Talk:Caterpillar Inc.

message: Whoever keeps saying that Cat has begun to manufacture clothing and shoes is an idoit.  Cat has licensed it's logo to clothing and shoe companies - it doesn't make its own.  
Furthermore, who gives a !@## about the use of Cat products in Israel?  In fact, who cares about Israel?
* For the sole point that it is newsworthy. The issue comes up at their boardmeetings and someone even died bringing it to the worlds attention. We're just interested in the facts as they relate to the company. --Hooperbloob 20:18, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I happen to agree that blaming the toolmaker for evils done with the tools is short-sighted and foolish.  However, we're not here to write an op-ed piece; last I looked, this was meant to be an encyclopedia.  Relevant policies here include WP:NPOV and WP:CIV.  Friday 16:09, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Well, if you are aware of other newsworthy items to include in the article then by all means, please expand it. A section on the lengthy labour strike might be a good addition. --Hooperbloob 16:52, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  What the !@#$? 

message: It's puzzling to see that detailed discussion of ownership is cut off for any period after about the 1950's. Who actually runs this company today, and what political background do they hail from? are questions I would like to see addressed. Also the recent closure of the London, Ontario plant needs a competent and objective appraisal by someone in the know. Rumor has it that the entire fiasco was a set-up by Caterpillar from the getgo. All in all, the article reads more like a company web page than an encyclopedic entry.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orthotox (talk • contribs) 02:48, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Management/Ownership

message: Can someone fix this? It is impossible to be killed BY a tractor. A tractor has no will and can not kill anyone. You can not be c-killed BY a gun either. You can only be killed WITH a gun by a person. This type of wrong phrasing is typical. I don't know by whom this person was killed, and if someone does, feel free to state who it was and why he use a tractor to to do it, but don't tell me a tractor killed a person. That is just ridiculous.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.224.223.54 (talk) 10:38, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: "an American who was killed by a Caterpillar tractor"?

message: If we're going to keep the section on Israel's policies, then I've added "settler homes" to the section to add balance. Over 1500 settler homes have been demolished with CAT equipment and there's no reason that that should not be mentioned. However, I think the Israel controversy section should be removed. I am raising this issue again because having that section goes against all logical reasoning. As has been mentioned, it is ludicrous to blame a company for the policies of their clients. Do we blame BOEING for building jets for Israel? No. Why should we blame CAT? CAT is not responsible for Israel's policies - this is a logical fallacy and does NOT belong on Wikipedia. No mainstream media outlet endorses the argument that CAT is responsible for Israel's policies. This section should be deleted. There is already an article on home demolition.  Also, someone earlier said that this is a popular issue and therefore should be kept - but that argument is an appeal to popularity. It essentialy says just because enough people think its controversial, it is therefore controversial. Not true. Controversy must be reasonable. We do not say a company is controversial due to an unrelated issue! Israel's use of bulldozers is not related to CAT. CAT has no influence over that policy, and critics need to get that through their head. Again, Wikipedia should not allow these kinds of logical fallacies. In the meantime, I've deleted part of the section as a compromise. Monitorer 06:16, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, I am getting quite tired of editors substituting their personal opinions for the source material. Activists have not criticized CAT over settler demolitions. Whether you think it's ludicrous, whether it actually is ludicrous, is irrelevant. The controversy exists, therefore we report it -- and we do not create false permutations of the controversy to satisfy somebody's personal opinions. Please review policy on original syntheses of source material. Eleland 12:50, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough:::Monitorer 19:49, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Israel Controversy and Bias 

message: I was just wondering, if you guys have finshed your "politically correct" arguments whether you might get back to talking about CAT machinery. There is a very lucrative collaboration between Claas of Germany, and CAT, whereby each gets to distribute the other's agriculture products in Europe and North America. There is a link on the article Combine harvester, with a photo of a CAT (Claas) combine, but no mention of either of these things on your article. You might want to write a section about this. Tom 22:04, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your suggestion. When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes.  Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the  link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills.  New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to).   <eleland/talkedits> 22:14, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Agriculture

message: I notice a strong tendency among commentators on this site to want to remove any hint of controversy connected to Caterpillar's activities.  The result is to align the article with Caterpillar's own corporate interest, and effectively to present the facts from Caterpillar's own POV.  For example, the 'Labour controversy' section is not, as it stands at the moment, the history of Caterpillar's relations with organised labour, but the story of how the company successfully outflanked those pesky unions.  This violates NPOV.  It is a fact that people have protested Caterpillar selling bulldozers to Israel.  Whether those people are right or wrong to do so, is not for us to decide; it's true that the company has been criticised for who it does business with, so it deserves to stay in the article.  Period.  Lexo (talk) 16:13, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The "environment" section is similarily skewed; there is a summary of an environmental controversy, followed by a whole lot of bullet-points about this or that alleged environmental commitment of CAT, like their donations to business-friendly, conservative conservation groups, and their membership in the "World Business Council for Sustainable Development" whose first principle is "Business is good for sustainable development". Uh-huh... suspicious? <eleland/talkedits> 22:22, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

text: The article is not so bad now.  It was atrocious before; most of the article was just non-NPOV screeds by people opposed to Israel's actions in the Palestine territory, to the point where it approached WP:coatrack.  The greenwashing "bullet point" prose could be toned down a bit, but even that is mild compared to the bullet points from other non-neutral points of view that used to run rampant in this article.  There seem to be a lot of editors whose POV seem to be that the defining identity of Caterpillar is related to either Palestine, clean air, labor relations, or whatever they're pushing this week.  All of those are probably somewhat notable, but almost none of these folks who insert this stuff (regardless of what side they're on — even the ones that write about Caterpillar's side of the story) seem to have any neutral contributions to make about Caterpillar's tractors and engines themselves.  (Remember those?  That's what Cat does, you know — makes tractors and engines.) --Closeapple (talk) 07:48, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've made a suggestion to remove some of the stuff described as greenwash, plus tidy that section. See section 21 below.87.102.2.132 (talk) 13:39, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: I don't see how Hamas' (or anybody's) relationship to Caterpillar is equivalent to Israel's relationship to Caterpillar.  See the lengthy discussion above.  I just want to avoid another edit war, but feel free to discuss.
If you feel otherwise, feel free to lead a news-worthy, grass-roots protest effort, at which point it may be included here ;)
Jshalvi (talk) 21:16, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hamas 

message: What statement are you referring to that does not allow the inclusion of Cat's logo? I'm just wondering, as I'd really like to know why the SVG version of their logo that I created for this article has been removed because of a statement by the "General Counsel". CoolKid1993 (talk) 02:57, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure specifically why the logo was removed (I presume because Caterpillar requested it), but here's the edit where Wikimedia's General Counsel Mike Godwin removed the logo and an accompanying discussion which confirms this. I guess there's no harm in asking him exactly why the logo was taken out. Gr1st (talk) 13:48, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Logo

message: Cat did not invent tracks they (Best and Holt) "shrewdly" bought 2 patents to the designs and Holt registered the name "caterpillar". the implication that Cat also invented the tank is stretching it as Richard Hornsby & Sons who they bought the design off had demonstrated a Steam tracked tractorHorsby ntractor to the British army before world war one. Which the army then turned down, latter Holt crawler tractors were supplied to the army. (see various other wikipedia articles). POV of article a bit biased see Eric C Orlemanns various books on Caterpillar eg Caterpillar Chronicle  has details of the Lombard hauler that Best bought the design to. - BulldozerD11 talk 15:30, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Invention of Caterpillar tracks 

message: The article on Continuous tracks is inconsistent with this one on the early history, mentioning an earlier patent.  Can an expert sort them out?Major_Clanger (talk) 21:41, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: History and Patents

message: This is not a labor right.  Right to work is a business right to hire workers not in unions.  If workers of a company don't have to join a union, the company will just bid for workers:  You want to join a union, no job for you.  You don't want to join a union, you get a job.  76.180.61.194 (talk) 03:20, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Right to work laws 

message: Copied here for sorting wheat from chaf before integrating former back into article:
The 1936 movie Earthworm TractorsEarthworm Tractors is based on stories in The Saturday Evening Post about Caterpillar. The movie premiered in Peoria.
The Fighting Seabees,The Fighting Seabees a movie starring John Wayne: Navy Seabees (construction battalions) use Caterpillar tractors during World War II
The Grapes of Wrath Film, screenplay by Nunnally Johnson: "They come. They come and pushed me off. They come with the cats ... the Caterpillar tractors."
Smokey and the Bandit, a movie: the character "Snowman" wears a "Cat Diesel Power" hat in his role as a "typical southern trucker" [http://www.bandittransamclub.com/Snowman.jpg
Black Dog, a movie: "Ain't nothing like a Caterpillar engine..."
The exosuit in Aliens was custom built by Caterpillar for the movie and carried its logo.
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen — Three Caterpillar vehicles are used for the alternate modes of three Constructicons: Long Haul (dump truck), Rampage (D9 bulldozer), and Scrapper (front loader).
In literature
The Grapes of Wrath, a book by John Steinbeck
Killdozer!, a 1944 short story by Theodore Sturgeon about a Caterpillar D7 that is "possessed" by an alien intelligence.
The Monkey Wrench Gang, a book by Edward Abbey: "They crawled all over a Caterpillar D-9A, world's greatest bulldozer, the idol of all highwaymen. Put so much sand in the crankcase..."
In art
"Lipstick (Ascending) on Caterpillar Tracks" Sculpture (1969) by Swedish sculptor Claes Oldenburg "Lipstick (Ascending) on Caterpillar Tracks"
In auto racing
From 1999 until 2008 they sponsored the various cars of Bill Davis Racing, scoring four wins, including two majors (2001 Mountain Dew Southern 500, 2002 Daytona 500). Beginning in 2009, the sponsorship will move to Richard Childress Racing's 31 car, driven by Jeff Burton.  Ironically, it was Burton's brother Ward who scored all four of Caterpillar's NASCAR wins, including the two majors.  Burton needs only to win the two restrictor-plate majors to finish off a Career Grand Slam."Caterpillar to replace AT&T as Burton's sponsor in 2009"
Sponsor for the Top Fuel Dragster driven by Rod Fuller (NHRA)
Sponsored the Australian V8 Supercar teams 00 Motorpsort/Gibson Racing and Ford Performance Racing
In sports
As of the 2008/2009 Guinness Premiership Rugby season (UK), Caterpillar Inc. are the official shirt sponsors of Leicester Tigers RUFC.
In music
The Stockholm-based Indie pop/rock band Shout Out Louds's song "Time Left for Love", in their 2007 album Our Ill Wills, mentions Caterpillar in the song lyrics "I lost all my friends in an accident/I couldn't believe what happened/The rumours said it was a serial killer/but they got hit by a caterpillar.Wikiuser100 (talk) 01:30, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excised material 

message: Hello. I linked to Maschinenbau Kiel which has some history of Krupp/MaK in Kiel. In the same section of that table - it says -
Renamed "MaK Motoren GmbH - I'm not sure about this - it seems to have been called "Caterpillar Motoren GmbH & Co. KG" , and now they seem to be using "CATERPILLAR MARINE POWER SYSTEMS" , but I can't find dates. Can someone check this.Sf5xeplus (talk) 13:05, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: MaK Motoren GmbH

message: With the exception of the israel tractor stuff, and the "emmision's defeat devices" and the "Illinois Governor's Pollution Prevention Awards" plus some mention of war contributions stuff the rest of that section seems (uncharitably) 'corporate fluff' - all big corporations donate to charity/do other stuff that makes them appear great (or bad) - but is it really notable..
Also the claim that caterpillar was someway involved in inventing the tank or tank tracks is a bit far fetched - they bought patent rights, and then made a business out of it - I can't see anything more to this.
:Also stuff like "Caterpillar built its first Russian facility.." or "Currently under construction is the $125M Caterpillar Suzhou" is not a notable acchievement - it should/could be mentioned in a section about foreign investments/company growth - it's normal expansion - not an achievement in the real sense - as it's what companies normally do
:Also the big list of cat machines (many red linked) - can it be removed - and made into a 'list of caterpillar products' type article - there aren't equivalent lists for cat engines.
Could someone look at that section, and tidy it (or can I)? Does what I've said above seem reasonable? Sf5xeplus (talk) 13:16, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've moved the list to List of Caterpillar Inc. machines - I can't imagine any objection to this. I've also attempted to tidy the "ups and downs section"  I've renamed it [] - The General Motors gives some ideas as how to cover this. In the end section Caterpillar_Inc.#Other I've placed items that I think are not really relevant, or should be in other sections - particularily the information about expansion overseas, and takeovers of other companies should be moved - it's also partially duplicated in the company acquisitions part of the article.Sf5xeplus (talk) 15:54, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Caterpillar_Inc.#Notable_achievements_and_controversies]]

message: Scabs?  Right-to-work-for-less?  I've decided to finally customize my search provider to exclude all wikipedia.org results.  The constant left-wing bias makes you worse than useless.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.107.101.161 (talk) 01:43, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Dripping Bias

message: With respect to the previously contentious discussions of this topic, I have updated this section. It was missing one key fact, needed attention to reducing/eliminating use of the passive voice and was a little confusing. I have attempted to maintain the approximate length of the section and believe I have included all ideas/facts that were present prior to the change. I attempted to use factual descriptions and neutral language in order to avoid unnecessary controversy or insult. With respect to all viewpoints - Ch Th Jo (talk) 03:25, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Regarding changes to IDF/Caterpillar section

message: Hay guise, i don't lyk really know how wikipedia works but i totally noticed lyk an error in the distribution section.  it says that 66% of cat sales are in the US and 44% are overseas.
personally i love cats but omg 110% cat is totally lyk the wrong amount of cat! lmao!
Love from 118.208.87.216 (talk) 01:22, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  66% + 44% = 110%? 

message: I'm moving the "Mirenco" section here to the talk page for discussion - the text is preserved below. This article is about Caterpillar Inc., not about individual deals between third party suppliers and one or a few regional Caterpillar dealers. If either Mirenco or Whayne Supply meet notability guidelines, then I'd suggest an article be created and this information added to it. Unless or until Mirenco strikes a deal with Caterpillar Inc. directly, this information does not belong in this article. I see no evidence that Caterpillar Inc. was a party to this agreement and Mirenco is not even mentioned anywhere on the caterpillar.com site. Obivously one editor, acting in good faith, thought this article was the perfect place for this information. I disagree. What do others think? Ch Th Jo (talk) 01:56, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion of Inclusion of information not about Caterpillar Inc. (Mirenco) 

message: The section on the use of CAT products by the IDF is seriously WP:UNDUE in this article, taking up a significant portion, when it is a relatively minor controversy. Unless anyone objects, I will soon remove most of it from here, moving some into the section on defence products that we already have. It is all already covered in Rachel Corrie which is where it should be. SmartSE (talk) 23:39, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it is fair to call it a minor controversy, however I do think that the current treatment is too long. Personally I feel that a section between a third and a half as long as the present one would be appropriate.Rangoon11 (talk) 00:10, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, maybe that wasn't the best wording, but it is a very minor part of what Caterpillar as a whole do. The main problem I have with it is having a whole section on it, which is why I want to move it into a different section, along with the rest of the defence info. Are you ok with that? SmartSE (talk) 01:05, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Personally I feel that it should remain as a separate section, in the current position at the end of the article, albeit considerably reduced. I am open to a change of section name however. For me this is a fairly independent issue and I don't think integration with the 'Caterpillar Defence Products' section is appropriate as the products used by the IDF - or most of them at least - were not produced by that part of the business. Rangoon11 (talk) 01:21, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Why's that? Is it really that important for a reader wanting to gain an understanding of Cat? As well as the Corrie article there's similar content at Armored_bulldozer#Israeli_usage and IDF Caterpillar D9 - WP:SUMMARY tells us that we should summarise what's in those articles and link to them. SmartSE (talk) 01:47, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  In my view it is significant enough in the context of Caterpillar to warrant that. What is left here will in fact be a summary, with greater detail elsewhere.Rangoon11 (talk) 01:52, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

