Talk:IATA class codes

This article was nominated for deletion on 11 August 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was merge to Fare basis code.

Aviation: Airlines

	Aviation portal This redirect 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 redirect is supported by the airline project.

Travel and Tourism Low‑importance

	Society portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Travel and Tourism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of travel and tourism related articles 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.Travel and TourismWikipedia:WikiProject Travel and TourismTemplate:WikiProject Travel and TourismTourism articles
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comments

what about G class? its not mentioned here.....

The information provided here is not fully correct as far as I am concerned. I have a (slightly outdated) IATA standardization document in my hands that puts some of the classes in doubt. Since I am not aware of the licensing situation/copyright, I do not feel at liberty to update according to this standard though. I agree, however, G is missing, R is not correctly reflected, ... --Rouven Thimm (talk) 16:09, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Implementing merge

In September 2012, an AFD concluded that the contents of this article should be highly selectively merged into International Air Transport Association, noting in particular that the detail in this article was factually inaccurate since airlines deviated from the old (2003) IATA resolution used as a source. However, no one has implemented this merge. Since I have recently improved Fare basis code to include the relevant still factually correct information, I am going to be bold and redirect this article there. We can call it an implied merge, if you will, though I was not aware of it at the time. Martinp (talk) 16:28, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]