Talk:YPF

message: Yacimientos Petrolíferos Fiscales →  — The page was moved from YPF to Yacimientos Petrolíferos Fiscales in 2005 per reason: Full name.  However, as of today, the company uses itself the short form YPF. Beagel (talk) 11:14, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: --Kotniski (talk) 17:39, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 

message: The article cites YPF as being "the first entirely state-run oil company in the world (the second being the French Compagnie française des pétroles (CFP, French Company of Petroleum), created in 1924 by the conservative Raymond Poincaré).[5] YPF's creation was followed by the creation of Yacimientos Petrolíferos Fiscales Bolivianos (YPFB), as well as the Uruguayan ANCAP (Administración Nacional de Combustibles, Alcohol y Portland, 1931) and the Brazilian Petrobras, created in 1953 by Getúlio Vargas..."
But that statement is wrong, as it forgets to say that before PETROBRAS was created, it was PEMEX in 1938, following the nationalization of petroleum in Mexico by President Lazaro Cardenas in march 18, 1938. Amclaussen.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.100.180.20 (talk) 16:21, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Erroneous statement 

message: > On April 16, 2012, Argentina's president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner announced the nationalization.
This sentence in the article is unclear and needs to be more specific! Do they nationalize with a honest, full and immediate financial compensation to the spanish and jewish private owners or do they nationalize "Robin Hood" gunpoint style or just token payment?
The latter method was tried by Pres. Nasser on the Suez Canal in 1956 and resulted in the immediate tri-partite IL/FR/GB military invasion of Egypt. Only the threat of Krushchev's use of the soviet thermonuclear arsenal and US passivity saved Nasser that time.
Control of hydrocarbons is about as central nowadays, as the Suez link used to be 60 years ago. Since Spain is in the NATO, theoretically the famous 5th article of mutual defence could be raised if the argies nationalize the spanish oil Co. without compensation. That means GB could assist them to war vs Argentine, e.g. to cement its hold on the Falkland-Malvinas islands, which is again a very tense region nowadays due to the recent undersea hydrocarbon find. 82.131.210.163 (talk) 09:19, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: There's also a language detail here, the meaning of "nationalization" in English and "nacionalización" in Spanish are not completely the same. In Spanish, the verb to note that a private enterprise will be owned by the state is "estatalización" (shortened in Argentina as "estatización"). As it can be checked in the RAE, "Estatalizar" means to turn a private enterprise into a state-owned one. "Nacionalizar" may mean that as well, but also to change the ownership of a foreign thing to ownership by nationals. "Estatalizar" may be done with any private thing, which may be owned by foreigners or by national people, the thing is that it was private and goes to the state. "Nacionalizar" may give ownership to the state, or it may not: it may be as well to take something from foreign private owners and give it to national private owners. Cambalachero (talk) 13:04, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

text: This thing about Kruschevs threats is not entirely true. It was Eisenhower who although a Republican acted like an anti-imperialst, and made quite direct threats on Britain. Britain caved in on the Suez, Nasser consolidated his power, and Ike later pronounced that he regretted his actions. I hold the latter statement for being true, if 1959 has to do with it. If I wanted USA to have control of the Canal Zone, blame can not be divided without mentioning Ike, and maybe Jimmy Carter. If we go to 1961, India attacked Goa, and the Soviet said: Veto. 1982: the Soviet did not veto. Argentine diplomats managed to (wait for it) confiscate the time belonging to Soviet diplomats. As for NATO actions, none happened in with regard to the Falklands. This has to mean that Repsol has none to do with it. --Stat-ist-ikk (talk) 07:43, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unspecific! Nationalization can mean various things and have various consequences from mild to disastrous. 

message: Several book citations appear to be missing page numbers, making them almost useless as references. (Wirth, Solberg, Lewis, etc.) If an editor with these books is still watching the page, is it possible for these to be added in? Thanks! Khazar2 (talk) 09:01, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page numbers? 

message: The following was in an article published on 22 April in the Financial Times of which I saw the full text:
Animosity between Madrid and the populist government of Cristina Fernández has grown since it emerged that certain Spanish executives at YPF were “hunted down” and “harshly interrogated” by Argentine security forces following the expropriation, according to a document sent by Spain to its embassies about the seizure, seen by the Financial Times.
According to the memo, Spanish YPF executives and their families had been forced to seek refuge together in a house after being driven from the YPF headquarters by Argentine government ministers, accompanied by armed security guards who used “physical violence and threats”.
The title of the FT article was "Repsol threatens action against YPF investors." If the FT really believed that the events occurred, they might have spoken more confidently. The only thing we can tell for sure is that this is a document sent by Spain to its embassies. Whether the allegations in the document are true remains to be discovered. You would think that other business newspapers might have tried to follow up on this matter if they thought it was important. I don't notice any followup in the FT itself about the claimed harassment of the YPF executives since the original report of 22 April. 
The current version of our YPF article states: 
  It is probably too strong to put it this way. "Hunted down" is language that the FT quoted from the memo, and is not due to any reporting of the FT itself. Our article says now: 'According to the Financial Times'.  It ought to say: 'According to a Spanish government memo obtained by the Financial Times..' That is on the assumption that Wikipedia editors agree that this report deserves inclusion in our article. EdJohnston (talk) 02:53, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Financial Times is quoting a government memo 

message: There is an edit war about the inclusion or removal of information from The Economist and Seeking Alpha. Please discuss here the reasons to keep or remove it. I will revert things back to the state it was before the edit war, and I hope it won't be needed to request page protection Cambalachero (talk) 23:48, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The section dealing with the renationalization already features numerous remarks both for and against the move, as well as official statements. Bob Rayner and the user above should stop imposing new, blatantly biased op eds as a factual edit, while deleting real news (the Chevron agreement) - and crying "edit war" while doing so. Shame on you. 98.166.173.7 (talk) 00:09, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Please discuss the edits, not the editors Cambalachero (talk) 02:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit war 

message: My corrections of the factual information concerning the 1993 privatization of YPF by the Menem government are largely based on my role as director of the restructuring process in 1992-93 under YPF President Jose Estenssoro. However,I have tried to insert two published references (Chicago Tribune in 1993 and Harvard Business School Case study on YPF in 1995) but these do not appear in the revised list of references so I have made an editing mistake. My apologies but could someone advise me how to do this correctly. Dustbowl (talk) 23:48, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correct 1993 Privatization Discussion Errors 

message: The YPF article is the subject of a discussion at Talk:Economy of Argentina#‎Request for comments on neutrality. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 19:08, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for comments 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on YPF. 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://archive.is/20130101181452/http://www.al.com/newsflash/index.ssf/story/argentine-president-names-ypf-leader/47805bf51854491792060145f1a096b2 to http://www.al.com/newsflash/index.ssf/story/argentine-president-names-ypf-leader/47805bf51854491792060145f1a096b2
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120620133744/http://www.ypf.com/InversoresAccionistas/InfoEconomicoFinanciera/YPF%20Estados%20Contables/Estados%20Contables%20al%2031%20de%20Diciembre%20de%202011.pdf to http://www.ypf.com/InversoresAccionistas/InfoEconomicoFinanciera/YPF%20Estados%20Contables/Estados%20Contables%20al%2031%20de%20Diciembre%20de%202011.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:08, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified