Talk:Hawker Beechcraft

message: I'd like to update the current state of the Hawker Beechcraft page with additional historic information to accurately reflect the company's history and update out of date information. I've declared my conflict of interest here and would like the editor to review my suggested edits.  
The first thing I'd like to update is the number of employees stated. Currently, there are 6,600 employees at HBC. The 7,000 listed right now is not accurate. Here is the reference. If you need another third party reference, I can supply that. Career Builder page
:I don't have a problem with updating the employee number but the page you have cited doesn't give a number. The "company facts" page linked from there says 8000 employees, but the website is so strangely organized for URLs that the page can't be cited on its own. Do you have a ref that says 6600? - Ahunt (talk) 01:25, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for the feedback. Will this link suffice for the number of employees? HBC Investor Relations Ericacenci (talk) 15:02, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It is fine as a ref, but it says the company has 8000 employees! Is it out of date? - Ahunt (talk) 15:05, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the update. Can we differentiate the numbers by location? Perhaps something like "Employees 8000 Worldwide; 6300 U.S. Headquarters (2010)". Ericacenci (talk) 16:51, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure that will work - I have gone ahead and added that with the ref, see what you think! - Ahunt (talk) 17:18, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  History updates 

message: Thanks for uploading that new version of the company logo - looks better! - Ahunt (talk) 17:56, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Logo

message: ===Civil===
There are two Hawker products that do not have Wikipedia articles (or they are not linked in this article).  
The Hawker 900XP - was redirected to the Hawker 800 article. Shouldn't there be its own page for this and a link to the product on this page? The specifications for the model are here: http://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com/hawker/900xp/specifications.aspx and I can find additional sources, if needed.
This is also the case for the Hawker 750. I believe there should be a link to these two products in this particular HBC article as they are both seperate jets. Source: http://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com/hawker/750/specifications.aspx Again, let me know if I need to supply additional information/sources on each unit to help build the content for each respective article.
King Air 350 -- The current iteration of this the King Air 350i. Is there a way to reflect that in this article? Or have this edited as King Air 350i? http://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com/beechcraft/king_air_350i/specifications.aspx Let me know your thoughts on this. 
Thanks! Ericacenci (talk) 13:56, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I had a look though these types and have added specific links to them. On Wikipedia we don't generally have new article pages for sub-variants of other aircraft and the Beechcraft King Air 350i is covered in the Beechcraft Super King Air article while the 750 and 900XP are variants of the Hawker 800 and are described in that article. If you think more could be said about them then additional text and refs could be added to those articles. - Ahunt (talk) 20:31, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: To add, if that additional information causes the specific variant's coverage to dominate the article, then a split would be warranted. Another consideration is Specs, since we usually only have specs for one variant in non-airliner articles. If the varints differ to the point that covering the specs in the main text is not sufficient, then considering a split is also warranted. - BilCat (talk) 20:55, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the add. I think that is great and understand your points. I'll review and see if there is anything else to add to the article and will review the specs to see how that might look. Thanks again Ericacenci (talk) 22:32, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Products

message: There are two Hawker products that do not have Wikipedia articles (or they are not linked in this article).  
The Hawker 900XP - was redirected to the Hawker 800 article. Shouldn't there be its own page for this and a link to the product on this page? The specifications for the model are here: http://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com/hawker/900xp/specifications.aspx and I can find additional sources, if needed.
This is also the case for the Hawker 750. I believe there should be a link to these two products in this particular HBC article as they are both seperate jets. Source: http://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com/hawker/750/specifications.aspx Again, let me know if I need to supply additional information/sources on each unit to help build the content for each respective article.
King Air 350 -- The current iteration of this the King Air 350i. Is there a way to reflect that in this article? Or have this edited as King Air 350i? http://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com/beechcraft/king_air_350i/specifications.aspx Let me know your thoughts on this. 
Thanks! Ericacenci (talk) 13:56, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I had a look though these types and have added specific links to them. On Wikipedia we don't generally have new article pages for sub-variants of other aircraft and the Beechcraft King Air 350i is covered in the Beechcraft Super King Air article while the 750 and 900XP are variants of the Hawker 800 and are described in that article. If you think more could be said about them then additional text and refs could be added to those articles. - Ahunt (talk) 20:31, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: To add, if that additional information causes the specific variant's coverage to dominate the article, then a split would be warranted. Another consideration is Specs, since we usually only have specs for one variant in non-airliner articles. If the varints differ to the point that covering the specs in the main text is not sufficient, then considering a split is also warranted. - BilCat (talk) 20:55, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the add. I think that is great and understand your points. I'll review and see if there is anything else to add to the article and will review the specs to see how that might look. Thanks again Ericacenci (talk) 22:32, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Civil

