Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (aircraft)/2010 article renaming checklist

Way forward?

I have started checking and ticking some to get the ball rolling. I wonder if it would be better to remove checked articles from the list rather than ticking them, it should get shorter and easier as checking progresses, eventually ending up with no entries at all! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 11:56, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Should probably also remove from this list or tick any links to variant sections where the parent article title is correct such as P-2 Neptune#Variants (now Lockheed P-2 Neptune) for the RB-69 as an example. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 12:17, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Agree, doesnt help that the original article has got into a bit of a mess! MilborneOne (talk) 18:15, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

(EC)It is a bit of a mess but it's serving our purpose. Should add something to the blurb at the top about removing the ticked articles (might confuse people to see number gaps in the list of designations). The archive talk page thing was a bit of a 'gotcha', luckily most don't have archives. Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 18:28, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Problems or queries

Keystone B-3

• Currently at Keystone B-3A should this be Keystone B-3 ? MilborneOne (talk) 18:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Boeing Y1B-9

• Article is at B-9 Death Angel which appears to be a made up name in a press article. MilborneOne (talk) 18:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
  • I'd go with Boeing YB-9 (admin move). The article had been moved to B-9 Death Angel by old "friend" Dave G., who never met a guidleine he understood correctly! The name appears to have been a derrogatory nickname only. - BilCat (talk) 18:46, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Thanks, done MilborneOne (talk) 19:00, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

XS-3/X-3 Stiletto

• Marked as not done should be Douglas X-3 Stiletto, any reason why? MilborneOne (talk) 18:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC) Just marked by me as not being moved yet, double 't' in the name, suspect a typo there, no reason not to move. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 18:36, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done MilborneOne (talk) 19:58, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

XS-4/X-4 Bantam

• Marked as not done should be Northrop X-4 Bantam, any reason why? MilborneOne (talk) 18:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC) Same as above I think Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 18:36, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done MilborneOne (talk) 20:00, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

B-2 Spirit

• Marked as not done. MilborneOne (talk) 18:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done Also moved archive pages, search box is not working, might be a server catch up thing, need to check back. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 23:41, 10 June 2010 (UTC) Working fine now, all good. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 11:11, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

E-5

• Comment added was "Eagle" part of the MDS designation or just the manfacturer's? MilborneOne (talk) 18:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

E-8

• Comment added Boeing or Northrop Grumman? MilborneOne (talk) 18:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

E-10

• Comment added Boeing or Nothrop Grumman? MilborneOne (talk) 18:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

F-14 Tomcat

• Should be Grumman F-14 Tomcat, not done? MilborneOne (talk) 18:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC) See F-16! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 18:36, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done Moved by Bill Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 23:53, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

F-16 Fighting Falcon

• Should be General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon, not done? MilborneOne (talk) 18:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
  • I just marked it as not being moved yet, was not feeling brave!! Can see no reason why it should not be moved. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 18:30, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
  • I think a reasonable case could be made for Lockheed Martin F-16 Fighting Falcon, so this should be handled as a move proposal on the talk page. Bewre of tenditious editors such as the 70-series IP cusing problems, :) - BilCat (talk) 18:38, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

YF-23 Black Widow II

• Not done was the BWII part of the official name? MilborneOne (talk) 18:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
  • The article has been at Northrop YF-23 for some time now. BWII appears ot have been a fanboy name only. - BilCat (talk) 18:38, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

P-4/PB4Y

• Not done Consolidated or Convair? MilborneOne (talk) 18:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
  • I had already moved it to Consolidated PB4Y-2 Privateer, as "Consolidated" is what was listed in both the Lead (title line and text) and Infobox. I've no problem with it going to Convair PB4Y-2 Privateer if the sources show it's warranted. - BilCat (talk) 22:43, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Titles that I marked not done are all good to move I think, just not done yet! It might be better to use the red crosses just for queried or uncertain titles. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 18:36, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

F4U Corsair

• Should this be moved to "Chance Vought..." or just "Vought..."? - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 22:41, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

TBV/TBU Sea Wolf

• Seems Consolidated is the manufacturer of choice as opposed to Vought - but should it be Consolidated or Consolidated Vultee? - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 23:30, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

F-9 Cougar

• The page for the Grumman Cougar is currently at F-9 Cougar, which would probably nicely distinguish the Cougar (F9F-6 and onwards) from the Panther (F9F up to -5). But I think the aircraft spent most of their time in service as F9Fs. I believe this should stay at F-9 (i.e. Grumman F-9 Cougar) (since all the main variants were redesignated, it disambiguates them, and the TF-9J saw combat in Vietnam(!!)), but wanted to check to be sure with y'all first. - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 23:55, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
  • I actually chose "F-9 Cougar" for just the reason you stated - to distinguish it from the F9F Panther more easily. As far as time in service, including the TF-9J, both designationa (F9F v. F-9) are probably about equal. So Grumman F-9 Cougar works for me, but Grumman F9F Cougar is OK if the consensus is for it. - BilCat (talk) 15:41, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
    • Makes sense. I was going to go ahead and move it to the former, but it seems that needs G6-ing anyway! - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 15:59, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done !! MilborneOne (talk) 16:04, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

