Talk:Emirates (airline)/Archive 1

message: The 2010-11 results were out on 10 May, so it could be added to the article. The sidebox as well as the table of historical performance.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.49.92.51 (talk) 14:42, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Revenue, Profit etc

message: It's written that Emirates will start a route to Sao Paulo Brazil and that it will be the first middle eastern line to fly to South America. That is not true, Syrian Airlines flies to Caracas, Venezuela.
Iran Air fly to Caracas with Syrian Air code sharing on the flights.
::According to their websites neither Syrian Air nor Iran Air flies to Caracas (or anywhere in the Americas).  Emirates has services to Sao Paulo.  Iraqi Airlines used to fly to Rio de Janeiro.  And El Al occasionally flew to Buenos Aires (of which Adolf Eichmann travelled on with a one-way ticket)  Kransky (talk) 11:26, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Syrian Airlines

message: I merged the two sections on ICE into one. I also removed "...at a rate of 80 per week, due to rise to 160 per week..." from the opening as it was covered later on with different figures. In the Business Class section it says "...with a 60" pitch..." is that 60 inches or 60 degrees? I also noticed that a couple of sections had fact tags at the beginning which I replaced with Refimprovesect. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 10:39, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Last edits

message: I found that all 4 gallery images were also in the article and the Manchester Ringway was in 3 times. I merged the "Partnerships and Alliances" and the "Codeshare agreements" into one section as they are the same thing. Changed bullet points into prose (badly). Most of the "Destinations" is now at Emirates destinations as this article is getting too large. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 01:41, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: More cleanup

message: :Image:Emirates.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 04:14, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Emirates.jpg

message: Some dates are written like this...October 27, 2007.  Others are written like this....27 October 2007. WP:DATE states that both are acceptable but that only one style should be used in a particular article.  I can't see a need for discussion of this point but simply a vote (unless one style is predominately used in Dubai).  Usually a discussion is more appropriate and not a vote.Archtransit 23:12, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just change your preferences to see what you want. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 22:00, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Dates:  Which style?

message: I just read this section for the first time and it sounds very one-sided to me.  It's called a "Controversy" section yet it reads more like a section attacking European legacy carriers for foul play.  In fact there's nothing "controversial" about Emirates Airline in the section, which is what it's supposed to be used for.  The information that's there now is more relevant in the other airlines' pages not this one.  Anyone else have an opinion?  NcSchu(Talk) 22:36, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy Section 

message: I believe that this article should only be about the passenger airline.  Anything dealing with SkyCargo should be removed and put on the Emirates SkyCargo page.  This would include the removal of the cargo fleet and an adjustment to the number of destinations.  In the article is states that Emirates flies "to 94 cities in 60 countries on six continents."  This number includes the passenger and cargo services.  In reality, Emirates (the passenger airline) only flies to 87 different destinations, in 86 different cities (London is counted twice due to flights to both Heathrow and Gatwick), in 55 countries (I went to the Emirates Route Map and counted to be sure).  I would be interested to hear what people have to say about this proposal.  If there is no opposition to this change by 03:00, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Passenger versus Cargo 

message: Should the link below be put into the paragraph about Emirates ordering the 747-8 if Boeing provides a shrink version?. According to this article, http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/prnewswire/AQTU09706112007-1.htm
Boeing has frozen the 747-8 design and nothing is mentioned about the short- shrink version(which would allow for DXB-LAX, 365 days a year with good cargo capabilities) that Tim Clark has been pushing for because that was the only condition a 747-8 order would be signed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melrosepark (talk • contribs) 22:24, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Customer for 747-8 

message: At some point tonight I am going to start cleaning up Emirates Airline page.  It has become cluttered, and has alot of facts that are just facts and do not add to the overall experience or have any significance. Any comments please respond.--Jab843 (talk) 23:10, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean Up 

message: i think the Emirates Airline page looks really good and most information has been placed into other pages. But i think it is time we removed the clean up template, since the page does't need it anymore.
Thanks.(mini mo 12:35, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove Clean Up template 

message: To the various IP's that are changing the two dates. Read Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Dates) which is quite clear on the matter, "Wikipedia does not use ordinal suffixes or articles, or put a comma between month and year." I note too that it's only the two dates in the box that are being changed yet there are multiple others throughout the article that don't include the ordinal suffixes. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 18:59, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Dates

message: What's the name of this airline?  I thought it was "Emirates".  Sometimes "Emirate Airline" (not "Airlines") is used.  Is this a grammatical error that the company started?  Does this deserve mention or is there a history about the terminology used? Archtransit (talk) 23:06, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In terms of common names, clearly Emirates should be the preferred name. I am still wondering why there is a page move to its current name.--Huaiwei (talk) 15:54, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: name of airline

