User talk:Jetstreamer/Archive 8

Flag carrier
Swiss is operated by Lufthansa and that's common knowledge virtually anywhere to check. So please undo your premature activist revert. — 91.10.11.168 (talk) 20:55, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Common knowledge is not considered a reliable source. Before making any edits, you should be familiarised with Wikipedia core content policies a priori. Otherwise, your changes might get reverted.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 21:15, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The source is one or two clicks away, so go for it and don't withhold information to myriads of Wikipedia users just to be anal about ”policies“ – reminds me of the Usenet ”netiquette fascists“ back in the good old 1990s. So why don't just be constructive and add the (superfluous) reference (next to the blue link in the very same table row) you long for yourself? — 91.10.11.168 (talk) 21:36, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * WP:BURDEN. I'm not gonna do your work for you.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 22:26, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * . What a pity you chose to only take the BURDEN to revert an edit and ridiculously cite WP rules rather than producing anything useful. Let's wait for a wise man together, both clever and diligent enough to click to Swiss and undo your revert while inserting that reference never to be looked at again (cf very same column entry for Austrian). — 91.10.11.168 (talk) 23:57, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I already explained my reasoning. There are policies to be followed. Do not edit Wikipedia if you do not agree with them.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 02:12, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The thing you don't get is: there are policies – but they have to be laid out, applied with respect to each individual case. You know mathematics? They do a lot of proving, don't they? Do they prove the obvious? Of course they could, but they don't: Besides someone proved it already, anyone not believing the ”obviousness“ can do the prove himself. – So in Wikipedia, you clearly don't have to prove (or cite sources) the world is round™, New York is located 40.42° N or Rome 41.53° N… — So rules and policies are a good-thing™, unless self-declared guardians of  following words rather than reason turn them into tools of disruption. — (edited previous comment for orthography; same individual, different IP than above:) 91.10.37.111 (talk) 14:26, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Sources for "the sky is blue" are not needed. I'd be obtuse if I try to challenge that claim. Sources to support Lufthansa (LH) being the parent of Swiss International Air Lines (LX) company are required; that's not as obvious as you suggest above. Matemathics is based on axioms. LH being LX's parent is not an axiom. You are not understanding the verifiability policy.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 14:34, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Images at Mexico City International Airport
I've been doing edits to Mexico City International Airport, but i have a doubt, while HKG has 17 aircrats pics, MAD 12, DXB 17 and NRT 18, why not Mexico? What is the criteria? and who decides? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.132.146.136 (talk) 00:01, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Consensus decides and as far as I can see from the article's history, there are two editors (me included) that believes the page had too many images.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 00:39, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Mayday episode of Quantas 32
You removed my reference to the Mayday episode of Quantas 32 citing unreliable source. What would you consider a reliable source in this case? I have seen the episode myself and it is listed in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mayday_episodes. Should I link directly to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mayday_episodes?

Kind regards, NiclasB (talk) 17:24, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, the fact that you have seen the episode does not count as a reliable source. See WP:RELIABLE and WP:VERIFY. Thanks.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 17:30, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Flydubai Incidents Section
Hello,

You seem like the person people would come to for help regarding anything aviation related. I am a new user and I need your opinion on something. I was editing the page Flydubai and I added a new section for incidents the airline has had and this was the following that I wrote:

"* On 22 April 2012, a Flydubai flight bound for Doha was involved in a 'near miss' incident with Air Arabia that was bound to Istanbul. The incident took place off the coast of Dubai. "

The first time it was removed, the reason was "doesnt appear to be particularly notable". I undid the revert and stated the reason why I undid the revert. And 2 minutes later, it was removed a second time with the reason being "remove trivia" which I believe is not trivia at all. I am leaving the page without the incidents section because I do not want to violate the 3 revert rule and end up in an edit war.

What I am trying to ask is your opinion. Is what I wrote worthy enough to add in Flydubai? I'd appreciate the opinion! --PilotJaguar1996 (talk) 17:33, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
 * First of all, thanks for considering I'm the one to be contacted, even when there are a number of editors far more skilled than me in this subject. Regarding warring, you may want to use the article's talk pages to discuss with others and gain consensus. To me, the entry seems to be not notable enough for inclusion; it was just a potential tragedy. Cheers.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 17:39, 11 September 2014 (UTC)


 * There is a discussion going on at the articles talk page. I wish to invite you to voice your opinion as well, regarding what I first wrote and how I am not adding the section anymore. Appreciate it! --PilotJaguar1996 (talk) 17:42, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Ethiopian Airlines Cargo
Hi Jetstreamer,

I apologize if I am annoying you right now. But I was browsing the Ethiopian Airlines fleet section and noticed that there was a Boeing 737-400 under Passenger Fleets. Seeing you edit the page the most, adding information and reverting incorrect edits, I did not want to make an edit without consulting you.

The Boeing 737-400 is actually a freighter aircraft, as per these pictures found on airliners.net at the end of this message. I am still trying to find a source that shows Ethiopian Airlines acquired the freighter jet. I do not know if pictures are reliable sources or not, but I believe this should be moved to Cargo fleet instead of Passenger fleet. But I'll leave that decision to you.

Thank you for your time! --PilotJaguar1996 (talk) 21:59, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Ethiopian-Airlines-Cargo/Boeing-737-43Q(SF)/2392956/L/&sid=c8bbd1cdf59afbd3a1c22d07816fce6c http://www.airliners.net/photo/Ethiopian-Airlines-Cargo/Boeing-737-43Q(SF)/2320511/L/&sid=255b36c0307d036490289b51d43c3a0f http://www.airliners.net/photo/Ethiopian-Airlines-Cargo/Boeing-737-43Q(SF)/2316155/L/&sid=255b36c0307d036490289b51d43c3a0f http://www.airliners.net/photo/Ethiopian-Airlines-Cargo/Boeing-737-43Q(SF)/2302483/L/&sid=255b36c0307d036490289b51d43c3a0f

Re: Speedy deletion nomination of Earl Hilton
The article Earl Hilton was just created and only had one edit in its history before the speedy deletion tag was placed on it. As a contributer, I appreciate the expeditious manner in which you reviewed the article, but I along with other editors would probably appreciate more if administrators would exercise more patience before tagging a brand new article for deletion. :-) --Educatedblkman1914 (talk) 19:40, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Your suggestion might work. The other plausible option that will avert these arguments is to start any article with at least a section and including a minimun number of references, by contrast to starting a page with just an infobox. You may use either the sandbox or a draft space in your own personal page to work on an article until you believe it is ready to be moved to the mainspace.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 20:47, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Jetstar Airways
Hi I am having some trouble cleaning up fleet the table in the Jetstar Airways article. Seeing you edit so many airline pages I was hoping you could give me a hand in removing the unnecessary columns and just generally cleaning up the table. Thanks Otchiman (talk) 22:01, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Sure. What exactly do you want me to do?--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 12:51, 13 September 2014 (UTC)


