This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Aviation: Airports 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.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: | b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> | b2<!--Coverage and accuracy   --> = <yes/no> | b3<!--Structure               --> = <yes/no> | b4<!--Grammar and style       --> = <yes/no> | b5<!--Supporting materials    --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion. This article is supported by the airport project. Dallas-Fort Worth ( inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dallas-Fort Worth, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Dallas-Fort WorthWikipedia:WikiProject Dallas-Fort WorthTemplate:WikiProject Dallas-Fort WorthDallas-Fort Worth articles United States: Texas High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as High-importance). Military history: Aviation / North America / United States / World War I / World War II C‑class This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles C This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale. This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Military aviation task force North American military history task force United States military history task force World War I task force World War II task force

I would think an encyclopedia would be devoid of bias. The portion of the article written for love field pertaining to southwest airlines is obviously biased to the position held by southwest in wanting to repeal the wright amendment. Whoever wrote the article is attempting to re-write history pertaining to the agreements made between Dallas and Fort Worth. It uses loaded phrases like "This angered the City of Fort Worth and DFW International Airport, which resented expanded air service at the airport within Dallas." Angered, yes. Resented expanded air service, no. The anger was over Dallas not taking measures to prevent Southwest from operating at Love. Dallas should have used non-renewing leases. By not doing so, Dallas shows it wanted Southwest to operate at Love. Dallas even now operates at a deficit at Love to curry favor with Southwest.

The phrase "Using the pretext of protecting DFW International Airport, the Wright Amendment restricted passenger air traffic out of Love Field" reeks of bias. I truly beleive Southwest Airlines is using this as an additional attempt to alter history and advance it's desires without bothering to pay for an advertisement.

I love the note on the wikipedia site "Content must be based on verifiable sources." I don't think either of the quoted phrases or much of the article could be verified beyond the Southwest web-site. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 144.9.8.21 ( talk •  contribs) .

I might note that the above is written by a not-so-unbiased source, while we're on the topic. Here is the organization lookup of the IP associated with this comment:

OrgName:    American Airlines Incorporated 
OrgID:      AMERIC-112
Address:    4200 Amon Carter Boulevard  MD 2512
City:       Fort Worth
StateProv:  TX
PostalCode: 76155
Country:    US

NetRange:   144.9.0.0 - 144.9.255.255 
CIDR:       144.9.0.0/16 

— Cleared as filed. 20:51, 6 December 2005 (UTC) reply

True I work for American, but that does not alter my analysis of the article. Anyone with knowledge of the facts and history of Love and DFW will realize the partial truths, untruths, and bias in this article. The problem is, most people are not from this area and are not aware of the history. That makes this article misleading to people who may be trying to form an opinion. By the way, how about an analysis of the ip address of the people writing the article? Would we find it belongs to Southwest?

Love Field is within the Dallas city limits. Any objections to changing the passage that says it is northwest of Dallas? Dmp348 22:15, 8 August 2006 (UTC) reply

That essentially refers to the distance from the city center. Look at any airport article and it will have that type of statement, in fact look at Dallas Executive Airport. If you are really wanting to know exactly click the AirNav link at the bottom of the Article it states that as well. Basically that is the proper location identifier. -- MJHankel 22:36, 26 October 2006 (UTC) reply

This section has now been edited to say that the amendment was recently repealed. Per the MOS, the use 'recently' should be avoided. This section needs to be recast as a historical note, giving the date the amendment was repealed, eliminating the use of 'recently'. -- Donald Albury 03:11, 18 October 2006 (UTC) reply

While Delta may be selling tickets from DAL they have been blocked by the DOJ from having these gates. Word is that the City of Dallas is not going against the DOJ. American has turned its lease over to Virgin America so the discussion that is taking place regards Southwest and Virgin America. If the argument for keeping Delta is they are selling tickets then the same applies to Virgin to be removed from the list (as they have no gates to sell). While no official word is out the leaked information favors Virgin. At this point it would seem that only Delta Connection should be listed without end dates and Virgin America should not be listed RicHicks ( talk) 22:21, 10 May 2014 (UTC) reply

Why is DL still selling tickets if VX has already gotten the gates? They don't have any room to use for the flights, so i would assume that they would stop selling tickets now that they can't fly much from DAL? Commodore007 ( talk) 13:02, 18 May 2014 (UTC) reply

Delta is leaving DAL January 5, 2015 as there is no room for Delta RicHicks ( talk) 05:15, 9 December 2014 (UTC) reply

Delta still flies in and out of DAL. Please do NOT remove it. RicHicks ( talk) 23:00, 18 May 2015 (UTC) reply

It is official Virgin America wins the gates. http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/news/2014/05/12/its-official-virgin-america-is-in-love.html RicHicks ( talk) 21:01, 12 May 2014 (UTC) reply

