Jump to content

Template talk:US-airport-ga

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

ICAO vs IATA

[edit]

Perhaps we should do the prepend-K thing for US-airport-ga. It was sort of a bad decision in general for the US-airport one but GA airports with numbers shouldn't have a K prepended to it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dbchip (talk • contribs) 17:24, 21 October 2005 (UTC).[reply]

  • I agree since all US airports do not follow that 'rule'. If you need the ICAO code, then enter it. As a short term solution, modify the template to only append the K to turn a 3 letter code into a 4 letter code. That way the codes can be adjusted over time. Vegaswikian 23:06, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I thought the same thing and made the change about a month ago, however the links that use the passed-in value all depend on four-letter codes for airports. As I said in my edit summary
      the live airport activity link and NOAA/NWS link don't work at smaller airports, effectively leaving {{airnav|{{{1}}}}}
    • If/when these other sources update their data to include non-ICAO code airports, then the template should be changed. McNeight 23:21, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Although this discussion ended over a year ago, I just wanted to note that in September 2006, MJHankel created a {{US-airport-minor}} template that I have found works well for the smaller airports with FAA identifiers containing numbers:

{{US-airport-minor|18I}}

-- Zyxw 03:34, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Users Dbchip, Bovineone, and Lucent appear to be affiliated with a commercial link found in the External Links of the US-airport-ga template. Dbchip has made very specific entries in the Wiki pages of the CEO of another company in the list (avoiding the use of names). These users have been maliciously cleaning links from competitors of their site from various Wiki articles in clear violation of numerous Wiki policies and the very spirit of Wiki. Please stop reducing yourselves to this level of behavior.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.78.251.178 (talk • contribs) .

You appear to be signing in with different IP addresses in order to avoid the ban that was put in place on User_talk:65.33.51.221. Furthermore, you appear to be violating the three revert rule by insisting on re-introducing obviously commerial links that other editors have been explicitly removing because they do not meet the external links policies and because Wikipedia is not a link directory.
The FBOweb link you add does not appear to offer any benefit beyond what is already offered on the existing AirNav link. FBOweb appears to be consistently less notable than AirNav (which has an established presence on Wikiepedia), based on on Alexa and Google (288,000 hits vs 570,000 hits). Also FBOWEB seems to be a commercial and non-free service.
Sure, I happen to be a fellow wikipedian editor with the people you have mentioned (I link to them on my user page) and know each other because we share a subset of similar interests, but we all have independent thought and are acting with free accord on the behalf of wikipedia. -- Bovineone 15:14, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There are three people involved in this particular issue; a user of fboweb.com, someone who works there, and then myself - thus the three IP addresses. The site does indeed provide subscription services; however, all of the links that had been submitted were all free services without any charge, as are all the other links in the template. The edits you've made are clearly biased towards your own personal gain and are innapropriate - you are clearly, empirically affiliated with or related to the other parties, and you should avoid censoring links submitted by other users for that reason alone, especially when there is a conflict of interest so apparent. If you use your rule, the "airport information" reference in the "FlightAware" link should be removed as well, since it is duplicated by AirNav.
FlightAware provides competing services to fboweb.com - the link you've been removing from various aviation-related submissions. However, your own livejournal page has an entry dated July 8th that references a business relationship with "nugget" who is David McNett, the CIO of FlightAware; that same entry says, and I quote, "Business relationships have worked out such that nugget and xxx will also be there.". You've also made substantial edits and contributions to the FlightAware entry, as well as that of Daniel Baker who is the CEO of that company. You, dbchip and Lucent have all made substantial edits/contributions to those pages. The original entries that you removed were placed by a legitimate, unrelated party.
In the spirit of good nature, I'm doing my best to avoid any libelous remarks or personal attacks, but clearly you have a biased opinion related to the entries in question, and it is inappropriate for any of you to be making these changes so readily. Surely everyone's energies are better spent elsewhere rather than playing add/remove games. Please try to maintain some form of neutrality if you're going to particpate at all. -- 67.78.251.178 16:18, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I already told you I know those wikipedians; I publicly declare so on my user page. And fwiw, my business trip with Nugget was regarding an unrelated business, not FlightAware. I do edit many pages on wikipedia for formatting and style, whenever I find an interesting topic that I've heard of (nearly 2200 distinct pages currently), so it's no surprise that I have edited those. You'll notice that all of my edits to FlightAware or Daniel Baker are strictly formatting and do not otherwise alter the textual content or NPOV of those two articles.
Regardless, this discussion is not about the nature of the existing links to AirNav/FlightAware that have already been contributed by other users, accepted by the community, and are already present in this template--just the addition of even more links. WP:NOT says "wikipedia is not a linkfarm", so it is not necessary to add more links for the pure sake of completeness.
I can understand that you are motivated to promote your content while simultaneously help wikipedia but FBOweb seems to offer substantially comparable functionality as the links already present.
WP:EL also says that it should not include "A website that you own or maintain, even if the guidelines above imply that it should be linked to" and you mentioned above that an employee of FBOweb added the link. WP:EL also forbids "Links that are added to promote a site, that primarily exist to sell products or services", and FBOweb does appear to be primarily a commercially sponsored website. -- Bovineone 21:59, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Re-read my message - the original article was not posted by anyone at fboweb.com - they were added by a user of the website with no urging from anyone at fboweb.com; when it was deleted by the users previously mentioned, the original contributor contacted us to report the vandalism, and when we restored the information, this unproductive exchange between "us" and "you three" ensued. And this discussion is entirely related to the to FlightAware links, the removal of the fboweb.com links, and the reasons you did so. You are all quite clearly related, professionally and personally, and therefor biased. Calling on your previous "wiki experience" does not change that situation, and you're now obviously trying to fool someone. As for wether or not fboweb.com offers "substantially comparable functionality" as the other links referenced, that is entirely your opinion, and does not warrant the actual deletion of information without discussion or debate (poor etiquette).
In short, it's dissapointing that you felt it necessary to conduct yourself in this manner. Using the wikipedia as a playground to resolve your corporate competitiveness issues was simply unwarranted, and certainly unprovoked. -- 67.78.251.178 22:59, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