 * There is just an extra column at the end that I cannot work out to remove. If you could remove it I would be greatly appreciated. Otchiman (talk) 23:05, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I think it's done. Please check. (BTW, you don't need to use the template at my talk page, I get a popup notice when I receive a new message).--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 00:22, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much looks much better now. Otchiman (talk) 01:42, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Fuerteventura Airport page
Hey there! Thanks for leaving that notification on my talk page. Just to let you know, the reason why I removed the picture of the airport is because it's the wrong airport. The current Fuerteventura airport is El Matorral. The airport in the photo I removed was Los Estancos, the former airport closed down in 1969. So BIG MISTAKE from whoever placed that picture. Woodywyatt (talk) 18:32, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The template I left at your talk was not for removing the image but for adding unsourced information .--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 19:38, 13 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Oh okay. How do I source it? I'm new to Wikipedia and I really want to give LOADS of information I know about this island, Fuerteventura.
 * WP:RELIABLE, WP:SOURCE and WP:VERIFY should help.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 01:55, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

No war please
Everything in Wiki articles should have a reason. OK? 77.185.38.248 (talk) 16:53, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
 * No aims to war. Have you seen the number of references I've added to Qatar Airways? You cannot tell me I'm not aware of the current condition of that page: it's full of unsourced statements. And you suggest to tagbomb the article?--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 17:14, 19 September 2014 (UTC)


 * First: thank you for your edits and talk.
 * You added refs: Thats it. Of course additional refs improve and some could be added: Thanks, AND: Refs are not absolutely needed if content is self-explained for well informed editors or can be quite quickly googled. Thats the reason i deleted the tags, additionally the "closely related".
 * Tagbomb: Can't see much disputed content. Or?
 * Generally: Article tags are obviously for main parts of the article:
 * important messages to readers: main article faults
 * minimum highly important and urgent messages to the editors with reasons how to improve.
 * No reason given and no can be seen here. Don't know anything about Ilyushin Il-76. 77.185.38.248 (talk) 17:46, 19 September 2014 (UTC) Updated: 77.185.38.248 (talk) 20:46, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Never mind about the Ilyushin Il-76 stuff. I don't agree with your position regarding the maintenance templates but I think I can live with the article not having them.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 18:31, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Glad about the agreement. I generally think Wikipedia fullfills minimum quality in most articles. Bad articles, which are not wrong, but bad in
 * being stubs
 * missing the point
 * missing refs without being disputed
 * mostly don't get better even if article tagged for years.
 * In contrary inline tags are mostly corrected within a few weeks. 77.185.38.248 (talk) 20:46, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Message from Orientaldecorations
Actually this is for AndyTheGrumpy or whatever he is calling himself. Somehow I can't get his own page or he is hiding because he knows very well what he wrote under spam on my page:

'I strongly advise you to stop spamming Wikipedia articles with your third-rate publications. This is an encyclopaedia, not a platform for the promotion of misleading self-published copies of official reports masquerading as books, and abusing our facilities in this way is liable to result in you being blocked from editing. While there is clearly little we can do to stop you promoting your ripoffs elsewhere, we are certainly under no obligation to permit you to do so here. AndyTheGrump (talk) 07:55, 29 September 2014 (UTC)'

is pure slander. You accuse an acclaimed writer (just check amazon.com or Barnes&Noble) of writing "ripoffs", publishing third rate publications and "masquerading" etc. I can sue you for that. I did explain exactly why we publish these books but you seem to lack the level of understanding it. You hide behind childish names such as "Andy Grump", "Streetwalker" or "I love horses". What is that a children's playground? I demand within 24 hours an apology and putting back on the appropriate websites the additions I made. If not I will file a complaint directly by mrs Lila Tretikov Wikimedia Foundation in San Francisco. You know perfectly well that she does not need this kind of publicity from low level ants. Good day, discussion closed.

(Orientaldecorations (talk) 01:43, 30 September 2014 (UTC)).


 * I'm calling for admin help regarding the message above, as it borders legal threatening.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 10:22, 30 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Yup. And note the irony in someone registered as 'Orientaldecorations' complaining about anonymous usernames. The simple facts are that Orientaldecorations' only 'contributions' has been to add multiple links to books he is publicising (often duplicating them on the same page:, or placing them on pages not even concerning the subject of the article ). This is a blatant violation of our conflict of interest guidelines. If he wishes to draw further attention to his unscrupulous business practices, that is his concern, but Wikipedia is under no obligation whatsoever to assist him in selling for profit material which is freely available. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:20, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
 * And incidentally, if Orientaldecorations/Dirk J. Barreveld (see ) is an 'acclaimed writer', why is he publishing books under the pseudonyms of ' George Cramoisi', 'Pete Collins' and 'Igor Korovin'? AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:40, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Indef block for Harassment, lawyers aren't actually mentioned. Ron h jones (Talk) 23:09, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 23:56, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Reliability
Hi Jetstreamer,

I just saw that you reverted my edit in Aeroflot's page, because "Planespotters is not a reliable source". 85.218.56.214 (talk) 14:16, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * About the general case: How do you come to that conclusion? WP:RS, or a consensus in the WikiProject Aviation / Airlines ?
 * About this particular case (aeroflot): You probably know that Aeroflot website's fleet page is clearly outdated. In this case, we're not talking about replacing an official source by another one, just to keep wikipedia's data updated on an hourly or daily basis. It's a matter of 6 months. The article currently says "As of September 2014, the Aeroflot fleet includes the following aircraft". This is obviously a false information. It's not about Planespotters versus aeroflot.com. It's dozen of reliable sources versus aeroflot.com. Don't you feel uncomfortable to revert a correct information by a wrong one?
 * Hello. It was agreed not long ago that the official information is the more accurate one we have to support fleet tables. Regarding Planespotters, you may want to have a word with, with whom I had a number of discussions over the reliability of the different sources available for this particular purpose.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 15:09, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Please remember that this is an encyclopedia so it doesnt matter if it is a few months (or even years) out of date as long as it has a reliable reference and is dated, there are plenty of enthusiast websites like planespotters that keep up to date almost daily if that is what the reader wants but that is not the role of an encyclopedia. Most of these fan site are personal websites that do not meet the wikipedia requirement for reliablity. MilborneOne (talk) 15:15, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your answers, but let me disagreed, for the following reasons:
 * Per WP:RS, I can't understand why Planespotters is not a reliable source. This should be discussed and decided by consensus.
 * I can't understand why "the official information is the more accurate one we have to support fleet tables". Where does that come from? Why should we, in this case, give priority and even exclusivity to a primary source? Especially when this source comes from the company itself (clear conflict of interest).
 * Provide a reliable source for a statement is a thing, but is it enough? What if the source is obviously wrong?
 * We can debate about the fact that "It doesn't matter if an information is a few months or even years out of date". But what's the relation between Wikipedia being an encyclopedia, and the fact that it should not be up to date?
 * In Aeroflot Il-96's case, I don't get your point of view. Aeroflot obviously do not operate them anymore. This can be sourced by dozens of reliable sources. Why do you prefer to keep the outdated information? Which also become a wrong information, as the text said "as of september 2014"… Your position appears far more dogmatic than pragmatic to me. And finally, in that case, leads to make wikipedia less relevant. That's my opinion, but I'll open the debate on the subject as soon as I find some time.85.218.56.214 (talk) 15:57, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Air Serbia's fleet
WHY YOU ALWAYS CHANGE THE FLEET SECTION ON AIR SERBIA?!?!?!? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.180.124.130 (talk) 17:58, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Capital letters are not necessary. Anyone can edit Wikipedia but you behaviour is disruptive and I'm just following the consensus. I suggest you to read the article's talk to know the reason why you're being reverted. You're making exactly the same edits that led to their current block. And WP:DUCK suggests that you're the same editor. I strongly advise you to stop.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 20:33, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Edit
To user Jetstreamer:

It was my intention to edit the article in SkyTeam, but I would just like to say that I would include my sources.

