User talk:Petrolmaps

Invitation to join WikiProject Environment
Hi there, I notice your background and interests. I am seeking to expand the membership of WikiProject Environment to create a more informed vibrant environmental community on wikipedia. Would you be interested in joining? If so please put your name down on the project page --Alex 14:05, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Gulf Oil
Petrolmaps. Regarding your recent edits. As far as I am aware, the Gulf brand is still owned outright by Chevron - although they have licensed use of the brand on a long term basis to GOLP in the USA and GOI outside the USA. I am not sure of the terms of the licenses. GOI appears to be part of the Hinduja group. But I would not call it an Indian company since it is registered in the Caymans, based in London and owned from Luxembourg. If you can add anything about the licensing of the Gulf brand by Chevron and about GOI then that would be useful. As an aside, at least one senior GOI manager has contributed recently to the Gulf Oil article but even he seemed to have only a sketchy knowledge of the ownership and operations of GOI. regards. Bob BScar23625 (talk) 11:29, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

''Hi Bob, Sorry, I may have fallen into the trap of editing an article based on information taken from their own websites, where they may be using words a little more loosely than in a strict legal sense of ownership. My understanding is that GOI do have absolute rights to the name outside North America (and I think in Canada too, although I did not put that onto the wiki page as I'm less sure. The Gulf Oil Ltd website  says "The Hinduja Group, a private Indian business family acquired the rights to the Gulf brand after the company was acquired by Chevron in the US. Today, Gulf Oil International (GOI), part of the Hinduja Group, a private Indian business, is a vibrant oil marketing company with operations in over 70 countries. In the US, Gulf Oil still remains a subsidiary of Chevron, which has licensing agreements with various independent distributors to use the Gulf brand to sell Oil products", which doesn't appear to imply that Chevron have any residual rights in the name, but that might just be a long-term licence!    The Hinduja Group's own website  refers to Gulf Oil International as "Acquired by the Hinduja Group in 1994", which I why I called it Indian-owned.''

''I should perhaps have extended the list of countries in which Gulf is used as a brand. Their website shows a photo of a station in Jordan; there are plans to open stations in 2008 in the Czech and Slovak republics, and appears to be at least one station in Malta. Your views on this are very welcome!'' Petrolmaps (talk) 11:58, 27 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Petrolmaps. GOI was a division of the old GOC prior to 1984. It was based in London and engaged mainly in the worldwide sale of Gulf branded lubricants. I don't know what happened to GOI between 1984 and 1994, but it may have been restructured by Chevron to act as a vehicle for the transfer of Gulf interests outside the USA. It would be surprise me if Chevron had sold the Gulf brand (non USA) outright to the Hindujas - I envisage all sorts of problems with that. I would suspect that a long term licence is involved. But, one never knows. The Hinduja group is a Byzantine set-up and I have no idea how it works. 'Off the top of my head', Gulf (Canada), the country marketing company for Canada was "spun-off" from GOC around 1980. Something similar happened to the local Gulf E&P company. This was a response to some Canadian local ownership requirement. So, for a time at least, the Gulf brand in Canada was separate from GOLP/GOI. regards Bob BScar23625 (talk) 13:40, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Bob, Gulf Canada was largely sold by Chevron to Olympia &amp; York (the property vehicle of the Reichmann brothers in late 1985. At the same time, Gulf Canada's Western refining and marketing was then sold on to Petro-Canada.   See articles in the New York Times

''The Eastern Canadian (Quebec and Atlantic Provinces) Gulf assets were sold to Ultramar at much the same time. Gulf Canada Resources (as the rump company became) was then purely involved in exploration and production activities. However (and here I am relying on memory) they (the Reichmanns) kept the rights to the Gulf trademark in in Canada as neither Petro-Canada nor Ultramar had any use for it on downstream activities, and Olympia &amp; York had no prior oil industry activities. After Olympia &amp; York slid into bankruptcy in the 1990s, the assets of Gulf Canada Resources were taken over by its creditors, including the Toronto Dominion Bank. Gulf Canada did however have an Indonesian operating subsidiary (originally acquired from Asamera) that also sold Gulf branded lubricants, and sub-licenced the rights to the brand from Gulf Canada (see March 1998 form 10-K for Gulf Canada Resources Ltd). At some point, the rights to the Gulf name were then sold to the Hindujas, giving them control over the name everywhere except the USA; I believe that this was following the sale of Gulf Canada Resources to Conoco in 2002. (I can't corroborate that statement, unfortunately.)''

''One final thought: I don't believe that GOLP have national US rights to the Gulf trademark. They only use it in the north-eastern states, and their operations in Florida use the Cumberland Farms identity of their C-store chain.''Petrolmaps (talk) 16:33, 27 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Petrolmaps. Thankyou for that fascinating information. I must admit that my understanding of the affairs of Gulf (Canada) are based only on vague memories of working for Gulf (GOC-EH) in the early 1980s. Obviously, you know a lot more than I do about it!. best wishes. Bob BScar23625 (talk) 16:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Logicity
I'm a little disappointed that you deleted this page by so strictly interpreting the 4 hour limit. The first version of the page was indeed unbalanced, but I had worked hard to correct that, and was actually editing the Talk:Logicity page to explain how we had addressed the issues identified, only to return to the page and find it gone!

LogiCity is an online (or distributed) serious game, that falls within the sub-category of Global warming games. Like the Climate Challenge Game, also listed on the Global warming game page (and which also has its own Wikipedia page), LogiCity has been publicly funded by the UK's Defra, through its Climate Challenge Programme. The game is not a commercial venture; it is freely available to anyone to play. As such, I believe it has as much justification to a Wikipedia page as the other games linked from the Global warming game page, which apart from Climate Challenge, include V GAS, Stabilization Wedge and Keep Cool. --Petrolmaps (talk) 18:15, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll restore it and bring to articles for deletion noticeboard to encourage more consensus. Regards, Rudget . 18:21, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Rudget. I agree that Dackers' first attempt lacked a neutral point of view, so was initially a worthy candidate for deletion.  --Petrolmaps (talk) 18:25, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:45, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Borealis AG, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Port Arthur ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Borealis_AG check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Borealis_AG?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:51, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:National Energy Foundation logo.gif
Thanks for uploading File:National Energy Foundation logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:30, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 28 November 2023 (UTC)