Talk:Embraer

Embraer 175 or Embraer E175 ?

@RickyCourtney: Back in October 2021 you made this edit removing the 'E' prefix from the entire E-jet range (E170 to E195). Has there been any discussion about this naming policy, either here or elsewhere? Do you still believe it to be correct?

Just a heads-up, I am going to disagree, and I will bring plenty of examples, not least of which are the number of sources all talking about Finnair recently ordering up to 46 Embraer E195-E2 aircraft. One of those sources is Embraer's own Media Center! Other sources include United, KLM, Luxair, aviationinfo.org, skybrary.aero, simpleflying.com, and Aviation Week

Embraer Media Center, March 23, 2026 - Finnair selects Embraer E195-E2
Embraer Press Release, February 28, 2018 - Embraer E190-E2 granted certification by ANAC, FAA and EASA
Aviation Week - Marathon Airlines Adds Fourth Embraer E195
Aviation Week - South Africa's Airlink Expands Reach With New Embraer E195-E2 Fleet
Aviation Week - Air Serbia Completes Fleet Modernization With Final Embraer E195-E1 Delivery
United Airlines Embraer E-175 (not a perfect example, I should have used American Airlines, meh!)

WendlingCrusader (talk) 02:38, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

First off, I welcome this conversation and I want to make it clear that I’m open minded, I’m not dead set either way, but some consistency would be nice.

Secondly, I think it’s going to be hard to establish a definitive common name because Embraer’s communications has been all over the place.

I based my initial changes based on a few official Embraer sources:

• Airport Planning Manual
• Audited Financial Prospectus
• Q425 Backlog and Deliveries

I would consider these sources more authoritative than the marketing materials, as the Airport Planning Manual is a long-standing official document, and financial statements are audited and tend to have more internal review, with more "eyes" checking every line.

Pinging those involved prior discussions: User:Canterbury Tail, User:Dfadden RickyCourtney (talk) 02:53, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. As i mentioned previously, I consider financial reports and airport planning manuals pretty niche, except within the industry. But more importantly, these are primary sources published by Embraer. WP:PSTS tells us that primary sources should be treated with care, supported by reliable secondary sources and not given undue weight. So my interpretation of policy is that those sources, at least in a wikipedia context are less authoritative than secondary sources, including the articles mentioned above by @WendlingCrusader from publications like Aviation Week. (I'd caution against Simple Flying sources though, there has been some debate on wikipedia about that particular outlet's reliability). Dfadden (talk) 01:58, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Returning to @RickyCourtney's list of sources; note that these are not pure English-language sources; they are in-house translations of Embraer's original Portuguese documents? For instance the Q425 Backlog and Deliveries PDF is marked "ri.embraer.com.br/en"

This is the original Portuguese version; CARTEIRA DE PEDIDOS & ENTREGAS 4T25

Maybe I am nit-picking, but just supposing Embraer had not translated it in-house, how would we approach these documents? WP:NONENG ?

Yes, of course I accept that Embraer's preferred presentation is unlikely to change through translation; but could it be another nail in the which sources do we prefer coffin? Probably not...

FWIW I am raising a similar issue regarding Czech manufacturer LET, who appear to have dropped the hyphen from Let L-410 Turbolet, specifically in literature that is derived from their own language. The Czech alphabet is full of háčeks and other diacritics, and they do not use Q, W and X. Maybe they don't use hyphens either? But English language media does, and invariably names the aircraft type as "L-410", regardless of LET's own preference. Sorry - I'm digressing!

WendlingCrusader (talk) 13:21, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

A full month has elapsed, which is time enough for any further input. To add to the comments above, I will note that there seems to be no problem with the Embraer EMB 110 Bandeirante & associated family (EMB 120, etc) where it is perfectly clear that "EMB" stands for Embraer. Likewise the Embraer Embraer EMB 312 Tucano is never identified as just the "Embraer 312" (except as a redirect here on Wikipedia!)

Hence I will now revert back to the designations in place up until October 2021, as described above.

WendlingCrusader (talk) 14:01, 17 May 2026 (UTC)