Talk:BA CityFlyer

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion not met Supporting materials: criterion not met

This article is supported by the airline project.

Greater Manchester Low‑importance

	Greater Manchester portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greater Manchester, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greater Manchester on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Greater ManchesterWikipedia:WikiProject Greater ManchesterTemplate:WikiProject Greater ManchesterGreater Manchester articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Embraer E-Jet family#E190|Embraer 190]]

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Cityflyer/CityFlyer

Use User:Christopher_Card has changed all the references in WIkipedia and this article from BA Cityflyer to BA CityFlyer. I am tempted to change it back ! as the Operating Licence has Cityflyer Express Limited trading as BA Cityflyer and it refered to as Cityflyer on the British Airways website. Just thought can anybody provide a citation for the change. CityFlyer Express. MilborneOne 20:38, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History

Have reformulated this paragraph because there seems to be a widespread misconception among Wikipedians that defunct CityFlyer Express was a part of BA's former regional operation. CityFlyer Express never was part of BA's regional operation in its various guises, i.e. BA Regional, BA CityExpress or BA Connect. Instead, BA subsumed its erstwhile wholly owned CityFlyer Express subsidiary into its short-haul Gatwick mainline operation as part of its reorganisation at London's second airport in the wake of recording its first-ever full-year loss at the turn of the millennium.

User:Pimpom123 17.25 GMT

Non-notable incident

The recent minor incident to a BA CityFlyer aircraft at LCY does not warrant inclusion in this encyclopedic article as it does not meet the criteria defined at WP:AIRLINES, namely that:

Accidents or incidents should only be included if:

The event was fatal to either aircraft occupants or persons on the ground;
The event involved hull loss or serious damage to the aircraft or airport;
The event resulted in changes to procedures, regulations or processes affecting airports, airlines or the aircraft industry

These guidelines were introduced in order to avoid airline and airport articles becoming cluttered with minor, non-notable (and ultimately non-encyclopedic) incidents. Remember that verifiability does not equal notability. Please do not re-include the incident before discussing the issue here so what we can come to consensus on the issue. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 20:28, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree that the incident is not notable but note also the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BA CityFlyer Flight 8456. MilborneOne (talk) 20:39, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I'll agree maybe it isn't notable, but I felt it was. I'll nomitate it for deletion if it is kept on BA CityFlyer article as it is some rather good information to know, and to be honest this article does need more things and something like this is worth mention. So if I add some references etc, can we have it on here please? Thank You. Zaps93 (talk)22:02, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would it qualify on the basis that "It is the first or worst accident for a particular airline ~~or airliner~~."? Wikipedia:AIRCRASH#Accidents_notability Or is BA Cityflyer just part of BA in which case, it's not notable - indeed it's possible that the Cityflyer web page should be merged with BA? 84.9.32.224 (talk) 23:59, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My personal feeling is that this certainly would justify mention in the airline's article - where it is detailed already - but that it doesn't necessarily justify a separate article. AKRadecki^Speaketh 02:00, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it is otherwise a minor incident which doesn't need an article. Indeed, the BBC call BA Cityflyer "British Airways" (they fly a BA Logo, colours and brand) and this article doesn't actually contain anything of substance. The question is really if this is a seperate airline worthy of an article or if it's just another paragraph in the BA article (minus the minor incident). 84.9.32.224 (talk) 09:25, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Baemb1.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Baemb1.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations

What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 18:50, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on BA CityFlyer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:36, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edinburgh Base

Hi Guys,

I have heard from a couple BA City-flyer Pilots that Edinburgh is a base for them. Not just for A/C but for Pilots and Cabin Crew too. I went about adding this to this BA CityFlyer page.

Obviously word of mouth cannot be used as a reasonable backup for my edit but I went and got a reference for this which I put in with my edit.

Despite this, I have had my edit reverted several times now. Can someone please explain why? Seems strange.

Here is a list of links I have used: http://www.airlineportal.org/ba-city.htm https://www.aviationjobsearch.com/job/first-officers-e-jet-series-1/2838978 https://www.jobapplications.co.uk/ba-cityflyer-application/

And many others too!

I look forward to hearing back from others on this.

Flyingmaneasy (talk) 18:19, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Flyingmaneasy: you might get more help regarding the quality of your sources here. Garretka (talk) 19:59, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]