Talk:Boom Overture

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.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Requested move 13 July 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Andrewa (talk) 04:05, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Boom Overture → Boom Technology Overture – Boom Technology is a manufacturer of this aeroplane. Therefore, according to the WP:AIR/NC, this should be renamed Boom Supersonic Overture. Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 05:07, 13 July 2020 (UTC)—Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 05:44, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose for now - Leaving out "Technology" is more WP:Consise. We include it in the company's name because we a disambiguation page at Boom, as the company isn't the primary topic, and using "Technology" (or "Supersonic") is a natural disambiguator. - BilCat (talk) 05:39, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per BilCat. —Mdaniels5757 (talk) 20:27, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

designed to be like a 75% scale model of Concorde:

For those who never saw Concorde in person: it was much smaller than you probably think it was. A 3/4 size plane will be really small, maybe 3 passengers per row at best. 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:F1D2:9E1D:C125:3853 (talk) 08:39, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's where the "like" part comes in, as it's obviously not an exact scale-down. BilCat (talk) 20:54, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Engines

The following sentence makes no sense: "The International Council on Clean Transportation estimated the plane would burn at least three times as much fuel as a subsonic business-class passenger."