Talk:Fluor Corporation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Untitled[edit]

No mention of Fluor's nuclear waste operation. This entry reads like a press release ~~ memetank

Article Expansion[edit]

Additional facts of their operation citing the 5 major groups of the company. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thinkbeforeyoupost (talkcontribs) 22:38, 17 May 2011 (UTC)


Naomi Klein discusses Fluor extensively in her book The Shock Doctrine, in relation to no-bid contracts and with reconstructive efforts, specifically with the war in Iraq and Hurricane Katrina. Klein's stance is critical but well-developed in one of her more popular works, and should be mentioned in the article.

Bias in article[edit]

It's pretty obvious that this article is being edited by someone who represents Fluor and is trying to promote the company. This has been reverted several times by various users but it invariably returns again and again. This is not the place for corporate marketing, so cut it out! SirLamer 22:11, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

This piece doesn't bother to mention there is no mention of the very large presence that Fluor has in Iraq. Is that not significant or are they trying to hid it?

23:53, 10 September 2007 (UTC)~

It's a copy of their about page[edit]

See http://www.fluor.com/about/default.asp (accessed 23 March 2007).

Definitely not neutral in its content either.

Corp?[edit]

Why was this moved from Fluor to Fluor Corp. ? Articles on other corporations don't have "Corp." in their name. See: Microsoft, Dell, Johnson and Johnson, Jacobs Engineering Group. Actually, I can't find one other company with "Corp." in their article name. Harksaw 15:11, 15 May 2007 (UTC) Never mind. Wikipedia:Naming_conventions#Companies Harksaw 15:15, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Still, why "Corp." rather than "Corporation"? —Tamfang (talk) 17:15, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
I agree, use "Corporation" instead of Corp." much formal and appropriate —Thinkbeforeyoupost

14:13, 10 May 2011 (GMT)

Initiate a page move discussion here and, if nobody object, move it in due time. If there is objections, you might have to go through the proper motions. Calistemon (talk) 18:29, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:20, 17 May 2011 (UTC)



Fluor Corp.Fluor Corporation – To give this company an appropriate name that is not conflicting with the name of the mineral fluor and fluoride. . Mksolmoro (talk) 18:43, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Support: Seems the right name to me. Calistemon (talk) 19:01, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Support: thanks mksolmoro for the motion. Google search suggests "Fluor" alone or "Fluor Corporation." Search result "Fluor Corp." was only from wikipedia. Thinkbeforeyoupost
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Fair use rationale for Image:Fluor-logo.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Fluor-logo.jpg 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) 05:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Draft[edit]

I am affiliated with Fluor Corp. and have offered a draft of a substantially improved version of the article at the Conflict of Interest Noticeboard here for consideration/review/feedback by impartial editors. I wanted to also post here on the Talk page in case there are editors with this page on their watchlist that want to discuss the new material. CorporateM (Talk) 21:47, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

From my edit summary at article page: "Sub in CorporateM draft as discussed at this talk page, COI noticeboard and at article draft. Please revert me if you do not agree" North8000 (talk) 19:22, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
For general reference and archival purposes, I've copy/pasted the discussion about the re-write of the article that took place in my user-space below. There are also some comments on the COIN board that will get archived there eventually. BTW - I noticed when user:Ukexpat updated the article to C-class that it is marked as "low importance" in Wikiproject Companies, which I thought was unusual for a Fortune 110 company to be of low importance, though I do not know what criterion are used for evaluating it. CorporateM (Talk) 20:46, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Reviewing this article

Just a note that I am reading this over, and comparing it to what is now at Fluor Corporation. I'll give more detailed feedback soon(-ish). My first quick thought is that this looks much, much better than what is live. I'm afraid I won't be much help in determining whether or not it will be good enough for GA but I can at least lend my support as an unbiased editor without a COI. -- Atama 22:00, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know! I had just pinged user:North8000 not knowing if anyone was actively taking a look. It's a large body of work, so I figured it would take some time to give it a lookover. Most editors are just like me and never get to most things we intend to do. CorporateM (Talk) 22:31, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Looks like a big improvement. Are you aware of anything significant that has been removed? Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 22:36, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Below is the material that didn't make it into my draft, because it wasn't sourced well-enough. For the Notable projects section, I mostly looked for jobs included in profiles that summarize their most important jobs, with some exceptions where the item was covered in a lot of media. However it wasn't always clear which projects to include. I was really on the fence with the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge project for example.

