Talk:American Airlines fleet

message: 2015-12-22: American announced plans for premium economy earlier this month. I added a citation to an article that talks about a "late 2016" date for the 787-900 model to enter revenue service.
Mike (talk) 00:09, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: We use ch-aviation.ch as a source for the fleet which has better coverage, so please stick to this source. Thanks! FonEengIneeR7 talk 16:42, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: 787s

message: I wonder, given we specify some aircraft with the subtype used [I.E instead of mentioning they flew a 747-200C the article mentions American briefly operated a 747-273C, or how the 737s acquired from the AirCal merger are listed with their subtypes], how abut we apply it across the board - listing 767s as 767-223ERs and 767-323ERs, MD-80 as MD-82, MD-83 technically where applicable, etc?  
(ESPECIALLY SINCE MD-80 is just a label to the MD-8X fleet, and there technically is no aircraft called the MD-80 (and the aircraft line actually started with the DC-9-81 (MD-81))
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Travelsonic (talk • contribs) 18:13, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Usually, we do always use generic aircraft types i.e. Airbus A320-200 instead of Airbus A320-214. As to the MD-line you are right, we should distinguish between MD-82s and MD-83s etc... FonEengIneeR7 talk 08:02, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

text: I think we should get rid of the timeline and replace it with a table as seen in many other airline articles. It's much simpler to edit and to understand the syntax. Also, the years listed for each aircraft don't line up with where they are placed in the timeline. I'm going to re-do it as a table. —Compdude123 00:17, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subtype consistency? 

message: Is  a reliable source? I see it used as a reference for many fleet tables. Anyone can offer to correct the information, although there are some requirements. — Sunnya343✈ (háblame • my work) 16:50, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not.--Jetstreamer  16:51, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, and I also found that they use several "unofficial" sources. — Sunnya343✈ (háblame • my work) 16:52, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Planespotters.net 

message: While removing some copyright violations I removed the gallery, commons is the place for images. A few images around the article is fine but a gallery is not needed, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 23:02, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Gallery

message: Given the size of the airline, is it appropriate to have such a section, given how this is fairly static? --AEMoreira042281 (talk) 21:18, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Special livery section 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:21, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: So can we establish here that the a321neo doesn't repalce the md83, because they hold a difference of 50 some passengers.
Can we also create consistency of the descriptions (like the 787-9 replaces the a330-300, but the a330-300 description is blank) because when I try to add it my edit gets undone. 
:There are 20 First Class, 47 Main Cabin Extra, and 129 Main Cabin seats. That equals 196. That is what the seatmap shows on the AA website and on other sites such as seatguru. CZ3699 (talk) 19:07, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consistancy of Descriptions and Aircraft Replacing MD-83 and Airbus a321neo cabin seating 

message: I tried to add the flight 93 crash to the 757-200 part, but i caused a serious issue that i cant fix. I'm very sorry, but can you help me?
Please put answers below here. (R32 nissan skyline (talk) 13:49, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Normally we dont list accidents on fleet tables either in airline or stand alone article, normall to have an accidents or incidents section in the airline article for that. MilborneOne (talk) 14:10, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Also flight 93 was operated by united, not American CZ3699 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 17:20, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  I need help! 

message: For some aircraft types, the row entry is split to account for crashed aircraft. For others, there is mention of a crash, but the row remains unified. Unless there is an objection, let's get rid of the splits. When a plane crashes, it isn't "retired," which is what the header entry says. At the very least, make all entries the same, and split out all crashed aircraft. But since this is cumbersome, requires more upkeep, and contradicts the plain meaning of "retired," I recommend the first option. I'll leave this here for a while to see if anyone acts on it or objects. Holy (talk) 06:11, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistency with "retired" dates for crashed aircraft 

message: According to planespotters.net, which is cited in the article, American has 303 737-800s, but the article currently shows that 276 737-800s are in the fleet. So is the number 303 or 276? Fire9600 (talk) 16:05, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of 737-800s in the fleet 

message: In accordance with Wikipedia:Be bold, I just added a new "potential future aircraft" section listing AA's conditional agreements with Boom and Vertical Aerospace for their supersonic and eVTOL planes, respectively. While not firm orders, I still think agreements between AA and aircraft manufacturers have encyclopedic value, as long as that is clearly stated. John298 (talk) 14:48, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Just undid the edit before I saw this. While I agree with Wikipedia:Be bold, this information is better mentioned in a sentence rather than an entirely separate table. WP:ALFC states orders only, and there are plenty of other airlines with agreements. We've always just listed firm orders. As such, I think a mention is totally fine and is encyclopedic, but shouldn't be on a separate table. VenFlyer98 (talk) 23:50, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conditional orders