Talk:Sikorsky Aircraft

message: I am requesting that the category, Military in Connecticut be added to the list of categories for the page Sikorsky Aircraft.  The category Military in Connecticut is not limited to military units.  The category Military units and formations in Connecticut is specifically for just military units.  The category Military in Connecticut is a broad category that covers all military related topics in Connecticut, to include military people, military history, battles, domestic emergency responses and defense contractors.  Sikorsky Aircraft has a long history of providing military aircraft to the United States Armed Forces and the Armed Forces of nations around the globe.  They have a great history with the State of Connecticut.  This category is very logical.
So stop removing it.  There is no advantage to not including it with the rest of Connecticut's military community and history.Hobbamock (talk) 20:01, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Sikorksy Aircraft is a civilian company it is not part of the military, it is not a military formation and by any definition is not military. Military in foo categories is not a category for companies defence contractors are not part of the military, so why they should be considered to be part of the military just in Connecticut doesnt appear to be logically and would just confuse the reader. Also note your addition of the category has been challenged you should not keep adding it without consensus as this could be considered disruptive, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 18:17, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

text: Sikorsky Aircraft is a defense contractor and aerospace corporation and not a part of the military.  A category with company or corporation in the name would be more fitting here, e.g. Category:Defense companies in Connecticut or Category:Military companies in Connecticut.    Some existing US-wide categories like this are :Category:Defense companies of the United States or  :Category:Aerospace companies of the United States. -Fnlayson (talk) 18:42, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, the company is not military, it is a civil company and should not be categorized as "Military in Connecticut". It doesn't belong and is a misuse of a category. - Ahunt (talk) 19:18, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: For info: This editor has been adding a :Category:Military in Connecticut tag to lots of articles for which it is even less appropriate than it is on this article (e.g. Hartford circus fire) and to categories like :Category:Disasters in Connecticut. (S)he appears to have little understanding of wp categorization. DexDor (talk) 21:32, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Tens of thousands of companies have had contracts with various nation's armed forces and provided services to their members - Should we start tagging McDonalds as part of the US Military as they have hundreds of outlets inside of military compounds to feed their troops? Businesses aren't a part of the military, regardless of their level of engagement; in my opinion the use of the category is being equally, and therefore correctly, applied. Kyteto (talk) 03:00, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding Category:Military in Connecticut 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Sikorsky Aircraft. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100329101947/http://www.sikorskyarchives.com:80/train.html to http://sikorskyarchives.com/train.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:50, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Sikorsky Aircraft. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090702104052/http://www.sikorsky.com:80/vgn-ext-templating-SIK/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=2dd9e39d40a78110VgnVCM1000001382000aRCRD to http://www.sikorsky.com/vgn-ext-templating-SIK/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=2dd9e39d40a78110VgnVCM1000001382000aRCRD
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080410040550/http://www.sacusa.com/Closing_Press_Release.PDF to http://www.sacusa.com/Closing_Press_Release.PDF
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100611091515/http://www.flightglobal.com:80/articles/2010/06/08/342785/sikorsky-breathes-new-life-into-pzl-mielec.html to http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/06/08/342785/sikorsky-breathes-new-life-into-pzl-mielec.html
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110110110549/http://www.sikorsky.com/About+Sikorsky/News/Press+Details?pressvcmid=ec821075c9257210VgnVCM1000004f62529fRCRD to http://www.sikorsky.com/About+Sikorsky/News/Press+Details?pressvcmid=ec821075c9257210VgnVCM1000004f62529fRCRD
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100329101947/http://www.sikorskyarchives.com:80/train.html to http://sikorskyarchives.com/train.html
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100329101947/http://www.sikorskyarchives.com:80/train.html to http://sikorskyarchives.com/train.html
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100312071527/http://www.sikorskyarchives.com:80/boat2.html to http://sikorskyarchives.com/boat2.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:07, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: the sikorsky global helicopters corporate brand is no longer in use. hence,  Dog-Patch Zero-Six (talk) 19:21, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a source for that to update the article? A section or inline tag would be more fitting for this instead. --Finlayson (talk) 20:15, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sikorsky Global Helicopters 

message: I work at Sikorsky Aircraft and today March 5, 2018 we are celebrating the 95th Aniversary of our company, not the 93rd.
Yes, Igor Sikorsky founded his company on March 5, 1923 as "The Sikorsky Aero Engineering Corporation"1 and later renamed to it "Sikorsky Manufacturing Corporation" in 1925.
However, the current Wikipedia article on "The Boeing Company" states that it was founded by William Boeing "on July 15, 1916, as "Pacific Aero Products Co" and " On May 9, 1917, the company became the "Boeing Airplane Company". Later the company was renamed again as "Boeing Aircraft Company" in 1961 and then again renamed "the Boeing Company" in 1997.   Despite all these name changes Wikipedia considers "the Boeing Company" as having been founded in 1916 and correctly so.
To be consistent this article should state the founding date of Sikorsky Aircraft company as March 5, 1923, not 1925, perhaps with parathesis (as The Sikorsky Aero Engineering Corporation).
Mcrodgers2 (talk) 19:02, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: That's definitely odd. Previously, Sikorsky claimed 1925 as its date of founding here, which is the source of the year in this article. Looks like some history revisioning going on for some reason. - BilCat (talk) 19:13, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

text: The link you provided does say "...establish(ed) The Sikorsky Manufacturing Corporation in 1925 on Long Island, New York..."  That is correct.  But "The Sikorsky Aero Engineering Corporation" did proceed that and was the original name given by "the Founder" Igor Sikorsky in 1923.    At least the name Sikorsky appears in all the company names unlike the name of William Boeing's first aircraft company.  I still consider "Pacific Aero Products Co" (1916) to be the first incarnation of Boeing.  One could argue it was instead "Boeing Airplane Company" in 1917 just because of the original name did not contain the word "Boeing".  You can't make that same argument about Sikorsky. Mcrodgers2 (talk) 19:47, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Mcrodgers2 and BilCat, The link above and a book I have at home will be enough to change this in the article. Give me a little time and I'll change/add inline citation. Thanks for bringing this up Mcrodgers2. - Samf4u (talk)  20:06, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  - Samf4u (talk)  18:49, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Founded 1923 not 1925. 

message: Hello! Just curious, but does the lack of year number mean that the year production stopped is unknown? If so, we should make it more clear, possibly by adding "unknown" into the table. ElToAn123 (talk) 11:26, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say leaving it blank is better, as it encourages editors to fill it in;  makes it sound like the information just isn't out there when it probably is. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 16:40, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Helicopters, production