Talk:Bristol Airport

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


CO flights to New York[edit]

Is it worthwhile introducing any information on the soon-to-exist scheduled flight to New York? Estel 1422 13 Sep 2004 (UST)

Well, it's nearer the time now. Added short bit. Nick04 11:23, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

British Airways - BA Connect & GB Airways[edit]

Checking on the G-INFO site, BA Connect is no longer based on the Isle of Man, but at Exeter as part of Walker Aviation (the holding company for Flybe). Flybe issued a press release stating that they would be terminating all the BA Connect services as of the 25 March 2007 - which happened. The remaining BA branded service from Bristol is a franchised service operated by GB Airways. Former BA operated BA Connect services, that are now with Flybe are showing on the BA Web site as a code-share for 6 months as part of the transistion arrangements.

It will be noticed that the BA Connect fleet (as part of Walker Aviation) will diminish over the next few weeks as Flybe phase out the EMB145 and DH8-300. The BAe 146 are being transfered to Flybe. --Stewart 07:46, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from User talk:Pencefn
== BA Connect ==
As a Manager at BA, I can assure you that BA connect does still exist, GB airways still operates under this branding from Bristol, Nottingham East Midlands, Manchester. Please See BA.com for more info, or at GB airways: http://www.gbairways.com/flying-withus/baconnect/baconnect-summary/ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.141.204.92 (talk) 08:32, 29 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]
And thoughts on this comment......
From GB Airways website:-
The Franchise Agreement
GB Airways, although a privately owned airline, flies as British Airways which means the aircraft are painted in BA livery, our cabin crew wear BA uniforms and on board the service is the same as any other British Airways flight.
Depending on whether your flight is from London or one of the regional airports, service is BA Club Europe and Euro Traveller or BA Connect. You still earn BA Miles and GB Airways is a member of the oneworld global alliance.
The first sentence in this section states that GB Airways, although a privately owned airline, flies as British Airways. The second paragraph statens that the service provided is BA Connect.
To my mind as the old BA Connect was a wholly owned BA subsidary operated in the BA colours with BA Connect service. The description quoted above leads me to understand that the BA Connect that is quoted here is the BA Connect service (i.e. buy on board service), compare with BA Club Europe and Euro Traveller. The BA Connect buisness was sold to Walker Aviation. If British Airways and their franchise partners chose to name a service BA Connect then so be it. This indicates that BA Club Europe and Euro Traveller service could be on board an aircraft, not the name of the company operating the service; or the company the service is franchised by. --13:50, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Flybe[edit]

to be fair it does say here http://www.bristolairport.co.uk/flight_information/destinations/times.aspx?destination=BRU that they fly to brussles. --Mark999 19:03, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

However this is a codeshare flight. The Flybe web site does not offer the ability to book these flights. --Stewart (talk) 15:42, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sections 1.3/1.4 - Sale/Resale[edit]

I find the whole section titled History - Bristol International Airport (1.4) very confusing. First it indicates that Bristol City Council (BCC) sold the airport outright in 1996 [to whom?]. However, the previous section implied that it had already been sold to Bristol Airport plc in 1987 - The only way I can make sense of this is to presume that was just a name-shuffle and Bristol Airport plc was a wholly-owned subsidiary of BCC.

However, if we appear to have solved that mystery, after the following sentence the article states that in December 1997 a 51% stake was sold to FirstGroup with BCC retaining 49%... How does this work if BCC had already sold the darn thing a year ago? Did they sell it and buy it back [if so why]? Or is it that the article is poorly worded and what is actually meant is that a majority share was advertised for sale in 1996 but was not completed until December 1997?

