Talk:London Stansted Airport

East Anglia B‑class Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Anglia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of East Anglia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.East AngliaWikipedia:WikiProject East AngliaTemplate:WikiProject East AngliaEast Anglia articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Aviation: Airports B‑class

This 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

B

This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked 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.

This article is supported by the airport project.

Architecture C‑class Mid‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

London B‑class Mid‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Text and/or other creative content from London Stansted Airport was copied or moved into RAF Stansted Mountfitchet with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Charters

How about culling that list of charters? It is a list of holiday operators rather than airlines (mainly), and it's very likely most will remain red links. Can't see the use either. -Wangi 13:19, 18 August 2005 (UTC) Worth mentioning previous flights to Middle East and Kuala Lumpur?[reply]

Future Expansion

I think it's necessary for a section on the proposed second runway and general expansion of the airport. I'd write a section myself but my knowledge of the plans is very limited. --Fozi999 00:13, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Maplin

Is it worth mentioning in the history that Stansted was only chosen for London's third airport after the project to build a large airport (bigger than Heathrow) on reclaimed land at Maplin Sands was cancelled in the 1960s on the grounds of cost?

Piers

I think that it has two piers connected by bridge and one or two by monorail, rather than 1 and 2 as stated in the article... is it possible to check this?

BaseTurnComplete 18:11, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, one pier is connected by bridge, gates 1 to 32. The other two are connected by monorail, gates 33 to 68 and gates 69 to 99. Sb2k4 9:30, 19 February 2006 (GMT)

I thought there were four piers but in fact it seems more complicated than that... according to the website: There are currently three satellite buildings at Stansted. ● Satellite 1 is used by international passengers and is served by the tracked transit system ● Satellite 2 is used by both domestic and international passengers who walk and use the tracked transit system respectively; and ● Satellite 3 is used by international passengers who walk to and from the terminal. Claret 22:07, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sleeping

Is it worth mentioning the several hundred people who sleep on the chairs and floor at Stansted each night? I was astounded to see about 700 people there last Friday, and did a search earlier for "people sleeping at stansted"; turns out it's a regular occurence (some sites list 100 average, 3-400 peak; others (eg http://www.geoffjones.com/stansted.html gives a quote from a worker stating an average of ) 500 nightly. If included it would presumably only fit into a Trivia header, but with a figure of however many hundreds of people per night it seems like something notable enough to include, though I don't know how to state the figure so am not currently Bold enough to write it in myself. It's worth noting that the two nearby hotels are a Hilton and a Radisson, both expensive locations, and this is probably a factor in why so many people prefer to bring a sleeping bag... --User:Firien § 11:35, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

For: The Stansted expansion article is very short and could occupy a section of the main article as it is very closely related. Flymeoutofhere 08:24, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Annoying Police

Could someone point out the sheer incompetence of Essex Police, who regulary shut down the drop off and pick up point (as shown in the "The lawn in front of Stansted Airport..." photo)because of "terror alerts." They funnel everyone down into the short stay car park and the coach station where there is one huge traffic jam and thus creates an even BIGGER target for any would terrorist bomber!

I work with the police airport, and if you had any idea about what goes on with airport security, then you wouldn't be saying that. Luke0406 23:27, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

News

Is it worth adding a link to a daily updated Stansted news page - http://www.uk-airport-news.info/stansted-airport-news.htm

the above looks like spam to me and the site is part of a network of such sites. Thundernlightning 20:20, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi-Jacks

Special branch in the airport confirm that stansted is used to re-direct all hi-jacked, and suspected hi-jacked planes heading for london airports, and most other uk airports. does anyone thinks this is worth adding? Luke0406 23:30, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Airlines & Destinations: Air Berlin

Air Berlin will discontinue to offer flights from STN to Manchester, Glasgow and Belfast-Harbour BHD after 31-OCT-2007. As rumoured the economics of these flights were too bad. Archie02 21:26, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

David O'Leary

I wasn't able to find any supporting information for the claim that all survived the 1998 incident "due to the expertise of the flight crew and the distinct bravery of the team's assistant manager, David O'Leary." Neither the cited newspaper article nor the article for David O'Leary makes any mention of his "distinct bravery" or the expertise of the flight crew. For now I've removed the claim. SkipSmith (talk) 07:39, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Environment

"Since then passenger numbers have been in decline, due partly to rising fares and the lower value of Sterling, and perhaps also influenced by growing awareness of the detrimental impact that aviation has on climate change." This is rather humorous speculation but speculation nonetheless.-newkai t-c 11:02, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stop Stanstead Expansion --> London City Airport

I note there is a section here called "Opposition". I am trying to set one up for London City Airport. However, I keep getting blocked. Only 1-2 lines are necessary. Yet even mention is not allowed?. Clearly there Wiki editors are not showing consistency?.