There is some... erm... stupidity going on with the whole linking of supposedly "current" observations and "historical" observations from NOAA. That stupidity is the fact that the "current" link goes back a day, while the supposed "historical" link goes back... you'll never believe this... 3 days! I suggest STRONGLY that the "current" link be dumped and the "historical" link be called simply "weather observations from NOAA"... the current linking structure is, IMHO, false advertising.Famartin 03:02, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With no debate to the contrary, I have removed the duplications. Famartin 10:46, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I see your surprise. I believe the more useful link is the current weather conditions; Perhaps the best way to treat this is to have NOAA weather: current, past three days; Intersofia (talk) 16:15, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
How about this: *Weather at KMYF: Current and Last 3 days (from NOAA)
Intersofia (talk) 16:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adding theAirdb to resources?

[edit]

There is avery good resource for airport in general, that gives destination routes and statistical information for all airports worldwide. The format is

http://www.theairdb.com/airport/IAD.html

Where the last three upper case letters are the IATA code of the airport (in this case Washington Dulles Intl). IMHO this can be a valuable resource to add. Vitoque 14:32, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With no debate to the contrary, I'm going to add theAirDb Vitoque 14:32, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adding AeroPlanner.com

[edit]

AeroPlanner.com is ad free and the linked page provides useful information at no charge. I think it meets the criteria for a valuable external resource. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.151.13.10 (talk) 14:38, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adding GlobalAir.com

[edit]

http://www.globalair.com/airport/bowman-field-lou.aspx would be a resource that should go along with or replace the Airnav link as it provides similar if not better information and is updated more frequently than AirNav.com which is only updated every 56 days according to the [Project home page]. GlobalAir.com is a good replacement to Airnav for this specific airport due to the fact that GlobalAir.com is located at Bowman Field.

--I have made the changes requested to Template:US-airport-ga/sandbox and Template:US-airport-ga/testcases. Advise if I have made a mistake, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srwikieditor (talk • contribs) 23:15, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Have a look at the testcases... The top sandbox cases do not match the bottom live version (not allowing to specify the location code in the sandbox for the one you changed). See if you can get that fixed... (hint: you shouldn't have to change the sandbox to make top and bottom match for that)  :) Technical 13 (talk) 23:31, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, I've looked it over in more depth and I notice two things. First (KLOU) isn't in GA. It is in KY. Second, GlobalAir.com doesn't use callsign friendly URLs or redirects, so... Not done: until GlobalAir fixes their site, and then it can be added to the list, but not a replacement for any other place unless there is consensus for such a thing. Thank you for your interest in editing the English Wikipedia! Technical 13 (talk) 20:00, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for taking a look at this. I did a little more research on GlobalAir.com's site and found that they do have call sign friendly URLs. For example, http://globalair.com/airport/apt.airport.aspx?aptcode={{{1}}}. Second I know that KLOU is not in GA, on sandbox it shows the templates for LOU in {{US-airport-ga/sandbox|LOU}} and on the Bowman Field page it shows the template as US-airport-ga|LOU. Will you please accept GlobalAir.com as an additional resource to this template?
  • I feel too involved in this request at this point and overwhelmed with getting caught up in my classes in school and other personal issues right now that I don't feel like I am the best person to look into this with the proper depth. So, I'm reactivating the request which should bring one of the other  Template editor's here of whom should be more than happy to look into it for you. — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 02:05, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you, no rush! Sorry it took so long to get back on your suggestions I have been dealing with the same type of thing. I am new to this and since I have a passion for flying I thought I would start here. I use Globalair.com for all my fuel prices and it drives me crazy that it isn't on here so I decided I would try to make that happen. This has turned out to be a much harder project than I anticipated but I think it will be worth it in the end. Thank you for your help and I hope everything works out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srwikieditor (talk • contribs) 03:33, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done: According to the page's protection level and your user rights, you should currently be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. I've added GlobalAir to the list. AirNav, should stay on the list unless you can get a consensus to remove it (I oppose removal for the record). You actually could have made this change yourself by now as you have way over the 10 edits and have been around longer than the 4 days required to edit semi-protected pages, but where-as this is a template, and template syntax can be tricky, I've made the edit for you without being the alternative and making you do it yourself (like others may have). ;) Happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 14:49, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not done: The page's protection level and/or your user rights have changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. —cyberpower ChatOnline 07:50, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi, the first Link to FAA is not working anymore, the new link seems to be https://nfdc.faa.gov/nfdcApps/services/ajv5/airportDisplay.jsp?airportId={{{{1}}} Airwalk-td 01:16, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

[edit]

The current (May 2019) link is broken for NOAA/NWS latest weather observations (http://www.crh.noaa.gov/data/obhistory/K{{{1}}}.html). Here is an example of that broken link for KFRG (Republic Airport, Farmington, NY).

This is my proposed replacement link: https://w1.weather.gov/data/obhistory/K{{{1}}}.html. Here is a test of that proposed updated link for KFRG (Republic Airport, Farmington, NY).

Any comments on making this change? — Archer1234 (talk) 11:38, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Is there a way to fix the "last three days" link in the penultimate bullet point in this template? It seems to be a dead link. Jeffrey Beall (talk) 15:54, 18 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:US-airport-ga&oldid=1246378149"