![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comment: Austrian Airlines also flies this route VIE-SIN-MEL and VIE-KUL-SYD —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.73.98.91 ( talk • contribs) 2006-01-02
Comment: Qatar Airways does not actually fly to Melbourne yet. Thai Airways is listed both in the table and afterwards, and why is only Auckland listed as a Malaysia Airlines destination? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.129.51.96 ( talk • contribs) 2006-04-15
Comment: I suggest Qatar Airways be deleted from the list. They do not actually fly to Melbourne. Objections? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.129.37.5 ( talk • contribs) 2006-05-15
Comment: Should that footnote thing be added for Gulf Air? Their flights go via Singapore as well as Bahrain. Emirates also has stopovers in Australia (for NZ destinations) and South East asia on the way to Dubai for Australian destinations. Nice is served via Rome. Or have I totally misunderstood the point of the footnote. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.129.37.5 ( talk • contribs) 2006-05-15
Comment: Which airport does VN, JL, KE, SQ, MU, TG, CA and Emirates fly to in Moscow? Domodevo or SVO ? KK kap 13:41, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Comment : Gulf Air has no longer fly to Australia via Singapore. Both australia and Singapore have no longer in their route maps. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.77.203.10 ( talk) 11:07, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Why is London listed as London Heathrow, yet the other cities not by airport names? Other cities in the table have multiple international airports - so I don't understand the distinction for London. The table should be consistent one way or the other. -- kjd 17:56, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
This article needs a bit of a clean up as noted by Kjd and anon poster. There are a number of duplications but, more importantly, why do we have both a list and a table? Surely it's much better to have just one. I'd go for the list, I'll change it all soon (when I get a chance, do it yourself if you fancy it). Anyone any preferences for how to format it? Iancaddy 23:39, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure if United Airlines' Sydney-Los Angeles/San Francisco-London services and Air New Zealand's Auckland-Los Angeles-London flight should be listed here. I've always thought that Kangaroo Route flights are specifically those that go via the Eastern hemisphere. If United is included, then Air Canada, LAN and Aerolineas Argentinas should be too.
- QFlyer 11:55, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Austrian's Routes to Sydney and Melbourne are going be suspended from March 2007 [1])
Where would this go in the table? Nicko6 07:23, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Sorry folks, but this definition of the Kangaroo Route is incorrect.
The term was coined by QANTAS after the war and had NOTHING to do with the number of hops that it took to get from Australia to Britain, or vice-versa. It had EVERYTHING to do with the fact that it was promoting an Australian airline and a service from/to Australia. The flying kangaroo symbol on the tail of the aircraft, and the name "Kangaroo Route", identified it to the world that it was Australian. It has no legitimate connection with any other airline and as far as I can determine the name belongs to QANTAS.
In additon, the term "Kangaroo Route" ONLY applies to the route Between Australia and Britain via Asia and Europe; it does NOT refer to the route across the Pacific Ocean to North America. This was referred to as the "Southern Cross Route", coined by the Australian airline which inaugurated the service and who operated it prior to QANTAS taking it over - British Commonwealth Pacific Airlines (BCPA).
I think that we definitely need a separete table for the REAL Kangaroo Route services - that is services between Australia/NZ and Britain with the SAME aircraft, NOT involving a change of planes. This would mean only BA, Virgin, Qantas and Air New Zealand. Only on these airlines the terminus of the flight that you board in Britain is actually in Australia/NZ and vv. FlyerBoy 07:11, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
should SAA's codeshare with qantas on JNB-SYD be included?
if so then why not include all of BA's codeshares with Qantas on SIN-PER/MEL/BNE/SYD/FRA or Lufthansa's codeshares with SIA on SIN-PER/SYD/MEL/BNE/FRA/ADL; as well as Virgin's codeshares with SQ for LHR/MAN-SIN-SYD, Air France with Qantas for SIN-SYD, Finnair with QF for SIN-BNE, Air Malta with QF for LHR-SIN-SYD? well you get my point. Blahx100 08:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Does anyone have any source for the claim that Air France plans to fly to Oz in 2007?
