Talk:Alaska Airlines/Archive 1

Archive 1

'Spirit' photo

Why is the Spirit of Disneyland photo in the 'Incidents and accidents' section? I propose moving it to the top of the article. who ever did it is weird because the crash planes werent 737s but md80s

SFO

If Vancouver is being listed as a focus city, then shouldn't San Francisco International Airport be listed as one too, considering the fact that SFO has more flights in and out and serves more destinations than Vancouver? August 31, 2006.

With recently added service to San Diego, and Cancun, I agree that SFO should be considered.

Go add more

Can somebody also add more things to this article, why is everybody missing out the 734 problem back in January? im gonna add this to the accidents and incidents section. NO ONE DELETE IT! its all real —Preceding unsigned comment added by CrazyHermit (talk • contribs) 00:46, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, please add more stuff to this article, especially the History section. I put an "expand section" message there months ago, but nobody has bothered to add anything. So please, please, PLEASE expand this article, mainly the history section. --Compdude123 (talk) 02:16, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Comment of price increase

Can anyone comment on how the price of airline tickets had spiked? In 2006, the prices were competitive with those of southwest and united, sometimes even lower!! But now its 5x as much as its competition, why is that?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.54.232.69 (talk) 04:05, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

McDonnell Douglas aircraft

MD-80s or MD-83s? Both are mentioned. Granted, MD-83s are probably in the MD-80 series. It's been a long time since I watched airplanes - Viscounts, Electras (the four-engine kind). 4.249.186.70 03:19, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Christian owned?

There is one fact that needs to be checked. I don't believe that it is a Christian owned airline. It's a publicly traded on the NYSE.

Re: this edit,[1] I don't know about its ownership but I just flew on it this weekend and they do in fact place a Christian Bible verse in every meal tray. I will research this further to try and find an explanation, but there is definitely truth to this. Postdlf 19:25, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

This source has some interesting details about the Bible verses. Postdlf 19:28, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Here's a mention in a USA Today story (look towards the bottom)...looks like they've been doing the Bible verses since the 1970s. No statement on the company's ownership. Postdlf 19:36, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

• The comment about the prayer cards does not follow the Wikipedia unbiased comments policy. The comment is slanted negatively toward Alaska Air. Two of the sources are from obviously biased groups with an athiest agenda to push, the 'travel site' is extremely obscure and actually a reprint from an online magazine which Wikipedia itself describes as one that "covers all issues from a liberal political viewpoint"(Salon.com), and the one mainstream source (USA Today) is about Starbucks, with a one-liner toward the end about Alaska which states positive customer reaction to the cards.

Furthermore, the topic seems trivial, especially in light of the lack of historical information about the airline. I'm sure if we delved into the various trinkets and marketing campaigns of other companies, they'd reveal their biases for the causes and ideologies they subtly support. (Hilton Hotels' distribution of Connie's religion laced autobiography & Marriott's distribution of the Book of Mormon come to mind).

history????

What is with the "Helping Israel" topic??? MANY airlines helped during operation flying carpet. The article on operation flying carpet makes NO mention of airlines. Is there a reason this is being called out as a SEPARATE section? --75.5.0.129 (talk) 04:23, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

This one needs history of the airline.. actually the whole article reads like a press release almost.

agree, why are the United Airlines and Southwest articles bigger than this article?? Contribute more to this page please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CrazyHermit (talk • contribs) 00:44, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, if anybody has some information about Alaska Airlines' history, PLEASE add it to this article. There's some info on the airline's website, but I think that info from the company's website may be biased. So please add more info about Alaska's history. Compdude123 (talk) 23:04, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Legal Entity

ALSO... Horizon Air is *NOT* a subsidiary of Alaska Airlines. Alaska Airlines and Horizon Air are both subsidiaries (sister carriers) of Alaska Air Group, which is a holding group entity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.49.254.2 (talk) 20:02, 24 September 2007 (UTC) 'Somebody can change the subsidary on Horizon Air to sister carrier here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aznriceboi (talk • contribs) 05:26, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

This was just changed today by someone. Then I made that sentence more clear.Compdude123 (talk) 17:59, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Destinations

No time reference for destinations - unclear when exactly services to these destinations are effective from. Ardfern 23:33, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

When we refer to DCA, it makes sense for the first reference to be 'Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport,' but how should we refer to it subsequently? The second reference in the article is unlinked, so it seems as if we should come up with a non-bulky standard. MKoltnow 17:46, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Orland service began in 2003, not 2002. If I get time I will see what I can do about fixing this, but at the moment I don't know about the other routes listed in the same sentence. Paulc206 (talk) 17:30, 1 June 2008 (UTC) refs: (Orlando) (DC)

Removed Report Card Link

"Its safety record rates a "A", the highest grade possible, according to Air Rankings Online (see rankings at Airline Rankings). Rankings are cumulatives, based on the number of fatal accidents per million flights that the carrier has flown since 1970."

The above link and associated text seems dead. The site is currently gone. --ORBIT 03:15, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Hubs

I think that the Portland International Airport should be added as a main hub due to PDX's large Alaska Airlines presence. User:Tv145033 23:33, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

No way! Portland serves no trans- or mid-continental cities and really serves no cities that Seattle does not serve. That is very different from say Los Angeles or Seattle. Portland is definately a secondary hub especially if you also consider the fact that Alaska Airlines no longer bases flight attendants out of Portland (unlike SEA, LAX, and ANC). Jarfingle 05:10, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

If Portland International Airport should be considered a hub, why not include Vancouver, for Vancouver on Alaska serves alot of West Coast Cities. 63.202.190.242 12:50, 22 June 2006 [UTC]

Alaska has lots of point-to-point service to Vancouver (YVR), but the term Hub implies passengers make connections there to other Alaska (or Horizon) flights. Surely passengers are not connecting through YVR to get to other points on the Alaska/Horizon system, with rare exception.MKoltnow 18:02, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

No. While Alaska does have a large presence at PDX, it is no where near the size of the Seattle Hub. According to Alaska's website, Seattle has 127 daily departues as compared to only 35 for Portland. Plus, it also lists SEA at its main hub and the rest as secondary hubs. 24.113.22.73 06:01, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

According to the alaskaair.com web site the main hub is SEA and the secondary hubs are ANC, LAX, and PDX. This may be confusing because they list them all as hubs (and they do not list any "focus cities") but they do make it clear that SEA is the "main hub", whereas ANC (or any other) does not have this distinction. Neither YVR nor SFO (nor any mexican city) are listed as hubs. -- abfackeln 22:12, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

These commenters do make a good point, though. How do we acknowledge Horizon Air's or Alaska's State of Alaska partners' contribution to the Alaska system? It seems clear that ANC is a hub, using the definition of a city where passengers frequently make connecting flights on the Alaska system. Similarly at PDX, Alaska passengers connect via Horizon to some cities otherwise not served. Particularly when a commuter/regional partner is wholly-owned by the mainline airline, like American Eagle, it makes sense to consider that partner's flights as contributing to hub status. This has gotten very complicated in recent years with the introduction of regional jets. Now regional/commuter partners can offer flights of long distances. We have seen city pairs introduced to the Alaska system (SEA-LGB) as Horizon flights. Presumably, their popularity led the routes being transferred to Alaska. Since cities may be on both Alaska's and Horizon's route systems, I think we should consider the sum total when we describe a city as a hub (or not). MKoltnow 18:02, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Under "hubs" in the info box, SEA should have the label Seattle, Washington rather than SeaTac, Washington. I realize that Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (SEA) is actually located in the city of Seatac, WA but this breaks the convention both in the industry and on wikipedia of listing major airports by the major city they serve rather than the city they happen to be in. For example look at the infobox for Delta Air Lines where the hubs are listed as being Cincinnati, Ohio; Detroit, Michigan; and Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota rather than the suburban cities or CDPs the airports are actually located in. 66.195.33.201 (talk) 23:34, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

It was a separate point of discussion on WP:AIRPORT, and based on that I have restored the airport names as the visible text. HkCaGu (talk) 03:17, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Trivia Removal

I removed the trivia section as the comment on MD-80s being grumpy and 737s being happy was verifiably false (see MD-83 and 737-400) Given this I'm not sure the sunglasses trivia item was valid either, so I removed both of them. —Cliffb 05:02, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Also, given the Trojan.goum's (the creator of the trivia section) edit history, I think this is likely false, and should probably be supported with a citation to readd it... —Cliffb 05:12, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I removed one of the cities in the employees section (abbotsfored) because Alaska doesnt even go there.

About the other facts section, there should be more add to it becuase Alaska has alot of facts like how it was the only US carrier to fly to Russia during the Cold War and other facts too ya know. Golum4ever

Codeshare error

The wiki link to SABRE in the Codesharing section: "and the two airlines both use the SABRE reservation system." is linked to the wrong page. The SABRE system that Alaska and other airlines uses is a computer software system for reservations which has nothing to do with the SABRE jet engine.

