Jump to content

Talk:SkyTeam/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

SkyTeam Alliance

The alliance calls itself SkyTeam, not SkyTeam Alliance. Star is the only one of the three with "Alliance" in the title. Dbinder 21:18, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

China Southern Airlines is a future member, too. How do you edit the boilerplate to include it? --apoivre 12:36, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Why hasn't Alitalia been removed rom the alliance due to its piss-poor customer service? - Sentiments of nummerous FlyerTalkers

There's rumours that Air France wants Thai to join the alliance instead of Malaysian? Do they have any connection to the truth?

A wikipedia talk page is probably not the best place to ask this. However, AF recently agreed to admit MH into the alliance so there you go: apoivre 19:22, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

How someone determined that now Skyteam is the third largest following Oneworld? I compared the figures and don't understand why Onewold is the second. 31 Mar 2007

Members section

All right people, I have fixed the SkyTeam page AGAIN, please don't vandalize it! I have put links in proving that SkyTeam has 9 members! KLM and Air France are OFFICIALLY two seperate airline carries of SkyTeam! --83.81.20.248 (talk) 16:15, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Like is said before: WHY is some ignorant guy changing this all the time! Skyteam has 9! members and that's official. KLM and Air France are seperate airlines! Air France-KLM is a holding company NOT an airline! And this ignorant user who changes it all the time even puts KLM under affiliates and not Air France, that's a mistake on top of a mistake. PLease wikipedia, stop this incorrect changing.--83.81.20.248 (talk) 15:33, 28 December 2009 (UTC)


KLM and Air France form a holding together not 1 airline! That's a fact. Not my opinion. That's why Skyteam states the 2 airlines as seperate airlines! That's why Skyteam states on their website that they have 9 members! Please do NOT put these 2 airlines as 1 airline in the member section cause Skyteam and Air France-KLM themselves say it are 2 airlines!

signed: AutoPilotDelta, Netherlands (I don't have an account yet!) --83.81.20.248 (talk) 00:07, 27 December 2009 (UTC)


that is one of the most confusing/jumbled sections i have ever seen. its not neat and well organized. i mean, if your flying northwest your flying with the company that operates for it i.e. mesaba airlines. duh. this is just ridiculus... Urban909

The infobox on Members has to be changed. The date when they are joined has to be the year only and non-member affilates are to be removed. Anyone agree with this?— Preceding comment signed as by Pinas Central (talk • contribs) actually added by Jetstreamer (talk • contribs).

I do not agree. In first place, that's not an infobox, but a table. Secondly, you should wait for comments before proceeding. I've reverted your removal.--Jetstreamer Talk 10:47, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
The non-member affilates should be removed they have relevance to Sky Team (they have recently been removed from Oneworld)/ MilborneOne (talk) 12:14, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
Ok, MilborneOne (talk · contribs), I'll be removing that column in a matter of a week if there are no objections. Thanks for your comment.--Jetstreamer Talk 20:40, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
Removed, as per WP:SILENCE.--Jetstreamer Talk 10:46, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Potential Future Members

User XLR8TION has repeatedly tried to insert Alaska Airlines, Emirates and several other airlines into the section on potential membership. While it would be very nice for any ST frequent flyer to have EK in, they have repeatedly stated they are not going to join any alliance yet. And while it would be very nice for any ST frequent flier living or working in the West Coast to have AS in, word is this is just not going to happen any time soon. The potential future memebers section is not about who we would like to see in the alliance, it's about who said they want to join or are rumoured to be in negotiations with the alliance.

