![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Hi all. I noticed that China Eastern Airlines said it was going to start Boston-Beijing service in June 2012. However, it obviously does not serve currently, but it wasn't terminated either. What happened to it? I found more than 5 online sources that announced the service commencement? Anyone with info, please reply. Thanks. -Connor ( ConnorLax101| talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:49, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi everyone. I am wondering for the Airlines and Destinations table, should I merge the mainline United operations in A with the mainline operations in C since they are all going to end up in the same place. Also, the Continental/United merger is completely done? I think we should since it is a) a minor edit and b) it will make it easier for everything else, too. Thanks. -Connor ( WorldTraveller101 | talk | contribs) 13:03, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
This talk page is getting massive. If no one objects, I'll ask User:MiszaBot III to automatically archive threads more than 365 days old. —Alex ( ASHill | talk | contribs) 19:36, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Is the footnote "Although those airlines depart from the domestic terminals, they arrive at Terminal E for customs processing" really necessary? Do any of the other terminals have customs facilities beside Terminal E? 68.119.73.36 ( talk) 03:53, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
I am for now removing the Cargo Airlines and Destinations part of Airlines and Destinations. This is because there are a lack of sources and it is very incomplete and outdated. If you disagree or would like to revert it, reply on this talk page. Anything personal, post on my Talk Page. -Connor talk —Preceding undated comment added 01:56, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
It's the problem I have. There are no sources. Some airport pages such as the San Francisco International Airport one don't have a cargo list. If we can't find anything soon, it'll be removed until further noticed. Thanks.-Connor ( ConnorLax101| talk)
I've refrained from reverting the extensive modifications ConnorLax101 (now WorldTraveller101) has made because they're happening faster than I care to keep up with. However, it appears to me that essentially all of the changes are not an improvement. First, they are largely based on this source. That source doesn't seem like a reliable source to me; it's authorship is unclear and it's difficult to discern that they maintain accurate schedules for all the cargo carriers listed. Moreover, it doesn't state that the enormous list of cargo carriers that has been compiled actually fly aircraft to/from Logan, let alone to the indicated destinations. Instead, it claims only to be a list of advertisers. Thus, I believe it is essentially worthless as a source for cargo destinations from Logan.
Also, does anyone believe that (for example) Singapore Airlines flies their own cargo planes from Logan to Amsterdam, Chicago-O'Hare, Dallas/Fort Worth, Los Angeles, and Singapore? I don't think they actually fly to Logan at all, though I could be wrong.
There is also a larger question, which may be best answered at WP:Airports: what is the point of a list of cargo destinations anyway, particularly one this long? Cargo schedules are difficult to ascertain and not generally publicly available, and it's also unclear what they contribute to the article except as a directory (which is NOT the purpose of a Wikipedia article). If the table actually listed what it meant, then it would be better. As it stands now, there's no indication to a reader what it means.
I've also tagged several references that don't actually include the destinations that are listed in the article. I only checked a few, though; I suspect many more are questionable. For example, the Lufthansa cargo schedule (from the provided ref) lists cargo flights to the indicated destinations, but on a passenger widebody; should that be included in the cargo destinations? I don't think so. —Alex ( ASHill | talk | contribs) 00:27, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
A few I recognized as "incorrect", I removed. However, a 'destination' according to several users can be a stopover or a continuing flight. Any cargo that gets Point A to Point B is considered a 'cargo destination', no matter how many stops are made, as long as goes to a point. For example, Singapore Cargo flies to Singapore and Amsterdam (which continues on to Singapore), and make a stopover in the other three. I know ABX is right. Cathay Cargo has Taipei as O & D, but uses the rest as stopovers. But this is based on 'cargo destinations'. This was a discussion that I brought up on other pages and most did not know. Only two said that for cargo, as long as it gets from Point A to Point B, no matter how many stopovers it has, it is destination, as well as those stopovers. It was also decided that these differ from passenger destinations, since passenger only transports people and their luggage. All are going to one airport. It's not the same for cargo. There are many different things, most not going to the same place or airport.
