User talk:SempreVolando

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Hello, SempreVolando, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! — Rod talk 21:19, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I saw that you had previously edited the Malaysia airlines fleet, do you know what happened with the 747-400? Thanks kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by GogoLive123 (talkcontribs) 19:18, 19 April 2015 (UTC)



Hi, I noticed you undid my edits on the AirAsia page. While I understand that the crash of AirAsia QZ8501 came under the Indonesia AirAsia company, the articles I quoted are about AirAsia handling compensations. Mr Tony Fernandes, CEO of AirAsia and not Indonesia AirAsia, is mentioned in the articles. Jermzc (talk) 01:40, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Focus city[edit]


I thought a focus city is defined as: " a location that is not a hub, but from which the airline has non-stop flights to several destinations other than its hubs. "? Got it from this: Focus city. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eightnine2 (talkcontribs) 23:46, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

@Eightnine2, it must match the airline article. None of those carriers have focus cities, only bases! They are not the same thing and you cannot use another Wikipedia article as your source as per WP:CIRCULAR! Rzxz1980 (talk) 18:13, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Took the matter to WT:AIRPORTS, please continue discussing there. Rzxz1980 (talk) 18:33, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

your occupation[edit]

Hi, I've just noticed you are a first-officer for the a320. May I ask what training and what JPL etc... exams you took? Because I would be interested in a career in aviation, since I actually know quite a bit about flying, and I've flown an approach in a cessna 303. I also hold a few awards on FSX :D


Cf38 (talk) 20:47, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Cardiff Airport[edit]

If you visit Zoom Airlines's website you can see that they do not have tickets for sale on its service to Vancouver to Cardiff, thus resulting in myself to change the cardiff airport page. If you prove that this service still operates please tell me.

Many Thanks Loughrey13 —Preceding comment was added at 20:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Cardiff International Airport[edit]

Information.svg Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Cardiff International Airport. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Cardiff Airport is an essential airport for the UK considering its location, the people relying on it, its routes, its role in the economy et cetera Welshleprechaun (talk) 15:50, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I have added no commentary of my own to the article, merely reverted to a previous version, a change made for good reason. You clearly disagree with the wording of the article and as such you should use the article talk page to put forward your point of view on this matter so that everyone can contribute and come to an agreement on the wording. As the 19th largest airport in terms of passenger numbers in 2006, Cardiff is certainly not a major UK airport and the previous text accurately represented the important part it plays in serving Wales. I have therefore reverted your change again and ask that you use the talk page if you wish to start a discussion on the matter. SempreVolando (talk) 16:06, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Durham Tees Valley[edit]

Sorry I might have lost one of your edits when I re-worked the article. It was badly in need of a re-work. Regards MilborneOne (talk) 18:43, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

That's fine, there were only small bits and much of it you rightly removed from the article anyway. Hopefully it is a little better now. SempreVolando (talk) 18:54, 31 December 2007 (UTC)


The new routes i added to the lgw page for easyjet are approved. they are bookable from tommorrow. So dont remove it again. Thanks Josh Rice —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:23, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

My Apologies, have just reaslised this myself via the website. Nice of them to tell their staff first, as usual! SempreVolando (talk) 19:26, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Heathrow expansion[edit]

Thanks for your contribution to the 'opposition' section, very helpful. I have come back with some more changes, I have added back some details about the impact on Sipson (which got watered down a week or so ago), and also the section on the climate camp/injunction (but I have added details of BAA and responses to the camp and injunction). The camp was a very significant event gaining worldwide attention, and provides the context for BAA's involvement in Flying Matters. I think there will also be a call for short paragraphs on climate change, local air pollution and noise (with both points of view expressed) but think it is better to let the section 'settle' first. I look forward to your further contributions and hope the 'health warnings' on the section being removed. Do you agree with the heading change, I think it is now at a more logical position in the table of contents. PeterIto (talk) 12:09, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Reversed your reversion to London City Airport[edit]


I've reversed your reversion to this article. I'm not a participant in Wikipedia:WikiProject Airports, and as best I can tell the article isn't a part of that project anyway, although I guess it should be. I came to the article through Wikipedia:WikiProject London, which the article is part of.

The guideline you refer to seems bizarre from a general WP POV, and I've already raised an objection to it on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports. However that is not why I decided to reverse the reversion. I did that because an undiscussed reversion was IMHO way over the top. Wikipedia:Revert#When_to_revert suggests reversion in a few cases including vandalism, but explicitly not in good faith cases. As an editor not participating in the project you quote the guideline from, and making clearly non-vandalistic edits, I think I should be accorded good faith. -- Chris j wood (talk) 17:13, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

On a more pragmatic note, I feel that linking destinations does resolve some practical difficulties with the unlinked list. For example, without the link, individual readers are going to have to find out for themselves that the destination referred to as Nice is actually Côte d'Azur International Airport. -- Chris j wood (talk) 17:27, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Chris. I just left a note at the WikiProject Airports Talk Page following your comment which crossed with your message, and have commented there on the policy as it stands for not linking the destination names. I apologise if you considered my reversion to be over the top, I did assume good faith in your edit and perhaps should have discussed it first, but it was on the basis that the edit was not satisfactory (in view of the aforementioned rule). I did not mean to cause offence and did explain my reasoning. In the meantime I have made no further changes as discussed on the project talk page since this article may be a good example to use as the discussion on whether to amend the rule (hopefully) progresses. SempreVolando (talk) 17:28, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for your reply and no harm done. I'm happy to abide by whatever the discussion leads to. I've copied my second comment above to the talk page, as it probably belongs better there. -- Chris j wood (talk) 17:32, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Clickair destinations[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

An editor has nominated Clickair destinations, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clickair destinations and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 23:44, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Destinations Sol Airlines[edit]

Hi..i'm Migssant. Hey why you think this article doesn't need the country flags? i think they look good and is better for the lectors.. Thanks for you attention. Have a nice day Lacreta (talk) 12:53, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

incidents-manchester airport[edit]

hi, why did you remove the incident of dragonair cargo from the page. its an accident and the refernce was given —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danfearn77 (talkcontribs) 12:03, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, the guidelines for including an accident / incident are shown at the WikiProject Airports page and state that "Accidents or incidents should only be included if:

  • The accident was fatal to either the aircraft occupants or persons on the ground.
  • The accident involved hull loss or serious damage to the aircraft or airport.
  • The accident invoked a change in procedures, regulations or process that had a wide effect on other airports or airlines or the aircraft industry."

This accident is therefore not relevant for inclusion. SempreVolando (talk) 13:02, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, i thought it was relevant thats all, due to damage to aircraft etc. is the incident about the excel airways takeoff relevant then? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danfearn77 (talkcontribs) 15:25, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

That's fair enough - the reason for the guidelines is simply to prevent airport and airline articles from becoming filled with minor incidents which happen all the time. In terms of the Excel Airways incident it is a more difficult one. I would be inclined to keep this as it was described by the AAIB as a "serious incident" with several safety recommendations made to both the CAA, NATS and Manchester Airport plc (see here), and therefore may comply with the final category for inclusion in the guidelines (invoking a change in procedures within the industry). Best to start a discussion on the article discussion page so the opinions of other editors can be sought on that one! Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 15:55, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, yeh thats fair enough i didnt realise it wasnt relevant enough. I was also thinking if you might know where we can get get up to date passenger numbers for manchester from. Either on a rolling 12 month time line or for the first few months in 2008. It would be good to see if there is any change but i have looked briefly and cant find anything? cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danfearn77 (talkcontribs) 16:21, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

The CAA statistics are really the only official ones I know of - see the CAA Stats Page. If you click on the provisional airports data you will see some January 2008 Provisional Airort Stats which shows Manchester in Jan 2008 having 1,316,690 passengers (down 0.8% on Jan 2007) and the rolling year to Jan 2008 was 21,880,737 (down 1.1% on the rolling year to Jan 2007). The provisional February 2008 stats are due to be on there on Friday next week (14th March). Hope this helps. SempreVolando (talk) 16:36, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Ottawa Macdonald-Cartier International Airport[edit]

I restored the weather link here as it appears in several Canadian airport articles. It serves as an anti-spam link as can be seen here. It links to the official NAV CANADA site rather than advertising some site. At the time (September 2007) there were two different sites that were trying to put links in for weather. I know that there had also been attempts in other airport articles to get various weather sites included. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 08:48, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

LHR Virgin Nigeria[edit]

You were asking for a source for the London Heathrow Airport mention of the Virgin Nigeria Airways service to Lagos from March 29th, which you reverted. Would this timetable do? David Biddulph (talk) 23:41, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi David. You're right - the flight also appears on the BAA timetable. Sorry about that - checked the VK website but saw nothing so assumed it was confusion over LGW/LHR. Feel free to re-revert. SempreVolando (talk) 23:47, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Gatwick Airport Apology[edit]

Sorry about reverting your revert we were probably both waiting for the IP user to stop his multiple edits. Still not the 30th March yet! MilborneOne (talk) 17:32, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem, I assumed that was the case. SempreVolando (talk) 17:37, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Oasis to MAN and DUS[edit]

Is Oasis beginning HKG-MAN and HKG-DUS flights on July 3? Users keep readding back to the destinations list with a reference that I don't find very useful. Couldn't find the flights on their website. It still has Hong Kong to London-Gatwick and Vancouver flights stilll listed but not Dusseldorf or Manchester flights on their schedules. Did they announce it? Thanks! Audude08 (talk) 15:25, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Audude, sorry for not getting back to you sooner, as I have now posted on the WP Airports Discussion I don't believe there is yet any reliable source other than speculation for this route commencing. Until the airline starts to sell flights or publishes a timetable or press release, it shouldn't appear on Wikipedia, so I have removed references to it. SempreVolando (talk) 07:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Hey SempreVolando, about the Oasis flights to DUS and MAN. It is odd that the HK airport website has the flights listed on their schedules for July 4 but neither Oasis Hong Kong Airlines's website or Manchester Airport's website mentions the said flights. Audude08 (talk) 19:14, 31 March 2008 (UTC)


Go to the site of Venice Marco Polo Airport official website (English) and put seasonal schedule, you will see that the flight from London Luton to Venice maky (talk) 20:37, 2 April 2008 (UTC)User:S marky 90


Hello, thanks for the information you data.Mi like to know where is your information? Thanks hello maky (talk) 20:52, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, no problem. Thomsonfly, First Choice, Jerairfly and TUInordic timetables are at This Site. SempreVolando (talk) 20:55, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

MAN Catchment Area[edit]

