Talk:Adelaide Airport

message: I read somewhere that Adelaide airport is Australia's 4th busiest domestic airport and australia's 6th busiest international airport. Has anyone else read this? 
: Adelaide is the 6th busiest International Airport in Australia, ranking behind the Gold Coast or Cairns depending on when you look. Technically we have more movements than Perth domestically, but Perth is busier domestically in terms of passengers --Linkqer (talk) 15:47, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just how busy? 

message: Just who is Adelaide Airport Corp?   What else do they own (parrafield?).    —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.26.122.12 (talk) 02:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Adelaide Airport Limited purchased the operating leases for Adelaide and Parafield Airports in May 1998, to operate both airports for the next 50 years with an option for a further 49 years. (Source: About Adelaide Airport > Adelaide Airport Limited. The current shareholders are no longer European superannuation funds - as listed at Adelaide Airport Limited – Shareholders, the current largest shareholder is the Adelaide University superannuation fund Unisuper, plus Local Super, Colonial First State and various other superannuation and fund managers. Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 04:34, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Corporate 

message: Gold Airways has recently been added to the domestic carriers list. Unlike OzJet, i have doubts whether this airline will ever get off the ground. A quick Google search reveals no news reports about Gold Airways, and the only other mentions of it seem to be people who question the character and integrity of the proponent and his ability to launch an airline. There have been no reports of Gold Airways that I am aware of in any industry magazines/publications. I don't think that there is any evidence to warrant an encyclopaedic entry. I have less concerns with OzJet because their progress towards obtaining an AOC has been widely reported in the press and publicised by the company, I think I would rather wait until there was either a start-up date, or the company had commenced services to teh city rather than say "subject to AOC" (AOC not having been defined in the article).  I'm going to delete both of them for now but am happy to discuss should people have concerns with this.  Adz 06:10, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You beat me to it Cyberjunkie. - What are your thoughts on leaving OzJet up there before they have anounced a launch date? Adz 06:13, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

text: I think we were both editing at the same time, hence you beat me to it. I hadn't heard of Gold Airways either before it appeared here, so I went Googling. From what I have read on discussion boards, I suspect that it is a pipedream. I'd be happy with OzJet, but it doesn't appear on any other airport pages, I don't think they have published a start-up date yet, and I don't think that Adelaide will be one of their first destinations. I'll get rid of it for now, and when a start up date and routes have been discussed, i'm sure plenty of people will want to update it. Adz 07:04, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Everyone's looking at it! - I just added "(expected early 2006)" based on this report --Scott Davis Talk 07:08, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gold Airways? 

message: I think reference to the 2 month delay for domestic airlines to move into the new terminal should remain in this article even after they finally solve the problem. I would describe the delay as embarrassing and frustrating - why is this not a NPOV? Auswide 11:32, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: As an encyclopædia, we must only document, not emote. "Frustrating" and "embarrassing" are emotive words. The only way they could be included is if they were mentioned as something a credible third-party source had said, such as: "AAL chief Joe Blogs remarked that the incident was such and such (link to source)". But I doubt even that would be necessary.--cj | talk 05:50, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I agree- a reference to it should still stay in the article if/when the situation is resolved. --Rachel Cakes 04:49, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delay for Domestic Carriers 

message: Sorry, my bad I did not fully read the article properly. Apologies to those who followed my comment here. Sorry, once again. Nicktwiggy 06:49, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No worries. I hope that eventually the Rex concerns will become a minor footnote to the development of the new terminal, but agree that at the moment they are significant enough to be mentioned in the article. I moved things around to try and make the whole article flow better. It could still be improved, but is at the limit of my writing ability. --Scott Davis Talk 10:26, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rex problems

message: Where on earth did this come from? I haven't found any articles or press releases relating to the service.
::I reverted an addition a few weeks ago and it's back again. I also reverted the addition of direct flights by Garuda to Jakarta. I'm mystified. Softgrow 08:40, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no idea. I searched the PR website and they say nothing. So I reverted it back. Elektrik Blue 82 11:33, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philippine Airlines 

