This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the
project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 13 January 2020 and 11 May 2020. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Aibroci26,
Lmurillo4,
CO2EmitterExtraordinaire.
Ekem how about creating a redirect with the term "California gas leak", which is what most non US media use?
The present title is of course accurate but obscure and doesnt easily lead to this page. what do you think?--
Wuerzele (
talk)
20:29, 11 January 2016 (UTC)reply
No intention to agitate, just trying to improve the article. I can't use Wikipedia as a source but there was no mention that methane causes nosebleeds and the article section just says these things without attributing to the cause. It's just an assumption there. It seems to let those jump to a conclusion that might not be true. If I'm formally incorrect then the
Methane article is incorrect. I'm not gonna bother editing this article anymore but suggest that section clarifies what is actually attributing what is causing the medical problems. Also, another suggestion is to possibly mention what the Gas Company might be trying to do. I'm sure they're making some effort with the community. Right now the article looks kind of one sided. I'm not trying to be an apologist at all for the gas company and this is a terrible environmental disaster but I think this article needs some help to be a little more NPOV.
The most interesting man in the world (
talk)
20:26, 3 February 2016 (UTC)reply
$4M profits in an average 12 hour cycle?
I don't think this claim is true. If you look at SoCalGas' parent company's, Sempra Energy,
annual report, it shows Sempra's total earnings (profit) were $1,370M. This means Sempra Energy made $0.15M per hour profit total. Therefore, $4M would take Sempra at least 25.57 hrs to generate and therefore, it would take even longer for SoCalGas to generate that profit. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
96.41.73.28 (
talk)
05:18, 20 July 2017 (UTC)reply