F4F, F6F, XF10F, YFM-1

• These will all need admin help to move, it seems. - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 23:59, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done all four MilborneOne (talk) 16:07, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

C-40 Clipper

• Needs help to move as Boeing C-40 Clipper seems to be un-move-overable (and was pointing to the wrong article to boot!). - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 02:51, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done MilborneOne (talk) 15:09, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

XB-38, XB-39, XB-43, KC-97

• These all can't be moved normally, presumably they need a G6 on the target title. - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 23:44, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done was the KC-97 really the stratotanker? MilborneOne (talk) 09:30, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Convair B-36

• Is "Peacemaker" a common enough name for the type to be part of the title? (if not, then the current title is good) - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 23:44, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

C-46 Commando and C-76 Caravan

• Should the former be at Curtiss C-46 Commando or Curtiss-Wright C-46 Commando? Normally I only see it referred to in print as the former, but the article uses the latter and I was surprised to see the Google hit score being 27,000 to 102,000 in favor of C-W...but how many of those are Wikimirrors? - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 00:06, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

...and also C-76, C or C-W? It seems to me that, based on my perhaps limited reading, the only types ordinarily referred to as Curtiss-Wrights are the CW-21 and CW-22, with all other Curtiss types being just Curtiss. But maybe that's just me? Want to be sure before going either way! - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 00:09, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Naval

Let's not forget the types not redesignated in 1962, found at List of military aircraft of the United States (naval)... :) - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 22:26, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

If you like you could paste it into a sandbox, remove the images, cats, external links, navboxes and anything else that is not needed then tag it onto the end of the existing list that we are working on. Might be one very long list but it would all be in one place. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 22:46, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Done. There's a lot of duplication due to the 1962 system change, and aircraft used by both services before that, though... - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 22:57, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

"Chance Vought" or just "Vought"?

We should probably decide on this before we go too much further. Most modern references seem to list all the Chance Vought aircraft under "Vought". Thoughts? - BilCat (talk) 23:23, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Don't forget Vought-Sikorsky and Ling-Temco-Vought/LTV! Seems to me "Vought" before 1950s, "Chance Vought" during 1950s, "LTV" 1960s onwards would be most accurate, but most "LTV" aircraft do seem to be simply referred to as just "Vought".... - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 23:31, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Angellucci (American Fighter) just uses Vought for all of them (Chance was the founder's first name). It's an excellent source for what we are doing here if you guys have it. Gives all the company history, names and dates. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 23:38, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it's a good one, though it doesn't cover the A-7. ;) I think we only have 2 aircraft by LTZV< the A-7, and XC-142 (which has been at LTV XC-142 for several years now). I've no problem with V-7 going to Vought if the rest of the Vought-onlies are there too. (Vought-Sikorsky seems to haqve only applied to a few Sikorsky flying boats.) - BilCat (talk) 23:51, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Ah, but the Ginter "Naval Fighters" books for the F7U and F6U both are titled "Chance Vought...". Who ya gonna call use? ;) And don't forget the VS-300 helicopter. Although that's probably splitting hairs! - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 23:53, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

The sources that agree with me - isn't that what we all do? :) ANyway, Vought-Sikorsky VS-300 already exists, and that's where it should be. It's also a Sikorsky design, and it did use floats. :) - BilCat (talk) 00:00, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Gunston (Fighters of the Fifties) = Vought F7U Cutlass, Vought F8U (F-8) Crusader and Vought XF8U-3 Crusader III. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 23:59, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

XF8U-3... *twitch* Why couldn't they have called if XF9U, grr. Anyway, seems to be consensus with you, Bill! :P - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 00:00, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

It might have been XF9U had it entered production, but it might have depended on how tight with the budget Congress was that year. ;) - BilCat (talk) 00:04, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Strip out the ticks?

Any objections to stripping out any green ticked links? That way the list will get shorter and we can see what we have left. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 00:02, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

None here, aside from possible "is it done or just missing?" confusion. - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 00:19, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Lost me there? Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 00:24, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I understand. I'm going to add a little to the instructions at the top about that. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 00:25, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

T-50 Golden Eagle...

