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.

Beijing Capital Airlines[edit]

The carriers name seems to be just Capital Airlines, a disambiguation will also need to be created in this case if title is changed. (talk) 05:32, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

You can request a page move directly at the article's talk page. (talk) 04:26, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Air Tahiti[edit]

It would be good if someone could take a good look at the Air Tahiti article, which reads like it was written by Air Tahiti staff in some ways. It even uses the first person to describe operations in one place! —Alex (Ashill | talk | contribs) 13:45, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

American Airlines destinations[edit]

Since US Airways no longer exists, all former US Airways destinations needs to be included in this list. Need to find someone experienced to do this. (talk) 06:43, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Page has a deletion notice like for some other airlines routes, why? Mustangmanxxx (talk) 19:54, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
See below, and please comment at the deletion discussion. oknazevad (talk) 20:04, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Mass AfD tagging[edit]

Mdann52(alt) (talk · contribs) is mass-AfDing airline destinations articles. What's going on here?--Jetstreamer Talk 16:11, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Following the discussion at WP:ANI#Disruptive editing by *AirportUpdater*, there was some discussion over whether articles should be deleted, so I nominated them at WP:AFD. That's all. Mdann52 (talk) 16:27, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
@Mdann52: Such a mass nomination is too premature. Right from the start, the discussion should take place here and not at WT:ANI, where not everyone was aware of that thread.--Jetstreamer Talk 16:33, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
No need to discuss here first - for deletion discussions, taking straight to AfD is usually better then generating a local consensus here. Mdann52 (talk) 16:39, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
That's your vision, not mine. A large number of articles are involved here, so the best way to get consensus is to discuss the matter at the appropriate project.--Jetstreamer Talk 16:46, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
In my experience, the best way to get a neutral discussion on such topics is AfD - that's like saying that any bulk deletion of related BLP's (which I've seen before) needs discussion over at Wt:WPBLP, which it doesn't. Mdann52 (talk) 17:21, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Mdann52. The ANI, and the subsequent Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports#Removal of destinations of airlines?, was more about "airline and destination" sections in articles about airports rather than stand alone destination articles. I also see that you put a large list of articles at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pages in Category:Lists of airline destinations but haven't tagged some of those articles that they are up for deletion. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 19:18, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────@CambridgeBayWeather: there was some discussion about this action as well, hence why I nommed this lot. As for the tagging, it's in progress (I had to go offline to addend to some urgent business, I'm loading AWB back up now). Mdann52 (talk) 20:51, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Emirates destinations pages up for deletion?[edit]

Both EK and EK SkyCargo routes pages have those notes on top, why are they getting deleted? Mustangmanxxx (talk) 19:52, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Why maintain structured data here instead of at Wikidata?[edit]

I notice we have a lot of tables on airport articles that are highly-structured, and language-independent. I was wondering whether it might be better to maintain the corresponding information at Wikidata instead. I mocked up a quick template to show how it might work. Compare the current Denver_International_Airport#Airlines_and_destinations with this version that's based on the information at Q330015. What do you think? Bovlb (talk) 23:42, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

To clarify, if we maintain this type of information in WIkidata instead of directly in the English Wikipedia, then our work can be seen in every language Wikipedia. Cheers. Bovlb (talk) 02:22, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Strong oppose Under no circumstance should we rely on wikidata for article content. Information there is generally unreferenced and we wouldn't know if it has been changed on wikidata, so vandalism and the like would be undiscovered. Data field names on wikidata are subject to changes without any real discussion, and any consideration about how data is used on other wikis (Wikiproject:ships has been burnt by this in the past when fields in wikidata that were used to autofill empty infobox fields had their names changed on wikidata without duscussion, wrecking hundreds of articles here. Allowing wikidata to write our articles for us neans that it would be much harder to edit our artticles, with editors having to leave wikipedia, and stuggle with the incredibly poor user interface over at wikidata.Nigel Ish (talk) 06:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Oppose - I agree with User:Nigel Ish, this would make maintaining articles much harder, not easier. - Ahunt (talk) 13:00, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Strong Oppose - per Nigel Ish, WP:SHIPS have decided against Wikidata for very good reasons, which would also apply to this WP. Keep en-Wiki info on en-Wiki, where it can be controlled. Mjroots (talk) 18:29, 29 October 2015 (UTC)`

Thanks for the feedback. I wasn't aware of the history with WikiProject:Ships (1, 2, 3). That would have been useful to know before I started on this. Those discussions are largely about whether to use Wikidata to supply a default value for an infobox field for ship class. Reading through them, I see the following issues raised:

  1. The Wikidata property conflated the ship class and type, making it impossible to style them separately.
  2. The Wikidata user interface was or is dreadful. (It's unclear to me whether it has changed significantly since then.)
  3. The property in question had been proposed for deletion, at least partly because of the lack of use by client projects.
  4. Wikidata would benefit from the subject-matter expertise available in the English Wikipedia WikiProject.
  5. Wikidata property ids are opaque, but the label-based aliases are unstable.
  6. Wikidata claims may lack references, multiple values, or temporal qualifications.
  7. Vandalism on Wikidata could affect all client projects but wouldn't show up in local recent changes.
  8. It's unclear to WP editors how to edit the Wikidata value or to override it locally.

Did I miss anything important? Bovlb (talk) 01:39, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Northeast Airlines (2015)[edit]

User:Yellowliner is apparently a company representative for Northeast Airlines (2015). I've warned for COI, but I could use help keeping an eye on his edits. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 04:42, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed the pretty clear COI involved. Frankly, I'm not even sure if a paper airline that's only coverage is essentially two stories regurgitating press real eases is even notable. It hasn't flown a single flight, even as a charter. (Unlike its most similar competitors, National, which has gotten back into pax ops after being a cargo-only airline, and has scheduled flights for later this year, and the new Eastern, which is already flying some charters and owns its own birds. But it's the obvious way the editor(s) are using Wikipedia to promote the existence of their startup that bothers the hell out of me. oknazevad (talk) 07:00, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, they seem to be operating as if WP is their home page until their actual one is up, if ever. - BilCat (talk) 07:17, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
Watched. - Ahunt (talk) 16:39, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
Changed the name to Northeast Airlines (2014) as the article says it was formed in 2014, although little evidence provided. Took out the Boeing order as nothing on Boeing website or any other that I can see. Anybody know if the 737-400 exists? MilborneOne (talk) 13:16, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
I really think it would be best to stub this down to the information actually supported by the refs, which isn't much at the present. - Ahunt (talk) 14:23, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
Oddly enough a search of the FAA registry shows 12 aircraft registered to "NORTHEAST AIRLINES INC", none of which are a Boeing 737, instead mostly long-gone Convairs and Bristol Britannias with old cancelled registrations, plus one unassigned reservation from 10 Oct 15. That may be a reserved N number for the Boeing 737, but, if so, it proves that they haven't got it yet. - Ahunt (talk) 14:30, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
In an early version of the article Yellowliner put "We have purchased our first Boeing 737-400, N73NE, which will be delivered to Clearwater early 2016." MilborneOne (talk) 17:29, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
Smells like COI to me! - Ahunt (talk) 00:54, 10 November 2015 (UTC)


Poor English grammer and speling in Destinations ➡ Route Network[edit]


The last sentence regarding the JFK/EWR "slot swat" needs much work. -- (talk) 03:16, 17 November 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)