Sam@leapofaith.net (talk) 10:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Fixed this error a few days ago - thanks --Golden retrievers (talk) 18:37, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Dulles

The "Destinations" section states that AS started service to IAD (Dulles International) in 2002. While I can find records of AS having flown into IAD at some point, I can't find starting or ending dates. Alaska does not currently provide service to Dulles. What's the best way of reflecting that in the article? ~~ tonei 23:13, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Spirit of Seattle

I was going to add something to the livery section about the new Spirit of Seattle plane, but I'm not sure how to describe the paint scheme without a picture. Any ideas? 24.22.110.9 (talk) 06:10, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

• If you live near an Alaska destination airport (especially Seattle) see if you can photograph it yourself. Otherwise you may ask a Seattle-area Wikipedian to get a photo of it. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:29, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

L-382/C-130s?

The retired fleet listing does not include any mention of Lockheed L-382/C-130s, although they were used (I have an image I'd like to add to the article, but without the data it would not fit). Does anyone have details of this fleet that they can add? AKRadecki^Speaketh 21:32, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I just added that to the history section earlier today (in the 1960s section). I'm currently in the process of expanding that section and it would be nice if you could add that picture. Sorry it took two years (not my fault) for this to be added to the article, but at least it's now there. -Compdude123 (talk) 04:14, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Ash clouds and airline safety, Wall Street Journal article

The Wall Street Journal published an article, How One Airline Skirts the Ash Clouds, on April 21st. It features Alaska Airlines and discusses its procedures for dealing with ash. Might be useful for this article. Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 10:16, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

the alsaka airlines page seems to give a very favourable position to the airline. watching the may day episode about the needless jan 31 2000 crash where all on board died, gives a very different impression of the company. a company stymied by corruption & cost cutting which allowed it's planes to deteriorate to such a poor condition that this accident would eventuate. This company and what it allowed to happen was absolutely shameful G —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.92.174.19 (talk) 03:42, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Horizon as regional carrier

re articles like this: http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=aviationdaily&id=news/avd/2010/08/23/08.xml&headline=Horizon%20Air%20Changes%20Business%20Model

are we going to change the way we list these flights in airport route infoboxes? So that the routes say "Alaska Airlines operated by Horizon Air"... like we do for almost all the other regionals such as skywest and colgan? I think its high time to normalize the treatment of horizon as all of my boarding passes have had AS # on them for years now. 66.220.101.106 (talk) 03:40, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't think we should change it yet. Horizon still seems to be independently branded, even though they use Alaska flight numbers. I was just at LAX's International Terminal yesterday and noticed that the Horizon-operated flights on the connecting flights monitors were listed as Horizon, not Alaska, and even had QX flight numbers (e.g. QX 442, not AS 2442 or QX 2442). We've treated Horizon differently because Alaska Air Group has treated it differently, the predominant name passengers see is Horizon, not Alaska. Although Alaska Air Group has announced an intention to change Horizon's operation to be more like how other regional carriers are handled, until they actually do it, we shouldn't make the change. -- Hawaiian717 (talk) 03:39, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

article says changes are effective Jan 1. 66.220.113.98 (talk) 22:10, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

The article may say Jan 1, but I'd prefer to wait until there's evidence that the change has actually happened. -- Hawaiian717 (talk) 20:11, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

barring a wp editor who happens to work for AS or QX, I can't see that we will ever find more RS's than what we get from media and press releases. 66.220.113.98 (talk) 22:59, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, now we have a press release that states the branding change will start next month [2] and a rendering of the new livery [3]. I think that's good enough to start the change to "Alaska Airlines operated by Horizon Air". Normally I'd say to wait until February, but that's only a few days away so I won't object to people staring changes now. -- Hawaiian717 (talk) 16:48, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

please tell me there is some type of bot that we can order to do such things... or is it really a hand-by-hand job? 66.220.113.98 (talk) 23:57, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

also any thoughts on, considering the pic, are we supposed to call this "Alaska Horizon" in a similar vein to delta connection, united express or whatever? B/C in all the info boxes we seem to use the regional affiliate branding along with the operator, not the national branding. IE for regional flights we say "continental EXPRESS operated by expressjet air" and not "continental AIRLINES operated by expressjet"... so its a important note whether the new regional service is being branded as AS or something else. 66.220.113.98 (talk) 00:07, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Expanding the history section

Hello, I am starting to expand the history section of this article as it is WAY too short. Any help would be much appreciated. The sources I'm using are:

• The Best Source - This one is really extensive and has lots of good info. However, it doesn't have any info for the 2000s.
• Alaska Airlines History By Decade - This is from Alaska airlines' website and doesn't have quite as much info as the previous one.
• HistoryLink.org article on Alaska Air

Thanks for your help! --Compdude123 (talk) 23:31, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

If anyone has any pictures that previously wouldn't have fit in the article, go ahead and add them. It would be very nice if we had some pictures, too. Thanks, Compdude123 (talk) 04:16, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Pictures Wanted: 727, DC-3, DC-4, DC-6, C-46, Stinson biplane -Compdude123 (talk) 17:40, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

The "Eskimo face"

Before I get into that, I glanced at most of the history section and see two omissions: the fare war which preceded Wien's demise, and the airline's "Samovar Service."

Now, on to the titular subject of this missive. From the article:

There are numerous anecdotes linking the Eskimo face wearing a parka to different celebrities, including once to Chester Seveck by an Alaskan senator.

This makes no sense to me. The cited article is a dead link. Since it appears to originate with a Post-Intelligencer article, it shouldn't require much effort to find it the old fashioned way. Unless the ease of Google has killed everyone's enthusiasm for such a thing.

I will attempt to make sense of this statement. Chester Asakak Seveck (January 7, 1890 – ?) was a reindeer herder from Kotzebue, Alaska. Starting in the 1950s, Seveck was hired by Wien Airlines (which had established itself as the primary airline serving Kotzebue after buying out Archie Ferguson ca. 1946) to perform traditional dances for visitors to Kotzebue. I'm quite certain that Seveck was the model for the Eskimo face on the plane, though a quick Google search proved inconclusive towards confirming that.

As for the Alaskan senator? Ken Fanning was elected to the Alaska House of Representatives in 1980, the second person to be elected to a state legislature in the United States as a Libertarian. He only served one term, losing reelection in 1982 following redistricting. Fanning wrote a humor-tinged book about his experiences, with cartoon illustrations by his legislative aide, John Manly. The 12th Alaska State Legislature in which Fanning served was the first in which Alaska started receiving large-scale revenues due to oil flowing through the Trans-Alaska Pipeline from Prudhoe Bay. Not surprisingly, there were all sort and manner of wild schemes concerning what to do with the money, some of which centered around state government investment in companies based in or operating in Alaska. I don't specifically recall whether or not Alaska Airlines was mentioned in this context. Regardless, in Fanning's book, there was a cartoon by Manly suggesting "State of Alaska Airlines," with the Eskimo face being replaced with the visage of Bill Ray, then the state senator representing Juneau. Ironically, Manly was Ray's election opponent in 1982.

Another item may not be appropriate for the article, but I wanted to share it nonetheless as a pop culture parody item. An Anchorage-based performing artist, Jim Henderson, had a standup comedy routine which aired on cable access television quite often in the 1980s. The routine was mostly centered around an oilfield worker at Prudhoe Bay, who arrived in Anchorage with his paycheck and pays a visit to "Hal Sleazington VD" (a parody of Cal Worthington Ford), looking to purchase a vehicle so he can drive around and score cocaine. To cut to the relevant part, Henderson sings the Alaska Airlines jingle, except he sings it as "Alaska Airlines, sit on a happy face."RadioKAOS (talk) 05:38, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Do you have a source for all this stuff? If so, you should consider adding it to the article. Thanks, Compdude123 (talk) 03:50, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

The statement which appears in the article is incomprehensible, sourced or not. Trying to sort it out via the prevailing method (i.e. Google) turned up nothing, which is often the case with anything on the Internet involving more than a superficial look at history. The reason I posted all this here rather than in the article is that sourcing it would require to a large extent looking up books and magazines published in the 1970s and 1980s at the library. That is, except for the Henderson comedy bit; something tells me that finding a source for that is unlikely. The cited source in the article is a dead web link which appears to point to a newspaper article from the 1980s, but isn't specifically cited as such. The information I posted was offered in the spirit of collaboration, as opposed to the intimation that if I bring this up, I should do all the work involved. I'd be happy to help if I can.

