Talk:3M

message: For reference to 3M's passive fire protection products, see http://www.mmm.com/firestop . 3M uses its own brand of sodium silicate, called "Expantrol", as an active ingredient in a variety of firestops, including its CP25 caulking, FS195 wrap strip, CS195 intumescent sheet and more. 3M also offers endothermic wrapping to preserve the operability of electrical circuits while exposed to fire. 3M's fire barrier mortar offers the best bounding in the business, with certified repair procedures using "itself" as well as 3M's intumescent caulking and putty. Their main man behind this is now retired, one Mr. Richard Licht, who testified in front of US Congress in the Thermo-lag 330-1 scandal that brought to light the US nuclear industry's acceptance of bounding without mandatory product certification.--Achim 00:09, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just restructure the 3M article slightly. I also added a major products and technology section. If you think the above is worth adding to this section, go for it. IMHO, I think it is, but do not know the topic well enough to write about it in an encyclopeadic fashion. Anubis1975 02:02, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Passive Fire Protection

message: There is no mention within the 3M article of the 3M/Scotch line of professional 2-inch magnetic recording tape.  I don't have sufficient historical knowledge of these products at my disposal; however, 3M does hold an important place in the development of magnetic recording tape, and so should be indicated as such.
````--Defone 09:47, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Magnetic Recording Tape 

message: My school is currently in the middle of a project about 3M's production of carcinogenic perfluorocarbons. This controversy has been in the local newspapers for the past year. Why is there no section of the article exploring this issue?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.144.36.137 (talk) 19:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Then add it, add an acquisition/controversy section,Lihaas (talk) 11:32, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  PFC Controversy 

message: I have copy edited the section "founding", and removed the copy edit tag. I recommend some clarification for that section because the points don't seem to link. For example, what does the sentence "In reality, however, Dwan and his associates were not selling what they thought; they were in fact selling the worthless mineral anorthosite." have to do with the rest of the paragraph?--Samuel Tan 03:59, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  copy edit 

message: The 3M web site says that its headquarters are in St. Paul, but this article's History section and its infobox say they're in Maplewood, a city bordering St. Paul.  The Maplewood article claims the same.  Can someone set this straight? – Wdfarmer (talk) 21:03, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not without a source it cant say that.Lihaas (talk) 11:32, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose driving past it is original research, I will look for a source.Tomsv 98 (talk) 22:26, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: One would think this would be easily sourced, but one would be wrong.  I hesitate to use Google maps as a source.  Is a GIS map for Ramsey county an acceptable source? Tomsv 98 (talk) 20:01, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone has fixed and sourced this, the difficulty with finding source is due to the fact the company’s headquarters campus is in parts of at least two cities, with a mailing address of St. Paul and the headquarters building being in Maplewood.Tomsv 98 (talk) 21:55, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

text: I thought the Austin site had become their headquarters? Or is that just for some smaller region? I sure remember a lot of hoopla when they bought the site about 30 years ago. Shanen (talk) 08:14, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Headquarters location 

message: *Coming Clean: Did 3M and DuPont ignore evidence of health risks?
*3M found not liable for home value loss
*3M begins cleanup of PFCs at former landfill -Shootbamboo (talk) 01:12, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources for [[perfluorinated compounds]] (PFCs) in environmental section 

message: This article says a company with 79,000 employees makes 55,000 different products. For that to be true each product would have to be made by 1.436 people. Since 0.436 of a person can't work on a production line but can spend 0.436 of her time on one product line and 0.436 of her time on some other product we get that after splitting her time between two product lines she has 0.128 of her time to spend on a third line. Follow this line of reasoning and we see that some lines have only one person on them whilst others have 1.536 people on them. This leaves one person with 182 hours a year to do the paperwork, pay the bills, marketing, advertising, design the logos, calculate payroll, open the mail and answer the phone. Does she have a Wikipedia page because it sure sounds as if she deserves one? Cottonshirtτ 05:14, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: They can make more that Qty (1) of each product.  For example they may make more than one pack of Post-It Notes and more than one roll of Scotch tape each year.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.177.128.131 (talk) 00:01, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is a new article required? 

message: I turned the reference to the 3M M79 recorder to a link to a page waiting to be created.  The 3M M79 was a among the first production 24 track audio tape recorder.  It became a recording industry standard.
