Template talk:Infobox airline

Aviation WikiProject
General information
Main project page (talk) Notability & Style guide (talk) Showcase & Popular pages Announcements and open tasks (talk → Maintenance (talk) → Article alerts → New articles (talk) → AfD record (talk) → Resources (talk)
Departments Assessment (Log) (talk) → B-Class / A-Class → Instructions Collaboration (talk) Peer review (talk) Outreach department (talk) → Current newsletter New! Contest (talk)
Project organization Coordinators (talk) Members (talk) Project banner (talk) Portals Project category (talk)
Templates Infobox templates → Aviation infobox (talk) → Airport infobox (talk) → Airline infobox (talk) → Aircraft infobox (talk) → Aviator infobox (talk) → Aircraft occurrence infobox (talk) → Company infobox (talk) Navigation boxes (talk
Sub-projects Aircraft project (talk) → Engines task force (talk) Airlines project (talk) → Defunct Airlines project (talk) Airports project (talk) Gliding project (talk) Rotorcraft (talk) Military aviation (talk) Aviation accident (talk) Air sports task force (talk) Aerospace biography (talk

Template needs a tweak

Can we have an option to turn off IATA, ICAO and Callsign please. See Air Union for an example of why this is needed. Mjroots (talk) 22:20, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

(I believe that the correct action to request is to change those fields from "required" to "optional"?) For whatever reason those things were never assigned to that airline and therefore "None" is in fact correct. (In this case the airline became defunct before those signifiers were assigned and/or globally governed, right?) Having no information (or a blank) suggests that the information is out there somewhere but no one has taken the time to look it up and edit the article. In a case like this a positive entry of "None" makes it clear that those concepts do not apply. (Perhaps "N/A" or "Not Applicable" is a better entry?) I'd rather see positive acknowledgment that those aviation concepts/signifiers don't apply than see a blank that will leave readers wondering. Since most airline articles' infoboxes include that info, having a few articles that leave an unexplained blank is likely to confuse readers, especially those who are "novices" not yet familiar with many of the concepts in aviation, airlines, etc. Rather than changing the template code, I support leaving IATA, ICAO and Callsign as required fields but updating the template documentation with instructions to enter "None" (or N/A or Not applicable -whatever consensus suggests) when those fields do not apply. Ch Th Jo (talk) 23:11, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

The reason the codes were not assigned is because the airline was in (and out of) existence long before such codes were thought of. Mjroots (talk) 23:15, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Merge this template with company template

Would it be possible to include all company template infos with the airline template? There are several airline articles having both templates on one page. Please see SpiceJet and Jet Airways... Thanks.--Malaikaran (talk) 18:36, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Airlines and companies are not always the same thing, only the Jet Airways one has both so perhaps it should be changed to be similar to the SpiceJet article which only has the airline infobox. MilborneOne (talk) 19:28, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Frequent flyer programme vs program

I know this is minor, but I suggest adding some way of selecting either correct spelling of programme or program, to better tailor the frequent_flyer parameter to all worldwide English speakers, not just those of North America. Maybe having parameters frequent_flyer_int and frequent_flyer_na respectively instead? Thanks, The Z ^UKBG (talk) 14:44, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 21 November 2011

This template has a typo in it that can cause formatting issues: |+ colspan=2 class="fn org" style="text-align: center; font-size: 125; font-weight:bold" | {{{airline}}} It says: font-size: 125; This is clearly incorrect and should read 125%. Robert Chin (talk) 07:45, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Checked [1] [2] and I agree; please just add "%".  Chzz  ►  09:32, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Y Done T. Canens (talk) 09:41, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 25 November 2011

please change "IACO" to "ICAO" because it is in error

Meltdown627 (talk) 17:59, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Most templates with the blue "documentation" box are set up so any editor can fix the documentation, using the "edit" link at the top of the blue box. Anomie⚔ 18:25, 25 November 2011 (UTC)