Jump to content

Talk:Hartsfield–Jackson Atlanta International Airport/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Possible Vandalism

I have removed a lot of nonsense from this article in which users has been inserting airlines that no longer serve this airport. If any one feels that my edits should be reverted, then please revert them. Many thanks! Bucs2004 04:54, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Possible Plagarism

Based on the history I'm reading about ATL, I think it's basically a plagarism from this video I saw to commemorare the opening of the 5th runway.

Link: http://www.nmediatv.com/DNN5thRunwayTribute.html

Starcity ai 05:48, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I really don't see the plagiarism. They both cite the same facts, but there can be no copyright on facts. Nowhere that I've heard is the video's narration exactly what the video shows. Furthermore, this revision from two days before the video was released, 5/15/06, contains basically the same information as is in the video. I think it's possible that the video's producers used Wikipedia as a source! FCYTravis 06:24, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

funny fact

I'll try not to take up too much space on the talk page but an interesting tidbit, the airport train system's PA system calls out the name of the terminals both their letters and their letters in the phonetic alphabet. The train goes: Tango(T) Alpha(A) Bravo(B) Charlie(C)but when it comes to D they had to change it so as not to confuse passangers because the phonetic for D is Delta... they change it to david...Nweinthal 13:46, 25 November 2006 (UTC)NW

In addition, taxiway D is referred to as Dixie in ATL and CVG. V1 Rotate 03:35, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Ontario (CA)

Please discuss this on Talk:Nashville International Airport#Ontario (CA). Thanks. - BillCJ 06:35, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Redirects updated

"Hartsfield International" now redirects to this page. If someone feels that this should not happen, please remove it. toll_booth 00:37, 27 January 2007 (UTC)


Locally known as "Hartsfield"?

Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport (IATA: ATL, ICAO: KATL),
locally known as Atlanta Airport,

Isn't the airport commonly referred to as "Hartsfield" as well? Can that be included? toll_booth 21:57, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Hearning no objections, I went ahead and made the change. If this was done by mistake, please correct it. toll_booth 00:40, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

It is almost universally called Hartsfield by natives, never Atlanta airport.

Unclear sentence

This sentence is in the article's second paragraph: Hartsfield-Jackson also has fifty-seven percent of their passengers flying elsewhere. What does the sentence mean by "elsewhere"? Are 57% of passengers flying to destinations outside of the South? Perhaps someone who knows what the sentence is trying to say can rewrite it more clearly. - Walkiped 03:55, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

From the "Trivia" section in the article: "Fifty-seven percent of Hartsfield-Jackson's airport passengers do not stay in Atlanta but go on connection flights elsewhere." I think this use of words better fits what the original sentence is trying to say, assuming that it is accurate.
On that note, the statements need references in both places, and I am marking them as such. toll_booth 01:07, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Accidents and incidents

This section contributes no value to this article. The Lexington incident occurred on the ground at that airport. Suggest removing

  • Perhaps remove the incident you reference but the section in toto should not be removed. It provides interesting history relative to the facility. JBEvans 13:29, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Article doesn't do justice to Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport

Compared to other airport articles, such as Denver International Airport, SFO, LAX and even IAD, this article is dull and lacks content. There should really be more pictures too. I'd like to offer help, but I don't travel through ATL often enough to be able to take pictures with my own camera. Hope you can improve on it. Thanks.--Inetpup 21:06, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I notice that there are many cities and airports that are not linked. Is there a reason for not building the links? I'll be glad to add them if I hear no objections. JBEvans 13:34, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Gate Numbers

I was able to add Gate numbers to their respective airlines by using the Arrivals and Depatures list located on Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport's website as well as the terminal maps located there also. I also used information from the airlines websites. Unfournately, due to gaps in the information I was unable to gather a complete list, and there could be some gaps and holes.

Sources Used:

Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport: http://atlanta-airport.com/applications/trakaflight/flightinfo_frames.htm

Spirit Airlines: http://www.spiritair.com/welcome.aspx?pg=airportmaps&Airport=ATL

Airtran Airways: http://www.airtran.com/cities/atlantaga.aspx

Delta Airlines: http://www.delta.com/traveling_checkin/airport_information/airport_maps/atlanta_atl/index.jsp

Frontier Airlines: http://www.frontierairlines.com/frontier/flight-info/at-the-airport/airports.do



Note: Since Concourse D and E has a "Common Use" Policiy, many of the Gates there overlap.AmericanAtl 21:22, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Heathrow Terminal 5

One of the notes under trivia states that "ATL is expected to lose its title of the "World's Busiest Airport" when Heathrow's T5 is completed." Heathrow can't really increase operations because of runway constraint issues (Atlanta has 5 runways and Heathrow has 2). Completing T5 won't increase the number of passengers traveling through Heathrow that dramatically.Starcity ai 04:53, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Picture

any decent pics for the infobox?

