Talk:Raytheon

Requested move 5 August 2023

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 as proposed. As discussed in the discussion below, "Raytheon" page does not need to be a disambiguation page. If necessary in the future, Raytheon (disambiguation) can be created. Regarding the incoming links to "Raytheon", it has been pointed out some links to need to retargeted. This should be done by someone familiar with the subject. Thank you everybody for keeping the discussion civil. Regards, —usernamekiran (talk) 14:46, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

---

Raytheon Company → Raytheon – The new division of RTX Corporation is called "Raytheon". -- Jax 0677 (talk) 23:24, 5 August 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Adumbrativus (talk) 03:23, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

• Support Per nom. I'm involved, as I've made comments in discussions elsewhere on the issue, or I'd just close this and move it myself. BilCat (talk) 02:52, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
• Question - what's the basis for arguing that this article should be the primary meaning of "Raytheon"? I'd imagine that when most people today say "Raytheon", they're referring to the current company, not the one that merged into it 3 years ago. For example, when my wife's cousin says he works for Raytheon, he isn't telling us he got laid off 3 years ago and is unemployed. He's saying he works for RTX. Parsecboy (talk) 12:00, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
  • +1. What does the usage of this look like in reliable sources? Are news articles using the old name or RTX? Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 22:42, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

• Comment, the topic of this article is the pre-merger company, not the present-day division. Wouldn’t a new article be named simply Raytheon and this article be left as-is? WikiRedactor (talk) 01:51, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

  • Reply - We can add the new Raytheon division of RTX to the Raytheon article. --Jax 0677 (talk) 16:16, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

• Comment "Raytheon" should be a disambiguation page. We can sort of which one is which with the short descriptions on a disambiguation page -- 67.70.25.80 (talk) 04:10, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
• Comment Are you suggesting merging into RTX Corporation or to have RTX Corporation and Raytheon as two separate articles? Please clarify. Graywalls (talk) 04:04, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

  • Reply - Two separate pages. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:20, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Support (but somewhat ambivalent). Technically (and legally, which I know isn't dispositive on Wikipedia policy), UTC acquired Raytheon Company as a subsidiary and changed its name from UTC to Raytheon Technologies Corporation (and subsequently, to RTX). It was discussed as a merger of equal from a management standpoint, but it was technically an acquisition.

The wholly-owned Raytheon Company is effectively the "Raytheon" subdivision of RTX. Technically a bit of the old Rockwell stuff made its way into the Raytheon subdivision, and some of the old Raytheon Company stuff made its way into Collins . . . but other than that, the Raytheon subdivision of RTX is largely the same business line as the Raytheon Company page.

Moreover, it seems a bit much to have separate pages for Raytheon Company, the new Raytheon subdivision of RTX, Raytheon Missile and Defense, and Raytheon Intelligence and Space. All four pages deal with basically the same business enterprise; the only real change across them is (1) their acquisition by UTC/RTX and (2) about 3 years of changes in how the company was internally organized. TheNorseEagle (talk) 02:58, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

• page mover comment: I was about to close the discussion as "moved", as there are supporting arguments, and no opposing arguments. But there were two issues that caught my eye: first — I am not sure about the consensus regarding "Raytheon" being a disamb, or redirect. The second thing — there are around 1,000 mainspace incoming links to "Raytheon". Do these links need to be re-targeted to something else, or be left as is? —usernamekiran (talk) 07:53, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

  On the incoming links to Raytheon, some will probably need to be re-targeted to RTX Corporation, while the rest are probably for the previous incarnations of Raytheon, which the moved article will be covering. As for the consensus regarding the move, it is to Raytheon, which you've apparently agreed there is a consensus for. I don't see the need for a disambiguation page at all, as a hatnote should suffice, but one can be created at Raytheon (disambiguation). (That's my "involved" advice. If you're not certain about the consensus on that, then you can let another editor make the close.) BilCat (talk) 08:39, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

  @Usernamekiran I came here with the same intent yesterday, but noticed that Raytheon is tagged with {{R with possibilities}} from Draft:Raytheon. I don't know if that's a duplicate article from this one, but I think that needs to be resolved before any move comes here. estar8806 (talk) ★ 15:30, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

  @Estar8806: Bill, yes. I think it would be better if I defer this. I'm also not sure when I will get free time on my computer. —usernamekiran (talk) 22:23, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

  @Estar8806: I created Draft:Raytheon for the new Raytheon division, but I stopped working on it once the discussionsnon expanding this articleto cover the division began. If Raytheon Company is moved to Raytheon, it will be expanded to cover the current division, and I'll request the draft's deletion at that point. BilCat (talk) 01:52, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

  Thank you. That resolves my concerns. I'm not quite certain if you have a response to @Usernamekiran's concerns. Once all that is cleared up, I'm sure either one of us would be satisfied enough to move this. estar8806 (talk) ★ 01:58, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

  Which of Usernamekiran's concerns did I not address? I thought I'd answered them all. BilCat (talk) 03:28, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

  I think you did. I was mostly just trying to get him back here to see if he felt those concerns were addressed. Assuming they have been, I'm sure if he feels they've been addressed this discussion can be wrapped up. estar8806 (talk) ★ 03:41, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

  I do not have any objections/opinions regarding this discussion. The only doubt was the comment by IP above which said "Raytheon" should be a disambiguation page. This has been addressed. The second doubt was about incoming links, as the Raytheon (which is currently a redirect to "RTX Corporation"), has more than 1,000 incoming links from mainspace. I was not sure if the links needed to be retargeted. BilCat has addressed that as well. I will shortly close the discussion. —usernamekiran (talk) 14:40, 31 August 2023 (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.