Talk:Airbus Zephyr
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Airbus Zephyr article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg)
Reqphoto
editI have uploaded a picture from the QinetiQ website as an illustration, but I am not clear on the wikipedia fair use rules. Could someone please update the license info for the picture, and also reply here with what license is used (or why the picture was deleted) and why? Thanks. Andipi (talk) 17:20, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Also, the section describing the launch of 5 people running under it is accurate, if you consider this YouTube video from Qinetiq: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejXaAwsIDoI — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caspianhiro (talk • contribs) 22:29, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Requested move
edit- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:09, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
– Another page moved away from the correct Title QinetiQ is spelt with the Last Q as a Capital letter!!!!!!!!!!!! Petebutt (talk) 11:17, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose. The parent article is at Qinetiq and this is in accordance with MOS:TM. Also, using 12 exclamation points in your nomination does nothing to further your cause (more the opposite really). Jenks24 (talk) 13:20, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
- Procedural oppose - As I have procrastinated my requested move of QinetiQ. I will be making a multi-move request shortly. Marcus Qwertyus 10:37, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Not Qinetiq any more
editThis article should be moved (to eg. Zephyr (UAV) or Airbus Zephyr) or split in two (Zephyr 7, Zephyr 8), as Qinetiq sold Zephyr to Airbus in 2013, and now, when Airbus is selling Zephyr 8 to UK, it's more relevant than ever to do something with an outdated title of sthis article. SkywalkerPL (talk) 16:38, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
- per common name policy, articles don't necessarily change name just because the company has undergone name change. GraemeLeggett (talk) 19:40, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
- Let me clarify: company did not undergone a name change. It's UAV itself that's not longer QinteQ's, not since 2003, and to the first customer it's Airbus's. SkywalkerPL (talk) 22:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
- Agreed. I think there would be a good argument against if any had already been sold, but as a product it is owned and marketed by, and wholly associated with, Airbus. Only industry analysts and some engineers would associate it with Qinetiq at all. Raspberrypirate (talk) 10:45, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Change Title from QinetiQ to Airbus
editAs discussed before this page is outdated, it should be moved to Zephyr HAPS or Airbus Zephyr. UK MOD have already purchased two Zephyr from Airbus not QinetiQ therefore it is imperative the associated current business manufacturer is named not the old one. The product is no longer owned by QinetiQ. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jack T Reed (talk • contribs) 11:28, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Requested move 14 April 2018
edit- 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. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 05:25, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
Qinetiq Zephyr → Zephyr HAPS – Zephyr was originally developed by QinetiQ, but has been bought by Airbus in 2013 (http://spacenews.com/40314amid-google-and-facebook-interest-airbus-eyes-high-altitude-pseudo/). The activity has been merged with other Airbus activities on HAPS, resulting in the development of a new generation HAPS called Zephyr S (http://www.airbus.com/defence/uav/zephyr.html). Three units have been sold to UK MoD (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/mod-buys-third-record-breaking-uav) in 2016. Keeping the name QinetiQ in the page title is misleading. Trygon87 (talk) 13:21, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose on a number of grounds, Zephyr HAPS doesnt match the naming convention and calling it the Qinetiq Zephy is clearly not misleading as the aircraft was built, flown and broke records under that name. What I would suggest is leave this article to cover the Zephyr 7 and record breaking flights and development and create a new article as Airbus Zephyr for the later development by Airbus. MilborneOne (talk) 17:05, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.