message: To me it seems odd to list domestic destinations under the International heading simply if there's a stop over there. I know there's been a case or three in the past where these have been added and removed. It is also redundant to state there are Qantas flights to Melbourne under the International heading when it's already listed under Domestic. --AtD 04:45, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: QF1-399 flies between domestic ports departing from international terminals, QF400 and above departs from domestic terminals. There is currently no consensus against listing "domestic" destinations flown by their home carriers between international terminals (ie QF175 Sydney to Brisbane to Los Angeles), but listing it as (Singapore via Melbourne) for example isn't allowed, so therefore technically those 'domestic' destinations counts as a destination from the international terminal per WP:AIRPORTS. --Arnzy (talk • contribs) 08:50, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  International Destinations 

message: The airport info box is obviously labelling the lengths of the runways runways incorrectly (e.g. 05/23 appears as 3,100 ft and 10,171 m). 
Looking at the relevant code, it seems correct ( |runway_length_f=10,171 |runway_length_m=3,100 ). I'm not sure where the error lies: in the fact box template? Can someone more knowledgable than I fix this? -Ian Page 22:50, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems to be OK for me. Perhaps it's been fixed. --AtD 03:47, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Someone edited the template to try and force the meteres to show before the feet and all it didn't work. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 13:03, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Feet/metres fix needed 

message: The other day a person added the Air South Charter information, which I subsequently tidied up. Now I'm looking at various airlines' websites like Regional Express and Alliance, and see that they regularly run charters out of Adelaide too. Should the charter airlines' section be removed altogether? --splashmo 07:01, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charter airlines 

message: I have added Internal Links to this article.  Kathleen.wright5  13:00, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added Internal Links 

message: Haven't QantasLink suspended their services to Port Lincoln and Kingscote? Why is QantasLink listed under regional carriers? Anyone opposing the removal of this? --Besancon 14:16, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  QantasLink 

message: Should we mention in the article that the Cathay Pacific flight runs through Melbourne to Hong Kong but nonstop Hong Kong to Adelaide, but you can't fly just Adelaide to Melbourne on Cathay Pacific. Maybe also an explanation for the Qantas International Flight to Sydney.--Goldwing 5000 (talk) 04:17, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  International Destinations within Australia  

message: I've removed the Aircraft Used section which was added but an Anon IP as it's pointless since it's nothing to do with the airport only the airlines and what aircraft they use which does nothing to improve the article.. Bidgee (talk) 09:37, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of Aircraft Used 

message: Do we need two images in infobox? Aaroncrick(Tassie Boy talk) 04:56, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Several airports have both a logo and a picture in the box. However, I don't recall seeing such a large logo before. I reduced the size a bit. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 09:47, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Aaroncrick(Tassie Boy talk) 06:19, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox

message: Canadian and American airports generally contain a link to an aviation weather source in their external link section. Why should airports in this country be different?DSatYVR (talk) 22:19, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aviation weather links 

message: In the box "Ngurah Rai International  Airport" has a note numbered 2 but there is no actual note 2 given. something lame from CBW 06:56, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Busiest International Routes out of Adelaide Airport 

message: Pacific Blue flights from Adelaide to Nadi have been cancelled as of May 6 2010 see http://www.tripadvisor.com.au/ShowTopic-g294331-i883-k3490130-Virgin_Pacific_Blue_Flight_Changes_from_Adelaide_Australia-Fiji.html so I have made the change in the Airlines and Destinations --Linkqer (talk) 15:47, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pacific Blue Adelaide to Nadi Flights 

message: A couple of recent edits have tried to increase the main runway length from 3100m to 3200m, without substantiation. These edits have been reverted as the figure given in Adelaide Airport Ltd's Masterplan (Vol. 1, December 2009, page 1.12) is 3100m. Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 12:45, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main runway length is 3100m 

message: Id like to know why someone put up a old picture of the airport in the infobox? The terminal obviously is still not finished according to this photo. You can see the passenger bridges have still not been added. This photo would be appropriate in some other section.
:I've promoted a different picture from the stack further down the article. --Scott Davis Talk 23:35, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Old photo 