I got it from the Wikipedia Articles of King Abdulaziz International Airport and King Khalid International Airport.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MANdropov (talk • contribs) 14:48, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * WP:CIRCULAR. Furthermore, Wikipedia is not a reliable source.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 15:46, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Star Alliance
Sorry about accusing you of vandalism. Can you help me as someone keeps removing what I have put for the former affiliates when I am putting the airlines affilates (e.g Bmi Regional) Can you revert it back for me.thank youSillyPotatoe (talk) 17:35, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Jetstreamer please help me in wikipediaSillyPotatoe (talk) 16:16, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't know what kind of help do you need with the article. I see you've been warring there. I suggest you to start using the article's talk.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 17:27, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Invitation for a discussion: Serbia national basketball team
Hey, one more invitation for a discussion here: Final disscussion: Results/medals history. Please, participate.-- AirWolf  talk  13:30, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Ethiopian Airlines to Dublin and Los Angeles
I think that these 2 destinations should be removed since the source provided and the official press release from ET does not mention a start date of 15 June 2015 only June 2015. 71.12.206.168 (talk) 05:00, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Aurigny Air Services
I'm not sure how more explicit a source you would like? The title of the article states that the government of Guernsey owns Aurigny and the article goes on to say that the airline was bought by the government of Guernsey in 2003 for £5 million. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phinn (talk • contribs)
 * Have you read the message I left at your talk page? That's original research because the source does not mention flag carrier status.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 17:06, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
 * The flag carrier article itself defines a state-owned airline as a flag carrier. "The term also refers to any carrier that is or was owned by a government"; "The chart below lists airlines considered to be a "flag carrier", based on current or former state ownership, or other verifiable designation as a national airline." Aurigny is owned by the government of Guernsey according to the source ergo it's the flag carrier of Guernsey. - Phinn (talk) 17:15, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
 * No, I already explained that that's your conclusion and therefore constitutes original research. Read WP:VERIFY again. Your edit has been challenged and you should provide reliable sources to support your claims. Furthermore, Wikipedia cannot be used as a reliable source.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 17:18, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
 * It's not, and if it was it would contradict that entire list as it clearly states that it considers a flag carrier to be an airline in state ownership, but I've found you another source that says 'flag carrier'. Hope this proves satisfactory. - Phinn (talk) 17:38, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
 * That's a step forward. Thanks.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 17:43, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Terminal 1
perhaps you can confirm when Heathrow terminal 1 is due to be demolished - I updated that because the current statement is wrong and is not even backed up by the current reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5lanimret (talk • contribs)
 * There's a tag at the top of the section requiring more sources. You don't need to tagbomb the article by placing tags all over the section; the one at the top is more than enough.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 21:50, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Terminal 2B
"There will be further moves when the Terminal 2B opens in 2018: Today's Terminal 2 will be renamed Terminal 2A and all airlines from Terminal 3 will shift to there."

If you are not going to allow this to be deleted can you please give a current source that confirms the information as it does not appear to be correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5lanimret (talk • contribs)
 * You changed a wrong statement with an unsourced one, violating the verifiability policy and also making the reference already there to appear like it was supporting your changes. Add all the sources you need to back your modifications and I'll be more than happy to accept them. The lack of sources in the article is not an entitlement for you to add more unsourced content. Separately, you should sign your posts.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 21:50, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Sudan Airways Flight 139
I was simply editing the error that no one survived. Actually, a small boy named Muhammad el fettah osman did. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.180.36.191 (talk) 01:18, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Flynas
Info verified by website flynas.com schedule, blog was added just to confirm dates for those in doubt or lazy to search the schedule.139.190.165.153 (talk) 11:48, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I reverted nothing related to the schedule, but related to the fleet . Your changes were not in agreement with the supporting sources.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 11:50, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

About Kenya Airways Edit
I cited the Sources. Thank you. The airline actually has 37 active aircraft in operation as of today and also in the source http://www.ta-emags.com/V1/KQ/M105/ which I have included in the edit. I believe they have 38-39 Total active aircraft including the Freighters. The Boeing 767-300ER is not in active status but may be in the airlines garage or about to be sold or leased. The leased Embraer 170 that I edited is also out of service as they are nearly 10 years old. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jo88viator (talk • contribs) 17:51, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Halloween cheer!


Happy Halloween!

Hello Jetstreamer: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!   –  PinasCentral (talk) 07:37, 30 October 2014 (UTC) Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.
 * Thank you very much! Happy Halloween to you too.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 10:07, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

About sourcing airport destinations lists
Hi,

As you may have noticed, 99.9% of airport destinations lists in airport articles are "unsourced", because, well, it's kind of "obvious", flights on this route are available in the airline booking system.

The list on the Belgrade Nikola Tesla Airport article is also "globally sourced" on the top of it: "The following scheduled passenger airlines use the Belgrade Nikola Tesla Airport:[15]", the [15] redirecting to the airport timetable on the airport website.

So why do you require the particular Belgrade - Milan Malpensa route from easyJet to be individually sourced?

