Talk:Aranmula International Airport

Untitled

The project is not yet complete and it is doubtful that it would be completed ever owing to the protest by the people and the opposition party ,so the title should e changed to Aranmula airport project or like  ::binu (talk) 12:23, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

My edits has been removed without giving edit summary, and the edits where to favour a controversial project which is not anywhere near the stage of completion. so I reverted it--binu (talk) 08:44, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Firsly, this article is about the airport project and not the company promoting it, hence KGSIA Ltd. should not be in bold. Secondly, despite the controversy, editors are expected to adopt a neutral Point of view. See WP:NPOV The pros and cons may be placed in subsequent relevant sections of the article. Trinidade 11:55, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Change the title into Aranmula International Airport project

I would put forward a few suggestions that may help to improve the article.

• The title should be changed to "Aranmula International Airport project" as the Airport is a non-existent one and there are people who hope that it should never.
• The protest against the project is as impoprtant as the project itself,because it is getting more support from the people and media coverage. So it should get equal importance .So The first sentence may start like " Aranmula Airport project which faces protest from---
• The article seems to be written for bussiness promotion, so it should be thoroughly re-written to accommodate objectivity.--binu (talk) 11:06, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Airports are not built overnight. The Airport is in the project approval stage as stated in the article. The article is about the airport and not about the protests. The opposition to the project is already suitably mentioned in the lead paragraph. As i've said earlier, you may add encyclopaedic content on the opposition to the project in a neutral way. It will definitely improve the article's accuracy. In response to your points:

• Please gain consensus with other editors familiar with the subject before proceeding to change the title of the article.
• Please feel free to add more content underlining the importance of the opposition to the project and remove any business promotion material that may present in the article . Trinidade 13:41, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

What the use of so much air ports in a small state like Kerala after converting paddy fields creating trouble to the people living there.I think more good roads to reach the existing Airports.Development doesn't mean to demolish the entire system. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.206.23.250 (talk) 23:53, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

My contention is that the title itself reflects PoV of its promoters.The people who are behind the project would like to call it an Airport, but those who oppose to it would only like to view it a controversial project that would never come into existence. So NPoV title should be Aranmula Airport Project,hich does not imply the project would or would not be complete.So the PoV title should be changed to "Aranmula InternaTIONAL AIRPORT project"-:: binu (talk) 08:18, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

The question of the Environmental Clearance still remains, as Smt. Jayathi Natarajan ( Cabinet Minister for Environment and Forests, India )writes Smt Sushama Swaraj ( Leader of Opposition, Central Govt. of India ). She says in the letter that " the Environmental Clearance for the project has not been granted so far". The letter was published on the Haindavakeralam on 15 February 2013 and it makes clear that the environmental clearance has yet to be given.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Jagadeeshmv1990 (talk • contribs) 07:52, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Jagadeeshmv1990 (talk) 08:29, 27 February 2013 (UTC)The airport has not yet come into existence and the majority of the people at Aranmula ( the place where the Airport is supposed to be built) protests the idea firmly. So the title "Aranmula Airport Project" would be suitable rather than " Aranmula International Airport". The KGS Group ie. the promoters of the airport has not yet completed any construction work, their website says. The promoters have no experience of working in any airport project, as the cited reference says.The Group has not yet completed any project, their site says. All their projects are either 'Ongoing' or 'Upcoming'. So it's not sure that the company can run an airport effectively. The Sabarimala pilgrims do not fly but walk or go by bus to Sabarimala. Most of the pilgrims are from the southern region of India and they would never wish to board a flight. The "Irumudi" which they bear on head is thought to be sacred and NO PILGRIM wants it to be checked by airport officials. Jagadeeshmv1990 (talk) 08:29, 27 February 2013 (UTC) Jagadeeshmv1990 (talk) 17:52, 27 February 2013 (UTC) The District Collector, Patahanamthitta has not yet given sanction to the airport project, furthermore, he stated that the project has violated some pivotal laws, rules and regulations. As an answer to Shri. Ananthakumar. S under the RTI (No. C8-51855/09 dated 12 February 2013), he says,"The District Administration, so far, has given no permission, either to the KGS Airport Limited or any other parties for land conversion or any other activity in Aranmula. Proceedings are progressing against Sri K.J. Abraham in connection with the illegal activities taken place at Aranmula under Kerala Land Reforms Act, Kerala Land Conservancy Act, and Kerala Land Utilization Act. The details of government officials, who have failed to act against various illegal activities, including unauthorized conversion of paddy land and natural streams in a time bound manner, will be reported soon." It was a clause and instruction in the Site Clearance Approval Certificate for the Project that the KGS Group should get permissions from Local Statutory bodies before setting up the airport. The violation of the said dinstruction questions the validity of the Certificate, hence it is absolute that the KGS Group has skipped an impotant procedure. This means the airport project has alot of steps to go like getting clearances from Government bodies,aquiring land for the airport and getting land mutated , etc. So, the project has not yet been sanctioned for construction.Jagadeeshmv1990 (talk) 18:09, 27 February 2013 (UTC) Jagadeeshmv1990 (talk) 10:21, 5 March 2013 (UTC)Hi dear Admin, i don't know why did you delete my edits, actually the KGS promoters have not yet proven they can run an airport. They have no experience whatsoever in any airlines company or even any related fields. I'm sure that this page has been built to promote KGS and their commercial intentions. I've added enough web references to strengthen my comments. However, can anyone cite a completed work of the "renowned" KGS.Jagadeeshmv1990 (talk) 10:21, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Hariarchal (talk) 10:40, 6 March 2013 (UTC)I also support changing the title into Aranmula Airport Project because the Project hasn't been completed yet.