Do you want an aerial picture of the airport? I'd be glad to get one for you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Press208 (talk • contribs) 01:36, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Section on how to access Hartsfield Airport

Do you think that a separate section should be written detailing Hartsfield Airport's location and how to access it via road, MARTA, etc.? Correct me if I'm wrong, but as the article stands I don't think much is written on this topic. Gujuguy (talk) 16:56, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

The Layout Section

I have cleaned up the layout section and removed redundant information. I also removed some of the info about the Underground Train, since the APM now has it's own article (I provided a link to the article). Most of the info (especially the PA and the NATO Alphabet) is mentioned in the APM article. I also gave the MARTA Station paragraph it's own heading to separate it from the APM paragraph. If my edit is seen as unnecessary, feel free to undo it.

Sanibel sun (talk) 04:45, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

"Connecting" and "transit" passengers

The statement "Fifty-seven percent of Hartsfield-Jackson's airport passengers do not stay in Atlanta but go on connection flights elsewhere" needs to be explained - and it definitely needs citation, as flagged.

The official information page, cited in the article, states that passenger traffic was 84.8 million at 2006. This was broken down as 76.3 million "domestic," 8.1 million "international" and 0.5 million "transit." Regrettably, "transit" is not defined; this term "might" refer to passengers traveling between two other countries via the U.S. Ldemery (talk) 19:38, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Relative Size Among US Airports

This article states that Hartsfield is the largest airport in the United States, but DFW in Texas is quite a bit larger, at 18,076 acres (73.15 sq. km.) Hartsfield's stated .54 sq. km. is quite small for an airport size, and must refer to the airport's terminal area only. This should be clarified. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.214.96.241 (talk) 20:52, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Number of Gates

I recently flew through ATL, and I noticed that the number of gates on Concourses C and D have increased. I looked at the map on the webpage, and Concourse C now has 48 gates, and Concourse D now has 36. I also checked the other concourses, but they have not changed. With these changes, I counted the new grand total to be 196 gates. I have included all of these changes in the article. However, I am uncertain if the citation on the total number should be removed or not, since that webpage has not been updated with the new number of gates. I have left the citation in place for now, but if anyone else knows what to do, please do so. Thank you. Sanibel sun (talk) 21:51, 14 July 2008 (UTC) The total in 2011 is 199 gates.

North Terminal

Delta has totaly redone the north terminal and the photo posted on the page is no longer accurate. Does anyone have a picture of the new check-in "pods"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bucs2004 (talk • contribs) 00:43, April 20, 2007 (UTC)

I took a picture of that during my last vacation. I'll take a look at it once I'm home. 65.242.127.130 20:08, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I added Korean Air to North Terminal and removed it from South Terminal. Source is official Hartsfield-Jackson web page: Airport_Info Rsgore (talk) 16:08, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Removed

I removed the following text from the History section of the article:

On May 11, 1996, ValuJet Flight 592, which had taken off for Hartsfield from Miami International Airport in Miami, Florida, experienced a fire and crashed into the Florida Everglades, killing all on board.

This passage seemed out of place in context and irrelevant in reference to the history of the airport, as the ValuJet crash happened over 500 nm away and had nothing to do with Hartsfield other than being bound for it. It is mentioned in the article for Miami International, which is, I think, more appropriate, as the mishap occurred shortly after takeoff there. Most interested in this crash will, I think, begin their search in the ValuJet article instead. Chris 05:58, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I removed Korean Air from South Terminal and added them to North Terminal. Source is official Harstfield-Jackson website. Airport_Info Rsgore (talk) 16:10, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Triple takeoff/landing

With the addition of runway 10/28, can Hartsfield now perform triple simultaneous landings/takeoffs like Cincinnatti? Bigpeteb 18:05, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes. Triple landings are more common though. It is still not possible to conduct triple simultaneous ILS approaches to 8L (26R), 9R (27L), and 10 (28) because 9R and 10 are slightly less than the required 4300 feet apart. A Precision Runway Monitor system has been installed and will be activated either in the middle of January or March which will allow this. V1 Rotate 02:02, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Simultaneous indepedent ILS approaches to TWO runways require 4300 feet between the runways, but THREE runways require at least 5000 feet between each of the 3 involved runways. It's true that PRM can be used to resolve this issue. PRM "simuls" also require additional procedures by ATC and aircraft crew training. 75.66.91.10 (talk) 15:57, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Why is airport bicycle policy unencyclopedic?

Wikipedia is not a travel guide and is not an indiscriminate collection of information. The consensus is that an airport's article should cover its history, terminals, airlines, destinations, and ground access. We cover public transport because every airport is unique, but not always parking lots or other ground transport details because they are too unimportant. Anything not in the standard format must be proven of its relevance, and consensus says no to bicycle policy. HkCaGu (talk) 18:58, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Secret underground tunnel

I was just in Terminal C the other day, and I walked passed an escalator labeled as going to Terminal B. Apparently it must be some kind of underground shortcut to avoid having to go all the way to the main passageway. I was shocked to find out such a thing actually existed!

Does anyone have a source to cite that this exists? (since wp does not allow original research) Bigpeteb (talk) 22:35, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

You can probably use the concourse maps as a source. Concourse C map (tunnel to B near gate C40), Concourse B map (tunnel to C near gate B29) --Latish redone (formerly All in) (talk) 02:59, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

This tunnel was built in order to connect the Eastern Airlines' gates at B north with the ones at C north. This tunnel was permanently closed in October of 2008. V1 Rotate (talk) 21:08, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Busiest airport?