Finally, The airport was bought by Macquarie Bank and Cintra [Macq/Cin] in January 2001 for £198m seems fine, but this statement is actually quite lacking as there are 5 possibilities (assuming only FirstGroup, BCC and Macq./Cintra involvement):
[assume X>51%, Y<49%]
1. was this the majority share previously owned by First (leaving ownership as Macq/Cin 51%, BCC 49%)?
2. have they now bought the airport outright (ownership Macq/Cin 100%?)
3. did First sell up and BCC further reduce their stake? (ownership Macq/Cin X% BCC Y%)
4. did BCC sell up and First reduce their stake? (ownership Macq/Cin X% First Y%)
5. or is this purchase of the BCC stake (ownership First 51% Macq/Cin 49%)

Information on Bristol Airport's website would imply that option 2 is correct, but seems slightly unclear to me. The natural conclusion reached from the article is also that of option 2, but this could do with clarification.

And to cap it all, none of the history of the modern airport (since 1957) cites any references at all! If there were just one or two I might be able to answer my own questions.

I hope someone out there knows the answers or at least how to find them, because as it stands, this rather important section is very difficult to follow! I appreciate many people will have spent much time trying to get this article to where it is today, but all I wanted to do was to check if BCC still owned any of the airport or not, and the only reliable answer I could come up with was 'probably not', which is a bit of a non-answer really!

Sorry - that's quite a lot to take in at once, but if you could point me in the right direction I'll happily do some clarification and citing myself. In the meantime, all I can do is flag the problems up. --Peeky44 (talk) 01:53, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Macquire own the airport outright with a 100% stake in it. Shazz0r (talk) 18:23, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I share your discomfort with this whole section, it is poorly worded and uncited. Current ownership is well described here. If I get time I'll do some digging, but finding online citations dating back the late 90's is pretty tough. --TimTay (talk) 18:37, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Runway[edit]

I have created this new section as the current script was placed under Shcedlued Services which made it appear misplaced. This new section is in keeping with Wikipedias policies as it is a sub-article on many other airport pages. People wishing to expand on it, for example runway directions and any other associated information, please add. (Fanrailuk (talk) 12:41, 11 November 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Jet2[edit]

Jet2 is a Thomas Cook Charter operating to Sharm El Sheikh, the flights operates on a Monday from BRS. (Plaincrazy (talk) 20:40, 17 November 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Got any references? I cannot see any web reference to Jet2. If it is a Thomas Cook flight then surely it should be "Thomas Cook operated by Jet2", or similar? --TimTay (talk) 21:16, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Destinations - lists vs tables[edit]

A couple of editors have tabulated the list of destinations. If you look at WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT it is clear that these should be presented in list format. One editor cited the talk page, stating this is evidence of consensus about using tables but I see nothing of the sort. I believe that the list of airlines and destinations should remain in list format. Let's get some consensus in this article before making any more changes. --TimTay (talk) 19:48, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that over time the consensus has changed by default. There are now a lot of articles using the table format. See also Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports#Lists or tables Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports#Destinations - lists vs tables - help appreciated for Bristol International Airport. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 22:37, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The last I saw in this discussion there was no clear consensus on tables vs lists and the advice I was given was to reach consensus on the individual article talk page. That's what I'm seeking on this page for this airport article. I'll state again that I am opposed to a two-column table being used. --TimTay (talk) 18:23, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the 2 or 3 column table looks better than the list. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 22:30, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:When to use tables - "If there is no obvious benefit to having rows and columns, then a table is probably not the best choice." - good reason not to use tables IMHO. If this were three or more columns then it might be of use to have a table but not for two --TimTay (talk) 22:43, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Lists, EVERY TIME. Tables just get in the way and if anything lower the quality of the article Shazz0r (talk) 22:58, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I also prefer the list format as recommended at WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT, over the table format which seems to be increasingly working its way in to airport articles. There is no real benefit or necessity for a table and I also think it lowers the quality of the article as it simply doesn't look very good. SempreVolando (talk) 17:28, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Table, I think a table is much better suited for this page, lists are horrible they are very easy to make you confused. They are not clear enough, but as for a table which is designed for airline destinations, then I believe it is a much more practicle choice. Zaps93 (talk) 23:50, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I really don't see why people seem to think they are neater, when they list everything in almost exactly the same way, but in a table. If anything it looks worse. Shazz0r (talk) 09:42, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Per the above, it looks like the WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT guidelines have been updated to show the table format as the preferred method of displaying airlines and destinations. Obviously the use of the table template is not mandated, but I see no reason why this article shouldn't fall in line with the guidelines, mainly because it makes sense for airport articles to display the information in the same format. Johnwalton 09:55, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But the feeling here is still that tables aren't wanted and until clear consensus is reached the default should be no change. If no consensus can be reached then we can take things elsewhere to get a solution. But my position is still for lists. --TimTay (talk) 09:58, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
to further add to the above I to feel that a Table would be better suited for this page, as having a list makes it rather confusing and makes the page look a bit messy, and is now on the wiki guidelines page for airports. Gareth Smart (talk)1105 01 April 2009 )BST

I've tried to trawl through the places where this was previously discussed, but have not been able to find where consensus was reached for its inclusion. Discussions have been moved from one Project talk page to another and also had headings changed which hinders searching. It was apparently discussed at WP:Village pump (policy), but again I've not found that. I think that the inclusion of such detailed information presents a few problems:

  1. Depending on the respective lengths of the individual articles and destination data, inclusion of such data could give undue weight.
  2. Wikipedia is not a directory
  3. Spammers (especially with single-purpose accounts) can currently easily add their favourite airline(s), without considering the inclusion of others
  4. Maintenance of up-to-date information is an issue, but this can be adequately addressed if enough editors are involved.

Alternative outlets are are also available and should be considered, e.g. spotterswiki.com, flyerguide.com. -- Trevj (talk) 10:46, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yay, a voice of reason! I despair at the plethora of bus/train/plane spotter types who seek to document every bit of minutiae possible about their chosen obsession (although sadly they never seem to want to add references to support this). If they all left and went to the sites you mention, or Wikia then Wikipedia would be much better off. --Bob Re-born (talk) 10:52, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've just seen Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports#Airline/Airport Table Voting! -- Trevj (talk) 10:55, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

SAS[edit]

What happened to the SAS routes to Stockholm and Oslo? They've run over the last couple of summers, but I can't find any evidence that they'll be operating in 2009. Has the airline withdrawn from BRS? Has there been any official announcement one way or t'other? 86.153.90.219 (talk) 17:32, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Catchment area[edit]

The masterplan[1] states that the main role of BIA is to meet the needs for air travel within the South West region... the airport also plays a role in providing air services for travellers whose journey origins or destinations are in Wales, for routes not supported at Cardiff. Given that more than 10 per cent of passengers came from Wales (Table 1) and Cardiff urban area is specifically mentioned as a source of passengers (page 176), this needs to be acknowledged in the article. Pondle (talk) 17:37, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heathrow, Gatwick and Birmingham also play a role in providing air routes for South Wales, but South Wales isn't part of their catchment area. If passengers want to go there, that's up to them but Bristol is there primarily for the South West. Cardiff is there for South, West and Mid Wales. Those are the areas they were built to serve. Reverting - if you want to take it further, call for a 3O or a consensus. Welshleprechaun (talk) 18:57, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Using Table 1 as a reliable source I would suggest that the infobox should just indicate the airport serves South West England (it is only a summary and doesnt need to list every area covered just the primary catchment area). But I would also suggest that in the lead it would not be unreasonable to say it serves South West England and Wales. This could be explained (or more exactly the 85%/10% split) later in the article if needed based on Table 1. MilborneOne (talk) 22:01, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seasonal Flights[edit]

We do not need references, start or end dates, or anything similar for recurring, seasonal flights. All of the references I removed (and whoever added them was on quite the referencing spree, and repeated basically the same reference a hundred times), were from recurring/seasonal flights. The established project standard (available at WP:Airports and WP:Airlines in case in doubt) is to simply say [seasonal] after the seasonal destination, without mentioning resumption or suspension dates. And certainly not to use the word "recommencing". Refer any other airport article, and flights will be listed as "XXX [seasonal]" everywhere. Bristol cannot be an exception for no good reason. Thanks, Jasepl (talk) 08:56, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've just had a look on the project, and yes you're quite right we don't need recommencing dates. I wasn't a fan of using that word anyway, I much prefer seasonal, but my main point of the revert was the references. I don't know how many times I've gone onto an airport page on WP with destinations listed that aren't actually served. Hence why I would prefer to maintain the refs. I can only see a "referencing spree" as doing more good than bad. Welshleprechaun (talk) 09:09, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But if we have the dates that these services resume then surely that could help people potentially plan a future holiday or trip at a glance? Gareth Smart (talk) 21:19, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is an encylopaedia, not a holiday brochure or travel guide. Welshleprechaun (talk) 23:07, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 03:44, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Bristol International Airport → Bristol Airport — Bristol International Airport changed its name today to Bristol Airport. ⇐ ǝɓpỊɹqɯɐq ʞɔỊu 10:07, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just a question - do you have a reference for the name change as other than the logo the airport website still uses Bristol International Airport and makes not mention of a name change? (also note the company that runs the airport is still called Bristol International Airport Limited) MilborneOne (talk) 11:41, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This BBC link confirms a rebranding will take place on 12 March, but doesn't mention what to. Welshleprechaun (talk) 13:13, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Bit hasty with the move Simple Bob it is still in discusion and all we have is a comment I hear that Bristol International Airport (BIA) will be rebranding itself on Friday, 12 March 2010. doesnt sound particularly reliable. We should really move it back unless somebody can find a reliable source for the name change, I would have at least expected a press release on the airport website. Apology simple bob I see you have now provided a reference. MilborneOne (talk) 14:07, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Surely as by far the primary topic, it could do without the (England). Welshleprechaun (talk) 14:31, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - The version in the UK is clearly the primary topic out of the two anyway. Jeni (talk) 19:29, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is already moved, please close the discussion. Vanjagenije (talk) 00:36, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Jeni is correct. It has not already been moved. Clearly the primary topic, but why is Bristol Airport a disambiguation page (this will need moving)? With just two options, a disambiguation page is deprecated in the Wikipedia guidelines; hat notes should be used instead. Skinsmoke (talk) 16:40, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment just to clear up the confusion the article was moved from British International Airport to Bristol Airport (England) in the middle of this discussion (the move request box just updated itself to the new name which has probably caused the confusion). Users are concerned that it may not be the best choice of name. I agee with Skinsmokes comments should be prime topic.MilborneOne (talk) 16:49, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support move to Bristol Airport as prime topic, and just have hatnotes for the disambig. But there may be more than one Bristol Airport in North America, perhaps? –– Jezhotwells (talk) 22:29, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Cancellation of Bristol/Newark service[edit]

I have just reverted a couple of editors who state that the Continental flights to/from Newark are to be cancelled on November 7th. All information on Wikipedia should be properly referenced from reliable sources. I don't see any evidence of this in the recent additions. Where is it stated that the flights are to be cancelled? --Simple Bob (talk) 13:03, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I found a reference and added it to the article. It would save a lot of trouble if people would add references as a matter of routine - that is the whole basis of how wikipedia operates. --Simple Bob (talk) 13:16, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hub for?[edit]

The standard airport infobox has the option to include which airlines have a 'hub' at Bristol. I think it is being slightly misused (across Wikipedia, as well as here) because so few airlines satisfy the definition of having 'Hub airports' (where passengers transfer from one flight to another). I suspect this needs to be part of a wider discussion at project level, but I don't think anyone other than EasyJet and Ryanair can claim to have a 'hub' at Bristol (even then, the definition does not necessarily fit). I believe in this and other airport articles 'hub' is being confused with 'base'. Any comments? SempreVolando (talk) 16:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agree completely - even those two airlines don't use it as a hub in the true sense. I'd be in favour of removing it from the Bristol infobox altogether. --Simple Bob (talk) 16:10, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I had originally removed all the charter airlines as none use Bristol as a hub but was reverted, I dont think EasyJet or Ryanair operate a hub operation either. So I would agree thats we should remove them all from the infobox unless somebody has evidence that any of them operate a hub operation for example could you get a ticket from Alicante to Belfast via Bristol. MilborneOne (talk) 14:22, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's three of us. WP:BOLD - JFDI! --Simple Bob (talk) 14:55, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Flybe winter charter[edit]