First of all how seriously do you want to take yourself!? It's not the end of the world by the way, I do appologise that people from all over the UK might just want to use Manchester International at some point in their lives and that doesn't slot in nicely to your little wiki palls ideas. You can tarnish my name all you like over talk pages, but thanks for letting me know eh? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abfab27 (talkcontribs) 18:32, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps you might take a look at Wikipeida's policy on civility? I have been perfectly polite and reasoned in my discussion with you on this topic and would therefore expect the same in return. Judging by your contibution on the discussion at the Manchester Airport page (which I politely invited, so that your views could be debated among other wikipedia editors), the policy is likely to be quite lost on you anyway. SempreVolando (talk) 18:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC)


Nuvola apps important.svg You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Manchester Airport. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Woody (talk) 19:12, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, my apologies for this. I do not make a habit of violating the three-revert rule, with this article unfortunately I and one other editor tried hard and politely to encourage the offending editor to use the discussion page in order to come to consensus before making potentially controversial / against policy edits. Unfortunately this was to no avail as the editor Abfab27 refused to participate in any discussion on the matter, simply responding with a couple of uncivil remarks. SempreVolando (talk) 20:31, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Heck it's not like I'm important, I can't ban you *grin* It was more of a hold on stop it please to both parties :) --Blowdart | talk 16:13, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: easyJet[edit]

No worries, I noted the edit summary you left immediately, and understand the reasoning behind it before you wrote. I'm not a pilot, but it sounds to me like mechanical failure caused a compressor stall, and all the flames were just incompletely consumed fuel igniting after exiting the engine - doesn't strike me as a notable event in itself either. Regards and thanks for your message, WilliamH (talk) 18:50, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

On Your Edit Summary Here...[edit]

Hey there, Sempre. When you are using some kind of policy or project guideline as a reason for an edit, could you please link to that project guideline or policy properly in future? I saw your summary and thought it was page blanking because it was linked wrongly. Only after looking at your page did I realise my blunder and did a self-revert. -- Altiris Helios Exeunt 10:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Apologies for that - did intend to link properly but slip of the keyboard! SempreVolando (talk) 11:06, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Ceased Airline[edit]

Hey there, just out of interest which airline that used to fly in to manchester has ceased all operations?~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danfearn77 (talkcontribs) 09:06, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, it was EuroManx. See my edit here. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 09:08, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

bmi Regional ICAO[edit]


My friend is a bmi regional pilot (on the E135/45) and he assures me that their ICAO is BMA not BMR, so I feel my source is correct.

If you have anything to say, please email me at:


SamNagy (talk) 19:06, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Sam. Unfortunately Wikipedia requires verifiable sources, I'm not suggesting your source is incorrect however an ICAO code can only be used by one airline at once. In this case BMA is used by bmi. It may be that BMI Regional flights are operated under the BMA code, but this does not necessarily make their own allocated ICAO code BMA. I have started a discussion at the article talk page so this can be cleared up; in the meantime the code has been kept as BMR in the article as the BMA code remains unverifiable. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 19:18, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Nuvola apps important.svg You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on BMI Regional. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Whilst you may have citations you're still over 3 revisions in under 24 hours. --Blowdart | talk 19:23, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

BMI Regional ICAO[edit]


Do you want me to send you some realworld flightplans that feature the callsign?


SamNagy (talk) 19:27, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I am aware that the 'Midland' callsign and 'BMA' code are used by BMI Regional, however per my reply above this does not make their allocated ICAO code BMA, per ICAO it is BMR. This is verifiable. If you continue the discussion at Talk:BMI Regional other editors can also contribute and hopefully we can come to consensus. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 19:31, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


Hi. Please note that Silverjet is not defunct. It has suspended operations, not closed down. MrMarmite (talk) 10:16, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


How is the ground collision between LH and Futura not "notable"? It is a collision and LH have requested even that the German equivalent to the AAIB make a report never mind just the British... so I hear. Where do you compile the rules for what is a "notable" accident? AreaControl (talk) 01:08, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. See WP:AIRPORTS article guidelines which include a section on what should / should not be included in Accidents and Incidents sections. This accident only caused minor damage to the aircraft involved and is therefore are not notable. Likewise a (very similar) incident which occured in 2004 was removed as non-notable (see AAIB report here). Therefore just because the AAIB (or national equivalent) investigate an incident and produce a report, this does not necessarily mean it is has encyclopedic notability. These guidelines were introduced to avoid Wikipedia becoming flooded with minor, non-notable aviation incidents which happen regularly all over the world. Hope that helps, and welcome to Wikipedia. SempreVolando (talk) 00:41, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Birmingham International Airport (Retailers)[edit]


This isn't advertising as its not in line with any particular retailer, therefore please do not remove them. Additional info such as Austin Reed & Julian Graves have been added as they opened recently, I note that the other retailers have been on BHX's wikipedia article for a long time hence no reason to remove them.

Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:46, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, unfortunately this information remains non-notable and non-encyclopedic. Remember that Wikipedia is not a travel guide and as such individual resturants, shops, etc... within an airport are not notable. New shops and restaurants will open very regularly at airports around the world, but this has no encyclopedic notability. The fact retailers have been mentioned in the article for some time also has no bearing on their notability. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 14:36, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Thats subjective and whilst I take on board what you say the article advises of developments at airport, hardly giving directions or travel guides to people, therefore it's notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:43, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:NASlogo.jpg)[edit]

You've uploaded File:NASlogo.jpg, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 13:36, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:PLHlogo.jpg)[edit]

You've uploaded File:PLHlogo.jpg, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 00:11, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Travel City Direct[edit]

Nice job removing the advertorial text. You might be interested to know that the text was added by an IP address registered to Virgin Holidays (, which probably explains the tone of language used. I left a COI notice on their talk page. --TimTay (talk) 13:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Ryanair - Bournemouth Airport[edit]

Hi, just a question regarding the reverted edit about where you attained the information to revert the edit, as the Ryanair website shows that all but Turin operations are seasonal. Yellow routes indicate summer routes, blue routes indicate winter routes and grey routes indicate "year round" services. Currently, the website shows that 17 of 18 destinations appear as year round services, of which were changed within the last 2 days. thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:28, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I was using the Bournemouth Airport website (Summer / Winter Destinations Timetables). The Ryanair route map isn't very accurate when it comes to seasonal routes - if you check the timetable on the Ryanair website (Timetables) it confirms that these routes are not bookable until the summer (and Turin ceases for the summer). For example, Palma commences 31st March and ends on 24th October. Ryanair call this "year-round" on their route map! Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 15:44, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, however - i changed the routes all from seasonal to "year round". This is because the website changed the routes from seasonal to year round on the 2nd february 2009 - this is the first time that ryanair have changed the seasonal routes at Bournemouth, shortly after announcing new routes to Faro, Limoges and Reus. Before the change from seasonal to year round services, the 3 new routes were added as year round routes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:30, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

I have re-added the seasonal tags as these routes are demonstratably and verifiably seasonal per the WP:AIRPORTS definition. I have stated the points on the Bournemouth Airport talk page if you wish to make further comment there, and so that other users can read the logic and also contribute to the discussion if they wish. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 10:50, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

BA CityFlyer Flight 8456[edit]

Hi, you removed BA CityFlyer Flight 8456 from BA CityFlyer article. I would like to say maybe the article itself for CJ8456 is not notable but I do believe we should keep the incident on the actual CityFlyer page due to the fact the information may come in helpful, its currently being investigated by AAIB, it did cause damage to aircraft and the airport (closed airport throughout the night) and there was an injury onboard the aircraft. I'd like to add the information and references as validation if you believe it is ok. Thanks. Zaps93 (talk) 22:12, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

London City Airport[edit]

You removed two referenced entries involving accidents at the airport. Whilst neither meet WP:AIRCRASH criteria to make them notable enough to justify a separate article, they are each sufficiently notable to have an entry under the aircraft type, airline involved and airport where it happened. I can't see anything in WP:AIRPORTS that says the incidents are not sufficiently notable for a mention. Mjroots (talk) 11:02, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Crash removal[edit]

Hi, You mis-applied WP:AIRCRASH in this article again. Sub-notable crash events are placed on pages like airport ones, exactly in this manner, by convention. Leondz (talk) 17:44, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Ryanair toilet charge[edit]

Hi, I agree that the piece I added suffers from POV - specifically the word "talent" is not the right one to use.

Can you suggest how we can balance the statement to point out that Mr O'Leary is a well known mischief maker [1] who does this type of thing time and time again, as discussed on the talk page for the article. (talk) 23:33, 6 March 2009 (UTC)


Please mind WP:3RR on Dublin Airport. Toddst1 (talk) 22:42, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Busiest airports in the United Kingdom by total passenger traffic[edit]

Sorry about that. My 2 year old grandson got to the laptop and decided he wanted to start editing Wikipeida and I missed it. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 23:17, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem, assumed it was not intentional! SempreVolando (talk) 23:22, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:TOM Airways.JPG)[edit]


Thanks for uploading Image:TOM Airways.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 22:51, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Emirates Airline[edit]

Hi, the incident i had put was anotable incident for Emirates. It was the first incident of Emirates, in which the engine sparked on fire and take off was aborted. Also, broken debris was left on the runway. It is quite notable, since the Australian safety board launched an investigation, and the engine was sent back to the Rolls royce factory. I think it is quite important. So, please bring it back. (MoHasanie (talk) 19:15, 29 April 2009 (UTC))

But the aircraft did get damaged, as the engine was set on fire. The fact that the Australian safety board was involved is quite serious. You said that they're are hundreads of incidents like this, however major investigations haven't been involved. Even the engine was sent back to the rolls royce factory.(MoHasanie (talk) 19:31, 29 April 2009 (UTC))

Really, well i can't argue with that. I just thought it was important, becasue in a recent article by the Times, they mentioned this incident of emirates, and they also mentioned the johannesburgh incident, and the 2009 march melbourne incident.(MoHasanie (talk) 19:37, 29 April 2009 (UTC))


Hi SV, Zaps93 has changed the Palmair article to reflect that it is an airline and has reverted my reversions. I have tried to explain on the talk page the difference between an airline and a tour operator (albiet a whole aircraft charter operation). I have given up banging my head against a brick wall, but just as a sanity check with your experience could you have a quick look at it. Thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 18:52, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks MO I have commented at the article talk page but agree with your analysis, there's not much more to say! The article is misleading in it's current form. SempreVolando (talk) 13:52, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
OK thanks for your help, the user does not appear to understand what an airline is! MilborneOne (talk) 14:24, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Aer Lingus[edit]

Explain to me your problem with the things i have added to the Aer Lingus Page

  • Some may find it helpful... fair enough you dont but some might
  • The more info the better edcuated you would be after you read the page

Please contact me via my pagey thing... so we can come to some sort of comprimise thanks for you co-operation --Msmyth (talk) 15:46, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Edit of Ryanair's page[edit]

Hi SempreVolando, I don't get why you cut my edit? Why leaving other incidents and not adding new ones? The incident has a source, and passengers need to get transparent news. Do you have any interests in protecting Ryanair, as you are a pilot yourself? I'll unedit the page, and will add in a near future more incidents related to Ryanair as I feel like people try to hide these information. Let's talk if you disagree with my edit. Bye —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:46, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I have replied at your talk page. SempreVolando (talk) 10:29, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Deletion to Incidents - City of Derry Airport[edit]

Greetings SempreVolando

Being a new editor, I now understand your reason for the deletion of the two, what you might call minor, incidents. You are certainly in accordance with wiki policy.

