Talk:Enbridge Pipeline System

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Meryssa.tran. Peer reviewers: Meryssa.tran.

Above undated message substituted from

talk) 20:34, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Requested move

---

Possible graphics

This SEC filing has some potentially useful maps in it: http://google.brand.edgar-online.com/EFX_dll/EDGARpro.dll?FetchFilingHTML1?ID=6511335&SessionID=mns-FFAQq_SWFP7

Not sure about the copyright status of such things...

--Ilnyckyj (talk) 04:56, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

self-linking

Why do the references link to this same wikipedia entry? ( Martin | talkcontribs 17:59, 6 March 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Line 10 says 91 miles (into the USA, Western New Work, across Grand Island, and then along the Youngman and Thruway to the 400)

But the distance as a bird flies from the two end points is 100 miles, but the map shows the pipeline ending in West Seneca south of Buffalo, not south of Jamestown. Also Line 10 has spur down to Lake Ontario to a decommissioned coal power plant. Is that length included in the 91 miles? It is not clear where the end of the pipeline is. I have seen references to a pumping station in Williamsvile NY, but no idea where that could be - well I assume it is "near" the airport actually, but no evidence. ( Martin | talkcontribs 20:10, 8 March 2015 (UTC))[reply]

References needs editting

The significant source of references of articles are from the Enbridge website, notably, references 1 and 3. These would not count as independent sources and thus are not suitable to use. These references also do not link to the information that is described in the citation but merely links to the home website.

References 2 and 17 are broken links and either needs to be found or removed.

References 4-8, 11,13 are not actual references and merely link to the Wiki article itself

References 14 and 18 are from a climate news organizations that may include a bias towards an oil pipeline system.

More sources are needed that are independent and neutral are needed to verify the information in this article. There are various facts mentioned in the article that lack proper citation. The entire table on each line needs a verifiable source for each entry.

Meryssa.tran (talk) 00:45, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Consolidation or cross-referencing of Wiki pages needed

I noticed there are many pages regarding to the Enbridge Pipelines, oil spills, as well as the Wiki page of the Enbridge company itself. The oil spills and incident section needs to stay consistent with these other pages or need to be consolidated into one page, as the information between these pages are not consistent (i.e. there are oil spill incidents that are missing in this page that are shown in other pages). Meryssa.tran (talk) 02:01, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Citation 1 Dead Link

Needs to be found, removed, or replaced please Hmthorner (talk) 03:56, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Enbridge Pipeline System. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:15, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]