Block quote
I would suggest that this article be moved to Kangaroo Route (capitalised R), as the article specifically deals with services to/from Australia, is a term coined in Australia, and is subject to a Qantas trademark [6] and its useage is as a proper noun. But I see the "R" article already redirects here. Just a stickler for detail :) -- Russavia 18:52, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
I don't know whether this term can legitimately be applied to New Zealand as well as Australia, but the article as it stands needs fixing one way or the other. If New Zealand counts, the table column heading shouldn't read "Australian Departure Point(s)", whereas if it doesn't, the New Zealand mentions should be removed. I leave it up to someone more knowledgeable than me about the subject to decide which. -- Vardion 04:31, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
The trademark name refered to the multistop Qantas flights between Australia and London via Asia. It does not refer to Qantas flights via North America (Southern Cross, Fiesta). It certainly does not refer to other airlines' routes. Vietnam Airlines would be quite surpised to hear that its flight from Melbourne to London (change planes in Ho Chi Minh City overnight, fly Air France from CDG to LHR) is called the 'kangaroo route'.
I propose to Delete all references to non-QANTAS airlines in this article, to make it genuinely about the real Kangaroo Route. Kransky ( talk) 12:54, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Is it an international trademark? just curious. -- Vsion 05:36, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Is it really necessary for a list of airlines competing on the route to appear in both the introduction and the end of the history section? I can't say I'm keen on either as they're going to be edited to death as no-one agrees on where to draw the line, but at the very least we surely don't need the duplication. -- Rob.au ( talk) 14:29, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Should the flight durations be added? Can be sourced from airlines websites. 94.173.122.171 ( talk) 23:40, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
That is in fact a good idea, but would probably be best in a table. -- MJLRGS ( talk) 19:08, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
A couple of weeks ago most of the operations section was removed by Wikipeterproject, and the stated reason was uncited information. Firstly, the information can be confirmed quite easily through various routemaps, and I feel that the section was good, and therefore I can add citations to the section and put the operations section back. Please get back to me. -- MJLRGS ( talk) 20:14, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
What is "V-Jet service"? BadaBoom ( talk) 11:44, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
I took out the following paragraph.
Originally, Air New Zealand participated in the market by allowing a connection in Auckland and a stopover at either Hong Kong or Los Angeles. However, it relinquished the opportunity by dropping the Hong Kong - London route by 4 March 2013 which ends most airline companies in Oceania's adoption of the Kangaroo Route, especially routes from East Asian cities to London.
It's a bit vague and I'm not sure what it is the editor is trying to say here. The LA route is not part of the Kangaroo Route, and I don't think they flew from Hong Kong to Europe on their own planes. But the last sentence makes no obvious sense. Can the editor pls clarify, or could someone else reword it.-- Dmol ( talk) 10:56, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
I already explained in my edit summary deleting more than half of the size of this article. This article is about services between AU/NZ and UK, not about all services between Oceania (e.g. including Guam, Saipan, Palau) and Europe (e.g. including FRA, CDG, or even IST!) This article's relevance is because of AU/NZ's historical ties with the British Isles.
Anyone is welcome to re-establish the section with only a listing of (1) carriers, (2) connecting cities, (3) AU/NZ points, and (4) UK airports. Anything else is not encyclopedic. HkCaGu ( talk) 17:05, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
In para. 2 there is a comparison between the number of airlines offering the route in 2003 (over 20) and the number offering it in ? 2020 - only 2 as a through route, meaning no plane change. But in the over 20 airlines in 2003 several, and probably many, utilised plane changes. The comparison is invalid. Boscaswell talk 09:32, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
There are multiple topics already in this Talk page around the same topic, ranging from the most recent of 8 years ago, and the oldest of 16 years ago... I'll link them here so as to act as a psuedo-consolidator and try to readdress the topic as it has come back in yesterday's well-intended good faith edit (with a lot of work) from @ Essexman03:
See Previous Discussions:
[1] 2006 -
Talk:Kangaroo Route#Definition of Kangaroo Route
[2] 2007 -
Talk:Kangaroo Route#One-aircraft service
[3] 2007 -
Talk:Kangaroo Route#Needs fixing regarding New Zealand
[4] 2008 -
Talk:Kangaroo Route#Kangaroo Route can ONLY refer to the Qantas route
[5] 2008 -
Talk:Kangaroo Route#Airline lists
[6] 2011 -
Talk:Kangaroo Route#Recent removal of operations
[7] 2014 -
Talk:Kangaroo Route#Large route/airline section REMOVED!