Would you consider allowing them on the basis that they are major in terms of the operation of this particular airport? I make this proposal as a gesture of goodwill on the basis that I believe no-one else would mind.--Cyber Fox 12:13, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

You are too quick to delete[edit]

I am editing the article, give me a break! --Cyber Fox (talk) 16:43, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

An exciting opportunity to get involved![edit]


As a member of the Aviation WikiProject or one of its subprojects, you may be interested in testing your skills in the Aviation Contest! I created this contest, not to pit editor against editor, but to promote article improvement and project participation and camraderie. Hopefully you will agree with its usefulness. Sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here. The first round of the contest may not start until September 1st-unless a large number of editors signup and are ready to compete immediately! Since this contest is just beginning, please give feedback here, or let me know what you think on my talkpage. - Trevor MacInnis contribs 05:16, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


Original Barnstar.png The Original Barnstar
For all your hard work on keeping airline and airport articles in line. MilborneOne (talk) 19:03, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much! SempreVolando (talk) 20:30, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

See BA trouble over Concorde tribute[edit]

London City Airport and BA made a big fan fare about this inaugural flights. Hence relevant.

You can add above reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:16, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the reference. It is not the inaugural flights which I feel are not relevant, they are mentioned in the article already, it is the opinion of the group Campaigners for the return of Concorde. All Wikipedia articles must be written from a neutral point of view and so if this is deemed relevant the opinion of British Airways must also be included to provide balance to the article. However I still maintain that the issue has little encyclopedic relevance.
In the meantime I have started a discussion at the article talk page so that other editors can provide their opinion and we can gain consensus on the issue. Please feel free to add your view there. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 20:50, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Ireland West Airport Knock Editing[edit]

I was just giving info about the routes that were available in 2008 and now. Isn't it worth mentioning that a route to Glasgow was available in 2008 with Bmibaby? It is technically info about the airport, not a travel guide. Isn't it worth mentioning the connecting service to Cork via Dublin with Aer Arann? I see information at the beginning of the Recent Years section about MyTravel's service to Birmingham! Isn't that info about a route? It's not a travel guide. I see other people in the past have had bother with editing of pages. I think we should come to a consensus about the Aer Arann connecting route being in the Ireland West Airport article.

Jamesliveproductions —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesliveproductions (talkcontribs) 21:19, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi. The problem is understanding what Wikipedia is designed to be, and what it isn't. Encyclopedic airport articles are designed to provide things like historic information, location, notable events. etc... They are not designed to list a history of what routes have been operated by airlines at the airport over the years, unless those have some encyclopedic notability (like the first scheduled flights, the first transatlantic flights etc..). You are right to say there is no logic to the MyTravelLite Birmingham service, it has no particular relevance and should be removed.
In terms of the Aer Arann route, WikiProject Airports is quite clear that only non-stop and direct flights should be listed in airport article destinations lists. "List non-stop and direct flights only. That means the flight number and the aircraft, starts at this airport and continues to one or more airports." - this means the Aer Arann Cork service should not be included as an aircraft change is required en-route at Dublin. If you disagree with the project guidelines you should take that up at the project talk page. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 17:43, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi, can I just say, isn't there significance in the information about the Ryanair route to Alicante, as it is the first scheduled route to a European destination?

James, Jamesliveproductions —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesliveproductions (talkcontribs) 18:24, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I don't see why not, provided it is sourced. SempreVolando (talk) 21:01, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Castle Donington[edit]

You said: "Revert: Never heard of anyone refer to an airline's HQ location with reference to an administrative district! Can't see the relevance of this."

Is Castle Donington an incorporate municipality? Or is it just a place name? WhisperToMe (talk) 00:26, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Castle Donington is a place (a town/village), in which BMI's headquarters are located. My edit to the article did not remove reference to Castle Donington, but to North West Leicestershire, which is an administrative district, whose location and in particular boundaries are unlikely to be familiar to most people. It is also of little relevance to the BMI article, as it is not a place. Hope this makes sense? SempreVolando (talk) 17:44, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
I am aware that North West Leicestershire was removed. What I was getting at was, Does Castle Donington have a recognized municipal government? If it does, then North West Leicestershire would be not necessary. If it does not, and it is entirely under the jurisdiction of North West Leicestershire, then North West Leicestershire would be necessary as it would be the local government. WhisperToMe (talk) 23:48, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, I fail to see why this is necessary. I can't see any reference in WP:AIRLINES or WP:COMPANIES stating that it is necessary or preferable to state the local authority / administrative local government of the town / city in which a company elects to have it's headquarters located. In my view it is irrelevant and not preferable as the names of these local government areas are often misleading and likely to be familiar to very few editors. The important and relevant information is the geographical location only. North West Leicestershire District Council has no juristiction or governance over BMI, and has nothing to do with the operation of the airline, except that BMI will pay corporate taxes (known as 'business rates') to the council for their headquarters building. In return, the council basically provide a regular waste collection to the company at this location. What relevance does this have to an encyclopedic article about a company? SempreVolando (talk) 21:33, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Malaga Airport Expert (And Page Improvements)[edit]

Hello SempreVolando

As you have may already noticed, since I've joined Wikipedia, the Malaga Airport page has had a massive expansion. The reason is that I am an expert of Malaga Airport. It is my favourite airport and i have flown the airport 11 times, going for the 12th this Easter. If you're ever lost or need help about the airport, you know who to ask.

Just need to know, is there any Improvements i can do to this page? Keep in mind that there is some things I might not be able to resource as they can be very complicated to resource, like the gate numbers being changed. (The page with the information gets deleted two hours after the flight leaves)

Thank You

--MKY661 (talk) 18:06, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Malaga Airport Graph[edit]

Hi again

Just like to say thank you very much for adding the graph to the Malaga airport page.

--MKY661 (talk) 16:55, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Also, are you sure TUIfly have stopped flying to Malaga?

Edinburgh AIrport and Birmingham Airport[edit]

Well, according to this article:, it states that EDI has overtaken BHX as being the 6th busiest airport in the UK. Snoozlepet (talk) 18:04, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Can we keep an eye on this? The scotsman in the source above got its information directly from EDI which is hardly reliable as any airport is going to "big itself up" to the local media. The official CAA stats show BHX 6th, EDI 7th. [1]
The reference from the Scotsman refers to the latest (provisional) data published by the CAA for February 2010 (here), wheras the Wikipedia airport articles (and the busiest airports article) refer to final statistics for the full year 2009 (Jan-Dec). The latest data (though not final yet) shows that Edinburgh moved into 6th place for the 1st March 2009 to 28th February 2010 period with 9,022,434 passengers vs. 9,014,372 for Birmingham. The problem is that airports with passenger totals close to one another will inevitably overtake one another and 'flip-flop' in the rankings from time to time if rolling year to date figures are used. Wikipedia articles on the other hand aren't there to provide a 'running commentary' and so generally only look at whole year statisitics. The statements in both airport articles on their ranking in the UK are clearly correct as they are based on 2009 statistics. When the February 2010 statistics are made final (and published here) it may be worthy of a comment in the statistics section of the Edinburgh airport article, but it should not replace the correct statement in the lead section which refers to 2009. SempreVolando (talk) 11:31, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Agreed. Up until now, the rankings on here have been based on Annual reports rather than the monthly ones. Even if the monthly report says that EDI is 6th, the official monthly report isn't released until 22 March, so changing the stats now is speculative. It's worth a mention, but not changing lead paragraphs over, because as you say, there may be leap frogging every month (could you imagine all the tables in the busiest airports article if all the monthly numbers were continuously published there?!) WillDow (Talk) 12:02, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Irish Airport Graphs (Help)[edit]

Sempre, could i ask you how or could you create Airport graphs for Cork, Dublin and Shannon Airports in Ireland. Ive created a new Busiest airports in the Republic of Ireland by total passenger traffic and they would go down nicely with the airports. Hope you can get back soon.Kavs8 (talk) 00:50, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Monarch Strange[edit]


Please may i ask, why is everything being deleted on the Monarch page. everything in 2010 seems to get vanished?


--MKY661 (talk) 08:05, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Monarch Configs[edit]

Here are the steps from the website

Step 1: Choose Flights, i will use LGW-MAH as an example

Step 2: Who is flying and extras?, Enter name, choose insurance, bags, meals etc, i will use Mr Hi Bye

Step 3: Choose Seats, seat maps displayed, this flight operated by A320, seating 174 seats

hope that helps —Preceding unsigned comment added by Awwdabaaby (talkcontribs) 12:43, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks - unfortunately that can't be used as a reference in Wikipedia though. I think we just have to wait for Monarch to update the seating configurations on their website where the current reference refers. I will contact the airline to ask whether the latest configurations can be uploaded there and see what they say. SempreVolando (talk) 13:59, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Images & B757-200[edit]

Hi again

Just asking, how do you add images from websites from wikipedia?

Also, when you deleted the possible orders of a B757 for Monarch, the reason i did not reference it is because one of the cabin crew told me that Monarch are looking for some more 757's.

thanks --MKY661 (talk) 19:47, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Largest Operators[edit]

Hi. you know when you deleted the monarch largest operator thing? well i read the message on the history page, so do you want me to add the information you said to all of the UK airlines.

Eg Thomas Cook is the largest A330 operator in the UK, BA is the largest B747 operator in the UK etc.


--MKY661 (talk) 15:41, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi, no what I was saying was that almost every airline is the largest (or sole) operator of a certain type in their country - so the fleet tables would be full of these notes if we did it by country. Being the largest operator in the world of a particular aircraft type is notable and is usually included (e.g. Delta is the largest B757 operator in the world), but including it by country is too much. Thomas Cook, for example, is the largest (and only) UK operator of the B757-300, but with only 2 in the fleet it's hardly noteworthy. Hope this makes sense? Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 16:15, 27 May 2010 (UTC)


That's been driving me batty ;-)

I live 20 minutes from the airport, so I don't get too concerned about the current services (as I see them whenever I pass the airport...) but the uncited future schedules annoy me, particularly as it seems to be just one or two uncommunicative users doing it.