Also, as you can see, I got previous approval and consensus of all of this. I'm glad you recognize some inaccuracies, however some claimed inaccuracies are actually correct. I was wrong on a few of them, but most are right. Was EVA Cargo not working for you, for me, or something? It brought up Boston. Lets continue to discuss it further. Thanks. -Connor ( WorldTraveller101 | talk | contribs)
Connor/WorldTraveller have you totally bent my meaning? Why should cargo be MORE LIBERAL than passenger destinations? It can't be a destination if it isn't the same plane AND flight number, period/full stop. If it is, anywhere in the world is a destination, just like how UPS/Fedex/DHL advertising departments would want to tell you. To me, anything cargo that isn't non-stop should be excluded. To a piece of cargo, it's getting from Point A to Point B that matters, not whether the whole trip involves a plane change or flight number. Cargo doesn't get lost with a plane change like passenger baggage. Therefore there is no justification of including continuations. Now this gets into muddy waters as foreign carriers would fly domestic routes that passenger services would not. (For example, CX wouldn't fly from much anywhere in the US to HKG.) So to agree with Ashill, I think only carriers should be listed and destinations should be all but eliminated. HkCaGu ( talk) 14:04, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
A number of references are being added now; thanks. However, nearly every one of these references (as of this version of the page) explicitly indicates that the airline does not fly cargo flights to BOS:
All of these airlines should be removed from the cargo list based on the reference provided. —Alex ( ASHill | talk | contribs) 02:19, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
At this point, with what you're saying, we are back down to the list we had two months ago, which had zero citations and was <10% complete. Thanks. ( WorldTraveller101 | What is up? | How do I help?) 14:43, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Now the bit of the cargo list that no one disputes (ie the cargo airlines that actually do serve BOS) has been removed. Why throw the baby out with the bathwater? —Alex ( ASHill | talk | contribs) 22:30, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
A user recently removed the second Japan Airlines 787 incident from the A and I section. [2] Should this be included or not?
Well thats wrong. The incident was not what caused the groundings. They where grounded because of battery problems, this aircraft had a fuel leak!! -- JetBlast ( talk) 09:29, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
The destination map that was recently uploaded by Josh.avery21 is erroneous on several accounts and should be promptly removed.
1) The term 'direct' can refer to a flight that has interim stops but is ticketed to the final destination. If intending to show flights with 'nonstop' service from Logan Airport, the map should use the term 'nonstop' otherwise a large majority of Southwest Airlines destinations could be added if we're talking 'direct' i.e. Southwest Airlines Flight 413 offers 'direct' service to Orange County: Baltimore-Boston-Kansas City-Indianapolis-Denver-Orange County-San Francisco.
2) Istanbul service does not commence until May 2014 and should not be on the map until then.
3) Covington, Kentucky refers to the city in which CVG was named after when the airport first opened, however, the airport serves (and is referred to as) Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport.
4) Label the destinations by IATA code, not city (Houston listed twice could be confusing for some).
5) The map text is illegible and of poor quality - if you're going to showcase the commercial aviation network from a large US city, make it tasteful.
Overall, I think this page is in need of a map to showcase the nonstop destinations and I am glad someone attempted to do so and after a few changes, this could be a very useful exhibit.
Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.151.131.131 ( talk) 13:24, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
So I just realized that Nantucket Airlines was added to the list of airlines. This confused me slightly as I thought that Cape Air owned Nantucket Airlines and therefore was essentially the same airline.
Any clarification would be great.
Bbrsox ( talk) 01:45, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Are the two buildings north/south or east/west? Google map says it's east and west, and here is a probably more reliable source:
https://www.massport.com/logan-airport/inside-the-airport/logan-interactive-maps/
18.53.0.88 ( talk) 01:04, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
\bairport-technology\.com\b
on the local blacklistIf you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 11:28, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—
cyberbot II
NotifyOnline
19:24, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
A user has twice removed a citation needed tag for the sentence "Air France, British Airways, and Lufthansa are also possible candidates [to fly an A380 to Logan] due to the volume of European traffic handled by those airlines." I thought this sentence was in the article a while (months or years?) ago with a citation, but I can't find it in the history. Without a citation, this sentence is original research, as far as I'm concerned. Is there any justification for including this sentence without a citation? —Alex ( ASHill | talk | contribs) 00:22, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Why is AirTran deleted? I believe the airline is still operating flights but will not cease until December 28, 2014. Did it convert to Southwest already?? Rzxz1980 ( talk) 05:23, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Please do not add BOS as a focus city or hub for DL. We are currently reaching a consensus on the DL talk page, if you have opinions or sources, please post them there. For now we have agreed to not include DL as either, but when a decision is made, this page can be updated to reflect the decision. Stinger20 ( talk) 23:24, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
Boston-Cancun on American Airlines runs YEAR ROUND on American Airlines every week. Source: American Airlines flight listings shows the route operating every Saturday from 11/4 until September 2016.. where they finished scheduling to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.91.76.32 ( talk) 18:30, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Totally agree here. BOS to CUN. Is a year round operation on American Airlines.runs 50 weeks a year — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
2600:1006:B16A:90F3:5179:6B70:EEA0:E33 (
talk)
18:36, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Unfortunatelya 'seasonal' flight, is one that operates during a particular season. BOS-CUN runs year round. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caulineire ( talk • contribs) 04:38, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
It is a 3:1 vote to keep AA's BOS-CUN at year round since it operates the route year round, just skips 2 weeks in November. Route DOES operate 2 weeks in November. Very much year round — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caulineire ( talk • contribs) 04:53, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
Seasonal means it operates during a particular season.. if that was the case I can give you a list of AA routes that arent year round. skipping 2 weeks is just reduced frequency. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.91.76.32 ( talk) 05:01, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
Logan International Airport. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 23:38, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Logan International Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:46, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
I disagree with those contributors who axed the "Expansion of International Service" section. The suppositions left with the edits--that the section was "way out of control" or "not what Wikipedia is for" --are personal opinions, and its complete removal does not improve the entry other than to make it shorter.
