Talk:Vaca Muerta

Argentina Mid‑importance

	Argentina portal This article is part of WikiProject Argentina, an attempt to expand, improve and standardise the content and structure of articles related to Argentine economy. If you would like to participate, you can improve Vaca Muerta, or sign up and contribute to a wider array of articles like those on our to do list.ArgentinaWikipedia:WikiProject ArgentinaTemplate:WikiProject ArgentinaArgentine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Energy Low‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy 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.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Geology Mid‑importance

	Geology portal Talk:Vaca Muerta is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

expropriation section

I don't see any reason to have this section here, as it belongs instead with the articles on YPF and Repsol. A one-sentence mention here should suffice. Plazak (talk) 02:39, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Belongs, as a testament to Chevron's courage. User:Fred Bauder Talk 18:36, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not really about this formation. Belongs to YPF article. Beagel (talk) 04:12, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Article title

Should this just be titled "Vaca Muerta," and geological material added? I notice there are several references to paleontological discoveries in the Vaca Muerta formation, but no cross-references available. Doesn't seem too likely anyone will look up any dead cows by mistake.Isidorpax (talk) 21:30, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support. It should be also clarified that Vaca Muerta is a shale formation and not a single field as it consist of several fields (e.g. Loma Lata Norte and Loma Campaña). Beagel (talk) 04:11, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Los Molles Formation

The current text says: It is underlain by the Los Molles Formation, a middle Jurassic formation which is thicker but less rich. The Los Molles Formation is estimated to have 275 trillion cubic feet (7.8×1012 m3) of technically recoverable shale gas and 3.7 billion barrels (590,000,000 m3) of technically recoverable oil.

Unfortunately it seems to be a misinterpretation of data by the EIA. Although both formations lay in the Neuquen basin, there is no information in the giver reference that the Los Molles Formation underlains the Vaca Muerta formation. At the same time, this source this source says: The Chachao Formation overlies gradationally The Vaca Muerta Formation. I will change it accordingly. Beagel (talk) 15:16, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done Beagel (talk) 07:44, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oil and gas development

Information on oil and gas development is split at the moment between 'History' and 'Oil and gas development' sections. I would be probably better to have all this information in the 'Oil and gas development' section. Also, while I think that agreements to develop different blocks are important, the information of rigs contracts by YPF is probably WP:WEIGHT. Any comments? Beagel (talk) 09:19, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. In typical Wiki fashion, additions are being plopped in at random, without regard for organization or narrative flow. Plazak (talk) 14:48, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]