I have a reference to the original owners of the first two recorders:
"[ Armin Steiner's Sound Labs' Studio 1] also featured among the first 3M M79 24-track tape machines, Serial No. 2, (Wally Heider received No.1),"
Mix Magazine: Classic Track: 'Rhinestone Cowboy':
http://www.mixonline.com/news/classic-tracks/classic-track-rhinestone-cowboy/425566
Robert.Harker (talk) 00:33, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  3M M79 was a ground breaking, industry sandard 24 track audio tape recorder 

message: Various sources say that it only changed its name from Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company to 3M in 2002. It seems to have used both names in print adverts, with 3M Company as the logo and Minnesota etc as a kind of subtitle. When did 3M come about? The company's official history is vague on this. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 20:46, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Name 

message: In the Products section most entries have been tagged "Citation needed". Are citations really needed, wouldn't a link to the 3M product page suffice? If it's thought this is unreliable as products may be withdrawn, do we need a list of all products here (possibly a list of product categories would be helpful). Simply "Current products are listed on the 3M Web site [123]" seems enough. Pol098 (talk) 14:48, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are product citations needed? 

message: Substituted at 06:05, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on 3M. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120313125926/http://mixonline.com/TECnology-Hall-of-Fame/1978-EM-Mastering/ to http://mixonline.com/TECnology-Hall-of-Fame/1978-EM-Mastering/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:56, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Aren't 3M mainly known for the controversy around their Scotch-branded video tapes? They were pretty popular due to their cheapness back in the 70s, but within only five years or so, those tapes became unplayable because they became sticky and the layers of tape on the reel stuck to each other like glue. Today, an intensive, several-hour baking process is required to play these infamous 1970s 3M video tapes. --2003:71:4E6A:B477:3C31:2EDD:5C49:A691 (talk) 19:13, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm assuming you're referencing sticky-shed syndrome, yes? If so, it was an issue with binders used by multiple manufacturers - It wasn't exclusive to 3M tapes. Do you have a third-party reliable source that mentions 3M related to that issue? I looked in that article; and while 3M is mentioned, it's also unsourced over there - if a reliable source can't be found, a specific manufacturer probably shouldn't be mentioned over at that article either. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 19:26, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Magnetic tape controversy 

message: In the sidebar, the number of employees listed is stated to be 89,800 while in the opening section of the article, the number of employees is listed as 88,000. If new numbers has been produced, the number in the sidebar should be switched to the current number, and the year updated. Currently it reads as though one of the numbers is inaccurate.67.221.121.30 (talk) 13:38, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Difference of numbers 

message: I removed a large amount of content because it was unsourced, out of date, or otherwise incorrect. If you have a problem with an individual edit by all means revert but please state a valid reason. Claiming that I have "an axe to grind" is not a valid reason. FYI I have no axe to grind other than making articles conform to Wikipedia policy and best practices. 203.151.232.90 (talk) 11:39, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not getting involved in the reverting because I don't know the entire story of what is going on here, but your motivation for an edit or edits is a valid concern.  I would suggest that you work with the other editors following this page to address your concerns. 331dot (talk) 11:47, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: A specific concern about my motivation would be valid. Merely claiming that I have an axe to grind is not. 203.151.232.90 (talk) 12:08, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not exactly a denial, but whatever.  I can't say that I disagree with the other editors who have reverted your large scale removals who are saying that you should be less heavy handed and more nuanced.  If you believe such a large scale removal is necessary you should hash that out on this page first.  Being correct is not a defense to edit warring. 331dot (talk) 12:13, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I was not doing anything except trying to improve articles by making them conform to policy. And I do deny that I have any other motivation. 203.151.232.90 (talk) 12:28, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of content

message: I suggest that at least some of the unsourced history could ref to this article: http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fsb/fsb_archive/2003/04/01/341016/ Ben Aveling 13:53, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source 

message: Hello, I'm Kelsie! I've created a Wikipedia account to propose updates to articles related to 3M, my employer. I've disclosed my conflict of interest above and on my profile, and I'll try my best to follow Wikipedia's many rules. Thanks in advance to editors willing to review my requests here and update the article on my behalf.
Currently, the information in the infobox and introduction do not match. The infobox has 2018 information for finances and employee count, but the introduction has 2017 financial information sourced by Vault.com, which I'm not sure is an appropriate source, and an outdated employee count sourced by 3M's website (again, possibly not appropriate). If you click on the Fortune 500 link (reference #7), you'll see the ranking of #97 is not correct. The company now ranks #95. I'd like to propose removing the introduction's second paragraph and replacing with proposed text and sourcing below.
