Talk:Grumman EA-6B Prowler

Grumman/Northrop Grumman

The convention for aircraft articles seems to be to keep the name of the original manufacturer. So for example, the article for the F-15 is still "McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle" despite the plane now being produced by Boeing. So I'd say this article's title should be changed to "Grumman EA-6B Prowler" —Masterblooregard (talk) 03:13, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Completely agree with this statement, on all points:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F-15_Eagle

It is eleven-and-a-half years later. Why has this change not been enacted?

Most of us do not have the ability to do this. Can someone with appropriate authority please review this. 2A00:23C7:3131:FE01:C5FA:6037:9855:5FE0 (talk) 18:46, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

• Understood, but renaming this article has little real benefit for the effort. The Lead makes it clear that Prowler was formerly Grumman in the Lead. -Fnlayson (talk) 14:21, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 23 May 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Polyamorph (talk) 07:46, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

---

Northrop Grumman EA-6B Prowler → Grumman EA-6B Prowler – Why does Northrop Grumman, a corporation formed in 1994, get credit for an aircraft that first flew in 1968? Rename per WP:AIR/NC. Jane's All the World's Aircraft 1992–93. Schierbecker (talk) 01:49, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Aviation and WikiProject Military history have been notified of this discussion. Schierbecker (talk) 22:02, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Support for a different reason - Had production of the EA-6B continued after the Northrop Grumman merger, I would oppose this move. However, since Northrop Grumman never built the EA-6B, it makes no sense to use that manufacturer in this title. Per WP:AIR/NC, "Be wary of using non-contemporary names like Boeing DC-3 or British Aerospace Spitfire." - ZLEA _T\^C 03:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Support: Use the company name when aircraft were being manufactured. -Fnlayson (talk) 15:06, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Support Per nom and Fnlayson. I'm surprised there's no convention on this. I would go with the design and initial production firm in most cases, although I see the C-17 is listed under Boeing, not Douglas or McDonnell Douglas. --Lineagegeek (talk) 23:36, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Only ECM aircraft

I have some doubts about the statement in the article, From the 1998 retirement of the United States Air Force EF-111 Raven electronic warfare aircraft, the EA-6B was the only dedicated electronic warfare plane available for missions by the U.S. Navy, the U.S. Marine Corps, and the U.S. Air Force until the fielding of the Navy's EA-18G Growler in 2009. The EC-130H Compass Call aircraft has filled the role of dedicated electronic warfare plane for much (if not all) of the time mentioned, at least since the early 1980s. The quote from the article says the EF-111 retired in 1998. Am I missing something? Anyone want to check that and update the article? — TadgStirkland⁴⁰¹ (Tadg^Talk) 01:20, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

The statement is unsourced, so we can probably remove it. - ZLEA _T\^C 03:26, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@ZLEA, removed. — TadgStirkland⁴⁰¹ (Tadg^Talk) 04:07, 4 September 2024 (UTC)