Talk:Istanbul Airport

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Istanbul New 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/20140226030448/http://www.todayszaman.com//news-339045-istanbul-court-orders-suspension-of-3rd-airports-construction.html to http://www.todayszaman.com/news-339045-istanbul-court-orders-suspension-of-3rd-airports-construction.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:22, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Help request
Please move the article to Istanbul Airport. It has now official been named and opened.

Sources

http://www.kokpit.aero/yeni-istanbul-havalimani-ad

http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/ekonomi/son-dakika-istanbul-havalimani-icin-tarihi-toren-yapildi-41001971

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/economy/istanbul-airport-worlds-new-hub-officially-opened/1296955


 * ✅ Huon (talk) 18:57, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Airlines and destinations
Hi User:CBG17, I had removed the indiscriminate list of destinations as WP:YELLOWPAGES but I see that you have reverted me. Care to explain why ? -- D Big X ray ᗙ  11:23, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Wider discussion "Airlines and destinations"
I note that there is a failure to develop a consensus on the format of the section "Airlines and destinations", and an edit war has inevitably developed. The diffs involved in the edit war are listed here:

From what it appears, there is a dispute between a few methods of formatting the list of airlines and destinations for this airport, which I feel could be better resolved through discussion rather than edit warring.

The first view proposes a format that follows WikiProject Airports/page content guidelines to the letter:

The second view proposes a format that group the dates together, contradicting the guidelines but appearing more user-friendly:

Lastly, the third view that the list should be entirely deleted.
 * Another option could be to just Bold the destinations currently served, so they stand out. 45.116.232.36 (talk) 11:19, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Comments
I would like to tag the editors that have been involved in the addition, deletion and/or substitution of the table. I invite you to contribute and discuss your edits here and avoid further edit wars. I am unable to ping the IPs which have also been part of the edit war. I have also left a message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports to obtain their input and contributions to the discussion, as their guidelines at WikiProject Airports/page content appears to be relevant in the dispute.