Slasher-fun (talk) 20:44, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
 * WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT is clear about providing sources for start/end dates, plus WP:VERIFY applies. "I do not follow policies because others don't" is not a good philosophy for well-established editors.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 21:31, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
 * So you could have at least left the destination, minus the end date. And how exactly do you source an end date? I've seen few airlines doing press releases about ending a route... Slasher-fun (talk) 18:35, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Have you tried with Airline route? Discussions regarding the matter have taken place at WT:AIRPORT but there were no consensus. We may start a new discussion if you prefer.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 10:10, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Aeroflot parent company
I accepted the change because what is there now is misleading. It operates as a joint partnership and if you dispute that then explain how the airline would operate without its 30,000+ employees of the AG Group? I also checked the Template:Infobox airline and see nothing that specifies that it be a single company. --SCalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 16:08, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The article includes sources stating the Russian government is the owner of 51% of the shares, they are not in the infobox per WP:INFOBOXREF. I'm perfectly aware of this because I was the one that added those sources. There's nothing more to say about Aeroflot's parent company.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 16:30, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
 * So then you are the Editor that created the confusion. There is only one other company involved, why are you against listing it? WP:INFOBOXREF backs my assertion that the AG Group should be included. --SCalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 16:37, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
 * There exists only one parent company, which holds 50% plus one share. The rest are shareholders.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 16:54, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Where are you getting this definition of "parent company"? If you understood the terms you are using you would see that the Russian government is the shareholder and the AG Group actually runs things? The Russian government is not a company nor is it in the business of running airlines. If you don't understand these terms ("parent company", "shareholder"), it's OK to admit it. You seem knowledgeable on aircraft and airlines, but less so about business and companies. By the way, a "controlling interest" in a company is not necessarily "50% plus one share", that's a simple "majority ownership". --SCalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 17:36, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Although somewhat dated, the following information appears in the reference titled ″Aeroflot profits up on regional airlines turnaround″, already in the article: State-controlled Russian airline Aeroflot... ...According to its latest plans, the government aims to reduce its 51.17 percent stake in the airline to 25 percent plus one share. I didn't invent anything. The article reflects what reliable sources say about the topic, in agreement with WP:VERIFY and WP:NOR.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 17:50, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
 * OK, Jet, so you don't actually understand what the term "parent company" means; and that's OK. I'm not arguing WP:RS with you, just trying to discuss how you are applying the content in the Infobox and show you that its not correct. No business analyst would refer to the Russian government as Aeroflot's "parent company". I am moving this conversation to the article Talk page. --SCalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 18:23, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm fine with moving the discussion to the article's talk page. All I want to add is that the IP edit you accepted added "AG Group" with no sources, which is clearly a violation of the verifiability policy.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 18:26, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Alaska Airlines will reduce operation to Vancouver as soon as possible
I recieve an report from Airlineroute that AS will reduce Vancouver operation on January 6. Nikolas.Sudarpo (talk) 08:45, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Ok, and why do you tell it to me?--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 10:24, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Libyan Airlines
I was referring to Ali Aujali. How we can include his statement as a source when he was actually standing against Gaddafi and he made this statement when "secrets" were being revealed. There were no indications of formal investigations.  Occult Zone  (Talk • Contributions • Log) 11:04, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
 * In that case the statement can be removed, but your edit summary was misleading. I'll be removing it right away.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 11:12, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I was referring to him, when I was talking about the source. Wasn't referring to BBC. Thanks!  Occult Zone  (Talk • Contributions • Log) 11:31, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Wanjiku Mugane
Dear Jetstreamer, Wanjiku Mugane is one of two female businesswomen recently voted to serve on the Board of Directors of Kenya Airways. The Wikipedia article about her has been tagged as an orphan. Could you add a sentence with her name in it on to the KA article? That might help address the orphan issues. I appreciate your assistance. Thanks. Fsmatovu (talk) 17:14, 26 November 2014 (UTC).
 * ✅--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 21:19, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Sockpuppets
Hello. = Agustin.leon21 = Agustin.leon20. Thanks. --Лукас Фокс (talk) 10:59, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Already blocked.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 21:40, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Aurora (airline) fleet citations
Citations added. Ronnie Tse (talk) 15:59, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
 * The citation you added is Planespotters.net, which is not reliable. I've reverted your changes.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 16:08, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
 * OK Ronnie Tse (talk) 16:09, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

This is HanSangYoon.
Greetings. It seems that you have reverted my edits on flag carriers, which I posted a statement about Korean Air. The Wikipedia page of Korean Air clearly states this statement:

"Korean Air was founded by the South Korean government in 1962 as Korean Air Lines to replace Korean National Airlines, which was founded in 1946. On 1 March 1969, the Hanjin Transport Group took control of the airline. Long-haul freight operations were introduced on 26 April 1971, followed by passenger services to Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) on 19 April 1972.[3]"

Therefore with citations, this article proves as an evidence that my addition into the page was valid. Please re-revert the edits back. Thank you! HanSangYoon (talk) 22:09, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I won't re-revert. You did not provide inline citations to reliable sources for your changes. It doesn't matter what Korean Air says, Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Read WP:VERIFY.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 22:52, 13 December 2014 (UTC)


 * How come there are pages that cites Wikipedia pages, then? And how come they're not deleted? The third citation of Korean Air is an example; they lead to another Wikipedia page. Isn't this a violation, too, then? HanSangYoon (talk) 03:08, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
 * The third citation for Korean Air has a wikilink, i.e. a link to a Wikipedia article. That's not a citation. The citation proper is a section of Flight International, a renowned aviation-related magazine. If this citation was based on a Wikipedia article, this is not a justification for introducing references using Wikipedia articles. Wikipedia cannot be used as a source for Wikipedia, per WP:CIRCULAR.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 13:39, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
 * So then since it's not a proper citation, how come it's not deleted? You did explain why, but how come nobody's doing anything about it? Can you not delete the third citation of Korean Air and the paragraph that depends on it, then? HanSangYoon (talk) 17:44, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
 * That citation is perfectl valid, since magazine, volume, and number have been provided so you can go to any library and check it. The wikilink takes to the magazine's article, it is not used to support anything at the article. I don't see the reason to remove that reference. Separately, you don't need to use the template at my talk. I'm automatically notified when someone leaves a note here.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 18:13, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Since you're the admin, I will stop defending myself, because I still have the resources. Please revert with this citation from this reliable source: http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/korean-air-lines-co-ltd-history/


 * "In 1962 Korean National Air Lines, the forerunner of KAL, folded because of a combination of low demand, inability to compete with foreign carriers, and inexperienced management dealing with poor technology. The state-owned enterprise had been started by the government shortly after World War II and consisted of nine small aircraft; the Korean government could not afford to keep the airline afloat, however, and began the search for suitable private-sector investors. The task of rehabilitating the airline was at first taken on by Choong Hoon Cho's Hanjin Group, in part out of a sense of patriotic duty and in part as a business challenge. At the time the prospect of a mismanaged, ill-equipped airline competing with the world's largest carriers seemed daunting. Cho realized that the domestic market for air travel within South Korea was limited by the country's small size, and international travel originating out of country was severely restricted by a government ban on its citizens traveling abroad. Despite these limitations Cho set about putting his acute business sense to work on the airline, which he officially named KAL when he acquired it in March 1969."HanSangYoon (talk) 20:57, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

If you are uncomfortable with the current source you may start a discussion at the article's talk. Let me remind you that this discussion commenced for Flag carrier, not for Korean Air. That said, Funding Universe can be a good reference, but we should be careful on copying their content over WP:COPYVIO issues. Finally, I'm not an administrator.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 22:02, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

XMas
Merry Christmas to you too! WhisperToMe (talk) 03:40, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

BTW since your native language is Spanish, are you interested in adding Spanish-language content to: es:Vuelo 226A de Britannia Airways (Spain) and es:Vuelo 1248 de Southwest Airlines (United States)? WhisperToMe (talk) 03:42, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I rarely edit the Spanish Wikipedia.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 16:11, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh, ok. Happy editing! WhisperToMe (talk) 16:34, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Seasonal Greets!

 * Thank you. Merry Christmas to you too.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 22:48, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Bulgaria Air
I don't understand what you mean that the "Credit card related stuff isn't notable to an airline article plus promotional tone"? Make sure to read the T&C of CCB-Bulgaria Air co-branded Credit Card. This Credit Card gives special privileges to it's holders when travelling with Bulgaria Air. I'm having such a Card and it gives me:
 * 3-5% discount on the ticket price
 * 46 kg of luggage
 * Business Check-in at the airport
 * Seat Location
 * Special discounts - on-board purchases

If this is not related to the company profile, I don't know what Bulgaria on Air media have to do with it :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mashine1984 (talk • contribs)
 * I meant exactly what I wrote: you added this material because you own that credit card. What are the five points you enumerated above if not promotional? I've reverted the changes again. If you want your edit to stay, please tone down the prose and use more reliable sources, because not all the information you introduced is properly referenced.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 14:02, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I have reverted your edit again . It's off etiquette to unilaterally reinstate the edit without replying to my comment above. Additionally, unsourced stuff persists.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 17:21, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year!
 Dear, HAPPY NEW YEAR Hoping 2015 will be a great year for you! Thank you for your contributions! From a fellow editor, --FWiW Bzuk (talk)