If you're going to continually state that this section includes airlines rumored to be in negotiations, you should not include a requirement to state a source. Rumors generally cannot be substantiated because they are usually based on information that is not public knowledge. Incidentally, Hawaiian Airlines WAS in active negotiations with Delta Airlines for a codeshare agreement but it was put on hold because of Delta's bankruptcy filing. I know this for a fact because I used to work for the airline and was a part of the team preparing for the alliance. As for Hawaiian joining skyteam, this is based on hallway conversations that obviously cannot be cited as an official source and fall into that troublesome category of rumors. So, my advice would be to remove the "rumoured" part altogether and only allow additions with confirmations from one of the parties involved in negotiations. To continue as you are now is contradictory and confusing. Alenag25 (talk) 15:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC)Alenag25

I'd like to invite user XLR8TION to back up his claims with facts/references here on the Talk page before s/he makes any further edits in the article (which will be the third revert and, thus, would call for action from mods). If I may suggest a good place to start, FlyerTalk SkyTeam branch has lots of links and quite a lot of posters over there are very well informed. (In case anyone is interested, my handle on FT is the same as here). I'd also like to point out that having a frequent-flyer relationship with a full/associate or potential ST member does not automatically qualify an airline for inclusion in the list -- you can earn SkyMiles on Singapore Airlines, so what?--apoivre 23:46, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Edited to add: Judging by his/her talk page, user XLR8TION is already familiar with the three-reverts rule [1] and no-original-research policy [2]:--apoivre 23:52, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

As I had mentioned, Portugalia became a member on June 2nd. El Al and Air Jamaica have been invited to past Skyteam events, such as a Skyteam pilots convention held in Jamaica in 2001 ( http://www.dalpa.com/public/releases/2001/0010405.htm ). This is strong proof that Air Jamaica and El AL already have indicated interest in joining an alliance, mainly Skyteam. As for Emirates, the airline announced they have no interest of joining any alliance in a press release, therefore they can be removed from the list of potential members. However EL AL and Air Jamaica should be added --XLR8TION 01:12, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

China Airlines - Potential Future Member

Any new updates regarding China Airlines becoming a SkyTeam member? --Starcity ai 04:32, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

  • I am afraid that I don't have many updates in "Eglish" now. But I do have a lot in Chinese([[3]]) now.One particular is that their present chairperson Wei, Philip Hsing-Hsiung(魏幸雄) expressed their interest([[4]]) to Taiwanese Journalists in many ocaasions during the 2003-2004, and that was when they started the code-sharing arrangement with Delta. These news have been reported again and again. And almost every aviation-lover (Please forgive me for my poor English. I don't know how to modify a person who loves aviation, but I think you could understand me)who have keep an eye on the Great China Region know it. Another obvious attestation is the latest issue of Airway Magzine(世界民航雜誌),No.117, which is the most authoritative magzine of Chinese-speaking world. In the Editorial, they discussed about the stiuation of Taiwanese carriers' joining the Intrenational alliances, and they mentioned about CAL's interest in joining SkyTeam.(on p.10,the last sentence of fifth paragraph) I am afriad that I am not be able to upload the image of the magzine. But it can be bought in Taiwan and Hong Kong.There are also many reports that reprot this issue. You can easily find it on the Internet.Because I do sure CAL and SkyTeam have a strong relationship(CAL's only non-ST code-sharing partner is Thai Int'l), I would repost it first. If you still don't think it is suitable after reading those Chinese information, it'll be okay to delete it.--Tsungyenlee 16:23, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikify

i believe this article is in much better shape. should the notice be removed? Urban909

Potential Future Members

hjk Emirates has expressed they do not want to join an alliance. See this news article

Mexicana will unlikely join their rival Aeromexico in the same airline alliance. They have been strengthening their relationship with oneworld partner American Airlines and it seems they wish to continue this relationship. [5] --XLR8TION 20:55, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Pakistan Airlines is highly unlikely to join an alliance that their archenemy, India, is a member of. Both national governments would have to agree on certain airspace restrictions and cooperation between both states has always been tense. --XLR8TION 20:57, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Indian Airlines, may or may not join Star or Skyteam, depending on the outcome of merger, and Air India was supposed to sign a tentative agreement to join Star in Decemeber, but didn't. So Indian Airliens is going back in (so no one delete it until the an official announcement contrary is made). SiberioS 00:26, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

