Talk:Tiber Oil Field

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Tiber Oil Field has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology 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.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
June 18, 2010 Good article nominee Listed
Did You Know
WikiProject Energy (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Table issue[edit]

I'd like to include the following, but the data (especially reserves sizes) is very unclear from sources. FT2 (Talk | email) 16:26, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

== Comparisons ==

Tiber is most commonly compared to two other Gulf wells, both also developed by BP: Thunder Horse (in production), and Kaskida (under appraisal):

Field Location Ownership Reserves Production First
Announced First oil Platform
Water depth Initial
well depth
Thunder Horse Mississippi canyon block 778
and later, block 822
75% BP,
25% ExxonMobil
1 billion barrels
300,000 barrels/day
200 million cu.ft gas
1999 July 15, 1999 June 14, 2008
(delayed from expected 2005)
Semi-submersible 6,300 ft
(1,920 m)
- -
Kaskida Keathley Canyon block 292 70% BP, 30% Devon Energy est. 3 billion barrels
Under appraisal/
Not commenced
2006 - Not commenced - - - -
Tiber Keathley Canyon block 102 BP 62%,
Petrobras 20%,
ConocoPhillips 18%
est. 4 - 6 billion barrels
Under appraisal/
Not commenced
2009 September 2 2009 Not commenced Semi-submersible 4,132 ft
(1,259 m)
- Lower Tertiary

Update suggestion[edit]

There should probably be some mention on this page about the disaster. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TeigeRyan (talkcontribs) 06:30, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Why? Beagel (talk) 07:27, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
what disaster? --emerson7 13:37, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
It's possible to read Deepwater_Horizon#Drilling_operations and get the idea that the rig explosion took place at Tiber. A brief look at the lat/long shows that the locations are a couple of hundred miles apart. HausTalk 15:17, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
The wording of Deepwater_Horizon#Drilling_operations is changed to avoid further confusions. Beagel (talk) 18:04, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

GA nomination[edit]

Note no suitable free image of the well or the drilling rig exists at the moment. The only free image of the rig or well is the rig in flames, which is suitable for articles on the rig and the explosion but not really balanced as an image for its previous (and uneventful) wells. FT2 (Talk | email) 22:47, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tiber Oil Field/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Arsenikk (talk) 23:26, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

  • Specify that it is the US sector of the Gulf. (fixed)
  • Use of dashes and hyphens isn't quite right. See WP:DASH. (fixed)
  • There is a single Wall Street Journal link which is dead. I've removed it. (fixed)
  • Bloomberg is a disambiguation page. (fixed)
  • I've removed a WSJ entry from the external links because it is a preview for a subscription page, and adds nothing as an "external link". ELs must (unlike references) be fully accessible to the general public. (fixed)
  • I am uncertain about the value of the external links. ELs should provide information sources which cannot be provided in the article, of copyright, space or other restrictions. If there is information in these articles that could supplement the article, instead add it too the article.
  • There is no information in the article about Petrobas and ConocoPhilips' partial ownership in the field.
    • I jumped in and cited the Petrobras/ConocoPhilips co-ownership. HausTalk 00:33, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
  • I am accepting the reasons for there not being an image in the article, as it is very difficult thing to make a picture of.

Placing on hold. Arsenikk (talk) 23:26, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

A number of these are now marked as "fixed". Is the only issue left, the external links? Is everything else okay? FT2 (Talk | email) 15:25, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
That is correct. Arsenikk (talk) 15:48, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
The 2 external links are worth mention in the article. I've added a sentence or 2 using the new pages as references, and removed them as external links. (diff). Hopefully that also fixes the EL point and all is okay now. FT2 (Talk | email) 19:08, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations with a good article. Arsenikk (talk) 19:21, 18 June 2010 (UTC)