Talk:Hughes TH-55 Osage/Archive 1

Schweizer 300C

Born2flie: Bill, I was just arguing the merging of MBB/Kawasaki BK117 and Eurocopter EC 145 and using the illustration of the Hughes 300 linking to the Schweizer 300C, and here you've created an article for the Hughes 300. From what I've seen, you could incorporate this all into the prescribed Development and History sections of the Schweizer 300C article according to WP:Air's page content style guidelines. Since, ultimately, you may have to merge the two anyways. --00:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I noticed that :) I've been working on it for two weeks here. Btw, I have a detailed explanation at Talk:Schweizer 300C#Hughes 300 article on my reasoning, and on alternatives. - BillCJ 01:28, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Born2flie: I saw that explanation and came here afterwards. My comments are after reviewing your hard work...sorry! :) --01:34, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, what do you want to do? Now that I've mucked up the 300C article with the 330/333, do we want to plop all the Hughes info in with it? I'm OK with that, but I would like Hughes in the article title if we can. I don't mind splitting off the 333/330, but without any pics, and more info, it'd just be another stub.

I have re-read WP:AIR's Page content and Naming conventions, and I didn't see any guideline related to this type of problem. The only thing mentioned is that license-built aircraft should be covered under the manufacturer in most cases. Here, we have two manufacturers, one with a 30 year successful history of production before licensing, then later selling, the design. - BillCJ 01:45, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Born2flie: I think one good article with all the Hughes information as development and history and the Hughes 269/300 redirecting to the Schweizer article will give a good unity to the article, and if written right, doesn't detract from the fact that the article name doesn't totally match the history. I also think that is why Wikipedia has the redirect pages, for when history takes these kinds of twists. Those searching for it can still find the information they want as well as learning how the situation has changed. I believe this is one of the advantages of the Wikipedia.

I don't think that anything you've added to either article is detrimental to a merged article or the visitor's understanding of the subject matter. --01:57, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I can handle the logistics of the merger, and fix the redirects. You can come along when you can and clean-up the text where it needs it.

All we need to agree on is the name. You like Schweizer 300C. I'd prefer a title more representative of the history, such as Hughes/Schweizer 300, though I'd accept Schweizer/Hughes 300. I'm not going to make a big deal of the issue, I just like to state my case, and see what happens. You and I seem to be the only ones doing any work on the article, so I don't think trying to poll for a consensus would do much good. If we do decide on a new name, the Schweizer article is much older, so we would just move it, and merge the Hughes 300. - BillCJ 02:13, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Born2flie: How about:

• Schweizer (Hughes) 300C
• Schweizer 300C (Hughes 300)

--02:36, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I'd prefer Schweizer (Hughes) 300 (no C), tho I could live with Schweizer (Hughes) 300C if I had to. I think the palin 300 is more reflective of the fact that the series is more than just the 300C, and it allows for a future 300D if one comes along. - BillCJ 03:04, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Born2flie: I was gonna come back to change my suggestions to reflect just that. I totally concur, no "C". --03:07, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

OK. I'll start on it tonight or tomorrow. - BillCJ 03:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Move went through fine. I'll move this discussion to the new page when I can. - BillCJ 03:28, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Restoring article

Given the recent ingoring of consensus on the naming of Schweizer (Hughes) 300 by a single admin (who himslef unilaterally ingnored concensus to create and keep the Dauphin 1 page), I am restoring this page. - BillCJ 17:08, 15 May 2007 (UTC)