What happened to Air Algerie? It has been stated that Air Algerie is in talks to join the alliance. Einsteinboricua 11:42, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Find a reliable source for that before adding the airline back. DB (talk) 05:41, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
China Airlines in Taiwan HAS expressed MANY TIMES that they have HIGHLY interests in joining. It's all reported local and international press icluding the latest issue of the largest Chinese civic aviation magzine called Airway, which can be bought at Hong Kong and Taiwan. Can anyone tell me why China Airlines has always been taken off the "otential list"??Tsungyenlee (converse)、(Contribs) 13:15, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Jet Konnect is not a separate airline

I had removed Jet Konnect from non-member affiliates of Jet Airways here, but Schalkcity readded the same. Please see that JetKonnect is not a subsidiary of Jet Airways but is merely a low-cost brand of the airline and has the same IATA/ICAO code and callsign as Jet Airways. —   Abhishek   Talk to me 15:10, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

JetKonnect is a separate brand from Jet Airways, despite having the same IATA code. It is the same for AeroMexico and AeroMexico Travel, both have the same IATA code. JetKonnect (and AeroMexico Travel) should be mentioned in the table, because they are part of a SkyTeam member.
Also consider the case of Delta connection. These flights are operated by other, independent companies. However, they are for sure part of SkyTeam, since all those flights are operated under the IATA code of Delta (DL). So Delta Connection should also be mentioned in the table, because the flights are operated for Delta, a SkyTeam member. Schalkcity (talk) 15:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Oh, and I forgot Delta Shuttle. That is not a separate airline, only a brand of Delta. So, regarding all this, JetKonnect should definitely be mentioned in the table. Schalkcity (talk) 15:23, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
It's only a brand and not an airline just as Kingfisher Red is a low cost brand of Kingfisher Airlines. —   Abhishek   Talk to me 15:27, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Read what I just wrote. Aeromexico Travel is also NOT an airline, just a BRAND. Delta Connection is NOT an airline, just a BRAND (operated by several airlines). Delta Shuttle is NOT an airline, just a BRAND. And for non-SkyTeam airlines: Air Canada Express is NOT an airline, just a BRAND. And yes, Kingfisher Red is not an airline, just a BRAND, but it is in the same way mentioned in the OneWorld table! So, stop removing JetKonnect! Schalkcity (talk) 15:31, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
More examples: Aer Lingus Regional has the same IATA code as Aer Lingus. I quote from the wikipage: "Aer Lingus Regional is an Aer Lingus brand used for commuter and regional flights...". The same stands for Kingfisher Red, I quote: "Kingfisher Red, ..., is a low-cost brand run by Kingfisher Airlines." The same stands for Air Canada Express, I quote (again): "Air Canada Express is the brand name of Air Canada's regional operation." And for Delta Connection, I quote: "Delta Connection is the name under which ... operate short and medium haul routes in association with Delta Air Lines Inc." And for Delta Shuttle, I quote: "Delta Shuttle is the brand name for Delta Air Lines' air shuttle service ...". And another one: "QantasLink is a regional brand of Australian airline Qantas ...". And Qantas, Jetconnect and QantasLink all operate under the same IATA code QF.

So, JetKonnect should remain on the existing list. Schalkcity (talk) 14:01, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Do we have a reliable source for what is a non-member affiliate or even a member affiliate most of the entries in the table are not referenced. MilborneOne (talk) 18:16, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
A member affiliate is most often a regional / domestic arm of the mainline, a non-member affiliate is most often a lost-cost subsidiary or a very high premium subsidiary. In general, for the general public, a member affiliate is just part of the mainline whereas a non-member affiliate is a distinctive airline / brand. Schalkcity (talk) 18:32, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
See this and also go to Jet Konnect. The article has been merged and redirected to Jet Airways. A low-cost brand of this airline (Jet Airways) has a name. You can in no way treat Jet Airways and Jet Konnect to be separate entities. Is it so difficult for you to understand? — Abhishek  Talk 19:39, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Some news (and help needed)

