Talk:Gimpo International Airport
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Aviation, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles related to aviation. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. | ||||||||||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (comments) |
||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
 |
WikiProject Korea invites you to join in improving Wikipedia articles related to Korea. | |
The page says 'sometimes romanized as Kimpo,' but I flew into that airport in 1991 and in 1997, and both times, the stamps that the Korean immigration officials put into my passport said "Kimpo" and not "Gimpo". Perhaps it would be more correct to say 'often romanizaed as Kimpo '? Dominus 19:56, 16 Oct 2003 (UTC)
The romanization to Gimpo is fairly recent. WhisperToMe 06:36, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- 2000 in fact. Kokiri 16:55, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Previously I contributed this paragraph:
“Except for the continuation of a few regular flights between Korea and Japan through Gimbo Airport, Seoul would be the largest city on the planet without its own international airport. Incheon Airport, which replaced Gimbo, is actually located in the municipality of Incheon – not Seoul.”
Within only a few hours Visviva removed the paragraph for lack of substantiation. OK, I am open to some creative suggestion here… how does one go about substantiating this assertion? Here is the dilemma;
The list of largest cities on Wikipedia (“List of metropolitan areas by population”) is suspect due to what appears to be jingoistic turf wars. Check the associated Discussion page, i.e. “Korean areas being moved up.” Therefore I suggest that this table is virtually useless and other sources must be used. The top five results for “world’s largest cities” on a generic search engine consistently produce these top ten (in a variety of orders):
Bombay, Delhi, Jakarta, Los Angeles, Mexico City, New York, São Paulo, Seoul, Tokyo, Shanghai
(Note that these are listed alphabetically in traditional English spelling in an attempt to sidestep the jingoistic turf wars)
Of these ten cities, all have international airports as referenced in Wikipedia and elsewhere. Most cities have multiple airports serving the metropolitan area, but one older (often primary) airport actually within the political administrative boundary of the city itself. Rather than listing each and every airport in a metropolitan area (i.e. Los Angeles has five) I have opted to observe the primary airport that is actually within the city The city, airport/s, and approximate number of international destinations according to the airport’s web page (not Wikipedia) are as follows:
Bombay - Chatrapati Shivaji International Airport (http://www.airportsindia.org.in/aai/mumbai/index.htm) has 45+ international airlines with dozens of flights per day to over 100 destinations
Delhi - Indira Gandhi International Airport (http://delhiairport.com/) has 35+ international airlines listed with dozens of flights per day to over 100 destinations
Jakarta - Soekarno-Hatta International Airport (http://www.angkasapura2.co.id/cabang/cgk/content.php?menu=9&page_id=2) has 20+ international airlines listed with dozens of flights per day to over 30 destinations
Los Angeles – Los Angeles International Airport (http://www.lawa.org/lax/ )50+ international airlines listed with scores of flights per day to over 150 destinations
Mexico City - Mexico City International Airport (http://www.aicm.com.mx/ ) 30 international airlines listed with dozens of flights per day to over 60 destinations
New York – John F. Kennedy International Airport (http://www.panynj.gov/aviation/jfkframe.HTM) 60+ international airlines listed with scores of flights per day to over 150 destinations
Sao Paulo - Guarulhos International Airport (http://www.infraero.gov.br/usa/item_gera.php?gi=instempr&menuid=inst) 20+ international airlines listed with dozens of flights per day to over 45 destinations
Seoul – Kimpo Airport (http://gimpo.airport.co.kr/eng/index.jsp) 4 international airlines (Japan Airlines, All Nippon Airways, Korean Air, Asiana Airlines) each with two round trip flights to Haneda per day.
Tokyo - Tokyo International Airport (http://www.tokyo-airport-bldg.co.jp/english/i_flight/index.html) 4 international airlines (Japan Airlines, All Nippon Airways, Korean Air, Asiana Airlines) each with two round trip flights to Gimpo per day.
Shanghai - Pudong International Airport (http://www.shairport.com/en/index.jsp ) 30 international airlines listed with dozens of flights per day to over 70 destinations
In all fairness, Tokyo’s Narita airport isn’t in Tokyo any more than Seoul’s Inchon Airport is in Seoul. Therefore the only fair comparison is to use Haneda Airport in central Tokyo.
Therefore, Visviva, would you be satisfied with the paragraph altered to read:
“Except for the continuation of eight daily flights between Gimpo Airport in Seoul and Haneda Airport in Tokyo, Seoul and Tokyo would be the largest cities on the planet without an international airport. Incheon Airport, which replaced Gimbo, is actually located in the municipality of Incheon – not Seoul. Narita Airport, which replaced Haneda is actually in Chiba Prefecture – not Tokyo”
Additionally, Visviva, what are your suggestions for taking all the raw information above and compressing it in to some sort of convenient substantiation?