Largest perhaps, but read on Heathrow, they say they have the busiest airport. What right or wrong here? Shandristhe azylean 13:52, 13 July 2006 (UTC) 

often referred to as Heathrow, is the third busiest airport in the world, after
Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport and Chicago O'Hare.
According to the FAA, Hartsfield-Jackson is still on top. [1] I think the opening paragraph should be modified to reflect this. toll_booth 22:02, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Check the Wikipedia article for "world's busiest airports" and you'll see that an international body recognizes that "title" by multiple criteria. Hartsfield is largest in one category, Heathrow is largest in another. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.214.96.241 (talk) 20:57, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Heathrow operates the most airplanes per runway (they only have two, and operate just shy of 200,000 aircraft per runway each year) and has the most international passengers (both stats were in Air and Space about 2 years ago. I'll try to find and post this reference). ATL is far from the largest airport. DEN, IAH, and DFW are much larger physically, and that is only the USA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.66.91.10 (talk) 15:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, considering Great Britain is the size of Kansas, one would expect it to have a lot of international passengers (just as there's not much point of traveling by air between say Lawrence and Wichita, why would you fly from say London to Birmingham?). However, ATL is indeed the world's busiest airport in terms of passengers - although ORD (another airport busier on passenger terms than LHR) has occasionally beat them. Yes, LHR does have more international passengers - but one has to wonder how many of those are simply between EU countries (EU in it's entirety is about the size of the US - probably the equivalent for the US would be to talk about interstate passengers. Other than passport control and customs, there really isn't much difference between "international" vs. "domestic" passengers, i.e., a passenger is a passenger.) Don't think many would think "largest" airport refers to acreage - that's just geography, cost of land, etc. Jmdeur (talk) 02:10, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

If you look at paragraph 1 of London Heathrow Airportit specifically says Heathrow is the busiest airport in the United Kingdom, not meaning the world.

Old terminal

Where was the old passenger terminal located (before the current Midfield complex opened)? I've just read an article that a portion of an old concourse still exists, but it didn't mention where the terminal was. Judging from a satellite photo I would guess it was on the north side. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 16:09, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

That's correct. It was where Atlantic Aviation is currently located. The current "Loop Rd" exit off of I-85 south, used to directly serve the terminal. V1 Rotate (talk) 21:13, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I just found this link, also. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 23:06, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Redirect

Even though I typed in 'Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport', which is the correct title of this article, I still receive a direct. Why does this occur? Please address this issue. Mathpianist93 (talk) 22:20, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

AeroMexico

AeroMexico no longer services HJIA. All of their flights are now done in cooperation with Delta who operates all flights carrying an AeroMexico designation from Atlanta.

Starting this summer, that all changes!68.158.34.21 (talk) 22:00, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

"Busiest airport in 1957 (?)"

"Atlanta was the busiest airport in the country with more than two million passengers passing through that year [i.e. 1957, probably] and, between noon and 2 p.m. each day, it became the busiest airport in the world.[9]

Two million passengers would put it somewhere in the top ten, in the US in 1957. Anybody know the specifics of that other claim? Tim Zukas (talk) 22:19, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

File:Exterior MHJIT.gif Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Exterior MHJIT.gif, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests November 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • 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.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:26, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Delta destinations January 30, 2012

Added the following "citations needed" in the destinations table for Delta:

Barbados not found at Delta's website or Delta Air Lines destinations.

Acapulco WAS found at Delta's website, not found at Delta Air Lines destinations, listed as "discontinued" at General Juan N. Álvarez International Airport.

Guayaquil not found at Delta's website, shown as "station closed" at Delta Air Lines destinations, listed as "seasonal" at José Joaquín de Olmedo International Airport.

Havana charter not found at Delta's website or at Delta Air Lines or Delta Air Lines destinations; listed as "charter" at José Martí International Airport, citing same AJC article as does this article; charter operator Marazul (http://www.marazul.com) lists Atlanta, but provides no further information about Atlanta flights. --Chaswmsday (talk) 17:41, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Also, looking at Delta Connection/Comair, it seems that destinations may not be correct. Delta Connection destinations, in fact, is tagged as being out-of-date. Probably all Delta Connection destinations here should be verified. --Chaswmsday (talk) 18:41, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit Request

Spirit Airlines to begin seasonal service to Atlantic City on May 17, 2012. Source: http://ir.spirit.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=644977 Snoozlepet (talk) 22:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Not done: This page is no longer protected. Subject to consensus, you should be able to edit it yourself. Anomie⚔ 20:45, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikilinked Destinations

Per the (apparent) consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports#Airlines and Destinations tables, I've "boldly" wikilinked the airport names in the Airlines & Destinations table. This is not a suggestion for mandatory wikilinking in airport articles, just to make it permitted, and perhaps suggested. --Chaswmsday (talk) 22:30, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

