Talk:NATS Holdings

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.

Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Advertising?

Links to a not particularly major software supplier added by an employee of that company don't seem relevant. I propose deleting this (or should we add links to all NATS' suppliers?) GTH1 (talk) 21:23, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Northern Oceanic Transition Area

The operations section should probably also mention NOTA. www.nats.co.uk/8050-9013/IAA-and-NATS-sign-letter-of-intent.html

Md84419 (talk) 12:50, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

line in introduction reads like advertisement

line "NATS aims to set standards in safety, service and value to their customers – the airlines." reads like an advertisement or directly from nats marketing - doesn't seem to add any value --

talk) 02:15, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Some structural changes needed

Suggests that the article is restructured so that it focusses on present time and not primary history.

The IAA/UK FAB actually changes the scene in a way that is not reflected in the text - enroute charges are required to unified for the complete FAB after at most 5 years from signature. Governance is no longer solely CAA but the FAB high level board.

The text needs an overhaul to be updated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcs45 (talk • contribs) 06:30, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Use of primary sources

@

WP:SECONDARY

requirements in my view, merely reporting news without any meaningful analysis. IMO, they're independent, but not secondary.

The tag was mostly regarding the references, rather than the article content. At least the last incident sounds like it'd eventually get the secondary non-news coverage that'd indicate it's significance in the context of NATS.

I don't understand the criteria that apply to including Eyjafjallajökull-related airspace closure though. What it has to do with NATS (other than they've been referenced by the news reports to confirm that the airspace was closed) and why is it included and dozens or hundredths of other restrictions NATS promulgates every month aren't?

Same concern regarding the "Associations and alliances with other organisations" section. PaulT2022 (talk) 16:25, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]