I trust that the hasty removal of the original posting wasn’t part of the jingoistic turf war.
Cletus J. "Bubba" Huckabee Jr. 10:26, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Your input is requested yet again. The justification is presented with references above, please indicate what would satisfy your requirements for substantiation in light of the fact that much raw information needs to be spread across the mental table for a comparison. I don’t see a way of conveniently substantiating this in the normal page style, but trust that you do. Please respond.
Cletus J. "Bubba" Huckabee Jr. 05:31, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
- You do seem to have justified the assertion quite well, and I won't remove it again from the article. However, despite your admirable efforts I must still question whether this material is not fundamentally a) original research, and b) hypothetical. It would be one thing if Seoul really was the largest city without an international airport within its jurisdictional boundaries -- that would be an interesting piece of trivia. But since that is not actually the case, although I can only admire your dedication to this factoid, I have to wonder whether this is really a useful contribution to the article. Useful or not, however, I won't stand in the way of your adding it again. I'm really not the Wikipolice. Happy editing! -- Visviva 13:16, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
OK, so all the pieces of information are scattered about with Wikipedia and any reasonably intelligent person can look at the various facts and draw an obvious conclusion. Is the act of pointing out the obvious original research? I suggest the distinction between original research and glaring facts may be a bit blurred when it comes to a conclusion so easily drawn.
As for being hypothetical… by definition it isn’t… assuming I understand the meaning of the word hypothetical. If the facts are presented, then does that not eliminate the opportunity for the ascertain to be a hypothesis? Maybe I am misunderstanding the way “hypothetical” is being used on Wikipedia.
We can observe each and every bit of information on this page, and in fact throughout Wikipedia, to be interesting pieces of trivia. It depends on one’s vantage point.
Cletus J. "Bubba" Huckabee Jr. 04:05, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
- Quite so. I was quite sincere when I said I admired your dedication to this. Dedication to trivia is surely a key ingredient in the Wikipedia stew. :-)
- By hypothetical I simply mean that, as your contribution itself stated, Seoul is not actually the largest city without an airport within its boundaries -- but it would be, if Gimpo did not have a handful of international flights. One could, in theory, make very similar claims about other cities. But at any rate, this is a wiki, which means you are perfectly free to re-add this content to the article.
- Why did I remove this in the first place? Well, unfortunately, there are a lot of people who like to take advantage of Wikipedia's openness to post all sorts of non-factual material. This crypto-vandalism is a threat to the work that all of us (including you) do here. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, and I do my best to be vigilant when it comes to the 2,500-some pages on my watchlist. Rightly or wrongly, your original contribution raised a number of red flags when I saw it on my watchlist. Unfortunately, the price of vigilance is that sometimes you see things that aren't there... in this case, possible crypto-vandalism in your original contribution. I regret the offense which this seems to have caused. I hope you will continue to make useful, verifiable contributions to Wikipedia.
- Thus endeth my part of this conversation. Cheers! -- Visviva 04:52, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Trivia removed.
I removed the trivia for the following reasons:
What about Guangzhou?
The population of Guangzhou, according to one source (http://english.people.com.cn/english/200104/20/eng20010420_68214.html) stands at almost 10 million. I would think that this city should be listed in the top ten in Wikipedia. Very odd that it isn't. Guangzhou's new airport is also not in Guangzhou proper. It is in the city of Huadu. I lived near Huadu for 4 months, and I went by the new airport frequently.
Airports that are TECHNICALLY with in the "city", BUT...
LAX maybe "in Los Angeles," but it's actually an exclave of Los Angeles, it is surrounded by different cities.
Same with San Francisco International, it is 13 miles away from SF. Although SF itself is small, the Airport serves the Bay Area, which in population is quite large.
Beijing's Capital International Airport may also be "in Beijing", but Beijing is a municipality, meaning it's both a city AND a state. The airport it is quite distant from anywhere in the city most people would want to go.
Same problem with Shanghai, which is the same geo-politcal status as Beijing. Pu Dong International is a good 45 minute bus ride through farm land from the city center.
And what of Hong Kong? If people consider Beijing a "city," they should also consider Hong Kong a city. Hong Kong's new airport is also quite distant from anywhere most people want to go.
Suffice it to say that the trivia information is too problematic.61.47.219.140 16:59, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Terrorism preparedness exercises
Are these really notable? Don't all international airports have them on a fairly regular basis? -- Visviva 09:26, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
