Talk:Embraer Lineage 1000
Add topic | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||
 |
This article contains broken links to one or more target anchors:
The anchors may have been removed, renamed, or are no longer valid. Please fix them by following the link above, checking the page history of the target pages, or updating the links. Remove this template after the problem is fixed | Report an error |
Separate from Embraer E-Jets
[edit]Does this need to be separate? 90% of the content is the same as the parent article. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 04:42, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
- There was recently a discussion on WikiProject aircraft about the E-jets, and if they should be separated. It was decided to keep the 170/190 under one page, but give the Lineage its own page. If you want to bring that discussion back to life, do so at WikiProject Aircraft, as to get more opinions on the matter. Personally, I think the Lineage should be its own page, falling under the same category as the Legacy and the BBJ... --KPWM_Spotter 14:12, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
Lineage 1000
[edit]All the sources I can find show that the proper name for the aircraft is "Lineage 1000", so the proper name for the article is as such. I've moved the article over the redirect. If there are any beefs, please drop a note on my talk page. AKRadecki 01:51, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
Significant popularity?
[edit]"The aircraft has gained significant popularity in the Middle East as several operators have taken delivery or have ordered the Lineage 1000."
With THREE aircraft built in FIVE years I don't think it can be called "popular". But it does qualify as advertisement. Or, actually, misrepresentation. BadaBoom (talk) 17:26, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Main image change
[edit]
current, on ground
proposed, flying
.jpg)
--Marc Lacoste (talk) 14:13, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
- While flying does look better, the proposed picture has a noticeable lower quality on big screens. That said the Image currently used has some background screen tearing too. I would leave it as is. Redalert2fan (talk) 18:02, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
- Current is 1200px wide, proposed is 1024px, a 17% difference, (or printed on A5, 145dpi vs 124) not sure it's worth keeping a grounded plane. No matter the choice, it would be interim till we have a left pointing, flying aircraft picture.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 19:20, 2 November 2016 (UTC)