Talk:Airline call sign

message: Northwest Airlines isn't listed. Does anyone know its call sign? Is it "Red Tail"? EdwinHJ
----
It's "Northwest" according to http://airlines.afriqonline.com/airlines/102.htm
I see both Martinair and Transavia are listed and their callsigns are the same as their name, but Lufthansa, another airline whose name is its callsign, is not listed.
Should we list all airlines or only those whose callsigns differ from their names?
The introduction states "Some of these less obvious examples are listed below.", so I feel Martinair and Transavia should be removed, or the introduction changed. Opinions?
Wikibob 23:08, 2004 Feb 27 (UTC)
I believe that we should list all airlines, even ones that have their callsign the same as their name, for a sense of completeness.  I'll go ahead and change the introduction, since this seems to have been considered for six months now. Joblio 16:17, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: In the air, I also hear "Independence" without the "air" following, but since both Aerosite and airlinecodes.co.uk include Air in the callsign, I decided not to press the point on that one.Joblio 18:24, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Northwest Airlines

message: The list of callsigns is out of date and is only a small selection of those allocated - we could update the list which would take some time or should we just give a few examples and rely on the external links to enable readers to look up callsigns of interest = any comments from watchers ! MilborneOne 23:11, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: List of callsigns is out of date

message: Just to update the list:  Longtail Aviation (Bermuda) Call sign "Longtail" identifier is LGT.
66.109.83.7 19:16, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Longtail 

message: ICAO airline designator should not be merged here.  The other article is more compelete and easier to navigate.  It was split up since it was too large.  Adding this data, and by inference the IATA data, here would make this an even bigger article that would need to be split and there would be no use to it at all since you can only arrange the infomation in one order, either IATA code, ICAO code or call sign.  So it would not serve most readers.  Perhaps a better solution would be to eliminate all of the duplicate information from both articles?  Given the problems, and this was discussed at least once in the past, it is best to leave all three.  Another consideration, since this is arranged by airline name and since the call sign is included in the airline article, this is the article that should be deleted.  It is duplicate information included in the airline articles.  Vegaswikian 17:43, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested merge of ICAO airline designator 

message: Well, since the seperate ICAO airline designator page consisted of only two lines, and nobody has looked here since July, I've gone ahead and merged it. If you feel that I was wrong you can always revert it. andy29 18:24, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: as we have now established that the airline designator page is not just two lines but also a detailed listed in 26 sub-pages can we remove the merge request on ICAO airline designator please ? MilborneOne 19:31, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  Vegaswikian 23:52, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge of ICAO airline designator 

message: I don't think the 2-way radio template is quite relevant enough for this article, and doesn't add anything to the article.  There are lots of templates that would be more relevant, and "2-way radio" would be good for articles with radio equipment.  Thoughts? Joblio 22:01, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  2-way radio template