From what I see, there was no consensus made. AND when the consensus is made, if we go with the linking, it should span to all airports to have a continuous format throughout all of wikipedia. Kairportflier (talk) 23:24, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Undone per no consensus. You just wasted two hours of your time. N124BC (talk) 02:14, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
I concur. I looked at the discussion on WP:AIRPORT and there has been no declaration of consensus, nor has the issue been closed. It's not like there is a deadline, so let's wait and see how it pans out, then go from there. --McDoobAU93 23:39, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
@N124BC's comment was not civil, and was made only after its reverts.
@McDoobAU93's revert also removed a discrete edit by 108.81.25.227 unrelated to wikilinking of destinations. Who should clean that up? --Chaswmsday (talk) 12:11, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Actually, that "discrete edit" you mentioned was adding Concourse F into the discussion of which concourses handle international flights. Please note the HTML comment asking that Concourse F not be included until it has officially opened, so the undo was appropriate there, as well. --McDoobAU93 15:52, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

(unindent) This is ridiculous. A consensus does not magically come into being when someone says "now, there's a consensus", nor should it need to be formally declared as such. In the WP:AIRPORTS discussions, as I frequently pointed out, those of us in favour of linking destination airports have repeatedly given long lists of reasons why we think this is a good idea and will aid a reader in navigating the encyclopaedia. Those against have misquoted guidelines such as WP:OVERLINK, failed to answer questions, and put up roadblocks claiming [in squeaky, childish voice] "no consensus! no consensus! no consensus!" without actually giving reasons why they disagree. That is why the debate has not yet been closed.

The essay Don't revert due solely to "no consensus" seems especially relevant here (thanks, Chaswmsday, for drawing my attention to it). All that N124BC achieved was (as they rather obnoxiously pointed out) to waste other editors' time, who had been making good-faith edits trying to improve the encyclopaedia. Going through and mass-reverting good-faith edits with no reason other than squealing "no consensus! no consensus! no consensus!" does not respect the time and effort that other editors are putting into the encyclopaedia, and is absolutely against the collaborative spirit in which Wikipedia is supposed to operate. (I would not blame Chaswmsday if (s)he decided that they'd had enough of Wikipedia after this and quit.) The "undo" button should only ever be used to revert vandalism, nonsense or accidental typos, in my opinion, not to revert others' efforts at the flick of a switch.

Rather than blindly reverting, why not participate in the discussion? The fact that none of the editors here who are claiming "no consensus" have actually participated in any of the recent WP:AIRPORTS discussions on this topic, strikes me as particularly distasteful. I recommend that, if Kairportflier, McDoobAU93 and N124BC have any valid reasons why they object to linking destinations, that they join in the discussion there, rather than continue to revert. Otherwise, their claims of "no consensus" will just be patently untrue. --RFBailey (talk) 22:58, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

