Talk:Vickers-Armstrongs

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated projects or task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no This article is not currently associated with a task force. To tag it for one or more task forces, please add the task force codes from the template instructions to the template call.

	This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Firearms; If you would like to join us, please visit the project page where you can find a list of open tasks. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked

I believe the page name here is wrong. The company name was "Vickers Armstrong" not "Vickers Armstrongs", although the latter seems to be a common misspelling.

Anyhow, I get about twice as many Google hits for the first spelling than I do for the second, and Hutchinson encyclopedia confirms that "Vickers Armstrong" is the correct spelling, I quote:

In 1927, Vickers merged with the Tyneside based engineering company Armstrong Whitworth, founded by W. G. Armstrong, to become Vickers-Armstrong, Ltd...In 1928 the Aviation Department became Vickers (Aviation) Ltd and soon after acquired Supermarine, which became the "Supermarine Aviation Works (Vickers) Ltd". In 1938, both companies were re-organised as Vickers Armstrong (Aircraft) Ltd, although the former Supermarine and Vickers works continued to brand their products under their former names.

The Aircraft and Shipbuilding Industries Act also led to the nationalisation of Vickers' shipbuilding division as part of British Shipbuilders. These had been renamed Vickers Armstrong Shipbuilders in 1955, changing again to Vickers Limited Shipbuilding Group in 1968. Gatoclass 15:31, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

• I was thinking exactly the same thing, will ask for comment at WP:AIR Nimbus227 (talk) 22:07, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

• It appears that the current article name is correct according to this reference from BAE Systems (successor of the parent company): [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nimbus227 (talk • contribs) 22:40, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

All the reference books I have show the bit that built aircraft as Vickers-Armstrongs (Aircraft) Limited. Please note that the reference quoted above is an old copy of this wikipedia article page which has been corrected to Vickers-Armstrongs! MilborneOne (talk) 22:47, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Aha!!! Nimbus227 (talk) 22:48, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

What reference books do you have, exactly, that refer to the company as "Vickers Armstrongs? Gatoclass (talk) 09:15, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

None - all mine have Vickers-Armstrongs. Why do you have a problem with the hyphen? MilborneOne (talk) 12:24, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

It's not the hyphen I have the problem with - it's the "s" on the end of the "Armstrong"! Gatoclass (talk) 12:26, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

OK -

• London Gazette Issue 34582 23 December 1938 - Supermarine Aviation Works (Vickers) Limited be wound up - "that the main businesses of the company are carried on by Vickers-Armstrongs Limited".
• London Gazette Issue 41502 19 September 1958 - Vickers-Armstrongs (Aircraft) Limited
• London Gazette Issue 41727 Supplement 13 June 1599 Award of an OBE - "Gabe Robb Bryce, Esq., Chief Test Pilot, Vickers-Armstrongs (Aircraft), Ltd."
• London Gazette Issue 40914 30 october 1956 List of land to be registered by "Vickers-Armstrongs (Aircraft) Limited"

Just a few I found on a quick search. MilborneOne (talk) 12:51, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah sure, I know you can find plenty of examples of usage. But if you do a google search you will find that "Vickers Armstrong" is actually used far more commonly. Gatoclass (talk) 14:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry this is not just a google search - the London Gazette is the official government newspaper, it does make mistakes but it is rare. A few examples more from Companies House:

• English Company 00227013 Vinters-Armstrongs Limited changed name from Vickers Armstrongs Limited in 2003 company founded 31 December 1927.
• English Company 00542022 Vinters-Armstrongs (Engineers) Limited changed name from Vickers-Armstrongs (Engineers) Limited in 2003 company founded 1954.
• English Company 00542023 Vinters Defence Systems Limited changed name in 2003 from Vickers Defence Systems Limited, changed name in 1987 from Vickers-Armstrongs (Shipbuilders) Limited company founded 1954.

MilborneOne (talk) 20:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm not convinced :)

I suspect this may have come about because, perhaps, the company name was wrongly registered in a database somewhere, in its tax records or something. It just doesn't make any sense to me that they would suddenly decide to pluralize their name.

Obviously I don't have proof of that though, so I guess I'll have to try and do some sleuthing on the subject at some stage. Don't really have the time right now though. Gatoclass (talk) 05:24, 29 February 2008 (UTC)