text: I've gone ahead and removed most of it, leaving a short summary which links to the relevant articles. In the interests of transparency, I should note that myself, Cullen328 and Rklawton had mentioned this off wiki on Corporate Representatives for Ethical Wikipedia Engagement as an example of where an article on a company was not NPOV. I didn't ask them to comment though, or tell them that I had suggested removing it. SmartSE (talk) 17:43, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Note I was the one who brought this up in CREWE as an example of persistent POV editing. I have no ties or interest in Cat - just an interest in removing POV stuff whenever I find it. Rklawton (talk) 18:51, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have reverted the move of this content to 'Caterpillar Defence Products', per my earlier comments above. Rangoon11 (talk) 19:43, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: But you haven't actually explained why it is significant - wholesale reverting of my attempt to make the article more neutral isn't a particularly helpful action. Regarding where I placed it WP:CRITICISM suggests that incorporating information throughout the article is considerably better than having a separate section. Do you have any suggestion to where it should belong? SmartSE (talk) 20:04, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Certainly not there, per comments above. The History section would make more sense to me. Rangoon11 (talk) 20:09, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Why there? That's about the history of the company, not its products. It's about machinery, so it should be somewhere within that section surely? SmartSE (talk) 20:12, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  That section is for describing the company's range of products and services, not for the addition of random content. For me this content should either remain in a separate section (my preference) or be in the history section, it is not about a description of products but relates to the company itself.Rangoon11 (talk) 20:18, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  On the basis that this information is about the company itself, the information should be removed entirely as it isn't significant (per UNDO). One way we know it's not material to Caterpillar is that two courts threw out the complaint. If you want to bash Caterpillar, why not cite cases where Caterpillar actually lost or made a deal? Rklawton (talk) 20:33, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think I would actually prefer it to be removed completely rather than shoe-horned into an irrelevant section in an attempt to hide it away.  Rangoon11 (talk) 20:41, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

text: Giving it due weight - and I have said that I support a two-thirds reduction in the amount of content on this topic - does not equate to or require moving it into an inappropriate place. Rangoon11 (talk) 21:18, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: He moved it to the section dealing with the product that was involved in the incident. If it's appropriate in the article at all, that's where it belongs. Rklawton (talk) 21:21, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Wrong, many of the applicable products were not produced by Caterpillar Defence Products. In any case this is not relevant to the product line but to the company. We have article sections for a reason. Rangoon11 (talk) 21:29, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Shall we just remove it all then? SmartSE (talk) 21:37, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  I wont revert it.Rangoon11 (talk) 21:48, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

text: The consensus reached in February was rather strange and I agree that it is due to have a brief mention about the IDF in the article. This shows what I left in the article back then, but was removed soon after. That might be a sensible place to start if you want to reintroduce something. SmartSE (talk) 22:20, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. That looks about right to me. I've read through the comments, and I can't say I really understand the issue. I might leave it for a couple of days, and then suggest something to reinstate. Gamesh (Gil) (talk) 22:41, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use by the IDF 

message: As this has come up again, it looks like more discussion might be necessary. I have explained the problems with the content that keeps on being added here: User_talk:Anne_born#Caterpillar. SmartSE (talk) 11:56, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Revisited

message: Re: "The first machine is scheduled for production in March 2009."  Does anybody know if this over 3-years out-of-date statement came to pass? Paulburnett (talk) 22:59, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Under paragraph "Expansion..." "The first machine is scheduled for production in March 2009." 