Tarom just signed an agreement with SkyTeam to become an associate some time later. This time they will be sponsored by AF, not by AZ as was initially announced. I can't figure out how to add this link as a note - http://corporate.airfrance.com/index.php?id=communiques_detail&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=2773&L=1&no_cache=1 - as the brackets inside don't work well with wiki markup. --apoivre (talk) 15:15, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Co-Location Section

Many SkyTeam airlines have already co-located at many airports. At Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport, all SkyTeam airlines operate out of the McNamara Terminal and have been since 2005. So, what exactly is the criteria for listing airports in this section?--Golich17 (talk) 21:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


Air Tahiti Nui - Potential Future Member

The reference given is just a discussion on airliners.net about rumors. It is stated that the starter of that discussion had read about Air Tahiti Nui being in talks with SkyTeam in a newspaper, but without providing any link or further reference. I don't think that qualifies as a source here. I have looked up for a source on the web but did not find anything else but rumors. If nobody else can come up with a real source I think it should be removed.--Ota1ffm (talk) 19:26, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Co-locations

Some locations will be removed from this section (I would actually vote in favor of the complete removal of that section as there is no pre-established criteria for inclusion). Co-location implies that the airlines of the alliance are currently consolidated within one terminal or concourse.

  • With DL being the dominant carrier at ATL, SkyTeam airlines are sprawled across the entire airport. No consolidation exists.
  • MEX, MTY, and LHR are not currently co-located at the same terminal. Either provide a source or include those airports when the airlines are actually co-located.

Butterfly0fdoom (talk) 09:28, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The image File:Delta logo.svg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --03:58, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Air One

Air One and Air One CityLiner are currently classified as a member affiliates of Alitalia in the Member Airlines section/table, but also listed as a Potential future full members. As I am not that close with the development of Alitalia, could someone clarify Air One and Air One CityLiner's relationship with SkyTeam? I believe it should definitely be removed from the Potential future full members section as it is now part of the 'new' Alitalia. But it should be moved to the Non-member Affiliates column, until such time they are confirmed to be an member affiliate. Interested in anyone's thought on this one.Aviator006 (talk) 03:29, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I have removed Air One out of the Potential future full member section as it is now part of the new AZ. In the Member airlines table, however, I have moved Air One from being an affilate to non-member affiliate as there is no mention of it being a SkyTeam member in Air One website. Furthermore, I have checked Delta's website to see whether Delta's frequent flyer can earn points flying Air One, there is no mention. Hence, until further advice, I am classifying it as a non-member affiliate.Aviator006 (talk) 13:58, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Uzbekistan Airways

The article that was cited for Uzbekistan Airways joining SkyTeam (http://www.gov.uz/en/press/politics/4255) is the only source one can find after a search through SkyTeam's website or Google News. The only mention to SkyTeam even in the article itself is "In the framework of preparation to joining the SkyTeam international alliance, Uzbekistan Airways has identified a supplier of information systems, which will soon be introduced.". There has been no official announcement and as a result I have removed Uzbekistan Airways from the future members list. Once a proper cite with a more official announcement is provided, we can place the carrier back on the list —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.114.255.99 (talk) 18:30, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Middle East Airlines

Does anybody have any sources more recent than 2007 which mention MEA as a potential SkyTeam member? If not, move MEA to 'possible future associate members'? Schalkcity (talk) 19:30, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Hello. A source has been provided for MEA, and you have erased it. As for Shanghai Airlines, the fact that it is a subsidiary of another airline does not mean that it will not gain full membership. KLM is also a subsidiary and yet is a full member. Thus, as no source indicate that it will be an affiliate, we have to consider it as a future full member. Thierry Caro (talk) 21:45, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
For MEA: the ref states nothing about a membership, only that AF will sponsor the FUTURE membership of MEA. So MEA membership is still not confirmed. For Shanghai Airlines: China Eastern Airlines is the parent of Shanghai Airlines, so Shanghai Airlines is an affiliate of China Eastern Airlines. It is the same for Cityjet, Britair, Regional, KLM Cityhopper and so on. So Shanghai Airlines is not a future member. Schalkcity (talk) 23:22, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
MEA full membership is clear. As for Shanghai Airlines, it is true it is not. But affiliate membership is not either. So I would add MEA to the template and let others decide whether Shanghai should also be included. Thierry Caro (talk) 23:37, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
I repeat, as on the talk page of the SkyTeam template:

As for MEA, I quote from their website: "During the meeting, Mr. El Hout confirmed that the Board of Middle East Airlines has approved his proposition that MEA should officially plan to become a Full member of Skyteam Global Alliance. Mr. Pierre-Henry Gourgeon received this information with great pleasure and committed that Air France would sponsor and support Middle East Airlines in this endeavour." So I rest my case, MEA should officially plan to become a Full member --> so NOTHING is yet official! So stop adding MEA. And also for the Shanghai Airlines case, I already quoted before from the SkyTeam website. Becoming part of SkyTeam under the parents of another company explicitly means that China Eastern will become a member and Shanghai Airlines will become an affiliate.Schalkcity (talk) 10:35, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Map of WTC Schiphol

I found: http://www.wtcschiphol.nl/assets/routediscription.pdf WhisperToMe (talk) 03:02, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Future members and associate members

I have removed China Eastern Airlines and Garuda Indonesia from the Future members list as these two airlines have not been officially announced as future members on SkyTeam.com. According to China Eastern's MD Ma Xulun, it will announce their choice before Chinese New Year of 14 February (Recovering China Eastern promises February alliance decision). KLM's CEO Peter Hartman explained that Garuda Indonesia will be officially confirmed soon, but not yet (Skyteam bundles its forces in Asia). China Eastern is already on the Possible member list, I will move Garuda Indonesia to the list until official announcment.
Additionally, I have put a {{fact}} on Middle East Airlines as there is no official press release in regards to their associate membership on skyteam.com or citation in the article. I may remove it from the list completely if there is no citation in 1 week, to ensure article accuracy. Aviator006 (talk) 15:22, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Apologies, I have found Middle East Airlines' (MEA) associate membership details in a SkyTeam press release from way back January 2006 (citation added to the article). However, MEA didn't get a mention as a future associate member in October 2009 Newsflash. Does anyone close to SkyTeam knows what happening with MEA, in terms of their membership? Aviator006 (talk) 19:23, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
I've re-added China Eastern to reflect current, cited by reputable sources (WSJ + BusinessWeek), news.
As the official announcement has not been made by China Eastern Airlines, all speculative or hearsay from reliable sources should not be included. According to these reports, it is only 2 days away before the official announcement if they are to be believed, please wait till it is officially announced. Aviator006 (talk) 04:05, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Why Shanghai Airlines not a future member?It's on the future members page on Skyteam's official website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbtcsem (talk • contribs) 11:31, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Because Shanghai Airlines will become an affiliate member. China Eastern Airlines will become a member and Shanghai Airlines is a daughter of China Eastern. Schalkcity (talk) 12:25, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
But only full members are on the future members page on Skyteam's official website,I see no affiliate member there,So I think Shanghai Airlines is a future member. Sbtcsem (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:34, 14 March 2011 (UTC).
Quoting from SkyTeam website: "On 1 November 2010 Shanghai Airlines announced it will become part of SkyTeam under the wings of parent company China Eastern, which is already in the process of joining the alliance." --> UNDER THE WINGS OF PARENT COMPANY CHINA EASTERN... I rest my case. Shanghai Airlines is mentioned so often because it is a former Star Alliance member and it has just been taken over by China Eastern. Nevertheless, China Eastern will become a member and with it Shanghai Airlines will become an affiliate. Schalkcity (talk) 22:06, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Shanghai Airlines and Xiamen Airlines

