---

---

Improvement drive

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)

Terminals

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)

A lot of articles would be nothing but stubs without those sections, and I think that the information on the terminals, airlines, and destinations is one of the most important parts of an airport article. You should restore the original McCarran Article and be on the look-out for more of those clean-ups. PRueda29 17:49, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Layout and formatting of ICAO + IATA codes

Hello all, an issue has recently come up regarding the placement of ICAO and IATA codes in airport articles. It arose at Victoria International Airport, and identified the fact that there is no explicit standard as to whether airport codes should be placed after the article title, in the infobox, or both. I've reproduced some comments from the Victoria airport page below, and started an informal survey &mdash please weigh in. -Lommer | ^talk 17:47, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

COMMENTS

So Lommer just reverted my edit to add the airport codes to the opening paragraph of this article, citing the fact that they are in the infobox. His (i'm assuming) edits are not incorrect, but i want to put down why i disagree.

• The codes are redirects to this aiport

The codes appear in bold at the beginning of the article, which is standard wikipedia style for alternate names for things (if something has multiple names) and those bold words should redirect to the article, which they do.

• This is standard accoss many airport articles

In all the airport articles that i have edited lately, i have been placing the codes just after the primary name, and before the alternate names. I am a big fan of standard layout, and i don't feel it should be altered if the codes appear in a table.

The table seems more like "extra info cleverly formatted" but should not remove the codes from the opening paragraph.

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Airports doesn't seem to say much about what should be done when the info box exists, and perhaps that would be a more suitable place to discuss this. (Man, after checking my own link, the Layout page actually has the codes in the table and in the opening paragraph. However, this issue is still up for discussion, i think)

In summary, i support restoring my codes to the opening paragraph. Please comment

-- Fudoreaper 07:09:32, 2005-08-17 (UTC)

Given the voting to this point, it looks like most people support codes in the infobox and after the article title. Would anyone object to calling this issue closed and making that format standard? -Lommer | ^talk 05:06, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

SURVEY

Please note that this survey is fairly informal. Please check back often to see if comments have been made that might change your mind.

Triffling Things

I'm curious how people feel about the following standardization issues for desitnation lists:

1. Do we prefer Seattle or Seattle/Tacoma? (I don't care)
2. 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)
3. 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)
4. Is it Washington-Reagan or Washington-National? (I don't care)
5. Is it Houston-Bush or Houston-Intercontinental? (I don't care)
6. Is it New York-JFK or New York-Kennedy? (I prefer JFK, but don't care strongly)
7. 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)

My thoughts... I could be wrong....

1. I've seen (and done) both. I guess I would choose Seattle/Tacoma if we are going to pick a standard.
2. Baltimore/Washington has become pretty standard and that's what I use. That's it's name, and it is the 3rd airport for Washington, DC.
3. I've seen both but the slash is more common; I myself always use slashes.
4. Washington/Reagan is more often used for wiki airports and I use it as well. I would prefer though, Washington/National if it became standard.
5. Houston/Intercontinental is more often used for wiki airports and I use it as well (and would vote for this alternative).
6. I've seen both, not sure which is more common, and would also prefer, and use, New York/JFK
7. It's wiki airport standard to put the state in parenthesis if there's more than one in that city.

I agree these are triffling; and I too don't care that much one way or the other, but they should be standardized. Allstar86 02:38, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

• The airlines project has been considering a master list of all airports listed and arranged like they are in many of the larger airline destination articles. This would make it easier to create destination lists for each airline with the same information for all airlines. Maybe this project could use what comes out of that effort. The biggest problem is that they use the airport name but this project uses a city name . Vegaswikian 05:34, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure exactly what you mean by the airport name. The whole name would be way too long to include in destination lists; I've seen people delete destination lists because they looked too long and messy already. For a big airport, you could have several airlines which each list a few dozen airports in parenthesis. And if you're just using short names, I think city names are generally far more useful. I mean sure, most people probably know O'Hare or JFK. But I think 'San Jose (CA)' or 'Providence' is more useful than 'Mineta' or 'T. F. Green'. Plus for a lot of airports, there is no way to give the name without the location anyway. Rdore 18:01, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
    • Probably did not make this as clear as I should have, and this may not help. That list would also include the city name which would be the city name used in this project. Sometimes there is conflict in the city name where the airport is actually located. As an example, POU is Dutchess County Airport, it is listed as a destination under Poughkeepsie and is located in the Town of Wappinger. What city is used here? I'm suggesting using whatever comes out in an airlines master list of destinations. Vegaswikian 21:01, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
      • Are you refering to articles in Category:Airline destinations? Because, as I said, those are way to long. I understand your objections. However what I want is a list of short forms for use in Destination lists. I don't see a good way to fit that into the airline destination structure. I think it might be best just to make a list for our use as a subpage of Projct Airports, and specify the full airport name on that list as well. Rdore 23:37, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
        • Not a problem with two lists. I just think that both projects need to use the same information in articles. Using the earlier comment, one project should not use JFK and the other Kennedy. Both projects should use the same names. Vegaswikian 23:53, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Comments on the questions

• For different airports in the same city I would go with the dash (city-aiport)
• If it's two cities on the name use a slash (city/city)
• For names, I'd use the traditional one. That way you don't need to change it when someone adds a modified name like they did on EWR and IAH. If you select a short hand like Bush or Intercontinental maybe there needs to be a subpage here that lists these so it is clear what to use since it is difficult to cast a rule in concrete. Based on my traditional comment it would be Houston-Intercontinental. Also the IATA code is based on the Intercontinental name so more support for that as the choice.
• In some cases usage is the key, JFK is JFK for many but Kennedy has a strong showing in the NY area. I suspect that worldwide JFK would be the hands down winner.
  Vegaswikian 05:34, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

FBOs

Should data for fixed base operators be included in airport articles? What data specifically should be included? How do we prevent the article from sounding advertisement-like while still being informative if we chose to include FBOs? -Lommer | ^talk 02:35, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
P.S. See also the discussion at Talk:Vancouver_International_Airport#FBOs_section

I