Talk:Monarch Airlines

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	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.	Aviation Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated projects or task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Airlines WikiProject

Orders from Boeing are not made public and should not be added to this listing.

Order now public as per Boeing press release 05:01 ET 18/08/2006.

Contents 1 Deer Lake 2 Images 3 Irrelevant info. 4 Fair use rationale for Image:MONARCHAIRLINESLOGO.jpg 5 Incidents and accidents 6 Monarch Scheduled hyperlink

[edit] Deer Lake

Does anyone know why the airport at Deer Lake, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada, has a Monarch Airlines desk? There was no-one there when I passed through. Ground Zero | t 15:59, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Because they have run charter flights into Deer Lake - suggest you put Monarch Airlines and Deer Lake into your favourite search engine MilborneOne 12:00, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Images

User User:Arpingstone has added a picture of an A320, do we need more than one picture of each type, should the extras be referenced and moved out to commons!. Should one of the A320s be deleted or replaced with an A321 which is missing ? MilborneOne 21:41, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Irrelevant info.

I have deleted the following information from the article

• Information on the models - this is a hobbyist thing and has nothing to do with the operations or history of the airline --Russavia 18:48, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:MONARCHAIRLINESLOGO.jpg

Image:MONARCHAIRLINESLOGO.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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:15, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Incidents and accidents

Have reverted change to earlier version omitting 2001 incident involving A300-605R G-MONS because it is listed as an official incident in the Flight Safety Foundation accidents/incidents database. Besides, according to the incident description, it could easily have developed into something far more serious if circumstances at the time had not been so favourable. Therefore, I am of the opinion it should be included in the article. PussyCat_369 16:52, 22 December 2007 (GMT)

Being featured in the Flight Safety Foundation database does not mean the incident was serious enough to warrant inclusion in an encyclopedic article. Generally speaking, passengers need to have been injured or the aircraft has to have been in serious danger or have suffered serious damage to be featured here. There are many similar incidents of this kind which have happened to Monarch and other airlines which do not appear here for this reason and including all of these would unnecessarily lengthen all airline articles with minor incidents. This incident has therefore been removed from this page before some months ago (along with another engine failure incident). Please do not keep adding the details until a consensus is reached on this discussion page first. SempreVolando (talk) 16:58, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Support SempreVolando it is a not in my opinion a notable incident nor does it meet the criteria as detailed above for inclusion. MilborneOne (talk) 18:20, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Monarch Scheduled hyperlink

Have removed the hyperlink from the first instance of mentioning Monarch Scheduled in the article as it only linked back to the same article (i.e. Monarch Airlines).

Pimpom123 15:10, 27 December 2007 (GMT)