Talk:Brent Spar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Anybody got any nice free use photos to illustrate this article. Greenpeace's are all educational/free use, so can't use those, and shell are "keen to move on..."  :( Anilocra 17:19, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Featured article

What do people think of nominating this as a Featured Article candidate? I think it's well-written, -structured and -referenced, and also a fine example of NPOV. SaintedLegion 11:28, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree. This is a fine example of an article, and believe it could well be nominated. Born Acorn 18:33, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

There are some inconsistent numbers in the article. in the Aftermath section the article quotes 5000 tonnes. In the Impact of Brent Spar section the article quotes 5500 tonnes. So which is it? Good Day.

I am actually surprised that Wikipedia, that supposedly are to proof read the articles, let this one through. The emphasize of Greenpeaces lies to the public are nearly non-existing. Pressure groups must be held accountable if they don't tell the truth, and they must take the heat standing, or else it will affect all other causes that they work for. Secondly - to end the article with a biased quote from the Greenpeace leader saying that their mistake were that they were mislead by the government, Shell and the media - what is that? It was Greenpeace telling the lie, wasnt it?