Noted previous talk contributors (in no particular order, just me reading from the bottom of the page up): @ HkCaGu @ Dmol @ Wikipeterproject @ MJLRGS @ Rob.au @ Huaiwei @ Kransky @ Vardion @ FlyerBoy @ Essexman03
I am bringing back up this topic (and tagging the main valued participants in the previous discussions) as the topic has come up again with yesterday's edits. I made a revision and then when went to create a Talk page entry for it, found this robust-yet-aged rich history of the topic being debated.
To summarize my change: Removal of any flights with non-Australia origins (eg: Saipan) and non-UK destinations (eg: Paris)
(n.b. - I believe the frequency columns will prove hard to maintain/remain accurate, also noticed that the MEB3 are all missing which are a main operator on the kangaroo route)
@
Essexman03 has built a robust table that shows (what I presume to be ticketable) 1-hop routes between OZ & the UK served by the same carrier ("the same ticket") if I understand it correctly? (please correct my understanding @
Essexman03 ?)
As I can see the inevitable question coming back up of does it belong in the Kangaroo Route article, I thought best to create this talk topic to attempt to focus discussion?/any debate before reaching consensus on what the table should look like/further edits to the article to make it the best Wiki/Encyclopedic article on "The Kangaroo Route"
The pertinent questions in my mind:
Q1 - Include other carriers between Australia and UK? - I opine YesNo (edited to reflect my mindset change, see my inline reply below from 23 Jan, believe may be possible to have other carriers in a separate subheading or another article altogether, but Rob.au is right it is creating undue weight by having them all in the same table): , Whilst the term is held as a an
Australian Trademark by Qantas, As pointed out above, Qantas uses the term to refer to other operators between Australia & UK,
example1(2003) and
example2(2013)
even IATA uses the term to refer to all AUS-UK routes
Q2 - Include other origins/destinations outside Australia and UK? - I opine No. Explicitly not ever part of the definition of "The Kangaroo route"
Q3 - Is The Kangaroo Route defined as A, B, or C?: I opine Option B on the below, while Qantas has used the term flexibly for marketing purposes: example of Option A (see '1947') , Option B , and Option C I am of the opinion that while the original was A, the most prevalent usage (by Qantas and others) is Option B.
A) Sydney - London
B) [any Australian origin] - London
C) [any Australian origin] to [any UK destination]
Interested in people's thoughts on the current state on these questions and seeing what we can do to continue to make this wiki entry the best possible, cheers all (and my respect to all contributors past and present!)
DigitalExpat (
talk)
09:01, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi All, continuing this important topic, I did ( WP:BEBOLD) a significant edit to the article by adding a new section with cited examples of the evolution of the route over time, helping to combat the WP:NPOV and WP:Undue that have occurred (via good faith contributions!). Added this section to balance the article and also allowed for a cleaner cleaving of the article to delineate Qantas' ownership of the "Kangaroo Route"™ trademark term, but acknowledging and highlighting its other continued use (even by Qantas themselves) to refer to other operators. Also suggested some other revisions as well. Would appreciate the sharp eyes of other editors to help refine the table if you see anything wrong in it (n.b. - it can get confusing counting "stops" versus "hops"! (eg 1947 first Qantas flight had 6 stops which equals 7 hops!) Also not helpful that even Qantas contradicts itself on multiple items (thus the reinforced citation on items). Cheers to all to hopefully continuing to evolve and improve the article. (Two thoughts for future discussion: 1 - Should we make (both?) Tables Collapsed by default for ease of reading? 2 - I'd like to suggest we trim some of the columns off the other operators table (eg: direct flights available, frequency (x2) ) for easier upkeep / more credibility?) DigitalExpat ( talk) 10:14, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
@ Kai2004: please fill in a source for the ref you named "JL". -- Fyrael ( talk) 18:57, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comment: Austrian Airlines also flies this route VIE-SIN-MEL and VIE-KUL-SYD —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.73.98.91 ( talk • contribs) 2006-01-02
