Talk:Royal Air Force Voyager Vespina

Not notable

A single aircraft is almost never notable for a separate wikipedia article. What’s special here? SurferSquall (talk) 05:07, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

We have dozens of articles on single, notable aircraft, including several on aircraft used for heads of state and/or government. BilCat (talk) 05:38, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Aircraft such as Air Force One of the US have been featured in countless news reports, movies, books, etc. That is not the case here SurferSquall (talk) 06:41, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Also, does a single one of the sources confirm that the aircraft’s name is “Vespina”?? I don’t see it anywhere. SurferSquall (talk) 06:43, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

There are numerous independent and secondary sources cite its name as 'Vespina' - both UK and international sources. It has been featured multiple times on the BBC, in the Telegraph and Independent (both 'broadsheet' reputable sources), Reuters, and no doubt umpteen more independent sources. Militum professio scriniarii (talk) 11:44, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Then cite these sources in the article. SurferSquall (talk) 15:03, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

There was already a number of independent secondary source citations to support the Vespina name when you added the non-notable tag. However, I have continued to add more. Regards. Militum professio scriniarii (talk) 23:43, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

I do not see any sources in this article that support that name. Care to point out which ones? SurferSquall (talk) 00:35, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

The crown

the British Government don't own anything all "state owned property" is owned by The Crown, I did change it but got reverted. Can we change it to The Crown please Jord656 (talk) 18:12, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Read the article that you linked to: The Crown, to see why this is not a useful link. Also you could claim that everything in the UK is owned by the crown, ultimately. It is more useful, precise and normal to indicate it is owned by the British Government and operated by the Royal Air Force. - Ahunt (talk) 18:33, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

it should be the Crown. As everything else owned by the State is crown property, even the Palace of Westminster and number 10 downing street Jord656 (talk) 18:36, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

The article on 10 Downing Street does not indicate who owns it, crown or otherwise. The article on the Palace of Westminster indicates it is owned by "King Charles III in right of the Crown" but has a very specific reference cited that addresses that special case. You have made your case, so let's see if any other editors support it or not. - Ahunt (talk) 18:41, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

AirTanker Services

The aircraft is maintained and owned by AirTanker Services on behalf of the RAF and British Government, shouldn’t this be reflected in the article? 60.226.208.65 (talk) 20:22, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

“AirTanker owns, manages and maintains the aircraft and provides infrastructure”

From RAF Website 60.226.208.65 (talk) 20:25, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

 Done - Ahunt (talk) 13:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 9 July 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 to Royal Air Force Voyager Vespina. (closed by non-admin page mover) Bensci54 (talk) 16:49, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

---

Vespina (aircraft) → Airbus Voyager ZZ336 – I am a close watcher of aviation generally and military aviation specifically, and I had no idea what this article title referred to. WP:AT states that when article titles have multiple possibilities, "editors choose among them by considering several principles: the ideal article title precisely identifies the subject; it is short, natural, distinguishable and recognizable; and resembles titles for similar articles." None of those are true to "Vespina (aircraft). Being strictly factual and naming it as <Aircraft (i.e. general type name)> <Registration (denoting specific aircraft> is much clearer. The current name is vague in the extreme. Mark83 (talk) 08:31, 9 July 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Quadrantal (talk) 16:04, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Suggest move to Royal Air Force Voyager Vespina instead. I agree that the current title is inadequately WP:CONCISE, but WP:COMMONNAME is also important in cases such as this, and a Google News search suggests that Vespina leads ZZ336 in mainstream sources, and that "Royal Air Force" is more commonly used than "Airbus". I also think that "Royal Air Force" does a better job of conveying why this particular aircraft is notable. Carguychris (talk) 18:36, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

It feels a bit clunky, however I agree this is better than my suggestion. Thank you for the input and for taking the time to check the instances of the options in sources. Mark83 (talk) 19:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I also considered the title "RAF Voyager Vespina", but the meaning of "RAF" isn't immediately obvious to the uninitiated. Carguychris (talk) 21:46, 18 July 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.