Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports/Archive 2

message: The article on Transportation is currently nominated on Wikipedia:This week's improvement drive. Vote for Transportation there.--Fenice 09:11, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvement drive

message: What is the feeling of the group here about the terminal lists?  An anon editor slapped a cleanup tag on McCarran International Airport and one of the items removed afterwards was the sections on the terminal and the how they are used by the various airlines and where they airlines fly to.  That seems to be a standard element of most airport articles, especially for major airports.  I could not find suggested heading as a part of this project.  Should there be one?  Should the data on terminals be in articles?  Vegaswikian 17:37, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I did restore that section.  However on the McCarren talk page there is a discussion about what should be in an airport article.  Should charter service be included?  What is the recommended order for the sections?  Should sightseeing be included, McCarren is a major sightseeing hub, in the article?  Should information about cargo be listed?  I think these should be discussed in this project under a structre heading that would indicate the suggested order and what should be generally covered in each section and what should not be included in the article?  I may add that if there are no objections.  Vegaswikian 20:45, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  My suggestions over at the LAS talk page where to not include gate information, that airline info should be at the end (right before links) and that charter airline info, if included, should be separated out. I also generally do think that article was a bit of a mess, but that the response of deleting all kinds of stuff was silly. Rdore 00:06, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terminals 

message: I'm curious how people feel about the following standardization issues for desitnation lists:
# Do we prefer Seattle or Seattle/Tacoma? (I don't care)
# For BWI, is it Baltimore or Baltimore/Washinton? (I prefer the former since it's a shorter name, the airport is much closer to Baltimore, and there are two other washington airports)
# If we distinguish between two airports in the same city by name, do we slash or hyphenate? For example, is it Chicago/Midway or Chicago-Midway, or something else? (I don't care)
# Is it Washington-Reagan or Washington-National? (I don't care)
# Is it Houston-Bush or Houston-Intercontinental? (I don't care)
# Is it New York-JFK or New York-Kennedy? (I prefer JFK, but don't care strongly)
# Also, for cases where there is more than one city with the same name, both having commercial airports, (like Portland), I've been trying to specific which state with the two letter abbreviation in parenthesis. Any objections?
Feel free to add to this list. Rdore 00:16, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Triffling Things 

message: Any comments on the List of the world's busiest airports by international passenger traffic article?  I'm tempted to put this up for AfD since I'm not sure it is needed.  Most of the links are to cities and not airports.  Any interest in saving this article and cleaning it up and making sure the data is current?  Vegaswikian 02:14, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd vfd them all. Don't worry about it too much, if deleting them isn't appropriate after all, then that will come out at vfd. -Lommer | talk 21:44, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

text: One of the pages is an old discussion. See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Singapore Changi Airport passenger traffic by destination.--Huaiwei 09:36, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of the world's busiest airports by international passenger traffic 

message: I don't like the way that multiple cities with the same name are disambiguated. The parenthesis within parenthesis and non-standard abbreviations are jarring, and in some cases not entirely clear. I favor using Associated Press-style abbreviations where necessary, and spelling out the full name where abbreviations would be unwieldly. ABC Airlines (San Jose, Calif., San Jose, Costa Rica). XYZ Airways (Portland, Ore., Portland, Maine). Alternatively, they could be displayed the way the airlines do it on the terminal displays... that would require separating destinations with semicolons - as in (San Jose, CA; San Jose, Costa Rica; Manchester, UK; Manchester, NH; Portland, OR; Portland, ME). Either way, it would get rid of the parenthesis within the parenthesis. FCYTravis 04:02, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  City disambiguation 

message: At least one editor has already combined these into one, listing both sets of destinations.  I'm going to revert that change until there is some concesus on what to do.  The problem I see with doing this is that both airlines will continue operating for at least 2 more years.  Until the merger of the airlines themselves is complete, America West probably should be listed as US Airways dba America West Airlines.  Comments?  Vegaswikian 05:04, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  US Air/ America West terminal listings 

