This template must be substituted. Replace {{Requested move ...}} with {{subst:Requested move ...}}.

Military history: Aviation / North America / United States C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles C This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale. This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Military aviation task force North American military history task force United States military history task force

Aviation: Aircraft Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: | b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> | b2<!--Coverage and accuracy   --> = <yes/no> | b3<!--Structure               --> = <yes/no> | b4<!--Grammar and style       --> = <yes/no> | b5<!--Supporting materials    --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion. This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Chance-Vought F4U survivors → F4U Corsair survivors — Per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (aircraft) US military aircraft are titled, notwithstanding certain circumstances, by Number and name. The parent article to this article is F4U Corsair, it only follows that sub/related articles would be named F4U Corsair X. — Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 19:16, 9 September 2008 (UTC) Also involved in this proposal are:

• Boeing B-52 survivors → B-52 Stratofortress survivors
• Boeing B-47 survivors → B-47 Stratojet survivors
• Boeing B-29 survivors → B-29 Superfortress survivors
• Boeing B-17 survivors → B-17 Flying Fortress survivors
• Boeing B-47 survivors → B-47 Stratojet survivors
• Consolidated B-24 survivors → B-24 Liberator survivors
• Douglas A-20 survivors → A-20 Havoc survivors
• Douglas A-26 survivors → A-26 Invader survivors
• Lockheed P-38 survivors → P-38 Lightning survivors
• North American B-25 survivors → B-25 Mitchell survivors
• Republic P-47 survivors → P-47 Thunderbolt survivors

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

• Support - Per nom. - BillCJ (talk) 19:43, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
• Support - The current project naming conventions have proved themselves over time. - Ahunt (talk) 20:24, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
• Rename something else — When I came here, initially I thought it was an article about people who had survived crashes in these aircraft. Perhaps List of surviving foos (e.g. List of surviving B-47 Stratojets or List of surviving Boeing B-47s, whatever the consensus is) would be less ambiguous? — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 21:03, 9 September 2008 (UTC)reply
• Rename something else Agree with Twas Now, I thought these were about people who survived the aircraft(?). If they survive deletion, List of surviving foos seems much clearer. Tassedethe (talk)
  • user Tassedethe has made a fool out of himself - aircraft survivors has been the accepted term in the warbird community for over 50 years - all he has to do is look at any projectwiki aviation article and there is a section named "Survivors - so his comments about changing the name survivors to something else is irrevelent Davegnz (talk) 14:28, 10 September 2008 (UTC)reply
    • I don't appreciate your comments. Please remain civil when participating in these discussions. I don't care if the 'warbird' community has used this term for 50 years, to me it suggested people who had survived crashes, just like 'Titanic survivors' suggests people who survived the sinking of the Titanic, not multiple ships called the Titanic. Tassedethe (talk) 15:05, 10 September 2008 (UTC)reply

    Actually, Davegnz, I was the one who suggested this, not Tassedethe. I don't see how naming an article unambiguously is foolish, though. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 20:38, 10 September 2008 (UTC)reply

• Leave the names alone named correct Davegnz (talk) 14:29, 10 September 2008 (UTC)reply

Discussion

Any additional comments:

• I have nominated each and every one for deletion. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 20:09, 9 September 2008 (UTC)reply

Yes, and the nominations have little if any chance of success. What a waste of time. Andrewa (talk) 15:25, 11 September 2008 (UTC)reply

Alternative names

I'd suggest renaming along the lines of Surviving F4U Corsair aircraft. I thought of List of surviving F4U Corsair aircraft, but these articles are more than mere lists, and I wouldn't like to see content removed until they were lists. Andrewa (talk) 15:31, 11 September 2008 (UTC)reply

Wikipedia:Naming conventions

Per the rules concerning naming articles: Where there are many names, none of them clearly the most common, use manufacturer and number - this is the most common way of identifying military aircraft (see Janes All The World Aircraft) - I do not know why projectwiki aviation has to go against 100 years of aviation standards - but if editors want chance lets do it completely:

1. Chance-Vought F4U survivors to F4U/FG-1/F2A-1 Corsair - F2G Super Corsair survivors
2. Boeing B-29 survivors to B-29/PB2B Superfortress/Washington/Super Dumbo survivors
3. Boeing B-17 survivors to B-17/PB-1B/PB-1W/PB-1G Flying Fortress / Dumbo survivors
4. Consolidated B-24 survivors to B-24/PB4Y-1 Liberator - PB4Y-2 Privateer survivors
5. Douglas A-20 survivors to DB-1/A-20/P-70 Boston/Havoc survivors
6. Douglas A-26 survivors to A-26/B-26/A-26/JB-1 Invader survivors
7. Lockheed P-38 survivors to P-38/F-4/F-5 Lightning survivors
8. Curtiss P-40 Survivors to P-40 Hawk/Tomahawk/Kittyhawk/Warhawk/Superhawk survivors
9. Messerschmitt Bf 109 survivors to Me Bf 109/HA-109-K1L/HA-1112-M1L/Avia S-199 Mule survivors
10. North American B-25 survivors to B-25/PB-1 Mitchell survivors

Lets not forget:

1. North American P-51 Survivors to P-51/A-36/F-6A - Apache/Invader/Mustang survivors

• • Lets not forget the F-4 - I can think of 10 different aircraft named F-4 pick one!

• Again per Wikipedia:Naming conventions: Where there are many names, none of them clearly the most common, use manufacturer and number - end of story! The survivors series are named correct per wiki rules Davegnz (talk) 14:28, 10 September 2008 (UTC)reply

No. - BillCJ (talk) 18:30, 10 September 2008 (UTC)reply

The "wiki rules" in question I guess are Wikipedia:Naming conventions (aircraft), which does state Where there are many names, none... as quoted. But it's about naming the main article about an aircraft. Perhaps it can be argued that the same convention should be applied wherever the aircraft name appears in an article name, but that's an extension of the rule, it's not what the rule actually says, and we don't always follow this logic in other article naming conventions. Andrewa (talk) 07:48, 12 September 2008 (UTC)reply

The term survivor

It's been pointed out above that the term survivor as used in the article names is standard terminology in "warbird" circles. That's relevant but it's not the whole story. We need to cater for all readers, not just specialists in this area, and that's the general principle of WP:NC as well. Andrewa (talk) 07:48, 12 September 2008 (UTC)reply