message: (to 88 destinations in 55 countries all over the world) this needs to be changed, Emirates now flies to 100 destinations around the world. can someone do this please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by  211.208.42.22 (talk • contribs)  15:42, 18 March 2008 
:Please see the message a few sections up titled "Routes" for information on this.  Thank you.  Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 02:32, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: destinations: incorrect number

message: The article needs to be consistant. If the two destination boxes are going to use the redirect "United States of America" then every time "United States" is used in the article needs to be changed as well. At the same time if the full formal name of one country is being used then the same applies to other countries, Republic of South Africa, Republic of India, Federal Republic of Germany, Republic of Turkey, Commonwealth of Australia and United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 22:27, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we should stick with the common names.  United States, China, South Africa, etc. are the most common names of these countries.  People seldom refer to countries with "Republic of ...", "Federation of ...", "Commonwealth of ...".  Therfore, we should only do what is common and not what is perfect and precise.  Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 06:40, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Destination countries

message: I'm not sure that merging four articles into here would be a good idea. This article is already rather large and could do with reducing in size which is why some of them were created. The only advantage is that it would make it easier to see when advertising material is added. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla
:I agree that it is not a good idea to merge all of those articles.  This article already contains a lot of information and several "main articles" helps keep this page precise and not so long.  Actually, back in October 2007 several articles relating to Emirates were created to take weight off of this article.  Merging everything back would undo those exact edits.  There is really no point to merge everything into one article.  Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 20:22, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge proposal

message: I think its a good idea to merge the article into Emirates Airline, infact I say all airlines having seperate articles for them like Singapore Airlines Cargo, Air China Cargo, MAS Kargo, Lufthansa Cargo should be merged into teh main airlines article and destinations list, Cathay Pcific Cargo and El Al Cargo articles were merged into the main airlines articles.(203.81.237.164 (talk) 18:13, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not quite. The reason that Emirates SkyCargo should be merged into this article, is because Emirates SkyCargo is not an airline. It doesn't hold an air operator's certificate, it doesn't have any aircraft registered in its name, it is not a stand-alone company (it's a division of Emirates Airline), and doesn't operate service utilising its own call-sign. There are entities such as Aeroflot-Cargo, Singapore Airlines Cargo, Lufthansa Cargo, etc which do have their own AOC, do have aircraft registered in their name, and are separated legally from their name sake by way of being a separate company. The very basic requirement to call an entity an airline is holding a valid AOC - if these cargo entities don't have that AOC, they need to be merged into the main article. --Россавиа Диалог 19:07, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose; Whether or not Emirates SkyCargo is a different company is not the issue.  SkyCargo does have an identity and does form a large part of Emirates.  Emirates (the passenger airline) and SkyCargo operate separately although they are under the same umbrella.  I oppose merging the articles together for that reason.  Also, merging more things into this article is a bad idea; see my comment in the section above.  Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 20:25, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I say the article should be merged, if you look at Emirates SkyCargo article all it will take is one paragraph and only the all freighter destinations (the ones taht are exclusivly served through freighters only) to add to the main Emirates article and destination list.(203.81.239.79 (talk) 17:29, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I strongly disagree that this article should be merged.  Emirates SkyCargo and Emirates Airline are both subsidiary companies of Emirates Group.  My company works with both SkyCargo and Airline, but we had to establish those arrangements seperately at Group level.  By the same rationale as is being proposed, you should merge both Emirates Airlines and Emirates SkyCargo into Emirates Group.  I'm sure we can see how silly that is.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.30.22.119 (talk) 15:45, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Then every airline with a seprate Cargo divison should have a seprate article for the Cargo wing at wikipedia, but then again El Al and Cathay Pacific Cargo articles were deleted from here and now redirect to the main airline articles.(203.81.239.188 (talk) 15:02, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Emirates SkyCargo article merger related 

message: Anon 58.179.64.21 continually changes “daily” to “Daily” in the article, as in the extract below:
Destination           	Frequency (per week)	Aircraft                            	Commencing
London, United Kingdom	7 (Daily)           	Airbus A380                         	1 December 2008
Guangzhou, China      	7 (Daily)           	Boeing 777-200ER (all same aircraft)	1 December 2008
In my opinion there is no reason to capitalise “daily” since it is inside the phrase “7 (daily)". If I imagine that the 7 had been written in full like this - Seven (Daily) - (which doesn't change the argument) it seems clear to me that a capital is wrong. Also the anon changes “twice daily” to “double daily”, which sounds odd. What is people's opinion on these two points, please? - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 08:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Twice daily