There was no backup VC-137C "62-5000". The VC-137C 62-6000 was the only one of it's type until 1972 when a second Boeing 707-353B was acquired and given serial no. 72-7000, then becoming the principal presidential aircraft. The backup aircraft in 1963 would have been one of the the VC-137Bs acquired in 1958 (58-6970/1/2). Ambak51 ( talk) 17:09, 20 May 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Dallas Love Field. 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 User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090505141310/http://dallas-lovefield.com:80/lovenotes/lovechrono.html to http://www.dallas-lovefield.com/lovenotes/lovechrono.html
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20131005021555/http://www.afmissileers.org/newsletters/NL1997/Dec97.pdf to http://www.afmissileers.org/newsletters/NL1997/Dec97.pdf
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100115222018/http://www.dallasnews.com:80/sharedcontent/dws/bus/stories/012209dnbuslovefield.3e8a922.html to http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/stories/012209dnbuslovefield.3e8a922.html
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100114021902/http://dallascityhall.com/committee_briefings/briefings0209/TEC_3Program_Mgr_022309.pdf to http://www.dallascityhall.com/committee_briefings/briefings0209/TEC_3Program_Mgr_022309.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{ Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— ^{cyberbot II} _{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:04, 10 June 2016 (UTC) reply

All seems to be working KDTW Flyer ( talk) 22:15, 10 June 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dallas Love Field. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20010911233514/http://www.aa.com/ to http://www.aa.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{ Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC) reply

I have never heard of the "tradition" this section talks about, it carries no sources, and I can't find any mention of it online. Besides, the courtyard and the statue in it are less than two years old - that's hardly enough time for a tradition to develop. As nice as it sounds and as much as I wish it were true, I'm removing it. Dispute this if you can find any sources to back it up. Mattwillmarron ( talk) 03:59, 8 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dallas Love Field. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160112041846/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109%3ASN03661%3A%40%40%40R%7C%2Fbss%2Fd109query.html to http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109%3ASN03661%3A%40%40%40R%7C%2Fbss%2Fd109query.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:10, 10 April 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Dallas Love Field. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120702223515/http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00042/aaa-00042p1.html to http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00042/aaa-00042p1.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100201222753/http://www.blogsouthwest.com/blog/flashback-fridays-a-look-back-dallas-love-field to http://www.blogsouthwest.com/blog/flashback-fridays-a-look-back-dallas-love-field
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141105080600/http://southwest.investorroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1863 to http://southwest.investorroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1863
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100106091813/http://www.dallascityhall.com/aviation/aviation.html to http://www.dallascityhall.com/aviation/aviation.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:00, 3 September 2017 (UTC) reply

I am new to this so go easy on me. I was browsing the article about Love Field Airport in Dallas, Texas and under the section of accidents and incidents I noticed there was no mention of a fatality crash there in 1990 that I happen to be witness to. After doing some research I found that there was indeed a record with NTSB about the crash. A gentleman from Wikipedia suggested I post my findings here and the diligent aviation editors would probably run with it from here. The NTSB had the crash listed as April 20, 1990. The event id # is 20001212x22922 and the accident # is FTW90FA097. Hope this info is helpful. Thanks. Three7mx ( talk) 22:33, 20 July 2019 (UTC) reply

Crash added. Carguychris ( talk) 15:44, 30 July 2019 (UTC) reply

Dallas Love Field has a long a storied history; I should know, as I've been a frequent contributor to the History section. However, I've recently come to realize that this section really dominates the article, to a greater extent than in almost all other U.S. airport articles. I propose to spin off a separate and linked "History of Dallas Love Field" article, as has been done for Heathrow Airport and Toronto Pearson International Airport, and pare the History section down to 2-3 paragraphs describing only the most historically significant events (U.S. Army establishes WWI training field; city assumes ownership and converts to civil use; brief description of WWII military use; new terminals built; LBJ sworn in; most airlines move to D/FW Airport and Wright Amendment is imposed; Wright Amendment is repealed and latest terminal is built). Thoughts and comments are welcome. Carguychris ( talk) 20:48, 13 August 2019 (UTC) reply

A dummy version of the proposed article has been posted in my sandbox. 95% of it is cut-and-pasted from this article. I propose to remove all sections found in the new article from this one, including "Previous Airline Service" and "Legend Terminal," which are not currently found under History. If anyone has any major objections, please bring them up promptly, because I propose to remove most of the "History" section from this article next week. Carguychris ( talk) 14:26, 11 September 2019 (UTC) reply

After further consideration, I've decided to just leave the article alone. Carguychris ( talk) 16:04, 24 October 2019 (UTC) reply

Under Recent History, there's a reference to a lawsuit against Delta by the city of Dallas. The last sentence says that as of 2016, Dallas is appealing a preliminary injunction. Surely this has been resolved in the last five years? If not, a mention that it hasn't should be included.

I've repeatedly removed the name of the suspect (whom I'll call Ms. O) in the July 2022 shooting incident per WP:SUSPECT and WP:NOTNEWS. This is an article about an airport, not an article about the shooting, nor an article about Ms. O. Stating her full name and the myriad emerging details about her criminal and mental health history don't belong here; if they belong on Wikipedia at all, they belong in a standalone article, subject to WP:TOOSOON of course. Carguychris ( talk) 15:40, 27 July 2022 (UTC) reply