I would think that Alaska magazine, as well as multiple major Alaskan newspapers, would provide sources to much of this, but that may require searching over several decades. I believe there are printed subject indices, though I'm not aware of anything on the web that would be anywhere near as comprehensive. As for Fanning's book, the web catalog of the Elmer E. Rasmuson Library turns up: Fanning, Ken (1982). Behind the scenes in the Alaska Legislature. Juneau: Graphics Plus Publishing. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help) No ISBN number, but it gives a Western Library Network (now part of OCLC) number of 82209431. Technically, it would be considered self-published, as Graphics Plus Publishing was Manly's company.RadioKAOS (talk) 07:25, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Continental US

"...not only within the state of Alaska but also throughout the Continental United States...". Alaska IS a part of the "continental" United States. It is NOT a part of the "contiguous" United States. Common colloquialisms are not a replacement for effort and research. Or a fucking map, for that matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎216.115.124.169‎ (talk) 14:27, March 22, 2012

Do not assume Wikipedia to be perfect 150% of the time, and assume good faith by not calling other editors "idiots." To be honest I thought I corrected this already, but perhaps I'm just imagining things... —Compdude¹²³ 04:16, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

(Nope I didn't correct this, I was thinking of the following sentence) BTW I actually wrote the sentence you referred to so in a way you're calling me an "idiot," which is not cool. —Compdude¹²³ 05:03, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm changing the section header from "Idiots" to "Continental US". The prior title not only violates WP:NPA; it's not descriptive of the topic and is unhelpful. TJRC (talk) 18:11, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Also, while I prefer the word "contiguous," there's nothing wrong with using "continental" here; "Continental United States" is an accepted way of referring to the 48 states excluding Alaska and Hawaii:

2.b being the part of the United States on the North American continent; also  : being the part of the United States comprising the lower 48 states . "Definition of CONTINENTAL". Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Retrieved March 23, 2012.

TJRC (talk) 18:23, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

• "Contiguous" actually sounds more encyclopedic and makes more sense because one can argue that Alaska is part of the "continental United States" (and Hawaii is not). Contiguous is probably the correct word to use here. —Compdude¹²³ 02:26, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

I completely agree; my point is that using "continental" does not rise to the level of idiocy, as claimed by the IP editor... who, by the way, is not always so clear on the meaning of words himself. TJRC (talk) 17:13, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

The IP geolocates to the Fairbanks, Alaska school district, so it's some school kid... (not me, of course :D) —Compdude¹²³ 05:06, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Does Compudude live in Alaska? "Continental" can be considered derogatory here just as "Indian" can be considered derogatory even though it is "generally accepted." Idiot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.115.124.169 (talk) 20:59, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't think most Alaskans consider it "derogatory" (this one doesn't anyway) its just plain wrong. However that doesn't make it ok to attack other users and resort to petty name calling. That being said, this really is a frustrating issue for Alaskans. Our fellow Americans have a lot of really wrong ideas about AK. I've been told I don't live in the US, that we aren't really a state, that we don't get to vote in presidential elections, that it is impossible to use UPS or FedEx to ship things to AK (in spite of the fact that the Anchorage airport is very important freight hub) and so forth. It can get very frustrating to see this misconceptions, such as the whole "continental" thing, which I've personally argued with a shipping department about before. They actually seemed to think Alaska was not on the mainland of North America, possibly due to those stupid maps that we all saw in school that show Alaska in a box off the coast of Mexico. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:23, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Alaska Airlines/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk · contribs) 13:51, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

I am quick-failing this nomination as there are clean-up banners that are obviously still valid, e.g. dead links and citation needed. Some of these date back to January 2010, Articles with dead external links (August 2011, October 2011), Articles with unsourced statements (April 2011, February 2011, January 2010, July 2011, May 2011, October 2011). When this is sorted please re-nominate. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:51, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Dang it, I was afraid this might happen. I wasn't the one that nominated it, but I do agree that the GA nomination was premature. I will take care of removing all the citation neededs and dead links so that this will be a definite good article candidate. Thanks, Compdude¹²³ 15:00, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Alaska Airlines/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jetstreamer (talk · contribs) 20:10, 5 May 2012 (UTC) I told Compdude123 I would add my comments into the peer review of the article some months ago. Given that I never did so, I have now the opportunity to redeem myself with this review.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 20:10, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Overall review

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	No dead links so far.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Original research found here. See below. Original research removed.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	No issues found.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Everything is ok.
	7. Overall assessment.	Article passed

FYI: I have fixed the last dead link left in this article. Since I couldn't find an archived version I replaced it with another website that said the same info. —Compdude¹²³ 04:23, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

History

Early years (1932-1945)

I'll start my review with this first sub-section. At this stage, I'm not checking whether the information is reliably backed by the sources, but will do it soon.

• Given that Wikipedia does not require a minimum number of inline citations for any sentence, information contained in a paragraph that comes from a single source can be put at the end of that paragraph. However, it is not clear where the contents of the second paragraph —consisting of several sentences— comes from. I therefore suggest splitting references 9 and 10 (current version) so as to have each sentence properly referenced. Furthermore, there's an awkward sentence in parenthesis in the middle of the paragraph that can be properly integrated into either the previous sentence or the following one. Much the same consideration can be given to the last paragraph.

 Done – For the second paragraph, I moved the ATW ref (formerly ref 10) up to the part about McGee getting into the mining business. I got rid of the parentheses as well. As for the last paragraph, both refs back up everything in the paragraph so they're fine how they are. —Compdude¹²³ 02:49, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

• Regarding third and fifth paragraphs, I suggest moving the inline citations to the end of each sentence (or paragraph if applicable), bearing in mind the aforementioned considerations.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 01:01, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done —Compdude¹²³ 02:49, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

 Not done I have fixed the references in the last paragraph so as to follow the numbering for the inline citations. It is currently backed by two references, but I still don't know which of them is supporting which sentence (Let me tell you that I haven't checked yet whether the references in the section are properly backed by the sources provided). Is it that the paragraph is supported by both inline citations appearing at its end? Please clarify. In the meantime, I'll jump to the comments for the next sub-section.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 22:36, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Both refs cover all of the info in that paragraph, so they are fine how they are. —Compdude¹²³ 22:56, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done--Jetstreamer ^Talk 10:23, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Expansion after WWII (1945–1949)

• The first sentence of this section is unsourced, while the second one contains two inline citations. Again, I'll ask to split that two references so as to have both sentences properly sourced.

The first citation covers both sentences, but the the second one covers the second sentence. To make that more clear, I copied the first citation to the first sentence. —Compdude¹²³ 23:09, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

• Is it necessary to have “Worldwide charter flights” as a fourth-level heading? In my opinion, wiping it out gives more continuity to the text.

Removed subheading. I agree that it's unnecessary. —Compdude¹²³ 23:09, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

I additionally took the freedom to make some minor improvements to the grammar of this sub-section in order to avoid the repetition of words, wikilinked, etc. Furthermore, I archived some of the references in order to avoid dead links in the future.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 22:36, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

This subsection is also done. I will continue with the review for the next sub-sections below.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 10:23, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

New leadership (1950s)

• The first paragraph is unsourced.

 Done – Added source. —Compdude¹²³ 16:02, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

• Please clarify the following: “That year also saw the CAB award Alaska Airlines with the long-coveted routes from Anchorage and Fairbanks, in Alaska, to Seattle and Portland in the continental United States; this would become permanent in 1957.” I think this needs a rewording, as the main idea is not clear.

 Done – Reworded sentence to read like this: “In 1951, the CAB awarded Alaska Airlines with a temporary certificate allowing them to operate on routes from the Alaskan cities of Anchorage and Fairbanks to Seattle and Portland in the contiguous United States; this award would become permanent in 1957.” —Compdude¹²³ 16:02, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

• I have made some minor changes to the sub-section in order to improve the grammar (avoiding the repetition of the world airline, among other things), and also added a wikilink to the 1950s decade.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 11:05, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

The jet age (1960s)

• Nothing to comment.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 11:05, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
• Reference number 14 states Head Office: 2320 Sixth Av., Seattle, Washington, USA. Nothing is said there about that place being located in Belltown. This is original research unless a proper source is provided supporting that that particular address is in Belltown. The very same assertion can be found in the article for that Seattle's neighbourhood, for which I suspect it was copied as is from that article. Apart from that, is this relevant to the article? I suggest removal.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 11:28, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

 Removed this sentence entirely; I agree that it's irrelevant and unnecessary. —Compdude¹²³ 16:11, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done--Jetstreamer ^Talk 20:20, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Hey are you going to finish reviewing this article? Looking forward to additional comments. Thanks, Compdude¹²³ 04:37, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I will. I'm not plenty of time these days, so please be patient.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 20:38, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Economic hardship (1970s)

• It's hard to find a connection between the first sentence of the paragraph and the following one that deals with the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System (I guess it, though, but it's preferable to have it explicitly stated in the article). I think an additional sentence explaining the reasons that led to the grounding of cargo aircraft will give more readability to the entire sub-section.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 21:28, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done I rephrased the first few sentences of that paragraph. It now reads like this: "However, the airline was not in good financial shape at that time. Like much of the airline industry, Alaska Airlines was hit with rising fuel and operating costs and was on the verge of bankruptcy. Revenues were significantly reduced when work on the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System was delayed. The airline's cargo aircraft had played a key role in building the pipeline, but now sat idle." I also rephrased parts of the first paragraph, too. —Compdude¹²³

Post-deregulation expansion (1978–1990)

• I made some improvements to the grammar and aesthetics, but the sub-section looks fine the way it is. Please check the changes out, as probably there's even a better way to present this information. You're kindly invited to modify any of my changes for the sake of tidiness. In particular, is it correct to state that both Horizon Air and Alaska Airlines are subsidiaries of Alaska Air Group since the former was acquired by the latter?--Jetstreamer ^Talk 12:02, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Horizon Air remained separate from Alaska Airlines, not its parent company Alaska Air Group. I also made some other spelling and grammar fixes to that section. —Compdude¹²³ 15:28, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

New competition, new technologies (1990s)

• Half of the sub-section is unsourced, as the first five paragraphs have no references supporting them.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 23:13, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

 Fixed – The info is from ref 10. To make that more clear, I added more citations to that source at the end of each paragraph. —Compdude¹²³ 23:34, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

• Regarding the paragraph that claims the airline's MD-80 fleet peaked at approximately 45 in 1996: would it be possible to state the exact number of these aircraft by that time?