Comment: Qatar Airways does not actually fly to Melbourne yet. Thai Airways is listed both in the table and afterwards, and why is only Auckland listed as a Malaysia Airlines destination? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.129.51.96 ( talk • contribs) 2006-04-15
Comment: I suggest Qatar Airways be deleted from the list. They do not actually fly to Melbourne. Objections? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.129.37.5 ( talk • contribs) 2006-05-15
Comment: Should that footnote thing be added for Gulf Air? Their flights go via Singapore as well as Bahrain. Emirates also has stopovers in Australia (for NZ destinations) and South East asia on the way to Dubai for Australian destinations. Nice is served via Rome. Or have I totally misunderstood the point of the footnote. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.129.37.5 ( talk • contribs) 2006-05-15
Comment: Which airport does VN, JL, KE, SQ, MU, TG, CA and Emirates fly to in Moscow? Domodevo or SVO ? KK kap 13:41, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Comment : Gulf Air has no longer fly to Australia via Singapore. Both australia and Singapore have no longer in their route maps. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.77.203.10 ( talk) 11:07, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Why is London listed as London Heathrow, yet the other cities not by airport names? Other cities in the table have multiple international airports - so I don't understand the distinction for London. The table should be consistent one way or the other. -- kjd 17:56, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
This article needs a bit of a clean up as noted by Kjd and anon poster. There are a number of duplications but, more importantly, why do we have both a list and a table? Surely it's much better to have just one. I'd go for the list, I'll change it all soon (when I get a chance, do it yourself if you fancy it). Anyone any preferences for how to format it? Iancaddy 23:39, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure if United Airlines' Sydney-Los Angeles/San Francisco-London services and Air New Zealand's Auckland-Los Angeles-London flight should be listed here. I've always thought that Kangaroo Route flights are specifically those that go via the Eastern hemisphere. If United is included, then Air Canada, LAN and Aerolineas Argentinas should be too.
- QFlyer 11:55, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Austrian's Routes to Sydney and Melbourne are going be suspended from March 2007 [1])
Where would this go in the table? Nicko6 07:23, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Sorry folks, but this definition of the Kangaroo Route is incorrect.
The term was coined by QANTAS after the war and had NOTHING to do with the number of hops that it took to get from Australia to Britain, or vice-versa. It had EVERYTHING to do with the fact that it was promoting an Australian airline and a service from/to Australia. The flying kangaroo symbol on the tail of the aircraft, and the name "Kangaroo Route", identified it to the world that it was Australian. It has no legitimate connection with any other airline and as far as I can determine the name belongs to QANTAS.
In additon, the term "Kangaroo Route" ONLY applies to the route Between Australia and Britain via Asia and Europe; it does NOT refer to the route across the Pacific Ocean to North America. This was referred to as the "Southern Cross Route", coined by the Australian airline which inaugurated the service and who operated it prior to QANTAS taking it over - British Commonwealth Pacific Airlines (BCPA).
I think that we definitely need a separete table for the REAL Kangaroo Route services - that is services between Australia/NZ and Britain with the SAME aircraft, NOT involving a change of planes. This would mean only BA, Virgin, Qantas and Air New Zealand. Only on these airlines the terminus of the flight that you board in Britain is actually in Australia/NZ and vv. FlyerBoy 07:11, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
should SAA's codeshare with qantas on JNB-SYD be included?
if so then why not include all of BA's codeshares with Qantas on SIN-PER/MEL/BNE/SYD/FRA or Lufthansa's codeshares with SIA on SIN-PER/SYD/MEL/BNE/FRA/ADL; as well as Virgin's codeshares with SQ for LHR/MAN-SIN-SYD, Air France with Qantas for SIN-SYD, Finnair with QF for SIN-BNE, Air Malta with QF for LHR-SIN-SYD? well you get my point. Blahx100 08:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Does anyone have any source for the claim that Air France plans to fly to Oz in 2007?
