Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports

Washington National Name

I’ve been having a bit of an edit war with some IP editors over at Salt Lake City International Airport. The back and forth edits have been going on for over a month now. Basically, the IP user(s) keeps changing “Washington—National” in the destinations table to “Washington—Reagan National” or something similar. I keep reverting as “Washington—National” is used on every airport page that has it as a destination; it’s even used in the example table at WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT. Just wanted to gather consensus that “Washington—National” is the name we should be using so we have established consensus about it. VenFlyer98 (talk) 01:59, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

I'd prefer "Washington-National" since it's more concise. Sunnya343 (talk) 16:04, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Is it too simple to refer to that airport with the name/title it has with us? Which does (to my regret, but this is not really my cup of tea) begin with the name of the former US president? Jan olieslagers (talk) 20:18, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

I brought this up on the the KSLC page a while ago, and VenFlyer8 was the only person who responded. I think the ongoing good faith edits to Reagan National have a lot to do with it being the most commonly used name for that airport among the people who most frequently use KSLC. In other regions it's probably more common to refer to it as simply National. I know it's a politically charged question to an extent, but I do see the value of labelling with the name that it is commonly given; especially since it's the official name. The arguments I've seen for just Washington-National are that it's shorter, and it's the status quo. Ok, but why is it the status quo, and does that matter? Seems arbitrary. Darkage7_[Talk] 23:54, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

I'll clarify that I think either Washington-Reagan or -National are acceptable, as long as there's consistency within the article. "Washington-Reagan National" is another option, but perhaps it's unnecessarily long. Sunnya343 (talk) 21:00, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Washington-Reagon National still seems appropriate in my view, even if it may be a long name. Although simplifying the name is ideal, I think the important thing is: 1. is the name correct and 2. is the name consistently applied throughout the article. As long as both conditions are met, then I don't think it's too much of an issue with whichever of these 3 options the airport is called. Jrbob 123 (talk) 11:03, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Agreed with this, full one seems a bit long, even if it’s accurate. I’d say either of those work, it’s just the consistency across pages (although I know that doesn’t really matter as what 1 page does should have no effect on another). I will say the airport’s name is “Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport” with “National” following “Washington,” I think that’s the reason for my preference towards “Washington–National.” VenFlyer98 (talk) 20:10, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Yet another reason that destinations shouldn't be included in airport articles. Destinations are not a property of an airport, they're a property of an airline. Airports don't travel to other airports, airlines do. Canterbury Tail talk 21:02, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Reliability – Airfields of Britain Conservation Trust

Hello. Sorry if this is an annoying kind of FAQ or I'm in the wrong section but is it possible to tell me, please, whether the Airfields of Britain Conservation Trust can be considered an RS for articles on former RAF fields? It doesn't look to me to be self-published, but I know nothing! Advice gratefully received, even if it is only somewhere else to ask ... Cheers DBaK (talk) 23:00, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

No comments here so I shall assume it's reliable till told otherwise. Cheers DBaK (talk) 14:34, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Excuse me for not answering before, the question went unnoticed here. I have consulted this website in the past, and observed that it changes very little. It was quite complete at one time, but is not very well kept up to date. Quite good for historical information, though, and that seems to be the prime intention. Jan olieslagers (talk) 14:42, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much Jan olieslagers for the useful reply. My main motivator was old RAF stations (for example Brunton and Eshott), so it sounds like it might be OK for that area: I absolutely take your point re currency. Thanks again! DBaK (talk) 19:17, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport#Requested move 13 August 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport#Requested move 13 August 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 01:09, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Dashes in airport names

I notice, esp. in Template:Airports in France, a lot of airport article titles with spaced en dashes in them; e.g. the redirect Angoulême – Brie – Champniers Airport and the article it redirects to. Per MOS:DASH, these should be unspaced, yes? Dicklyon (talk) 18:41, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

This is not my specialism, but it would seem to me that you might well be right. Jan olieslagers (talk) 13:20, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Not mine either. I have little understanding of the French conventions for hyphens and dashes in locale names and such, but there's clearly a problem with these articles using what appear to be made-up French names and styles that are not found in sources. So fixing the styling of the English article title is only half the problem. E.g. La Môle–Saint-Tropez Airport which I moved and edited, I'm not at all sure of. Dicklyon (talk) 20:32, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Contact French contributors? But they might only react to messages in their own language, been there, done that. Feel free to invoke my assistance, being originally Belgian I have a fair bit of French. Jan olieslagers (talk) 21:29, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't parle no francais, so maybe you can ask someone to take a look at the French names in the articles on that template. Dicklyon (talk) 03:38, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

I guess part of the problem is that here on enwiki, we apply (or ought to be applying) English conventions, not French ones. MOS:FRANCE is pretty short on details about dashes and hyphens, despite hyphenated place names being pretty common in France. It does mention that unspaced en dashes should be used for railway stations that serve two communities, and we could no doubt transpose that advice, even though some airport names have dashes not because they serve multiple communities but to distinguish between multiple airports serving a single city. That said, at a quick glance it looks to me that changing the spaced en dashes to unspaced ones would be the way to go. There are probably a few cases where the exact locality of the airport can be dropped from the title altogether, leaving just the name of the place that it serves, but that will require checking whether an English COMMONNAME exists or whether the French COMMONNAME or OFFICIALNAME should be used. I don't have time to do all those checks right now but I'd be happy to give advice (as a French speaker and resident). Rosbif73 (talk) 07:01, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Merci, @Rosbif73. To continue on the example given, the French article is titled Aéroport international Angoulême-Cognac so it seems fr.wikipedia applies broadly the same guidelines as we do here. I only checked this single one example, though. But everything indicates that@Dicklyon is absolutely correct. Jan olieslagers (talk) 07:25, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll look there for acceptable French names. To Rosbif's point, there are two questions here that we should not mix up: the English article title, and the French name in the article. I definitely aim to apply English (and English WP) style conventions in the article title, but we also want an appropriately styled native name. It seems we all agree that at least unspacing the en dashed is a step in the right direction. Dicklyon (talk) 15:27, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

What to do?

