User:Ashill/Cargo

This is a draft guideline to add to Wikipedia:WikiProject Airports/page content. Other editors are welcome to hack away at this until it's ready for inclusion in the guideline.

This draft has now been copied to Wikipedia:WikiProject Airports/page content and any edits should probably be made there. —Alex (ASHill | talk | contribs) 07:53, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

• Cargo airlines

Cargo airlines may be included after Airlines and destinations but are not necessary. The decision about whether cargo airlines add encyclopedic value to an airport can be made on an airport-by-airport basis. The text before the list should also make clear what inclusion in the list means, as these guidelines are not likely to be obvious to readers.

It is often difficult to find reliable source which verifies cargo service. This does not lessen the need to follow Wikipedia's policies and is a consideration in whether to include cargo airlines in an article.

If a list of cargo airlines is included, only airlines that operate cargo-only planes to the airport should be included. Cargo airlines in the following common situations should not be listed if they do not also operate cargo-only planes to the airport:

• Airlines which sell cargo space on passenger planes.
• Airlines with "cargo drop off" stations or cargo offices.
• Airlines which sell cargo space on trucks from the airport to a different airport.
• Airlines which sell cargo space on flights operated by other airlines, except for the primary codeshare partner if the operating carrier does not market the flight. In this case, the airline should be listed as for a passenger service, eg FedEx Feeder operated by Wiggins Airways.

If cargo airlines are included, cargo destinations are optional. Cargo destinations are not necessary for several reasons:

• unlike passenger destinations, the encyclopedic value of cargo destinations is unclear.
• direct cargo destinations are less important than direct passenger destinations, as cargo does not mind connections, whereas passengers generally do.

If cargo destinations are listed, only destinations served nonstop should be included. Or alternative proposal: "If cargo destinations are listed, only the final destination of the cargo plane with a single flight number should be listed; intermediate stops should not be listed."

If cargo airlines only are included, a simple list is typically a useful format for presenting the information. If cargo airlines are listed with destinations, an airlines and destinations table may be used, as for passenger airlines.

Sources: Because cargo airline schedules are often less readily available than passenger schedules, a reliable source should be explicitly listed verifying the service of each cargo airline.

• The best source is typically the airline's schedule listing a flight number of a cargo-only service to the airport in question. If an airline cargo timetable is available, it should be listed as a reference, with the reference including the direct URL of the timetable.
• If a timetable is not available and no other reliable source explicitly states that the airline operates a cargo flight to the airport, each destination should be justified by footnoting a flight number. URLs for cargo schedule/status on airport websites can be used. For areas of the world with air traffic control tracking coverage (North America, Europe, Australia, and any flight flying through related airspaces, such as most of the North Atlantic and North Pacific), a flight number and a static URL of such a flight number (e.g. CPA095 on FlightAware within <ref></ref> tags) should be included so anyone can easily verify if the service still exists. For these types of references, inclusion of an access date is particularly important.

Several common types of sources do not usually establish that an airline operates cargo service:

• Destination maps. Many airline cargo destination maps include passenger flights which carry cargo, airports with truck cargo service only, or other cargo service which does not merit inclusion.
• The existence of a cargo office.
• Sales directories. Cargo airlines and third parties advertise cargo space on an airline from an airport even if the service from the airport is on passenger planes, on other airlines, or on trucks.

Otherwise, the guidelines for the passenger Airlines and destinations list apply.

Comment

• Instead of "Airlines and Destinations", better to say "Airlines and destinations" bolded and with a small "d".
• Specific "should" requirements for listings:

• If an online airline cargo timetable is available, the URL should be used as source, appended after the airline's name.
• Otherwise, each destination should be justified by footnoting a flight number. URLs for cargo schedule/status on airport websites can be used. For areas of the world with ATC tracking coverage (North America, Europe, Australia, and any flight flying through related airspaces, such as most of the North Atlantic and North Pacific), a flight number and a static URL of such a flight number (e.g. CPA095 on FlightAware within <ref></ref> tags) should be included so anyone can easily verify if the service still exists. HkCaGu (talk) 01:47, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

• I like these guideline. However, HkCaGu, be careful that when you add the timetable/PDF, that it is current. Timetables from 2005 or even 2011 (any past year or timeframe) do no good and would get an tag, since it is not current. Sometimes, we just assume that the PDF timeframes are useful, without necessarily looking at the timeframe, since airlines (and cargo airlines, too), discontinue/suspend and commence services. I believe that any airport article with a cargo carrier list and not an Airline & Destination should be kept as a list and any with an A & D list that has not been reverted or disputed should be left alone, for now.
• May be flight numbers are included in a hidden note: No need for this note to be visible, but it lets editors know not to edit it or why it isn't edited.
• I would like to know better what significance having a cargo office at an airport has.

ASHill, thank you for making these guidelines. Thank you. (WorldTraveller101 | What is up? | How do I help?) 15:31, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

I think it's best to keep discussion consolidated at WT:AIRPORT. —Alex (ASHill | talk | contribs) 19:15, 15 April 2013 (UTC)