Cheers, TFOWRpropaganda 16:47, 27 May 2010 (UTC)


Why have you removed Ryanair as a hub at Standsted. It is the airlines largest hub with over 40 ac based and over 100 routes served from the airprot. Jamie2k9 (talk) 20:39, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Ryanair have a large base at Stansted, but it is not a hub per the airline definition. You cannot book a ticket from Glasgow Prestwick to Agadir via London Stansted on Ryanair for example, you must purchase two separate tickets. It is not the same as British Airways at Heathrow or Lufthansa at Frankfurt, where this is possible and quite common. These are examples of a hub operation. Low-cost airlines like Ryanair and easyJet don't have hubs, just bases. Hope that makes sense. SempreVolando (talk) 20:46, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Norwich International Airport[edit]


That report, on it's own, does not meet criteria I agree.

There is a general trend though with three overruns prior to the tarmacing of the concrete 09 end of 27 in 2005

Since 2005 there have been no overruns.

Chaosdruid (talk) 05:30, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer[edit]

Wikipedia Reviewer.svg

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:32, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Making deletions at Dublin Airport[edit]

First of all congratulations on your excellent user page and I am jealous that I never achieved my boyhood dream of becoming a pilot and ended up an accountant! Turning to less important matters, I noticed that you deleted a piece on the contract awarded to run bookshops at the new terminla 2 at Dublin airport. This featured on a number of media outlets including Ireland's largest selling newspaper and it shows either stupidity on the part of the management or sharp practise on the part of WH Smith (the truth being somewhere between the two) and is worthy of inclusion. Nonetheless I would welcome your thoughts before engaging in an edit war. Skreen (talk) 12:07, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Malaga Airport Graph (edit)[edit]

Hello again

How do you make graphs because i need to add the 2010 statistics to the graph at malaga. (Yes AENA have revealed the 2010 statistics)

--MKY661 (talk) 23:53, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I create the graphs myself and upload them. Normally I wait until final full year statistics are published for most airports (in the UK this happens around mid-March). Since AENA are far quicker than other countries at publishing final stats I will try to update the Malaga and Palma graphs this evening. SempreVolando (talk) 00:04, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

OK thanks. I will also consider making a statistics table for Alicante As well.

I have also noticed that a citation needed for the average age of the Jet2 737-800 fleet. What i did to find it (Its on the same page on the website) and it tells you the age of the aircraft (There is only one 737-800 in the fleet at the moment). I also use for finding the aircraft type fleet age.

--MKY661 (talk) 00:29, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Just added Alicante Statistics table --MKY661 (talk) 01:07, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Also, do you think we should add statistic tables and graphs for the majority of Spanish airports. I won't be able to do the rest until tomorrow though. --MKY661 (talk) 02:04, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

New statistics[edit]

Hello. just added a statistics table for Gran Canaria, Tenerife South & Lanzarote. Also added Cargo to Alicante & Palma and filled in missing operations.

--MKY661 (talk) 23:07, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

More Graphs Ready For You![edit]

Hello SempreVolando. I have just added statistics for Fuerteventura and Tenerife North.

Also the graphs still need to be added for Lanzarote, Gran Canaria, Tenerife South & Ibiza.

Thanks for your help, and i hope to do Bilbao sometime this week. --MKY661 (talk) 14:31, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Etihad incident[edit]

Re your removal, why is the incident not notable enough to mention? I agree that it is not notable enough for a stand-alone article, but the escorting of the aircraft to Stansted by the RAF should give enough notability for a mention. According to Pprune, the unruly passenger made a bomb threat. Either this has not been picked up by RSs yet, or it is a rumour. Which is why I didn't add the info. Mjroots (talk) 16:26, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi, WP:AIRPORTS and WP:AIRLINES has guidelines for the notability of aircraft accidents / incidents and their inclusion on these pages. Largely, non-notable or minor incidents are excluded so that these articles do not become cluttered with minor, non-notable events such as this one, which while relatively rare do happen from time to time. See the criteria here. Basically, incidents / accidents should be fatal or result in a hull loss to qualify. Thanks SempreVolando (talk) 16:32, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
I'm well versed in the various notability debates. An accident does not have to result in a hull loss or even substantial damage to qualify for an article. I believe the rarity of the event gives sufficient notability for a mention, but not an article. Will raise the issue at WT:AV where you are welcome to comment. Mjroots (talk) 16:35, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Ok that's fine. It would go against the project guide to include it though, which was introduced some years ago (after much debate and discussion). Will happily comment on any new proposal however. Airborne intercepts of civil jets by military aircraft are much less common than you think by the way, the airline I work for had 2 last year alone over Europe. In some countries during the busy summer months, there is more than one per day. They usually come about because of loss of communications issues but disruptive passenger incidents are even more common than intercepts sadly! Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 16:42, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Raised at WT:AV#Etihad incident. Mjroots (talk) 16:47, 24 January 2011 (UTC)


Hello. Sorry for the delay but the statistics for Bilbao is now ready.

When do you create the graphs. Is it around march time when you do the UK ones?

--MKY661 (talk) 23:59, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I've been a bit busy recently, but will try to do the Spanish airport graphs this week. The UK ones should be around the third week in March when the final stats are released. SempreVolando (talk) 10:33, 8 February 2011 (UTC)


Hi. You know you are a Pilot for a UK airline, which one is it? And which airport are you based?

--MKY661 (talk) 20:27, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I fly the A330 for Thomas Cook Airlines, from Manchester and London Gatwick. SempreVolando (talk) 10:36, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Im going from manchester on Friday, but it is on a Monarch, sorry (ZB574 to GIB) --MKY661 (talk) 12:52, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

EasyJet fleet[edit]

There's already 2 references: CAA, and Airbus O&D. The last one gives the figures I updated (or tried to update...), as well as do Airfleets and CH-Aviation (that I'm adding right now). Note also that when reverting the fleet total, you're also reverting the number of orders that the CAA reference doesn't reference at all (figures from Airbus O&D, obviously up-to-date). Slasher-fun (talk) 16:03, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Also, I think it's better to specify the exact aircraft type of the aircrafts operated by EZS, it mainly helps for calculating the remaining orders. Slasher-fun (talk) 16:08, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Airbus A330/A340 photos[edit]

Hello SempreVolando, thanks for your time in advance :) Since you're also a pilot on the A330, do you mind taking a photo of the cockpit, similar to File:Airbus A380 Qantas Cockpit.JPG. Regarding the wing, I'd like two photos of the both aeroplane models (A330 and A340) from a front-on angle, encompassing the whole wing from tip to tip, like this page this page. Please make them as similar as possible, because I'm thinking of placing both of them next to each other so the reader could compare them. If I need a picture of aeroplane parts in the future, do you mind lending me a hand? I won't be needing a lot, just now and then. Also, I'll try to promote your photos to "Featured Picture" status as well. Words can't describe how appreciative I am towards you Face-grin.svg --Sp33dyphil (TC • I love Wikipedia!) 08:35, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

PS Have you tried out for A380 courses!?


Hi. The spam problem has been fixed so the edit i did has changed to the way it should of been. (The other one was a mess wasn't it) The photos are on the side because it matches other articlews like Manchester and Palma. Thanks and sorry about the mess i did. --MKY661 (talk) 17:11, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Monarch Employees[edit]

Hi. I do have a reference for the employees of Monarch but it is not on the internet. It it in the Current Airliner World issue. It has a pullout and it says how many employees each induvidual airline has. Not quite sure how to reference it though. --MKY661 (talk) 12:50, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry - I found a reference on the airline website and added it. It might be slightly out of date but it's close. SempreVolando (talk) 13:03, 28 February 2011 (UTC)


Hi. Are the statistics for the UK done yet? --MKY661 (talk) 18:33, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

by the way, type in MikeySeedot on youtube if you want to see some of my flights

Great. Look fab and they are great for the article.
Will the spanish ones be done too? most of the main ones already have statistics. --MKY661 (talk) 22:25, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

London Stansted Airport[edit]

Please could you explain to me in what way this edit is vandalism. It looks like a good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia to me and as such, per WP:VANDALISM is not vandalism. Dpmuk (talk) 14:03, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Why remove IATA codes?[edit]

I added the IATA codes to the list of busiest airports because they were very useful to me. I was searching for flights using the "Matrix Airfare Search" in ITA software. I wanted to make a list of large airports to find good flights, and I realized that one good approach would be to work from this Wikipedia page. So I added the IATA codes to help other people --- besides, the US version of the same page has the same codes. I don't think that it's helpful to remove it just because the information exists elsewhere; it's a very small amount of extra space on the page and it truly does serve a purpose for some people. Greg Kuperberg (talk) 17:54, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

File:CWLpax.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:CWLpax.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:43, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you![edit]

Meissen-teacup pinkrose01.jpg Hello. Thanks for your concern in contents about the recent issue of Qatar Airways and Juneyao Airlines.

The indicent, which Juneyao Airlines refuse to give way to a Mayday aircraft and risked deadly air crash in Shanghai Hongqiao Airport, is the first case in civil aviation history, also caused hot argument in public. Although the emergency landing succeed and no fatalities, the indicent was reported very widely by media, well known by people in a short time. There is over 700,000 pages in Chinese, over 200,000 pages in English and over 10,000 pages in Japanese about this indicent. This case is not finished yet and continue widely noticed by public. Today, the pilot has been cancelled the license and the airline has been punished.

I have read the guideline you provided that I realized this content probably not meet the "Accident". However, in my opinion it is really notable, and not off from Wikipedia:Notability so Wikipedia should contain it. I am not sure if it should create a single page or simply add to existing page, I referred Chinese version that it has been created only a paragraph in airline pages.

I would like to ask for your opinion, about this case, if it should be wrote or not, or write in which form or place.

Thank you. Hitomi (talk) 06:57, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

About indicent of Qatar Airways and Juneyao Airlines[edit]

Sorry to bother you again, since I didn't received any reply or comment for last message.

The indicent, which Juneyao Airlines refuse to give way to a Qatar Airways "Mayday" aircraft and risked deadly air crash in Shanghai Hongqiao Airport, recently reviewed by several users in English wikipedia and other language projects, are considered as "extremely noteworthly"[2], etc. Also with the reasons of the impact in public and social climate, I think this content should be kept although it may not formed an "accident"(Of course, may be not wrote in "accident" section).

Kindly reply if you have different opinion. Thank you. Hitomi (talk) 19:09, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

British Midland International[edit]

Please see Norwich and Peterborough Building Society, Chelsea Building Society, Barnsley Building Society, Britannia (former building society), Derbyshire Building Society, Cheshire Building Society and others for examples which contradict your edit summary. Chrisieboy (talk) 10:08, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi. Ok no harm done, it's just my opinion! I think it looks messy that's all. I note the examples you use are all financial institutions, where trading / brand names may differ from ownership due to takeovers. Just because there are other wikipedia articles which use a different format, doesn't make it the right one! Following the same logic wouldn't we have to change the airline name above the infobox to things like Flybe Group PLC t/a Flybe or Limited t/a Jet2? I just don't think that's in the sprit of the concise summary the infobox is designed to provide, particularly when trading names and ownership details can be done to death elsewhere in the article. In any event, the issue should be raised on the article discussion page to gain consensus from a few other editors. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 10:59, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

New Monarch A320's[edit]

Hello SempreVolando. You know you removed the A320 order on the Monarch page? They are second hand and are due from Air Berlin in March 2012. Also says on the monarch website that they are getting them :)

Thanks --MKY661 (talk) 12:23, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I found the source and added it to the Notes column. The Orders / Options columns in airline articles are only for new aircraft ordered from the manufacturer. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 13:27, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Need urgent input for WP:AIRPORT[edit]

Hi SempreVolando! We need some consensus quickly regarding listing of UA/CO destinations in airport articles. Please come to comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports#CO.2FUA_SOC_2011-11-30 at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, HkCaGu (talk) 04:19, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Listing of London Southend Airport as a destination[edit]

An IP continues to change the destination for London Southend Airport in airport pages it will fly to. Don't know if Southend Airport is considered a London airport. Snoozlepet (talk) 21:42, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

New Airline Format[edit]

I don't appreciate you undoing edits on many of the airline pages. I have no problem discussing this with you but you don't undo an edit and just give 2 words if its a change in format. I am 100% willing to listening to your excuses and reasonings but there needs to be discussion before changing it. I changed it to the new format after the new format actually came out so there was no need for a long discussion as it was the actual new format. Cali4529 (talk) 04:32, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

The format does not comply with WP:AIRLINES infobox format criteria. You are welcome to start a discussion there is you think it should be changed. We don't need a collapsable 3-line space in the infobox for a field which is only supposed to contain one number. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 04:35, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
You can see this being snotty but it is not meant to be so, can you show me where it says it in you WP:Airlines link because I can't find it. Cali4529 (talk) 04:37, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
See Template:Infobox airline, it lists the infobox categories and states what each should contain. In this case fleet_size: The number of aircraft currently in service (delivered, in service aircraft only - no orders, purchase options or aircraft in desert storage). In the meantime I've started a discussion at WP:AIRLINES inviting comment in case other editors agree with your format, as the template would have to be changed if so. Thanks SempreVolando (talk) 04:44, 11 January 2012 (UTC)


Hello SempreVolando. Just asking will you be making your Graps again this year for the total passenger numbers? Reason I asked was because Aena now have their statistics for 2011 and i have added some to Wiki (AGP, ALC, PMI, LPA, TFS & TFN). I will also get some more done tomorrow. Thanks --MKY661 (talk) 19:27, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi MKY661. Actually the statistics published by Aena are provisional 2011 totals, not final figures which aren't released until around May each year. While it's useful to include them in articles, they must be noted as 2011 (provisional). In the same sense it isn't really worth doing the graphs until final figures are released as they do sometimes change quite a bit. The UK provisional 2011 stats will also be released next week but the same applies. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 20:54, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Ok no problem. Just done a few more (ACE, IBZ, FUE & BIO) and I have said that they are provisional. Thanks MKY661 (talk) 18:04, 12 January 2012 (UTC)


hi, Should the number of aircraft movements be based on commercial terminal flights or all flights, the figures on DUB page for 2010 are all but I have added 2011 commercial terminal flights only as don't have data for all flights. Which should it be? Jamie2k9 (talk) 23:28, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Aircraft Movements should include all take-offs and landings at an airport (regardless of type). The term for commercial flights only is Air Transport Movements. What is your source for the movements data? If it's IAA, it seems they have stopped reporting total movements and now only report on commercial movements, so we might have to annotate the data differently. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 08:46, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Air France[edit]

Per WP:EW, please DO NOT REVERT the IP. I appreciate it can be frustrating, but there are other editors about who are free to revert. I'll take a closer look at this myself and maybe semi the article to force discussion at talk. Mjroots (talk) 07:07, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Airport Table Voting[edit]


Voting for the Airport Linking Format has begun please visit Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports under the Airline/Airport Table Voting column. Thanks! Cali4529 (talk) 02:26, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Manx 2 Jetstream accident[edit]

The last sentence of the source's blurb states "The aircraft sustained substantial damage." Please revert your removal of the accident from the articles. Mjroots (talk) 13:36, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

You're quite right sorry I missed that entirely! It may still be an issue with Aviation Herald's "sensationalist" language (it's not the most reliable of sources at the best of times particularly on new incidents). In the picture it doesn't look too bad, but with older types like this, it could also easily be a write-off. I've restored the incident let's keep an eye on subsequent reports, especially AAIB in time. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 13:47, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the revert. Of course, other websites are available, such as Aviation Safety Network, and the BBC. Apparently the incident made The Sun today, or so I was told. I doubt that the incident is notable enough for a stand alone article, but it is worth mentioning. Mjroots (talk) 16:39, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

List of the busiest airports in the Republic of Ireland by total passenger traffic[edit]

Has the page been moved for consistancy or another reason? Its just that the title seems a bit long and over descriptive? If you could reply on the articles talkpage it would be good. Thanks.Murry1975 (talk) 12:40, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

World's busiest airports[edit]

Hello. Could you express your opinion here about the Guangzhou airport.-- (talk) 21:59, 30 March 2012 (UTC)


Hi! I noticed this edit - You said "Removed previously, abnormal convention to state Local Authority Area"

I don't understand what is going on. Exeter municipality and East Devon municipality are two separate places. The airport is within East Devon, not Exeter. The company head office is on the airport property. WhisperToMe (talk) 16:08, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi, the issue is that East Devon is not a place, it is a local government / local authority area. The article already states that the airline is based in Devon (the accepted geographical county with which most are likely to be familiar). It is not normal on Wikipedia to state the local authority area a company is based in. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 11:21, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Humberside Airport[edit]

Good afternoon

I am afraid that I dont agree with your removal of the KLM detail. This is a FACT, not promotional and not incorrect. If the page is allowed to show a reduction in overall pax numbers, then why, with respect, is it not allowed to expand on the numbers and provide detail that gives greater depth of information? The H4U collapse is also relevant.

You state that its not neutral. I would argue that the removal of the detail provides an unbalanced view.

The 10k plus increase for KLM during the last 12 months is, I believe, an important piece of information which is neither promotional nor inflammatory.

Why also delete the point about the airport having its own fuel farm?

Clearly you are a highly experienced contributor; non the less, as you neither fly, operate or work from HUY I would like you to explain why you felt this huge edit was required?

Kind regards Latituded610 Latituded610 (talk) 16:19, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

N.B Happier with the changes now. Perhaps you can suggest how we provide the validation for the helicopter movements other than from my own chroma report? The CAA dont show this as separate information on their statistics. I would have to get a report produced. However, this is a fact,again, and is useful to have it shown.

I would also like to point to the government discussion paper that shows a potential for HUY to have some 10 million pax in another 25 years. This may be somewhat optimistic (clearly the airport wont look anything like it does today)

A brand new ILS has just been installed at a cost of 1.2 million, finished and approved for use in late March 2012. Is this allowed to be mentioned or would this be a NPOV?

regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Latituded610 (talkcontribs) 17:14, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi, firstly I would suggest raising all these issues on the article discussion page so that other editors can also add their comments and opinion. The CAA do produce an annual report of passengers and air transport movements by fixed and rotary wing for each airport and the 2011 report is here. It shows Humberside had the 4th highest number of helicopter movements in the UK in 2011 (after Aberdeen, Norwich and Scatsta), and 4th also by total passengers by helicopter. This might be worth mentioning somewhere. Any report you would be able to produce would likely fall foul of WP:NOR, unless it was independently published. There is no harm in having details of future developments, as the article is missing lots of detail on that front, for example the Airport Masterplan and government discussion paper are not even mentioned, and a new ILS system is probably worthy of comment provided an independent source is quoted. SempreVolando (talk) 17:37, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Humberside Aiport and Antonov 12 DG flight[edit]


I have several images of the Antonov 12 that arrived at HUY last week; our first one of its kind for both the plane and cargo type. Is this an acceptable image to show? ALso, how do you embed the picture?


Latituded610 (talk) 07:21, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't think an An-12 would be all that notable but if the image quality is good enough, particularly if it shows a good amount of the airport as well, then it might add to the article. You would have to upload it to Wikimedia Commons first by creating an account and following the instructions there before you could add it into the article here. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 12:56, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Ten is more than enough for an airport of this size ?[edit]

Hi there

I notice you cut the list of busiest destinations at Aberdeen airport down to ten, which I think is not enough. Since we disagree, could you please point to any independent source for ascertaining how many is enough for a particular size airport.

Thanks Paulalexdij (talk) 23:06, 15 June 2012 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, SempreVolando. You have new messages at Oddbodz's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

List of Japan Airlines incidents and accidents[edit]

About the removal of incidents in the 2000s, please note one has a Wikipedia article (2001 Japan Airlines mid-air incident) WhisperToMe (talk) 18:38, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

About Jetstar Hong Kong[edit]

Jetstar Hong Kong should not be created right now. They've just announced their plan but without further action. It is impossible to establish an airlines without Hong Kong's investor.--Dragoon16c (talk) 05:53, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Glasgow International Airport[edit]

You added two fact tags here (just the Thomas Cook section) without a problem. However, when the next edit was made look what happened to the table. I was able to fix it by removing the two tags and the uncited material here. It had to be those two. Any tags removed from another part of the article didn't solve the problem. I've reported it at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Too many fact tags in one section?. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 14:35, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

How can improve AA text?[edit]

Regarding to this edit, can you give your inputs, how to improve it? You saying 'It doesn't really have encyclopaedic notability. Not a spotters / enthusiasts guide'. Thanks for help and inputs. --B767-500 (talk) 14:56, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Merry Xmas![edit]

Snoozlepet (talk) 05:07, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Monarch Aircraft On Order[edit]

Hello I remember you reverting one of my edit's saying Monarch do not have any aircraft on order. I have found referenes (But not sure if suitiable for Wikipedia) that they do actually have some coming over next year. These are:

  • G-OZBZ A321 c/n ???? due late March 2013 (second hand)
  • G-ZBAA A320 c/n 5526 due late March 2013
  • G-ZBAB A320 c/n 5581 due late April 2013
  • G-ZBAD A321 c/n 5582 due early May 2013
  • G-ZBAE A321 c/n 5606 due late May 2013

Plus 2 A321 due before summer 2013.

References to prove this:

Hope this helps. Thanks --MKY661 (talk) 19:19, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Shannon Airport[edit]

yes, I no you can't board a flight thats y i have it in the notes.If you could board the flight i would of had it in destinations and the reason i have it there is because it is the only airline atm that uses us pre clearance at Shannon airport. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:32, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Qantas DXB[edit]

Qantas's press release is calling Dubai a "hub" but it is a secondary hub. (talk) 02:44, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Your Math issues[edit]

This is the last time I'll provide you with a source, you are clearly inept at finance and/or math. Kavs8 (talk) 11:45, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Scoot fleet[edit]

9V-OTE now in operational as of yesterday. Check — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:58, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

That's fine but planespotters is not a reliable source unfortunately. The article has to match the reliable reference (CAAS database). Once it's updated the aircraft can be added. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 13:25, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Scoot Airlines[edit]


I notice that you have omitted the news regarding the "World's Longest Virtual Flight" contest and the fiasco that follows. This World Longest Virtual Flight contest is part of the Scoot Air 1st Anniversary celebrations and should be newsworthy to the history of Scoot Air. The contest has attracted thousands of contestants and whatever happens to the contest involves some elements of public interests. The aftermaths of this contest are well reported in mainstream local media in Singapore.

You have cited "No encyclopaedic notability" for this omission. Independent media sources/references from the media have been previously cited articles.

Care to enlighten me the reason for your omission? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:28, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. This is an encyclopedia, so only information of lasting significance would qualify as notable (see WP:NOTABLE), this is more of a temporary news item. Some controversy over a competition run by the airline would hardly be of any encyclopaedic relevance 5 or 10 years from now (notability is not temporary). Also, Wikipedia is not a news service. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion. For example, routine news reporting on things like announcements, sports, or celebrities is not a sufficient basis for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Hope that helps, thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 05:23, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Air Mauritius[edit]

Hi there, Sempre Volando. I noticed that you removed the ″Incidents and accidents″ section from the article. Don't you think that, for the sake of completeness, it is approrpiate to include a section pointing out that the airline had not experienced a deadly accident in its history? Cheers.--Jetstreamer Talk 19:47, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

  • (TPS) excuse me - just to comment that we dont normally have an accident and incidents section if they have not been any, fwiw. If it is notable that it has had no accidents and that is backed up by commentary from reliable sources (rather than a nil count from ASN) then that could just be mentioned in the main body of the article. MilborneOne (talk) 11:33, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your message. I don't think there's a particular need for completeness in featuring a section in the article to simply state... well nothing really. It should go without saying that the lack of an 'Incidents and accidents' section implies that there have been no notable ones in the airline's history. The WP:AIRLINES page content template also suggests sections such as 'Codeshare agreements' and 'Airline Affinity Programs', so it's a bit like saying if an airline doesn't have any of these we should insert the section(s) anyway then state they don't have one, which seems a bit illogical to me. SempreVolando (talk) 14:32, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, your arguments sound pretty reasonable to me. Thanks for your response.--Jetstreamer Talk 00:40, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Aer Lingus fleet[edit]

Can you keep an eye on this page? IPs continue to include 757s in the fleet table as explained countless times that the aircraft will be damp-leased and will not be part of the Aer Lingus fleet. Rzxz1980 (talk) 23:22, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Thai Lion Air[edit]

Consider revising the {{Lion Air}} with respect to Thai Lion Air. Thank you. --G(x) (talk) 17:12, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Boeing 777[edit]

Hmm, the USA Today article says otherwise. SQ has 57 according to that. SQ's fleet section on Wikipedia also reflects this. Where did you find that it operates 61? (talk) 06:38, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Here: List of Aircraft on Singapore Register at 31 May 2014. The Singapore Airlines Fleet section on wikipedia concurs, total 61. Do you have a link to the USA today article? SempreVolando (talk) 08:06, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, thanks for the reply! Here is the link, although I really can't be sure it's entirely accurate: . (talk) 15:22, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Malindo Air[edit]

Malindo Air is listed as having 2 parent companies. I have removed Lion Air which only has 49% of shares of the airline. Can you take a look? Thanks! (talk) 05:16, 18 July 2014 (UTC)


Hi.You recently reverted a category change I made to Citywing. Grateful if you could double check - it is selling and operating scheduled flights around UK cities using wet-leased aircraft in Citywing colours - much as predecessor Manx2 did (and many other airlines do). Seems to me to be an airline, rather than a travel company. Ardfern (talk) 23:10, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

    • Forget it, I see Manx2 is not listed as an airline either, bizarre. Sorry to disturb you. Ardfern (talk) 23:42, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

British Airways- January 2015[edit]

Hi there, I am Class455fan1 (talk) 21:31, 19 January 2015 (UTC)Class455fan1 . I was alerted that you had undone my edit on the British Airways page about the Boeing 737-400's, Boeing 767's and 747's in BA's fleet

Please note that this is the current number of these aircraft in the fleet. I have since undone your edit and replaced references with more up-to-date ones from

Please think twice before undoing an edit


Class455fan1 (talk) 21:22, 19 January 2015 (UTC)Class455fan1

Sorry but planespotters is not a reliable source, the table info is sourced from the UK CAA Aircraft Register which is regarded as the most reliable source, and the data in the table must match the reference. Please discuss at the article talk page if you have any queries. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 03:06, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Template: A350 Orders and Deliveries[edit]

SemprVolando, the figures are correct as of December 2014 because they are cumulative. Note the zero orders and deliveries for 2015. It was et up for 2015 to facilitate the next month's O&Ds in 2015 because some people find it tricky. Ex nihil (talk) 05:21, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

garuda indonesia incident[edit]

hey! i wrote about garuda atr72 incident and you deleted it. why? any words or something wrong? tell me! thanks before Muhammadariotama (talk) 10:30, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

List of Airbus A320 operators
added links pointing to Belair, Berkut, Maldivian, Travel Service, Niki, Global Airways and Hi Fly

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[edit]

This has already been discussed before and it has been deemed a reliable source by consensus. (talk) 23:08, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

The most recent discussion I can find on the topic was actually inconclusive. is a blog site and Blogs are not reliable sources. Please share the discussion where this was deemed a reliable source. The NokScoot website is a far more credible source in this case, and it lists two destinations. SempreVolando (talk) 14:39, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Here is the link to the discussion with the use of at Addis Ababa International Airport years back (Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Airports/Archive_12#User_of_airlineroute.net_in_the_Addis_Ababa_Bole_International_Airport_article). If you want to start a new discussion, please do so at the project talk page. Citydude1017 (talk) 15:06, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, I didn't see that or find it in my search. SempreVolando (talk) 15:12, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Germanwings Flight 9525 crash and Barcelona Airport[edit]

This crash continues to be added by an IP to the accidents and incidents section of the article even though the accident did not place at or near the airport. The plane crashed in the French Alps which is nowhere near Barcelona Airport. Citydude1017 (talk) 06:27, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll continue to monitor it as well as the Düsseldorf Airport page but for now it seems to be kept clear of both pages. SempreVolando (talk) 02:50, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Hidden notes were made to both articles. Hope this will help. (talk) 04:35, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Philippine Airlines destinations[edit]

A user continues to add flags to the table at this articles as per Wikipedia:WikiProject_Airlines/page_content says not to use flags. I have requested protection and warned user for edit warring and report him admin. Can you keep an eye? Thanks! Citydude1017 (talk) 18:11, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye on this one. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 02:51, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

The article has been fully protected until 10 April 2015. User that has been warring at the article has been blocked for 31 hours. I believe he will return to the article after it is protected. (talk) 04:34, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Aegean Airlines destinations map[edit]

Hello, you recently removed the destinations map on Aegean Airlines destinations "by project consensus". I have invested a lot of time in creating and maintaining that map on a daily basis, making sure all destinations served are listed correctly, with no destinations missing, correct "begins" dates, etc. Since this particular map is actually helpful and always up to date, why do you believe it should be removed?

By the way, I understand the removal of flags, it is per WP:AIRLINES

Best regards, Thakaran 14:33, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Belfast International Airport: Accidents and Incidents[edit]

Just noticed that you deleted TCX8507, but why? There was a reference and true information and it could have turned out way worse. RMS52 (talk) 07:59, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi, the criteria for accident / incident inclusion on wikipedia airport pages is as stated in WP:AIRCRASH. This one doesn't qualify. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 08:08, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jetairfly destinations, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Macedonia. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:49, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

United Seasonal Route[edit]


Just wanted to let you know that I changed the Belfast - Newark route because I thought the January - March Suspension was only a one off, didn't know it was going to continue, thanks. RMS52 (talk) 09:02, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

No problem, the suspension is reflected in the schedule for 2016 also, so the route continues to be seasonal unless they load additional flights over that period. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 03:35, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

IndiGo fleet[edit]

Hi, Thanks for your recent edit on IndiGo airlines fleet. In your edit you updated their fleet strength from 97 to 96 providing an official reference. But the reference you provided clearly says that the fleet strength is 96 as of 30 April 2015 so how come it is updated? Unfortunately IndiGo recently made their fleet reference page accessible. Since I have personally contacted their team on Twitter to know the current fleet size where they confirmed me that the fleet size currently stands at 97 as of July 2015.[2] Now I need your opinion about updating the correct information with proper reference. Thanks, M.soumen (talk) 09:49, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your message, when I referred to the reference as 'updated' what I meant was the previous reference was no longer accessible (as you noted) so I found an alternative statement on the Indigo site which quoted their fleet total, I didn't mean that it was 'newer' as such. Since the DGCA in India does not publish an online aircraft register to my knowledge it's hard to know where to turn for a regularly-updated reliable source for this information other than relying on IndiGo to update the newly-referenced page with the latest totals on a regular basis. Unfortunately Twitter is not a reliable source I don't think. SempreVolando (talk) 10:59, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Actually it turns out there is an online DGCA aircraft register - [3]. Using 'Interglobe' (the parent company) as the search criteria, it does generate a fleet list for IndiGo. This would be classified as a reliable source. Only two things - firstly it still states a fleet of 96 A320s, and secondly (perhaps related) it does not seem to feature an 'updated date', so we can't be sure what period the fleet listing relates to. It could also be a snapshot from 30 April? SempreVolando (talk) 11:06, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

August 2015[edit]

Hello, I noticed you did alot of clean up on Belfast International Airport and removed lots of route and airline information, former destinations are very valuable pieces of information, I don't think they should be removed, as it is very useful information that people could know about.