I have just noticed that N124BC and Kairportflyer have participated in the discussion--if making a couple of one-line edits squeaking "there isn't a consensus" counts as "participating", that is. But N124BC's behaviour is still distasteful. --RFBailey (talk) 23:02, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
The IP should be reported as breaking the 3RR rule.--Jetstreamer (talk) 23:58, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Why? Although they reverted several separate changes, they only did so once. 3RR applies only to back-and-forth reverts. --RFBailey (talk) 01:33, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
I told you I was right! I'm still waiting for a reply from you (Jetstreamer) about my last post on your talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.81.25.227 (talk) 02:47, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
You were right. Nevertheless, the very unfortunate "I win" comment you left me in my talk page only shows that you haven't understood yet what Wikipedia is for. This is not about winning or losing.--Jetstreamer (talk) 14:59, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Many people don't understand what Wikipedia is for. It is ostensibly to create a free encyclopedia that anyone can edit, but all too often my efforts to improve Wikipedia (and presumably the efforts of many others as well) get reverted for nonsensical reasons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.81.25.227 (talk) 13:23, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Also, the point stands that I received a warning for potentially violating 3RR, while other reverters to this same article have not received similar warnings. Possible discrimination against unregistered editors? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.81.25.227 (talk) 13:48, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
This particular concern of yours is easily solved by creating a login account. Besides that, I'm against editing Wikipedia anonimously.--Jetstreamer Talk 13:14, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
When I look at the WP:AIRPORTS guidelines, the current guidelines state that city names should not be wikilinked. It has been updated within the last week to indicate that there is a discussion ongoing. Based on that, I would presume that, if consensus changes to suggest how the destinations should be listed, the change will be reflected in the guidelines. Until then, if an editor decides to make this change without the guidelines saying so, I'd chalk it up to good faith and move into WP:BRD.
As to whether or not someone has commented on a thread elsewhere: irrelevant. Frankly, I would think a fresh set of eyes would be welcome since apparently battle lines have been drawn on this topic. This concept is apparently quite incendiary, to the point where I requested page protection just to shut down the edit warring. My only reason for undoing this change is because the Manual of Style for this type of article currently says not to wikilink. Nothing more or less.
--McDoobAU93 00:31, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
The edit war a couple of weeks ago was down to a single editor who went on a disruptive rampage for spurious reasons. If you read the actual discussion that was taking place at WP:AIRPORTS prior to and after that, there was broad agreement among those participating that there should be a change to the guidelines. Unfortunately, nobody seemed to be willing to close that discussion.
My concern was that, if anyone actually read the discussions thoroughly, ignoring the distractions caused by the rampaging editor (including the ludicrous "vote" setup), they would decide that, among those editors who actually gave justification to their point of view, there was a consensus. (Reminder: a consensus does not have to be unanimous.) For someone to come along out of nowhere, bleat "no consensus" without giving any indication of having actually parsed any of the discussions, is not helpful.
My point about deliberately undoing other editors hard work and then being obnoxious about it on talk pages still stands. --RFBailey (talk) 01:33, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
I will concur about being civil regarding undoing others' hard work. I will also concur that consensus is not necessarily unanimous; it never has been, to my understanding. At the same time, I do believe there is something to be said about making a simple statement as to what consensus was reached, then updating the MoS appropriately. That way everyone's on the same page at the same time, without trying to divine the results while discussion may still be ongoing.
As to the edit war two weeks ago, it was a couple of editors getting involved in the same argument, each taking sides and defending their points to the level of SHOUTING and quoting discussions, etc. At the time, I made no reverts and simply asked both parties to stop, including requesting page protection to freeze things at whatever current form it was until things cooled down. I honestly do not have an opinion as to which format would be better, although if forced to make a decision it would be against wikilinking, if only to keep the task of updating the article relatively simple and free of unintentional overlinking. If consensus goes against that, I'll support it without question. --McDoobAU93 01:43, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Please clarify your advice. Are you saying that we should state our understanding of what we believe to be consensus on the Airport talk page, then immediately and pre-emptively update the MoS, even though exactly when consensus may be declared is yet to be defined?
Per your earlier comment, "Actually, that "discrete edit" you mentioned was adding Concourse F into the discussion of which concourses handle international flights. Please note the HTML comment asking that Concourse F not be included until it has officially opened, so the undo was appropriate there, as well. --McDoobAU93 15:52, 14 February 2012 (UTC)": I don't know whether User:108.81.25.227's edit was proper or not. IMO, it, or something similar, probably was. Regardless, you reverted based on an "HTML comment". Made when? By whom? Under what circumstances? Perhaps consensus has changed since then. You could have left that edit alone for the rest of the community to debate, rather than immediately removing it from view. As an alternative, you could have reverted it separately, with its own edit comments. At the very least, you could have mentioned it in the edit comments for the wiklink reversion. --Chaswmsday (talk) 20:07, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
What I am saying is that the debate needs to be settled before wholesale changes are made. The debate appears to be ongoing, regardless of where people interpret sentiments to be at any given point. When the discussion is declared "closed" or "consensus reached" or something like that, then the changes suggested by consensus should be made. For example, RFBailey's comment about "if anyone actually read the discussions thoroughly" is exactly my point ... their interpretation may be different from that of other editors. The proposed change will affect every commercial airport article on the project, not just Hartsfield's article, so there does need to be some sort of finality to this. Since there is no rush, let's wait and see what happens, since we know where prognostication can get us.
As to the HTML comment, I too do not know when it was added or by whom. At the same time, nobody has removed it or questioned it, so apparently it's accepted (i.e., consensus is it's valid). For what it's worth, in a matter of weeks it will be a moot point. Again, let's just wait until things actually happen before deciding something may have happened and thus start making changes that leave other editors wondering what happened.
Lastly, might I suggest a nice cup of tea and a sit-down. I can imagine you felt slighted by some callous comments about your hard work earlier. Rest assured I don't feel that way, and hopefully soon this debate will be settled and you can make these changes for the betterment of the project, as I'm sure they've always been intended.
--McDoobAU93 20:42, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
I still don't get how or when consensus is considered "reached". I can't figure it out from WP:CONSENSUS, or wherever it is I've looked.
If you're intending to calm me down, please be advised that references to the 2000 US Presidential election and to the "Tea Party" ain't doin' it... :>) --Chaswmsday (talk) 21:41, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
I do like the humor in the last paragraph, which leads me to believe it worked. :)
To answer your question, it's common for editors to request an interpretation from an admin within the WikiProject (but not one involved in the discussion) for guidance. You might want to suggest that, especially if the discussion seems to be going in circles, as RFBailey has suggested may be the case. --McDoobAU93 21:52, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

The guidelines have been updated since 24 February 2012. As there has been no further debate at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports, I hereby declare "consensus reached" and will proceed with the re-wikification of this article's destination table...--Chaswmsday (talk) 15:25, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

I concur ... looks like the matter is settled, so get to it! :) --McDoobAU93 15:52, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Let me remind you that WP:SILENCE is the weakest form of consensus. Noone closed that debate, so technically consensus has not been reached. You may proceed, but anyone in disagreement may revert without violating any guideline.--Jetstreamer Talk 00:16, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
I disagree. I consider that consensus was reached once the guideline was updated, following the discussion. There is no formal "discussion closure" process for talk page discussions, like there is at AfD for instance. No objections have been made since the guidelines were updated. Stop bleating "no consensus! no consensus! no consensus!" all the time and let other editors get on with trying to improve the encyclopaedia, rather than giving signals to encourage revert wars. If you objected to the change, you had weeks to do so in the WP:AIRPORTS discussion. --RFBailey (talk) 15:10, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
I've re-involved @McDoobAU93 on its talk page. Again, sigh. --Chaswmsday (talk) 21:51, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Terminals, airlines, and destinations: Which Rochester?