message: C-6 Ute/U-21 Ute and T-34 Mentor were removed as they were built by Beech, not Hawker Beechcraft.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aeroweanie (talk • contribs) 21:31, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, thanks for the explanation. In future please indicate why you are doing things in the edit summary, it is the box right above the "submit" button. If you remove text and don't add an edit summary as explanation some editors may mistake your edits for vandalism. - Ahunt (talk) 21:34, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Any particularly reason why those two have been removed as some of the other Beechcraft products built before 2006 have not been removed for example the Baron? MilborneOne (talk) 22:12, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The Baron is still in production today. - Ahunt (talk) 22:14, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: OK understood all the others have been produced since 2006. MilborneOne (talk) 22:17, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Link removal

message: The following are links that you can use to improve the article:
* "Hawker Beechcraft bankruptcy plan outlines 3 options"; The Wichita-Eagle; June 17, 2012. --- • Sbmeirow • Talk •  02:55, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links 

message: It now seems clear from the bankruptcy proceedings that the company will soon be renamed Beechcraft Corporation, but will be a much smaller company, with fewer employees and no jet line. I am not sure whether we should rename this article or tie this one up at the end of the bankruptcy and start a new article at Beechcraft Corporation. What does everyone else think? - Ahunt (talk) 15:12, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not certain either. This article also covers the time that the company was "Raytheon Aircraft". I don't think we need a new article for "Beechcraft Corporation", so moving this page to that title is one option. Another option is tie tie this one up, but to just use the main Beechcraft page, especially since the new, smaller company will mainly be concerned with the Beechcraft products. - BilCat (talk) 15:27, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Those are all possibilities! It looks like it will be early in the new year before the company emerges from bankruptcy and is renamed, so I think we have a little time to decide yet. Whatever we decide we will have to tie in the Beechcraft article one way or the other. - Ahunt (talk) 18:45, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Any further thoughts yet on how to handle the restructuring? I'm still undecided, but leaning towards tying this one up, and handling the new company at the main Beechcraft article. - BilCat (talk) 01:38, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: That solution does make sense. We would have to write some "bridge" text there to explain things, but it could be done fairly easily. I think my previous idea of a new article at Beechcraft Corporation would just confuse things unless we create a good nav box that will explain it all. In a way that solution would still leave the Beechcraft article hanging, though, so I like your suggestion better. This Hawker Beechcraft article could then be wrapped up when the bankruptcy legally ends, probably at the end of March and Beechcraft Corporation made a redirect to Beechcraft. - Ahunt (talk) 12:05, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like that day has arrived! The bankruptcy exit is today. I have updated the article text and added a ref, although it needs some serious clean up and consolidation now. I am thinking that the previous idea of sewing up this article at this event and continuing the story at Beechcraft is the best way to proceed. Beechcraft Corporation should become a redirect to Beechcraft. Thoughts? - Ahunt (talk) 12:22, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Works for me. - BilCat (talk) 13:42, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I don't mind working on this article, if you are interested in taking the story forward in Beechcraft. Beechcraft Corporation is now redirected to Beechcraft. - Ahunt (talk) 18:17, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I've updated the infobox, and tried to expand the lead, but the main text still needs a paragraph on the banruptcy. - BilCat (talk) 01:29, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  - See what you think. - Ahunt (talk) 02:34, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good, thanks. - BilCat (talk) 02:36, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Happy to help! Thanks for your work here in figuring out what to do at the end of the bankruptcy. - Ahunt (talk) 02:39, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Article name

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Hawker Beechcraft. 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/20090207144459/http://www.forbes.com:80/feeds/ap/2009/02/03/ap6003135.html to http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2009/02/03/ap6003135.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, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: - Ahunt (talk) 20:03, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Hawker Beechcraft. 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/20121026103529/http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2007/03/26/afx3552267.html to http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2007/03/26/afx3552267.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 09:04, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Reverted, the link is "404", as are all the other archives. - Ahunt (talk) 16:38, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Hawker Beechcraft. 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/20121026103529/http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2007/03/26/afx3552267.html to http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2007/03/26/afx3552267.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 08:24, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Hawker Beechcraft. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120519161459/http://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com/include/content_view.aspx?id=14117 to http://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com/include/content_view.aspx?id=14117
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110728184408/http://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com/include/content_view.aspx?id=11779l to http://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com/include/content_view.aspx?id=11779l
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090929001648/http://www.kake.com/home/headlines/61507312.html to http://www.kake.com/home/headlines/61507312.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071121013105/http://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com/ to http://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071121013105/http://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com/ to http://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130624215039/http://www.wingsoverkansas.com/avmfg/default.asp?avmfg=beechcraft to http://www.wingsoverkansas.com/avmfg/default.asp?avmfg=beechcraft
*Added  tag to http://ka100aviation.org/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:04, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Hawker Beechcraft. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100818104138/http://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com/investor_relations/faq/ to http://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com/investor_relations/faq/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:33, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified