Jump to content

Talk:List of British Airways destinations

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 219.76.24.207 (talk) at 07:40, 26 December 2021. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconAviation: Airlines List‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles
ListThis article has been rated as List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
B checklist
This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
  1. Referencing and citation: not checked
  2. Coverage and accuracy: not checked
  3. Structure: not checked
  4. Grammar and style: not checked
  5. Supporting materials: not checked
To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call:
  • | b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no>
  • | b2<!--Coverage and accuracy   --> = <yes/no>
  • | b3<!--Structure               --> = <yes/no>
  • | b4<!--Grammar and style       --> = <yes/no>
  • | b5<!--Supporting materials    --> = <yes/no>
assessing the article against each criterion.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the airline project.

Untitled

If we have to have a separate British Airways destinations article (about which I am not convinced - it does not seem sensible to leave the original British Airways page to view this - the destinations were originally listed alphabetically on the BA page, which I think is much better) then at least it should state the date when these destinations are actually being served and where the information is taken from eg Summer 2005, BA timetable. Ardfern 3 July 2005 22:19 (UTC)

  • This list of destinations is not date referenced. Are these destinations being served in 2005 or what? We need to know how current the list is or it is of no value. Is there anyone out there? Ardfern 20:10, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Of course the list is the "in service at this moment" list. Why on earth would we like -- on purpose -- to have a list which is not valid right now? Please make corrections, if you see errors. User:FlyerBoy Feb 14th, 2006

Too many flags

Some of these flags add colour to what is otherwise a dull list. However, the inclusion of state (and city!) flags is making it too unwieldy. Can we restrict it to national flags only? The alternative would be to remove the flags altogether as I am not convinced they are essential for understanding the information presented. --John 20:21, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to implement this in the absence of any argument to the contrary. --John 02:25, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Making former destination list without Bmed

To screen out the Bmed destinations, I used this list: http://web.archive.org/web/20011230083826/http://www.britishairways.com/inside/wrldwide/partners/franchise/docs/bmed.shtml

WhisperToMe (talk) 05:45, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shannon

As British Airways will begin scheduled service from LCY - JFK/EWR with a fuel stop at Shannon on west-bound flights I have added Shannon to destinations page but styled as Shannon - Shannon Airport fuel stop. Any other thoughts, changed you wish to make, etc. Please reply. Thanks. Zaps93 (talk) 18:06, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a destinations page, a "fuel / technical stop", scheduled or unscheduled, is not a destination as passengers cannot leave or join the service at this airport. For that reason I have removed Shannon from the page as it is misleading / unnecessary. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 18:17, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kyiv or Kiev?

Recently there have been changed regarding the name of Ukraine capital, Kiev. The change is 'supposingly' the correct spelling for Kyiv, but I visted earlier this year and it was still spelt Kiev of boarding pass, so my question is why Kyiv if it is recognised and spelt as Kiev? Zaps93 (talk) 21:24, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kiev is the correct spelling in English, but others (mainly non-english speakers) disagree Talk:Kiev/naming. MilborneOne (talk) 21:28, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kiev is latinisation of Russian way of calling the Ukrainian capital. When Ukraine gained its independence from the Soviet Union, it was proposed that in English Kyiv is used instead (being the latinisation of the Ukrainian pronunciation). It took some time, but several English speaking countries (e.g. Canada, USA and UK) officially adopted the new name. The old name is still in use though (like in your example). It becomes quite interesting when UEFA Champion League subtitles mention FC Dynamo Kyiv playing in Kiev. The situation is very similar to the Mumbai/Bombai case. You may imagine the politics surrounding this issue. Kyiv is the correct English spelling of the city. Andriy155 (talk) 21:33, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever you may think of the situation, British Airways still spells the city name as "Kiev". Do you have a reference for this having been adopted as the "official" name by the UK? DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:35, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://ukinukraine.fco.gov.uk/en/ - As has been clearly demonstrated, the official spelling of the word is in fact Kyiv. Notice how airlines also migrate to Kyiv: Wizzair (the other airline you keep on changing the name of the city for) is using Kyiv: http://wizzair.com/?language=EN Andriy155 (talk) 21:43, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, two can play at that game [1] shows that BA list it as Kiev, and as this is a BA destination page, so Kiev it is. Zaps93 (talk) 22:27, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BGN database shows Kyiv as BGN standard. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andriy155 (talk • contribs) 22:31, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, due to the fact Andriy155 is very confident of Kyiv as name instead of correct Kiev, a vote is best chance to chose. Vote for which ever one you believe it should be. Regards, Zaps93 (talk) 22:36, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I dont think we need a vote - while the wikipedia article is at Kiev this article should be the same. MilborneOne (talk) 22:39, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So the name Kiev stays? Regards, Zaps93 (talk) 22:42, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What is EW? --Andriy155 (talk) 22:43, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
EW is Edit War. Zaps93 (talk) 22:45, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, to avoid that, may I suggest Kyiv (formerly Kiev)? Please note, however, that Kyiv is the official spelling in UK, USA and Canada. --Andriy155 (talk) 22:48, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The name is Kiev as per the article - If you need to discuss the name then I suggest that Talk:Kiev/naming is the correct place, when a decision to change is made at that discussion then other articles should follow. This is not the correct place to debate. So not an edit war just the wrong place. MilborneOne (talk) 22:53, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kiev please - that's the city's name in English. The comparison with Bombay/Mumbai is not correct, because that city's name was actually changed, unlike Kiev, where there's been no change in name. Apples to oranges really. A more apt compare would be something like Milan (which is Milano in Italian, Mailand in German, and so on) or Cairo (Le Caire, Kairo, etc) - these are different ways of calling the same city. Jasepl (talk) 07:32, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If Kiev were the English name for the Ukrainian capital, why does the UK government use Kyiv?--Andriy155 (talk) 15:26, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Be that as it may, amongst other things, one of the concepts Wikipedia works on is popularity/commonality. The British goverment can call it whatever it wants to be politically correct. In any event, governments are hardly standard-bearers in these matters - what a majority of English-speaking people use, is what matters. Also, as was also pointed out, it's not as if the English language has expunged the word 'Kiev' from its vocabulary. Oh, and why not call it 'Kyyiv'? Why just 'Kyiv'? Jasepl (talk) 15:44, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The 3rd general guideline of the naming conventions for geographic names currently states: "The contents (this applies to all articles using the name in question): The same name as in the title should be used consistently throughout the article." So, as long as the article on the city itself uses Kiev for its title, Kiev is the form that all other articles should use, including this one. — Besides, the name the greatest number of English speakers would most easily recognize (the core criterion of our naming conventions policy) is Kiev.

In any case, as MilborneOne mentions above, the naming issue itself should be discussed at Talk:Kiev/naming. If at some point discussion there leads to the article on the city being renamed to anything other than Kiev, that new name will be adopted in this article too, for consistency; but no before. - Best, Ev (talk) 17:09, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. States

Hi everyone, I am just wondering why there are no states in the U.S.A. listed. They serve a large majority of cities all in a large variety of states and therefor I believe that states should be added to show their large network coverage in the U.S.A., like a major US airline. Your comments welcome. Regards, Zaps93 (talk) 09:54, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I dont think that US states are that important (to anybody outside of the US) I dont see any reason to list them for a non-US airline. Readers can follow the city links if they really want to know where destinations are. MilborneOne (talk) 11:22, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I get you. I was just abit confused by the large ammount and no state, but no you have cleared it, Thanks! Zaps93 (talk) 11:28, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Terminated Destinations

Terminated destinations on the old list were without airports name so I made an effort to search for the airports. There is a possibility that some of them are wrong if so, contributions supported by references Will be appreciated. --Meshoo.d (talk) 22:22, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent work. I'm currently tidying up some details.--Jetstreamer (talk) 22:24, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why are the terminated destinations included in the table? The way Air Canada destinations or KLM destinations keeps them separate, looks clearer. Thankyoubaby (talk) 22:00, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Technically, two different articles appear within a single one in those two cases, which makes difficult to perform certain searches, such as the countries served for either served or terminated destinations. In that combined version you should check the list and the table simultaneously. It is actually easier to do this kind of things in the current layout of the article. Apart from that, why not mentioning Pakistan International Airlines destinations or El Al destinations? They combine current and terminated destinations in a single table format. Please also note that this format is also preferred for Dragonair destinations, which is a featured list.--Jetstreamer (talk) 23:30, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The list is unreadable, as is the BMI one; this one and BMI are the only two on Wikipedia posted in this retarted manner of current and terminated destinations. I don't give a toss to know a terminated destination ; if it's so bloody important put it on a secondary list like EVERY OTHER airline destination article... Seems someone has a fetish to keep it this way. 75.4.239.200 (talk) 04:37, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just take a longer survey, many other airlines have their destination articles in the same format (see above). Apart from that, your judgment relies upon visual and aesthetics of the article, not over contents.--Jetstreamer (talk) 10:24, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why do we even list terminated destinations? They just make the table harder to read, especially if you want to see only where they serve now. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 17:37, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, and unlike the Dragonair article mentioned above, more than half of the "destinations" are terminated. Thankyoubaby (talk) 19:10, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Everyone's comment is welcome, but let me tell you that neither of the users opposing to the inclusion of terminated destinations have significantly contributed to the creation or maintenance of the article. Listing terminated destinations is not forbiddden, as per WP:AIRLINES. Furthermore, they engrose the history of any airline, as the “History” sub-section included in any airline article (if it is present at all) does not provide a complete list of all destinations served by the company throughout its history. Unsurprisingly, because the purpose of an airline destinations article is just that. You may also want to read an ongoing discussion regarding airline destinations.--Jetstreamer (talk) 02:17, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I absolutely agree that the terminated destinations should be listed. I just believe that they should be listed separately. If we are listing them all together, why not list BA's current and retired fleet in one table? Thankyoubaby (talk) 05:33, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Future services to Seoul-Incheon

British Airways will begin flying to Incheon International Airport from December 2, 2012 but there has been a dispute whether or not is this service a resumption or new service. 2 news articles are calling it a resumption but the airline's official press release calls it a new route. I know that the airline served Seoul in the past but they flew to Gimpo International Airport and ended service a little before Incheon became operational. 123.117.36.87 (talk) 06:50, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BA withdrew its services to/from Seoul in 1998, three years before the opening of Incheon Airport. There's no such a dispute therefore: GMP is a terminated destination, and ICN is a future route. Services to ICN are starting, not resuming.--Jetstreamer Talk 13:43, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BA World Cargo destinations

Can these be added to the list with reference from BA World Cargo website? 182.178.63.22 (talk) 18:56, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Needs to be mentioned in the cargo destinations that they are operated by Global Supply Systems for BA. MilborneOne (talk) 21:38, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done, yet a source is required to support the claim. I'm trying to fin one...--Jetstreamer Talk 21:49, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Does this help it says the 747-800Fs are on wet-lease from GSS at http://www.baworldcargo.com/news/pr246.shtml MilborneOne (talk) 21:54, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's perfect! Will add it to the one I already included. Thanks.--Jetstreamer Talk 22:16, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See the article of airports

Please see the article of airports have hub of British Airways — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minhtuanvn 1995 (talk • contribs) 04:41, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What's your point?--Jetstreamer Talk 22:04, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resumes Granada

http://airlineroute.net/2013/03/20/ba-lcygrx-jul13/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minhtuanvn 1995 (talk • contribs) 11:18, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The source above is not reliable.--Jetstreamer Talk 11:30, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New 2 Spain destinations

BA will fly to Las Palmas Gran Canaria and Granada http://airlineroute.net/2013/03/20/ba-lcygrx-jul13/ http://airlineroute.net/2013/05/03/ba-lhrlpa-w13/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.179.54.234 (talk) 11:30, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As I said in the above thread, the sources provided are not reliable.-Jetstreamer Talk 11:42, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Begins Austin

http://www.usatoday.com/story/todayinthesky/2013/09/03/british-airways-dreamliner-austin-london-heahtrow/2757385/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.179.18.225 (talk) 12:25, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted the addition including the source above thrice, as it does not mention a firm date, i.e. yyyy-mm-dd, as required by these guidelines.--Jetstreamer Talk 13:37, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Archived references not used in the article

--Jetstreamer Talk 15:01, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 24 external links on British Airways destinations. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 19:32, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Terminated Destinations

Hi all, I just wanted to propose that the terminated destinations on this article either be removed, or put into a separate section with a valid reference to support its inclusion. What are your views? st170etalk 18:48, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your proposal is against the project guidelines. Furthermore, most of the terminated destinations are supported by a source. I don't know what you mean by "valid". Sources in Wikipedia are either reliable or unreliable.--Jetstreamer Talk 21:20, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, but I believe they should go into a separate section. I don't really see the need to have all terminated destinations mixed in with current destinations. st170etalk 17:24, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced changes

@Spyder212: This [2] set of two edits was unsourced. Please do not accept edits like this one. The article has been PC-protected to prevent the addition of such information.--Jetstreamer Talk 16:02, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing that out! I'll be more cautious in the future. Spyder212 (talk) 16:05, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Including Distance and Journey Time

Distance is particularly useful as it provides context for understanding how the airline's network has evolved and allows for insights that aren't readily visible - for instance, until inclusion of this information, I wasn't aware that the shortest flights are NOT domestic flights. Journey Time is also useful in understanding how the airline manages congestion at larger airports, and add extra contingency. This obviously impacts on the profitability of routes - which provides additional context to understanding the network.

