Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Peer review/Port Columbus International Airport
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.
Port Columbus International Airport[edit]
I believe this is at least a B-class article, but i would like some outside opinions on what could be added/improved. In regards to the images, they have been cleared for use by the Columbus Regional Airport Authority. The e-mail correspondance I had with Rob Tanner from the CRAA is being sent to be reviewed. The dispute is resolved, as it was simply a mistake on my part. Polypmaster 00:49, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Consider a terminal diagram. It used to be a Y shaped concourse before expansion. Also consider a section on crashes, if any CMH departing or planned arrival flight crashed. Consider a brief paragraph on airports in Columbus, mentioning that Rickenbacker has the longest runway. Only a brief sentence is needed due to a wikilink but such a mention puts CMH in perspective. Consider adding a paragraph of the air museum that used to be there until the 1990's. See [[1]]. If you want, I could do this but this nice CMH is your baby for now!Archtrain 18:14, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Trevor MacInnis[edit]
- "It is also known for" , who knows? needs Reference.
- NOTOC should be removed, the page is long enough to require one
- "Airport Traffic" section needs expansion or merging into another section
- Facilities restates runway info already in the infobox
- The whole "Future Development" section sounds a bit vague (and without references). "To facilitate an anticipated passenger increase, the current terminal will be improved in order to maximize the usage of the facility."? That's like saying, "To improve things, things will be improved."
- Refs need a separate section. Some of the external links can be used, and should be moved to the References section.
Overall a very good article, certainly B-class, I'd put it up for GA after the above issues are fixed.
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.