*Moderator feel free to remove this thread if needed.*
I really didn't expect it goes there so fast!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobil_1
I really didn't expect it goes there so fast!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobil_1
Mobil 1 controversy on wikipedia.org
- Thread starter Kitto
- Start date
- Status
Once again this proves how far rumors based on speculation, hearsay evidence and mass hysteria can spread on the internet.
Anyone want to bet how long it will be before that gets pulled?
Yes, it appears a certain party or group is intent on goring ExxonMobil's ox with this Grp III issue.
If you follow the link to the Wikipedia page & click on edit at the Mobil 1 section & click edit history, the following will display:
(cur) (last) 03:45, 4 February 2007 65.88.98.232 (Talk) (→Mobil 1)
(cur) (last) 03:41, 4 February 2007 65.88.98.232 (Talk) (→Mobil 1)
(cur) (last) 05:41, 3 February 2007 65.88.100.253 (Talk) (→Mobil 1)
(cur) (last) 03:33, 3 February 2007 65.88.100.253 (Talk) (→Mobil 1)
(cur) (last) 03:20, 3 February 2007 65.88.100.253 (Talk) (→Mobil 1)
The IP addresses of the 2 computers used to insert& edit the section titled "Controversy" are 65.88.98.232 and 65.88.100.253 on February 3 & 4.
Note, these IP addresses are not logged in Wikipedia user names, so it looks like a one-time "guest" appearance.
What I would like to believe is that the 2 IP addresses do not also appear on the Bitog membership roster, but then again I sometimes hope for too much...
If you follow the link to the Wikipedia page & click on edit at the Mobil 1 section & click edit history, the following will display:
(cur) (last) 03:45, 4 February 2007 65.88.98.232 (Talk) (→Mobil 1)
(cur) (last) 03:41, 4 February 2007 65.88.98.232 (Talk) (→Mobil 1)
(cur) (last) 05:41, 3 February 2007 65.88.100.253 (Talk) (→Mobil 1)
(cur) (last) 03:33, 3 February 2007 65.88.100.253 (Talk) (→Mobil 1)
(cur) (last) 03:20, 3 February 2007 65.88.100.253 (Talk) (→Mobil 1)
The IP addresses of the 2 computers used to insert& edit the section titled "Controversy" are 65.88.98.232 and 65.88.100.253 on February 3 & 4.
Note, these IP addresses are not logged in Wikipedia user names, so it looks like a one-time "guest" appearance.
What I would like to believe is that the 2 IP addresses do not also appear on the Bitog membership roster, but then again I sometimes hope for too much...
I was gonna ask "Who from BITOG, did that?"
"MARYLAND GERMANTOWN HUGHES_NETWORK_SYSTEMS "
"MARYLAND GERMANTOWN HUGHES_NETWORK_SYSTEMS "
Now THAT was pretty funny. Only real belly laugh I've had today.
Backlash? A few thousand oil nerds is a backlash? The general public is busy watching a NASCAR race and they know that if it's good enough for NASCAR is the best oil there is.
The entire world used to believe the earth is flat also. Does it mean it IS really flat?
Dynamic allocation DHCP.
[edit] Mobil 1
Mobil 1 was introduced in 1974. In 2002 Mobil 1 introduced "supersyn" anti-wear technology, followed by Mobil 1 Extended Performance in 2005 which increased the use of this technology further.
Controversy
In 2006, the results of a gas chromatography test on Mobil 1 EP 5w-30 were posted by an industry expert on the popular motor oil discussion website BITOG. It showed the oil to be primarily composed of a less expensive, Group III hydroprocessed mineral oil. Until this time, Mobil 1 was believed to be a true synthetic, utilizing a Group IV (PAO) basestock. The release of this information has led to a backlash against ExxonMobil's lubricant products in many automotive communities. Ironically, in 1999, Mobil fought Castrol's change in formulation to a Group III basestock in motor oils being marketed as fully synthetic. Mobil claimed that Castrol was decieving their customer base, while degrading their products. The National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus eventually ruled that Castrol could continue to market their Syntec line as a fully synthetic motor oil. ExxonMobil currently refuses to comment on the primary basestock of their Mobil 1 series of oils.
Old Mobil logo
Mobil 1 was introduced in 1974. In 2002 Mobil 1 introduced "supersyn" anti-wear technology, followed by Mobil 1 Extended Performance in 2005 which increased the use of this technology further.
Controversy
In 2006, the results of a gas chromatography test on Mobil 1 EP 5w-30 were posted by an industry expert on the popular motor oil discussion website BITOG. It showed the oil to be primarily composed of a less expensive, Group III hydroprocessed mineral oil. Until this time, Mobil 1 was believed to be a true synthetic, utilizing a Group IV (PAO) basestock. The release of this information has led to a backlash against ExxonMobil's lubricant products in many automotive communities. Ironically, in 1999, Mobil fought Castrol's change in formulation to a Group III basestock in motor oils being marketed as fully synthetic. Mobil claimed that Castrol was decieving their customer base, while degrading their products. The National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus eventually ruled that Castrol could continue to market their Syntec line as a fully synthetic motor oil. ExxonMobil currently refuses to comment on the primary basestock of their Mobil 1 series of oils.
Old Mobil logo
I just clicked on the site above and it was still there.
Yeah, same here. I still see it!
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
I couldn't see it. I wondered what everyone was talking about
Here's what I see:
Here's what Sarge quoted:
I still do not see that anywhere on that page.
Here's what I see:
Here's what Sarge quoted:
I still do not see that anywhere on that page.
- Status
Similar threads
