Talk:Aerolíneas Argentinas

Unsignes comments

Which is the goal of these unsigned, "personal" comments made in spanish (and left untranslated), in an encyclopedia written in english? Can anyone please explain? Thanks, DPdH (talk) 12:17, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Comet Picture

I like the picture, but its a BOAC comet, not an Aerolinas Argentinas one. Anyone else noticed this? --w2ch00

Fleet

I don't think that stating that the 747-400 being put in service are used but "modern". They are used and old. The 747-400 is an airplane that has almost 20 years since launched. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.217.226.71 (talk) 21:01, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Fleet/Destinations info all wrong

OK so someone is messing up with the fleet info. We don't fly or plan to fly to Asia, nor have any 773 on order. Check the news for the latest fleet announcements made by Marsans (so not AR). Also there are less 747s operational (3 -400 and 1 -200), the 340 fleet should be sub divided in 4 -200 and 1 -300 for making it clear, and we certainly don't have 35 737s working! This is not a simple rant, I edited the page but it came back like before, and I can't make any editing anymore, for whatever reason. Oh, Having 3 flights a week to Bogotá/Auckland hardly makes them FOCUS CITITES!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.114.249.226 (talk) 01:19, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey, Whisper To Me, I don't know how to reply by PM. Fine, keep the cholera part if you think it's worth it. But either you or someone else is messing with the fleet info, and worst, adding wrong info about future destinations like ASIA. How come? do you people have any idea of what you're doing? now that I call vandalizing —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mal karma (talk • contribs) 06:01, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, the answer is to find a source (I.E. the Aerolineas Argentinas timetable), cite it (give a URL), and *revise* the destination list. For the fleet, find a source for the new fleet information. The Aerolineas Argentinas website is a Wikipedia:Reliable source, so please use that for destinations. I do not know if the fleet info is also on the AA site. WhisperToMe 06:03, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

There is no timetable. The destinations can be found at the website. And while so is the fleet info, trust me, we don't have that many aircraft operational. Just give me a proof that we are going to fly to asia. Yeah, we, I freaking work there. Don't tell me to find a URL or a source when a lot of info is simply wrong and made up. I am not vandalizing, I'm correcting the wrong info. VERY WRONG INFO. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mal karma (talk • contribs) 06:09, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Here's the link, sorry but I don't know how to post properly.

http://www.airfleets.net/flottecie/Aerolineas%20Argentinas.htm

Remember, the MDs were transferred to AU in exchange of some 732s, so they do not appear, and any aircraft is ordered by Marsans, not AR, meaning that those planes may come in different numbers, if come at all. Mal karma 06:14, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Wrong information

The firm incurred massive debt, and operating profits were not realized. Iberia bought from Aerolíneas Argentinas two 10-year old Boeing 707 aircraft for the price of US$1.57 each.

Those were some cheap aircrafts. Is that information correct? James Hetfield (talk · contribs)

I don't recall real figures, but it was widely commented that Iberia transferred capital from Aerolineas. It would be nice to have a source for the fugures quoted. By the way, sometimes a "nominal" value is used in transactions of this type (need to find facts, eg when the USAF ceded Sabres F-86 to the FArArg). Regards, DPdH (talk) 12:12, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

"Neutrality" tag - Why?

Can anyone please explain why this article is tagged as "non neutral"? I've read it and could not find an "advertisement" style, nor any evicence of a "tendency" being supported. Maybe quoting/referencing is not adequate enough, but the content does not seem (IMHO) to support any aprticular point of view.
Having said that, I couldn't find also in this discussion page any rationale supporting the current "tagging". Maybe it would be adequate to replace these tags with one related to "Cleanup Required". Regards, DPdH (talk) 12:26, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Have you ever actually flown this airline? This is too positive about an airline that is largely perceived(by the majority of its passengers) to be poorly run and has very poor passenger service(cancellations, delays) and a very old fleet(one of the oldest in the world). John

• • Wikipedia is not a vehicle for people to give subjects positive nor negative views. If there is a link with a percentage of late flights for Aerolineas then you can put the percentage here and provide the link, but plainly saying it is one of the worst at anything, that is point of view. That said, those were the only lines where I saw the POV tag could be placed for, and I removed them, it would be more appropiate if you said "according to (source+internet link), only 5 percent of Aerolineas' flights go on time."