Could someone please provide a source for the recent addition of Jersey and Toulouse as Flybe/Thomas Cook winter charter flights, otherwise they are to be removed according to WP:V. Welshleprechaun 12:54, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No reply - removing from article. Welshleprechaun 23:44, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 11 December 2011[edit]

Hi, Ryanair will be finished with the operating Riga ends 6 January 2012 i hear news earlier last week.

109.152.18.46 (talk) 00:24, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done, was already added but removed by another user. Jamie2k9 (talk) 01:13, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not done. What is it with this article and a complete lack of citations. If a flight is going to end on January 6th then please give a reference. "I heard news earlier last week" is original research. It is the recent rash of such edits that caused the article to be semi-protected. While it is hard to present a reference for something that is removed from the article (other than in the edit summary or on the talk page) it is absolutely possible to put a reference next to a date. What is so difficult about that? --Bob Re-born (talk) 01:59, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

THe airline booking system is the ref, you can go and check and Riga flights are no longer bookable after Jan 9 2012. Bratslava resumed in October and is bookable up until October 2012 which means its year round. Why have you not added refs to Easyjet flights, or will I remove them?? Jamie2k9 (talk) 13:20, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So post a reference, otherwise it is original research. How difficult is that to understand? As for the easyjet flights, go ahead and delete them but do read WP:POINT first. --Bob Re-born (talk) 15:08, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The route is clearly due to end. Is there a source that proves it will operate after Jan 9? --NorthernCounties (talk) 20:13, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What? I am asking for a source that shows the route is going to end. How can you claim "the route is clearly due to end?" This is an encyclopaedia and it needs citations for claims made within it. So where is the reference? --Bob Re-born (talk) 21:56, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia and it is our responsibility to ensure misleading statements are not on pages. You cannot book a flight after January 9 2012, and I defy you and anyone to do anything else. An airline is not going to make a large fuss about a route closing, but the route clearly is ending.If Bratislava is bookable in both the Winter and the Summer, that route is not seasonal, Why? - Because it operates through the two major airline seasons, Summer & Winter. Now please desist in pleading for a reference as it is not constructive for the Bristol Airport page, I will again ask you for proof that the Riga route is operating after January 9. Can you? --NorthernCounties (talk) 08:21, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Facts need to be referenced. It is stated that the service ends on January 6th yet no reference is offered. How is that encyclopaedic? As it currently stands it is original research. --Bob Re-born (talk) 09:08, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It is also unencyclopaedic to state something that is simply untrue. You can't book the route after a certain date... therefore it is not operating. Facts need to bre referenced, yes... so were can you prove that the route operates after this date? Sometimes we have to stop emotions getting in the way of our better judgement. It is unfortunate that the route is seizing, but the truth is, it is. --NorthernCounties (talk) 16:17, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
With you all the way, NorthernCounties. Regards, David J Johnson (talk) 20:11, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.airport-technology.com/projects/bristol-international-airport/
    Triggered by \bairport-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist
  • http://www.airport-technology.com/news/news86218.html
    Triggered by \bairport-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist
  • http://www.airport-technology.com/news/news96679.html
    Triggered by \bairport-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist
  • http://www.airport-technology.com/news/newsbristol-airport-awards-150m-framework-contract-boost-capacity
    Triggered by \bairport-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 12:48, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Aegoceras (talk) 11:35, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Bristol Airport. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:33, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Bristol Airport. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:15, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bristol_Airport&oldid=1218565413"