message: Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted.
Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia.
This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link.
If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting.
If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page.
If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta.
When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags.
The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true.
Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
*http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/meko/
*:Triggered by \bnaval-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist
If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 12:02, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page 

message: Caterpillar Inc entered the smartphone market by releasing a rugged android phone called CAT B15. It is now followed by another phone called CAT B25. I think this should be mentioned in this article. Also they have started selling mobile accessories like cases for smartphones. This info is missing from the article, it should be there.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deadly437 (talk • contribs) 21:03, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caterpillar Inc enters smartphone market 

message: From New York Times:
Presbyterians vote to divest holdings i Caterpillar to pressure Israel. The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) voted on Friday at its general convention to divest from three companies that it says supply Israel with equipment used in the occupation of Palestinian territory. The vote, by a count of 310 to 303, was watched closely in Washington and Jerusalem and by Palestinians as a sign of momentum for a movement to pressure Israel to stop building settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem and to end the occupation. The companies the church has targeted for divestment are Caterpillar, Hewlett-Packard and Motorola Solutions. The church has about $21 million invested in them, a spokeswoman said.
The church says Caterpillar supplies products to Israel that are used to destroy Palestinian homes.--85.166.156.247 (talk) 13:44, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Presbyterian Church in USA divest holdings because of Israel 

message: Main article has one short section on Caterpillar Engines, then a follow on section for Caterpillar Defense Products. These are subsections to a section labeled as Business Lines. I propose either a new section - or change the Caterpillar Engines section to Caterpillar Diesel Engines. a batch of what is labeled as Caterpillar Defense Products is sole about the Caterpillar Diesel Engines in use in military vessels. I would say over the last 20 years Caterpillar market share of medium to large diesel engines has vastly increased - especially in the marine environment/usage - Ships - both military and civilian.Unknown to me- I wonder if market share has also increasaed for railroad locomotives. Facilities usage of Catapillar has probably increased as emergency diesel generator in the medium to large size. 
Wfoj3 (talk) 22:30, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caterpillar DIESEL Engine 