message: A couple of changes recently that have sort of irked me somewhat:
# dba is in my eyes an alien term, I had to look it up to find out what it meant. I had to add the disambig mention to the dba page! I'd venture a lot of other people are likewise confused. It's American terminology where others would use franchise I guess. Consider these two options of presenting the same info:
#: British Airways (Loganair) (Inverness, Kirkwall, Lerwick, Shetland Sumburgh, Stornoway, Wick)
#: Loganair dba British Airways (Inverness, Kirkwall, Lerwick, Shetland, Sumburgh, Stornoway, Wick)
#: (nb - I'm just using Rdore's changes - "Sumburgh, Stornoway" is his error in the edit)
# London/Heathrow, London/Gatwick, London/City etc rather than using the correct names of the airports (London Heathrow, London Gatwick, London City) nothing at all is gained by this and it is using terminology which is not in common use.
# Over zealous disambiguation of city names... A case in point being Edinburgh Airport which Rdore has just took at hatchet to on the destination list (example of all 3 points raised). All the cities had wikilinks to the correct (disambiguated) city and where required the airport, this has been replaced by a list with no wikilinks on the city names and largely redundant 'disambiguation' of the cityname. I mean, as if there are ever going to be services to Manchester and Birmingham in the US! I'm minded to revert this change given it also added the dba usage...
Regards/Wangi 19:43, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Americanisms and other recent changes 

message: Is it time to add a policy to the project page?  Vegaswikian 01:06, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The seperator to use is being discussed at #Multiple Airports in Same City Disambiguation below.  I would have no problem using Heathrow IF, we can agree on standard names for all airports.  Going back to the NYC example, do we use Kennedy or JFK?  NYC is a good example since it also has LaGuardia.  The NYC destination also includes Newark.  And for a point of reference, airline schedules typically identify these three airports as 'K' (I think that is what was used), 'L' and 'E'.  Vegaswikian 16:37, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Airline destination lists in airport articles

message: How should you list an airline that is in multiple terminals?  At McCarran they were in the terminal most commonly used and then a (see above) or (see below) in the lesser used terminal.  Now someone has chnaged this so that Southwest is listed in Terminal B where they have about 6 flights a day with a (see above) in terminal C where they have about 180 flights a day.  Unless it is easy to keep track of the flights by terminals I think the destinations should be listed in one place and secondary terminals should have a (see xxxx) comment.  Maybe a (see terminal x for list of destinations) rather then the see above.  Vegaswikian 01:35, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  How to list an airline using multiple terminals 

message: What is the practice regarding the name of the airports? This primarily concerns Canadian airports as I have no clue outside that area. The Canada Flight Supplement (CFS) says on page A4:
"NAV CANADA is responsible for all Canadian civil aeronautical information, however, the Canadian Aviation Regulations make it mandatory for aerodrome operators to report all changes to the CFS information to the Minister of Transport."
The rest of the paragraph explains how to do that.
Now the problem is that many airports appear to have more than one official name which may or may not be reflected in the article. An example of this is Toronto Pearson International Airport, which is the Greater Toronto Airports Authority name for the airport. The CFS listing is Toronto/Lester B. Pearson International Airport, which in this case is not reflected in the article. It was moved to its current name from the CFS listing to the GTAA name. This is just one but there are several others Greater Sudbury Airport - Sudbury Airport, North Peace Airport - Fort St. John Airport.
My feeling is that the article should have one name and the info box should have the other but I'm not bothered which way round. CambridgeBayWeather 21:44, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Official/Commonly used airport names

message: Would anyone mind if we moved the section about all the airlines into a template that was included in the article? I don't mean a parametarized template, merely a subpage of the airport article that is included inline using the template syntax. The reason for my request is that I watch several airport articles, yet have zero interest in airlines and their respective destinations. For an airport like CYVR, the vast majority of edits are to the airlines/destinations list, if I could ignore these edits that on my watchlist that would be great (they also consume a lot of space on the page history). I'm not saying that its not a worthy section of the article by any means, I would just like a way to sort of separate the two subjects so that those wikipedians who want to focus on only one or the other can do so. There's no difference from a reader's POV, and from an editor's the main dif is that you'd have to use the section "edit" button instead of the article "edit" button. What do people think? -Lommer | talk 06:05, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Specific airport airlines template? 