References

Wiki diversions

jagadimv 07:24, 7 March 2013 (UTC)dear admins please consider revising the edits by mr ajithpithu, he deletes my edits without showing any reason or reliable evidence. I usually add data referring enough documents and web references. Please let me know why do you allow him to continue doing it?jagadimv 07:24, 7 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jagadeeshmv1990 (talk • contribs)

(Non-administrator comment) I recommend that you visit Wikipedia:Dispute Resolution for ideas regarding how to resolve differences in editing. Andrew³²⁷ 07:31, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

The title is misleading.How can a project in the wild dream of certain people with business object is called like an existing one.This project itself creats strong objection from the people notonly from the locality but the people as a whole. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajeevkarunakarannair (talk • contribs) 16:22, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Violation of Wikipedia Norms

This article is sheer violation of all the norms practiced by Wikipedia. It is about a non-existing project which is haunted by a number of controversies. Firstly, they tried to start the work of the project without proper permission from the authorities. Since the proposed project involves the filling of wetlands and water-bodies, they should have obtained permission from the Ministry of Environment. They failed to get the permission from the conscientious officials. Now they are trying to get permission with the help of some politicians. Like any overzealous business firm, they are trying to get attention and Wikipedia is being used for that. Wikipedia should not become a prey to such commercial advertising ventures. The logo of the KGS Group and the copying of the materials from their brochure need to be removed. The length of the Runway, the promise of a hospital, the proposal to bring LULU, the promise of employment generation, etc. are enumerated as a ploy to lure the public. But the villagers are agitating for their survival in the area. Even though the government at the centre and the state government are playing to their tune, the people and the law of the land will give the final verdict. Already there are stay orders given by courts and tribunals in favour of the agitating environmentalists and the villagers against the airport project. so the article needs drastic editing.Som Karnavar (talk) 21:07, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Can you please specify which norms have been violated? Go through the edit history of the article to see the efforts taken to maintain a NPOV stance in this article. The article clearly reflects the controversial nature of the project with sufficient paragraphs being devoted to both sides of the story. References to various secondary sources have been provided. Please feel free to contribute to the article rather than just place Tags on the article. Trinidade 05:38, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

From Wikipedia Guidelines

I am quoting from the Guidelines: Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion

Extended content

1. To write that someone claimed or asserted something can call their statement's credibility into question, by emphasizing any potential contradiction or implying a disregard for evidence. 2. No subject is automatically or inherently notable merely because it exists: The evidence must show the topic has gained significant independent coverage or recognition, and that this was not a mere short-term interest, nor a result of promotional activity or indiscriminate publicity, nor is the topic unsuitable for any other reason. Sources of evidence include recognized peer reviewed publications, credible and authoritative books, reputable media sources, and other reliable sources generally. 3. Wikipedia is not a promotional medium. Self-promotion, paid material, autobiography, and product placement are not valid routes to an encyclopedia article. The barometer of notability is whether people independent of the topic itself (or of its manufacturer, creator, author, inventor, or vendor) have actually considered the topic notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works of their own that focus upon it – without incentive, promotion, or other influence by people connected to the topic matter. 4. Some commercial organizations meet Wikipedia notability guidelines but care must be taken in determining if they are truly notable or whether they are an attempt at using Wikipedia for free advertising. Wikipedia editors should not create articles on commercial organizations for the purpose of overtly or covertly advertising a company. 5. Individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. 6. Wikipedia is not a news source: it takes more than just routine news reports about a single event or topic to constitute significant coverage. For example, routine news coverage such as press releases, public announcements, sports coverage, and tabloid journalism is not significant coverage. Even a large number of news reports that provide no critical analysis of the event is not considered significant coverage Special note: advertising and promotion Advertising is prohibited as an official Wikipedia policy. Advertising should be removed by following these steps, in order: 1. Clean up per Wikipedia:NPOV 2. Erase remaining advertising content from the article

So these are the norms. I have quoted extensively so that there should not be any doubt. Accordingly we can see the violations.

