Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airlines

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Aviation / Airlines (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 
 
Taskforce icon
This page is supported by the airline project.

Reliability of PlaneSpotters[edit]

As User_talk:Jetstreamer told me, it's not a reliable source, however, in article Lufthansa, someone had used it as source for Lufthansa's fleet. Can anyone give me some idea on this and which source will be considered reliable source for airline fleet?0x44616E68 (talk) 05:00, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

ch-aviation seems to be used more frequently, but when I have compared it to official aircraft registers I have found it to be wrong. When I have double-checked planespotters it has been accurate. Others will no doubt say that neither is acceptable. YSSYguy (talk) 03:25, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
The annual reviews in the like of Flight, national aircraft registers and airline websites would be better to use, the airline fan sites are can be reasonable acurate but can sometimes be updated from reports from spotters at different airports which may not always be correct. Unfortunately in some countries the only source can be these fan sites but they should be used with caution if at all. (we did have edits changing all of planespotters for ch-aviation only to be followed a few years later by somebody changing them all back! a sort of spotter site war) MilborneOne (talk) 21:24, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Could anybody recommend some good and reliable source (better than planespotters), which could be used instead? --Dvorapa (talk) 18:56, 3 July 2016 (UTC) PS: There was another discussion about this topic under Village pump. --Dvorapa (talk) 18:56, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Already mentioned them in the last entry before yours. MilborneOne (talk) 19:47, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
Putting aside the question of accuracy, ch-aviation's info is behind a paywall now. YSSYguy (talk) 07:09, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Indeed. The best source for fleets are the airlines' official websites whether they are up to date or not. The problem is that not all of them are available. For instance, TAAG Angola Airlines' official website shows the types of aircraft in the fleet but it doesn't mention the nummber of them.--Jetstreamer Talk 10:00, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
I think we need to make some sort of decision about this. Jetstreamer is undoing edits that are based on planespotters and is leaving ch-aviation stand as a ref; I tend to remove ch-aviation in favour of planespotters. We both know that neither is necessarily the best source and ch-aviation is now not viewable at all unless one hands over some readies - which I will not do, because I think it is not as good as planespotters anyway. So, given the fact that the vast majority of airline articles use one or both, do we just turn a blind eye when there is no alternative such as a country's civil aircraft register or the airline's own website, or do we start removing fleet numbers from airline fleet tables if they are based on ch-aviation, airfleets or planespotters etc.; do we hard-line-accept the once-a-year Flight airliner census and endlessly undo everyone that "updates" the numbers? YSSYguy (talk) 10:39, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
They are clearly not reliable sources but in some parts of the world we dont have anything else, perhaps if used they should be tagged as unofficial (pending something better coming along) as in some instances they are made to look official. MilborneOne (talk) 21:09, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm only reverting the fresh addition of Planespotters as a source. If at any page it was already used I do not remove it, and in some cases marked it with a {{RS}} template. As YSSYguy points out, Ch-aviation no longer can be used as it is behind a paywall.--Jetstreamer Talk 22:01, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────I have begun using the {{Better source|reason=|date=}} template, with a note "Information from this website can only accessed by making a payment" for Ch-aviation, or "Planespotters.net is not considered a reliable source. Its information may be generated by user contributions and may be incomplete or outdated". YSSYguy (talk) 01:57, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm just going to mention that requiring a subscription does not make a source unreliable. Indeed, many scientific journals, the highest quality of all sources, are behind paywalls. So I don't think that's a good reason to tag something. oknazevad (talk) 02:57, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
I didn't say it is unreliable, I said there might be a better source, one that is freely available. I have two concerns; the first is that, when Ch-aviation was a free site and I compared it to official civil aircraft registers, it was often wrong and there is now no way to know without forking out money. The second is that, of the IPs and registered Users who change the fleet table numbers and never bother to update the access date of the source (the ones who change an article to say "as of July 2016 the Foo Airlines fleet..." and make wholesale changes to the numbers, and the ref date is 2014 or whenever), are not all forking out money to Ch-aviation either. YSSYguy (talk) 03:13, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

American Airlines destinations article messed up[edit]

Someone has set it to their preference. 119.73.100.198 (talk) 19:43, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

What seems to be the issue?--Jetstreamer Talk 20:37, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
It seems that someone added the destinations in a column format in addition to the table format. It pretty much a repeat of what cities American serves. 97.85.118.142 (talk) 03:44, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

ILFC[edit]

This company has been taken over by AerCap and the website confirms the fact, article title needs to be changed.42.201.154.185 (talk) 18:13, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Airport naming issue on destinations[edit]

I have noticed a couple of airline destinations tables or lists have some airports that do not have the word "international" in the name includes "international" (i.e. Auckland International Airport, Sydney-Kingsford Smith International Airport, London Heathrow International Airport, etc) especially European airports. However, it is dabbed to the correct name. Is this ok or should we stick to the official name of the airport? 97.85.118.142 (talk) 04:54, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Request assistance on new article city pair[edit]

Hi Wikians,

I wrote a new stub article on airline city pairs. Would appreciate your assistance in improving the airticle. Thanks.

--Airplane mode (talk) 05:24, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Kuwait Airways[edit]

Hello there everyone! Can someone please take a look at the article? An editor is persistently altering the fleet table with unsourced figures. Thanks.--Jetstreamer Talk 15:21, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

I've used Airfleets.net to amend the fleet table. However, it is not in full agreement with the fleet table so this is somewhat embarassing. Thoughts?--Jetstreamer Talk 15:40, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Fleet galleries[edit]

A user has been adding "fleet galleries" to some airline articles, I have reverted some that I have found for example British Airways, consensus is that we do not use galleries as a link exists to images on commons, this doesnt mean we cant have images to illustrate the fleet section but not as a large block or gallery. Some others needs to be reverted back as we are now getting other users saying well these exist so we can do it on this article, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 19:34, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Indeed, per WP:NOTGALLERY.--Jetstreamer Talk 21:50, 29 July 2016 (UTC)