message: What does that mean? Does it mean that they are going to use the same aircraft, with the same tail letters, day after day? CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 16:37, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It means that this destination will only be served by one type of aircraft and not different types throughout the week.  As you can see by this edit, someone does not think that Guangzhou will be served by multiple types of aircraft.  By adding "all same aircraft," they were justifying their edit.  According to this article in a Dubai newspaper, it says that Emirates will use an Airbus A330-200 from 1 July to 30 November.  Beginning 1 December, Emirates will use an A340-300 for six days and an Airbus A330-200 on the seventh day.  But, this article was from 4 March 2008, and I know that Emirates changed the aircraft used for Cape Town a short while after they announced flights to that city.  I am not sure if they did the same for Guangzhou; User:Jay zrules2 could be right.  Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 04:27, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, thanks. I removed it. None of the others use it and they appear to be the same. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 14:45, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: all same aircraft

message: Could Emirates - in theory - open a base in the United States. So would they be able to serve for example Amsterdam from Chicago or New York?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.182.216.232 (talk) 12:48, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  USA 

message: What is the point for the table in the Destinations section that shows changes in frequencies or aircraft for different destinations that Emirates serves?  I personally do not think Wikipedia should provide such detailed information that does not provide any encyclopedic content.  It is also difficult to maintain or to ensure the accuracy.  I believe the only table we should include is that of the new destinations.  If someone truly wants to find which type of plane Emirates uses for a certain destination or how many times a week that destination is served, they can use Emirates' website.  Wikipedia is only meant to provide information and not flight schedules and specifics about different routes.  Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 21:21, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with you totally on the subject. By the way why are you so adamant in listing country next to city in the new destinations table? its unecessary and looks crowded too, I have removed it and even improvised it many times which made more sense, but you have always reverted my edits to your own prefernces, you do not own the Emirates article.(203.81.239.188 (talk) 14:57, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It should probably go and would then mean that the second box, "Aircraft Changes/Increased Flight Frequency", would no longer be needed either. The country names should stay as there is no way to tell if every reader knows what country the cities are in. At the same time I also wonder about the two boxes in the "Performance" section, are they really required? CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 16:07, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: CambridgeBayWeather, I was only referring to the removal of "Aircraft Changes/Increased Flight Frequency," not "New Destinations from Dubai."  I am also opposed to the removal of the two tables in the "Performance" section.  I believe they provide good information, but I think they are either poorly placed or too big.  Maybe a reorganization is needed for that section?  Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 23:32, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry I misunderstood which box you were talking about. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 05:42, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Okay, I removed it.  What should be done with the performance tables?  Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 23:17, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table of flight changes 

message: An anonymous editor has changed the format of the city and country for the destinations in the New Destinations table.  This user believes that the original version was crowded and was harder to view.  The original version's format was CITY, COUNTRY.  The anonymous editor changed it to CITY - (COUNTRY), then subsequently changed it to CITY  (COUNTRY).  I believe we should use the original version (CITY, COUNTRY).  This is the usual format for writing the city and country.  This format also, contrary to what the anonymous editor says, does not make the table crowded or difficult to read.  I would like to see what the views of other editors are so we can reach consensus.  Thank you.  Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 00:23, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked at it on a 15" monitor at work. The standard CITY, COUNTRY looks fine. What might help is to use Frequency(per week). That box is rather wide for the small amount of data in it. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 10:46, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with "Frequency  (per week)" for the column title.  I will wait a few more days before I change anything to allow for the opposition to voice their opinion.  Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 20:34, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:   I have just changed it.  Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 21:27, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Obsessive control freaks, get a life, I cant believe such ridiculous issues are of concern here, talk about being petty.(inspector 15:32, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  City, country 

message: I believe I read somewhere (though I can't find a reference at the moment) that the Emirates is able to buy fuel at below-market prices arranged by the UAE gov't.  Can someone confirm or deny this?  Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Inetpup (talk • contribs) 06:58, 15 July 2008
:Thats absolutely incorrect.They pay at regular prices. (mini mo 21:45, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Inetpup, there have been a lot of people/companies/governments that have accused Emirates of receiving subisdized fuel from the government.  Emirates has constantly denied these claims.  Actually, Emirates has recently announced that the high cost of aviation fuel has led to the cancellation of a future flight to Durban, South Africa and the suspension of flights to Alexandria, Egypt.  Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 07:01, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fuel subsidies from UAE gov't to the airline 

message: How can Emirates be "the seventh-largest airline in the world in terms of international passengers carried" and also "the eighth largest airline in Asia, in terms of passengers carried"?
203.12.172.254 (talk) 03:39, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Because one refers to international passengers and the other to all passengers, which includes domestic. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 15:38, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Huh? 