 Done The airline had a total of 44 MD-80s at that time, according to the ref. —Compdude¹²³ 01:40, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

• In the following paragraph: the airline added another destination in Russia. Which was it?

I don't know; the ref doesn't say. —Compdude¹²³ 01:40, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

 Removed – it's a minor detail that doesn't really need to be included anyway. —Compdude¹²³ 19:35, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

• There's a reference at the middle of this paragraph (<ref name="alaska air group history" />) backing the acquisition of new Boeing 737s. Why is this reference not placed at the end of the corresponding sentence? Is it not supporting the fact that the airline ordered both the Boeing 737-700 and the -900? By the way, it would be of encyclopedic value to say how many of these aircraft were actually ordered, if possible.

 Doing... I found this Seattle Times article and I will include the info once I get the chance. —Compdude¹²³ 01:40, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

 Done – I added that source to the article and also added the number of aircraft ordered. —Compdude¹²³ 19:35, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

• I amalgamated some of the paragraphs to give more continuity to the reading.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 16:12, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Introducing flights across the USA (2000s)

• As per WP:CITEFOOT, I moved references some references to the end of corresponding sentence, and tidied-up the sub-section a bit.
• The introduction of services to Dallas is unsourced, as are the Bellingham, Washington to Hawaii ones. As for the flights to Hawaii, all the cities mentioned were served from Portland, OR, Sacramento, CA, Oakland, CA, and Bellingham, WA? Please clarify.

 Removed mention of Dallas (couldn't find source) as well as Bellingham (not needed). Also removed was the sentence listing all the cities served in Hawaii and cities on mainland USA where service to Hawaii is offered. It seems like a travel guide. I just listed the initial service to Hawaii. —Compdude¹²³ 23:15, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

• To mark which occasion? I placed a {{which}} tag in the text, please clarify.

 Done – Seemed pretty obvious to me, but I clarified it anyway. The Spirit of Seattle was to mark the airline's transition to an all-Boeing fleet. —Compdude¹²³ 00:11, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

• The airline planned to introduced more 737 Combi aircraft towards the end of 2007. Did it do so or not?

Not sure. I wondered the same thing myself but was unable to find any press release regarding additional combi aircraft being introduced. So I have now removed the information. —Compdude¹²³ 00:25, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

• The route map used a reference for Minneapolis–St. Paul, Austin, and the other destinations in the sentence cannot be used, as it does not provide the dates specified in the text.

 Done – Replaced route map ref with actual press releases from the airline's website. —Compdude¹²³ 23:42, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

• The last paragraph says that the airline planned to start flights between San Jose, CA, and Kahuliu and Kona in Hawaii, but it only started a service between Sacramento (not San Jose) and Kahului. Why?

 Fixed – it should say that they announced the service from Sacramento would begin on the specified date; it's more consistent with the ref. —Compdude¹²³ 23:42, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

• Also, the “hub and spoke” sentence is unsourced.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 16:13, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

 Removed sentence. —Compdude¹²³ 23:42, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Now that you're nearly finished reviewing the history section and I've addressed your concerns, (sorry for taking so long with this section) I'm looking forward to additional review of the article and your stamp of GA approval. —Compdude¹²³ 00:32, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Hey, just pointing out that you seemed to have forgotten about the 2010s section. Any critique for that section? Thanks, Compdude¹²³ 05:20, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I actually missed it. Will add it below in a jiffy.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 10:30, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

2010s

• Is it necessary to state that the airline announced a service and also to claim that this service began? In my opinion, to state that the flights started is enough. Apart from that, the only reference provided deals with a future event, but there's no source supporting the actual commencement of these flights.

 Fixed —Compdude¹²³ 02:13, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

• Something similar occurs in the next paragraph. It's claimed that Horizon aircraft would be painted in Alaska's decor. Have they started painting at least one of Horizons' aircraft in Alaska Airline's livery? You may say that an image is included, but I'm afraid that's not enough evidence, according to WP:V.

 Not done – Yes, a lot of their aircraft are painted in the Eskimo livery. I live in Seattle and see Horizon's aircraft fly over my house everyday, and I don't see any that are painted in the old livery. There may be a few painted in that old livery still. I couldn't find any press release mentioning that all of Horizon's aircraft are in the new livery, though. —Compdude¹²³ 02:13, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

• What “ER” means for a Boeing 737-900 (or any other aircraft) is not needed here. Such details can be found at the corresponding aircraft article, so I've removed it and linked the aircraft model.

 Fixed It actually didn't say what "ER" stood for on the Boeing 737 Next Generation article, but I have explained that there. —Compdude¹²³ 02:13, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

• Made some minor copyedit to the paragraph dealing with profits for 2010.
• The paragraph mentioning Facebook does not give due weight to those events that are important to the history of the airline, as the use of biofuel flights really are. I strongly suggest removing the Facebook sentence. I find it completely irrelevant, as most airlines currently have their Facebook profile.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 11:48, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

 Removed facebook stuff. —Compdude¹²³ 02:13, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

• At least a source supporting that the disruptions and new routes mentioned in the last paragraph effectively occurred is also needed. In summary, an announcement that an event will take place is not enough to support it actually occurred. This section needs additional references supporting the occurrence of the events stated. Two good sites for sources are www.centreforaviation.com and atwonline.com.

--Jetstreamer ^Talk 12:38, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

 Fixed – Added press releases that talk about commencement of services. —Compdude¹²³ 02:13, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Corporate affairs

I archived all the references included in the section.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 14:51, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Employees

• According to the source provided, the airline has 2,774 flight attendants, slightly below the 2,800 disclosed in the article. I corrected these figures.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 14:31, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Alaska Airlines Foundation

• Everything is ok. Just added a missing space.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 14:20, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Alaska Air Cargo

• Made a minor correction regarding the version of 737s flown by the airline.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 14:20, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
• The reference provided says nothing about the aforementioned versions of 737s. Please provided a source for this claim. I've tagged the sentence needing sourcing. Nevertheless, I believe this information belongs in the fleet section. Otherwise, a comment should be added pointing out that belly capacity is used on regular passenger flights.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 14:51, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

 Removed mention of aircraft. In its place I mentioned that it has the most extensive cargo operation on the West coast of any passenger airline. —Compdude¹²³ 05:14, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Destinations

• Put the image below the {{Main}} template.
• The first paragraph has two dead links. I have marked one of them, the other was already marked.

 Fixed – With the first ref in that paragraph, the link to the archived page was messed up, but I've fixed that. For the second dead link I just removed that sentence because it was unnecessary.

• The suspension of services to Rusia following the 1998 Russian financial crisis is unsourced.

 Not done – I've had no luck at finding a source for this information. But I don't really want to remove it though. :| —Compdude¹²³ 00:24, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

 Done! I now added a source, with thanks to John Carter (talk · contribs) who provided me with one. You do have to have a HighBeam account to view the whole source, but that's not an issue here. —Compdude¹²³ 22:08, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• The third paragraph is unsourced.

 Already done, but I just forgot to mark it as such. —Compdude¹²³ 22:12, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• The fourth reference announces a future event. As above, the actual occurrence needs sourcing.

 Not done – Again, I couldn't find a source. Sorry. —Compdude¹²³ 00:24, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Let's put a {{fact}} tag to both this an the above unsourced statements for the time being. Not so serious, as long as no additional unsourced statements show up.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 18:20, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

• Added an introductory sentence to the list of codeshare partners
• The last reference doesn't say when both airlines's flights started being part of oneworld Global Explorer fares. A citation is required for that date.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 21:42, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

 Done – Source found. —Compdude¹²³ 00:35, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Fleet

Current fleet

• Made minor changes to comply with WP:ORDINAL
• I have archived the source dealing with the fleet table. Please check that the figures are in accordance with this source, that was updated since the last edit at June 2012.
  • Last time I checked, the source hasn't been updated since June 2012. Since I keep a very close eye on this article, I check that source frequently. —Compdude¹²³ 04:51, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
• I've marked with {{cn-span}} a paragraph that needs sourcing.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 18:11, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

 Done – Source found. —Compdude¹²³ 19:16, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Fleet history

• Made some improvements to the grammar to avoid repetitions, added wikilinks, comply with WP:ORDINAL, etc.
• Much of the content regarding the MD-80s is included in the “History” section. I recommend removal from here.
  • Don't want to remove it entirely, so I'm just going to shorten it. —Compdude¹²³ 23:10, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
• The incorporation of MD-82s via the acquisition of Jet America Airlines is not mentioned in <ref name="md80 retired" />. It is therefore unsourced, as is also in Post-deregulation expansion (1978–1990). Both entries were tagged with {{fact}}.