More specifically, I propose removing the following text and sources: 
I propose replacing with the following text and sources: 
This change replaces 2017 finances and an outdated employee count with 2018 details, which are already sourced in the infobox. Furthermore, this change eliminates reliance on Vault.com and the 3M website, and uses the same Fortune 500 source to verify the company's current ranking. The number of countries in which 3M operates is verified by the same 10-K source in the infobox. Can someone please review this request and update the article on my behalf?
Thank you! KM at 3M (talk) 13:58, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with proposed changes.  Sandcherry (talk) 14:07, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for the endorsement. Since a couple days have passed and no one has objected or updated the page, might you be willing to make the proposed change? I can't update the page myself because of my conflict of interest. KM at 3M (talk) 20:24, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

text: Thanks to User:Tigraan for updating the article. KM at 3M (talk) 18:52, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update request 

message: Hello, I'm back with another request, this time for the "Leadership" section. Currently, the section has 4 subsections with lists of current officers, presidents, CEOs, and board chairs. However, the first section is sourced to 3M's website, and the remaining three have no sources. Some of the years are incorrect. I've also noticed many company articles include mention of presidents, CEOs, and board chairs, but not current officers. I've drafted a brief and neutral summary of 3M's board chairs, CEOs, and presidents (one paragraph each), based on Wikipedia-appropriate sources and with correct dates. I understand prose is preferred over bulleted lists, and I should also note these paragraphs take up significantly less real estate than the four existing lists. My leadership summary for editor review:
; Leadership
Board chairs have included: William L. McKnight (1949–1966), Bert S. Cross (1966–1970), Harry Heltzer (1970–1975), Raymond H. Herzog (1975–1980), Lewis W. Lehr (1980–1986), Allen F. Jacobson (1986–1991), Livio DeSimone (1991–2001), James McNerney (2001–2005), George W. Buckley (2005–2012), and Inge Thulin (2012–2018). Thulin continued to serve as executive chairman until current chair Michael F. Roman was appointed in 2019.
3M's CEOs have included: Cross (1966–1970), Heltzer (1970–1975), Herzog (1975–1979), Lehr (1979–1986), Jacobson (1986–1991), DeSimone (1991–2001), McNerney (2001–2005), Robert S. Morrison (2005, interim), Buckley (2005–2012), Thulin (2012–2018), and Roman (2018–present).
3M's presidents have included: Edgar B. Ober (1905–1929), McKnight (1929–1949), Richard P. Carlton (1949–1953), Herbert P. Buetow (1953–1963), Cross (1963–1966), Heltzer (1966–1970), and Herzog (1970–1975). In the late 1970s, the position was separated into roles for U.S. and international operations. The position overseeing domestic operations was first held by Lehr, followed by John Pitblado from 1979 to 1981, then Jacobson from 1984 to 1991. James A. Thwaits led international operations starting in 1979. Buckley and Thulin were president during 2005–2012, and 2012–2018, respectively.
Can someone please review this request and update the article on my behalf? I understand editors may want to expand or trim what I've provided, but I hope this draft will at least be considered more helpful than the current content.  I'm inviting you since you reviewed the above request.
Thank you! KM at 3M (talk) 17:38, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:   KM at 3M Your proposal looks much better than the lists.  I do not know how to cut and paste the revision with the citations included.  Perhaps another editor knows how. Sandcherry (talk) 00:48, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've tried to make the markup as easy to copy and paste as possible. By clicking on the "edit source" link you should be able to view the markup for the proposed paragraphs. I believe the same is true for the introduction request immediately above. Or, I'm hoping another editor can help, but thanks again for the endorsement. KM at 3M (talk) 18:45, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks to User:Theroadislong for removing the list of current officers.  Since you helped with copying over the markup in the above approved edit request, might you be able to help here as well? User:Sandcherry has endorsed the proposed change. KM at 3M (talk) 18:54, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I told you that the proper way to put in such requests is the  template. I added it, but please do so yourself next time. If you don't understand how to use it, ask at the Teahouse. TigraanClick here to contact me 13:57, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  The Chairmen were added. The other executive lists could not be added because their first names were missing. Regards,  Spintendo  16:25, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:   Thanks, and sorry, I am still learning this process.  Thank you for your work on the Chairman section. However, I'm concerned because much of the Leadership section remains unsourced, and some of the dates are still incorrect. If you look at the proposed text again, you'll see full names are used the first time someone is mentioned, then only last names are used in subsequent mentions (ie, "Bert S. Cross" becomes "Cross"). I believe this follows Wikipedia's manual of style (Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Biography#Subsequent_use). I don't mean to be a burden, but might you, User:Theroadislong, or another editor be willing to take another look? I still think the 3 short paragraphs proposed are a substantial improvement over the unsourced and inaccurate lists. Thanks for further consideration, and I hope User:Sandcherry's endorsement of the proposed text will also be taken into account. KM at 3M (talk) 17:39, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

text: Theroadislong (talk) 18:03, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:   Thank you for updating the article. KM at 3M (talk) 15:33, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leadership request 

message: Hello, I have another request, this time to modify the structure of the "History" section. Right now the section has subsections for "Founding" (which has just one paragraph) and "Expansion and modern history", and confusingly, text about the company's founding appears above the "Founding" subsection.