message: Does anyone know if emirates has any plans to fly to Vancouver? Rumors say that it could be starting next spring but with the delay of the Airbus A380's Los Angles and San Fran are being delayed.
91.73.168.89 (talk) 13:28, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Vancouver?

message: Why don't we put the total Emirates fleet in the infobox including the Emirates SkyCargo fleet. Because technically if you think about it, they operate as one unit and not a different subsidary of the Emirates Group. Without Emirates Airline, Emirates SkyCargo would handle very little. Its something the airlines competitors have critisced them for doing. So lets include the total fleet, but put a note next to it showing that this figure includes the SkyCargo fleet as well. (MoHasanie (talk) 17:31, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Fleet

message: Good Lord! What's up with the overly gushy praise of the wonderfulness that Emirates is purported to be? I mean sure, even if Emirates is the best thing since sliced bread (if the EK fanatics are to be believed)... but come on! Really? Half of the article looks like it was written by a 14 year old girl in dedication of her latest boyband crush, and the other half reads like an advertisement (and seems to me like it was plagiarized directly from somewhere else)! To top it off, 1/3rd of the airtcle looks like frivolous references to absolutely useless "information"... Oy vey!
Does anyone know if this article has been looked at for acceptability and validity? Or should I start doing the honors? It is supposed to be an encyclopedia, right? 114.31.174.214 (talk) 17:43, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have rewritten the Economy Class section: 
Emirates Economy Class offers a 32-34 inch seat pitch (81-86 cm) and standard seat width (except on the Boeing 777 fleet). The seat features adjustable headrests, a 600-1000 channel ICE In-Flight-Entertainment and in-seat laptop power-outlets on newer aircraft and laptop recharging facilities in galleys in older aircraft. There is additional recline on A380 Economy Class seats.
Emirates Airlines operates a highly unusual ten-abreast 3-4-3 seating configuration on its 777 fleet (rather than the most customary 3-3-3 configuration). Other airlines with this configuration include Air France-KLM (on selected 777-300ER aircraft), China Southern Airlines and two Japanese airlines in domestic services (Al Nippon Airways and Japan Airlines). 
If you don't like it then change it back, it was written in a hurry so there will probably be problems with it. Thanks, --Plane Person (talk) 18:39, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Encyclopedia or fan site? 

message: What is happening to the Bogota service? I noticed it has been removed from the new destinations table but is it listening in the text above? Can anyone shed some light on this subject?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by M i k e y 86 (talk • contribs) 19:03, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bogota, Columbia 

message: Emirates recently formed a codeshare agreement with the Australian Virgin Blue. I know it's not mentioned on the list here, but there is proof that the agreement has definitely gone ahead. The destinations I listed in this edit can be found here and a more reliable news source published this article. I just wanted to provide significant proof. --timsdad  (talk) 06:32, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Virgin Blue codeshare 

message: Warning: There are several items in this article that need citation. If no sources are provided for them, I'm afraid they are going to be deleted. *** in fact  *** ( contact ) 12:08, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations needed

message: Is anybody going to help me with improving Emirates (airline)? I've created a peer review page at Wikipedia:Peer review/Emirates (airline)/archive1, and only one person has posted comments to far. I think Emirates has the potential to be an FA-status article. All I need is help, and it doesn't seem to be arriving soon. Sp33dyphil (Talk) (Contributions)(Feed back needed @ Talk page) 07:04, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, in "Airbus A380" section, why the box of "Sheikh Ahmed bin Saeed Al-Maktoum" is crossing the texts in the paragraph ? *** in fact  *** ( contact ) 07:59, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help is needed 

message: It's written that Emirates is one of the nine airlines that fly to every inhabited continent... Where does this number come from? It's easy to check that every airline in the list flies to all the continents, but it's definitely wrong, as other airlines, that are not included in the list, fly to 6 continents: Air France, for example, flies for years to North America (e.g. NYC), South America (ex. Buenos Aires), Africa (e.g. Dakar), Europe (e.g. Paris), Asia (e.g. Tokyo) and Oceania (Papeete
The information needs to changes in the airlines of the other airlines, like BA, AF, Delta, ...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snosal (talk • contribs) 16:03, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Airlines that fly to 6 continents 

message: I've removed the incidents and accidents section for now, until we sort out the problems.  There is a lot of copy violations.  That aside, the section is overly detailed, written in expert language (looks like official reports) and includes some trivial items such as a plane taxiing on to the grass.--Dmol (talk) 09:24, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incidents and accidents section.