@Jae winwin: is active on a number of airport articles in Asia. It is an editor who never ever adds sources to an addition, never ever responded on attempts to communicate and often removes connection without explaining why. Very annoying, but he is not a vandal. After all, part of his edits are valid (removing start dates of new connections, removing connections after they ended). He has a talk page full of warnings but zero response. I tried to approach him in multiple languages, but zero response. I am at wits end, what do do next? The Banner talk 17:38, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

My two eurocents: @The_Banner, you have been clear and firm yet polite in your communications. Exemplary, all my compliments! Since no reaction came at all, I think you need to continue on the way you entered, and get a first time-limited gentle block on said user. Since her/his contributions are numerous, to say the least, this should be immediately observed, and hopefully it will trigger some reflection, which is indeed long due. If you don't pursue now, you will be making a fool of yourself. To cite from George McDonalds book about Lilith: "she would not yield to gentle measures, harder ones must have their turn". Cheers, and keep up the good work! Jan olieslagers (talk) 17:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

List of airports in Texas and WP:NOTDIRECTORY

I propose to radically pare down the list of airports in Texas due to WP:NOTDIRECTORY concerns. The list includes a truly epic number of redlinked airports that likely don't meet WP:GNG and WP:NBUILD. My impulse is to remove them outright per WP:NOTDIRECTORY but I would prefer to seek consensus whether WP:REDNO might be more appropriate. Discussion here. Carguychris (talk) 17:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

You may be right that there are too many trivial entries, but WP:NOTE is way too high a bar for list inclusion in most cases. Just don't link them, in preference to redlinks. Dicklyon (talk) 23:30, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

BNA Maps?

I added two maps to Nashville International Airport–one domestic and one international–back in mid September. It stayed that way for 2 weeks until Blissfield101 (talk) removed them, citing "the consensus was no maps" and "they clutter the page up." As far as I know, the simple solution is to have the maps be automatically be collapsed so that they must be manually opened. I believe this is a good compromise as the maps can stay but Blissfield and others do not have to see them if they believe they take up too much space. Bliss also has a history of removing content to trim down the page length according to his talk page. One other thing I want to note is Bliss pointed out that other large airports do not have maps. This seems ironic, how does removing content make a page better? Maps visualize the scale of the airport without having to look at a "cluttered" table of destinations. A lot of small airports have maps that feel unnecessary but are there to list three destinations. Yet Bliss doesn't want one that's shows almost 90? In the end, is having a closed map a good way to add content and reduce "clutter"? King airaglub (talk) 12:52, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

He's making things up, there is no consensus to remove them. This has already been discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports/Archive 19#Removal of maps by Blissfield101, where previous discussions are also linked. While I've advocated in favor of these in the past, I'm honestly not as into them as I used to be. Users adding/removing destinations from the table might not always do the same in the map since it's a little more complex to edit; I think linking these sections to external maps like flightconnections.com would also be fine. Reywas92^Talk 13:55, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

I had a feeling he was lying. I am glad somebody with a neutral stance on the topic was able to clarify this for me King airaglub (talk) 14:14, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Not true. If you scroll down to the RFC I did on that very page, you will see 4-2 in favor of removal (of those who responded). Ultimately, they are difficult to maintain, redundant with the airline and destination table, not well laid out and having styling issues. Now a flightconnections.com link, I would very much be in favor of. Blissfield101 (talk) 16:21, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Agreed, I remember there being discussions about maps with most users in favor of removing them. Difficult to maintain and look very cluttered, especially in the case of large airports like BNA. (VenFlyer98 (talk) 17:02, 27 September 2024 (UTC))

“Difficult to maintain” I don’t care, I do not mind updating these

maps. However if it is necessary I will try to fix overlapping airport names. flightconnections.com does not show future flights like MEM and KEF. I still do not understand why you will not accept my compromise-having them automatically be in the collapsed form. This allows you to not have to see them while they are still viewable to anybody that wants to. King airaglub (talk) 19:50, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Why don't you start an RfC on this then? The last discussion was over 2 years ago now with no consensus reached (despite more people being in favor of the maps being removed) so it may be good to get a new one going to get a firm consensus. (VenFlyer98 (talk) 21:04, 28 September 2024 (UTC))

Requested move at Talk:Mboie Airport#Requested move 22 September 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Mboie Airport#Requested move 22 September 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 03:02, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Wembo Airport#Requested move 22 September 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Wembo Airport#Requested move 22 September 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. RodRabelo7 (talk) 04:52, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Matsieng Air Strip#Requested move 22 September 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Matsieng Air Strip#Requested move 22 September 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 21:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)