Talk:Raleigh–Durham International Airport

United States: North Carolina Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	North Carolina portal This article is supported by WikiProject North Carolina (assessed as Mid-importance).

Aviation: Airports C‑class

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

C

This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion not met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the airport project.

Merger proposal

It seems highly unnecessary that the ongoing renovations at RDU needs to have its own article. I propose the content of the article "Terminal Renovations" be integrated into the "Facilities" section of this article. Even if the renovations article were to remain, it is need of dire clean-up before it can be considered an adequate page. Nichts (talk) 18:18, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, there is no need for a separate article. This information can be incorporasted into the main RDU article. The title "Terminal Renovations" is far too general anyway.--Rtphokie (talk) 12:36, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I originally took out the part about the renovations because the article was overly long and the renovation part was just a short long-term addition of information. When the renovations are over, it was my thought that the renovation article could be retired/cut/removed/etc and a short blurb could just be noted that the airport went through renovation. The article seems to flow much better without the long sections describing the renovations. A sub article would allow for those that want to read about it a place to go without interupting the core message of the article. But if it is suggested that it is integrated, so be it. -- Kacey (talk) 15:43, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Kacey on this one. The terminal renovations section is far too long, and it makes the RDU page look extremely unwieldy. I suggest that it remain a separate page until at least the construction has been carried out, at which point it can be drawn down and revised into a much smaller section and placed back on the RDU page. HBombL (talk) 15:59, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The merger has occurred, information was neatly integrated into page by another user. (Nichts (talk) 23:00, 15 December 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Growth

The article says RDU is one of the fastest growing airports in the US and then lists annual passanger numbers stagnating in the last 15-20 years. Amanitin 11:00, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. RDU's website states it was the 2nd fastest growing airport in the country in 2000, but it's now 2008 and growth has slowed down considerably since then.--AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 10:57, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Smoking

Does anyone else think that the article should mention the new non-smoking policy inside the airport? Maybe it doesn't belong, but I found it interesting since NC is the tobacco state. Here's a link if someone decides it's noteworthy. http://www.rdu.com/travelinfo/smoking.htm --AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 11:00, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Why is 98.26.60.99 repeatedly removing the image found at the top of the page?--AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 20:35, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:RDU hist.jpg

Image:RDU hist.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) 03:58, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rational has been added to the image in question. 75.177.180.229 (talk) 01:45, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Net Jets

Does anyone know of the progress of the proposed netjets hub/maintenance facility? RDU is one of the proposed locations for a hub station.

http://www.wral.com/business/local_tech_wire/news/story/2249767/ This article gives some details, but it's still in question whether or not they will relocate to RDU. An announcement might be given in March. --AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 22:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we should put an ad into the article about the proposed maintenance base. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.162.161.159 (talk) 06:06, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IMO, I think we should hold off on adding the NetJets reference until a final decision has been made in regards to whether or not RDU will be the actual hub. If we add a section about the proposal and RDU doesn't get it, then we'll just have to remove the entire section since it wouldn't be considered noteworthy. On a side note, this story shows it's between RDU and MCO. Here's another related story. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 07:29, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recently MCO was taken out as a possible base. But i do agree with that it would be pointless if we end up having to erase if it doesnt happen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.57.49.60 (talk)

This won't be necessary any more, Net Jets decided to stay in Ohio. --HBombL (talk) 16:37, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RDU to Cancun

It is listed that Cancun service by delta airlines nonstop will start february 2, 2008. Also it states this on RDU.com. But the flight doesnt appear for sale on Delta.com and i spoke to a res agent and they said they dont have listed nonstop service. Also it does list the nonstop to Cancun a few months later online at delta.com. Does anyone know when this service actually starts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.150.156.189 (talk) 23:08, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An Orbitz search comes up with February 16th being the first Saturday available for a one-way ticket. I'll change the date in the article unless someone else knows anything different.--AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 23:52, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

International service at RDU

I noticed that one of the pictures on the RDU site states "the only international flight out of RDU is LGW.. "

Interesting, but Toronto is still considered international. And also, though it ends in a month, RDU still has Cancun. I think we should edit it to say "One international flight out of RDU is LGW.. "

Just a thought..