  • building its first hydrocracker plant in 1968 for the American Oil Co. in Texas City (primary source)
  • helped established its credentials in the oil and gas industry (editorializing)
  • In 1932 it was awarded its first major refinery contract for Shell Oil at Wood River, Illinois. (primary source)
  • building its first hydrocracker plant in 1968 for the American Oil Co. in Texas City (primary source)
  • In 1995 Fluor acquired ADP, a design and project management business; in 1996 it acquired Marshall Contractors.[8] (press release source)
  • In 2000 it spun off its coal operations to Massey Energy Corp..[7] (primary source)
  • The corporation was sued because of "numerous design and construction failure" on a project in north Chile in 2002.[9] (primary source)
  • In 2009, Fluor entered the solar industry when it was contracted to design a 46 MW solar thermal plant in a partnership with California firm ESolar.[10] (Other projects were more "notable")
  • Eastern span replacement of the San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge: completed in in 2013[21][22] (As discussed I was really on the fence, but needed to be selective about which projects are notable enough to include)
  • U.S. Army's LOGCAP program & Al Zour Refinery (unsourced)
  • However, in March 2009, the Kuwaiti government informed Fluor to halt construction because reduced oil prices had made the project financially unfeasible. The announcement did not come entirely as a surprise because former Kuwaiti Prime Minister Nasser Mohammed Al-Ahmed Al-Sabah had been mentioning cancellation.[24] Some investment analysts predicted the project's cancellation as early as December 2008.[25] Fluor announced that it would remove $2.1 billion, the remaining value of the contract, from its books.[23] (broken link and one of those guest-post type Forbes things. There is one legitimate source in Bloomberg but again having to be selective about which projects are notable enough to include.)
  • Fluor has also been ranked No. 1 in Engineering News-Record (ENR) magazine's 2012 list of Top 100 Design-Build Firms and No. 2 on its Top 400 Contractors list.[26] Fluor was selected one of the "Global Most Admired Knowledge Enterprises (MAKE)" for the sixth consecutive year in 2011 and named one of America's Safest Companies by EHS Today magazine in 2011. (unsourced and/or promotional as we tend to avoid rankings, etc.)
  • Fluor has also been named one of the World's Most Ethical Companies by Ethisphere magazine for six consecutive years, 2007-2012. (unsourced and we prefer to avoid rankings)

CorporateM (Talk) 23:10, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I didn't mean to make you do all of that work; that's a more thorough answer than I hoped for. North8000 (talk) 23:25, 27 February 2014 (UTC)


From my edit summary at article page: "Sub in CorporateM draft as discussed at this talk page, COI noticeboard and at article draft. Please revert me if you do not agree" North8000 (talk) 19:23, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I just fixed the logo image, since trademarked images can't be posted in user-space. I just wanted to make sure if Atama had any feedback? I was a bit rude in pinging you not knowing that he/she was actively reviewing. CorporateM (Talk) 19:34, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
You know me....bull in a china shop, but with an invitation to revert me. It sounded like Atama was done, but if not, please revert me or mention it and I'll revert myself.
I was thinking about asking you what you would think about putting the logo back in somewhere, but you were way ahead of me. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 19:48, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

See also[edit]

Suggest adding a "See also" section with a link to the Wikipedia page on NuScale Power. It is mentioned in this page that Fluor has a majority interest in it. CorporateM (Talk) 17:03, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

Article promoted - 13 July 2014.
This review is transcluded from Talk:Fluor Corporation/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: TLSuda (talk · contribs) 19:02, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Greetings! I know you've waited a few months for a review, but I have good news! I'm stuck in a tin can for 5 hours tomorrow late night UTC, so I'm going to use that time wisely to review this article. I expect to have the review posted in the early morning hours UTC the following day. (Approximately less than 36 hours from this post.) I look forward to reading and reviewing this article. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 18:15, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks User:TLSuda! One thing I will point out about this article is that as a construction company (as oppose to tech, internet or something more modern) it is not a buzzy topic that gets as much media coverage as you would expect for a Fortune 500 company, so some of the sources are a little weak or non-traditional (for example, I found a government report that summarized their most significant government contracts). I think I have used good judgement in these cases, but I'll see what you think in 36 hours! CorporateM (Talk) 19:47, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Hey @CorporateM: sorry about the extreme delay. Internet has been spotty where I've been staying, so I've only been posting responses as I can. Here's my review. Take your time in responding if you need it. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 15:08, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Initial review[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. Has an appropriate reference section:
    B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    Almost there, just a few small things to consider. See prose review below. TLSuda (talk) 15:08, 13 July 2014 (UTC)


Prose review[edit]

Lead[edit]

  • "global services" does not need quotes around it.
 Done It's actually the name of the division, so I put it in title-caps, etc., which should do the trick CorporateM (Talk) 15:35, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Early history[edit]