According to the article new service to "Rochester" begins in Mar 2012. Which Rochester? Rochester, New York, Rochester, Minnesota, Rochester, Michigan, Rochester, United Kingdom, Rochester, Indiana, etc? EdwinHJ | Talk 16:16, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Presumably Rochester, New York: Delta has direct flights there from ATL. (Rochester, MN is only served by DL from Minneapolis.) That said, I can't find any GoJet-operated flights in the Delta schedules for that route from that date, only mainline and Pinnacle-operated flights. --RFBailey (talk)

Concourse F

At the risk of editing it myself, and being reverted for "violation of an 'HTML comment'", with Spring 2012 rapidly approaching: Should we mention that Concourse F is part of the Maynard H. Jackson Jr. International Terminal complex? Should we also mention that Concourse F, upon opening, will handle international arrivals along with Concourse E? Do we use the phrasing, "international arrivals" instead of something like "international arrivals and departures" because flights from the domestic concourses might ultimately connect to an international destination? Again, I'm tired of being reverted, so I'm currently abstaining from actual editing here. --Chaswmsday (talk) 20:19, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I agree there should be some mention that Concourse F is included in the International Terminal. However, I think we should wait until the Terminal actually opens before saying Concourse F handles anything (per the HTML comment).
As to phrasing, I would think that the average reader will assume that the term "international departure" means that the plane will land in another country when it touches down. I see your point about someone flying ultimately to, for example, Paris, but touching down at New York's JFK first prior to crossing the pond. However, if we took that route, we'd need to change every single airport to an "international airport," as, technically, I can depart Bush Field in Augusta and wind up in Johannesburg, South Africa simply by connecting through Hartsfield. Delta's flight schedules for many international city pairs out of Atlanta offer both non-stops and connecting flights to the international city, so when you boil it down, an Augusta-Johannesburg city pair can happen, just not in one sitting.
As to "being reverted", please understand that such actions are not personal in nature. On the contrary, what you're experiencing (and now participating in) is commonly called bold, revert, discuss. You were very bold in making a change, but other editors had issues with the change and reverted them, said issues were presented and now the subject is up for discussion. Soon, consensus will be reached and a way forward will be found, and you are by all means invited to take part in all such phases of the process ... if anybody tells you otherwise, send 'em my way and I'll straighten them out.
--McDoobAU93 21:31, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
The article didn't say "international departures". A strict reading might imply that arrivals come into a particular concourse to go through Customs, but that international departures might possibly leave from other concourses. Just to be Mr. Language Stickler...
Well, no. It wasn't "bold, revert, discuss". It was "bold, (no discuss), revert, discuss/discuss/discuss, bold, revert, discuss, find that reverter was admittedly disruptive due to an unwarranted fit of pique"; followed by yes, "silence" from everyone, which MUST count for something, "bold, (no discuss), revert". "Revert", particuarly after not participating in the discuss/discuss/discuss phase, strongly suggests that the reverter provide an explanation other than "no consensus". IMNSHO. --Chaswmsday (talk) 21:57, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

All foreign carriers (along with Delta and Southwest/AirTran international operations) will move their check-in to the new international terminal. Concourse F, along with the current Concourse E, will serve as the 40-gate international gateway and some domestic flights. When the concourse opens, the concourse location for all of the foreign carriers should have both E and F listed. The note actually states "All international arrivals are handled at Concourse E." I would change the note to "at the international terminal" instead of "Concourse". Snoozlepet (talk) 19:12, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

It's official! Atlanta's mayor announced that the international terminal and Concourse F will open for business on May 16, 2012. Source: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/opening-date-set-hartsfield-jacksons-162449324.html. Snoozlepet (talk) 22:18, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

I noticed that whoever changed the concourses that the airlines operate out of did not add Concourse F to Aeromexico. Is Aeromexico only going to operate out of Concourse E? Nascargeek21 (talk) 20:13, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Seattle–Tacoma International Airport which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 05:14, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Atlanta

No where in the article is the airport referred to as "Atlanta", but does anyone actually use "Hartsfield-Jackson", as in I was routed through Hartsfield–Jackson, or I flew into Hartsfield–Jackson? It seems to me that "Atlanta" is the normal name used, despite the actual name of the airport. Apteva (talk) 07:10, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Delta flights to Bermuda, Canada and Bahamas

Why are cities in Bermuda, the Bahamas, and Canada listed as domestic destinations? They are still international destinations eventhough they have US customs pre-clearance and check-in for those flights are at the international terminal not the domestic terminal. San Juan, St. Thomas, and St. Croix belong in that list because they are domestic destinations. Snoozlepet (talk) 03:13, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Needed

Needs a mention of the Sky Train to the GICC, Hotels and Rental Car facility. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.142.29.242 (talk) 21:38, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus. --BDD (talk) 18:12, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Hartsfield–Jackson Atlanta International Airport → Atlanta International Airport – Wikipedia strongly prefers common names. This may be the official name and should keep a redirect, but the common name should be used in preference. Relisted. Favonian (talk) 17:13, 16 June 2013 (UTC). Red Slash 01:03, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