The rapid increase from 2012-present in foreign airlines at Logan is unquestionably remarkable in recent commercial aviation history, as evidenced by the numerous media articles to the development (many of which were referenced in the section) which also note the economic benefits on the metropolitan area of these developments. The phenomenon merits more mention than the presence of a cell phone lot or other mundane details about Logan, which remain in the article.
Many other airport articles on Wikipedia have detailed discussions of the history of notable services to that airport, so the section is generally consistent with content in other airport pages. I'm not going to go back and forth with other editors reversing the deletion, but the suggestions that the section somehow detracted from the article are based on individual preferences. Dfiner ( talk) 09:24, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
@ Dfiner: Did you read the referenced article? The whole section had only one reference - and all that reference said was that El Al were planning on 3 767s a week to Tel Aviv - nothing about the great increase in traffic nothing about how such a thing is remarkable (which it isn't - Nearly every airport in the world could have the same story). Everything else on the page is WP:SYNTHESIS. What I meant by out of control was that someone had originally entered a statement that may or may not have been true and supportable by a reference for that time, subsequently additions every example possible of a new service have been added. That is uncontrolled and unencyclopedic! it was a absolute mess and needed to be gone. Andrewgprout ( talk) 19:54, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Logan International Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:58, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
On the destinations map, FLL (Ft. Lauderdale, Florida) is located above PBI (Palm Beach, Florida). However, the actual North-South ordering of the airports is PBI then FLL.
RC Howe ( talk) 01:24, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Logan International Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=196799&p=irol-newsArticle_print&ID=1347781&highlight=When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:19, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Logan International Airport has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Virgin Atlantic Clubhouse reference link (#77) needs to be updated following VS's website update - new URL: https://www.virginatlantic.com/gb/en/virgin-experience/clubhouses-and-treats/our-clubhouses/boston-clubhouse.html 185.46.212.64 ( talk) 08:43, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
"Runway 14/32, which officially opened to air traffic on November 23, 2006, is unidirectional. Runway 32 is used for landings and 14 is used for takeoffs." So the runway operations go in two different directions; landings are flying westward and takeoffs are flying eastward. Since two different directions are used for operations on the runway, is "unidirectional" an appropriate word to describe it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.68.134.1 ( talk) 15:04, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
"Unidirectional" appears to be the term used by the airport and the FAA; it means that a given operation happens in only one direction on a runway, not that airplanes move on it in only one direction. The object is to have no airplanes flying over the end of the runway that is near a dense residential area. 209.6.73.78 ( talk) 20:50, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
The first External Link, "Official website", 404's. It goes to
https://www.massport.com/logan/
A link that works is
https://www.massport.com/logan-airport/
209.6.73.78 ( talk) 20:55, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
The height of the control tower is listed as "nearly a dozen stories high." This should actually say "nearly two dozen stories high." The tower is 22 stories (approx 270'-0" to the roof of the offices, excluding the ATC "cab" on the top, which pushes the height even higher to nearly 280'). "A dozen" is the wrong way to characterize the height.
50.195.28.73 ( talk) 17:56, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Sao Paulo flights are now bookable on LATAM - This can now be officially added.
2601:181:C380:5B10:5080:1E17:C13D:1B12 ( talk) 23:35, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Logan International Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:39, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
Fares to KMSY from KBOS on Southwest Airlines are now available on Southwest Airlines' website for the listed start date of March 10, 2018. The "dubious -- discuss" marker can now be removed.
