Talk:Fortune Global 500/Archives/2012

Saudi Aramco etc
Where are all the private / government companies? If they are excluded, please explain why.

Maintain unranked EU entry!
The unranked EU entry should be maintained and regularly reinserted when deleted without discussion. The following rationale has been provided by numerous editors and is backed by external sources and acknowledgments.


 * a) Country like characteristics: Common market, common policies, common institutions, bodies, agencies, common EU legislation, a single budget financing projects in all member states. Its own budget to fund common programmes such as the European Union's programmes in agriculture, research and education. A common fund for trans-country infrastructure projects and for regional development. Election every 5 years and a European parliament as well as a EU court of justice, common currency Euro, EU-Day (holiday), EU-Licenseplate, EU-Anthem, EU-Citizenship, Schengen agreement, one representation of all 27 member states in WTO, Permanent G8 participant, Permanent UN observer. Common Policy Examples in the city of Berlin: The EU is financing infrastructure, education, social projects etc. In official press conferences and gatherings the national flag stands next to the EU flag.Image of the German Federal Chancellery  with 2 standard flags (Germany / EU flag)


 * b) already ranked in several other media and statistics like CIA World Fact Book: Preliminary statement on EU entry, IMF data sheet, Wikipedia List of countries by GDP (PPP) etc.


 * c) many other entries are included unranked with unclear state or country definition like the Overseas territories, Vatican, Hongkong and others. EU is not per se an exception.


 * d) Note that the inclusion of the EU is granted to its sui generis status and can not advocate the inclusion of Opec, Nato, African Union, UN, Commonwealth, Arab League, Mercosur, NAFTA, ASEAN and others. The degree of a state-like-entity and its characteristics make this a singular case.


 * e) Because of the sui generis status, the 27 member states will remain as single entry and the EU becomes unranked.


 * f) Talk:European Union/inclusion in lists of countries

Lear 21 (talk) 19:55, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Royal Dutch Shell
This article will state the fact that Royal Dutch Shell is 50% Dutch and 50% British with its headquarters in the Netherlands and its registered office in the UK, whether a certain couple of editors like it or not. Signsolid (talk) 21:03, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Please read WP:OWN. My suggestion would be that the article agrees with the source it uses, something that everybody excepts Signsolid seems to favour. JdeJ (talk) 21:18, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

So I just made it up that Royal Dutch Shell is 50% British? Read the Royal Dutch Shell article first then. Oh and who are these everybody who are in your favour? Itsempty (talk) 22:07, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

First of all, note that Itsempty is a sockpuppet of Signsolid. And once again, please respect the sources. This is an article on the Fortune Global 500, it follows that it's rather logical to use the the Fortune Global 500 as a source, no? The information in the footnote Signsolid keeps deleting is a good and fitting compromise. JdeJ (talk) 16:37, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

It's 60% Dutch/ 40% British. It's called Royal Dutch for a reason. While on paper is maybe a multination corporation, in reality The Netherlands is the powerbase. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.101.134.5 (talk) 21:10, 13 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I think the current presentation is reasonable: it's noted as a Dutch company, per the list source, with a note explaining the partial British ownership. —C.Fred (talk) 19:35, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Shell revisited
Looking at the 2009 rankings, Unilever is listed as British/Dutch, while Shell is listed as straight Dutch. Is it worth a comment about Unilever where we discuss how Shell is classified? —C.Fred (talk) 14:43, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

2009 is on Fortune website
Someone should add the list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.65.20.105 (talk) 00:03, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

2009 added
Huh a lot of typing ... should be there ... it complained about some span links in the beginning ... this is why there is no references ... obviously cnn.money.com is spamming cite ; ) YordanGeorgiev (talk) 10:47, 10 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Copyvio turned out to be the issue. We don't use the full list. We do use excerpts. I've pared it down to just the top ten companies and countries/cities with five or more. —C.Fred (talk) 14:44, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

2010 breakdown by country amedment
2010 breakdown by country table had India listed as top with 139 companies. I went back to the source to check; in fact, the U.S. is first with 139 companies, India has 8... I've amended the table in light of this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.253.187.37 (talk) 20:29, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

The 2009 breakdown by city had a similar problem... I've amended this also to be in line with the source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.253.187.37 (talk) 20:34, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Calgary, Canada
Aren't most of Canada's companies oil companies headquartered in Calgary? Suncor, Canadian Natural Resources, Transcanada, Enbridge, Cenovus, Husky. Calgary is the headquarters for over 4,000 oil and gas companies. There has to be at least one of them that makes this list.Grmike (talk) 05:32, 20 January 2012 (UTC)grmike