User talk:24.160.124.225

April 2018
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. Garretka (talk) 02:01, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Once again, provide an argument for why the entire table doesn't have references then, if your thought process is a made up Wikipedia rule. Either follow your own rule or don't. The policies you linked to, do nothing to show why the entire seasonal flights don't have sources, which they shouldn't. Furthermore, linking to a blank timetable of an airline, does nothing to source anything at all, regardless of seasonality. Comical that you all referenced Swiftair for charter flights. They are a charter airline that flies contracted routes. You can't find any of that info, routes flying wise on their website. Shows how archaic the thought processes are with a handle of individuals that apply their own agenda and their own rules.
 * You have not given one example where it says it's ok to remove references, I have. These tables are under increased scrutiny by the community. If it was up to me the entire table would have inline sources? Is it possible? Maybe. Timetable references work great to verify a route is running, but in order to prove it is a seasonal route requires original research, thus why an inline reference proving such is desirable where they exist. Please tell me how WP:V and WP:BURDEN make it ok to delete references? How do you know this material is not going to be or has not been challenged?
 * Why are you bringing Swiftair into this? What does that have to do with you removing references and me reinstating them?
 * A handful of individuals following Wikipedias core policies. I encourage you to branch out and check out other areas of editing. Airport articles will never reach FA status given the current state of the tables.
 * - also pinging here. Garretka (talk) 14:21, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

The tables are under increased scrutiny by the "community", because a small portion of 'you' have turned the airports pages, into something the community is against, but by majority rule of those that participate in the vote, something like all 5 of you, changes are enacted that fit's the agenda of the minority. Example; the consolidation of regionals into blanket mainline links. Example 2; the elimination of Terminal/Airside locations. Go read Airliners.net, that's the increased scrutiny.

None of the Wikipedia policies you sourced, state why a seasonal route must have a source over a different seasonal route, even after the original source states it began on XXX date(s).

You state you want references for seasonal routes, and I again ask, why you want them on some, but not all, and the proceed to get defensive when references are removed on flights that began months ago, but you have no qualms with other seasonal flights. The solution you think that solves this is by linking to a do it yourself research URL of a airline's timetable, which literally does nothing either for or against proving a route is seasonal, seasonality is a variable in which is not consistent across airline platforms/schedules and therefore can't not be defined by a simple timetable.

I bring up Swiftair, because whomever thinks that link is appropriate is what's wrong with the airports pages to begin with. Swiftwat doesn't even have a timetable to it's routes, it's amongst the airlines they lease to, to have a timetable/schedule.

Lastly, you state references up for challenge, are those of seasonal and can not be found by a timetable. Yet at PIE, when PVD references was removed, which the route is not seasonal, and was previously referenced to start on XYZ date you now say that has to have a reference. Again, it's your agenda and the agenda of a minority that dictate what and what isn't. It's gone from one thing to something totally different, of which have no similarity between the two.
 * So you're suggesting this DRV where almost 500 articles were wiped out was caused by the minority of the community? I'd hardly think 30 uninvolved editors stating their opinion is a minority. I'm trying to be civil here, but you're making it difficult. I don't understand why, in an encyclopedia that is based on references, users find the need to delete them. You want these tables to stay on Wikipedia? I'd suggest improving their referencing rather than saying "status quo is fine" when clearly it isn't. Garretka (talk) 17:54, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Also I suggest you re-read my last message. I stated the exact opposite regarding searchable timetables, and that whole paragraph is inline with what I was talking about. I do have qualms with the referencing for seasonal routes which is why not deleting references is a good start to improving these tables. The same goes for every destination quite frankly.
 * I still have no idea what you're talking about with Swiftair nor how it's relevant to this discussion. Garretka (talk) 18:02, 3 April 2018 (UTC)