Talk:Anadarko Petroleum

Untitled
The content for this page was copied from a press release by a company employee from the Human Resources department in order to provide a current statement of company operations.


 * The above sentence refers to the state of this article as it existed on October 5 2005, after which it was deleted and re-written from scratch by User:PM Poon, among others. DS 00:11, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Reidrect from Kerr McGee
While Kerr-McGee was indeed bought out by Anadarko, it is still relevant as a separate encyclopedia entry, and should not redirect here. Schnabeltier Angriff 19:43, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 14:54, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:KerrMcGee logo.png
The image Image:KerrMcGee logo.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --02:23, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

March 23, 2009
updated the financial data, but the new source they cite is large. I was unable to dig up the precise page number the stuff was on. Could someone else doublecheck?- Mgm|(talk) 22:05, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Lost Lawsuit
I am wondering because I cannot find a hint of the lost lawsuit and the 5.15 billion dollars they had to pay, as in the german Wikipedia. --Lkl ★ 11:09, 5 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I also can't find any hint about Anadarko having acquired Kerr-McGee in the article or about Kerr-McGee committing something that is not far away from genocide against the Navajos by polluting Navajo territory with corporate waste. Neither do I find that in the Kerr-McGee article. So I can't see if that would be true or false (DE-Wikipedia is known to be not trustworthy on controversial articles). --Constructor 06:57, 6 April 2014 (UTC)


 * There is a Track: Tronox - "[...] In April 2014, the federal government reached a $5 billion dollar settlement with Anadarko (successor to Kerr-McGee) in the largest environmental case in American history. According to one report, "Kerr-McGee, rather than pay for the environmental mess it created, decided to shift the liabilities between 2002 and 2006 into Tronox. Kerr-McGee, meanwhile, kept its valuable oil and gas assets." The cost to clean up the mess inherited by Tronox from Kerr-McGee was estimated by the courts to be over $5 billion.[4] There are contaminated sites in 22 states and the Navajo Nation. "Among the dozens of locations targeted for cleanup under the settlement is a former chemical manufacturing site in Nevada that has led to contamination in Lake Mead, abandoned uranium mines in and around the Navajo Nation, and a Superfund site in Gloucester, N.J., polluted by thorium."[4] [...]" --Lkl ★ 18:44, 6 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm concerned about the POV in this section. Calling Anadarko's woes a "mess" doesn't seem encyclopedic or neutral to me, for example. I hope to be able to make some edits that are more constructive shortly. Trevdna (talk) 23:28, 16 April 2014 (UTC)


 * The word "mess" is taken directly from the reliable cited source, that is what the source calls it and is an accurate description on multiple levels. However since that seems to be causing a problem I changed it. -- Green  C  02:19, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Move request

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Moved. Per consensus emphasizing WP:NCCORP. Philg88 ♦talk 19:15, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Anadarko Petroleum Corporation → Anadarko Petroleum – unneeded 24.131.80.54 (talk) 22:05, 5 November 2014 (UTC) already redirects
 * Oppose, Useful, Official, not about a form of petroleum. Gregkaye  ✍ ♪  12:40, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
 * If it was about a form of petroleum, it would be at Anadarko petroleum; but this request is to Anadarko Petroleum. Dekimasu よ! 22:33, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Not to mention that we shouldn't worry about other uses that could theoretically exist but don't.—Neil P. Quinn (talk) 00:41, 12 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Oppose The "Corporation" is in the mast-head logo seems to be what they are called. -- Green  C  16:19, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
 * We do not necessarily use the official name of the company in titles here, however. Dekimasu よ! 22:33, 10 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Support per WP:NCCORP. The legal status suffix of a company is not normally included in the article title, except in the case of disambiguation. This is not the case here, if we look for Anadarko Petroleum. As of official name versus common name, Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources.  The common name in this case is Anadarko, but it can't be used as disambiguate name. Therefore, Anadarko Petroleum seems to be the best option (and this page redirects here already since 2006 without nobody complaining that they expected it be a type of petroleum).  Beagel (talk) 10:51, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Why is "Anadarko" the most common way to refer to the company? A quick google check shows most sources using the full name, a few use Anadarko Petroleum, even fewer Anadarko. -- Green  C  14:00, 9 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Support. It's not easy to get hard numbers on which is more common, but I have the sense that it's "Anadarko Petroleum". As one quick heuristic, the first 20 hits from the New York Times include 13 using "Anadarko Petroleum", 6 using "Anadarko Petroleum Corporation", and 2 using just "Anadarko". As a bonus, this form is more concise and follows the recommendation of WP:NCCORP.—Neil P. Quinn (talk) 00:41, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Support per Beagel. Swordman97  talk to me
 * Support per WP:NCCORP. Dekimasu よ! 00:08, 17 November 2014 (UTC)


 * 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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

This company is not defunct
Hello there,

This article wrongly states that Anadarko Petroleum is defunct. After acquisition it became a subsidiary of Occidental Petroleum, details of the transaction are available here

Anadarko Petroleum can also be found on the latest list of subsidiaries of Occidental Petroleum, see here. 62.122.202.193 (talk) 22:48, 3 May 2023 (UTC)