Jump to content

Talk:AirAsia X

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Conflicting info from reports

[edit]

How does this fit in?? says Operations ceased... www.flyasianxpress.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.188.5.66 (talk) 20:07, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to TheStar, it will start in July with service to Tianjin, Hangzhou and Manchester. Yet according to channelnews Asia as linked to in the AirAsia article, it will start in July with service to one of Tianjin or Hangzhou. Can someone confirm which one is correct and update the articles accordingly? Nil Einne 11:40, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is all speculation right now. Everything is not confirmed yet. So no one is correct at this point. We will wait and see until the formal confirmation is carried out. Till then there will always be conflicting news reports. Cheers. Zack2007 12:35, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Both articles seem to want to 'confirm' the destinations. Since all these are still speculation and Tony Fernandes has not confirmed them, I would appreciate we dont use the word confirm. Thank you.Zack2007 12:47, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Per above, TheStar claims Tony Fernandes himself the CEO of FAX himself confirmed the destinations. If Tony Fernandes the CEO of FAX himself has confirmed then this is not simple speculation and we need to be accurate in the article. The problem is, this doesn't agree with ChannelNewsAsia which appears to be quoting Tony Fernandes who is more ambigious. If Tony Fernandes has not announced the destinations then we need to report this as well. The problem is that sources don't agree. However given that CNA doesn't really contradict The Star that much, I would say we should assume the Star is correct in the absense of further infoNil Einne 09:23, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Details

[edit]

This article [1] better explains what the relationship between FAX, AirAsia X and AirAsia is Nil Einne 10:16, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Move?

[edit]

should we move the page to AirAsia Long Haul? kawaputratok2me 05:05, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know whether we should yet. Maybe wait for a couple of days for more information if any. or else depend on your judgement --Zack2007 11:13, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think this should be moved to AirAsia X Long Haul since that is what is written on the title to its main page Stkhoo 14:24, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It has been moved so many times. Last time it was reported that Tony said they are going to drop the X. Now it somehow comes back on. Let's wait for more announcement. --Zack2007 15:28, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Now it is back on!

should the article be called AirAsia X or AirAsia X long haul???--Zack2007 04:52, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:AirAsia logo.png

[edit]

Image:AirAsia logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 04:47, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of AirAsia X

[edit]

I'm not sure if it is accurate to define AirAsia X as an "airline", and that it is "owned" by FAX. AirAsia X is a brand by AirAsia, franchised to FAX to allow them (FAX) to operate a long haul low cost service. To put it simply, AirAsia X is not an airline per se, but rather a brand for a service offered by an airline operator (in this case, FAX). The correct definition should be that AirAsia X is a long haul low cost service operated by FlyAsian Xpress. I am trying to emphasize that while the operation and ownership of the service belongs to FAX, the brand AirAsia X itself is not. Until FAX rename their company to AirAsia X, I think the relationship between FAX, AirAsia and AirAsia X is better explained this way. Agree? 74.78.194.9 08:05, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is more accurate to say that it is more of a brand name for FAX. I agree with you. What do others say? --Zack2007 10:44, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

[edit]

Since FAX has ceased operation beginning 1 October, and all the codes go to AirAsia X, it is only natural that we merge the two articles together into AirAsia X, and have a section on the historic flights of FAX. We do not need the FAX article as it will be redundant to the AirAsia X. With this, we can expand the AirAsia X article even further. --Zack2007 14:34, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As of 18 Septmeber 2007, Fly Asian Xpress Sdn. Bhd. (FAX) has had its name changed to AirAsia X Sdn. Bhd. The point about AirAsia X not technically being an airline is now moot and the FAX article really should be consolidated into the AirAia X article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.24.188.102 (talk) 04:48, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where do you get the news from? They are looking to change the name soon, but not yet. Remember the new aircraft was written, AirAsia X operated by FlyAsianXpress? So FlyAsianXpress is still the company which operated AirAsia X. So my suggestion is to have a section of the FAX into AirAsia X and redirect the FAX article to AirAsia X.--Zack2007 10:46, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
From a recent ads, it says "Operated by AirAsia X Sdn Bhd. (Previously FlyAsianXpress Sdn. Bhd)" When do they change it? Is there anyone that can provide sources. --14:18, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

A340-600

[edit]

Hello. I removed the bit from the fleet section that Air Asia X were to receive two leased A340-600 aircraft. This information is not commonly known and the referenced link doesn't provide for it. If you can confirm that Air Asia X will receive A340-600s, please revert my edit and include a reference. Thanks. Ben (talk) 03:23, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The CEO

[edit]

Azran "The Malaysian Train Station" Osman Rani, I think he deserves to be in too, don't you? jsha (talk) 16:46, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Future Destinations section

