Jump to content

Talk:History of British Airways

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleHistory of British Airways has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
In the news Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 24, 2010Good article nomineeListed
May 4, 2010WikiProject peer reviewReviewed
May 25, 2010Featured article candidateNot promoted
In the news A news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on April 8, 2010.
Current status: Good article

Starting article

[edit]

Wanted to mark the reason for this article's creation as the first entry into its talk page. The history of the current day British Airways is vast, and has become an extensive part of the main article. I'll be thinning out the History section on the main one, this article is to be used for specifically addressing British Airways matters in a historical light, with greater depth and focus on that particular goal. Hopefully this will be useful. Kyteto (talk) 11:34, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Really needs to be organised into time periods as it is very confusing mix of subjects at the moment. I will try and help later. MilborneOne (talk) 15:02, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well done, not bad for an article that is less than 24 hours old! This is looking okay now, I'm going my attention mainly to responding to the ongoing GA on British Airways, but I'll be dropping by to check how things are going, and if (I rpobably should say when) things are shuffled on the main article and movement to here is once again required. Kyteto (talk) 22:30, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copied

[edit]

Note as this was a copy and paste move it really needs Template:Copied on both this talk page and the British Airways talk page. MilborneOne (talk) 12:42, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Think I've added the template tag correctly. Kyteto (talk) 13:02, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Overhaul complete

[edit]

Just wanted to leave a message that I've more or less completed a massive overhaul on the article. This is now fully developed in my vision of what I intended for this subarticle, and now appropriately embodies the traditional history of British Airways. I hope these efforts help some interested people, and that the article is enjoyed. Kyteto (talk) 01:45, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good job done I think, it looks much better than before! Benny45boy (talk) 09:16, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interested in image: BA DC-10

[edit]

If anybody comes across a usable image of a British Airways McDonnell Douglas DC-10 aircraft, one that can be used in the article, I would much appreciate the inclusion of it here, I feel that it is a noteworthy and fairly iconic plane for BA, not to mention a unique sight these days. I was unable to find any with a sufficiently open licience for usage in my search. So keep your eyes open for one please, it really does deserve an image with the amount of passing mentions it already has throughout the article. Kyteto (talk) 17:57, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Industial Dispute

[edit]

Any reason why we have a section on the latest industrial dispute, I suggest it should be removed as NOTNEWS. The company has been involved in many industrial disputes in its history none end up being notable in the history of the company. MilborneOne (talk) 20:13, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am in agreement. There is already a section on BA's current financial troubles, and I don't think that the "industrial squabble of the day" neither means anything in the long run (If the opening of Terminal 4, argueably one of the biggest changes and redeployments in British corporate history, let alone BA's, only deserves a single sentence...) nor does it particularly stand out against the several dozen industrial disputes over the decades which are once again only mentioned in passing if at all. I agree with the application of WP:NOTNEWS, there is always a tendency for editors to shift history pages towards present events without evaluating their worth in anything but the current moment; hence every so often it has to be unbound, cut down, and rewritten into a much smaller state where it is in context. That is what I see as appropriate here. Kyteto (talk) 12:21, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have just finished heavily trimming the last two sections of the article, the financial crisis and the strike seem in much more fitting context now. If anybody is unhappy with the new revised passage, drop a comment here and I'll get back on redrafting it. Kyteto (talk) 12:07, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Once again I have removed a dedicated section to the current Striking action and stripped down the information stuffed into the article. This stike isn't monumental or of earthshaking importance to the company as to deserve its own section! The scandals, new terminal shifts, privatisation, none of those have a section to themselves, so which should what is likely the 60th strike by BA employees? Can I ask for some perspective and moderation please. We've not a news agency, we don't need every titbit of info on the strikes. Kyteto (talk) 20:21, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agree as has been stated before BA have had strikes before most of them not notable this one so far is no different. MilborneOne (talk) 22:03, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is not NPOV

[edit]

Seriously, "dirty tricks"?164.58.59.60 (talk) 16:54, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where? Airplaneman ✈ 22:00, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's the popular and most regularly used name for th incident, it is routine for Wikipedia to use the same terminology to refer to events as the majority of the media and sources provide. And this name has been used without complaint since 2007 for the event on Wikipedia prior to this objection, it is established and is not demonstrating bias or disfavour, that is imply the term used within respectable broadsheets decades after to refer to the internal BA mechanisations to sully Virgin, an emerging rival, and the ensuing legal action over the alleged line-crossing in which British Airways were effectively found to have been in the wrong. If there is to be a renaming, we would need a popular name that is in use, as not to get the "dirty tricks" scandal mixed up with this identical-but-under-a-different-and-unknown name. I don't see how that would be more convinent or clear, but it is hardly NPOV if it is of widespread usage long before Wikipedia came around and is sourced heavily throughout. Effectly, this is fair use, and a valid use of the term as a proper designation for the event rather than a directed slur from an insignificant minority. Kyteto (talk) 23:41, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is this the Speedbird House?

[edit]

Is File:BritishAirways1980soffices.jpg the Speedbird House? WhisperToMe (talk) 22:28, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No I dont think it is, Speedbird House was an office block, I think further South. It may be the glass fronted one on the left here http://www.airliners.net/photo/British-Airways/Hawker-Siddeley-HS-121/1422606/M/ but not 100% sure. MilborneOne (talk) 22:39, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on History of British Airways. 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 10:20, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on History of British 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) 02:08, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on History of British 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) 04:12, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on History of British 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) 03:41, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on History of British 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) 15:34, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:History_of_British_Airways&oldid=1207550804"