1. The logo of the KGS Ltd is given prominence. The summary gives details of a non-existent Project. KGS Ltd is not a "Notable" company. It is a small-time real estate company which wants to diversify into different fields. So an article giving prominence to such a company with its logo exhibited on the page is violating the established norm of Wikipedia.

2. The section 3 of the article: Economic feasibility of the project is simply projecting the wishful thinking of the KGS Ltd. as brought out by the press releases in different newspapers. These are not genuine secondary sources. These are just statements given by the KGS Ltd. authorities through news channels and newspapers. This section needs outright deletion.

3. The legal bans and court stays on the airport construction work because of the problems in the purchase of the land and the environmental approval are noted in the article. But the tenor of the article is to promote the KGS group in a subtle way. So "the advertising content from the article may be erased" as proclaimed by the guidelines.

4. It is only a proposed project and hence, the Title itself needs editing.

This explanation, I think, is sufficient to start cleansing this article. Som Karnavar (talk) 19:05, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

First of all, the argument that this is a non-existent project is false. The project exists, although it's still in the planning phase. It proved to be notorious enough already, which is why it is considered notable enough to have an article. In my opinion, the title is specific enough, and it says in the first sentence that the airport hasn't been built, so I don't see a problem. Aside from that, instead of complaining on the talk page, be bold and fix it. It's true that there were a lot of problems with people obviously associated with the project adding promotional content, but it wont help if you make us guess what you think needs to be done with the text. — Yerpo ^Eh? 20:10, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestion. The logo of KGS is deleted since the exhibition of the logo gives a kind of promotion to a company which is not coming under the notable category as per the Wikipedia standards. If somebody wants to see the logo he/she can use the external link. The portion: Economic Feasibility of the Project is deleted since the entire description under different heads seems to be the brochure information for the company which is of promotional nature. Som Karnavar (talk) 13:21, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Referenced material may not be removed without discussion and consensus. Economic feasibility section contained notable sources other than company website. Trinidade 20:24, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

I removed some unreferenced parts again. But in general, yes, wholesale deletion is not the right way to fix the article. — Yerpo ^Eh? 06:26, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry that I had to resort to some "wholesale" deletion. I had gone through the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia before doing this. To my understanding, notable companies have certain approved characteristics. Does KGS company fulfill those characteristics? I have reservations about it. The logo is promotional for an upcoming company which wants to capture market. The Feasibility Section is lengthy and so it appears to be "wholesale" deletion. Feasibility Section is replicated from some brochure or report and the section is more of a wish list. I still am not so much convinced. Yet I restrain myself because I am novice! Thank you, Trinidade for suggesting me to use the Sandbox. Som Karnavar (talk) 08:42, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

If a notable project is described, then of course it is reasonable to mention the company behind it. As for being notable itself, the company must satisfy notability criteria - to be described in at least one reliable secondary source. I think this article from The Hindu's Business Line falls under this definition. — Yerpo ^Eh? 08:49, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Suggestion for changing the title

The title should be changed into Aranmula International Airport Project ,as it is a non-existent Airport which would hopefully never come into existence. If Wikipedia is not for promoting someones business the title should be changed. This was demanded by many before, So I think it is better the matter be put to vote.--binu (talk) 18:27, 10 February 2014 (UTC)18:26, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Name of Aranmula International Airport in Hindi (हिन्दी)

आरन्मुळा अंतर्राष्ट्रीय हवाई अड्डा Ārʌnmŭɭa (as it is pronounced in Malayalam). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaji Mavelikara (talk • contribs) 06:13, 12 July 2014 (UTC) Shaji Mavelikara (talk) 06:18, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just added archive links to one external link on Aranmula International Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130209020046/http://www.janmabhoominewspapers.com:80/epaper.aspx to http://www.janmabhoominewspapers.com/epaper.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know. N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:03, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified one external link on Aranmula International 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/20150610213801/http://www.haindavakeralam.com/HKPage.aspx?PageID=16827 to http://www.haindavakeralam.com/HKPage.aspx?PageID=16827

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:29, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified 2 external links on Aranmula International 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/20120615111713/http://www.envirocareindia.com/pages/aboutus.php to http://www.envirocareindia.com/pages/aboutus.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131203011928/http://aranmulaairport.in/ to http://aranmulaairport.in/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:32, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 12 February 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page at this time; Proposed Aranmula Airport created as a redirect. Dekimasuよ! 00:07, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

---

Aranmula International Airport → Proposed Aranmula Airport – This article is about a failed proposal for an airport at Aranmula. So listing this as an airport is not correct as it starts to appear in List of airports of India Hagennos ❯❯❯ Talk 04:22, 12 February 2018 (UTC)--Relisting. –Ammarpad (talk) 12:00, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose – the title is just fine, and readers can view the article and read it to know that it was only a proposal. CookieMonster755✉ 17:55, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
• Support per nomination and per numerous Wikipedia main title headers which start with the form "Proposed" —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 19:23, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.