Please comment and discuss below. Thank you. —Madrenergictalk 13:56, 30 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Clearly "1" looks really stupid, I cant see why "2" is a problem although the date information could be part of the introduction text, that would also mean the table doesnt need to change on the 1 January and conforms to the suggested project layout. MilborneOne (talk) 14:20, 30 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Option 3. no such list. Both 1 and 2 are obnoxious and indiscriminate list of destinations, that flies in the face of WP:NOTYELLOWPAGE, This is an encyclopaedia, not the official website of the airport where the readers come and view if their destination is listed or not. There is no precedent of keeping such a list, Non of the GA level articles have such kind of list. refer to Lympne_Airport for example or any from the Category:GA-Class airport articles none of them has such kind of list. At best you can have a paragraph that discuss the notable ones, or talks about what regions are covered and what is not. -- D Big X ray ᗙ  14:58, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * or any from the GA-Class airport articles none of them has such kind of list. This is beyond a "pants on fire" big lie, per Melbourne Airport. If you want a complete removal of the destinations table, you will have to discuss it at WikiProject Airports/page content. Caradhras Aiguo ( leave language ) 15:17, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * User:CaradhrasAiguo That table is not the same as table you are proposing. the table in Melbourne article is a list of airlines and their destination. whereas in your case this is just an indiscriminate and ugly list of "unconfirmed and proposed" destinations. that also violates WP:FUTURE -- D Big X ray ᗙ  15:28, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Incorrect; it is nearly the same as that which is present at Atatürk International Airport, and in this case, under only one airline which has a confirmed, cited move date. Caradhras Aiguo ( leave language ) 15:35, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Airlines and destinations tables are common in GA-quality articles, and future routes are common and allowed if sourced. This is a completely different scenario - this airport has not yet opened, and entirely replaces an old airport... SportingFlyer  talk  20:45, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * The source cited explicitly quotes Turkish Airlines as stating "All our operations after [December 31, 2018] will be carried out at Istanbul New Airport," the Turkish carrier said in a statement. Caradhras Aiguo ( leave language ) 20:49, 30 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Option 2 until the Atatürk flights are moved over. Option 1 may follow the guidelines at WikiProject Airports/page content to the letter, but very few of the other airports are yet-to-be-populated replacements, much less a mixed situation where a handful of domestic destinations open ahead of the migration of over a hundred destinations, still ahead of the opening of a few new international routes. Caradhras Aiguo ( leave language ) 15:17, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I would als vote for Option 3 or 2. I would prefer 3 - no List - as Wikipedia is no newsletter, but I am also fine with 2. Option 1 has in this case a horrible layout and is hard to read – bad impression. As sad earlier - most other Airports have only a view new connections and than it might be OK or a good idea, but in this case I think we have to be flexible and have a look on the leayout and change to Option 2 – if at all. --GodeNehler (talk) 17:01, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Option 3 This is a very specific vote, but these are not "future routes" (ie an airline announces a new route) - these are routes which will be carried over from the old airport when it closes. I don't think routes violate WP:CRYSTAL but I think this does. We can recreate the airlines and destinations table in two months and create a sentence saying when Turkish Airlines will move service. SportingFlyer  talk  20:43, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Just realised some of these routes have started or may have started - in this case I favour no future destinations unless they start after January 1st, with a note Turkish Airlines will move other service on January 1st. SportingFlyer  talk  00:33, 31 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Option 3. Turkish Airlines have started limited flights to 5 domestic destinations but purely to test the airport and iron anything that comes up. The official opening is on January 1st 2019. Until then the 5 domestic destinations mention would fit better in a History section, and where it is already covered in the introduction. Ren97 (talk) 02:00, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Option 3. I think we need to wait until all operations move here, and then we can just copy the list from the Ataturk Airport article. Turkish Airlines had previously said they would fully move on October 29 and clearly that didn't happen. In addition, all airlines will move here either before or at the same time as Turkish Airlines - of course they're not just going to stop operating their flights when the other airport closes. This was announced by the General Directorate of State Airports so either we just copy the list for Ataturk Airport now and put "begins 1 January 2019" for every single destination (not ideal), or we just remove this list until the day comes. -Junk2711 (talk) 02:30, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Option 2 is best: some flights currently operate from this airport, and the fact that other flights are scheduled to move from Ataturk is reliably sourced. Suggesting that other airport articles don't have such a list is farcical. At the very least include the current destinations in the table, this article shouldn't include any less information than Al Maktoum International Airport. feminist (talk) 15:09, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Option 2 as clearly shows the destinations served at present and should be the one used. 45.116.232.28 (talk) 10:35, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * So its a tie between options 2 and 3, then why is option 1 still there? been almost three weeks now. 45.116.232.3 (talk) 20:03, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Airlines and destinations disambiguation
What disambiguation should be used in Airlines and destinations disambiguation tables? If this airport is only known as Istanbul Airport, then logically it should be listed is Istanbul–Istanbul Airport. Szqecs (talk) 09:26, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * its being listed as Istanbul-Airport, which is hilarious for Turkish speakers. 45.116.233.21 (talk) 14:10, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

More destinations being added
Just read on a post at an aviation forum that Adana and Trabzon are being added to ISL from December, no dates or references given though, I guess its from Turkish Airlines online schedule. 45.116.232.36 (talk) 11:06, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Move page to Havalimanı Airport or Istanbul New Airport
Would it be a good idea to move the page title to either Havalimanı Airport or Istanbul New Airport? It seems that the title Istanbul Airport is a bit broad, even though that is technically the airport name. What could be done is to make Istanbul Airport a redirect page. --146.115.218.33 (talk) 20:41, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I would it make it only in the opposite way: a redirect from Istanbul New Airport to the Istanbul Airport, as this is the official name. --GodeNehler (talk) 22:38, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
 * It can be called Istanbul-New Havalimani rather than just Istanbul or Istanbul-New. 45.116.232.47 (talk) 16:02, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * This is what About is for. Ythlev (talk) 16:22, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Don't call it Havalimanı Airport. Havalimanı is the turkish word for Airport, it is part of all airport names. Call it Istanbul New Airport (discussion below) until the official name is announced. (Who bets against Erdoğan Airport? ;>) RMeier (talk) 10:59, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Ground Transportation
I suggest that a ground transportation section be added and information sought out from contributors, because one of the first things a reader is likely to come here for is to know how to get from / to the airport. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Supernova87a (talk • contribs) 03:55, 1 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Not needed, Wikipedia is not a travel guide. MilborneOne (talk) 17:01, 5 March 2019 (UTC)


 * I think Ground Transportation is useful information: It is an indicator how good an airport is connected to a city. I think it is part of the whole infrastructure. And here in Europe, most of the Airports got in the last one or two decades a connection to ground transportation - either train, tube, or in case like the outdated Berlin Tegel airport, only Bus connection. According to my understanding, Istanbul Airport will get a train connection in the near future, but currently does not have it. --GodeNehler (talk) 20:30, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 3 April 2019