message: I removed the following as irrelevant and non NPOV.
: October 2013. Caterpillar division under criminal indictment - Progress Rail Services, wholly and solely owned by Caterpillar, accused of stealing from Union Pacific (UP). Under this indictment, allegedly sought to destroy the evidence by dumping it from barges off of Long Beach, California. This theft of services has allegedly happened before. This dumping, if found to be true, is extremely detrimental to the environment off our beloved California Shores. <http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/01/us-caterpillar-investigation-filing-idUSBRE9A013R20131101>
Preserving it here in case someone wants to edit it and reinsert appropriately somewhere?
— M3TAinfo (view) 22:49, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Environmental Stewardship 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Caterpillar Inc.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081205030801/http://www.allbusiness.com:80/manufacturing/machinery-equipment-manufacturing/8087464-1.html to http://www.allbusiness.com/manufacturing/machinery-equipment-manufacturing/8087464-1.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:11, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Caterpillar Inc.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081225095935/http://www.mde.state.md.us:80/Programs/AirPrograms/Mobile_Sources/dieselemmiscontrolprog/workshop/participants/index.asp to http://www.mde.state.md.us/Programs/AirPrograms/Mobile_Sources/dieselemmiscontrolprog/workshop/participants/index.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:35, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Caterpillar Inc.. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.caterpillar.com/cda/files/2607135/7/Cat+Inc.+4Q2010+Final.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cat.com/about-cat
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/18230/000001823010000092/form10k_2009.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2009/snapshots/81.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.library.hbs.edu/hc/lehman/chrono.html?company=caterpillar_tractor_co
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160107161102/http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9FI73L00.htm to http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9FI73L00.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1985-04-20/business/8501230692_1_sundstrand-caterpillar-solar-turbines
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130509162049/http://articles.marketwatch.com/2008-06-12/news/30755922_1_caterpillar-construction-and-mining-equipment-cummins to http://articles.marketwatch.com/2008-06-12/news/30755922_1_caterpillar-construction-and-mining-equipment-cummins
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110606230749/http://dir.salon.com/story/tech/feature/2004/05/13/bulldozers/index.html?pn=3 to http://dir.salon.com/story/tech/feature/2004/05/13/bulldozers/index.html?pn=3
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1733505920070917
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thefreelibrary.com/403.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.catwatches.co.uk/history.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.shopcaterpillar.com/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/1996/06/24/story1.html
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) 18:52, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Caterpillar Inc.. 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/20120803071138/http://www.wastehandling.com/ME2/Audiences/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&id=47C5DE563581487B9E4394B939909F9E&tier=4 to http://www.wastehandling.com/ME2/Audiences/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&id=47C5DE563581487B9E4394B939909F9E&tier=4
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121017162514/http://www.kipnotes.com/AgriculturalMachinery.htm to http://www.kipnotes.com/AgriculturalMachinery.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719235759/https://www.acmoc.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14&Itemid=35&limit=1&limitstart=2 to http://www.acmoc.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14&Itemid=35&limit=1&limitstart=2
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) 06:13, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 14 external links on Caterpillar Inc.. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.caterpillar.com/cda/files/2607135/7/Cat%2BInc.%2B4Q2010%2BFinal.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cat.com/cda/layout?m=37321&x=7
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091204121517/http://www.historicroadways.co.uk/s-007.htm to http://www.historicroadways.co.uk/s-007.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719235730/https://www.acmoc.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14&Itemid=35&limit=1&limitstart=3 to http://www.acmoc.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14&Itemid=35&limit=1&limitstart=3
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719235829/https://www.acmoc.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14&Itemid=35&limit=1&limitstart=6 to http://www.acmoc.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14&Itemid=35&limit=1&limitstart=6
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160107161102/http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FZX/is_8_66/ai_64991321 to http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FZX/is_8_66/ai_64991321
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120603105131/http://www.rtands.com/newsflash/on-the-right-track-twin-city-signal.html to http://www.rtands.com/newsflash/on-the-right-track-twin-city-signal.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110711015908/http://www.forconstructionpros.com/online/Acquisition-Positions-Caterpillar-to-Deliver-Subsurface-Imaging-and-Mapping-Services/1FCP16840 to http://www.forconstructionpros.com/online/Acquisition-Positions-Caterpillar-to-Deliver-Subsurface-Imaging-and-Mapping-Services/1FCP16840
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120226200321/http://unitedkingdom.cat.com/cda/layout?m=105662 to http://unitedkingdom.cat.com/cda/layout?m=105662&x=7
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nysun.com/national/caterpillar-escapes-liability-for-israeli/62872/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111003231833/http://www.usaengage.org/archives/studies/append2.html to http://www.usaengage.org/archives/studies/append2.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080612091803/http://www.dnr.state.il.us/PUBAFFAIRS/2007/Oct/illinois.html to http://dnr.state.il.us/PUBAFFAIRS/2007/Oct/illinois.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.wbcsd.org/web/about/members.htm
*Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5u7teKGad?url=http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/UnitedStates/unarmored-halftracks/unarmored-half-tracks.html to http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/UnitedStates/unarmored-halftracks/unarmored-half-tracks.html
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) 20:27, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In case it is of use to editors of this article, I have jsts enhanced a short article on Noel Penny Turbines of England, which, in c1972 was contracted by Caterpillar Inc to design engines for its heavy vehicles. A publication entitled "The 'nearly' engine" contains details of this relationship. I am not suffciently acquanted with the subject to make direct edits to this article. I hope this may be of use to someone. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:45, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Noel Penny Turbines 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Caterpillar Inc.. 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/20090605024347/http://www.indusbusinessjournal.com/ME2/Audiences/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&tier=4&id=5EF6A8877FAD4AA98C813E6732B6C85A&AudID=6EF55B05AA694954939FA7B6FB605DAB to http://www.indusbusinessjournal.com/ME2/Audiences/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&tier=4&id=5EF6A8877FAD4AA98C813E6732B6C85A&AudID=6EF55B05AA694954939FA7B6FB605DAB
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) 04:39, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There seems to be an edit war in progress at "Caterpillar in Argentina". According to Wikipedia:COPYLINKS "It is currently acceptable to link to internet archives such as the Wayback Machine, which host unmodified archived copies of webpages taken at various points in time" so what is the problem? Mock wurzel soup (talk) 17:44, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The line you quote is about internetarchive itself and says that internetarchive is itself not a COPYLINK problem; this does not address any issues that might be present in the website that is archived there. The potential problem with posts at camionargentino.blogspot.com.ar and pesadosargentinos.blogspot.com.ar is that they host scans of newspaper articles and other copyrighted pieces, and transcriptions of some of them.  The sites have a copyright disclaimer that says (via google translate) "It is allowed the free reproduction of the material here present (used WITHOUT PURPOSE OF PROFIT), partially and totally, being necessary and fundamental the mention of the site and the author of the article. Thank you very much. *** The images that are attached to the articles are merely illustrative, and may not be the originals of the vehicle in question (or correspond to the equivalent of other markets / countries) and merely serve to identify them." but it is not clear to me that this is sufficient for Wikipedia. I have asked admins to review this.  If it is fine under policy, then it is fine. But until we are sure please do not post these links.  I also wonder if these are WP:RS but that is a different question that can be addressed after the COPYLINK question is resolved.  Jytdog (talk) 17:51, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Noted. Mock wurzel soup (talk) 17:52, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caterpillar in Argentina 