Bbrsox ( talk) 23:13, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Sal, Cape Verde was added as a non-stop destination from BOS with a reference to TACV's website booking page but no non-stop flights can be found on their website nor can any flights be found on any flight tracker website. I have added a "dubious -- discuss" marker to the relevant page.
Bbrsox ( talk) 19:18, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
Bbrsox ( talk) 22:48, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
Does anyone have a source for this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:181:C300:3750:5080:1E17:C13D:1B12 ( talk) 23:58, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
There were no sources stating that Korean Air service is a resumption. The source provided says that this is a new service. AddictedFlyer21 ( talk) 06:02, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
"There are no sources stating that Korean Air service is a resumption" is an untrue statement. Here is a reliable source stating that exactly: https://www.routesonline.com/news/29/breaking-news/279981/why-korean-air-is-returning-to-boston-/ It is common knowledge that Korean Air served Boston until about 1999. This is precisely why the Boston Logan page is so annoying to try to edit.
Please note that ICN couldn’t possibly be a resumption because Incheon Airport did not open until 2001. If KE served Boston until 1999, then it flew to Gimpo Airport not Incheon. AddictedFlyer21 ( talk) 15:47, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
I am just as surprised and excited as anyone about the upcoming arrival of RAM at BOS and I'm also firmly in the camp that this article should adequately reference the remarkable growth in intercontinental traffic at Logan over the last decade. However, Boston has for many years had a non-stop flight to Africa with TACV/Cabo Verde Airline's non-stops to Praia or Sal, which (other than its brief move to and back from PVD) has been in existence since prior to the more recent connections to Asia and Latin America. Cabo Verde is an African country; the islands are part of the African continent. Just because they are not on the mainland of Africa does not make CMN Logan's first direct African flight. As historic as RAM's non-stop to Casablanca is, it is misleading to imply that this milestone represents the first direct flight from Logan to Africa.
I'm making a minor edit to Line 68 for now, (and keeping the previous line as is, which has long grouped Bermuda and the Azores into something termed "the Mid Atlantic region" —which I have never heard existed and question whether there is any actual geographic term that lumps these two distant island entities together), so others can weigh in but I don't think this recent edit improves this article. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dfiner ( talk • contribs) 16:54, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
I believe the fact that two of the four flights highjacked as part of the 9/11 attacks originated at Logan bears more than a "see also" citation. Just sayin'.... PurpleChez ( talk) 16:36, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
TRM has been in touch with me offwiki. He's taking a wikibreak at least and is considering retiring altogether. He asked me to let you know that unfortunately he won't be able to help you with your GA review as promised. I haven't done a GA review before but I'm experienced at FA and confident I can read up, so if you'd like me as an inadequate replacement for TRM's expertise, please do ask. -- Dweller ( talk) Become old fashioned! 14:52, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
The lists of destinations should have the State or nation. Eg, instead of "San Juan," "San Juan, Puerto Rico." Instead of "Austin," "Austin, TX" This is helpful in at least three ways: lets users know where a destination is if they don't know; disambiguates among cities sharing a name; and allows users to search through the list for countries and states. Eg, one can see every German city in the list, or every Californian city, etc.