I propose removing the "Founding" and "Expansion and modern history" section headings, and instead, having a subsection called "Acquisitions and divestitures". Here's the content I would suggest moving into this subsection:
:On September 8, 2008, 3M announced an agreement to acquire Meguiar's, a car-care products company that was family-owned for over a century.
: On August 30, 2010, 3M announced that they had acquired Cogent Systems for $943 million.
: On October 13, 2010, 3M completed acquisition of Arizant Inc. In December 2011, 3M completed the acquisition of the Winterthur Technology Group, a bonded abrasives company.
: On January 3, 2012, it was announced that the Office and Consumer Products Division of Avery Dennison was being bought by 3M for $550 million. The transaction was canceled by 3M in September 2012 amid antitrust concerns.
: In May 2013, 3M announced that it was selling Scientific Anglers and Ross Reels to Orvis. Ross Reels had been acquired by 3M in 2010.
: In March 2017, it was announced that 3M was purchasing Johnson Control International Plc's safety gear business, Scott Safety, for $2 billion.
There is more content about acquisitions and divestitures to add to this section (including some business dealings recently and appropriately removed by User:Theroadislong because of poor sourcing), but for now, I am only proposing a structural change to improve the article's organization. I may have future requests of this section, but for this request I'm not proposing any text or sourcing changes. Do editors agree this would be an improvement, and if so, can someone please update the article on my behalf? Thank you! KM at 3M (talk) 15:33, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Since you participated in the two discussions above, might you be willing to say if you endorse this request as well? In short, I'm proposing removing the "Founding" and "Expansion and modern history" section headings, and creating a new history subsection called "Acquisitions and divestitures" using existing related content. If this is another request you're unable to help with, I understand, but your thoughts are helpful either way. Thanks! KM at 3M (talk) 19:14, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

text: Sorry to bother, but I'm struggling to get feedback on this proposed improvement. I thought I'd ask you since you helped with the request above. I'm proposing removing the "Founding" and "Expansion and modern history" section headings, and creating a new history subsection called "Acquisitions and divestitures" using existing related content. I should note, User:Commonwealth1333 just updated the article with another acquisition-related sentence, which could also be moved into this subsection. Thanks. 192.28.1.35 (talk) 20:18, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've omitted the confusing heading. Regards,  Spintendo  19:01, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

text: This is, in essence, creating two different expansion sections which cover the same topic - the expansion of the company. The COI editor needs to expand upon their reasoning given for making this change, because "improve(ing) how content is organized" is not one of them if it creates this duality in subheadings. And just to be clear, if you're proposing a new heading, you are proposing a change to the text. Regards,  Spintendo  16:21, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Acquisitions and divestitures request

message: Thank you for removing the confusing heading. In case my above request was confusing, I am hoping to improve how text is organized by moving several related claims about acquisitions and divestitures together, making a new subsection under "History" called "Acquisitions and divestitures".
Here are the claims to consider moving into the section:
# On September 8, 2008, 3M announced an agreement to acquire Meguiar's, a car-care products company that was family-owned for over a century.
# On August 30, 2010, 3M announced that they had acquired Cogent Systems for $943 million.
# On October 13, 2010, 3M completed acquisition of Arizant Inc. In December 2011, 3M completed the acquisition of the Winterthur Technology Group, a bonded abrasives company.