message: I understand the reason why this taken out of the Airlines and destinations for the service advertised as beginning in December. However a simple search of China Southerns schedules on http://www.csair.com/au/en/ will show the following:
* 22:00 Guangzhou Baiyun International Airport CZ663 Airbus A330 09:30+1d Adelaide International Airport 9h detail L(Economy) $1617.45 
So why is this such as an issue? --Linkqer (talk) 08:25, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  China Southern 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Adelaide Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.aal.com.au/lib/pdf/mf55.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.aal.com.au/corporate/history.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090515020444/http://news.theage.com.au:80/national/tiger-sets-up-second-home-in-adelaide-20080805-3q9s.html to http://news.theage.com.au/national/tiger-sets-up-second-home-in-adelaide-20080805-3q9s.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:09, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Adelaide Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160314070313/https://bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/files/WebAirport_FY_1986-2015.xls to http://bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/files/WebAirport_FY_1986-2015.xls
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130424114920/http://www.adelaideairport.com.au/assets/pdfs/media-releases/nr%20-%20airport%20award%2016%2011.pdf to http://www.adelaideairport.com.au/assets/pdfs/media-releases/nr%20-%20airport%20award%2016%2011.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.theage.com.au/national/tiger-sets-up-second-home-in-adelaide-20080805-3q9s.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150321213813/https://www.adelaideairport.com.au/assets/pdfs/media-releases/nr%20-%20Google%20Street%20View%2007%2013%20web%20%282%29.pdf to http://www.adelaideairport.com.au/assets/pdfs/media-releases/nr%20-%20Google%20Street%20View%2007%2013%20web%20%282%29.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:11, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Please explain why 2020-21 ,2025-26 and 2030–31 added to this table?
 Annual passenger statistics
Year   	Passenger movements
2020-21	9,856,000
2025-26	11,552,000
2030–31	13,537,000
Khoshhat (talk) 06:29, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Annual Passengers 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:51, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: Hi Andrew. You asked who cares. Well. Lots do. If you don't, well piss off180.150.114.118 (talk) 01:37, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry - the "who cares" comment was about the misplaced A380 comment I deleted. A piece of detail which probably does not belong in the article at all - like why is that special - and certainly not where it was situated.  Please try to assume good faith in your comment telling someone to "piss off" is simply not on and could easily lead very quickly to you being blocked.  The additions you have made are of very low quality - All airport have taxis outside - it really does not need saying, and you left the opening sentence of a section without a date (after you removed it with no explaination) leaving readers quite unaware of the chronology of the detail being discussed.  Andrewgprout (talk) 02:56, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Oh oh oh, threats. Go ahead and block. Blocks get lifted anyway and also, there's ways around them.180.150.114.118 (talk) 12:35, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Andrewpgrout 

message: @The Banner, I removed one source because Adelaide wasn't the focus in the article and at that time, the airline has not yet announced that its next destination. I also removed Perth because Australia currently has a policy that doesn't allow (most?) foreign airlines (Vietnam included) to operate domestic flights.https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-04/international-airlines-allowed-fly-domestic-routes-reduce-fares/9617598 The reason why the flight from Adelaide starts on the 22nd is because when you check the times and frequencies in the existing source, the flight from Vietnam arrives in Adelaide on the night of the 21st at 9:10pm. The aircraft will rest in Adelaide overnight and the flight from Adelaide starts the next morning of the 22nd at 07:25am. 
Again, please take note from the existing source of the times of departure and arrival, the days of the week, and how the source implied (but not state) that flights from Adelaide start on the 22nd. RPC7778 (talk) 12:22, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: So you admit that the start date of the 22nd is not sourced but is own research? The Banner talk 12:28, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone who is not stupid can already figure out that it starts on the 22nd just by looking at the days of the week the flight operates based from the source. RPC7778 (talk) 12:31, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Banner 

message: Also tagging User:SmileSmite83, User:Takendreams83, and User:Coastie43
Luke, we are not trying to edit war. However, per WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT, EXACT dates are required to add start dates to an airport page:
“For future destinations, add: "(begins date service begins)" after the destination. Starting dates must be provided with full date including the year and references should be provided.”
Additionally, you appear to have a Conflict of Interest, as you have stated you work for the airport (seen in this dif: []). You have been warned of this more than once (seen here: [] and here: []). WP:BFAQ#RULES states “Avoid editing articles relating to your organization entirely, because of the conflict of interest.” You are clearly not following this and have reverted multiple times to the point you appear to be breaking WP:3RR. Please refrain from further reverts. 
Thank you. (VenFlyer98 (talk) 14:20, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah yeah, alright you win kiddo. I’ll refrain. Luke848 (talk) 15:14, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[User:Luke848]] 

message: Need someone to update this section as I believe the aircraft was due to be moved late last year. 118.211.85.229 (talk) 13:03, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vickers-Vimy museum