The other suggestion: to have another view of the destination lists organized by region, a la the one available in the article for Addis Ababa's Bole airport (see article for reference). Haithem Abdella ( talk) 13:21, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
So I noticed American Airlines is starting to have quite a presence in Boston. American is about to have 25 non stop destinations in May. Many of which are to non hub destinations such as Austin, London-Heathrow, Cancun, Grand Cauman, Montego Bay, Nassau, Providenciales, Punta Cana, Harrisburg, Indianapolis, Raleigh/Durham, Rochester, Syracuse, Key West and Wilmington. By definition of focus cities for airlines is an airline where an airline is not a hub but has a quite a bit of non stop destinations that serve non hub cities for that airline. Take Raleigh/Durham for DELTA Airlines for example. Correct me if I am wrong. So my question is would American Airlines be considered a focus city in Boston since American his going to have 25 nonstop destinations? If American Airlines would not fall under the category of focus city for Boston may I please ask why? I would like to know. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fantech0104 ( talk • contribs) 00:12, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
Got it. Thanks! - Fantech0104
Hello,
Delta Mainline service to Cancun and DCI service to Charleston will be year round (albeit not daily for Cancun)not seasonal. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
205.174.22.25 (
talk)
21:13, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
{{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |accessdate=
(
help)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Hi all. I noticed that China Eastern Airlines said it was going to start Boston-Beijing service in June 2012. However, it obviously does not serve currently, but it wasn't terminated either. What happened to it? I found more than 5 online sources that announced the service commencement? Anyone with info, please reply. Thanks. -Connor ( ConnorLax101| talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:49, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi everyone. I am wondering for the Airlines and Destinations table, should I merge the mainline United operations in A with the mainline operations in C since they are all going to end up in the same place. Also, the Continental/United merger is completely done? I think we should since it is a) a minor edit and b) it will make it easier for everything else, too. Thanks. -Connor ( WorldTraveller101 | talk | contribs) 13:03, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
This talk page is getting massive. If no one objects, I'll ask User:MiszaBot III to automatically archive threads more than 365 days old. —Alex ( ASHill | talk | contribs) 19:36, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Is the footnote "Although those airlines depart from the domestic terminals, they arrive at Terminal E for customs processing" really necessary? Do any of the other terminals have customs facilities beside Terminal E? 68.119.73.36 ( talk) 03:53, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
I am for now removing the Cargo Airlines and Destinations part of Airlines and Destinations. This is because there are a lack of sources and it is very incomplete and outdated. If you disagree or would like to revert it, reply on this talk page. Anything personal, post on my Talk Page. -Connor talk —Preceding undated comment added 01:56, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
It's the problem I have. There are no sources. Some airport pages such as the San Francisco International Airport one don't have a cargo list. If we can't find anything soon, it'll be removed until further noticed. Thanks.-Connor ( ConnorLax101| talk)
I've refrained from reverting the extensive modifications ConnorLax101 (now WorldTraveller101) has made because they're happening faster than I care to keep up with. However, it appears to me that essentially all of the changes are not an improvement. First, they are largely based on this source. That source doesn't seem like a reliable source to me; it's authorship is unclear and it's difficult to discern that they maintain accurate schedules for all the cargo carriers listed. Moreover, it doesn't state that the enormous list of cargo carriers that has been compiled actually fly aircraft to/from Logan, let alone to the indicated destinations. Instead, it claims only to be a list of advertisers. Thus, I believe it is essentially worthless as a source for cargo destinations from Logan.
Also, does anyone believe that (for example) Singapore Airlines flies their own cargo planes from Logan to Amsterdam, Chicago-O'Hare, Dallas/Fort Worth, Los Angeles, and Singapore? I don't think they actually fly to Logan at all, though I could be wrong.
There is also a larger question, which may be best answered at WP:Airports: what is the point of a list of cargo destinations anyway, particularly one this long? Cargo schedules are difficult to ascertain and not generally publicly available, and it's also unclear what they contribute to the article except as a directory (which is NOT the purpose of a Wikipedia article). If the table actually listed what it meant, then it would be better. As it stands now, there's no indication to a reader what it means.
I've also tagged several references that don't actually include the destinations that are listed in the article. I only checked a few, though; I suspect many more are questionable. For example, the Lufthansa cargo schedule (from the provided ref) lists cargo flights to the indicated destinations, but on a passenger widebody; should that be included in the cargo destinations? I don't think so. —Alex ( ASHill | talk | contribs) 00:27, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
A few I recognized as "incorrect", I removed. However, a 'destination' according to several users can be a stopover or a continuing flight. Any cargo that gets Point A to Point B is considered a 'cargo destination', no matter how many stops are made, as long as goes to a point. For example, Singapore Cargo flies to Singapore and Amsterdam (which continues on to Singapore), and make a stopover in the other three. I know ABX is right. Cathay Cargo has Taipei as O & D, but uses the rest as stopovers. But this is based on 'cargo destinations'. This was a discussion that I brought up on other pages and most did not know. Only two said that for cargo, as long as it gets from Point A to Point B, no matter how many stopovers it has, it is destination, as well as those stopovers. It was also decided that these differ from passenger destinations, since passenger only transports people and their luggage. All are going to one airport. It's not the same for cargo. There are many different things, most not going to the same place or airport.