# On January 3, 2012, it was announced that the Office and Consumer Products Division of Avery Dennison was being bought by 3M for $550 million. The transaction was canceled by 3M in September 2012 amid antitrust concerns.
# In May 2013, 3M announced that it was selling Scientific Anglers and Ross Reels to Orvis. Ross Reels had been acquired by 3M in 2010.
# In March 2017, it was announced that 3M was purchasing Johnson Control International Plc's safety gear business, Scott Safety, for $2 billion.
# In October 2019, 3M completed the purchase of Acelity and its KCI subsidiaries worldwide for $6.7 billion, including assumption of debt and other adjustments.
My goal here is to improve how content is organized and encourage expansion of acquisition/divestiture coverage because there are many others to note. Again, for this request I'm not proposing any text or source changes, just making a new subsection and moving the above into that section. Hoping for someone to update the article for me, or at least provide some feedback since none was left specific to this request above. Thanks again to User:Spintendo for helping! KM at 3M (talk) 14:45, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: This is, in essence, creating two different expansion sections which cover the same topic - the expansion of the company. The COI editor needs to expand upon their reasoning given for making this change, because "improve(ing) how content is organized" is not one of them if it creates this duality in subheadings. And just to be clear, if you're proposing a new heading, you are proposing a change to the text. Regards,  Spintendo  16:21, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Subsection request

message: Hello, I'm back with another request, this time to add content about 3M's major partnerships and sponsorships. The company has sponsored many events and activities over the decades, but the content proposed below focuses on the most notable such as NASCAR, professional sports teams and golf tournaments, and the Discovery Education 3M Young Scientist Challenge and WorldSkills. I've drafted a brief and neutral summary based on Wikipedia-appropriate sources.
Please see proposed text below, which I suggest adding as a "History" subsection (but I'll let editors decide the best location): 
; Partnerships and sponsorships
3M began sponsoring stock car racing driver Greg Biffle's No. 16 Ford in 2005, then became a primary sponsor of Roush Fenway Racing in 2006. The company started sponsoring Biffle for the NASCAR Cup Series in 2008. In 2010,  3M extended its five-year NASCAR sponsorship agreement through 2015. 3M began sponsoring Jeff Gordon at Hendrick Motorsports in 2014, followed by Chase Elliott for the NASCAR Cup Series in 2016. The company was the title sponsor of multiple Sprint Cup races at Michigan International Speedway during the 2000s, as well as the NASCAR Xfinity Series in 2015.
3M has sponsored other sports teams and events, including the Minnesota Timberwolves, Minnesota Twins, and Minnesota Lynx. The company sponsored the 3M Championship tournament as part of PGA Tour Champions from 2001 to 2018, and became title sponsor of the PGA Tour's 3M Open in 2019. The seven-year sponsorship agreement with the PGA Tour is expected to keep the 3M Open in Minnesota until 2025. 3M sponsored Mucho Macho Man in all three Triple Crown events in 2011. In 2016, 3M became the official "science partner" of the Minnesota Vikings for ten years with a focus on enhancing the fan experience through science. The company acquired naming rights to 3M Arena at Mariucci, the home arena for the Minnesota Golden Gophers men's ice hockey team of the University of Minnesota, for fourteen years starting in 2017.
Outside of sports, 3M has sponsored several community and educational initiatives. The Discovery Education 3M Young Scientist Challenge, a national science competition for middle school students, has been sponsored by 3M for more than a decade, and the company has also sponsored the U.S. team at WorldSkills competitions. 3M and Nobel Media, an organization affiliated with the Nobel Prize, formed a partnership in 2016; the collaboration brings Nobel laureates to 3M's campus in Maplewood, and has 3M co-sponsor and send company scientists to Nobel events both in the U.S. and internationally.
