This template is part of WikiProject Norway, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Norway. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Why are stations such as Andenes and Lakselv listed as primary airports? These are "small" airports with respect to passangers and movements even if their runways are long... They should be listed as regional airports. Rogerb (talk) 20:38, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Avinor retains an official designation of primary and regional airports, hence why they have been listed as such. Andenes and Lakselv both have runways which can fully handle A320/737 jetliners, and see seasonal services with such aircraft, most of the summer for Lakselv, albeit only a handful for Andenes. Therefore Avinor classifies Andenes as a regional airport and Lakselv as a primary airport. Arsenikk(talk) 20:42, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
I have reverted the recent change of structure to the template for the following reasons: Nearly all sources discussing airports in Norway divide scheduled airports clearly into two groups: primary (stamruteflyplasser) and regional (kortbaneflyplasser). These are based on the nature of the routes operated and the physical characteristics of the airports. I have plans, after I have completed expanding all the airport articles, to create separate history articles on each topic, as they have quite distinct traits. A division between international and domestic is difficult, as there arises a question as to what constitutes an international airport. Brønnøysund Airport, Brønnøy sees occasional international flights (probably in the oder of half a dozen a year). As far as I can count, ten of the "domestic airports" are authorized for and serve occasional to regular international flights. The division between "major" and "minor" is arbitrary, especially since Bergen is grouped as major and Trondheim and Stavanger, with just 20% less traffic but twice the number of runways and a military sector, are categorized with Kristiansund, which sees less than a tenth of the former.
This is an encyclopedia and we need to be accurate and objective. The changes have introduced several subjective and factual incorrect traits into the navbox. The flag is purely decorative, acts as a visual distraction, does not add navigational or encyclopedic value and should be left out. I notice that Rettetast has already attempted to removed the icon. Also, small text should be avoided in navboxes due to reasons of accessibility. I have kept the term "unscheduled" as it is more covering than "general aviation". Arsenikk(talk) 20:43, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Please be constructive and discuss your opinions if you disagree, don't just edit. The latest change removed all the unscheduled airports, whether intentional or not. Arsenikk(talk) 08:16, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
As Arsenikk says aove, we follow the sources. I have reverted back to Arsenikks version. Rettetast (talk) 18:09, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Why does this section have to be so different from others like Spain, Sweden and even Iceland, those countries and many mores have the section whit the flag at the headline and major international and minor. So why is it different, maybe some of the airports have been categorized differently, so just change that, not to all this! Oslo and Bergen is both major intl airports, minor intl airports is airports who have more than 1 international routs even if it's charter or normal, domestic = domestic. And for you who dosent knows it: Arendal airport is opening in 2014… — Preceding unsigned comment added by Go-outside-40yr-virgin (talk • contribs) 00:53, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
The answer is under the headline "Structure". The sources (mainly Norwegian sources like Avinor) divide them like that. It is possible to discuss if we shall divide them like other countries template, that is International and Domestic and Unscheduled. --BIL (talk) 09:11, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 6 January 2014
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.