Talk:Drukair

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Kathmandu, Nepal and Paro, Bhutan pass close to Mount Everest
?

Naming

The name of this airline is a little unclear. The web page talks mostly about "DRUK AIR" and references a Druk Air Corporation Ltd, so I've opted for Druk Air as the name. The "Royal Bhutan Airlines" bit seems parenthetical, and the spelling "Drukair" as found on the A319's seems to be just stylistic. Jpatokal 03:05, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I agree, and I see that Kuensel takes the same approach. technopilgrim

Removing "this is a stub" tag

I feel safe in removing the stub tag in that the article already enumerates every plane the airline has every owned, plus every flight in its schedule. I'm not optimistic that the article can be expanded significantly without giving the names of specific flight crew members. Some articles just aren't destined to be 30KB hogs. Good work & I'd say this article is plenty full-size given the topic. technopilgrim 21:19, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fleet

I was in Paro over (US) Thanksgiving this year (2005). The BAe 146's were still parked in Paro. Based on the Druk Air inflight magazine it seemed that they were still in use. Perhaps summers only? I flew in and out on A319s

I was in Paro early April 2008. One A319 was in the hanger overnight (the other apparently overnights in Bangkok). The only aircraft mentioned in the inflight magazine is an A319-114. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.159.70.1 (talk) 21:44, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Fleet Update

I work for Flybe in Exeter, UK, and we hold the maintenance contracts for the Druk Air BAe146's. One has had a heavy maintenance (C Check) this week, and is still operational.

The aircraft also had its Royal Bhutan Airlines livery replaced with a new Druk Air livery

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 15:26, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Druk Air Royal Bhutan Airlines -resized200.jpg

fair use
.

Please go to

Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline
is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 22:43, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Table of destinations

The table of destinations is preferable over the "list" as it makes use of the space in the article - i.e. there is no huge amount of whitespace, and the list is frankly ugly, whereas the table is well formatted. There is no relevant

I'm chanting as we speak 19:54, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Well, yours is simply a point of view. I disagree with using the table, because its been a long-established convention and norm to use a list (as for the thousands of other airline articles) rather than a table. Pretty or not, we must be consistent, and a selective change to a "pet"article is not the way to go. Should anyone feel the need to establish a new norm or convention, then by all means do. But go about it in the correct way: by bringing your proposal to the project talk page, let editors contribute with their thoughts, and then, if there is consensus, people will start making the agreed-upon change sto all articles.
In any event, the Drukair talk page is NOT the place to discuss this.
Thanks, Jasepl (talk) 12:05, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Jasepl! The table is confusing and untidy most of the time! The current format is much better. Zaps93 (talk) 14:29, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is
Talk:Druk Air/GA1
. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Arsenikk (talk) 22:11, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article is being reviewed by someone else and they should get additional time. I would suggest getting a picture of the RJ-85X or similar plane since there is so much text devoted to it. This article looks good and I predict it will easily pass GA. TeacherA (talk) 03:42, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The airline never operated the RJ-85X, as the program itself was cancelled. There are a number of photos of the BAe 146 in Druk Air livery available on the net, and have approached people for permission, but as yet, none has been forthcoming in the last 12 months or so. --
I'm chanting as we speak 10:41, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
Comments
  • The article could do with some more copyediting for flow. I've done some, but this is by far my weakest part of Wikipediaing, so I'll pass the ball on.
It has been reworded in parts
  • I would have liked to see a longer lead. While it talkes about the framework around the airline, is says little about the details of the fleet, operations and history (hard facts).
Lead has been expanded
  • As far as I have seen, it is not common to insert "politeness" terms such as "his majesty" in titles.
Fixed.
  • I can't hold you against it in this review, but there are spacing errors with some of the dashes. I've fixed those I found.
Fixed
  • First occurrence of currency is spelled out, additional mentions use ISO code. (fixed)
Fixed
  • In the "contemporary developments" section, a lot of past events are written as if they will occur in the futue.
Fixed
  • There has now been established concensus that destinations should be in table format, see for instance the tables in
    List of Dragonair destinations
    . This consensus has changed since the talk page comments made in 2009. This is not part of any GA criteria, so this can be merely be regarded as advice. In any case, the list needs to be de-boldfaced and the hyphens replaced with endashes.
Smartened up and table added
  • I would like to have seen a 'service' or similar section. What sort of frequencies are the various routes etc.? Could you mention something about on-board service, frequent flyer program etc. Doesn't have to be a lot, but something.
A section was added but Russavia removed it claiming information about cabin services and standards to be unencyclopedic. Unfortunately he is highly uncommunicative and unwilling to discuss.
I responded to your questions at
I'm chanting as we speak 10:39, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
Your both right. Something has to be said, such as the 20–90 seating split, perhaps mention if there is complimentary meals and seat pitch. Cabin baggage size and carry-on luggage allowance is on the other hand not encyclopedic, for, as Russavia says, it is trivial and similar around the world. A company's website can be used as a RS for matters relating to the company itself, as long as it is factual and not related to issues outside the company. I would have said that for a flag carrier to not have FFP is more notable than saying they had one. Arsenikk (talk) 17:05, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lifeline and Woodford are both disambiguation pages.
Fixed.
  • There is a dead link with a
    WP:WEBCITE
    available.
Fixed
  • Ref 66 is missing a title. Refs 76 and 77 are incorrectly formatted (missing meta data).
Fixed
  • There seems to have been established consensus that old logos do not fall within the permitted non-free image use criteria.
Removed.

Placing on hold. Arsenikk (talk) 22:11, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Passed. Arsenikk (talk) 18:31, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on

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 or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

Sourcecheck
}}).

This message was posted before February 2018.

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).

Cheers.—

Talk to my owner:Online 01:38, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 19 external links on

Druk Air. 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.

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).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:55, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on

Druk Air. 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.

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).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:41, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on

Druk Air. 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.

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).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:25, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Drukair&oldid=1207040809"