 Not done – Tried to look for a source but failed. —Compdude¹²³ 04:20, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

The problem I'm having is that many newspaper websites charge money in order to view the full text of articles in their archives. The best that I've found are statements like "Alaska will keep all of Jet America Airlines' MD-80 aircraft" but it never says that the aircraft are MD-82s. —Compdude¹²³ 00:18, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

What about adding {{subscription required}} to that references? No problem in doing that, as long as few of them are included. Are you a subscriber of any of the references you are mentioning?--Jetstreamer ^Talk 00:45, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

No and that's the problem I'm having. I might try Highbeam research's website when I get the chance. —Compdude¹²³ 05:57, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

 Done (sort of) – The best I could find was that they acquired MD-80s, so I modified the text to just say that. Also fixed it in the 1980s section, and added info that Jet America was originally operated as a separate airline, but then merged into Alaska. —Compdude¹²³ 19:39, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

• The Boeing press release included in the last paragraph has been archived. It does not mention many of the claims it is supposed to support for the first sentence, i.e. that the 737-200QCs were able to accomodate 111 passengers in an all-passenger configuration or that the cargo pallets were called "igloos". As for the second sentence of the paragraph, the reference provided briefly describes the 737-200C that was donated to a museum, and nothing is said about replacing them with 737-400 due to fuel inefficiencies. I suggest checking the content of the entire paragraph to comply with the information the two references do include.

 Doing... I got back from a weeklong vacation, and am going on another vacation this weekend. Other than that I have other things in real life that are more important for me to spend time on right now. I will try and fill in the referencing gaps soon. —Compdude¹²³ 04:20, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

 Done —Compdude¹²³ 16:25, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

• Perhaps the tables showing the evolution of the fleet across the years can be merged into a single table that includes all the content currently split in two. This is just a suggestion, and it doesn't have to be implemented. Just consider this comment for future FA nomination.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 15:16, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

I'd rather not do that, just because it would take up more space vertically, and there would be wasted space on the sides of the table. I don't want it to look like this, where so much space is wasted. —Compdude¹²³ 04:20, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

• I hate to sound like a pain, but when will all the comments be added in? We're at the four-month mark for this review now, generally they should only take a couple weeks. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 01:29, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

More comments will be added once my latest ones are addressed. Can you please point out where the review guidelines say that there is a deadline for finishing a review?--Jetstreamer ^Talk 01:48, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Noted. On the time issue, it's less a set in stone issue and more one of common courtesy. If I were to write an article and know it would be reviewed for four months I'd just skip the process. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 02:07, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, is it being reviewed against review guidelines and if so why, that has nothing to do with reviewing GAN's its a disambig page? Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles mentions a lightweight review and a four-month review that is still unfinished does not appear to be lightweight. Pyrotec (talk) 20:31, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm not checking every little detail, but I'm certainly checking for accuracy and verifiability, apart from prose and aesthetics. That's the way I do things, and that's the way I work here at Wikipedia. Sorry for being rude, but I don't see you as a prolific contributor to this particular article; actually, the history page counts no edits from you. I will continue with my review tomorrow. And thanks for pointing out my linking to a disambiguation page: WP:RGA was to be the correct link.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 22:44, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't really mind that it's taking so long, but it'd be nice for the reviewing to go faster. I'm busy in real life right now, and don't have much time to address Jetstreamer's concerns. —Compdude¹²³ 04:23, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Livery

• The first paragraph is unsourced.

 Done – Ref addded. —Compdude¹²³ 16:41, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

• Despite <ref name="AlaskaFleet"> takes the reader to the basic 737-900 fleet information (and not to information related to the whole fleet as expected), it is used several times as a source for special liveries. I suggest adding a new reference for each special livery, if available (as is actually the case). However, doing this does not provide with much of the information stated for each special livery. Just two examples: this reference provides neither the registraton of the aircraft wearing the Spirit of Disneyland II livery nor that it replaced the one worn by a retired 747-400; also, this other reference doesn't back up the fact that the aircraft was painted for the Disneyland Resort's 50th anniversary.

 Done – Better references added. —Compdude¹²³ 02:46, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

• Regarding N792AS, I wouldn't regard a picture from Airliners.net as reliable. It seems that the problem with tail numbers is widespread here, so I suggest the removal of all of them from the article. After all, is it necessary to disclose the tail numbers?

 Done – Tail numbers and Airliners.net reference removed. —Compdude¹²³ 16:41, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

• Three references have been archived (one of them being <ref name="Spirit of Seattle">).--Jetstreamer ^Talk 22:56, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I am really looking forward to your completion of this review and getting the article up to GA status! I hate to be impatient with you and I know you have a life (at least I hope you do :D) outside Wikipedia, but this has taken far too long. Can you please finish up the review sooner rather than later? Thanks, Compdude¹²³ 03:04, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

The article is on the right track to GA status. You guessed well, I'm pretty busy these days. I will continue reviewing tomorrow, time permitting, and hope will finish this review.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 10:16, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Services

On-board meals and beverages

• The first reference of this sub-section takes the reader to the airline's “Food & Beverage service” info, but nothing is said there about a product named Northern Bites or the date it was launched. Furthermore, the “Picnic Packs” mentioned in the article appears in this url, and not in the one included. Is suggest explicitly including every different url needed to support the first paragraph, as the reader should not navigate the only url provided to discover the stuff presented in the page for theirself.

 Fixed, now everything in this section is suitably referenced. —Compdude¹²³ 04:47, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

• I've archived and moved the Starbucks reference. The last sentence of the paragraph including it is unsupported by that source, and has been marked as unsourced accordingly.

The last paragraph actually was supported by the reference. —Compdude¹²³ 04:47, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, you're right. It was fine the way it was.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 12:59, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

On-board entertainment

• I could find nothing related to WAEA in <ref name=alaska-awards />

 Removed <ref name=alaska-awards />. —Compdude¹²³ 04:48, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

• Two references have been archived.
• The last paragraph was relocated.
• A dead link was marked.

 Removed the dead link, since there was a ref there already. —Compdude¹²³ 04:48, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

On-board internet access

• Where in reference <ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gogoinflight.com/gogo/splash.do?execution=e1s1 |title=Gogo Inflight Internet |publisher=Gogoinflight.com |date=November 18, 2010 |accessdate=August 22, 2011| archiveurl= http://web.archive.org/web/20110711104155/http://www.gogoinflight.com/gogo/splash.do?execution=e1s1| archivedate= 11 July 2011 <!--DASHBot-->| deadurl= no}}</ref> does Alaska Airlines come into play?

 Fixed by replacing with a reference to the actual press release on the website. —Compdude¹²³ 05:06, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

• I cannot find anything related to Row44 in the reference provided for that sentence. Furthermore, please check the tense of the entire first paragraph.

 Removed that ref; completely irrelevant to the text. —Compdude¹²³ 16:32, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

• An unsourced claim has been marked with a {{fact}} tag.

 Removed sentence with the unsourced claim. —Compdude¹²³ 16:32, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

• Three references have been archived.

Lounge

• I could not verify the claim that Delta Sky Club members have access to Alaska's Board Room lounges, so it has been tagged with {{FV}}. The corresponding reference has been archived.

 Removed —Compdude¹²³ 23:53, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

This is not the end of this review as I intended to be, but at least another entire section has been passed through the process.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 23:54, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Okay, what's the status here? Reviews are supposed to take only 2 weeks. This is quickly approaching 5 months. --Rschen7754 06:30, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Supposed to take two weeks? Can you please point out where is that written at? My time is limited these days. I will continue with the review as soon as I have the time to do so.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 10:43, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

"Read the whole article, and decide whether it should pass or fail based on the Good article criteria. You can also put the article "on hold" or ask for a second opinion. The review process itself should take, at most, two weeks." WP:GAN. --Rschen7754 17:13, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Despite taking a look at WP:GAN several times, I completely missed that. Thanks for poiting it out. I've finished my review today.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 22:49, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Mileage Plan

• The section includes too much information, so detailed that it looks like a travel guide. I suggest some cleanup so that it includes the essential information related to the mileage plan of the company and their partners. In my opinion, the first paragraph is enough.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 17:54, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

 Done – Shortened this section to two paragraphs. —Compdude¹²³ 00:15, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Club 49

• Same comment as above. Is it that important to know the number of free checked baggage for an encyclopedia's article? Please do some cleanup to this sub-section as well.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 17:57, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

 Done —Compdude¹²³ 00:15, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Incidents and accidents

• Suggest changing the name of the section to ″Accidents and incidents″

 Done —Compdude¹²³ 00:42, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

• It would be great for the section to have an introduction, including a summary of the number of fatalities for all the deadly events, disclosing the number of aircraft that were written off, etc.

 Done —Compdude¹²³ 00:42, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

• The {{further}} at the top of the section has been removed, as all the articles within that template are wikilinked in their corresponding entries.
• Can the text put in quotations marks for some of the occurrences be written in prose?

