Talk:MyTravel Airways

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 has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

This article is supported by the Defunct Airlines task force.

Passengers carried by MyTravel UK 2001-2005

The above is a relevant and interesting subject for inclusion in a Wikipedia article on any airline, including MyTravel. Other Wikipedia articles on airlines, eg, easyJet, give passenger numbers over a period of years. This helps to give a 'rounded' coverage of the historical fortunes of the relevant airline operator.

However, contributions on MyTravel UK's passenger numbers have been persistently, and unreasonably, deleted from this article.

The now restored passenger statistics for MyTravel UK have been taken directly from the website of THE relevant source : the United Kingdom Civil Aviation Authority, and reproduce the figures submitted by MyTravel UK on a monthly and annually basis to the UK CAA for public circulation.

Examination of the contributions and deletions made by the persistent 'deleter' show that over 90% relate to MyTravel's affairs. This is an unusual statistic. Wikipedia contributors and readers may wish to consider the motivation and rationale behind the 'deletion campaign' - is this contributor adhering to the requirement not to 'push' an article on, eg, MyTravel, to an unbalanced presentational situation?

Ringwayobserver 20:37, 1 February 2007 (UTC)Ringwayobserver 31.01.07[reply]

A330-200 and B767-300

The B767-300 does not offer all passengers seat back or hand held televisions, therefore i have changed this to make sure no confusion can arise.

To avoid confusion a email to MyTravel has been sent. I will confirm whether or not the B767-300 has Hand Held or Seat Back Tv's for all passengers in due course.

I would think this level of detail on televisions can be removed as un-encyclopedic and perhaps even considered as advertising - I would suggest it is deleted. MilborneOne 22:09, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MyTravel Airways

This article was very confusing, parts of it refereed to just the UK Airline and other parts just to the Scandanavian Airline. The article should be either UK or Scandanavian to avoid confusion. My Travel Airways A/S should have another entry seperate to the My Travel Airways UK, as both are operated very seperatly and without many ties.

Must support the view that describing two different airlines in the same article is very confusing, as they each have a legal identity of their own (although owned by the same holding company), we also lose some of the history and developoment of each airline. MilborneOne 20:38, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

article rewrite

I've rewritten the article to make it flow sensibly and logically and combine the data about MyTravelLite as well. I've also removed the detail on the old aircraft fleet, hope this doesn't upset anyone. There's no real precedent for keeping historic fleet info in an article like this and there was no real information about why it had dropped so dramatically. If there is a great cause for keeping it then maybe write it all up into a separate section but as it read it just felt a bit out of place especailly without an explanation. I've listed the destination countries (primarily) which are on their website and I've linked there. I figured this was easiest as they change relatively frequently and the countries gives a decent flavour of the airline's target market. Iancaddy 20:46, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Swanwick??

Hey all, shouldn't this be shanwick rather than Swanwick??. Thanks DannyM 18:28, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Swanwick is the new ATC Centre in Hampshire MilborneOne 20:58, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recline

Annoyed by the statement from User:80.47.181.86 Edit Reverted. No Reason For Edit. Factual Information Was Removed. DO NOT REMOVE IN FUTURE. about parts of the recline paragraph. Which should have been discussed here first - I propose that we should remove the whole recline paragraph as being non notable and and probably falls under the wikipedia is not advertising category WP:NOT#SOAP. MilborneOne 20:34, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I too was sad at the unacceptable edit summary, particularly from someone who is anonymous. I've solved the problem of the strange final sentence (the one that said "every seatback has a magazine") by deleting it and adding essentially the same info to the first line as "quarterly magazine for passengers". I also cut the views of the magazine cover down from a pointless 3 to just 1. I think the para is now acceptable and doesn't sound like an obvious advert for the magazine's publishers (who I suspect wrote it!) - Adrian Pingstone 22:30, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the above. The edit summaries are totally unacceptable. That aside, the Recline section barely meets WP:NOT#SOAP and WP:NOT#IINFO as it is, so i've reverted 80.47.181.86's recent edit. The summary which User:Arpingstone describes above is more than adequate. I'm not sure that there should be a link to the current issue, either per WP:EL#Links_normally_to_be_avoided number 5. johnwalton ^(talk) 14:30, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There was no reference to advertising in that paragraph, it merely stated the average generic content; it didn’t even say who prints Recline! Wikipedia states Magazine Covers can be used in articles about a magazine so what is the problem with showing 3 different covers? They show how the layout has changed in the past few years. See for instance, the article referring to 'FHM' Magazine, there are 3 magazine covers featured on that page! As for links to the current issue, if providing a link to support info is an issue on Wikipedia, then you would have to edit every page on Wikipedia to remove links to company sites! The paragraph on Recline has been undisturbed on Wikipedia for several months, so why are you now suddenly concerned by it? In addition to all the above, your refined version of the Recline magazine paragraph reflects poor grammar - three 'ands' in one sentence?