Block quote
I would suggest that this article be moved to Kangaroo Route (capitalised R), as the article specifically deals with services to/from Australia, is a term coined in Australia, and is subject to a Qantas trademark [6] and its useage is as a proper noun. But I see the "R" article already redirects here. Just a stickler for detail :) -- Russavia 18:52, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
I don't know whether this term can legitimately be applied to New Zealand as well as Australia, but the article as it stands needs fixing one way or the other. If New Zealand counts, the table column heading shouldn't read "Australian Departure Point(s)", whereas if it doesn't, the New Zealand mentions should be removed. I leave it up to someone more knowledgeable than me about the subject to decide which. -- Vardion 04:31, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
The trademark name refered to the multistop Qantas flights between Australia and London via Asia. It does not refer to Qantas flights via North America (Southern Cross, Fiesta). It certainly does not refer to other airlines' routes. Vietnam Airlines would be quite surpised to hear that its flight from Melbourne to London (change planes in Ho Chi Minh City overnight, fly Air France from CDG to LHR) is called the 'kangaroo route'.
I propose to Delete all references to non-QANTAS airlines in this article, to make it genuinely about the real Kangaroo Route. Kransky ( talk) 12:54, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Is it an international trademark? just curious. -- Vsion 05:36, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Is it really necessary for a list of airlines competing on the route to appear in both the introduction and the end of the history section? I can't say I'm keen on either as they're going to be edited to death as no-one agrees on where to draw the line, but at the very least we surely don't need the duplication. -- Rob.au ( talk) 14:29, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Should the flight durations be added? Can be sourced from airlines websites. 94.173.122.171 ( talk) 23:40, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
That is in fact a good idea, but would probably be best in a table. -- MJLRGS ( talk) 19:08, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
A couple of weeks ago most of the operations section was removed by Wikipeterproject, and the stated reason was uncited information. Firstly, the information can be confirmed quite easily through various routemaps, and I feel that the section was good, and therefore I can add citations to the section and put the operations section back. Please get back to me. -- MJLRGS ( talk) 20:14, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
What is "V-Jet service"? BadaBoom ( talk) 11:44, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
I took out the following paragraph.
Originally, Air New Zealand participated in the market by allowing a connection in Auckland and a stopover at either Hong Kong or Los Angeles. However, it relinquished the opportunity by dropping the Hong Kong - London route by 4 March 2013 which ends most airline companies in Oceania's adoption of the Kangaroo Route, especially routes from East Asian cities to London.
It's a bit vague and I'm not sure what it is the editor is trying to say here. The LA route is not part of the Kangaroo Route, and I don't think they flew from Hong Kong to Europe on their own planes. But the last sentence makes no obvious sense. Can the editor pls clarify, or could someone else reword it.-- Dmol ( talk) 10:56, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
I already explained in my edit summary deleting more than half of the size of this article. This article is about services between AU/NZ and UK, not about all services between Oceania (e.g. including Guam, Saipan, Palau) and Europe (e.g. including FRA, CDG, or even IST!) This article's relevance is because of AU/NZ's historical ties with the British Isles.
Anyone is welcome to re-establish the section with only a listing of (1) carriers, (2) connecting cities, (3) AU/NZ points, and (4) UK airports. Anything else is not encyclopedic. HkCaGu ( talk) 17:05, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
In para. 2 there is a comparison between the number of airlines offering the route in 2003 (over 20) and the number offering it in ? 2020 - only 2 as a through route, meaning no plane change. But in the over 20 airlines in 2003 several, and probably many, utilised plane changes. The comparison is invalid. Boscaswell talk 09:32, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
There are multiple topics already in this Talk page around the same topic, ranging from the most recent of 8 years ago, and the oldest of 16 years ago... I'll link them here so as to act as a psuedo-consolidator and try to readdress the topic as it has come back in yesterday's well-intended good faith edit (with a lot of work) from @ Essexman03:
See Previous Discussions:
[1] 2006 -
Talk:Kangaroo Route#Definition of Kangaroo Route
[2] 2007 -
Talk:Kangaroo Route#One-aircraft service
[3] 2007 -
Talk:Kangaroo Route#Needs fixing regarding New Zealand
[4] 2008 -
Talk:Kangaroo Route#Kangaroo Route can ONLY refer to the Qantas route
[5] 2008 -
Talk:Kangaroo Route#Airline lists
[6] 2011 -
Talk:Kangaroo Route#Recent removal of operations
[7] 2014 -
Talk:Kangaroo Route#Large route/airline section REMOVED!
