Talk:Jet Airways
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Operations
It is being mentioned in the operations that after Chennai - Colombo, two routes Delhi - Kathmandu and Mumbai - Colombo were added. I am sure abt the Del Ktm route but Mumbai - Colombo... To my thinking it was Mumbai - Singapore. Can some one comment on that.
Secondly its being mentioned that 9W was the first private carrier to go international. Again to my knowledge It was Air Sahara Chennai - Colombo which was the first and not 9W.
Comments please..! Boeing737 21:10, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Primary Hub
Took Delhi out from the Primary Hub. Actually Mumbai is the Primary Hub and Maintenance Base. Apart from this Delhi, Kolkata, Chennai,Pune and Bangalore are the Secondary Hubs.
Hence the correction reflects the same. Boeing737 21:10, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] NPOV
This article is unabashedly written by the airline itself! This is NOT what wikipedia is there for. Can we rectify? How about starting with how the airline was set up and current tangles of its Chair/Owner Naresh Goyal? Autumnleaf 16:12, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] NPOV
Definitely agree with Autumnleaf. This reads like a brochure of Jet Airways. I think the whole page should be removed or re-written. As is normal there are no sources other than company brochures and hence this page should be removed.
Accordingly I have removed the two sections that were the most obviously biased. --Deepak23 11:14, 22 October 2005 (UTC) Deepak23
Great! We can all be patriots here. JET is a phenomenon - but we don't help our case if we don't exercise neutrality and balance in talking about our successes. I think it would be fair to bring in stuff about what the Indian Government alleges about the Daoud Ibrahim and Dubai underworld connections - this is front page newspaper material in public knowledge. Also the unusual fact of the apparent proprietor/shareholder Naresh Goyal being a German citizen. But we also need to find the dates for awards and have data about its market position. Autumnleaf 20:09, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
- I reverted attempt to remove NPOV tag. Having just googled to refresh my memory I think that the page does not reflect the balance of views about the airline. There should be a huge page about this guys! Meanwhile as it stands it still has information which should not appear on Wiki - which is not an adjunct to a company website after all. I made a few edits neverthelessAutumnleaf 15:51, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] What to keep in?
I think this needs to be reverted to a stub. I am going to delete some of this turgid industry data (a category I put in as a bin for the awful technical data!) unless I hear objections. Bye! Autumnleaf 22:12, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Do not include promotional or hagiological material.
I have noted that an anonymous editor has been posting links which are wholly promotional of Jet. Such purely partisan edits only brings disrepute to the subject matter and makes us suspicious that employees or friends of the airline are treating Wikipedia as a puff page. Also in future please sign in with four tildes which look like this ~ ~ ~ ~. This extends to the person who took the trouble of going to my discussion page to take issue with my edits - who also asked me to use the discussion pages; ironic. Perhaps this person would care to sign in here. Autumnleaf 19:33, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] NPOV
There is too much data about Jet's promotional offers and frequent-flier vouchers. A comparatively small airline like this shouldn't get more than a stub.Gyan guru, 0431hrs GMT, 28 December 2005
- I think its time to remove the NPOV--PlaneMad 12:36, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Controversy not resolved; sources for information
I have reinstated the material about US investigations as these have not reached a conclusion. Also - has been bugging me that the page still looks like a bulletin board for the airline. We also need sources for 'plans to fly to etc' so I finally removed that bit. I propose deleting all this stuff about number of aircraft and orders... it is not something other like pages have. Autumnleaf 12:41, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
- dont understand why the page looks like a bulletin board for the airline, seems fine to me. I beleive that aircraft orders should stay as it gives the reader an idea of the airline's future potential, but i think we can tone down on the fine details like A330s instead of A330-200 etc --PlaneMad 17:35, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] 777
I read they have ordered the 777-200LR, not the 300ER.--Arado 16:08, 31 May 2006 (UTC)