message: Shouldn't the headquarters still be listed as Peoria, Illinois and not Irving, Texas? While it is true that the company decided to leave Illinois for it's headquarters  They haven't officially packed up yet to go to Irving so shouldn't it be changed since it is not official?--12.29.116.64 (talk) 19:26, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Headquarters location 

message: NOTE: I’m proposing the following edits for FleishmanHillard on behalf of Caterpillar, Inc. I’m a paid editor and aware of the COI guidelines. I’m proposing the following edits to correct outdated information in the lead section and current board of directors. Please let me know of any questions as you review. Thanks for your time and consideration. Jon Gray (talk) 18:36, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The new hq was already mentioned in the lead, so I tweaked it a bit. Ptrnext (talk) 04:08, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @Ptrnext Thanks! Jon Gray (talk) 22:59, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit Request – Corrections Lead and Board of Directors sections 

message: NOTE: I’m proposing the following edits for FleishmanHillard on behalf of Caterpillar, Inc. I’m a paid editor and aware of the COI guidelines. Please let me know of any questions as you review. Thanks for your time and consideration! Jon Gray (talk) 23:02, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Done  Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 22:29, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

text: @Johannes Maximilian Thank you! Jon Gray (talk) 17:52, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit Request – Corrected/Updated Information 

message: NOTE: I’m proposing the following edits for FleishmanHillard on behalf of Caterpillar, Inc. I’m a paid editor and aware of the COI guidelines. Please let me know of any questions as you review – necessary sourcing is below. Thanks for your consideration. Jon Gray (talk) 15:23, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Question for other reviewers.  What's the consensus about even having a board of directors section in articles? Does WP:NOTDIR apply? I see IBM#Board and shareholders and Microsoft#Board of directors sourced using primary sources, seemingly against sourcing guidelines. Is there an exception made if the board member is notable and has their own article? STEMinfo (talk) 18:15, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

text: @STEMinfo I agree that WP:NOTDIRECTORY applies to a degree, but that consensus for these types of the lists has shown that names which are independently notable can be included using a primary source—which in the cases of employment, are the best sources to use. But unless Fish and Marks have their own Wikipedia pages, they should not be added.  Spintendo  03:47, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

text: @Spintendo Thanks, and noted on the positioning of the signature. I'll do that moving forward. Jon Gray (talk) 17:17, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

text: @Spintendo Apologies for the follow-on message, but I also noticed the date in that section still reads "October 2022." Could you please update to "September 2023." I'm also happy to make that edit if I have your permission. Will you please let me know how you'd prefer to handle? Thanks. Jon Gray (talk) 17:29, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit Request – Corrections to Board of Directors section 

message: #  The requested names to be removed were deleted.
#  The requested names to be added were not added. Please provide the Wikilinks for these names.
*Additionally, the COI editor is gently reminded to place their signature at the end of their talk page posts.
Regards,  Spintendo  18:48, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: @Spintendo Thanks, and noted on the positioning of the signature. I'll do that moving forward. Jon Gray (talk) 17:17, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

text: @Spintendo Apologies for the follow-on message, but I also noticed the date in that section still reads "October 2022." Could you please update to "September 2023." I'm also happy to make that edit if I have your permission. Will you please let me know how you'd prefer to handle? Thanks. Jon Gray (talk) 17:29, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Reply 22-SEP-2023