Can someone mediate —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.188.151 (talk) 23:33, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Viewing areas

IP User 86.8.223.117 has added a section about viewing areas which I removed, he/she has re-added it without explanation. Please note that this is an encyclopedia not a travel or plane spotters guide, viewing areas are not notable. Any comments? MilborneOne (talk) 15:41, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aircraft viewing areas aren't encyclopedic; agree completely. NcSchu_(Talk) 17:49, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree that it is not encyclopaedic content, however, I believe that lots of people come to wikipedia for information, and this could be valuable information for some people. Thomas888b (talk) 18:35, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Air Sylhet

I've seen very little noise about them. Are they actually flying ? Pmbma (talk) 14:54, 19 December 2008 (UTC)Pmbma[reply]

re-ordering of content

I have reordered and re-organsised the content today. I have promoted to the start of the article all the information needed by people using the airport to make trips including information about the flights on offer, the facilities and also proposed changes to the facilities (including a 2nd runway). The reasonably detailed history section is now later in the article next to the incidents section. I have moved various paragraphs around to more appropriate sections and roll the Plane Stupid protest into history. I have tried not to remove any content in the process. PeterEastern (talk) 18:50, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article is now different to the layout at Wikipedia:WikiProject Airports/page content! Just a note the article is not to "provide information needed by people using the airport to make trips" as this is an encylopedia not a travel guide, so you dont really need to move anything about. MilborneOne (talk) 19:35, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just to help with a large history section I have moved some of the Second World War history to RAF Stansted Mountfitchet. MilborneOne (talk) 20:34, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

London ?

I notice that a London portal has just been added to the article and it is part of the London project. Just curious as to why as the airport is not actually in London? MilborneOne (talk) 20:52, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably because it serves London... AnonMoos (talk) 19:37, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

early 1980s protests

Should be something on the early 1980's protests against the original approval or building of the airport... AnonMoos (talk) 19:37, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Irrelevant photography

There's something to be said for the irrelevancy of the MaxJet, though I wouldn't be so critical myself. But if it really had to go, what made it so much worse than the Ryanair or Air Asia X planes? Jan olieslagers (talk) 17:24, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Incidents

In the section incidents, there is a paragraph that says this:

On 6 February 2000, an Ariana Afghan Airlines Boeing 727 with 156 people on board was hijacked and flown to Stansted Airport. After a four-day stand-off the hostages on board were safely freed and the incident ended peacefully. It later emerged that the motive behind the hijack was to gain asylum in the UK, sparking debate about immigration into the country. A large number of passengers on board the plane also applied for asylum.[15] In July 2004, it was reported that a number of hijackers had won their bid for asylum in the UK, their convictions for hijacking having been quashed for misdirection of the jury in 2003.[16]

Noticed I highlighted the word Quashed. Is this even a real word? Thomas888b (talk) 18:37, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

From dictionary.com, Quash: 1. to put down or suppress completely; quell; subdue: to quash a rebellion. 2. to make void, annul, or set aside (a law, indictment, decision, etc.).

So yes it is a word. Alternatively, "overruled", "annulled", "overthrown" or "declared null and void" could be used and may sound better / be more readily understood? SempreVolando (talk) 19:35, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quashed is the correct legal term where a conviction is overturned. Mjroots (talk) 19:48, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talking of incidents, the Etihad incident today is under discussion at WT:AV#Etihad incident. Mjroots (talk) 19:49, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, Just wanted to check :-) Thomas888b (talk) 20:56, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I note that in the information on the Harrods terminal it states that it is used on some State Visits. I believe this is incorrect and do not think it has ever been used for this purpose.

PM — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.193.56.194 (talk) 21:49, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]