to the 300k tonne Universe tankers?. I have a vague recollection that they ended up being mothballed in a Norwegian fiord, for a time at least.

On another matter. I hope you cracked the "Bringing Home the Oil" song problem. Bob BScar23625 15:54, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Gulf2.jpeg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Gulf2.jpeg 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) 06:52, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Gulf3.gif[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Gulf3.gif 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) 06:52, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Gulftanker.jpeg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Gulftanker.jpeg 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) 06:55, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

GA Sweeps Review: On Hold[edit]

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I'm specifically going over all of the "World History-Americas" articles. I believe the article currently meets the majority of the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. However, in reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed. I have made minor corrections and have included several points below that need to be addressed for the article to remain a GA. Please address them within seven days and the article will maintain its GA status. If progress is being made and issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted. If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN.

  1. The "Other information" section needs to be cleaned up and removed. It reads as a trivia section and should have any relevant information incorporated into the existing sections. Anything else that can't be sourced or isn't that notable should be removed.
  2. A few of the statements concerning numerical figures should be sourced such as "In that year, the company processed 1.3 million barrels of crude daily, held assets worth $6.5 billion, employed 58,000 employees worldwide, and was owned by 163,000 shareholders."

Altogether, this article doesn't have very many problems except for the large trivia-like section. If that is cleaned-up and/or removed, I will pass the article as a GA. I will leave the article on hold for seven days, but if progress is being made and an extension is needed, one may be given. I will leave messages on the talk pages of the main contributors to the article along with related WikiProjects/task forces so that the workload can be shared. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 04:43, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Nehrams2020. The figures stated throughout (including the ones you specifically refer to) are taken from the Texas State Historical Association online handbook - Gulf Oil entry. I have added a link to this at the point you indicate (it is now reference 11TSHA). People do like to add anecdotal miscellany into the article and much of it is of a kind that would disturb the flow of the article if it was in the main text. So, I try to keep it in the "Other Information" area - and leave well alone. Hope that is enough. Bob BScar23625 (talk) 10:11, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

ps : As you say, most of the 'Other information' is trivia. If you feel strongly that it should not be there - then just delete it. I think the section acts as a notepad for the article and should be left alone. BScar23625 (talk) 10:41, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Looking over the information in that section, there is some that isn't really necessary for inclusion in the article. I watched the YouTube video, and don't see the significance of including it within the article. If you do, it could probably be moved to the external links section. I think most of the bullets could be converted to prose and incorporated into a "Marketing and sponsorships" section that covers the advertising and sponsor-deals that Gulf has had. This would create a new section and eliminate most of the unrelated points. "On June 17, 1974, Gulf Oil's Pittsburgh headquarters was bombed by the Weathermen to protest against Gulf's operations in Angola, Vietnam, and elsewhere. Nobody was hurt and damage was minimal." Could be moved to one of the above history sections, since it appears to be a significant event. If these above edits are made, the only points that would be left are the current first (Gulf of Mexico) and fourth (aviation) bullets, which seem trivial and could be removed (unless you can think of another area where they could go or be expanded). Good job with adding the source, and let me know if you have any further questions. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 23:19, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Done. I have left the Other information section in place, although much depleted, as I think it serves a purpose in the running and development of the main article. BScar23625 (talk) 11:24, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

GA Sweeps Review: Pass[edit]

I believe the article now meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 22:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Demise: Cities Takeover[edit]

I edited the Cities takeover material to remove the word "clutches" which was blatant POV. I also added considerable detail including share prices that clarifies the sequence of events and money involved in that complex episode.

Really what needs to happen is that a new page should be created which gives in detail the Cities battle and this article should just link to it but right now that page does not exist apparently. Another thing that needs to be done is to explain more clearly and in greater detail why the Cities deal compromised Gulf. John Chamberlain (talk) 18:17, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

The Gulf Developement Co. Inc.[edit]

I have a cirtificate for 10 shares of capital stock for the The Gulf Developement Company dated July 1918 and 4 letters that has the Spindletop logo and is signed by R. Hughes (vice president). The Stock cirtificate belonged to my Great great Grandfather. Does anyone have any information on this company and does the stock have any value? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nonamcguire (talkcontribs) 04:52, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Split?[edit]

Something needs to happen to this article. It is extremely misleading and confusing. It starts off by talking about the original company, but quickly goes off on tangents about resurrections of the brand and the current owners. The infobox was a mess and catered randomly to the UK based company instead of the original brand the article is about. I think there needs to be three articles. One for the original brand, one for the international brand, and one for the US brand. Each are completely unrelated besides having the same name and a common history. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 23:52, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok well I split out the American Gulf brand and trimmed down the other one to a reasonable degree considering that this article is about the historical company and the brand. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 15:24, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Sunoco owns Philadelphia Gulf refinery[edit]

Sunoco owns what once was the Philadelphia Gulf refinery, adjoining the ARCO refinery. I do not know just when the purchase happened. --DThomsen8 (talk) 13:16, 21 April 2010 (UTC)