By the way, why only Belfast? I looked at lots of articles and they list past routes in the history section. RMS52 (talk) 05:37, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi, please see discussion left at the article talk page. SempreVolando (talk) 06:33, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Ok, this user told me that former destinations are very valuable information. RMS52 (talk) 17:43, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

There have been previous discussions regarding the inclusion of former destinations at WP:AIRPORTS and from recollection the consensus reached each time was not to include former destinations. It was never added to the actual guidelines though, and I will have to take a look through the discussion archives tomorrow to point you towards them. The fact that some people find such a list useful doesn't really change the issue that wikipedia is not supposed to be an enthusiasts guide. While some route terminations are notable, the majority will not have much notability. There then comes the issue that they would all have to be sourced, and those which ended in 1963, for example, would then be no less notable than those ending in 2015 (notability is not temporary). This is an almost impossible task IMO. Just my $0.02! SempreVolando (talk) 18:20, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Yep, I see your point. At the time I thought that it was not that big of an airport so I thought it would be 'OK', I guess not. RMS52 (talk) 18:47, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Helvetic Airways[edit]

Whi you delate the flag in Helvetic Airways destinations? The destination are in the same page of the airline not in another page only for the destination! Zurich00swiss (talk) 15:19, 13 August 2015 (UTC) Zurich00swiss (talk) 15:19, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi. In accordance with the project guide at WP:AIRLINES, flag icons are not to be used in any destination list. It does not matter if the list is incorporated into the main article or on a standalone destinations page, the flags are not allowed. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 15:49, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

My edit on Singapore airlines.[edit]

There was an accident and an accurate reference. Why did you reverse my edit? I am not pleased, I spent a while searching for an accurate resource. JSACELA (talk) 11:20, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi, the incident did not meet the inclusion criteria for an airline article - as listed at WP:AIRCRASH. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 11:23, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

September 2015[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Class455fan1. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Virgin Atlantic because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. G-VFAB was ferried LGW-LAS-GYR on Sunday for storage so is no longer registered to Virgin Atlantic Class455fan1 (talk) 17:21, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

The content must match the source. Your addition is unsourced. This is why your edit was reverted. SempreVolando (talk) 17:34, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

October 2015[edit]

Hi there, noted your edit on my post regarding A330 accidents/incidents. Did'nt know that there must be fatalities or hull damage before it can be considered an "incident". Thanks for the information. Guangjin103 (talk) 23:18, 13 October 2015 (GMT+8)

You are very welcome, thanks for understanding. SempreVolando (talk) 15:22, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Aircraft of the week[edit]

The aviation user. Zurich00swiss (talk) 14:37, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Your edit on British Airways[edit]

Hi SempreVolando, I undid your recent edit on British Airways as the sources you say don't match do say the 737-400 is no longer in the fleet. If you think I've made a mistake, then feel free to revert my edit.

Thanks Class455fan1 (talk) 18:25, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Reverted to match the reliable source - CAA database at 11 November 2015. The BA source (despite it's name) it not a reliable source. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 18:36, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:36, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Delta air Lines Fleet page[edit]

I reverted the major deletion you made to the Delta Air Lines Fleet page. I know you are an experienced and respected editor for aviation related pages. Can you please cite the WP authority you are basing the removal of the Special Liveries table from the article? That table has been in the article for years. There are two editors who are keeping it up to date. Thanks in advance. (talk) 02:10, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

FYI Per Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Registrations found at Special Livery sections are allowed. Here is the relevant quote: "Airline fleet lists should not include registrations, although aircraft in special paint schemes can be identified either in a Livery section or in the general text." Based on this authority I am reverting your deletion of the Delta Air Lines Pleet page Special Liveries section. Thanks (talk) 04:43, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Heathrow Provisional Data[edit]

Hi, I've seen you have deleted my 2015 provisional airport statistics and I'm very upset by this as it took me some time to complete. If you need sources I can add them in so you didn't have to delete all my hard work. Next time please inform me first if you have a problem or query before you delete my edit.


AviationRhys (talk) 22:33, 12 January 2016 (UTC)


Since you are a partcipant of WikiProjects Airports, your inputs could be useful here. Pathmaraman (talk) 03:56, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

List of Airbus A320 operators
added a link pointing to West Airlines
List of Airbus A330 orders and deliveries
added a link pointing to Casc

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:22, 26 February 2016 (UTC)


Hi SempreVolando; why the revert on the laser pen issue. It would be easier to understand if you had given a reason on the revert. Thanks. The joy of all things (talk) 09:23, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello - thanks for the response. I was blissfully unaware of WP:Aircrash, so happy to defer to your experience. I am trying to correct many of the unreferenced sources and I thought of that as an inclusion, but on balance, I think you are correct. Thanks for the tip - safe flying! Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 09:39, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Error by you?[edit]

For the Brussels Airport article, you recently wrote as a comment " (Undid revision 713129572 by Whiskeymouth (talk) Not an error - did not occur at or near the airport as required for inclusion per WP:AIRCRASH / WP:AIRPORTS) (undo | thank)"

I randomly picked 3 airports and find that your rule is not a Wikipedia practice. For Stapleton International Airport, there is mention of United Airlines flight 173 crashing in Portland and United Airlines flight 585 crashing in Colorado Springs. For Toronto Pearson International Airport, there is mention in the accidents/incidents section of Air India flight 181 which crashed after a bomb blast near Ireland. For Boston Logan International Airport, there is mention of flights which crashed in New York on 11 September 2001.

Therefore, I believe your rules are not to be followed. Would you comply and not remove if my edit is reinstated? Whiskeymouth (talk) 18:00, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

American Airlines[edit]

There are two ways that people generally edit articles. One is to just change it, with or without discussion. You did make a talk page comment, which is good.

Another way is to have prior discussion. I propose that we have more prior discussion in this article because of the major repair that is undergoing. This is what I have been doing.

This is just a suggestion. Ensign Hapuna of the Royal Hawaiian Navy (talk) 17:17, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Very interesting[edit]

I saw your chart on your user page. Very interesting!

I have been a passenger on the....

Boeing 747SP, Boeing 737-200QC, Boeing 757-300, Boeing 767-400ER, McDonnell Douglas DC-10-40, Fokker 70, and Airbus A340-500, all not that common variants. Ensign Hapuna of the Royal Hawaiian Navy (talk) 17:33, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Tigerair Australia[edit]

i noticed that you have changed the table on the Tigerair page and you removed the Boeing 737's from the table. Those aircraft are a part of the Tigerair fleet just like the Qantaslink fleet and some of the Virgin Australia Regional fleet which have other airlines operate aircraft for their own fleet in their own livery. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dunno2014 (talkcontribs) 08:44, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Dunno 2014. Firstly thanks for discussing! For the case of the Tigerair Australia B737s, these are wet-leased from Virgin Australia and operated by that airline, their AOC and by their pilots. Obviously they are painted in the Tigerair livery for the purpose of the lease, but the policy at WP:AIRLINES clearly states Please do not include wet-leased aircraft. For the Qantaslink and VA Regional articles that is something I will take a look at as the same policy should certainly apply, though we do make exceptions in listing fleets operated for brands rather than airlines (for example, Citywing). Those are not wet-leases as such, as the company is a brand not an airline, and I suspect the same would apply to Qantaslink at least (which I understand does not hold an AOC). But I will take a look! Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 08:51, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
I am not aware of any aircraft operated under the Virgin Australia Regional brand that are not VARA aircraft, nor AFAIK are there VARA aircraft that operate for other airlines in the colours of those airlines. Some evidence for the claim would be nice. YSSYguy (talk) 09:19, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
Some of the VARA aircraft such as the A320's and the Fokker 50's are operated by Skywest on behalf of VARA. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dunno2014 (talkcontribs) 00:33, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Dunno, SkyWest no longer exists, it was renamed Virgin Australia Regional, if you don't know that, well... Moving on, let me explain a few things about airlines; an airline is a company that has an Air Operator Certificate (AOC) issued (in the case of Australian airlines) by CASA for Regular Public Transport (RPT), meaning it is allowed to operate scheduled flights. No RPT AOC=not an airline. Each aircraft operated by an airline is listed on its AOC by serial number and registration; if an aircraft is not listed on the AOC then the airline cannot operate it. Eastern Australia's aircraft are on its AOC, Sunstate's are on its AOC, Network's are on its AOC. QantasLink does not have an AOC, it is not an airline. There are no Dash 8 aircraft on Jetstar's AOC; there are no Boeing 737s on Tigerair's AOC. Jetstar is not allowed to operate Dash 8s and Tigerair is not allowed to operate 737s. The two articles show that there are some aircraft of a different airline operating with the Jetstar or Tigerair brand, there is no more to be said. YSSYguy (talk) 04:09, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

April 2016[edit]

Hi there, further to your edits to Tigerair Australia, please read the hidden note regarding the 737 aircraft before changing it and removing the details. The 737 aircraft are part of the Tigerair Australia fleet but they are operated by Virgin Australia on Tigerair's behalf. If you have any queries, please raise them at the article talk page prior to editing. It is really not constructive to get into an edit war over this, two experienced editors have calmly explained the reasoning and policy behind the article content, and though you clearly still don't agree - the solution is not to edit war, it's to discuss.Thanks. Dunno2014 (talk)

See my comments in the Section above. YSSYguy (talk) 09:29, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

April 2016 Jetstar Airways[edit]

Information icon Hello. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Jetstar Airways has been undone because it did not appear constructive. The Dash 8's are part of the Jetstar fleet just as those same aircraft were when they were in the Qantaslink fleet. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.

See my comments two Sections above YSSYguy (talk) 09:29, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Airbus A320 operators, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Csa. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:57, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 19[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited SunExpress, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Macedonia. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:55, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

British Airways six Boeing 737 Stored[edit]

About the conflict in British Airways Article. I checked out the six 737 registered in "United Kingdom Civil Aircraft Register" at the fleet of British Airways and all are Stored.

G-DOCV is Stored in 10/2013

G-DOCU is Stored in 08/2013

G-DOCH is Stored in 11/2013 actually Scrapped

G-DOCS is Stored in 06/2014

G-DOCE is Stored in 02/2014

G-DOCG is Stored in 12/2013


I thought is not allowed to include stored aircrafts in the fleet.


--Cuentaprueba10 (talk) 13:14, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Total fleet at April 2016[edit]

Your message: Please see the discussion at Talk:British Airways. The registered fleet per the CAA is used as the only reliable source for fleet information in the case of this airline ( / etc are not reliable sources). The article makes it very clear that the fleet information relates to the registered fleet - see the hidden notes: Please only use the official CAA register for fleet totals - thank you and THE FOLLOWING TABLE IS MADE UP OF THE REGISTERED FLEET ACCORDING TO THE CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 12:41, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Sorry but there is clear evidence, you can not be included aircrafts in the fleet that are stored or scrapped.

You can not justify these aircraft are included in the fleet because they are in the register of civil aviation. 747's are stored for a year in lower case and up to 3 in the case of the 737's.