Also, as you can see, I got previous approval and consensus of all of this. I'm glad you recognize some inaccuracies, however some claimed inaccuracies are actually correct. I was wrong on a few of them, but most are right. Was EVA Cargo not working for you, for me, or something? It brought up Boston. Lets continue to discuss it further. Thanks. -Connor ( WorldTraveller101 | talk | contribs)
Connor/WorldTraveller have you totally bent my meaning? Why should cargo be MORE LIBERAL than passenger destinations? It can't be a destination if it isn't the same plane AND flight number, period/full stop. If it is, anywhere in the world is a destination, just like how UPS/Fedex/DHL advertising departments would want to tell you. To me, anything cargo that isn't non-stop should be excluded. To a piece of cargo, it's getting from Point A to Point B that matters, not whether the whole trip involves a plane change or flight number. Cargo doesn't get lost with a plane change like passenger baggage. Therefore there is no justification of including continuations. Now this gets into muddy waters as foreign carriers would fly domestic routes that passenger services would not. (For example, CX wouldn't fly from much anywhere in the US to HKG.) So to agree with Ashill, I think only carriers should be listed and destinations should be all but eliminated. HkCaGu ( talk) 14:04, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
A number of references are being added now; thanks. However, nearly every one of these references (as of this version of the page) explicitly indicates that the airline does not fly cargo flights to BOS:
All of these airlines should be removed from the cargo list based on the reference provided. —Alex ( ASHill | talk | contribs) 02:19, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
At this point, with what you're saying, we are back down to the list we had two months ago, which had zero citations and was <10% complete. Thanks. ( WorldTraveller101 | What is up? | How do I help?) 14:43, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Now the bit of the cargo list that no one disputes (ie the cargo airlines that actually do serve BOS) has been removed. Why throw the baby out with the bathwater? —Alex ( ASHill | talk | contribs) 22:30, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
A user recently removed the second Japan Airlines 787 incident from the A and I section. [2] Should this be included or not?
Well thats wrong. The incident was not what caused the groundings. They where grounded because of battery problems, this aircraft had a fuel leak!! -- JetBlast ( talk) 09:29, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
The destination map that was recently uploaded by Josh.avery21 is erroneous on several accounts and should be promptly removed.
1) The term 'direct' can refer to a flight that has interim stops but is ticketed to the final destination. If intending to show flights with 'nonstop' service from Logan Airport, the map should use the term 'nonstop' otherwise a large majority of Southwest Airlines destinations could be added if we're talking 'direct' i.e. Southwest Airlines Flight 413 offers 'direct' service to Orange County: Baltimore-Boston-Kansas City-Indianapolis-Denver-Orange County-San Francisco.
2) Istanbul service does not commence until May 2014 and should not be on the map until then.
3) Covington, Kentucky refers to the city in which CVG was named after when the airport first opened, however, the airport serves (and is referred to as) Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport.
4) Label the destinations by IATA code, not city (Houston listed twice could be confusing for some).
5) The map text is illegible and of poor quality - if you're going to showcase the commercial aviation network from a large US city, make it tasteful.
Overall, I think this page is in need of a map to showcase the nonstop destinations and I am glad someone attempted to do so and after a few changes, this could be a very useful exhibit.
Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.151.131.131 ( talk) 13:24, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
So I just realized that Nantucket Airlines was added to the list of airlines. This confused me slightly as I thought that Cape Air owned Nantucket Airlines and therefore was essentially the same airline.
Any clarification would be great.
Bbrsox ( talk) 01:45, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Are the two buildings north/south or east/west? Google map says it's east and west, and here is a probably more reliable source:
https://www.massport.com/logan-airport/inside-the-airport/logan-interactive-maps/
18.53.0.88 ( talk) 01:04, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
\bairport-technology\.com\b
on the local blacklistIf you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 11:28, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—
cyberbot II
NotifyOnline
19:24, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
A user has twice removed a citation needed tag for the sentence "Air France, British Airways, and Lufthansa are also possible candidates [to fly an A380 to Logan] due to the volume of European traffic handled by those airlines." I thought this sentence was in the article a while (months or years?) ago with a citation, but I can't find it in the history. Without a citation, this sentence is original research, as far as I'm concerned. Is there any justification for including this sentence without a citation? —Alex ( ASHill | talk | contribs) 00:22, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Why is AirTran deleted? I believe the airline is still operating flights but will not cease until December 28, 2014. Did it convert to Southwest already?? Rzxz1980 ( talk) 05:23, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Please do not add BOS as a focus city or hub for DL. We are currently reaching a consensus on the DL talk page, if you have opinions or sources, please post them there. For now we have agreed to not include DL as either, but when a decision is made, this page can be updated to reflect the decision. Stinger20 ( talk) 23:24, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
Boston-Cancun on American Airlines runs YEAR ROUND on American Airlines every week. Source: American Airlines flight listings shows the route operating every Saturday from 11/4 until September 2016.. where they finished scheduling to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.91.76.32 ( talk) 18:30, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Totally agree here. BOS to CUN. Is a year round operation on American Airlines.runs 50 weeks a year — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
2600:1006:B16A:90F3:5179:6B70:EEA0:E33 (
talk)
18:36, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Unfortunatelya 'seasonal' flight, is one that operates during a particular season. BOS-CUN runs year round. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caulineire ( talk • contribs) 04:38, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
It is a 3:1 vote to keep AA's BOS-CUN at year round since it operates the route year round, just skips 2 weeks in November. Route DOES operate 2 weeks in November. Very much year round — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caulineire ( talk • contribs) 04:53, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
Seasonal means it operates during a particular season.. if that was the case I can give you a list of AA routes that arent year round. skipping 2 weeks is just reduced frequency. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.91.76.32 ( talk) 05:01, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
Logan International Airport. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 23:38, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Logan International Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:46, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
I disagree with those contributors who axed the "Expansion of International Service" section. The suppositions left with the edits--that the section was "way out of control" or "not what Wikipedia is for" --are personal opinions, and its complete removal does not improve the entry other than to make it shorter.