message: I'd like to see some sort of consensus on how one of several airports in a major city (for example Heathrow in London) should be used. Many people have object to using a slash, because it is also used to list multiple cities (and it's vaguely ugly). I personally dislike having nothing because then its not clear when the city name ends and the disambiguation part begins. For example, San Jose del Cabo could easily get read as del Cabo airport in San Jose. Therefore I propose we move to using a dash. A colon also seems reasonable to me, but I think I like the dash better. Can everyone please weigh in on this? (especially anyone who might get upset by the choice.) Rdore 05:18, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Given no consensus on the word to disabiguate the city, I guess the character used could be decided. Are the only options '/', '-', ':', ' ', and ';'? I guess you could use '@' but I don't think that would look good or read well. Vegaswikian 05:50, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Multiple Airports in Same City Disambiguation 

message: Hello, I haven't been active in the airports project but have worked on a few airport articles here and there. I have a couple of questions. Firstly when is it appropriate to use the  template? Can it be used on any airport article that needs work, or just those that are actively being worked on? Should it go on the article page or the talk page? Do the participants in the project need to have any ownership in the use of the template?Adz 12:27, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There's nothing hard and fast - if you want to add it, go ahead. Probably of most use on articles that get a lot of edits. It goes on the talk page. wangi 12:56, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Good work, I'd say so. I've made an edit to the page, removing the stub plus also making use of the :Template:Airport infobox and :Template:Airport codes templates. Thanks/wangi 12:56, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks!  Adz 23:36, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question about use of templats ''and'' 'when is a stub not a stub?' 

message: I've initiated an attempt to expand the Airport lounge article, notably with a list of airport club schemes and locations. Any attempts at expansion (particularly outside of the US) would be helpful. Thanks! FCYTravis 00:29, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Airport lounge]] 

message: This morning while doing some edits on Québec/Jean Lesage International Airport I found that the name of the company that runs the airport (Aéroport de Québec) redirects to the article. So I tried it as an external link in the infobox. What does anyone else think. I wait to hear others opinons before I do any more in that way. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 10:27, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: As in you end up with a recursive link... Sounds like a bad idea to me - better a red link, or no link if the operator isn't notable enough to warrent one. wangi 22:07, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not bothered about the external link, more the links in the infobox that returns you to the article. It would be better to have no link at all. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 02:49, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: External links

message: I've been WP:BOLD in swapping the article structure. The average Wikipedia visitor looking for information on an airport is going to care more about the airlines than the terminal buildings themselves. Therefore, the table of contents should stress the most important feature of the section - which airlines serve the airport where. Then, subordinated under that, of course, each airline is listed in its correct terminal location. FCYTravis 07:15, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Article structure

message: User:69.70.164.120 has added an extra section to the infobox for Montréal-Pierre Elliott Trudeau International Airport. The extra section shows the "Number of Passengers" and "Number of Takeoffs". I don't really feel that it does not improve the look. However, because the stats for the movements are ones that I don't feel are correct (see Talk:Montréal-Pierre Elliott Trudeau International Airport#Aircraft movements 2004) I didn't think it a good idea to remove it. I was wondering what anyone else thought of the box? Also, if the box is to stay then the "Number of Takeoffs" needs to be renamed to "Aircraft Movements". CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 00:20, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: For Canadian airports the TP577 is the government publication. However, it does contain at least one error. The problem with using the data as provided by the airport authority is I feel it may be inflated. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 01:33, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox addition

message: Please note that feature article Montréal-Mirabel International Airport is open for review at Wikipedia:Featured article review#Active reviews. Please consider reviewing the article and help resolving its issues.  --maclean25 02:05, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Featured article review

message: There's a discussion going on at Talk:Circuit (airfield) about which article the merge should terminate at. I feel traffic pattern should be the destination, but I'd like to gather opinions and get some consensus on this before we continue. ericg ✈ 00:02, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge of [[circuit (airfield)]] and [[traffic pattern]]