The other articles of airlines have a reliable source and UPDATED, is a page dedicated solely to tracking aircraft and have an a updated register of the airlines fleets, is an a exceptional source, reliable and updated.

You can not include planes that are stored since 3 years in the fleet, this things destroyed the credibility of the article.

--Cuentaprueba10 (talk) 13:14, 23 April 2016 (UTC)


I have restarted the discussion about the long-going "Orlando airports" issue at WT:Airports. Your thoughts and opinions on the matter would be greatly appreciated! The discussion is here. Regards— (talk) 03:02, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Just leaving this here for consistency reasons... though I know you've already responded, Cheers! :-) Ctsky (talk) 19:21, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 7[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Airbus A330 operators, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page French Blue. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:21, 7 September 2016 (UTC)


Hi. Just message to let you know my edits is the removal of starting and ending dates of schedule flight and references that haven't been removed from ongoing flights as they are no longer necessary. Thanks, 33aircharter —Preceding undated comment added 22:24, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 1[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Boeing 777 orders and deliveries, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oak Hill. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:49, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Current 747 operators list[edit]

The table is missing some information and seems factually incorrect about others, the referenced source is unreliable and I have found discrepency in their data quite a few times. inspector (talk) 20:34, 10 October 2016 (UTC)


Would you like to provide your input at this discussion regarding references and the Airlines and destinations tables? Thank you! — Sunnya343✈ (háblamemy work) 22:38, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, SempreVolando. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Delta Air Lines fleet[edit]

Hello SempreVolando, I've notice that an anonymous user uses planespotters source and I've reverted already. I bet they're a unreliable source. Correct? RacheyFlies (talk) 01:49, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

@SempreVolando, I bet the user who uses Planespotters source is this: [4]

Reference errors on 3 February[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:29, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Singapore Airlines Order[edit]


I have reverted your edit to Singapore Airlines Fleet. The airline has confirmed it is a firm order via a press release you can find here. -

"Singapore Airlines (SIA) has agreed to place firm orders with Boeing for 20 777-9s and 19 787-10s, for additional growth and fleet modernisation through the next decade. SIA has today signed a letter of intent with the US airframe manufacturer comprising the 39 firm orders plus six options for each aircraft type, which if exercised will enlarge the deal to as many as 51 aircraft."

Many Thanks

--JetBlast (talk) 07:10, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

I think that's the point, it states has agreed to place firm orders. They haven't actually placed them yet. So it is a letter of intent (LoI or purchase commitment as it is also known in the industry) to place a firm order at a later date. A Letter of intent cannot be a firm order yet by definition. This Boeing press release also confirms - has announced its commitment to purchase, and When finalised, the order will be posted on the Boeing Orders and Deliveries website. So both these references confirm the same thing, despite the unusual wording chosen in the Singapore Airlines press release. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 13:44, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Boeing 777 orders and deliveries, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oak Hill. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:47, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 8[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Boeing 777 orders and deliveries, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oak Hill. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:59, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Domestic Passenger Top Destinations[edit]

Why are you removing carriers from US domestic passenger top destination lists under the guise that the source does not have that information? It does have carrier information as the RITA stats are summaries of T100 data which associate carriers with every single passenger listed. These tables correspond with primary carriers in these routes. OslPhlWasChi (talk) 12:29, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi, the RITA summary stats do not mention the operating carrier. It is the summary which is currently used as the reference. To include the information the reference would need to refer directly to the source data itself showing the information. The information must match the quoted source. Thanks SempreVolando (talk) 12:32, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Fair statement - the information does not match the reference. Then instead of removing the information, we should change the reference to match the true source - with the appropriate access date, similar to the presentation of international top destinations. That is an easy change and still maximizes the presentation of true, valid information on the page. Removing the information to match the limitations of RITA summary stats (without the appropriate reference to T100 data) is a far less preferable final condition that removes otherwise good information. OslPhlWasChi (talk) 15:00, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your response. Can you give me an example of how the reference you mentioned (which also is used for the international stats) can provide the desired breakdown? It's obviously a very powerful database and I'm sure it can, but I can't get it to having played around with it for a few minutes (probably showing my age now!). While reliable sources should not be rejected just because they are difficult to access, it is also preferable for users to be able to easily verify the content in the source provided where possible (e.g. this is currently easy using the RITA summary stats). As a secondary point, even if the reference can show the operating carrier list by route (I'm sure it can), do we actually want to include this information? Surely the purpose of these statistical tables is to show the busiest routes at an airport, and including the operating carrier is simply duplicating the information already provided in the Airlines and destinations table for each airport. Possibly a discussion for project-level, but would be interested in your opinion on that. Thanks! SempreVolando (talk) 16:48, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Equally appreciative of this dialogue. On the website I provided above, you can download all that data that ultimately is used by the RITA summary stats, including specific passenger counts by specific route, carrier, and month. These are then aggregated over a 12 month period to come up with the annual counts. Admittedly, in addition to the primary carriers listed, numbers can also include a few unscheduled passengers or small/minor impacts of general aviation. But the carriers listed normally correspond with those who have scheduled service over that period. So you are correct, this is not as easily accessible. But some of us - myself included - who are nerds and play with this data in our spare time, can verify the carriers and do so via T100 data that correspond with the listed routes. Its the same thing for what you see for top international routes on US airport pages. The only difference is the RITA summary stats page creates a shortcut for partial information on domestic routes. For me, I have endless excel files of the T100 data and can isolate exactly which carriers have been on which routes over whatever 12 month period you want. So if the carrier information is correct albeit with a different and less legible reference, my though is it is better to include it than take it out. And yes, I would say we want to include it. A route with 1 million annual passengers served by one carrier is very different than a route with 1 million annual passengers served by five carriers. And since the data covers a 12 month period, that normally is several months in the past, looking at the current passenger route tables does not provide an accurate depiction of what carriers served the route over the period of the data. Thoughts?OslPhlWasChi (talk) 19:13, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Airbus A320 family operators, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page West Air. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:58, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Heathrow Airport[edit]

Recently, Delta lists LHR as a hub/key market on their webpage but Delta keeps getting removed from the infobox saying it is not really a hub. A discussion was started at the Delta talk page, project talk page, and Heathrow talk page. Need your opinion on this matter. (talk) 19:22, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Singapore a350 orders[edit]

Hi, I'm sorry for my edits on the List of Airbus A350 XWB orders and deliveries page. I was using the source at the end of the "notes" field in the chart. ( but I didn't see the official o&d page, which is definitely a better source. Thank you for your extensive contributions to wikipedia! BananaCarrot152 (talk) 15:55, 30 May 2017 (UTC)


Please stop war editing with me on the BHX page. These flights in question have a gap of slightly over 5 weeks. This is over a month in length of time. Therefore these routes are seasonal. Year round is 52 weeks out of 52 - or close by that figure. 47 out of 52 is no where close to this figure. These flights only have 1 flight in Jan so it's pushing the boat out slightly to say this is year round. I aim to edit Wikipedia to make articles more accurate and your disruptive edits are making these pages - like BHX - less accurate. Please stop this or you may become blocked from editing.

Futurepilot1999 (talk) 17:43, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.


I don't want to impose a burden upon you, but you're a commercial pilot (I don't even have a PPL !) and Futurepilot1999 presumably really wants to get be a commercial pilot. I'm guessing form his name that he was born in 1999 and is currently about 18 years old. I know that with youth comes a tendency to be a bit impetuous or hot-headed but people mature as time passes. Is there anything you could do to maybe encourage him / her and nurture in one way or another ? He/she seems to mean well but I just think that this is someone who could perhaps just do with a bit of nudging and/or encouragement in the right direction from someone who he/she would respect. Pmbma (talk) 22:41, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Aer Lingus Fleet Table[edit]


I have tried to update the A330-300 seating config on the table but cannot get the format correct. The latest A333 followed by any outstanding orders have a config of 313 (30J, 283Y) to allow crew rest access for West Cost ops. Any idea's as I think you did the A330-200 format before. Jamie2k9 (talk) 09:37, 18 July 2017 (UTC)


"Sorry for editing these articles includes Air Canada and Airbus A350 XWB.

I edited for the main reason: One of my friends said to me something wrong"

Thanks, User:Serjinh81 (UTC)

Singapore Airlines fleet[edit]

Hi, I noticed your slight revision to my edit regarding the A380 fleet regarding stored aircraft, yet I noticed you didn't make the same revision to the Emirates fleet article where a similar edit has not been corrected. Is there any Wikipedia guidance regarding this for the sake of consistency and avoiding edit warring on articles.

Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:00, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Information on Wikipedia articles must be reliably sourced. In this case the source is the national aircraft registry of Singapore, updated monthly. Hence the fleet is shown correct at 31 July 2017, until the next update is published. Altering the totals without a reliable source isn't going to be acceptable in line with the WP:RS policy if a reliable source is already stated. I have no idea about the Emirates fleet page but I'll take a look when I get time. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 16:21, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Singapore Airlines A350[edit]

9V-SMQ was delivered on 12 September 2017, there are 17 A350s in Singapore Airlines fleet — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:03, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. As explained before in the edit summaries, the reliable source for the Singapore Airlines fleet data is the monthly updated civil aircraft register published by CAAS. The fleet list is therefore correct at 31 August 2017 and the referenced total of A350s operated by the airline at that date was 16. Wait for the next update at 30 September 2017 when the total will no doubt be revised (and similarly for all the other types the airline operates at that date). Hope this makes sense. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 15:41, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
Anyway, "delivered" does not necessarily mean "operated by". YSSYguy (talk) 07:54, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 7[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

List of Airbus A330 operators (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Corsair
List of Airbus A330 orders and deliveries (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Corsair

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:13, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Boeing 737 MAX orders and deliveries[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:Boeing 737 MAX orders and deliveries has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 17:16, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Emirates 777-300ER citation requirement[edit]

There was a citation added to it previously, however after the 787 orders at the DAS, some genius decided to remove the citation when trying to 'clean up' the table. Anyway, I've added it again, and if you click the link and refine your search on Boeing's website to show orders for EK only, you'll see that there are 120 orders, with 105 delivered, which means 15 remaining. However, the list hasn't been updated since October 2017, but one aircraft was delivered between that time and now, which is A6-EQH, the newest 777-300ER delivered on 3rd Nov that showed the new First Class Cabin at the Dubai Airshow. So that would mean there are 14 unfilled orders, with 106 aircraft delivered. This information can be confirmed on the link here and here. I've updated the EK fleet page with removing the 787 orders again as well.

Regards, --Murtaza2000 (talk) 07:08, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, SempreVolando. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Clickair destinations for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Clickair destinations is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clickair destinations (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Rhadow (talk) 13:24, 6 March 2018 (UTC)