  • Support, with a caveat: I strongly support the common-name-over-official-name argument. However is there any other variation on the name which is more widely used among independent sources? Putting "International" in an airport's name is common among airports themselves and local municipalities, but nobody in the outside world ever says "Next week I'm flying from Singapore international airport to Toronto international airport". bobrayner (talk) 16:52, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose Local reliable sources refer to the airport by either its full name, "Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport" (omitting Atlanta) or simply as "Hartsfield-Jackson". I've not seen any of them call it "Atlanta International Airport", and I'm a local. --McDoobAU93 05:18, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Number= in Airlines & Destinations table

What is the purpose of "Number=" (e.g. 1=, 2=, 3= or 17=, 18=, 19=) within the rows of the airlines & destinations table in this article and a few others? It made alphabetizing a row difficult. Is it some artifact of VisualEditor, or was it meant to facilitate something? --Chaswmsday (talk) 11:50, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it is coming from the VE. I wouldn't know where to "complain". WT:AIRPORT may be the first place. HkCaGu (talk) 16:21, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Do you mean purposelessly generated by VE? (I knew that the edit in question had been done via VE, if that's all you meant.) If so, I guess I should complain to the VE folks... --Chaswmsday (talk) 13:16, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
For articles with the problem, insert {{subst:disable VE top}} as the first line and {{disable VE bottom}} as the last line. That will prevent editors from using Visual Editor on the article. Give me a list when you are done, and I will insert appropriate edit notices.—Kww(talk) 17:15, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Why is ATL busy ?

Atlanta is not that big of a city. Why is ATL busy?

Atlanta itself only has half a million people, but by most definitions, the metro area has cracked the 5-million mark, and IIRC this puts it in the top-ten largest metro areas in the US.
Also, note that a lot of passengers that travel through Hartsfield are connecting passengers--in fact, according to the article, more than half of them. Combine those two facts, and it suddenly becomes clear why ATL is THE world's busiest airport. :) toll_booth 03:22, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
To address the first poster, I think his point was while Atlanta is a large metro within the U.S., it is obviously not an "Alpha World City" like New York, Los Angeles, or Chicago, yet why does ATL apparently supersede these cities airports in traffic? I think somebody knowledgeable here could give an answer to this. --Section8pidgeon 10:59, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, as mentioned the Atlanta metro area is 5M+ now, and the population in catchment area for ATL is even larger, but in contrast to the cities you mention, ATL is the only commercial airport serving the metro - e.g. NYC is served by JFK, LGA, and EWR, Chicago by ORD and MDW, Los Angeles by LAX and five others. I'm pretty sure Atlanta the largest US city served by a single airport. Recently the FAA granted funding for a study about a second airport for Atlanta.
As also mentioned, origin/destination (O&D) traffic is only 30-something percent so most of ATL's traffic is connecting through the airport as a hub. ATL is very well situated as a hub in the middle of the growing sunbelt/Southern states serving both to collect traffic from smaller regional airports and particularly as a connection point for Florida destinations from the rest of the country. It is the primary hub for both Delta and AirTran. AUTiger » talk 14:35, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Take a look at all the destinations in Terminals T,A, and C. A lot of those destinations are temporary, but some are seasonal. When you put all the destinations into one pile, you have as many destinations as O'Hare! (possibly: I have no idea how many Chicago serve as of right now).--Press208 00:15, 2 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Press208 (talk • contribs) 01:30, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

- Not mentioned yet here is actually the largest reason Hartsfield is so busy. It has little to do with ATL population or its place as an "alpha" city. It is the fact that Hartsfield is the only airport of any appreciable size, in the only city of any appreciable size, in a large region of the country. The surrounding states are mostly rural, their cities mostly mid-size at best, their airports ill-equipped for large volumes. Although there are actually more passengers travelling to Texas, for example, than to Georgia, the presence of several large airports there allows none of them to grow as busy as Hartsfield. Connections are spread across many facilities. If there was, for example, a city the size of Houston where Charleston is, and a Philadelphia where Birmingham is, Hartsfield would be just another large regional airport, not the behemoth geography has caused it to be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.214.96.241 (talk) 21:04, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

One of the major factors in making a hub successful is passenger load originating and terminating at the hub itself -- filling seats, paying various airport fees and taxes, and otherwise supporting the hub. ATL's Delta hub consistently runs at 35-45% originating/terminating passenger load. Whatever the reason(s) may be, it's a fact, and Delta will most likely continue to keep or add capacity as long as the community supports it. As for the airport itself, it has one of the most efficient layouts, no other major airports nearby to interfere with its operations, and relatively good year-round weather (minimizes delays and cancellations). 75.66.91.10 (talk) 16:03, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

ATL's Airport's role is an connector airport. It's busy because lots of airlines fly connectors there.NolanCRules (talk) 01:34, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

747-400?

I just wanted to confirm that a 747-400 could land on at least one of the runways here.

Thanks!