This message promotes WikiLove. Originally created by Nahnah4 (see "invisible note").
 * Thank you very much. Happy New Year to you too!--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 20:02, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Maps on airport articles
Why are you reverting all my changes? Do ou have a problem with me? What is your story, buddy??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mashine1984 (talk • contribs) 14:02, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * If you refer to this, there's no consensus for the inclusion of maps at airport articles, as I explained in my edit summary. Regarding the rest of my edits, I always leave a clear edit summary with them. Separately, you should sign your posts.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 14:13, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

@Jetstreamer, please, note that the first map at all indicating the countries served with flights from Sofia Airport is mine. It took me more than 1 hour to find out how create such a map, how to upload it etc. As there was no such a map before, I decided to create it(this is a map that most of the airports have). Somebody uploaded a new map and deleted my map which would have been OK if that map was correct. On that map there were missing destinations as Dubai and Doha despite that it's written that it showing the served destinations in Europe and the Middle-East. I would like to work with you in cooperation for the common good of delevering accurate information. If you have a problem with the sources that I'm quoting let me know, but let us not play the cat and mice game... BTW I would be happy if you help me out how to make more efficient the edits, because for me Wikipedia is a bit hard to work with. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mashine1984 (talk • contribs) 14:35, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * First of all, I have no particular issues neither with you nor with anyone else. I'm against the use of these maps, but if you like it to stay at the article I'm fine with it. I'm restoring it right away. Please also note that there's an ongoing discussion regarding the inclusion of these maps at airport and airline articles at WT:AIRLINE. Your feedback there will be welcome.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 15:41, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

@Jetstreamer, thanks for your reply. I really appriciate it. You should told me about this discussion since the beggining. If you want to remove, please, do. I don't have a problem with it after you explained it to me. After we cleared it out, I think that now we can start a useful cooperation. Now I'm trying to contstuct the Air Lazur page, so, I'll be very glad if you can help me out with it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mashine1984 (talk • contribs) 07:17, 7 January 2015 (UTC) @Jetstreamer, can you, please, help me with Air Lazur page? For some reason it have been deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mashine1984 (talk • contribs) 08:54, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Date format issues
Hello there everyone! Please take a look at these three edits I've made at KLM destinations:. None of them worked to fix the red issue with the date format in the ″References″ section. Suggestions? Thanks in advance.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 14:08, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
 * You need to make sure the format is one of those listed here as acceptable, otherwise the template generates an error. It's rather annoying (especially the "July 3, 2001" vs. "3 July 2001" (note commas) issue), but if you use one of those formats, it should fix the problem. Yunshui 雲 水 15:09, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your response. As far as I can see, the formats used in the diffs provided above match the acceptable ones (either using date or inserting them manually)...--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 15:26, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
 * seems like it should have worked, actually. I'm starting to think that the coding for doesn't allow for ranges in the   parameter. Let me see whether I can get my head around the template syntax there... Yunshui 雲 水  15:38, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh lordy, it uses TemplateData. I'm at a loss, plus I'm going offline for the night now. Sorry JS - you might want to throw that help template back up again. Yunshui 雲 水 15:50, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
 * You've done enough, thanks anyway. I'm activating help-me again.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 15:52, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I've played around with valid ranges, and it does not support them.  and  are the two CS1 specialists that I'm aware of.  Perhaps one of them can help here.  Anyways, since this is such a specific request, I'm deactivating the help me and will help you get to the bottom of this. :) — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (e • t • c) 18:43, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

does support date ranges:

Date range formatting is defined at WP:DATERANGE. Where does not comply with WP:DATESNO, that non-compliance is noted at Help:Citation Style 1 which is linked from the citation's error message help text.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 19:09, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
 * What cite journal doesn't support is templates within those date ranges. I've fixed the references in that article. Huon (talk) 19:34, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks to all of you.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 20:30, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Glad you got to the bottom of this. Yunshui 雲 水 15:01, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion tags removed
Hello. has removed all db-event tags from the articles they created and I nominated for deletion on the basis of failing WP:A7. These are the articles in question: Please also note that the user's intentions seem to be creating one article for each year. No indication of importance for each of these articles yet. Thoughts?--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 20:39, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
 * 1960 South African Rally Championship
 * 1961 South African Rally Championship
 * 1962 South African Rally Championship
 * 1963 South African Rally Championship
 * 1964 South African Rally Championship
 * 1965 South African Rally Championship
 * If they are definitely the creator of the articles, serve a and revert the removal. If they persist, escalate to  etc. -- Red rose64 (talk) 21:42, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

South African Rally Championship pages
Hi Jetstreamer, to be honest I'm finding this whole business of trying to post of Wiki impossible, too much red tape it seems. I did delete the tags by mistake while updating the pages, but they were tag for no reference and I put references which are genuine and are agreed by many people within the SA rally community. I have put in categories which were requested, so I am complying with every request but it seems that once a request tag is made no effort is made by administrators to check or remove the issues. As far as relevancy is concerned, frankly it is very relevant to competitors and people interested in the SA rally scene, the number of Facebook pages about the sport clearly show that. On the bases of your argument all the Formula 1, World Rally Championship, Indycar, British Touring Cars and other motorsport pages should also be removed for not being of much interest to someone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BruceD81 (talk • contribs) 06:08, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Hello. You're still not understanding. The tags were placed for the articles not claiming their importance, i.e. why should they be part of an encyclopedia, not for not including references. You need to assess the importance of each article by writing a sentence or two on this. To me, it would be wise to merge all these articles into a single one.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 12:41, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi Jetstreamer, ironically I have been doing that now as I realised that this was probably your point earlier. I was going to expand on these individual years in later years with more information but I'll do that on the main page instead. Can the previous individual pages be deleted now?BruceD81 (talk) 13:34, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
 * If you are going to merge the articles into a single one there's no need to delete the original pages, you can simply use a redirect. I can do this for you if you don't know how to proceed with this. The first thing you need to do is to start the article that includes all the information form the individual pages. Do not modify anything on them until your new article is complete. Only after this we can redirect these articles to the new one.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 14:44, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Ok well I've already moved all the data from those pages onto the South African National Rally Championship page so if you would be kind enough to link them that would be great, although to me they are not really necessary any more as they are now in the contents box on the main page instead. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction. BruceD81 (talk) 15:03, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I'll be doing it right away. Let me tell you that the new page looks much more interesting than having the information split in many different pages. I invite you to click on each of the links below to check that you'll be taken to the article you condensed all the information in.