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
There is consensus to list in general only those destinations where a launch date has been reported by reliable sources. That position is not only backed up by arguments but hasn't been challenged here. Borderline case where there is no launch date, but significant discussion can still be brought up here on the talk page.--Tikiwont (talk) 08:10, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The section is really turning into a mess. It has very few references and as far as I can see is completely speculative. This section should either be completely removed or limited to cities/airports that AirAsia X has announced an official intention to fly to but has not provided a date (such as London-Stansted), AirAsia X has announced that they are investigating fly there or even if independent reliable sources have indicated AirAsia X is investigating the airport. On this rationale, I will be removing the entire section and cities should be re-added with a suitable citation. MvjsTalking 10:42, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Even with references, most of it is just speculation and passing statements in the press. It's not definite plans, more of publicity spins but the holding company. We should only keep future destinations with confirmed launch dates. Planenut (talk) 11:54, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I did in fact remove this entire section only for it to be immediately restored by IP editors and a note left on my talk page. If you are in agreement with me, feel free to remove the section - maybe they'll listen to you? MvjsTalking 20:49, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I just removed it. Expect an edit war to start soon. Planenut (talk) 23:22, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
To the individual who is so insistent to add all the "future destinations", take a look at WP:NOTCRYSTAL. While you may have reference sources to the information posted, it's just PURE SPECULATION and cannot be verified. Nothing is firmed except London. Planenut (talk) 03:02, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Let me reiterate to the anonymous user who chooses to edit via an IP address rather than a registered account. You won't get anywhere by undoing the edits. State your POV here on why the list should be kept and not removed. Planenut (talk) 06:10, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The IP editor now seems to think that all the content is sourced and cited. It's not. For the most part, the few references that the section has refer to general continents and then the editor who created this section took that to mean specific airports. Wikipedia is not the place for original research or synthesis. But even that doesn't account for the vast majority of this that is totally and blatantly uncited. As I said at the top of this disussion, I would be fine for any specific airports that have been specifically discussed by AirAsia X such as London-Stansted to be listed. But for the vast majority of this section that is not the case. Could this editor who keeps undoing this consensus please weigh in here? MvjsTalking 08:21, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This page has now been protected but protected to a version that is not inline with the consensus. Could this be remedied? MvjsTalking 10:19, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I protected the last version due to heavy edit warring as an alternative to blocking as several parties were at or over the WP:3RR threshold. Exempting some reverts as correcting edits against consensus wasn't obvious either as the same two parties who commented here also reverted. The chance here is to confirm here consesus now. --Tikiwont (talk) 10:54, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay then. Check - as per all my other comments, Wikipedia is not the place for pure speculation, personal synthesis or original research. MvjsTalking 11:20, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the points raised by Mvjs. I went through all the links gave as references. None gave specific information regarding future destinations. It was purely speculation and original research and theories by the IP editor. Planenut(Talk) 11:29, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We've now got a confirmation of that consensus. Any chance that the protecting admin can restore the correct version and/or unprotect the article? MvjsTalking 22:12, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Fleet Edits

[edit]

This section is becomes a mess every time a certain IP editor makes mutiple changes. Would the IP editor please state your POV here on why the your version should be kept and not removed. Rgds. Planenut(Talk) 05:42, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A new user keeps adding the non-encyclopedic information to the page. I have asked him/her to discuss on this page why this non-standard information should be included but they seem to be unaware of the talk page or wishes to ignore requests to stop. MilborneOne (talk) 14:12, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is a repeat of the scenario we had last year with the destinations section. Rgds. Planenut(Talk) 02:00, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
IP editor makes mutiple changes again and again, can anyone take some action? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maninter (talk • contribs) 14:11, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A330neo Launch customer

[edit]

Although Air Asia X was indeed the first to commit to the A330neo, Delta Air Lines was the first airline to actually place a firm order for the Airbus A330neo, and therefore will be the official Launch customer for the model, as well as for the A330-300 HGW, as stated on Airbus's official web site [1] Piper13 (talk) 14:11, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.airbus.com/newsevents/news-events-single/detail/first-242-tonne-take-off-weight-a330-successfully-completes-first-flight/
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on AirAsia X. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:51, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on AirAsia X. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:57, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on AirAsia X. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:34, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on AirAsia X. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:26, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on AirAsia X. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:07, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on AirAsia X. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:50, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi, every Wikipedians.

Recently I just noticed that AirAsia X introduced a new logo based on AirAsia's 2014 logo in 2022, which can be found here: https://logos.fandom.com/wiki/File:AirAsia_X_2022.svg.

Therefore, because I don't have Wikipedia account, I'm not sure if someone can upload the new AirAsia X logo? Thanks! 209.42.117.252 (talk) 23:31, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:AirAsia_X&oldid=1212232588"