 Not done – Not sure how else to write the text in a way that wouldn't look like I was copying it. —Compdude¹²³ 00:42, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

• Made a WP:ORDINAL fix
• Cleaned up the references and used {{ASN accident}} where appropriate.
• A reference have been archived.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 17:39, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

I will put the article on hold until my latest comments are addressed. Almost five months later, this concludes the review.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 18:02, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Yay, we're done!!! Finally!! —Compdude¹²³ 00:42, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

The article is now in condition to be promoted. There are still some issues, but they can be addressed later if the article is eventually nominated for FA status. Congratulations!--Jetstreamer ^Talk 00:50, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Woohoo! Finally, it's done: my first Good article! So glad that this is done, and I'm sure this will be the first of many good articles I promote. Let me know if you want me to do a GA review in the future, I'd be happy to do so. I promise I won't take so long. —Compdude¹²³ 01:12, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Peer Review for this article

Hello, I have started a peer review for Alaska Airlines right here. I have done a lot of work on this article over the past year or so, and would love it if someone other than myself gave it some critique before I (eventually) promote it to GA status and even go so far as to promote it to FA status, though this peer review will probably be the beginning of continual improvements to this article; I bet it still has a long ways to go before a GA review takes place. Anyone is welcome to take a look and review this article; long or short, all of your comments are appreciated. Don't post any comments here; please post them on the review so I can see all your comments on this article. Thanks, Compdude123 (talk) 05:42, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Peer review has now been archived and closed due to lack of comments. —Compdude¹²³ 17:05, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Does Alaska have focus cities? Source Needed...

I thought Alaska Airlines didn't have any focus cities. But apparently I am wrong because certain IP users keep adding them. Please provide a reliable source proving that Alaska Airlines has focus cities if you want to add them. Otherwise your edits will be reverted. This article is currently undergoing a good article review so it's especially important that anything likely to be challenged must be sourced. If you're unsure how to format it, it's okay to just put a link here and I can format the reference correctly. Again, you must have a source before adding the focus cities. Thanks, Compdude¹²³ 16:52, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Proof for Maui, Honolulu Focus city

In the airline industry, a focus city is a location that is not a hub, but from which the airline has non-stop flights to several destinations other than its hubs. Other terms with equivalent meaning are "minor hub", "mini-hub", "hublet", "key city", or "base." The term 'focus city' was originally used by various US airlines as a marketing term to promote operations at secondary destinations in the 1990's; however, widespread usage has greatly expanded the definition. There is no evidence of any regular use of the term by non-US airlines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 32.177.227.208 (talk) 16:53, 11 June 2012 (UTC) 209.183.55.115 (talk) 20:33, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

32.177.227.208 (talk) 16:59, 11 June 2012 (UTC) NOTE Definition of Focus City, along with Alaska Air . Com Route Map of Hawaii Schedules.

Okay but can you please find a source saying that? Your comments seem like original research which isn't accepted on wikipedia. Please paste a web address below that explicitly says that Alaska Airlines has sources. Thanks, Compdude¹²³ 17:05, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

PS. Compdude, Please don't threaten me as I mentioned on your talk page, I am not invested in this as much as you in terms of a Greek or Geek lifestyle. Focus cities interpretations are not set in stone in any way. There are 4 Hawaiian island Alaska destination that they serve with routes that meet Focus City criteria... I only included two, as the other two were debatable. 32.177.227.208 (talk) 17:32, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Anything likely to be challenged needs to be sourced, and this is no exception. This page on Alaska's website says that the airline has hubs in "Seattle (main hub); Anchorage, Alaska; Los Angeles; Portland, Ore." It says nothing about focus cities. Therefore, AS does not officially have them. We generally go with what the airline says. The airline knows what its hubs/ focus cities are better than anyone else. —Compdude¹²³ 01:23, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Article of interest

Here's an article of interest for the article.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 13:13, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Hawaii service livery

It should be noted that The native on the tail of Alaska Airlines aircraft certified to fly to Hawaii wears a leigh, and tropical drinks are complimentary on all flights to and from hawaii. My source is this: http://www.flyertalk.com/the-gate/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/alaska737-800leitail.jpg 216.67.3.61 (talk) 18:08, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

This is not considered as notable, Wikipedia isnt a travel guide. Also the source inst credible. --JetBlast (talk) 18:21, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

The livery should be mentioned because there is an extensive list of different liviries, none of which mention the leigh. 216.67.3.61 (talk) 21:47, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

It was mentioned before, but I removed it because I couldn't find a source proving that 18 B738s had the lei on the tail. This article is under GA review, and I had to make sure everything was sourced. And if a source couldn't be found, I was forced to remove the info. —Compdude¹²³ 05:05, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Also the word "livery" should not appear in the article. That is not a word used in Alaska. Aircraft is a better word. Apteva (talk) 02:49, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

That doesn't really matter. The word "livery" is a commonly used word in aviation-speak to refer to the paint job of an airline's aircraft. —Compdude¹²³ 04:11, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Eskimo face redux

I previously had issues with the following line:

There are numerous anecdotes linking the Eskimo face wearing a parka to different celebrities, including once to Chester Seveck by an Alaskan senator.

I see that it's since been removed from the article. However, I finally found the time to do a NewsBank search and came up with the Seattle P-I article in question: Gapay, Les (January 12, 1988). "Many frown over possible removal of Alaska Airlines' smiling Eskimo face". Seattle Post-Intelligencer. p. B5. The second session of the 15th Alaska State Legislature had convened the day before, with Senator Tim Kelly of Anchorage sponsoring a resolution urging Alaska Airlines not to remove the Eskimo face and replace it with a logo resembling a mountain, as a design firm hired by the airline proposed at the time. The remaining 19 senators signed on as co-sponsors of the resolution (though, as a current member of the legislature told me last month, this practice is more symbolic than anything else). An airline employee in Seattle was quoted as saying "We like our happy face". "Happy face," tied into the Eskimo logo, was the hook for their advertising at the time.

The newsletter (Alaska Airlines company newsletter of November 6, 1987) said some customers have had trouble figuring out that the picture on the planes is an Eskimo and it was difficult to use the logo in small size on stationery. Also, Alaska Airlines flies to California and the Southwest and some potential customers there have a perception the airline flies only within Alaska, says Kennedy...Kennedy also says the airline for years has gotten comments from passengers that the Eskimo face looks like Charles Manson, Moammar Gadhafi, Johnny Cash or Willie Nelson. Comedian Jay Leno on the Johnny Carson show has joked about the face.

The "Alaskan senator" which the deleted text was actually referring to was Willie Hensley, who represented Kotzebue, which was also the hometown of Chester Seveck. A brief aside into aviation history: Hensley was appointed by Governor Steve Cowper to replace Frank Roslyn Ferguson, who resigned his Senate seat in late 1986 due to ill health. Frank Ferguson was the son of legendary pilot Archie Ferguson and was himself a pilot. Anyway, Hensley's response to Kennedy's claims was, that if this really was true, "they're going to have to do a better job of advertising". Here's the clincher, another quote from Hensley:

Sen. Hensley says the Eskimo face is that of the late Chester Seveck, "a reindeer herder and a phenomenal Eskimo dancer" who greeted deplaning tourists at Kotzebue for years. "His face is a symbol of Alaska".

I would consider that to be more than just an anecdote, though it still makes it impossible to confirm one way or the other. Those in the know in Alaska generally regard this to be fact, however. The article also contained various other quotes from Kelly and Hensley, Anchorage Daily News columnist Satch Carlson, artist Byron Birdsall, and mentioned that the Alaska media was covering the issue fairly extensively. The article also carried a photo of planes parked at Sea-Tac with the Eskimo face logo, along with a photo showing the proposed new logo.

---

Based upon that, the reference to Bill Ray and "State of Alaska Airlines" wasn't relevant to this discussion. However, I do have a copy of Ken Fanning's book with the aforementioned cartoon by John Manly. I'm very far behind with image uploads at the moment, all the while taking more photos. I suppose you would have to see it yourself to say one way or the other, but does anyone think it would make for a good fair use image? Also, when I do get around to my upload backlog, I have a photo of the airline's offices at TSAIA I will include. RadioKAOS (talk) 22:24, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

• Added the information to this article. Thanks as always, Compdude¹²³ 16:34, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

A perhaps significant omission

The one source I consulted (Elizabeth Tower's history of Anchorage) was sketchy on details, but it appears that Alaska Airlines owned Alyeska Resort for approximately a decade, and ran the resort for several years prior to buying it. I believe in total, this covered the period of 1967 to 1980, when the resort was sold to a Japanese concern named Seibu. Back in the days when Anchorage touted itself as "The Air Crossroads of The World", the alphabet soup of international airlines (e.g. JAL/KLM/SAS/etc.) were prodded by Robert Atwood to help publicize the resort, which put it on the map enough to make it a viable entity. I'm not sure if there were other factors related to Alaska Airlines becoming involved, but surely this has been mentioned in other sources. RadioKAOS  – Talk to me, Billy 20:40, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Occasional name confusion