--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 17:12, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
 * 1960 South African Rally Championship
 * 1961 South African Rally Championship
 * 1962 South African Rally Championship
 * 1963 South African Rally Championship
 * 1964 South African Rally Championship
 * 1965 South African Rally Championship
 * 1966 South African Rally Championship
 * 1967 South African Rally Championship
 * 1968 South African Rally Championship
 * 1969 South African Rally Championship
 * 1970 South African Rally Championship
 * 1971 South African Rally Championship
 * 1972 South African Rally Championship
 * 1973 South African Rally Championship
 * 1974 South African Rally Championship

Hi Jetstreamer, yes thanks the page is getting there slowly. Lots of data to add. By the way, I wish to add full results of rallies onto the page too. Is this against Wiki policies or not? I also wanted to point final points tables where available too.BruceD81 (talk) 11:48, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

TAM Brazil
Hi, just wanna ask. Is TAM Brazil a flag carrier? I saw some pages that says it is, but in your list it isn't. Can you please provide clarification? Thanks.Dcxnetwork2 (talk) 07:28, 16 January 2015 (UTC)dcxnetwork2
 * First of all, it is not ″my list″. If the airline is not in the list is just because neither I nor any other editor has found a source supporting this. yet.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 13:08, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Airport destinations
Very weird reaction. I am an experienced user on the Dutch Wikipedia and know what I'm doing. Adding sources to the destinations is never done. Why not put the whole page offline, because there's nowhere a source.... On the Dutch Wikipedia, we have decided to remove destinations, because it was not properly maintained. If you continue with removing my contributions, the same will happen here. Iceandsnow (talk) 08:29, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Btw. Using the website of the airline as a source, is often seen as advertising. Iceandsnow (talk) 08:31, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
 * This is not Dutch Wikipedia. Read WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 13:27, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Cubana historic fleet
Hey there,

Most of the Boeing and McDonnell Douglas aircraft listed in that section were never operated by Cubana, but rather wet leased by Cubana, meaning the aircraft were owned and operated by foreign crew on behalf of Cubana, similar to the Euro Atlantic Airways B763 they currently lease for the flights to and from MAD. This of course, is all due to the Cuban embargo, which has been in place since 1960.

Usually leased aircraft, especially wet leased aircraft, should not be included in the historic fleet section of an airline, since they never actually owned or operated the aircraft.

Thenoflyzone (talk) 14:48, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Not to mention that the supporting source is not considered reliable. I will remove most of those entries and use Flightglobal as a reference for the remaining ones. Thanks for the heads up.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 16:50, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Number of countries to which Turkish Airlines flies
I made the count, and you're actually correct about 106, if both Libya and Syria excluded. I may confirm them, but it's what appears to me to be the case. (Unless we don't count with Hong Kong, which may be fair). But in this case, the number of countries would be 107 (including Syria). Including Syria and Libya, according to the counts I've made, there would 108 countries to which Turkish Airlines flies (or 107, not counting with Hong Kong). I may confirm, but that seems to be the case. 217.129.112.100 (talk) 20:12, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Your allegations about my unverifiable edits
If you are unhappy with an edit, it is reasonable to ask for a source. It is not acceptable to make false allegations that my edits are unverifiable and make threats leading to my being blockied from wikipedia without good cause. A search on the web would have led you to find the information I posted on wikipedioa as being verifiable. Please play nicely with other editors. Pmbma (talk) 21:56, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
 * You have had a number of warnings from me at your talk page regarding your addition of unsourced claims into articles. Maybe it's time for you to take a look at WP:VERIFY, a policy here. And the act of supporting your edits with reliabe sources relies on you, per WP:BURDEN. Neither me nor anyone else will do the job for you.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 21:59, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

PLUNA destinations, orphan status
You wrote
 * Undid revision 645850467 by Thnidu (talk) It's an orphan, actually. WP:ALSO applies for parent article.

I looked at WP:ALSO and didn't see a word about orphan status. Where are you getting this from? Please me when you reply. --Thnidu (talk) 16:34, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
 * First of all, newest threads at bottom, please. Regarding WP:ALSO, it says

As a general rule, the "See also" section should not repeat links that appear in the article's body or its navigation boxes.
 * You did exaclty the opposite at PLUNA, i.e. you added a link to the ″See also″ section that was already in the body of the article. Crystal clear.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 00:11, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry about the positioning. I tried to put my thread at the bottom, but I was using my mobile device and the beta version of the mobile website, and it wouldn't let me -- or I couldn't figure out how to do it. And once I was done and saw it in the wrong position, I couldn't find a way to edit it to include this explanation and apology. I'm on my laptop now. I'll make a bug report on Phabricator. (edit: see https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T88885)
 * I didn't see that there was a link in the body of the article until after I'd added the "See also". By that time it was late and I was tired, and editing on the mobile page is more difficult than on the desktop page, and sometimes very frustrating. I figured I'd do it in the morning, but by then you'd already fixed it.
 * The positioning and the duplicate link were my errors, but I still don't see a source for your statement that "WP:ALSO applies for parent article". I'm not going to make an edit war about this, but unless there is an actual policy about it, PLUNA destinations is not an orphan as long as it's linked from PLUNA.
 * On the other hand, as long as PLUNA destinations is up, it should make it clear that this information is no longer meaningful except historically. PLUNA is gone, and even the destinations not marked there as "terminated" are no longer served by (the now nonexistent) PLUNA. That's why I added "PLUNA ceased operations as of 5 July 2012" (as is stated and cited in the lede of PLUNA), which you removed. Yes, I should have sourced it then; and now that I have restored that text, I have included a full citation. At first I used the original source page rather than the WebCite archived copy, but after looking at your userpage I understood the value of avoiding potential linkrot and switched it to the WebCite ref. --Thnidu (talk) 04:33, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Kota Bahru / Kota Bharu
Howdy. I noticed that you reverted an edit of mine to the article Malaysia Airlines destinations, giving "WP:NOTBROKEN plus these are the names appearing in supporting sources" as the reason. Currently Kota Bahru is flagged as a mis-spelling of Kota Bharu; R from misspelling advises that links to mis-spellings of articles should be updated to use the correct title. There would seem to me to be three ways to resolve this;


 * 1) If Kota Bahru is in fact a correct alternative spelling, that redirect shouldn't be marked as a mis-spelling.
 * 2) If it is a mis-spelling, but it's use in the target article in this form is important it can be flagged up as such using Sic
 * 3) If it is a mis-spelling and there's no good reason to have it there, it should be corrected.

Cheers. - TB (talk) 21:59, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Egyptair Ecommerce edits
If you don't mind, I have an editing comment and a policy question (not a challenge) about Talk: EgyptAir. To discuss this, please me. --Thnidu (talk) 20:56, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) You opened a plainlist template but didn't close it, so the list is bulleted and the opening code is visible.
 * 2) Would it be appropriate to point  toward WP:COI?  has already pointed up Username policy in writing a Welcome on their talk page, but this is a different issue. OT1H, if the user works for or represents Egyptair, it is a potential COI, but OTOH it's nothing like advertising or advocacy, just a matter of sourcing, as you've already pointed out to them.
 * I don't mind. Regarding point 1, I've fixed the open template issue. It was created by in their request, not by me. As to point 2, I don't think appropriate to recall WP:COI for the user (at least for now). It was indeed a matter of sourcing, and it hasn't been completely solved yet. A third user made modifications not fully supported by the sources given.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 21:13, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Though I've been editing WP for quite a while, there's a lot I don't know about policies, customs, and so on. --Thnidu (talk) 01:35, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Daallo Airlines & Jubba Airways
Hi Jetstreamer. Daallo Airlines and Jubba Airways apparently just officially signed an agreement to form one larger company. Assuming that this is the normal procedure for such conglomerations, could you please merge their respective pages? Best regards, Middayexpress (talk) 21:34, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Hello, Middayexpress, hope you're doin' fine. I think it's better to raise the matter at WT:AIRLINE so we can discuss how to proceed with this. All the best.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 10:39, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