Probably, because they used to!!! (When Delta owned 747-200s / 100s). --Inetpup 18:14, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
A South African Airways 747-400 did land at ATL in the past. That was later switched to A340 before South African Airways withdrew service from ATL.Starcity ai 04:55, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Absolutely - Korean Air flies a 747-400 to Atlanta on a daily basis. Some other cargo carriers also use the 747-400. Rsgore (talk) 18:46, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Delta Airlines Fly From Tokyo to Atlanta and back on a 747-400.

Also, An A380 Recently made its first landing in Atlanta International Airport. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NolanCRules (talk • contribs) 01:36, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Error on table under "Traffic and statistics"

In the table "Busiest International Routes from Atlanta", items 4 and 6 are the same. I went to the citation but the page no longer exists. Should Item 6 be removed and the list contain 9 entires? 68.184.138.200 (talk) 01:12, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Table Busiest International Routes from Atlanta (2012) error

Table "Busiest International Routes from Atlanta (2012)" has London Heathrow both in 4th and 6th place. 6th place is obviously wrong and should be something else. Could not locate proper resources (since the citing link is dead) to correct the information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.137.61.144 (talk) 16:17, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 June 2014

Please delete the Fly Right Airlines row in the airline and destination. The page has already been deleted and the fake carrier is not in the USDOT list of certified carriers or commuter carriers. The airline is not real. Tieransb (talk) 01:23, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for bringing it to notice. — LeoFrank  Talk 03:06, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 June 2014

Please delete the Fly Right Airlines row in the airline and destination. The page has already been deleted and the fake carrier is not in the USDOT list of certified carriers or commuter carriers. The airline is not real. Tieransb (talk) 01:25, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Done per above — LeoFrank  Talk 03:07, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 June 2014

Delta Airlines will begin mainline service to Shreveport, LA on August 19, 2014. It should be added to the list of airports served by them.

[1]

Danblell (talk) 22:19, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. I suggest waiting until closer to August 19th to request this, and when you do, please make a very clear request of what you want added, and where. Thanks! — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 15:06, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ http://bizmagsb.com/delta-air-lines-begins-mainline-service-at-shreveport-regional-airport/

Additional Edit Request

Spirit Airlines to begin service to both DTW and ORD on 7/6/14.

http://www.nola.com/business/index.ssf/2014/07/spirit_airlines_announces_nons.html#incart_river http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/breaking/chi-spirit-airlines-atlanta-new-orleans-flights-20140730-story.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jshippel (talk • contribs) 03:58, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Additional information

I was ready to add the following, as this page and the referenced article below are of relevance to one another.

"The non-profit Candler Field Museum is an ongoing project to re-create the airport as it appeared in the 1920s and 1930s."

However, I could not find a place to put it; in order to prevent an unwanted edit, I have left it here for an experienced user to take care of. IdRatherBeFlying (talk) 00:24, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

I am adding a link under "See Also" in the meantime. IdRatherBeFlying (talk) 22:41, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Delta service to Dallas Love Field

As per http://info.flightmapper.net/route/Delta_Air_Lines_DL_ATL_DAL and a quick search on Delta's flight status page on its website, the airline still operates service from ATL to DAL on Boeing 717 aircraft. Please do not remove it! 97.85.113.113 (talk) 04:04, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Amsterdam is a Delta hub

Amsterdam is a Delta hub: https://www.delta.com/about_delta/corporate_information/delta_stats_facts/index.jsp As such, the "direct" flight to Mumbai should be removed as there is a stop in Amsterdam. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bradnewengland (talk • contribs) 16:06, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT says domestic hub. Go there and stop trolling here. HkCaGu (talk) 16:54, 16 March 2010 (UTC)


RESPONSE: In airline jargon, "direct" means "no change of planes." While a flight to Mumbai with a stop in Amsterdam is direct, it is not "nonstop," which is what many people mean when they say "direct." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.103.238.122 (talk) 02:40, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Edit Request

Can someone add Los Angeles to the Korean Air Cargo to the list of destinations as the airline operates ATL-LAX since July 11, 2015. Source: http://airlineroute.net/2015/07/21/kec-americas-jul15/. 97.85.113.113 (talk) 04:41, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: This article is no longer Semi-Protected, so you can now edit the article yourself, but please ensure that any additions are properly sourced, to reliable sources and you maintain a neutral point of view - Arjayay (talk) 14:38, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Hartsfield–Jackson Atlanta International Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:10, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hartsfield–Jackson Atlanta International Airport. 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:57, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 16 external links on Hartsfield–Jackson Atlanta International Airport. 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) 23:50, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on Hartsfield–Jackson Atlanta International Airport. 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) 00:29, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hartsfield–Jackson Atlanta International Airport. 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) 22:29, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Demolished runways?

The article mentions runways 3 and 15. Current satellite imagery shows no runways on those bearings, but the article does not indicate when they were demolished, or if 3 and 15 were designations not based on bearings, the article does not indicate the new designations. GBC (talk) 02:51, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

The current terminal opened in 1980, so all runways that weren't due east-west were closed by that time. Of course, that does not preclude being demolished earlier 2600:1700:FDF1:1FC0:3D53:206:1A6F:6EE0 (talk) 01:16, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hartsfield–Jackson_Atlanta_International_Airport/Archive_1&oldid=1142355719"