Noted previous talk contributors (in no particular order, just me reading from the bottom of the page up): @ HkCaGu @ Dmol @ Wikipeterproject @ MJLRGS @ Rob.au @ Huaiwei @ Kransky @ Vardion @ FlyerBoy @ Essexman03
I am bringing back up this topic (and tagging the main valued participants in the previous discussions) as the topic has come up again with yesterday's edits. I made a revision and then when went to create a Talk page entry for it, found this robust-yet-aged rich history of the topic being debated.
To summarize my change: Removal of any flights with non-Australia origins (eg: Saipan) and non-UK destinations (eg: Paris)
(n.b. - I believe the frequency columns will prove hard to maintain/remain accurate, also noticed that the MEB3 are all missing which are a main operator on the kangaroo route)
@
Essexman03 has built a robust table that shows (what I presume to be ticketable) 1-hop routes between OZ & the UK served by the same carrier ("the same ticket") if I understand it correctly? (please correct my understanding @
Essexman03 ?)
As I can see the inevitable question coming back up of does it belong in the Kangaroo Route article, I thought best to create this talk topic to attempt to focus discussion?/any debate before reaching consensus on what the table should look like/further edits to the article to make it the best Wiki/Encyclopedic article on "The Kangaroo Route"
The pertinent questions in my mind:
Q1 - Include other carriers between Australia and UK? - I opine YesNo (edited to reflect my mindset change, see my inline reply below from 23 Jan, believe may be possible to have other carriers in a separate subheading or another article altogether, but Rob.au is right it is creating undue weight by having them all in the same table): , Whilst the term is held as a an
Australian Trademark by Qantas, As pointed out above, Qantas uses the term to refer to other operators between Australia & UK,
example1(2003) and
example2(2013)
even IATA uses the term to refer to all AUS-UK routes
Q2 - Include other origins/destinations outside Australia and UK? - I opine No. Explicitly not ever part of the definition of "The Kangaroo route"
Q3 - Is The Kangaroo Route defined as A, B, or C?: I opine Option B on the below, while Qantas has used the term flexibly for marketing purposes: example of Option A (see '1947') , Option B , and Option C I am of the opinion that while the original was A, the most prevalent usage (by Qantas and others) is Option B.
A) Sydney - London
B) [any Australian origin] - London
C) [any Australian origin] to [any UK destination]
Interested in people's thoughts on the current state on these questions and seeing what we can do to continue to make this wiki entry the best possible, cheers all (and my respect to all contributors past and present!)
DigitalExpat (
talk)
09:01, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi All, continuing this important topic, I did ( WP:BEBOLD) a significant edit to the article by adding a new section with cited examples of the evolution of the route over time, helping to combat the WP:NPOV and WP:Undue that have occurred (via good faith contributions!). Added this section to balance the article and also allowed for a cleaner cleaving of the article to delineate Qantas' ownership of the "Kangaroo Route"™ trademark term, but acknowledging and highlighting its other continued use (even by Qantas themselves) to refer to other operators. Also suggested some other revisions as well. Would appreciate the sharp eyes of other editors to help refine the table if you see anything wrong in it (n.b. - it can get confusing counting "stops" versus "hops"! (eg 1947 first Qantas flight had 6 stops which equals 7 hops!) Also not helpful that even Qantas contradicts itself on multiple items (thus the reinforced citation on items). Cheers to all to hopefully continuing to evolve and improve the article. (Two thoughts for future discussion: 1 - Should we make (both?) Tables Collapsed by default for ease of reading? 2 - I'd like to suggest we trim some of the columns off the other operators table (eg: direct flights available, frequency (x2) ) for easier upkeep / more credibility?) DigitalExpat ( talk) 10:14, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
@ Kai2004: please fill in a source for the ref you named "JL". -- Fyrael ( talk) 18:57, 25 September 2023 (UTC)