Talk:Lavochkin La-150

Merger proposal
The Lavochkin Aircraft 150 appears to be virtually the same article as this one, merely with "Aircraft 150" replacing "La-150". There should be only one article. - The Bushranger (talk) 04:40, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, The Bushranger chose the wrong way to go when merging these. The proper title is Aircraft 150 following usage by the design bureau. La-XX designations were used only once an aircraft entered service for this OKB and are not appropriate for prototypes. These aircraft are so obscure that I'm not sure that common usage even applies. Gordon uses Aircraft 150 while Gunston uses La-150. Dunno about older books.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:01, 16 August 2011 (UTC)


 * This is a bit confusing. Are you requestg a "merge" or a "move"? All the other iterations currently redirect here! At any rate, I've raised the issue at WT:AIR for discussing this in a central location. - BilCat (talk) 23:34, 16 August 2011 (UTC)


 * It isn't confusing at all. Lavochkin did not use the La-prefix for non-production aircraft, it is a s simple as that!!!. The article title should read Lavochkin Aircraft 150 or Lavochkin Izdeliye 150. To citeGunston is an erroras all he did was perpetuate the fallacy.Petebutt (talk) 14:27, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:04, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Lavochkin La-150 → Lavochkin Aircraft 150 – Relisted. Do we have a consensus? Vegaswikian (talk) 18:35, 15 September 2011 (UTC) Lavochkin did not use the La-prefix on its aircraft. This was only applied by the customer for production aircraft. The source cited in the article is in error.Petebutt (talk) 14:32, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Doesn't common name apply in this regard? FWiW Bzuk (talk) 18:57, 8 September 2011 (UTC).


 * We need a highly reliable source that specifically states why Gunston is "in error". He's not just some fanboy self-publishing on a website somewhere. - BilCat (talk) 19:28, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * As discussed earlier, Yefim Gordon agrees with Petebutt, but it's not the most common name in English-language sources. Though I'd be curious to see how Shavrov refers to them.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:06, 9 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Vaclav Nemecek's History of Soviet Aircraft from 1918 use La-150 and it appears to be the common name in English. MilborneOne (talk) 19:25, 10 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose. This seems to be an appeal to the official name and if successful would put in doubt many other article titles e.g. Lavochkin La-152 and see also Lavochkin. It would also represent a major policy shift with implications beyond these articles. Andrewa (talk) 23:42, 23 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:12, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.