The rapid increase from 2012-present in foreign airlines at Logan is unquestionably remarkable in recent commercial aviation history, as evidenced by the numerous media articles to the development (many of which were referenced in the section) which also note the economic benefits on the metropolitan area of these developments. The phenomenon merits more mention than the presence of a cell phone lot or other mundane details about Logan, which remain in the article.
Many other airport articles on Wikipedia have detailed discussions of the history of notable services to that airport, so the section is generally consistent with content in other airport pages. I'm not going to go back and forth with other editors reversing the deletion, but the suggestions that the section somehow detracted from the article are based on individual preferences. Dfiner ( talk) 09:24, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
@ Dfiner: Did you read the referenced article? The whole section had only one reference - and all that reference said was that El Al were planning on 3 767s a week to Tel Aviv - nothing about the great increase in traffic nothing about how such a thing is remarkable (which it isn't - Nearly every airport in the world could have the same story). Everything else on the page is WP:SYNTHESIS. What I meant by out of control was that someone had originally entered a statement that may or may not have been true and supportable by a reference for that time, subsequently additions every example possible of a new service have been added. That is uncontrolled and unencyclopedic! it was a absolute mess and needed to be gone. Andrewgprout ( talk) 19:54, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Logan International Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:58, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
On the destinations map, FLL (Ft. Lauderdale, Florida) is located above PBI (Palm Beach, Florida). However, the actual North-South ordering of the airports is PBI then FLL.
RC Howe ( talk) 01:24, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Logan International Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=196799&p=irol-newsArticle_print&ID=1347781&highlight=When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:19, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Logan International Airport has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Virgin Atlantic Clubhouse reference link (#77) needs to be updated following VS's website update - new URL: https://www.virginatlantic.com/gb/en/virgin-experience/clubhouses-and-treats/our-clubhouses/boston-clubhouse.html 185.46.212.64 ( talk) 08:43, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
"Runway 14/32, which officially opened to air traffic on November 23, 2006, is unidirectional. Runway 32 is used for landings and 14 is used for takeoffs." So the runway operations go in two different directions; landings are flying westward and takeoffs are flying eastward. Since two different directions are used for operations on the runway, is "unidirectional" an appropriate word to describe it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.68.134.1 ( talk) 15:04, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
"Unidirectional" appears to be the term used by the airport and the FAA; it means that a given operation happens in only one direction on a runway, not that airplanes move on it in only one direction. The object is to have no airplanes flying over the end of the runway that is near a dense residential area. 209.6.73.78 ( talk) 20:50, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
The first External Link, "Official website", 404's. It goes to
https://www.massport.com/logan/
A link that works is
https://www.massport.com/logan-airport/
209.6.73.78 ( talk) 20:55, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
The height of the control tower is listed as "nearly a dozen stories high." This should actually say "nearly two dozen stories high." The tower is 22 stories (approx 270'-0" to the roof of the offices, excluding the ATC "cab" on the top, which pushes the height even higher to nearly 280'). "A dozen" is the wrong way to characterize the height.
50.195.28.73 ( talk) 17:56, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Sao Paulo flights are now bookable on LATAM - This can now be officially added.
2601:181:C380:5B10:5080:1E17:C13D:1B12 ( talk) 23:35, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Logan International Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:39, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
Fares to KMSY from KBOS on Southwest Airlines are now available on Southwest Airlines' website for the listed start date of March 10, 2018. The "dubious -- discuss" marker can now be removed.