Will Shanghai Airlines and Xiamen Airlines join SkyTeam as 'SkyTeam members' or as 'SkyTeam member affiliate' under the wings of their respective parent companies? Schalkcity (talk) 18:09, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Vladivostok Air

Is there any source that Vladivostok Air becomes the affiliate member? 180.46.156.74 (talk) 15:09, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

It's ok to remove this entry if there's no sources at all to support the claim.--Jetstreamer (talk) 15:16, 28 January 2012 (UTC)


SkyTeam special livery

I think SkyTeam special livery table has grown to be none encyclopedic, while it was unusual a few years ago a list of individual aircraft is not really notable. Propose the table is deleted, any comment, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 19:33, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, tail numbers are not to be included in fleet tables within airline articles, but same tables are included in Oneworld and Star Alliance. --Jetstreamer (talk) 20:23, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
Please, redirect your comments here.--Jetstreamer (talk) 22:13, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 23 February 2013

Error in elite status levels: Aerolíneas Argentinas "Oro" is SkyTeam Elite, "Platino" SkyTeam Elite Plus, "Classic" is no elite status at all. THEREFORE please list "Oro" in the "Elite" column and "Platino" in the "Elite Plus" column. Thank you. 190.227.249.85 (talk) 01:50, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

 Not done If you can find a reliable source to confirm your information, then I will grant your edit request. Camyoung54 talk 15:07, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Edits made by 85.151.233.247

This is the second time ([6], [7]) I revert the edit made by 85.151.233.247 (talk · contribs). There's a reliable source supporting the claim. This is no speculation at all, the statements have been published. WP:VNT applies here. I expect the IP to discuss their issues here, rather than keep reverting. Otherwise, I will ask for protection of the article.--Jetstreamer Talk 19:21, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

What about focus cities?

Seeing that each entry of the ″hubs″ column in section ″Benefits and services″, sub-section ″SkyTeam hubs″, is sourced with an official reference and that the "focus cities" entries are completely unsourced and I find no encyclopedic value for those entries, I'll be removing the last column of the table in a week or so unless otherwise specified. Thanks.--Jetstreamer Talk 20:42, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Went ahead with the removal, as per WP:SILENCE.--Jetstreamer Talk 14:15, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Refsic

Hello Jetstreamer and fellow WikiProject Aviation members! Recently, I removed a template about references. I feel like the article, with 121 refs, has sufficient refs! Note that Star Alliance and Oneworld each with 60 and 131 refs don't have a template about refs, so I think the refs are sufficient. Also, just a suggestion, if you are going to keep the template please update it, as it was put into the article in August 2013. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrandonWu (talk • contribs) 20:43, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

It's not the number of references, it's to have every piece of information properly sourced, which is not the case here. Despite being unnecessary, I will update the date for it as you suggest, but you may note that there are a lot of articles that are dated longer ago this one is.--Jetstreamer Talk 10:27, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

139.0.188.201 unsourced edits

I've reverted the last contributions made by 139.0.188.201 (talk · contribs) three times ([8], [9], [10]). All three were unsourced. I've also templated the IP at their talk page for violating the verifiability policy each time I reverted their edits. S(he) made no comments on the matter here or at their talk page. Can you, the author of these edits, discuss the matter here?--Jetstreamer Talk 15:23, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Reverted once again ([11]). I'll be requesting protection of the page the next time the edit is re-added without explanations.--Jetstreamer Talk 22:22, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
The same unexplained and unsourced edit [12] made by another IP (likely the same person). Requesting protection as there are no visible attempts to discuss this here.--Jetstreamer Talk 13:26, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Recent GA nomination

The article is not ready to undergo a GA nomination. I've re-added the {{refimprove}} tag as there are sub-sections that are completely unsourced plus not all the information included in the article is supported by sources. The nominator should have been more careful about this.--Jetstreamer Talk 13:45, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

