Talk:Texaco/Archive 1

Fair use rationale for Image:Texaco logo.png
Image:Texaco logo.png 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 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:41, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I removed the image. --Jonas419 22:12, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Back to the Future
I was just wondering... should the Texaco reference from Back to the Future (Parts I and II) be in this article? (rct2guy 04:28, 27 June 2007 (UTC))

Nice call. --Jonas419 22:12, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Bankruptcy
I can't find any mention of Texaco filing for bankruptcy. Why is it missing? --128.2.128.55 07:43, 26 September 2007 (UTC) shouldn't there be a mention of Roberts v. Texaco in this article or perhaps it should have an article of it's own?

Ecuadorian rainforest contamination disasters
Added info about the disgraceful contamination of amazonian rainforest by Texaco, in Ecuador. It SHOULD be elaborated on in detail and placed in THE opening line of the Texaco page. Texaco poisoned thousands of people in Ecuador - cutting costs and using sub-bar, highly polluting means to dispose of toxic wastes. Isn't this somewhat more important than "Its flagship product is..." ?


 * Can this be done without violating NPOV? 76.21.8.213 (talk) 01:05, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * This section is not currently presented in an unbiased manner and does not paint an accurate picture of the situation in Ecuador. No mention is made of the partnership between Texaco and PetroEcuador.  This subject may need clarification, but unless you put more facts, this section is complete propaganda.  I will try to make a more coherent article when I have more time.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.23.68.40 (talk) 17:50, 30 July 2008 (UTC)