Added the noteworthy, yet previously missed, fact that many people refer to this airlines as Alaskan Airlines (versus Alaska without the "n"). Source in point, ABC News. Additional sources? Just go to any airport Alaska Airlines serves and talk to the flying public. Or Google search it. But alas, if I didn't source it from a media segment it would have been dismissed as hearsay and thus deleted. Even though it's true. 71.102.15.47 (talk) 22:54, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

I'll ref a couple. Ssredg (talk) 03:23, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Honestly, I've never heard anyone refer to it as "Alaskan" or "Alaskan Airlines." I think it's more common to hear people refer to the airline as "Alaska Air" or simply "Alaska." —Compdude¹²³ 22:27, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

A visit to the the FlyerTalk forums will demonstrate otherwise. These flyers are hard-core ultra-frequent, and so they've seen and heard it all. But alas, such forums aren't acceptable sources even though they should be, if we are to follow the same principles as oral history. Luckily, I found two blaring quotes from official company sites. Some people are just careless with words sometimes; "Malaysian" for "Malaysia (Airlines)," "detail-orientated instead of "detail-oriented," etc. 71.102.15.47 (talk) 09:24, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Another new livery design

I noticed those Bombardier turboprops flying in and out of FAI a few times here and there, but I never had a good look at one until I passed through there this morning. Even though it was a faint peek through the perimeter fence, I noticed that the plane was painted with an Alaska Nanooks livery. Surely this was publicized and a source can be found? RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 17:57, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

It must be another special Horizon Air livery. Horizon has many aircraft painted with the colors and logo of universities in the Pacific NW. Since the Q400 turboprops are really operated by Horizon Air, this should be mentioned on that page provided a reliable source can be found. —Compdude¹²³ 17:44, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

lead sentence

I tweaked the lead, from Alaska Airlines is the nation's seventh largest airline based in the Seattle suburb of SeaTac, Washington, in the United States. because:

• It presumes the reader is in the united states
• It reads as though there are six larger airlines based in SeaTac, when really it is the seventh largest in the US.

--kelapstick^(bainuu) 14:11, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

I have tweaked it slightly. MilborneOne (talk) 15:37, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Maintenance issues prior to Flight 261 crash

After watching Air Crash Investigations episode of Flight 261 I like to browse wikipedia for additional information. and I have noticed something disturbing, that the history section of Alaskan Airlines wikipedia page completely whitewashes the maintenance issues that led to the crash.

This is not just a problem on the Alaskan Airlines page but of Wikipedia and airlines pages in general. I liked it better when wikipedia had a "controversy" section where you can basically see all the controversial incidents.

Sure at the bottom of the page it has a "Flight 261" crash section but I disagree that that is enough.

The end of the "1990s" history section should really read something along the lines: Yes they were making huge profits, but at the expense of cutting Maintenance which led to the Flight 261 crash.

Also another edit "I believe" is warranted would be a short paragraph or sentence on John Liotine, the whistleblower who blew the lid on Alaskan Airlines maintenance but got treated extremely badly (as expected) by Alaskan Airlines.

What does everyone else (that isn't an employee of AA) think?

202.89.165.64 (talk) 20:27, 26 August 2014 (UTC)Random Internet Guy

Quickly, over-reliance on complimentary sources which aren't too far removed from press releases and other whitewashed "official disinformation" tends to be a pervasive problem in general on Wikipedia, as you allude to. However, did you notice that the crash has its own article which gives significant space to the investigation of the plane's maintenance issues? Here's a portion of that: "Between 1985 and 1996 Alaska Airlines progressively increased the period in between both jackscrew lubrication and end play checks with the approval of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)". Reminds me of the Exxon Valdez oil spill, where most folks automatically blamed Exxon and failed to read (or, in some cases, refused to read) information on how the feds were complicit there, too. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 20:54, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

-Yes... thats why i said at the bottom their is a link/small paragraph alluding to Flight 261. -As stated again above. it should be reflected in its 1990s history -In reference to jackscrew issue. Yes I've read that part; Alaska Airlines and FAA were both just as responsible. My rebuttal is as I brought up the john Liotine whistleblower point, a large part of the blame should be blamed on Alaska Airlines, or even acknowledgement of the issues that lead to the crash!! Good Airlines go above minimum safety!

And last point, as stated again above-Why can't "controversy sections" be brought back. I loved reading the counterpoints to the rest of the article, brings more "balance" --202.89.165.64 (talk) 11:33, 27 August 2014 (UTC)Random Internet Guy

"Eskimo Face" redux (again)

Suggested Edit to Article:

Although Alaska Airlines officially denies that it is a depiction of any particular person, evidence suggests that it is an image of Oliver Amouak, leader of a native dance troupe used by the airline in the early 1970s to promote tourism interest in Alaska.

Brenda Ritchey wrote a fairly compelling book ("Know the Happy Face", available on Amazon) attempting to substantiate her claim that the face was Amouak's. The above edit does not say that it IS Amouak. It simply says that there is evidence to suggest it. An interesting read for sure. In a nutshell: Amouak and his wife led a native dance troupe that was sent on tour by Alaska Airlines to nearly 100 cities in the early 1970s. He was commonly featured for PR in parka, mukluks, etc. and was the chosen "face" of the airline for a long time. Under the circumstances, it would at least make sense why Alaska would choose his image.

In the archived talk section, I saw that there was also anecdotal evidence that it could have been Kotzebue dancer Chester Seveck. It is not my place to say which has more evidence or to try to prove it is one or the other. I'm just saying it should be mentioned that there are in fact a couple of possibilities and there is evidence to support either. Why? This question has been asked in many computer forums over the years. If someone's research leads them here, they should at least be able to walk away with a couple of possibilities.

The statement "There is evidence to support..." is both relevant and factual, particularly with a citation for the evidence. Xpofer (talk) 08:48, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

flight plan change from GTF, Montana

Thank you for dropping the Helena stop from the GTF flight to Seattle, it has always felt wrong calling that a non-stop flight when we fly 15 minutes in the wrong direction and land to pick up more passengers. Actually made my connection in Seattle due to the new change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.220.13.38 (talk) 15:34, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

SeaTac minimum wage

Should there be a section, "controversies" maybe, detailing how the Airline has fought the minimum wage increases of SeaTac and Seattle, and for a time refused to comply with the increase?

Sure. The minimum wage law will backfire and the efforts of a major employer within the city of SeaTac (Alaska Airlines) should be highlighted so that people are informed. Wikipedia, imperfect as it may be, is a prime source of information for potential voters. If readers can be made aware of the pitfalls that arise when misguided minimum wage laws are implemented, that can not be anything but positive - unless you are a liberal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.38.35.162 (talk) 19:06, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Seventh largest airline

According to this article, Alaska is the sixth largest airline in the US. It is #7 in North America, because Air Canada is #5.Avman89 (talk) 02:10, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Its not particularly notable and doesnt need to be in the lead. MilborneOne (talk) 11:24, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Why not? 108.38.35.162 (talk) 19:07, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Because it is just trivia and not encyclopedic. MilborneOne (talk) 19:25, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Fleet for 2010

Alaska Airlines has the history for the past 40 years in March, the Fleet of March 2010 needs to be added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kentwood18 (talk • contribs) 16:49, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Los Angeles hub

There seems to be somewhat of an edit war surrounding the question if Los Angeles is still a hub for Alaska. The current reference (dated June 2016) lists "Seattle; Anchorage, Alaska; Portland, Ore." as hubs. But as an another editor tried to point out, a more recent source (dated September 2016) says "With hubs in Anchorage, Alaska, Los Angeles and Portland, Oregon; Alaska calls Seattle home." So my question is, are there any published sources saying explicitly that Los Angeles is no longer a hub for Alaska? --RickyCourtney (talk) 18:22, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

References

I was one of the editors who helped get this article to GA status back in 2012. I've been rather dismayed ever since to see so little effort given to further significant improvements, instead seeing a lot of emphasis on minor details of questionable lasting value, something that's been pretty typical of coverage of a lot of aviation-related topics. The most obvious thing I notice about this is that I've only seen primary sources used by either side of the argument. If third-party sources aren't acknowledging it, is it really that crucial to include the information? That reason is given at plenty of other places on the encyclopedia to justify obvious omissions, including in other GAs. Moreover, to echo the response given in a previous thread, does it lean more towards encyclopedic or trivial? Does it help our encyclopedic presentation of the airline or does it help the article appear to be a part of the airline's social media strategy? As I'm reading it right now, the lead section and infobox don't appear to reflect the article body as much as they appear to promote the airline. This seems to make the presumption that people don't actually read the whole article, only the top of it, and therefore there's some sort of need to push this information as important. Also, I see plenty of holes in the airline's history beyond what I've previously mentioned. I simply fail to see the importance of this, so help me out here. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 00:02, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps a more important issue: photos

Recently, I scanned 75 pages from the Talking Totem, the airline's in-house publication, covering portions of the period between 1961 and 1970. Not only were these published without copyright notices, but the mastheads of most of them specifically carry the legend "All material may be reproduced without special permission". Sounds to me like it fits within the definition of free content. There's scores of photos among these pages. The problem I see: one only need look around and see how obvious it is that aviation-minded Wikimedians are fascinated with planes, particularly big planes. A while back, I went through every revision of Fairbanks International Airport. Tons and tons of editing activity reflecting short-shelf-life information and more fascination with big planes. Not a single mention of Ronald Reagan and Pope John Paul II having met there with 10,000+ people in attendance, despite the fact that a New York Times article which mentions the airport in its second sentence comes up pretty close to the top of the simplest Google search. This sort of POV prevails throughout aviation-related articles.