Bbrsox ( talk) 23:13, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Sal, Cape Verde was added as a non-stop destination from BOS with a reference to TACV's website booking page but no non-stop flights can be found on their website nor can any flights be found on any flight tracker website. I have added a "dubious -- discuss" marker to the relevant page.
Bbrsox ( talk) 19:18, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
Bbrsox ( talk) 22:48, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
Does anyone have a source for this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:181:C300:3750:5080:1E17:C13D:1B12 ( talk) 23:58, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
There were no sources stating that Korean Air service is a resumption. The source provided says that this is a new service. AddictedFlyer21 ( talk) 06:02, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
"There are no sources stating that Korean Air service is a resumption" is an untrue statement. Here is a reliable source stating that exactly: https://www.routesonline.com/news/29/breaking-news/279981/why-korean-air-is-returning-to-boston-/ It is common knowledge that Korean Air served Boston until about 1999. This is precisely why the Boston Logan page is so annoying to try to edit.
Please note that ICN couldn’t possibly be a resumption because Incheon Airport did not open until 2001. If KE served Boston until 1999, then it flew to Gimpo Airport not Incheon. AddictedFlyer21 ( talk) 15:47, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
I am just as surprised and excited as anyone about the upcoming arrival of RAM at BOS and I'm also firmly in the camp that this article should adequately reference the remarkable growth in intercontinental traffic at Logan over the last decade. However, Boston has for many years had a non-stop flight to Africa with TACV/Cabo Verde Airline's non-stops to Praia or Sal, which (other than its brief move to and back from PVD) has been in existence since prior to the more recent connections to Asia and Latin America. Cabo Verde is an African country; the islands are part of the African continent. Just because they are not on the mainland of Africa does not make CMN Logan's first direct African flight. As historic as RAM's non-stop to Casablanca is, it is misleading to imply that this milestone represents the first direct flight from Logan to Africa.
I'm making a minor edit to Line 68 for now, (and keeping the previous line as is, which has long grouped Bermuda and the Azores into something termed "the Mid Atlantic region" —which I have never heard existed and question whether there is any actual geographic term that lumps these two distant island entities together), so others can weigh in but I don't think this recent edit improves this article. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dfiner ( talk • contribs) 16:54, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
I believe the fact that two of the four flights highjacked as part of the 9/11 attacks originated at Logan bears more than a "see also" citation. Just sayin'.... PurpleChez ( talk) 16:36, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
TRM has been in touch with me offwiki. He's taking a wikibreak at least and is considering retiring altogether. He asked me to let you know that unfortunately he won't be able to help you with your GA review as promised. I haven't done a GA review before but I'm experienced at FA and confident I can read up, so if you'd like me as an inadequate replacement for TRM's expertise, please do ask. -- Dweller ( talk) Become old fashioned! 14:52, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
The lists of destinations should have the State or nation. Eg, instead of "San Juan," "San Juan, Puerto Rico." Instead of "Austin," "Austin, TX" This is helpful in at least three ways: lets users know where a destination is if they don't know; disambiguates among cities sharing a name; and allows users to search through the list for countries and states. Eg, one can see every German city in the list, or every Californian city, etc.
The other suggestion: to have another view of the destination lists organized by region, a la the one available in the article for Addis Ababa's Bole airport (see article for reference). Haithem Abdella ( talk) 13:21, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
So I noticed American Airlines is starting to have quite a presence in Boston. American is about to have 25 non stop destinations in May. Many of which are to non hub destinations such as Austin, London-Heathrow, Cancun, Grand Cauman, Montego Bay, Nassau, Providenciales, Punta Cana, Harrisburg, Indianapolis, Raleigh/Durham, Rochester, Syracuse, Key West and Wilmington. By definition of focus cities for airlines is an airline where an airline is not a hub but has a quite a bit of non stop destinations that serve non hub cities for that airline. Take Raleigh/Durham for DELTA Airlines for example. Correct me if I am wrong. So my question is would American Airlines be considered a focus city in Boston since American his going to have 25 nonstop destinations? If American Airlines would not fall under the category of focus city for Boston may I please ask why? I would like to know. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fantech0104 ( talk • contribs) 00:12, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
Got it. Thanks! - Fantech0104
Hello,
Delta Mainline service to Cancun and DCI service to Charleston will be year round (albeit not daily for Cancun)not seasonal. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
205.174.22.25 (
talk)
21:13, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
{{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |accessdate=
(
help)