This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics 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.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
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
I have changed the elevation figure because the original figure given - 330m - was clearly incorrect as on the official LINZ 1:50 000 topo maps the 100m contour line runs across the airstrip. However I don't have any information as to the exact height of the airstrip so can anyone with that information please fix it. Daveosaurus (talk) 12:06, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Mandeville Aerodrome and the Croydon Aircraft Company are not the same thing, so they ought not to be merged. If the CAC is not considered notable, why is Mandeville Aerodrome considered notable. There is nothing special about Mandeville Aerodrome (although I am really fond of the place). But there is something unique and special about Croydon Aircraft Company. Paul Beardsell (talk) 07:45, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If merging Mandeville Aerodrome and Croydon Aircraft Company is considered a good idea then we should merge Seattle and Boeing. I am removing the merger suggestion from the article. Paul Beardsell (talk) 23:28, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]