Talk:Boeing Yellowstone Project

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Aviation, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles related to aviation. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.	Aviation Portal
???	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 To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

Contents 1 Links to be integrated 2 This is totally unverifiable 3 Dispute Tag Added 4 Expansion tag 5 Requested merger 5.1 Survey 5.1.1 Survey - Support votes 5.1.2 Survey - Oppose votes 5.2 Discussion

[edit] Links to be integrated

I will integrate these links and info at some point in the near future: [1][2][3][4][5][6] —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 18:00, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] This is totally unverifiable

No where on Boeings website is there mention of any "Yellowstone Program" which makes me wonder where this idea came from.

Support - I totally agree, I checked the Boeing website today, I haven't seen any one of the informations given in the article. Either this information is yet a secret project that we shouldn't know or is a make-up bedtime story by Boeing fans. Another thing, the article Boeing 797 redirects here but there are no traces of a Boeing 797 in this article. Tekin 17:24, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Uh, try reading the SEVEN sources listed under "External links", all from reputable aviation publications (not by Boeing fans!), all posted online. Those are called verifiable sources, and are enough to substantiate the article. As to the "797", one of the sources (if not, it's on th Y1 page), mentions the designation in conjunction with the Y1/737RS program. I will try to put a mention in the Y1 page (with a cite), and redirect the link there. THanks. - BillCJ 17:45, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dispute Tag Added

Is this project even real? Dropal 03:14, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Since we have referenced sources, yes. The 787 is the first of three elements of Yellowstone. Are you unable to read cited sources? I removed the unnecessary and inappropriate tag. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 10:12, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Expansion tag

I removed the {{tl}expansion}} tag from the Talk Page, which ghad been added in April '06. I assume they wanted the article to be expanded. However, as that still has not happened (lack of content to expend with, most likely), I have proposed a merger with the Y1 and Y3 pages (see below). - BillCJ 17:53, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Requested merger

Boeing Y1 and Boeing Y3 → Boeing Yellowstone Project I assume when these pages were added, it was thought that we would have much more info by this time. However, as all 3 pages are still stubs, it would be best to keep them on one page at this time. - BillCJ 17:53, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

Add  * '''Support'''  or  * '''Oppose'''  on a new line followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.

[edit] Survey - Support votes

• Support - As detailed above. - BillCJ 17:53, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support - As detailed above. —Jonathan D. Parshall (Talk | contribs) 05:06, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support - Y3 - There is not enough information about this project, which is most likely still 10 years away, to give it its own article at this time. Nick Moss 06:39, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Survey - Oppose votes

• Oppose - Y1 - I believe there is enough information on the Y1/737RS, which I expect will be launched within the next 2-3 years, to support its own article. Nick Moss 06:39, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose - Y1 - I think that as more information on this project becomes available, people will be looking for a specific article instead of a more general page.
• Oppose - Y1 - We are discussing a merge right before Y1 should theoretically get rolling. All cues (from cited articles) suggest that the project begin in earnest around the time the 787 project is completed, which is nearing. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 23:05, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

The Y1 artcle is longer than the other 2 at this time, but it's addition here would help to fill out the combined article nicely. As we near launch, much more info should start to come out, at which time the info could be split off again, possibly to a differnt name than Y1. In the mean time, is the Y1 page more or less likely to remain about the same size? Can we really know the answer? I have no problem mergingthe Y3 in alone, I just don't want to leave the Y1 page where it is, and have it not grow for 2 years. - BillCJ 07:03, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I have merged the Y3 article in to this one, given there doesn't seem to be any disagreement on that front, and that the article had no content that was not already covered here. I have left the Y1 article as is, given there isn't a consensus on whether it should be merged here, or retained as its own article. Personally, I don't think we'll see the Y1 page remain static for 2 years - I would be very surprised if more information didn't start emerging about Boeing's 737 replacement studies this year.Nick Moss 01:35, 10 February 2007 (UTC)