Talk:FlyerTalk

This article was nominated for deletion on May 5, 2010. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

	This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Aviation: Airlines

	Aviation portal 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 is supported by the airline project.

Weasel Words

"It has been regularly asserted that FlyerTalk censors and removes information considered inappropriate or confidential that could negative affect the standards of the company that operates FlyerTalk." This seems to violate NPOV Chrisny2 05:40, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete

I removed the speedy tag that User:Koavf added because it's ridiculous. The article has been around for a while, I just renamed it to FlyerTalk from Flyertalk. The site ranks 3,855 on Alexa, has >250k google hits, and millions of forum posts; it's one of the largest forums on the Internet. Please be more careful and don't speedy delete willy nilly without verifying what you're doing. Thanks. Dbchip 22:00, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

===>Mea culpa My apologies. -Justin (koavf), talk 22:03, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's all good. Also I notice that someone recently over-zealously deleted a bunch of information that helps define the notability and interesting aspects of the web site. It's in the Flyertalk edit history. Dbchip 22:07, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial / NPOV?

The last edit of this article turned it into a commercial, don't you think? Lucasbfr 22:54, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not a commercial

Current edit looks like a diatribe from a disgruntled user. I've been around FT for many years and have not seen undue unfluence by adverisers or anyone blatently ripped off.

I have removed the unsourced attack statements, and added citation requests elsewhere. It is not enough to say that "FlyerTalk is criticized" - we must know who is making the criticisms, and expressly source them to that person. Source or die. FCYTravis 19:19, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Update

I know it's still far from perfect, but I re-wrote the article and added some new citations as all previous were no longer on line. I'm definitely open for improvement suggestions. Travellingcari (talk) 04:14, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Amazing tour to explore

< a rel="follow"href="https://www.pertourmarket.com/forum/safari-details/4-day-professional-and-experienced-adventure-trip">thrilling four-day adventure with experts"</a> 41.209.60.94 (talk) 13:27, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]