Kacey (talk) 02:02, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Puerto Rico is not international. Should we remove it from the list and the maps?

forceten (talk) 19:42, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Format of Airlines and Destinations

I have noticed that over the past few weeks a few IP users have tried to change the airlines and destinations section from a bullet based format to a table based one. I don't think that the table format is particularly productive or easy to read. Wouldn't it be better to leave it as a bullet based format. Unless there is a wikiproject guideline detailing that it should be a table based format, I will be leaving the format as a bullet based one. Thanks. HBombL (talk) 04:20, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The table format is very difficult to read and does not add any value to the article. At least the bullet format provides the information is a logical manner, although I don't necessary see the point of having each destination per regional carrier. Wouldn't it just be easier to list the destinations by mainline, then list all the destinations by regional carriers?

For example.. Delta (SLC, ATL, etc) and then have Delta Connection (CVG, BOS, LGA, etc) and under that bullet it so it says Delta Connection operated by Comair, Delta Connection operated by ASA, etc

That way, you don't have to go in all the time to change when a switch in carriers occurs). Just a thought. -- Kacey (talk) 15:51, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe. I still think that the current format works pretty well. I don't know if the refinements that you are suggesting would make the current format anymore user-friendly. HBombL (talk) 17:41, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion on this topic at WP:AIRPORTS. Cashier freak (talk) 19:47, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note, but when was it decided that we should change the format of Airlines and Destinations to a table format...I still argue against this format, as it is far less user friendly. HBombL (talk) 03:05, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

B Class article

So, if this is a B-Class article, what is needed to make it a GA class? A class? Some insight would be helpful to move this article forward. Kacey (talk) 02:25, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bad Link

There is a sub article link on here for "Airline Hubs at RDU" and all it does is redirect back to the main article. Why is this and what happened to the information that used to be included here and then in that sub article??? Qzd800 (talk) 01:31, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Northwest Airlines operating Delta flights

Strictly speaking here, Northwest Airlines no longer exists. It is now a subsidiary of Delta. In addition, all NW planes are being painted with the delta paint scheme, with a small inset noting "Operated by Northwest Airlines". Therefore it is safe to assume that one can say that these are now Delta flights being operated by a subsidiary. While the flight codes, etc. may not change, this is strictly because of the operating certificate that Northwest operates under. Until the op certificate is merged with Delta's, Northwest flights will stay have their own code. However, for all practical purposes, Northwest Flights are now Delta flights being operated by a subsidiary. HBombL (talk) 03:21, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Northwest Airlines still exists as a independent carrier. Delta just owns the airline. Northwest flights have not become Delta. Please stop changing this. Cashier freak (talk) 03:26, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports#Delta and Northwest because this issue concerns other airports. Spikydan1 (talk) 03:48, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Changing back Northwest as separate entry. There was a discussion on the WP:AIRPORTS previously and the consensus then was to leave them listed separately untill their operating certificates are merged into one. --Arnzy (talk · contribs) 04:36, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks for the comment. I didn't realize that WP:Airports had come to a consensus on this. Thanks! HBombL (talk) 13:05, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They are one airline now. Xrlq (talk) 15:49, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Top Destination Box

Is this box even remotely accurate? From what I can tell, it's calling the top destination from RDU all the top connecting hubs. I would think if this box was to be accurate, it would show the top final destinations and not include connecting hubs unless they are truly final destiantions. I, for one, know that CLT is not one of RDU's top destination. Any suggestions or feedback? Kacey (talk) 03:15, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

“Big” flight announcement

RDU is leaking their new “big” flight tmrw at 10:00AM EST. Amsterdam? Portland? Dublin? Those are just my guesses. Gw24444 (talk) 03:51, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Raleigh Durham International Airport NASA Image.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:23, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Seems good to me. But, maybe we should include an RNAV chart as well? Gw24444 (talk) 02:50, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

- - i meant that the satellite picture seemed good, and shouldn’t be deleted Gw24444 (talk) 02:50, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Aerial Image Update

Can we update the aerial image? The aerial image still shows the old red-roof Terminal C, which was replaced with Terminal 2 over 10 years ago. ATPhil (talk) 05:56, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]