After adding the information, it was initially deleted, and claimed it was against a certain policy - but that policy there are no rules against this information. It was again deleted and claimed that this information is not "normally" included - but since when have we been strictly limited to what has gone before.

There are many airlines listed on wikipedia. Ideally the page for each should have a consistent look and feel - British Airways should be treated similiarly to Air France or Lufthansa for example. Have a look at the page for Wikiproject Airlines, and see what people think there. If others agree that things like distance info should apply to all airline pages, then you will be in a better position Pmbma (talk) 16:27, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Whilst "ideally" this may be the case, we have to allow Wikipedia to evolve. If information is appropriate, then it should be added to one airline, and gradually added to others. Wikipedia would never have become what it is today without allowing one page in a family to evolve User:Andrew.smithh 17:00, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
I do not agree. This is not a travel guide per WP:NOTRAVEL, aside from what other articles look like.--Jetstreamer Talk 18:37, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Distance and Journey Time are not "travel guide" information - they are useful data to understand the airline's operations User:Andrew.Smithh 17:00, 217 November 2019 (UTC)
Maybe you are right about that, but if you include such information it won't be difficult for you to support what you claim about the airline's operations. Just putting that information in new columns as you did fails WP:VERIFY as well.--Jetstreamer Talk 17:07, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
What specific part of WP:VERIFY does it "fail". I sourced the information from British Airway's own magazine User:Andrew.smithh 22:08, 28 November 2019
It doesnt actually matter that it is sourced it is related to being encyclopedic and relevant to this article. As you dont appear to be getting much support here you may be better if you believe it is an improvement to take this to project level as there is no reason why British Airways sould be treated any different than other three or four thousand airline articles. MilborneOne (talk) 09:13, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I guess that means that WP:VERIFY isn't therefore a problem. As I said before, whilst "ideally" it would be good to have every page in a family change at the same time, Wikipedia didn't get to where it is today by frustrating all evolution / change - children have to be allowed to develop! User:Andrew.smithh 12:12, 1 December 2019 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew.smithh (talk • contribs)
I was just looking for you to find a wider audience as it is clear so far that you dont have a consensus to add it on this page. MilborneOne (talk) 12:35, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kai Tak

It was said in a recent edit summary that These sources do not support the services were regular. If parliamentary records aren't sufficient what would be needed? Perhaps the actual copies of something like this: [3][4], [5][6]? 219.76.24.216 (talk) 08:26, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ctrlwiki, Jetstreamer, MattSucci, and Nick Levine: Thanks. (For information, Kai Tak was closed in early July 1998, replaced by Chek Lap Kok.) 219.76.24.197 (talk) 11:56, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think the inclusion of timetable images as sources would do it.--Jetstreamer Talk 19:32, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. 219.76.24.193 (talk) 07:29, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Done. 219.76.24.197 (talk) 08:07, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kimpo

BA already flew to Seoul before the opening of Inchon Airport in 2001. That airport was Kimpo, which has been added to the list. 219.76.24.197 (talk) 08:06, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Haneda

The BOAC flew to Haneda until its merger in 1971 with BEA and other airlines, whereas Narita wasn't opened until 1978. Do we need any references to "prove" that British Airways had regular flights to Haneda in the interim years? The same question for Singapore's Paya Lebar and Shanghai's Hung-ch'iao (though not too sure if the latter was already served by the BOAC before it became BA). 219.76.24.194 (talk) 10:35, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We need sources to prove anything that can be challenged by anyone.--Jetstreamer Talk 14:19, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I see. That gonna take quite some time. 219.76.24.214 (talk) 13:55, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In the meantime why can't there be a streamlined procedure for the inclusion of former airports (either closed, or international role largely assumed by newer ones)? For the cases of Haneda, Kai Tak, Kimpo and Paya Lebar the whole thing is kind of straight forward. The respective cities have already been served by BA before Narita, Chek Lap Kok, Inchon and Changi were opened. 219.76.24.195 (talk) 11:15, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Me or anyone else can revert unsourced additions per WP:V.--Jetstreamer Talk 11:33, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Btw is there anyone who'd be interested to add a column for when service began for each destination (and for the terminated ones when they were terminated)? 219.76.24.215 (talk) 09:42, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Or perhaps at least for the part in brackets? 219.76.24.207 (talk) 07:40, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_British_Airways_destinations&oldid=1062098199"