 * 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved (non-admin closure) Iffy★Chat -- 08:13, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Istanbul Airport → Istanbul New Airport – Despite the official name, it is not the only commercial airport in Istanbul. The old Ataturk airport will continue to be operational for a while yet. There is also the Sabiha Gökçen International Airport (31 million passengers in 2017) which will continue to exist. The title "Istanbul Airport" could be correct if this will be the only airport of the city, but it is not, nor will it be, so this title is confusing. Wind of freedom (talk) 00:40, 3 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment If it's not known as "Istanbul New Airport" (except unofficially while it was under construction) it would be very confusing to have it under that title. I don't feel that the title indicates that it's the only airport there, just indicates that it's the name of an important one. Might be better to just add more to the hatnote: . – Þjarkur (talk) 02:09, 3 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Oppose clearly the common name. MilborneOne (talk) 17:59, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose it won't stay new. Ythlev (talk) 16:43, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment IATA website call the airport "Istanbul New" but if you all doesn't like the world "new", we can move the page to "Istanbul Airport (2018)". At least until a less generic name will be given: a name that can easily distinguish it from the other airport(s), Sabiha Gökçen (and Ataturk, for the moment), as happens in all other cities with more than one airport around the world. Although the airport will be destined to become the main airport of Istanbul, Sabiha Gökçen will continue to have a huge passenger transit and a name as "Istanbul Airport" would make believe to the users less familiar and less practical with Wikipedia that this is the only airport in Istanbul. --Wind of freedom (talk) 00:11, 6 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Oppose If the airport continues to operate for 50 years, then you cannot probably use the word "new" to describe it. The official website also names it as Istanbul Airport. Including the year in which it was opened in parentheses implies that it had only operated in 2018, which is not true. Keivan.f  Talk 16:25, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose Istanbul Airport is currently the official name of the place, and it won't be new after a while. I agree with Þjarkur, we should add a hatnote to distinguish it from Ataturk and Sabiha Gokcen --Dozerman94 (talk) 19:50, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose The name of the airport is "Istanbul Airport" and Wikipedia's disambiguation mechanisms deal with the situation just fine. If we invent our own names for things, it is hard for people to find the page. Dricherby (talk) 13:15, 8 April 2019 (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.

Move limited to Turkish Airlines?
According to this source at the last moment Turkish authorities limited the move from Atatürk Airport to the Turkish Airlines commercial flights, while all other airlines will remain at the old airport. The web site of Atatürk Airport as of this morning shows departures and arrivals of other Airlines. Would it be possible to search for reliable sources which confirm the move? Otherwise we should change the article. Alex2006 (talk) 10:09, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I can confidently say that the Guardian article is wrong. Here is the official move plan that was conducted. During the move there was a time period where only Turkish Airlines flights were permitted, but after that period all passenger airlines moved. That is probably what the article is referring to. All passenger flights are now operating at the new airport, you can clearly see it in the airport's web page and flight tracking sites like flightradar24. --Dozerman94 (talk) 18:34, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Byzantium Airport listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Byzantium Airport. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. feminist (talk) 16:58, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Constantinople Airport listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Constantinople Airport. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. feminist (talk) 17:01, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Havalimani Airport listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Havalimani Airport. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. feminist (talk) 17:02, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

This title should be a disambiguation page (?)
I think we can't keep this name, because this is not the only airport serving the city. So can move this page in Istanbul Airport (2018) or even Istanbul Grand Airport (as logo IGA). What do you think about that? --Wind of freedom (talk) 02:53, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Please see discussion above. --GodeNehler (talk) 08:01, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:37, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Aerial View of Istanbul Airport Terminal.jpg

Turkish Airlines service to Osaka and Newark
According to the provided source, Turkish Airlines is resuming service to Osaka and Newark April and May of this year (2020). However, Osaka and Newark were previously served from the old Ataturk Airport until 2017 and 1994, respectively, not this airport since this airport was opened on 29 October 2018. So, technically they are not resumptions. 172.223.6.230 (talk) 07:54, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Covid 19 policy for connecting flights passenger
Do they need negative rt-pcr results 93.35.191.94 (talk) 16:16, 30 May 2022 (UTC)