Jump to content

Talk:Equinor

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Merger proposal

[edit]

As all Statoil's assets and activities have been trasferred into StatoilHydro, I propose to merge articles on Statoil and StatoilHydro.Beagel 17:35, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More precisely, Statoil has taken over Hydro's oil and gas assets, and changed its name to StatoilHydro and at the same time the Hydro shareholders have been payed in Statoil shares. Arsenikk 20:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's probably worth noting that the retail (i.e. petrol station) operations will continue to have the Statoil name and pre-merger branding, so there may be a case to retain the Statoil article with info on this. Gr1st 21:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There seems to be a fairly dominant trend on Wikipedia to keep articles about defunct companies before they enter mergers. For instance, there are articles for Conoco Inc., Phillips Petroleum Company and ConocoPhillips. Arsenikk 15:10, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with this. At the same time the StatoilHydro seems more like acquisition of Hydro's oil business by Statoil rather than creation of a new company. Beagel 16:33, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think the article should be left as-is. There's a lot of history behind Statoil and it's name still exists in many places. In fact, the only people who really know of "StatoilHydro" are those involved directly in the oil industry.--193.130.175.129 (talk) 09:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The company is changing its name back to Statoil tomorrow (see last line of this article). That means something will have to be done with these two pages. Any suggestions? Gr1st (talk) 17:05, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hm. I would say the two companies (pre and post merger) and distinct enough to have two articles, but I also think that they are similar enough to have one. One possibility is to create the article History of Statoil (1972–2007) and make it a sub-article (just like we have Hydro Oil & Gas). Alternatively, we could create Statoil (1972–2007). Arsenikk (talk) 00:01, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer the first of those ideas myself. A bit of help from WP:RM is going to be needed to get these pages moved properly. Gr1st (talk) 07:19, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever you decide - please go ahead and do it without further delay. At present, leaving the fuel stations out of the main article does not help those researching details about this company. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.0.9.69 (talk) 20:07, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another merge proposal

[edit]

I propose to merge Statoil (fuel station). It is short article, which heavily overlaps with this article. Beagel (talk) 05:30, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose The fuel stations make up a small, but highly visual, aspect of Statoil's operations. The article is short, there is ample area of expansion; the history could be much longer, there should be coverage of the service, operations, internal logistics and organization. Including all this information in the main article will give part of the downstream operations undue weight in the main article, which will never be able to cover all aspects of the Nordic's largest corporation anyway. Arsenikk (talk) 11:30, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose On 17 March 2010 Statoil announced plans to spin-off the energy and retail business as a separately publicly listed company (source). It thus makes sense to have a separate Wikipedia entry for the fuel stations and indeed develop this article into what will become a separate company. Bifrost2 (talk) 22:36, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose -- assuming the spin-off is verified (I didn't check it myself), then the stations should continue to have a separate WP article. It does need improvement, as noted by the proposer. N2e (talk) 02:10, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Controversies regarding the Art collection

[edit]

Is the Statoil Art Programme worthy of its own article?--62.92.144.15 (talk) 09:54, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Text suggestions regarding a seperate article (rather than bloating the current article):

[edit]

"The Statoil Art Programme was founded in the mid-1980's by Harald Norvik. Its first public display of art was in 2002, and 40 items where exhibited as Kunst i Statoils eie. Its earlier focus on Norwegian contemporary art, has been re-focused towards purchases of photographs, "especially photographs from Finland", according to one of Aftenposten's critic's of art/architecture, as of October 2002.[1]

The collection consists of around 700 items, as of October 2010.

Leaders: Wenche Falkenhaug (1996-?), Jens R. Jenssen (incumbent)--62.92.144.15 (talk) 10:31, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ Aftenposten, 2010-10-24 page 15: "Det oppleves imidlertidig forunderlig at den statlige norske oljegiganten nå har forlatt satsingen på norsk samtidskunst, til fordel for en langt mer diffus profilering av fotografi — særlig finsk."

Orphaned references in Statoil

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Statoil's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "AR2011":

  • From Saipem: Masoni, Danilo (2010-12-20). "Saipem settles Nigeria probe for $30 mln". Reuters. Retrieved 2011-02-19.
  • From Orkla Group: "Annual Report 2011". Orkla. Retrieved 29 March 2012.
  • From Nokia: "Annual Results 2011" (PDF). Nokia Corporation. 26 January 2012. Retrieved 2 March 2012.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 12:08, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Number of employees

[edit]

I see the infobox says the company has about 31 000 employees per 2011 and links to an annual report. Store norske leksikon also says about 31 000 employees. However, the company's homesite says in its key facts that is has about 23 000 employees and a government report 2010-2011, says the company has about 20 000 employees. I would assume this is a question of definiton. Anyone knows what the different numbers refer to and what number Wikipedia should give? Regards, Iselilja (talk) 21:53, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Statoil Fuel & Retail Group (gas station company) employes around 10-11'000 people. Spring 2012, this part of Statoil was sold, and its therefore no surprise that the 2010 report says over 30'. The correct number today is closer 20' than 30'. Numbers before april 2012 stating ~20' excludes the retail chain. Sup7 (talk) 20:52, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for clearing that up. Regards, Iselilja (talk) 20:57, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What is Statoil doing in sustainability engineering?

[edit]

I would like the major fossil fuel company articles to indicate how they intend to transition to carbon-neutral fuels such as this work and "power to gas." I need to know whether they support emerging chemical engineering research such as catalysts for carbon-neutral transportation fuels, whether they are working on compressed air energy storage such as [1] and [2], airborne wind turbines such as [3], and on extracting carbon from seawater such as this PARC method in order to solve their long-term corporate viability issues. I do not believe it is possible to have a truly balanced article on a fossil fuel company without some indication of their long term prospects. Tim AFS (talk) 04:30, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I also need to know whether they are developing electrical grid energy storage in their existing expended oil and gas caverns along with mineshafts and mines for pumped-storage hydroelectricity where ordinary hydroelectric power is unavailable. Tim AFS (talk) 09:08, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hywind scotlan

[edit]

is it worth doing a small section on the hywind scotland project?

--Patbahn (talk) 19:36, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Statoil. 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 00:15, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Statoil. 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 03:10, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Statoil. 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) 17:09, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Equinor&oldid=1239241255"