Talk:British United Airways

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Aviation: Defunct airlines

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 met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the Defunct Airlines task force.

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Companies Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies 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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Formatting

I have undone a bunch of edits that were inconsistent with the Wikipedia:Manual of Style or were unnecessary. WP:MOS says:

Write out both the full version and the abbreviation at first occurrence: When introducing a new name in an article, it is good practice to use the full name on its first occurrence, followed by the abbreviated form in parentheses. For example, The New Democratic Party (NDP) won the 1990 Ontario election with a significant majority (first mention of New Democratic Party in the article), and The NDP quickly became unpopular with the voters (subsequent mention).

WP:LINK says:

Plurals and possessives. When forming plurals, do so thus: greengages. This is clearer to read in wiki form than greengages—and easier to type. This syntax is also applicable to adjective constructs such as Moldovan and the like.

What do you mean? Please elaborate. (It's not at all clear what you're talking about here.) -- Unsigned comment by User:91.194.221.231

I was referring here to links that were piped unnecessarily, such as [[East Africa|East African]] when [[East Africa]]n will do. This was a type to make linking easier for you, and to make editing the article easier for others in the future by simplifying the mark-up.

So pipe linking "British Overseas Airways Corporation" so that it only shows "BOAC" is incorrect. And there is no need to pipelink [[East Africa|East African]] -- [[East Africa]]n works just as well, and is what is recommended by WP:LINK. Ground Zero | t 02:44, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did a total revert in error -- I did not mean to revert all of the way. Please accept my apologies.

I will continue to edit this article and others to bring them in line with Wikipedia:Manual of Style. I encourage you to become familiar with it. For example, we should write for clarity, not for style -- many readers will not know what "New York JFK" is. Clarifying that it is an airport is important. Boldface all corporate names adds clutter to the article, and is not supported by WP:MOS. If you can find justification for boldfacing corporate names in WP:MOS, please point it out to me. I will explain my other edits here as I make them. Ground Zero | t

Also, New York is an article about the state. BUA was flying to New York City, and not to Albany or Rochester, for example, so I have adjusted the link accordingly. Ground Zero | t

No, you're wrong. They didn't fly to NY (at least not as a scheduled carrier). It was something they'd proposed to succeed in their bid to become Britain's official "Second Force" airline. So, in future, please study the contents properly before commenting on it. And, as far as that edit is concerned, you have to give credit to most readers to be intelligent enough to understand that an international airline operating long-haul airliners is most unlikely going to use these to land in Albany or Rochester rather than one of the airports serving New York City, even if New York CITY hasn't been explicitely mentioned in the article. -- Unsigned comment by User:91.194.221.231

You've missed the point. the point I was making was about linking. It makes more sense to link New York City than to link New York State. While non-Americans often shorten the city's name, Americans (from my recent experience visiting NYC) are careful to make the distinction. Ground Zero | t 02:29, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Revisiting referenced info

I have added a small explanation drawing readers' attention to the fact that the Hunting Group, including its parent the Clan Line, were already owned by B&C at the time of the merger with Airwork. I felt it was important enough to warrant its inclusion in this section of the article as it makes it clearer to readers why B&C acquired such a dominant position among the airline's shareholders. On a different note, I have also removed the expansion of B&C where it was repeated. It has already been explained in the intro. I have furthermore added another page no. to the relevant reference where more info can be found on BUA's success in reversing years of losses on the South American routes it had acquired from BOAC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.194.221.231 (talk) 13:38, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Source reliability

How reliable as an independent source is "Thomson, Adam (1999). High Risk: The Politics of the Air. London, UK: Sidgwick and Jackson. ISBN 0-283-99599-8."?

Thomson was the head of Caledonian which took over BUA, and thence head of the resulting British Caledonian. This puts him a bit too close the action and there is a possibility of that his re-telling of the history is biased. It would be better if where used, this source actually attributes statements (as opinion) to Thomson. GraemeLeggett (talk) 21:58, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:26, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]