Talk:Blue Grass Airport

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 met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the airport project.

United States: Kentucky Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Kentucky portal This article is supported by WikiProject Kentucky (assessed as Low-importance).

Runways

The proper numbering of the runways:

08/26 and  26/08

04/22 and  22/04

Should the multi runways be parallel the modifying letters "R" and "L" will be added to corresponding runway numbers.

FAA Airport Advisory regulations.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.62.251.246 (talk • contribs) 2006-08-28T11:18:06

Ok, but what is your point? Thanks/wangi 10:21, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The proper numbering of the runways:

8/26 and  26/08  or  runway  8  and runway 26 

4/22 and  22/04  or  runway   4  and runway 22

Such are official AIRFIELD markings in complianmce with FAA.

Should the multi runways be parallel the modifying letters "R" and "L" will be added to corresponding runway numbers.

FAA Airport Advisory regulations.

DO NOT correect what you are alleging REDUNDANT numbers if you do not understand AIRPORT safety operation.

Altough the AIRPORT has only two (2) runways in reality from the operational point there are 4 runways depending on weather (wind) conditions.

The runways therefore are for runway 8/26 there are two (2) runways one knowm as 8 and other as 26 for runway 4/22 there are two (2) runways one runway 4 and one 22.

For people in AIRPORT operations that is a clear and only numbering system, for laiks it doesn't mean a crap!

If you do not understand AIRPORT markings stay a way from any corrections and leave it to peope who understand the international Airfield markings!

DO NOT VANDALIZE the articles.

Can you please rephrase your concerns - giving examples in the article where you beleive things are incorrect. Please be civil, and assume good faith. Thanks/wangi 10:40, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote [1] refers to a 2002 crash of a Learjet, not the Comair Canadair crash.

Runways again

The image of the airport has two runways labeled as "04" and "08". These labels are incorrect, as runways in the United States do not have the leading zeros. The runway labels should be "4" and "8". The article lists the runways correctly, so the image is 1) inconsistent with the rest of the article, and 2) just flat-out wrong. I'm going to remove the image. If someone could do us the favor of uploading a corrected image, that would be ideal. In the interests of using sourced information and accuracy, please do not restore the incorrectly labeled image. 65.127.231.6 08:55, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are splitting hairs, and making a point... Please do not. I will update the image when I get the chance (as in gasp, people have jobs) but until I do it does no harm at all to keep the existing image. Thanks/wangi

Yes, it does do harm. It's incorrect, the labels are unsourced, and it detracts from an otherwise fine article. There is no good reason to have a known inaccuracy in an article. No information is preferable to wrong information. You can and should re-upload the image once you have had a chance to correct it. You cooperation in making this article better will be much appreciated. 65.127.231.6 09:30, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which really does sap any will I have to use the little spare time I do have updating an image due to trivial reasons. You are making a point, please stop. /wangi 09:45, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article is highly visible at the moment due to the recent accident. It is important that we attempt to be as strictly accurate as possible, since this page will be viewed by many people and possibly members of the media. Allowing an admitted inaccuracy to remain is unacceptable in any article, but even more so in this one due to the attention it's receiving. Please consider the effect you will have, as an administrator, on Wikipedia's credibility by insisting that an inaccurately labeled image to remain on this article. It's just not worth it. 65.127.231.6 09:56, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, I will try to change the image. Wangi, this is not proving a point: it's pointing out an inaccuracy. —Mets501 (talk) 12:10, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. You should be handing this user a barnstar instead of warnings. This type of anonymous editor is exactly the sort we need around here. Mexcellent 12:29, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

I was wrong adding the point notice, sorry. However I stand by my comment that this is not a major inaccuracy - it's just a style issue. For example had I annotated the runway with the length in metres it wouldn't have been wrong - just unusual to US customs. The correct fix is actually to have no annotation on the image. (and is there an echo?) Thanks/wangi 16:11, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with wangi that it's just a style issue, but I also agree with the editors who have chided him for edit-warring. Regardless, the situation seems fixed now, so can we move on?--chris.lawson 21:41, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Southwest

Southwest Airlines does not fly to LEX.

Location of airport

I am editing location of airport to be consistent with the reality of location. Airport is actually in Lexington-Fayette County, Kentucky. City and county are one entity since they merged in 1973. In other words, the city limits are same as county limits. The word unincorporated in article would suggest it is not part of the city, which is inaccurate. For verification, see Bluegrass Airports website. Also see city's page at www.lfucg.com or visitors bureau at www.visitlex.com. This is also consistent with the article on Keeneland, which is right across the street from the airport. --Lexeagle 18:53, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I had changed this earlier per your reasoning, but one of the revolving IP edits I surmised modified it back. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 19:15, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Flight Times/Aircraft Serving

I want to get any feedback I can from people about removing these two sections. They are useless fluff for this article that no other airport seems to have to use. I'll give a few days for people to offer a rebuttal, but there seems to be no need for this. NW036 (talk) 03:47, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Timetables

@Stinger20: Airline schedules are called timetables and in this article we should refer to them as timetables. Ral 33 (talk) 19:41, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ral 33: I am confused what this has to do with me or anyhting I have edited? Stinger20 (talk) 19:48, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Stinger20: On the revision list it said you had changed timetable to schedule. It may have just read it wrong or I read it wrong. Ral 33 (talk) 20:43, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]