Talk:List of airports by ICAO code: U

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of airports by ICAO code: U. 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://archive.is/20130616030152/http://goszakup.ans.kz/AIP/AIRAC_AMDT_01_13/AIP/html/UA-frameset-en-KZ.html to http://goszakup.ans.kz/AIP/AIRAC_AMDT_01_13/AIP/html/UA-frameset-en-KZ.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120905221821/http://legacy.icao.int/anb/aig/Taxonomy/R4CDLocationIndicatorsbystate.pdf to http://legacy.icao.int/anb/aig/Taxonomy/R4CDLocationIndicatorsbystate.pdf

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) 11:05, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

ICAO codes in Ukraine
Preamble: I am aware this matter is heavily linked to politics, still I absolutely wish to stay out of the muddy waters of politics. I am only trying to get a correct encyclopedia.

As I understand things:
 * certain territories, formally part of Ukraine, are presently under control of Russia. The Crimea peninsula in particular;
 * Russia now controlling these areas, it treats them like being Russian, and accordingly assigns Russian ICAO-style codes to airports in the Crimea;
 * Some of these changes have been reflected on Wikipedia articles, for example the one on Simferopol International Airport where the ICAO code has been changed from UKFF to URFF, with a reference to the Russian AIP;
 * the authority of Russia over said territories, and their airports, is not universally acknowledged;
 * the Russian "ICAO" codes are not recognised by ICAO;
 * The Russian ICAO-style codes are not really ICAO codes, and should not be published as encyclopedical.

So what do we do now?
 * mention no ICAO codes at all?
 * mention the real ICAO codes, which are in reality not used by anyone?
 * mention the Russian pseudo-codes, which are in use though only by one authority, but are not recognised by ICAO?

Again, please let us NOT enter into politics! Jan olieslagers (talk) 09:10, 16 September 2018 (UTC)


 * I would say we mention the "russian" codes (they exist so no need to pretend they dont) but just place a footnote saying these have been allocated by the Russian Federation and also mention the ICAO code as again it is still official. MilborneOne (talk) 11:35, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Having thought over my own question, I am afraid I do not agree. Yes the Russian pseudo-codes do exist, that does not make them encyclopedical. Just because someone says 2+2=5, that doesn't make us support this "fact" on WP, does it? There seems to be no really satisfactory answer, the least unsatisfactory I can think of is to not mention any ICAO code formally, and referring to both real ICAO and fake Russian codes in a footnote. Jan olieslagers (talk) 16:38, 16 September 2018 (UTC)