About Ecuatoriana de Aviación
Ecuatoriana de Aviación never flew to Israel, Spain, Bolivia or Costa Rica. Someone should change that false information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.215.236.138 (talk) 17:32, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Use the article talk page, please.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 18:23, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Cox's Bazar Airport
Hi I made a change on Cox's Bazar Airport wiki page but you removed it as incorrect information, but the fact is Biman Bangladesh Airlines is going to resume its flight to  Cox's Bazar Airport from Dhaka, Bangladesh. They posted it on their website (www.biman-airlines.com) as well as many mainstream bangladeshi media have covered the news http://bdnews24.com/business/2015/02/19/biman-to-resume-flying-on-5-domestic-routes-from-apr-6 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.65.244.51 (talk) 22:04, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I used the url you provided to mark the resumptions at Biman Bangladesh Airlines destinations. Despite WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT explaining how to add future destinations to airport articles, please contact me if you don't know how to add this information to the rest of the articles.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 22:19, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Airbus A330 / Turkish Airlines
Hello, Jetstreamer

You have removed both my contributions regarding the Turkish Airlines Airbus A330 incident at Kathmandu because you have considered them not notable (I am referring to the contributions on the wikipedia pages dedicated to the Airbus A330 Turkish Airlines). May I know why have you considered them "not notable" since this was an incident which resulted in a seriously damaged aircraft and one injured person?! I believe that removing them is a abuse, therefore i would need to know the motivation behind your actions.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Calin.pirlog (talk • contribs) 13:16, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not the only one removing them.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 13:53, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Still, you have not answered my question. Why is this kind of accident considered not notable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Calin.pirlog (talk • contribs) 21:26, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Notability is addressed here.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 21:54, 4 March 2015 (UTC)


 * You need to use the incident's facts to explain why the accident is not notable. Be explicit. Rattling off jargons on talkpages is not very useful. Mailer Diablo 22:36, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Did you read the page just pointed to? Slasher-fun (talk) 22:58, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Of course. My own understanding is that the aircraft looks damaged and got stuck in the mud, and it is too early to assume the aircraft is not going to be written off/hull loss (a write-off will make the incident notable). If you don't explain why you think it is to the contrary using facts (and not merely policy/essays), everyone else is only going to re-add the content because neither party understood what each other meant. - Mailer Diablo 23:04, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

My position is not to add any incident/accident until a reliable source confirms the aircraft has been written off. Can you confirm that by simple inspection of a picture? I started a thread at the article's talk. Shouldn't we discuss this there so everyone can participate?--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 00:07, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Much better, thank you for explaining your stand. Sure, we should discuss this at the article's talk. - Mailer Diablo 00:17, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

- So, it takes a written off aircraft for the article to be updated. Now, that's better then just removing my work, explaining things makes everybody's lives much easier :) I would say that the aircraft will not be written off, the damage seems not that bad (the front gear will need to be replaced and also engine no. 1 + some other smaller repairs). Thank you for making it clear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Calin.pirlog (talk • contribs) 09:48, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Air Serbia - financial data update
Again. Ever since that August-September battle for a consensus over the legitimity of the new article (Air Serbia), I have a dose of bitterness in mye mouth whenever I want to talk things over with you. I don't want to go into edit warring with you in our latest issue, and this way I just want to present my view of the situation. Template "Infobox company", as you know, has some parameters concerning financial status of the company (airline). These parameters, if not implemented, then surely are very similar in the template "Infobox airline". In my belief, this information should be filled based on the official revised financial reports and not the media information backed by the company's, I would say, promotional content, which in this case may be even very accurate, but not what should be taken for granted. So, have patience and wait for the official release of the revised financial report for calendar year 2014, which I expect that should be there in the following 2-3 months.

p.s. Based on our previous discussions, I assume that your, among others, biggest argument is that the company is re-branded, new, and more importantly, nearly doubled its revenue etc. But have patience, because of the given reasons. Thank you.-- AirWolf  talk  01:20, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
 * That's your opinion. A reliable source has been provided and your judgment about it is very limited. You do not own the article. An administrator has been informed about your disruptive behaviour.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 10:15, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
 * You are f**** arrogant here. What do you mean by it: "your judgment about it is very limited", you have some prejudices about me as a contributor, boy. And at the end, you are aiming finger in the wrong direction, try in different direction, towards you. You are acting just like that, constantly reverting anyone's contributions. You have relations with a few admins, I can also go that way. Author of the text source you were providing, or any other, even it is considered the most reliable, simply re-writed promotional content from Air Serbia.-- AirWolf  talk  10:27, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Also, stop edit warring, please revert your last edit. You are accusing me for "owning" the article, and you are the only one who is doing it. Admins will be notified about your disruptive behavior.-- AirWolf  talk  10:30, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

GoAir destinations table
Dear Jetstreamer, this time others changing format of GoAir destinations, which I have edited, by removing country name and adding IATA/IACO columns which are not needed any more according to WP:AIRLINE, please intervene. - M.soumen on 5 March 2015. — Preceding undated comment added 16:27, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
 * This edit restored your removal of the destinations table.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 17:05, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
 * But I had created a new article GoAir destinations as per the the wikipedia guidelines WP:AIRLINE. the current list showing IATA/ICAO codes instead. The new article I have created has been merged with the main GoAir article why is that?- M.Soumen — Preceding undated comment added 17:35, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
 * That's because the number of destinations is not enough to justify a separate article.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 19:23, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Jajadelera SPI
G'day from Oz; you might be interested to know that I have just reopened an SPI for User:Jajadelera, seeSockpuppet investigations/Jajadelera. Cheers YSSYguy (talk) 09:47, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
 * also a sock.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 13:25, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Indef'd. Can't be bothered to tag; not like he's making any effort to hide his identity. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  13:46, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Qantas Flight 32
The article contained the sentence: At the time of the accident a total of 39 A380s were operating with five airlines; Air France, Emirates, Lufthansa, Singapore Airlines (SIA) and Qantas. Generally it seems more of interest to know if the plane was the 39th delivered or the first. I simply looked it up in planespotters.net to see that it was the 8th one delivered. I assume this information is readily available in multiple sources. Pacomartin (talk) 16:06, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Planespotters is not a reliable source. You don't need to assume anything. All you need to do is to support your changes with reliable sources per WP:VERIFY, which is a basic policy.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 16:42, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Support Request
Hi. There's a well known user hiding behind an IP (see 1, 2, 3 etc.) repetitively undoing and editing my contribution to Düsseldorf Airport and LTU International without any or misleading reasons given. This time he changed the layout of DUS#Airlines & Destinations among others (see 4, 5, 6; only German airports) by moving the destinations map into a separate paragraphs, which is from my point against Wikipedia's layout rules as the map is visualizing the table's content and is therefor related to it and should be placed in the same paragraph. If that's correct, I might need a little help. Tanks so far. --AviNation (talk) 00:32, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Someone else has requested full protection of the article due to an ongoing edit war. You should use the article talk page to discuss the differences you have with the IP editor.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 00:44, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Vistara destination table
People keep changing format removing country name and adding IATA/IACO columns which are not needed any more, keep a check if possible, thanks.139.190.230.234 (talk) 06:20, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Sure. The latest version includes the format agreed by consensus at WP:AIRLINE.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 12:49, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
 * The latest format edit was reverted, read edtiors note in history, he thinks that its not standard policy the table layout. 139.190.230.234 (talk) 23:27, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm watchlisting the article from now on.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 00:07, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Someone else popped in and removed the country column deeming it unecessary, some days back you didnt notice even though you participated in some editing there after that. 139.190.230.234 (talk) 05:47, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I did notice that. I think you should start discussing these matters at the article's talk, which is still empty despite the several disagreements you had with some users.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 10:23, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

barnstar
Although I don't always agree with you, you are more reasonable than some editors. Thanks! Wowee Zowee public (talk) 19:08, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm not a monster. Don't mention it.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 20:18, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

