From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
|
This article is within the scope of Companies WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of companies. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
| ??? |
This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. |
| ??? |
This article has not yet received an importance rating assessment scale. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, which collaborates on articles related to energy. |
| Start |
This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale. |
| High |
This article is on a subject of high importance within energy. |
|
This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
|
 |
A story relating to the article StatoilHydro (or a previous version of it) was included in the news section of the Energy Portal. Please consider updating the portal news with any major developments on this topic. |
 |
[edit] Merger proposal
As all Statoil's assets and activities have been trasferred into StatoilHydro, I propose to merge articles on Statoil and StatoilHydro.Beagel 17:35, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
- More precisely, Statoil has taken over Hydro's oil and gas assets, and changed its name to StatoilHydro and at the same time the Hydro shareholders have been payed in Statoil shares. Arsenikk 20:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
- It's probably worth noting that the retail (i.e. petrol station) operations will continue to have the Statoil name and pre-merger branding, so there may be a case to retain the Statoil article with info on this. Gr1st 21:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
- There seems to be a fairly dominant trend on Wikipedia to keep articles about defunct companies before they enter mergers. For instance, there are articles for Conoco Inc., Phillips Petroleum Company and ConocoPhillips. Arsenikk 15:10, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
- I agree with this. At the same time the StatoilHydro seems more like acquisition of Hydro's oil business by Statoil rather than creation of a new company. Beagel 16:33, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
- I think the article should be left as-is. There's a lot of history behind Statoil and it's name still exists in many places. In fact, the only people who really know of "StatoilHydro" are those involved directly in the oil industry.--193.130.175.129 (talk) 09:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
