Enron timeline was nominated fordeletion.The discussion was closed on25 December 2018 with a consensus tomerge. Its contents weremerged intoEnron. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please seeits history; for its talk page, seehere.
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofcompanies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofbusiness articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofcrime and criminal biography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofEnergy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Houston, a project which is currently considered to beinactive.HoustonWikipedia:WikiProject HoustonTemplate:WikiProject HoustonHouston
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to theUnited States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Upon reading this article, the paragraph underAccounting Practices beginning with "In 1999, Enron initiated [...]," sounds as if written by a student arguing a point rather than being general/informative. Is there something we should/could do regarding this? Thanks.Tjsmith0194 (talk)03:58, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Various crypto-adjacent news sources (which I am unsure of the viability of) are claiming that Enron is coming back. The most reliable, non-crypto news source I can find isa humor column inThe Houston Chronicle, which claims "The smartypantses on Reddit’sr/wallstreetbets floated a semi-serious theory: “Enron,” they cracked, would be a great name for a new cryptocurrency." Can anyone more experienced in cryptocurrency sources claim the validity of this?wizzito |say hello!18:08, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Enron twitter account is reactivated with a few tweets. The community notes on the pinned video references the new ToS which does include a clause that this is parody, but it remains to be seen.guninvalid (talk)08:52, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support "was". I support using "was" when referencing any activities performed by old-Enron, and "is" for the reboot. I'd say for anything not strictly referring to either of them, such as in the lede, "was" is still appropriate.guninvalid (talk)03:38, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
“Was” feels more accurate for the original company, it’s a different organization entirely. If the new Enron continues to operate into the future, at some point it should probably be moved to a separate page, leaving it as a footnote here. (Unless there is a precedent or guideline for this situation I am unaware of.)HootyTheOwlTube (talk)21:21, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