Can someone please review this request and update the article on my behalf? I understand editors may want to expand or trim what I've provided.  I'm inviting you since you've reviewed previous requests. Thanks! KM at 3M (talk) 19:32, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: In my opinion, this material doesn't belong in the article.  This is just a summary of some of 3M's promotional activity. Constant314 (talk) 21:46, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for taking a look. My goal is not to promote 3M's activities or products, but rather to provide a neutral overview of major sponsorships similar to Nike,_Inc.#Sponsorship (which also sends readers to List of Nike sponsorships), Carlsberg_Group#Sponsorships, StubHub#Sports_partnerships, or Visa_Inc.#Sponsorships. I was also hoping to add brief mention of articles clearly affiliated with 3M, such as 3M Arena at Mariucci, 3M Open, and Discovery Education 3M Young Scientist Challenge, to make the article more complete and connect related pages. 3M has sponsored many other activities over the decades. These are the most prominent and well-documented in sourcing. Is any of the text problematic in particular? I certainly want to make sure this information is approached appropriately, so I'm keen to hear if you have thoughts on wording changes or other edits to make this more acceptable. Thanks! KM at 3M (talk) 19:18, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Information added to articles needs to be evaluated on its own merit.  The fat that a similar item appears in a similar article is not a valid argument that it belongs in some other article.  There are a lolt of articles that should be trimmed.  See WP:OTHERCONTENT.  Discovery Education 3M Young Scientist Challenge and WorldSkills could well be candidates for deletion.  Nor is it an argument that everything vaguely related to 3M should be linked through this article. See WP:ABOUTEVERYTHING.  There is a link to 3M’s corporate web site.  That is the place to link everything related to 3M.   Sponsorship of sporting events is not encyclopedic information.  The fact that 3M invites Nobel laureates to its campus is not encyclopedic.   Every bit of trivia added to the article dilutes the significant content.Constant314 (talk) 16:00, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for your reply. Not too long ago, the article said: "On December 20, 2005, 3M announced a major partnership with Roush Fenway Racing, one of NASCAR's premier organizations. In 2008, the company sponsored Greg Biffle in the NASCAR Sprint Cup Series as he drove the No. 16 Ford Fusion. In addition, on February 19, 2006, 3M announced that it would become the title sponsor of the 3M Performance 400 at Michigan International Speedway until 2011." This was removed by User:Theroadislong, along with original research and other unsourced content.  Do you agree with Constant314's assessment of the proposed addition, or do you think a sourced overview of major partnerships is acceptable? I'm asking in case sourcing was your only reason for removal. Thanks again to you both for providing feedback! 192.28.1.35 (talk) 14:39, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Constant314 you are just trying to promote your company here. Theroadislong (talk) 14:49, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Partnerships and sponsorships request.  

message: I thought neutrality was key to Wikipedia articles but this article is controlled by persons on the 3M payroll.  It sounds like a report to shareholders.  
~ ~ ~ ~  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:989:4280:3150:B158:EED7:54FC:51F0 (talk) 02:47, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: There are editors here on the 3M payroll.  They have self identified an are operating within Wikipedia guidelines.  That is allowed.  Constant314 (talk) 02:55, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutral article? 

message: The content you are removing is sourced to Miami Herlad, NPR, The New York Times, DW. That's a lot of references to remove as "non-notable" of sources that are widely used in many Wikipedia articles. These complaints have also been made by hospital executives, the President, etc, but I didn't add all of the many complaints that have been made and reported on in the press. The section will continue to be updated, but with the amount of press this is receiving a separate article is an option if it begins to overwhelm this article, or multiple articles like Viacom (1952–2006). Please share your thoughts here and let's try to find a solution.Gammapearls (talk) 12:14, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Greetings.  Thanks for contacting me.  My concern is this.  A report by Miami Herald, NPR, The New York Times of an interview with a public official is a reliable source for what the official said, but the official is not a reliable source. A public official saying that 3M should do such and such is just someone's opinion.  People complain all the time, but until those complaints are substantiated, the don't belong in Wikipedia.  There is hoarding and possibly price gouging.  That is related to the pandemic and should be covered there. The fact that it is a 3M product is again only tangentially related to an encyclopedia article on 3M. Of course, it is related if it is found that 3M actually orchestrated the gouging and hording.  Anyway, this stuff needs to be viewed through the lens of time before it makes it into the article. Emotions are too high right now.  You might what to see WP:NOTNP.   Anyway, thanks for the reaching out.  Constant314 (talk) 12:35, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, this is all related to the Defense Production Act, which has to be covered somewhere in this article. We certainly can make the connection to the article subject clearer and more focused and trim some of the excess. Gammapearls (talk) 12:49, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I listened to several of the interviews and read some of the others.  Although I am not suggesting any malfeasance, when a public official says "I talked to 3M and they said X," we have to ask, did the official talk to 3M himself?  How long is the chain from the person who talked to 3M to the public official and how much did the message change as it was passed on.  And did the person who actually talked to 3M verify that they were talking to3M and not to an independent distributor?  It is really hearsay and gossip. If the NY Times publishes an article and they say that they contacted a 3M spokesperson and 3M says " xxx ", that then is a reliable source about something that applies to 3M.  Again, I am not suggesting that public officials don't know what they are talking about.  It is just that public officials are not professional journalists and not accustom to high journalist standards. They just don't measure up to Wikipedia standards for reliable sources. Constant314 (talk) 13:11, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Two additions were removed as they appear to be inconsistent with WP:NOTNP. Please discuss here before reverting.  Cheers!  Sandcherry (talk) 20:53, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletions of sourced content 