The photos I've scanned present a far more multi-faceted look at the airline than what the article, Commons page or Commons category currently presents. I don't know about anyone else, but I would think that images such as a group of students from the Southern College of Engineering & Technology studying as apprentice mechanics at Paine Field, the airline's "Tall Lady" (an employee who walked on stilts to wave to arriving passengers seated on the plane) being interviewed on TV Tokyo, or John Wayne being served a cup of coffee by a flight attendant while enroute to Sitka, would be of far greater value than yet another photo of a 737. As images such as those go contrary to the prevailing POV, and since Upload Wizard is an often counterproductive pain in the ass, I would like to hear input before I go to such trouble. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 00:10, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

More to Love image

With the acquisition of Virgin America, a new aircraft with specialized livery has been introduced to the fleet, dubbed "More to Love". Could our project participants keep a weather eye out for that plane, so that we may perhaps get an original image? It would be greatly appreciated. DARTHBOTTO _talk•cont 02:53, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Fleet size

The number of aircraft listed in the fleet doesn't match the information on the Alaska Airlines website. Are we using reliable sources to determine the fleet size, or original research based on synthesizing primary data from Alaska, Boeing, etc? In my opinion, we should only include counts which are confirmed by reliable sources, such as the airline itself or a newspaper. Pburka (talk) 21:12, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

As there have been no objections, I've restored the fleet numbers which match those reported by the airline's website. If you change a number, please update the reference so that other users can verify the change. Please do not delete references (leaving the numbers unreferenced), or make changes which aren't reflected in the cited sources. Pburka (talk) 00:35, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

livery

There could be a better description of the liveries.

1. Pre-eskimo.

2. Eskimo, Miner, Russian, Igloo. Later only the Eskimo version.

3. Eskimo smiling, K cutting in to the last A (up to 2015)

4. interim 3 (K doesn't cut into the last A)

5. current livery Vanguard10 (talk) 20:49, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Fleet size?

The fleet size reference [4] shows 153 aircraft for Alaska air ... but there are additional aircraft for Virgin and Horizon. Shouldn't these aircraft be added to the total, since the merger was completed more than a year ago? -- Mikeblas (talk) 15:49, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Reconfigured?

What's with all the "Aircraft currently being reconfigured with new seats and decor." in the notes in the fleet table. I'm sure the Virgin planes are getting a makeover, but except for some mood lighting, no 737s were supposed to be reconfigured. I see no sources given, and in any case, the "currently being reconfigured" message doesn't have to be repeatedly made for every aircraft type; just once in the body text would do.Mirza Ahmed (talk) 06:04, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

737 Max

AS converted 15 out of 20 MAX 8 0rders to MAX 9. However, the article says that there are no MAX 8 orders left. I think that if there are orders, they should be included — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.95.2.221 (talk) 18:12, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Agreed. Do you have a reliable source which is reporting that there are outstanding orders? Pburka (talk) 00:13, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

The order book on Boeing's website is only updated monthly, and the latest update is from March. We'll have to wait a while to get the updates for May. The FlightGlobal article seems to be implying there were only 15 Max 8 orders to begin with, but other sources (Boeing and Alaska's websites) have always said 20. Mirza Ahmed (talk) 01:08, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Actually, it seems like the Max 8 order has been cancelled in favor of only Max 9s. If you go to http://www.boeing.com/commercial/#/orders-deliveries and click the "Report by Customer" button and select Alaska, the report generated shows 32 Max 9s on order and no Max 8s. I'm satisfied that that is the current state of the order book. Mirza Ahmed (talk) 01:19, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Someone keeps deleting the latest horizon incident, it should be on this page.

I had it all written out, took me hours. A couple hours later some idiot decides to delete the whole thing. Collynwallace (talk) 01:02, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I think that Star Air Service should be merged into Alaska Airlines. This current article starts Alaska Air at the McGee/Star Air point in 1932, makes sense to consider Alaska Air just continuation of that company, as is really already dones here, minus some details (to be incorporated) from the Star Air article. Doprendek (talk) 17:19, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose. The two are distinct the same way as Varney Air Lines and United Airlines are distinct and have their own pages. Mirza Ahmed (talk) 18:23, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

• @Avman89: WP:OTHER – Other articles exist. Though I oppose this nom., maybe Varney should be merged with United? Redditaddict69 ^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:28, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose Both articles are quite lengthy, we don't need an even longer article (WP:SIZESPLIT). funplussmart (talk) 02:36, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose – Star Air Service seems to be notable and is also too lengthy for a merging of almost all or all of the content. Though it later became (part of) the now-Alaska Airlines, S.A.S. played a significant role in Pacific Northwest Aviation in the 1930s and the Great Depression. Redditaddict69 ^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:28, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Alaska Airlines was first registered in 1937 in Alaska as Star Air Lines (Inc.) which the pronunciation was later changed to Star Airlines (Inc.). 1937 could be the establishment of Alaska Airlines, but the first incorporation of a company is not always the official establishment of a company.Granthew (talk) 02:23, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

References

Flight 3296 crash Oct 19, 2019

It must be listed in this article. Look at Unalaska Airport article. In that article, it lists ALASKA AIRLINES as flying to Anchorage, not PenAir. Wikipedia must be neutral and consistent. If Unalaska Airport article is changed to "Alaska Airlines, operated by PenAir", then not listing the crash here is ok. If we don't list the crash here but say in the Unalaska Airport article that Alaska flies to Anchorage, we are being biased. Let's be fair and consistent! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alaskapedic (talk • contribs) 03:27, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

In my opinion, it should not be listed in the Alaska Airlines article.

Firstly, the standard for airport articles on Wikipedia is to list the marketing carrier, not the regional carriers who fly under contract with airlines via capacity purchase agreements. Refer to WP:WikiProject_Airports/page_content#Airlines_and_destinations. So airport articles such as Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, Detroit Metropolitan Airport, etc. do not list regional carriers such as Horizon Air, SkyWest Airlines, Republic Airways, etc. They only list the main carriers they operate under contract to such as Alaska, Delta, United, American, etc. This is why PenAir would not have been listed in the Unalaska Airport article.

Secondly, airline articles do not list accidents of flights that were operated by regional carriers under contract, even if tickets for the entire flight were marketed and sold by them. This was the case with PenAir Flight 3296. Notable examples include Colgan Air Flight 3407 which is not listed under Continental Airlines, Comair Flight 3272 and Comair Flight 5191 are not listed under Delta Air Lines.

Therefore, for consistency, flight 3296 should be removed from the Alaska Airlines article.

Jdubman (talk) 02:03, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Ben Minicucci

Hi, I am a vice president with Nyhus Communications and Alaska Airlines is one of our clients. Ben Minicucci is the current president of Alaska Airlines and incoming CEO, starting next week.

We believe that, per Wikipedia’s guidelines regarding notability and verifiable sources, Minicucci is fit to have his own page. I would like to offer edits to this article to reflect relevant information. Due to the potential conflict of interest, I hope to create a conversation around the status of this page with the community. Please reach out with questions and/or comments. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Talking1200 (talk • contribs) 2021-03-26T21:25:58 (UTC)

Moved from Talk:Ben Minicucci

 – ~ Aseleste (t, e | c, l) 06:23, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

All,

Thank you for reading. The CEO transition is official and Alaska has new leadership. Regarding the above request, I have brief biographical edits for Ben Minicucci's personal page that fit with Wikipedia's notability and verifiability guidelines.

I look forward to discussing how we can quickly update Wikipedia's content on the topic so that visitors receive the most accurate experience. Thanks.

References

Talking1200 (talk) 17:59, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

• Talking1200, If you'd like to start an article about Minicucci the right place to start it is Article wizard and typing in Ben Minicucci. There's no changes to be made to this article (Alaska Airlines) as it already lists Minicucci as the CEO. (t · c) buidhe 04:09, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Css

Was there a crash land on 12/04/2021 2600:1700:DB60:1710:582C:E5A7:1EAF:B520 (talk) 11:54, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

"Alaska Airlines picketing incident" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Alaska Airlines picketing incident and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 2#Alaska Airlines picketing incident until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:15, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Alaska Air Mileage Plan image

That image has always struck me as being out-of-place, like an old advertisement that somebody forgot to take down, like a Pepsi machine featuring The Phantom Menace. Does its presence really enhance this page? BOTTO _(T•C) 21:08, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Feel free to WP:BOLDly remove it if you think it doesn't enhance the page (I've no strong opinion either way), but I'll note that the image itself is in the public domain because it's below the threshold of originality, so the image doesn't seem to be problematic from an WP:NFCC standpoint. Mz7 (talk) 20:12, 11 March 2023 (UTC)