I see no problem with a link to the arline's magazine. It would be no more of an advert than the article is an advert for the airline. Also it's a free magazine so I can't see any gains to the publisher from the link. So, I agree, leave the link.

The simple fact is that 3 mag covers is ridiculous on an article about an airline, it's not an article about My Travel magazine!! And having 3 mag covers in another article is totally irrelevant. FHM is a magazine!! so you'd surely expect to see covers. Your argument is very poor.

You are allowed to correct those 3 "ands", there's no need to tell us, just do it.

Finally I am not suddenly concerned by it, I happen to be editing other areas of WP at the moment so have not been looking at airline articles until yesterday - Adrian Pingstone 18:44, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to revert the paragraph back to its original form as I don't feel you have provided a compelling argument/reason as to why it was edited. Re: FHM page, a magazine is a magazine, regardless of size. Readers of the page are not subsequently going to be thinking it's 'ridiculous' that there a three covers shown, they will more they likely find it interesting to see how the magazine's image has changed over a period of time IMO.

FHM is an article about A MAGAZINE. MyTravel Airways is a an article about AN AIRLINE. That's the difference. One day when you've read thousands of articles and been editing a long time (in my case, since January 2003), you'll understand. So your efforts to get three magazine pics will be constantly reverted until you end up with a ban. - Adrian Pingstone 23:30, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recline is an article about the MAGAZINE of MyTravel Airways! The only difference being it is a smaller publication and the page isn't dedicated to it. As in my previous reply, you STILL haven’t provided a compelling reason for me not to change the page back to its prior reading. Three cover pictures or not.

OK, I give up arguing with you. Only long experience of editing would make you understand. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 22:57, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dont give up - Wikipedia is driven by consensus - at least Adrian Pingstone, Johnwalton and I agree that the article should remain as edited. I note all the comments suggesting reversion are unsigned so we can only presume that is only one vote for reversion. So you cant really change it back unless you get agreement. If anybody thinks that 'Recline' is that notable then they should create an article of its own then link from this page.MilborneOne 00:58, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Firsts & Destinations

How can you decide what firsts are 'too trivial'? On the in-flight meal bullet point, please be aware it is not 'too trivial' seeing as every single UK charter airline has followed suit and BA also offer a similar service on short haul flights! Sanford Airport - again every single UK Charter followed suit so how on earth can it be trivial?

Who has removed the world wide tour destinations? They are extremely relevant and should be back on under 'Worldwide', as they are after all... destinations!

The writer of the above should note that an unsigned, anonymous, undated, entry carries very little weight on WP - Adrian Pingstone 15:56, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the list of destinations. There's no reason to have it on this page when an updated list is easily available on the company's website. MrVibrating (talk) 15:01, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles merger

No thanks - these are two separate but sister airlines (airline codes, fleets, bases etc etc are all different. I have just updated both articles as separate airlines (in line with Flight International). Ardfern 22:12, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do Not Merge - Agree with user Ardfern, we should remove the Danish infobox from this page and provide links to the other airline.MilborneOne 22:28, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A330 Seating Capacity

According to the article MyTravel's fleet of Airbus A330 aircraft seat an unlikely amount of passengers:

Airbus A330-200, 360 Passengers

Airbus A330-300, 405 Passengers

According to the Airbus A330 article, the Airbus A330-200 seats 293 in a two class-configuration and the A330-300 335 in a two class-configuration.

Anyone like to say what the correct information is. One thing is for sure the current figures provided are way out. 79.67.122.200 16:25, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The MyTravel A330 seating capacities are correct. Their A330s have downstairs toilets allowing higher seating capacity, and are 9-abreast in economy / 8-abreast in premium. This compares with the Airbus standard ('typical') 2-class assumption of no downstairs toilets, 8-abreast economy and 7-abreast business class seating, which will clearly result in a lower overall capacity. 82.44.26.36 15:49, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect?

For some reason, "Liz" redirects to this page... What does Liz have to do with it? walkingonthesun 04:18, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LIZ was the three letter ICAO code for MyTravel Lite. MilborneOne 08:19, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:MyTravel.jpg

Image:MyTravel.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:17, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done - Added fair use rationale to the the image description page. SempreVolando (talk) 22:32, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ceased Operations

I have re-vamped this article to reflect the fact that, as of 30 March 2008, MyTravel Airways ceased operations and became Thomas Cook Airlines, which has its own dedicated Wikipedia article. SempreVolando (talk) 12:23, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article Move

Just to note that User:Airline7375 keeps trying to move this article to MyTravel Airways UK, I have suggested that they need to make a formal move request and provide a case as to why the current title is wrong, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 13:20, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Air tours 747 lease

In 1998 Airtours flew a 747 for the winter season. There are videos of this on YouTube. It was leased from Air New Zealand I think. Is it eligible to be added to an amme ded fleet list? 31.111.8.134 (talk) 08:04, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]