Antonio Sexy Pervert Martin

Here you go, dont really see the point though because somebody keeps editing this article by removing anything negative. http://www.expediacorporate.com/daily/edit/alerts/October/2007_November8_ARCancelsFlights.asp —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.240.146.75 (talk) 02:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

So? it's only one link saying some very old news. This page can easily become an AR bashing forum if things like that are allowed. Besides, I don't think most people editing here travel AR much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mal karma (talk • contribs) 03:44, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Much being the appropriate word because one flight with AA is enough, I'll never go back, LAN's service is far superior and a heck of alot more reliable. Rgs Patsy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.240.146.75 (talk) 02:27, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

This is about tag cleanup. As all of the tags are more than a year old, there is no current discussion relating to them, and there is a great deal of editing done since the tags were placed, they will be removed. This is not a judgement of content. If there is cause to re-tag, then that of course may be done, with the necessary posting of a discussion as to why, and what improvements could be made. This is only an effort to clean out old tags, and permit them to be updated with current issues if warranted.Jjdon (talk) 00:02, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi All, it seems to me that some people are using Wikipedia to vent frustrations experienced as passengers of this airline. This is not a forum for that, I'm afraid.
To "John" and "Patsy": I've flown several times this airline, both international and domestic routes. I have my own opinion of its service (ups and downs), which cannot be supported with facts and verifiable sources as Wikipedia requires. And as I've also flown other domestic and foreign airlines, I can compare (my own) experiences. So I believe that Aerolineas is not much worse (or better) than most other airlines currently flying. Kind Regards, DPdH (talk) 02:25, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

2008 Renationalization

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7518674.stm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.235.251.198 (talk) 07:15, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Allegations of corruption and mismanagement

Some pretty serious sources should be cited to substantiate these accusations if they are to be mentioned on an encyclopedia. Codik (talk) 16:44, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

fake website

Although it's been reverted a long time ago, I'd like to point out that someone with the IP: 76.167.244.236 changed the URL of four different airlines to a fake website claiming to be the english webpage. These websites were actually of a travel agency that has domain names similar to those of the airlines. I'm guessing that this might happen again (given a commercial interest). I don't know if there's any use in blocking this IP now, but I leave this note so that if someone finds an odd link like I did (on the Santa Bárbara Airlines article) they can be sure that it's a fake and revert it. JunCTionS 00:53, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

History of Aerolineas

I've found difficult to find additional "verifiable" historical sources about this airline. A good (albeit brief) article I've found is in the argentinian aeronautical magazine "Aeroespacio"; I've included the link in the "External links" section of this article and I'm copying it below:

• (online) Article about 50th anniversary of "Aerolineas Argentinas" - Los 50 de Aerolíneas Argentinas, "Aeroespacio" Issue 538, Nov/Dec 2000. (in spanish)

Will keep looking for more historical info, to improve the corresponding section of this article. Regards, DPdH (talk) 16:06, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

• I already edited the Privatisation sub-section including (I believe) reliable information included in a number of sources. Can anybody draw me some lines with an opinion? --Jetstreamer (talk) 20:51, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

embraer

why is no mention of embraer deal ? [1] --Jor70 (talk) 22:41, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

There is no mention as this article contains fleet information for Aerolineas Argentinas fleet, as for the Embraer order is for Austral as subsidary for the airline. See Austral as it is stated under there. Zaps93 (talk) 23:02, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Thks --Jor70 (talk) 00:33, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Movies on flights?

I heard that they aren't showing movies on flights to Australia anymore. To save money. Is that true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aidanb (talk • contribs) 06:29, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Spanish hub?

Whatever happened to Aerolineas Argentinas' Spain hub? I believe it was in Santiago de Compostela and they flew Boeing 737's to England. --Antonio el Che de Caguas Martin (dimelo!!!) 03:04, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

• I am not sure. It may have been dismantled when AR decided to rely on European partners... WhisperToMe (talk) 23:35, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Alternate URL

http://www.aerolineas.com.ar WhisperToMe (talk) 23:35, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

“Early years to privatisation” section

Please do not add information that is not verifiable by third-party sources. As per Wikipedia policies, all information not meeting with this criteria is subject to prompt delete. Thanks.--Jetstreamer (talk) 15:00, 4 May 2011 (UTC)