  • "President" should be lowercase when referring to the position and not using it as a title. IE President Obama vs Obama is president.
 Done CorporateM (Talk) 15:39, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • "Business declined rapidly during the Great Depression and picked up again during World War II" change "and" to "yet", it flows better
 Done I used "but" does that work? CorporateM (Talk) 15:39, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Spell out United States or write it as U.S. in the next sentence.
 Done
  • I just want to verify that the president in 1952's name was Si Fluor and that it isn't typo.
 Done The source says "John Simon "Si" Fluor Jr." which is what I have now placed in the text. CorporateM (Talk) 15:43, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Diversification and restructuring[edit]

  • Add a comma after "In 1972..."
 Done CorporateM (Talk) 15:43, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Same for US as above.
 Done
  • "Fluor's international business rebounded." When? What business? I assume sometime after 1987, but it is unclear.
 Done Changed to "revenues" to make it more clear. CorporateM (Talk) 15:58, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Recent history[edit]

  • Add a comma after "In the 1990s..."
 Done CorporateM (Talk) 15:47, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Organization[edit]

  • Fix US
 Done CorporateM (Talk) 15:48, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 Done CorporateM (Talk) 15:49, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • "anticorruption" should be "anti-corruption"
 Done CorporateM (Talk) 15:49, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Notable objects[edit]

  • US again x 3
 Done CorporateM (Talk) 15:51, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Side question[edit]

  • Not relevant to the GA discussion, but: Any reason you didn't use more of the parameters of the infobox? Like founder= former_name= area_served= divisions= ? TLSuda (talk) 15:08, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 Done Good question. CorporateM (Talk) 15:54, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
And with all of your additional work, I'm very happy to promote this article! Good work @CorporateM:! I'm glad that your work is so high quality and that your COI does not prevent you from being neutral as possible. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 23:44, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Request Edit[edit]

The current article states: "According to the company website, Fluor has four primary business groups....". The website has been updated to reflect that the company is now organized into six segments. That being said, I think breaking down all six segments in bullets as is done now for four segments is too much. As such, I suggest the following more concise replacement for that sentence and all four bullets.

According to Fluor's 2013 annual report, 57 percent of its work backlog is from the oil and gas industry.[1] According to the company's website, Fluor's work includes designing and building power plants, petrochemical factories, mining facilities, roads and bridges, government buildings, and manufacturing facilities. The company also performs nuclear cleanup and other services.[2]

I can update the annual report reference each year as a non-controversial edit with the latest numbers. CorporateM (Talk) 21:29, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Small update[edit]

Suggest adding construction of the Tappan Zee Bridge over the Hudson river to the "Notable Projects" section.

  • "In December 2012, Fluor was awarded a $3.14 billion contract to build the Tappan Zee Bridge over the Hudson River.[3]"

The Notable Projects section is just a concise summary of the most significant works, but as a $3 billion project covered in national media like Bloomberg, this seemed like it was significant enough to mention.

Also, the current Lede says "in four areas: energy and chemicals, industrial and infrastructure, government and Fluor Global Services such as staffing and equipment rentals." I suggest we replace this with the industries mentioned in Fluor's annual report: oil & gas, industrial & infrastructure, government and power. David King, Ethical Wiki (Talk) 14:22, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ 2013 Annual Report (PDF), Fluor Corporation, retrieved January 15, 2015 
  2. ^ Business Segments, Fluor, retrieved January 1, 2014 
  3. ^ Klopott, Freeman; Schoifet, Mark (December 5, 2012). "Tappan Zee Bridge Panel Said to Back $3.14 Billion Fluor Bid". Bloomberg.com. Retrieved September 24, 2015. 
Done. --Guy Macon (talk) 19:17, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Recent acquisition[edit]

Requesting Fluor's recent acquisition be added. Some potential text is below, cited to Reuters:

"Fluor acquired an engineering and construction firm based in the Netherlands called Stork for $755 million in March 2016. Stork mostly modifies and maintains large power plants.[1][2]"

David King, Ethical Wiki (CorporateM) (Talk) 21:59, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

The proposed acquisition was already in the article, along with one of the suggested references. I edited the article to indicate that the acquisition has been closed, identify the main business, the amount involved in the acquisition and add the other reference.--S Philbrick(Talk) 21:08, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Fluor to buy Stork of the Netherlands for $755 million". Reuters. December 7, 2015. Retrieved March 4, 2016. 
  2. ^ "Fluor finalizes acquisition of Dutch industrial services group Stork - March 2016". Hydrocarbon Processing. March 4, 2016. Retrieved March 4, 2016.