...should be at KAI T-50 Golden Eagle, not KIA T-50 Golden Eagle. Unless a certain subisidary of Hyundai bought 'em out when we weren't looking. ;) - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 20:48, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Ah. Reverted and fixed. -Fnlayson (talk) 21:46, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Problems and queries

H-26

• not sure of name Fairchild or American Helicopter ? MilborneOne (talk) 21:30, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

CH-53K Super Stallion

• at Sikorsky CH-53K should it be Sikorsky CH-53K Super Stallion ? MilborneOne (talk) 21:30, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

They may keep the Super Stallion name or get a new one. I have not seen anything on this yet. We can change it now and possibly need to change it later or wait. Either way works. -Fnlayson (talk) 21:36, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

OK best to leave it alone for the time being I think. MilborneOne (talk) 09:30, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Republic XF-84H Thunderscreech

• is Thunderscreech an official name. MilborneOne (talk) 19:44, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Neither Gunston or Angellucci uses it (the latter lists names next to a master list). Th text says this which is cited: '...earning the nickname "Thunderscreech" as well as the "Mighty Ear Banger"'. So Republic XF-84H is where it should be. The Thunderwarrior (XF-103) is another questioned one. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 19:56, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done I have moved it to Republic XF-84H. MilborneOne (talk) 20:08, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Curtiss and Curtiss-Wright

• While going through some of these types I saw a mixture of both companies used in the title, quite a few have not been moved yet so it would pay to get it correct at this stage. Angelucci just uses 'Curtis' for all of them but there probably is a distinction between types, many have 'CW' model numbers. According to Angelucci anything after 1929 is a Curtiss-Wright, anything before is a Curtiss. No preference but we should be consistent as someone might ask an awkward question about this! We have only one navbox for them which I believe is the best solution. Thoughts? Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 21:44, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

• • I would thing that only those with CW-XX type numbers should be Curtiss-Wright, these are the only military with CW-XX type numbers:
• CW-20 still at C-46 Commando
• CW-24 at Curtiss-Wright XP-55 Ascender
• CW-25 at Curtiss AT-9
• CW-27 at Curtiss-Wright C-76 Caravan
• CW-29 at Curtiss-Wright XF-87 Blackhawk

So if C-46 and AT-9 is moved it should be alright! MilborneOne (talk) 22:05, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Ah, yes. That would fix the ones in this US mil list that we are working on but I was thinking more generally across all their aircraft. You can see the problem by looking at the lists of 'products' in each company article and the related categories (I think there is only one cat where there should probably be two). We are yet to 'hit' the civil types I suppose, only 12,000 articles or so (to check, not necessarily to move)!!. I guess it was a priority to move the more popular, high profile US mil types and we will get round to the others in due course. Stops us getting bored anyway!! Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 22:19, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Very few outside the us mil are really a problem if you look at Category:WikiProject Aircraft articles only a small number for example are now d-n rather than m-d-n. MilborneOne (talk) 22:32, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

I have now moved the C-46 and AT-9 to CW. MilborneOne (talk) 22:35, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

RQ-2

AAI or IAI? Or both? - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 21:42, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Category search

I used the aviation articles by quality cats to find out unmoved articles and I moved everything I found apart from:

• A-4AR Fightinghawk Lockheed Martin ?
• A-4SU Super Skyhawk Singapore Technologies ?
• C-27 Spartan - this is a redirect, fine as is
• EF-111 Raven General Dynamics/Grumman ? Both- Done
• F-4 Phantom II U.S. operators
• F-4 Phantom II non-U.S. operators
• F-4 Phantom II variants
• F-4 Terminator 2020
• List of surviving F-4 Phantom IIs
• F-16 Fighting Falcon just need a decision on GD or LM
• F-16 Fighting Falcon operational history
• F-16 Fighting Falcon variants
• F-16 VISTA
• F-16 Agile Falcon
• F-35 testing
• F-22 cockpit
• Comparison of P-40 variants
• E-10 MC2A Boeing or
• E-8 Joint STARS Boeing or
• XH-26 Jet Jeep American Helicopter or Fairchild
• P-75 Eagle (GM or Fisher)  Done - "General Motors P-75" gets ~10,000 Google hits; "Fisher P-75", 66,000. - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 19:06, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
• T-1 Jayhawk Raytheon or Hawker Beechcraft
• X-9 Shrike should be Bell but it is a missile?
• F6U Pirate Chance-Vought or Vought
• X-26 Frigate presume Schweizer just checking.
• AZ-1 Marvelette I had moved XV-11 Marvel to Mississippi State University XV-11 Marvel but just thought I would check that the long form was ok before AZ-1 was moved.
• VC-137C SAM_26000 Boeing ?
• VC-137C SAM 27000 Boeing ?
• X-20 Dyna-Soar presume this is a project so can stay at X-
• X-41 Common Aero Vehicle presume this is a project so can stay at X-
• X-42 Pop-Up Upper Stage presume this is a project so can stay at X-
• X-53 Active Aeroelastic Wing presume this is a project so can stay at X-

Also some MQ/RQ drones not moved so these need to be checked, I also ignored some missiles AQM/MQM for now but some are drones so will need to be checked. As far as I am aware all the ones on the main page are all re-directs to moved pages or are OK ! MilborneOne (talk) 19:40, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, X-9 was designated as an aircraft, so.... P-75 seems to be almost always referred to as Fisher. X-20 was definitly Boeing so it should be at Boeing X-20 Dyna-Soar, I'd think, even though it wasn't built. - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 06:55, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

F-16

I have raised the GD/LM issue on the talk page. MilborneOne (talk) 19:40, 22 June 2010 (UTC)