message: Hello again. I'd like to submit another request for community review, this time to add mention of a handful of some of 3M's rankings and recognitions. Understanding editors may be skeptical of attempts by a representative of the company to add complimentary text, I've tried to focus on ones that are particularly representative of the numerous rankings and recognitions 3M has received over the decades. I've proposed the following text for consideration: 
3M's smog-reducing granules and 'Scotch Flex & Seal Shipping Roll' were included in Time magazine's lists of "best inventions" in 2018 and 2019, respectively. In 2019, 3M was included in Fast Company lists of the "50 best workplaces for innovators" and "most innovative companies", and received the Clean Energy Ministerial's Award of Excellence in Energy Management. In 2020, 3M was included in the Ethisphere Institute's list of the "most ethical companies" for the seventh consecutive year. The company has received 100 percent ratings on the Human Rights Campaign's Corporate Equality Index as well as the Disability Equality Index. 3M ranked in Corporate Responsibility magazine's "best corporate citizens" list each year from 2012 to 2014, and again in 2017 and 2019.
Can editors review this request and update the article on my behalf? Thanks! CB at 3M (talk) 12:23, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: COI noticeboard page stalker here.  I'd remove the Ethisphere info per []. Corporate Responsibility seems a bit minor on the notability scale; there's no Wikipedia article about them, and the only coverage I can find is about the winners, not the award itself. I have similar concerns with the Disability Quality Index - I'm sure 3M does great things in this area, but the recognition seems borderline notable.  Clean Energy Ministerial does have an article, but the sourcing is weak - it's from the group's site.  Can you find an independent third party source?  The other recognition items seem to be OK. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:24, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you for reviewing this request. This source is published by the U.S. Department of Energy, if that's helpful. Are you willing to update the article with the claims you think are appropriate? Thanks again! CB at 3M (talk) 13:27, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rankings and recognition section request  

message: Hi again! I'd like to revisit the Environmental record section to address a couple inaccuracies. Currently, the section's 4th and 5th paragraphs say: 
 
:In 1999, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency began investigating perfluorinated chemicals after receiving data on the global distribution and toxicity of perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS). 3M, the former primary producer of PFOS from the U.S., announced the phase-out of PFOS, perfluorooctanoic acid, and PFOS-related product production in May 2000. Perfluorinated compounds produced by 3M were used in non-stick cookware and stain-resistant fabrics. The Cottage Grove facility manufactured PFCs from the 1940s to 2002. 
:In response to PFC contamination of the Mississippi River and surrounding area, 3M stated the area will be "cleaned through a combination of groundwater pump-out wells and soil sediment excavation". The restoration plan was based on an analysis of the company property and surrounding lands. The on-site water treatment facility that handled the plant's post-production water was not capable of removing the PFCs, which were released into the nearby Mississippi River. The clean-up cost estimate was $50 to $56 million, funded from a $147 million environmental reserve set aside in 2006. 
 
 
First, to ensure readers aren’t confused between what they read on Wikipedia and other sources, we’d recommend replacing the term PFC, which stands for “Perfluroalkyl Compounds”, with the term “PFAS”, which stands for “Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances”. This term is more commonly used in discourse on this topic, including by the Centers for Disease Control and U.S. EPA. In addition, the examples of PFAS usage given is "nonstick cookware and stain resistant clothing" but this misses that PFAS are used in lots of other essential cases. It's useful context for readers that PFAS are used for a variety of products, including items that form important parts of modern life. I propose updating these two paragraphs to the following to make the text more accurate, with explanations below: 
:In 1999, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency began investigating perfluorinated chemicals after receiving data on the global distribution and toxicity of perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS). These materials are part of a broad group of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances often referred to as PFAS, each of which has different chemical properties. 3M, the former primary producer of PFOS from the U.S., announced the phase-out of PFOS, perfluorooctanoic acid, and PFOS-related product production in May 2000. Perfluorinated 
compounds produced by 3M have been used in non-stick cookware and stain-resistant fabrics as well as medical devices and equipment, electronics like smartphones and tablets, as well as low-emission vehicles and high-performance engines. 
