Talk:Mil Mi-2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

AVIATION 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.
Aviation Portal
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale.

Please help me. Let me know how much is repair engine for MI-2 and how can do it. thanks

The following discussion is an archived debate 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.

The result of the debate was no consensus. —Nightstallion (?) 11:30, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

Mil Mi-2 → PZL Mi-2 – almost all of the machines were produced by PZL -- Tangotango 06:51, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
  • No vote. I am only adding this to help with the technicalities. -- Tangotango 06:51, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose to provide designation sequnce of Mil's OKB projects. In PZL was exclusive production, but still on licence. Radomil talk 06:54, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Support Designation before the name of aircraft refers to factory where it was made so we have Mil Mi-8, PZL W-3, Areo L-39 etc. I agree that if some aircraft was made in many factories it's article name should refer to original name (but still all An-2 made in PZL Mielec are PZL An-2). But situation with Mi-2 is different, all production Mi-2s were made in one, and only factory - PZL Świdnik, so if some one saw Mi-2 in 99,99% probability it was PZL Mi-2, and thats why PZL Mi-2 is right name for this article.
Remember that all upgrades, all armed variant (like Mi-2URP, Mi-2URN), all modernizations (PZL Mi-2 plus, PZL Kania) were designed in PZL Świdnik.
Look at Mil Mi-38 article that redirects to Euromil Mi-38 (because Mi-38 is joint project of Eurocopter and Mil).
What is interesting Sikorsky UH-3 Sea King and Westland Sea King have separate articles - same copter produced in two different factories.corran.pl talk 11:29, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Neutral Negligible load on servers from a redirect, doesn't matter where the page goes so long as it's not being moved back and forth all the time, Mil is clearly identified as the designer in the lead paragraph, and PZL is clearly identified as the sole manufacturer in the lead. Sikorsky/Westland split is there because both articles are quite large. - Emt147 Burninate! 14:36, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose articles from designs from the Soviet days should always use the design bureau as its designator. Factories had absolutely nothing to do with design, and can be thought of as operating under license. You wouldn't call a license built DC-3 something other than a Douglas DC-3 would you? If some other design was also called DC-3 then it would be problematic if you know Douglas designed one, and say, Aeromecca designed another dissimilar aircraft, but they were both built by AVICII? 132.205.45.148 18:22, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.