@Kai Tak: This [13] edit added a reference that dates back to 2004 to support a future event. Please also note that the second reference cannot be considered reliable.--Jetstreamer Talk 14:05, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
I have withdrawn the GA nomination. Regards, Kai Tak 14:13, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Departure date for Copa Airlines

I've reverted this [14] edit for the third time. A source confirming the airline left the alliance is required, not one that predicted that event (the one added was published in May 2009 and intended to support an event that took place in October the same year). In other words, in order to comply with WP:VERIFY a source dated after Copa left the airline is needed to support the departure, not one published before that date.--Jetstreamer Talk 21:00, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Reverted once again [15]. A source after Copa departed the alliance is required. Predicting/announcing a future event is not a confirmation that that event effectively took place.--Jetstreamer Talk 14:23, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
A reference has been added [16] by 108.7.71.140 (talk · contribs). We're done with this.--Jetstreamer Talk 10:27, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Archived sources not used in the article

Archived references

--Jetstreamer Talk 00:54, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on SkyTeam. 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:59, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

New FF program from Air Europa, and "co-location" in Bucharest.

First, Air Europa quitted Flying Blue, and has its own frequent flyer program, called Suma.

Then, I would not talk about an airline co-location in Bucharest-Henri Coanda-Otopeni airport, as there is only one terminal, divided in departure and arrival "terminals". Maybe we could say they use the same check-in concourses (from my memory, A and maybe B are used by SkyTeam and others, while C and D are for OneWorld and Star Alliance, buy I would need someone to check this).

Yes, will someone please update Air Europa / Suma. Thank you. Ssredg (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:12, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

195.235.113.69 (talk) 02:34, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Joon as affiliate member

Skyteam logo is part of Joon livery, so this means that Joon is an affiliate member of SkyTeam. HOP!, for example, doesn't have SkyTeam logo on its planes, so HOP it's not an affiliate member. According to Flying Blue site, with Joon you can "enjoy ST benefits worldwide", but this is not said on HOP and Transavia website pages. --Wind of freedom (talk) 01:37, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Other affiliate member sources found: KLM Cityhopper and Aeroméxico Connect, Austral (2), Mandarin Airlines --Wind of freedom (talk) 18:36, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
The word ″affiliate″ is absent in the Austral source, so it hardly can support it as a member affiliate. Didn't check the others.--Jetstreamer Talk 18:59, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Possible future members table

Although this section is referenced it is mainly speculative and to show it as a table could be misleading, it really should be in prose with the reason why it is considered to be a possible member and not just press speculation. Suggest that the airlines are listed and taken out of the table format. MilborneOne (talk) 18:23, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

This table is in the same format as it is on the pages of Star Alliance and Oneworld. Although this table is merely based on press releases and nothing is 100% sure, the table is updated from time to time, so the airlines that are present in the table are the most likely candidates to join SkyTeam (and on the other pages, to join Star Alliance / Oneworld). If you want to eliminate the table, please also do so on the Star Alliance and Oneworld pages, to keep the commonality. Schalkcity (talk) 18:38, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Could Etihad be mentioned as one of the possible future members too? They are in talks of buying 40-49% stake of Alitalia and strengthening relationship with Air France-KLM. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.119.41.195 (talk) 09:44, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Is there any source to confirm this?--Jetstreamer Talk 14:10, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I just found this discussion, of this page. Philippine Airlines will joining Skyteam, but I don't know when or in the future maybe. About this discussion, maybe it will be considered to put Possible future members table? Because Philippine Airlines hints Skyteam to join the alliance, (website: https://liveandletsfly.com/philippines-airlines-skyteam/). So, yeah, if you do agree, just put TBA only to wait when will they join. Or if you don't agree, it's fine. :)) Thank you! Apple 3002 (talk) 12:50, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Air Europa

Air Europa's acquisition by IAG had been cancelled, so it's announced departure from skyteam is presumably also off the table? 2001:1C00:251A:F900:98ED:7C64:C916:4775 (talk) 11:49, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:SkyTeam/Archive_1&oldid=1253361678"