: The Cottage Grove facility manufactured PFAS from the 1940s to 2002. In response to PFAS contamination of the Mississippi River and surrounding area, 3M stated the area will be "cleaned through a combination of groundwater pump-out wells and soil sediment excavation". The restoration plan was based on an analysis of the company property and surrounding lands. The on-site water treatment facility that handled the plant's post-production water was not capable of removing PFAS, which were released into the nearby Mississippi River. The clean-up cost estimate, which included the construction of a granular activated carbon system to remove PFAS from the ground water was $50 to $56 million, funded from a $147 million environmental reserve set aside in 2006. 
 
I've included this EPA link as a source, as well as 3M’s PFAS History page that includes additional information 
this link that may be helpful as well. This source describes the wide variety of PFAS uses, including a quote from the industry group FluoroCouncil on essential uses we’ve described here. Additionally, I've repositioned the break between the two paragraphs so the Mississippi River contamination response immediately follows the Cottage Grove claim, changed two appearances of PCFs to PFAS, and added mention of the carbon system which is important context to better explain how the PFAS has been addressed. 
I have additional suggestions to improve the accuracy of this section but I don't want to propose too many changes for editors to review in one request.  I am making you aware of this discussion since you participated in the previous one related to this section, and invite other editors to weigh in as well. My goal here is to improve the article's accuracy but I won't update the page myself. Thanks for feedback or updates to the page on my behalf. CB at 3M (talk) 19:44, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: This request has been completed. Constant314 (talk) 01:26, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi  I noticed some of the edits have been implements, but others (like ) have not. Are you declining to add those sections to the article? If so, can you add a short explanation as to why you declined? Also, you can close the request yourself by following the instructions at Template:Request edit/Instructions so that the request is removed from the queue. Thanks for your help, and please ping me or post on my talk page if you have any questions or concerns. Z1720 (talk) 01:44, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello.  I did not decline the request on products, I simply wasn't inclined. Then there were comments by another editor.  I was waiting to see if those comments would be addressed by the requesting COI editor.   I do agree with closing it.  The COI editor can repeat the request in light of the comments.  Constant314 (talk) 02:13, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I think those examples are rather irrelevant and unnecessary, with an emphasis on whitewashing (read as life-saving devices, consumer-friendly products, eco-friendly industrialization). Is there any evidence that these are more widespread use-cases worth making examples out of? If so that should be sourced. (and perhaps added to Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) --Trougnouf (talk) 16:50, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  PFCs vs. PFAS 

message: In the History section of the Wikipedia article on the board-on-the-floor game Twister it mentions that during development in the 1960s the prototype game was shown to 3M, "who had a line of up-scale board games" at the time. If it is indeed true that they did, it would be nice if THIS article mentioned that line of games.
Second, it would also be nice if this article had an image of the old "3M" logo, in use back in the 1950s and '60s and possibly beyond, in which the two characters were figures of identical shape, but different 90° rotations. 2601:545:8201:6290:C59A:461:311B:8855 (talk) 09:53, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Up-scale board games(?); old 3M logo 

message: Hello again! I submitted a draft article for Michael F. Roman, which has been taken live, but an editor added a banner with the text: "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject". I've disclosed my conflict of interest as required by Wikipedia's Terms of Use, and I've worked to draft neutral text. I've tried to reach out to the editor who added the banner, both at Talk:Michael F. Roman and on their talk page, but I've received no reply. If there are no neutrality issues with the article's text, would someone mind removing the banner? Thanks for your consideration, CB at 3M (talk) 15:23, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi  The best place to post this request is on Roman's talk page. You can also use a Template:Request edit to ask for a review by a neutral editor. Z1720 (talk) 15:30, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for your reply. I've already tried addressing the banner on the article's talk page and on the user talk page of the editor who added the banner. I've disclosed my COI in compliance with the site's rules and Terms of Use and the draft has been reviewed by neutral editors. I will try the "Request edit" template soon if an editor does not remove the banner soon. Thanks for the suggestion. CB at 3M (talk) 13:59, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Banner at Michael F. Roman 

message: They have been so much innovative since the years 196.216.86.83 (talk) 07:16, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Innovation