You don't need the hyperbole
The guidelines say the terminated cities should be in the article. They don't say anything about allowing or disallowing entries in separate lists. The concept of a separate table for terminated routes hasn't been dealt with. There is an assumption that there should only be one list. I think having separate lists is much more useful, because someone searching for a list of destinations is usually interested only in current destinations. They are looking to answer the question 'Where does Qantas fly to?' They shouldn't have to separate current information mixed up with somewhere the airline used to fly for a few years in the 60s but stopped and never went back. This mixture is indifferent to what readers want from the article. I also think separating domestic from international is useful because they are almost separated anyway if the list goes by country. The flights to Argentina are separated from the other international entries by a long domestic list. Much better to split the lists, if only for ease of use by the reader. There wasn't a mass removal of entries for Qantas destinations. You don't need such silly hyperbole to make your point. There were a couple of removals of some incorrect entries, such as the non-scheduled services to Christmas Creek. Haneda and Narita simultaneously is also wrong as the changeover will not happen until later in the year, and Qantas doesn't and hasn't ever flown to Avalon and Osaka. They are Jetstar destinations. Jetstar and Qantas are different airlines. Just because Qantas includes them as a partner airline in its route map, that doesn't mean Jetstar-only routes belong in this list. In fact, I'd like to see any possible case anyone could make to have them included. Dragonair and Cathay Pacific destinations aren't combined. Jetstar and Qantas must be similarly separated. Mdw0 (talk) 04:50, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Two different layouts have been agreed some time ago. Both of them can be found at WP:AIRLINE-DEST-LIST. None of them have terminated destinations in a separate table.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 10:19, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree that trying to separate the terminated items in separate tables is probably wasted breath, despite the advantages. I think the determination to stick with convention in the face of possible improvement is pointless conservatism. However, the issue of the other deletions haven't been mentioned, especially the Jetstar deletions. Jetstar destinations do not belong in this list, they belong in their own list. Mdw0 (talk) 02:09, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * The article states in the lead that Jetstar destinations are included. However, their removal can be discussed at the article's talk.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 13:17, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Pristina International Airport
Can you keep an eye on this page? Air Serbia continues to be added as "(TBA begins 2015)" as WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT (bullet #11) specifically states that new services must have full start dates. 71.12.206.168 (talk) 03:02, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Air China flights to Budapest/Minsk
Air China is starting flights to Budapest and Minsk beginning 1 May 2015 according to and. According to both sources, the flight from Beijing to Budapest will have a stop-over in Minsk but the flight from Budapest to Beijing is nonstop. According to Airline Route, CA will not have traffic rights from Minsk to Budapest. Do we add Air China to the table at Minsk National Airport to Beijing but make a footnote saying that the flight is inbound only? We can't list Budapest solely as a destination for Air China from Minsk since they do not have traffic rights. Citydude1017 (talk) 04:55, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd say add it with a note saying the flight is inbound only.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 10:56, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Yugoslavia/Jugoslavia
Hello. I appreciate you a lot because of your anti-vandalism activity on several articles that we have both on our watchlists. By now I thought you have it clear that I make edits in order to improve wp. So I am really not sure what is your point here, but anyway, I will try to explain it to you and move on, I leave it to your judgment afterwords as, after all, its not that big deal anyway. The issue are your reverts (first and second). The source is this one. Yes, when talking about the countries as new destinations of Air Algerie it mistakanly says Jugoslavia instead of Yugoslavia. Its a not unusual typo mistake. Then in your second revert you mention WP:NOTBROKEN. Don't you see Jugoslavia is a redirect for Yugoslavia? So obviously they were referring to Yugoslavia. In English is and was allways Yugoslavia, and Yugoslavia was the name of the country since 1929 till 2003, so Jugoslavia, with J, was just a typo error. If you find a source saying Portogal wouldn't you fix it to Portugal? I really cant see any reason why are you being a jerk with me on this one, I cant get you, if I am missing something please explain it to me. I will not edit war, I will leave the typo mistake that you insist in restoring, and hope one day you will understand and fix it. FkpCascais (talk) 15:38, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Here's my explanation: WP:VERIFY is the answer and we cannot modify what reliable sources say. I'm perfectly aware that the correct name is Yugoslavia but I do not change names provided by these sources, which is the spirit of the verifiability policy. Regarding WP:NOTBROKEN, what you say is precisely in agreement with it, i.e. do not fix redirects. What can be done here is to add a pipe link in order to target Yugoslavia. This is not about what we prefer but to follow the basic policies. Please also note the thread above, where a similar discussion arose.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 16:08, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
 * For god sake, its not like if there is some reason for it, its just a typo ... -_- ... nevermind. FkpCascais (talk) 17:51, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I know what you mean, sometimes sources may use intentionally a different wording and some editors want to "fix it" and by that changing what originally the author of the source meant. But that is not the case here, the author of the source simply innocently made a mistake of writing Jugoslavia instead of Yugoslavia.  He didn't made it with any intention. Many languages write Yugoslavia with J in their language, so its a usual misspelling mistake.  Its like writing Tokio instead of Tokyo.  I see no point in leaving Tokio or Jugoslavia if there isn't any reason for it, just an unintentional mistake by the author of the source. FkpCascais (talk) 18:01, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Nice to see that I'm not the only one objecting to your actions. If the source has it wrong, you do not simply copy the error, you correct it. In both cases it's perfectly clear what the correct names are. Fnorp (talk) 08:32, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

mihin lanka routes article
Not understanding your post in wikiproject talk page for more comments, would you allow Etitrean airlines table to be moved to a seperate article for a handful of destinations? why have that for less than 20 routes? 139.190.230.234 (talk) 20:12, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I said I supported merging the list of destinations back to the original article.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 20:50, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Busiest routes from an airport
Hi there. keeps adding the list of busiest international routes and their stats on Indira Gandhi International Airport. As far as I remember, there was an agreement not to add these somewhere about 3-4 years. Are these really relevant? I also see that this user keeps adding whatever they like to the article. Could you pitch in here? &mdash;  LeoFrank  Talk 13:19, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I'll be keeping an eye on the article.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 22:00, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Varna airpor
Hi ! Every single airline and destinations timetable can be founded on varna airport website. I Dont understand why you delete CORRECT information ? I dont know who many charter airlines shared their timetables in internet ? Every single airlines who is operated to Varna airprot and Burgas Airport operated from years to this destinations !? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Azlanko (talk • contribs) 21:36, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Please come back here once you have thorougly read WP:VERIFY and WP:IC.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 22:05, 5 April 2015 (UTC)