*Oppose Previous NPOV and RSN as well as several related article talk page discussions reached a general consensus that the MJ article is a mix of reliable information and editorializing.  The list is based on the views of MJ's editorial staff, not a reported event.  No information is given as to what criteria was used to create the list other than the opinions of the author or perhaps the MJ editorial staff.  A list based on the editorial opinion of the magazine might be worth including if the list itself has weight.  In this case, and especially in comparison to the more significant sources talking about ExxonMobile there is no compelling evidence that inclusion on the list is in and of itself notable.  Thus we have an opinion that doesn't rise to the level of a RS and we have the fact that EM was listed on a list that carries no WP:WEIGHT.  I feel my view aligns with the limited consensus of the recent noticeboard discussions.