Talk:People Express Airlines (1980s)

rename article
In that People Express is being reborn in 2012, that is the name that will begin to be searched for, and keeping this article as the main would be confusing to the common user. Recommend changing the name to "People Express Airlines (1980s)" and turning "People Express Airlines (2012)" into the main article, with a link back to this page. --DeknMike (talk) 14:48, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Agree with that. &mdash;Comp dude 123 17:48, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. If any renames are done, this would be best brought for a full multipage move discussion at WP:RM.  If a move for the old airline does gain consensus, then someone is going to need to manually update all of the links to the old airline that are hard coded in articles before the second move can be completed.  Also using WP:RM would get the discussion in a single place.  Vegaswikian (talk) 19:36, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. Based on discussion on talk:People Express Airlines (2012), I have initiated action to merge the two and put this article's content as a 'history' section.--DeknMike (talk) 14:01, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * This is not an airline. Yet.  Do we even know if it is going to be an airline or a scheduled public charter, that lease and borrows the certificated airlines services of other airlines and then slaps the name peoplexpress upon the ticket jackets.  Additionally lauch plans have been postponed as of today... citing Peoplexpress leaders as saying launching the enterprise is more complicated then planned.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 32.177.110.168 (talk) 19:03, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No! This article should not be renamed. The proper way to address any confusion in the article titles is with a hatnote (WP:HN), which is already in place. Senator2029 ★ Talk 12:12, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

July 2012 merger proposal
So People Express is not being "reborn" in 2012. If they fly at all it will be in 2013. Worth mentioning in this article that there is a proposal to revive the name but until it is certified as an airline and actually flies, it is premature to have a separate article. Harry the Dog WOOF  15:06, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


 * The articles should not be merged. I agree with Harry the Dog: it is a different company with different owners; only the brand name is the same. Further, the new airline isn't even operating yet—and may never.  Let's not be hasty and foolish by pursuing this merger and rename nonsense any further. Senator2029 ★ Talk 12:17, 22 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm removing the merger proposal templates. It's being "reborn" in the sense that the brand name is being reused, but that's about it. Separate articles for multiple uses of the same airline name are appropriate and consistent with how other similar cases have been handled on Wikipedia. See, for example: Pan American World Airways, Pan American Airways (1996–1998), and Pan American Airways (1998–2004). -- Hawaiian717 (talk) 16:29, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Article move

 * ,, . I'm not exactly sure what you guys are trying to do with the reverts on multiple People Express Airline pages.  Could you spell out what moves where and Appleywar or I can do moves.  Bgwhite (talk) 07:26, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
 * At 09:20, 26 June 2014‎ User:Sawol put in a request to histmerge page People Express to page People Express Airlines (1981–1987) . At 05:10 to 05:12, 27 June 2014‎ I obeyed it. See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=People_Express_Airlines_%281981%E2%80%931987%29&action=history . The edits are very similar across the cut-and-paste point, proving that there was a cut-and-paste event. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 07:42, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I was correcting a botched page move made without discussion by an inexperienced editor. The problem was that a lot of pages (like People Express) redirect to People Express Airlines, so circular redirects were being created by the original page mover. Restoring the original situation as quickly as possible seemed for the best, and since the page could not be easily moved cut and paste was the quickest way. I wasn't sure what Sawol was doing when he reverted my edits a few days later but he has now explained what he was trying to do and that's fine. The articles should be restored as People Express Airlines and People Express Airlines (2012-) unless there is consensus to change the names. Harry the Dog WOOF  08:01, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
 * People Express Airlines (1981–1987) is original. Wait for an ADMIN's action. At 18:14, 15 June 2014‎ AirportExpert moved this article with no discussion. We want to revert to the previous state. Sawol (talk) 08:27, 27 June 2014 (UTC)


 * ,  Lets see if I have this right:  People Express Airlines (1981–1987) should be moved back to People Express Airlines.  Should People Express Airlines (1981–1987) be totally removed or be a redirect?  Bgwhite (talk) 08:38, 27 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Bgwhite. Do you understand the guide How to fix cut-and-paste moves? Sawol (talk) 08:43, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
 * , yes, but that doesn't appear to matter here. From my post above, do I understand correctly what moves where?  Bgwhite (talk) 08:49, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
 * People Express Airlines (1981–1987) should be moved back to People Express Airlines because the current People Express Airlines (1981–1987) is original and the current People Express Airlines is cut-and-paste. Whether to leave the redirect is of no particular importance. Sawol (talk) 09:06, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
 * The original was People Express Airlines. All the history is there. That was moved to People Express Airlines (1981–1987) and I was undoing the move. I don't see any harm in redirecting People Express Airlines (1981–1987). So we would be left with two original articles, People Express Airlines and People Express Airlines (2012-) relating to two different airlines plus any appropriate redirects. Harry the Dog WOOF  10:13, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:People Express Airlines (2012-) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 04:45, 30 June 2014 (UTC)