Talk:Biman Bangladesh Airlines/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

GA

I'm failing this based on a few things.

  • The lead does not summarize the article Done.
  • The Name section is short and unreferenced and should be merged with history Done.
  • Livery, this section needs to be deleted, all it does is explain what the logo looks like Done.
  • History contains too many one sentence/short paragraphs, thus not "Well written" Done.
  • Spell out numbers less than ten, 2 new - two new Done.
  • The government has recently, when? add a specific date, On [DATE] the government approved plans. Done.
  • New York & Manchester routes - contains external jumps which need to be removed or converted to references Done.
  • 'the final nail in the coffin' isn't quite encyclopedic tone Done.
  • Accidents and Incidents is a big list
  • They've had more than their fair share of accidents and needs to be mentioned
  • and many 'incidents' are unreferenced Done.
  • rest of the article is a list or table which makes for weak prose. Done.
  • This is the structure of airline articles (see WP:AIRLINE) but I've added a lead to each of the sections.
  • Trivia section needs to be removed or merged with the body per WP:TRIVIA Done.
  • External links comes at the end of the article Done.
  • References seem fine, although they need retrieve dates. Done.

Basically expand the lead to summarize all major headings (two paragraphs), cleans up the history section by adding one sentence paragraphs together, remove or expand on the first two sections, remove external links and try convert lists and tables into prose, which is doable for accidents and incidents.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by M3tal H3ad (talk • contribs)

The article has gone through radical changes to incorporate the suggestions above. I guess it should be good now. Aditya Kabir 15:49, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

GA nomination on hold

I've checked the article and it has certainly improved. However there are still some issues which need to be resolved before achieving GA status, as follows:

  • Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. Done.
  • As per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), please do not link words in headings. Thus, subsections in the "Destinations" section should probably be converted to a simple listing There are no section headings there anymore.
  • Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), avoid using special characters (ex: &+{}[]) in headings. Thus, "New York & Manchester routes" should be replaced by "New York and Manchester routes" Done.
  • In the lead, Hajj should be wikilinked Done.
  • The logo of a stylized white stork flying inside a red circle with dark green and red lines above and below the red circle should be replaced by "The logo of a stylized white stork flying inside a red circle with dark green and red lines above and below it". Done.
  • Biman started operations in February 1972 with a Douglas DC-3 aircraft, that had seen action in World War II, which had been gifted by the Bangladesh Air Force would be better like this Biman started operations in February 1972 with a Douglas DC-3 gifted by the Bangladesh Air Force, which was a veteran of World War II Done.
  • On April 8, 2006, Biman's inaugral flight to Manchester, landed at Manchester Airport en-route to JFK.[13], is a one sentence paragraph, it should be merged with the following paragraph. Done.
  • The "Destinations" section is tagged as unsourced. Sources added.

After this have been resolved, leave me a message and I'll check back on the article. Good luck, --Victor12 18:07, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

All the suggested areas are fixed now. Aditya Kabir 21:10, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Great job! I've now passed the article. Cheers, --Victor12 23:27, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Incident in March 07

Flight BG006 (LHR-DXB-DAC), carrying 236 passengers and crew, the nose gear of the Airbus A310-300 collapsed while accelerating down the runway. Fourteen people suffered minor injuries in the accident at Dubai International Airport.[37] The aircraft came to rest at the end of the runway and was evacuated, but crippled the only active runway and forced the airport to close for eight hours

Was the runway damaged, or had it just taken a long time to get the damaged aircraft off of it? Anynobody 21:51, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

News report would seem to indicate no damage was done (although it seems a miracle!). This CNN report says:
  • "The closure of the runway for eight hours was primarily to inspect its condition and ensure that operations could be resumed." (Dubai Aviation officials)
→ AA (talk • contribs) — 21:57, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

That is a surprise, I'd of expected the incident to have been pretty hard on the runway, I guess they did too if they took eight hours to make sure (which is smart).

On an kinda-unrelated note, I copied the discussion we began on my talk page here so nobody misses any of the relevant points. Anynobody 22:08, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Voluntary Retirement Scheme

Resolved.

Hi, Firstly, thanks for your edits. I notice you've changed "scheme" to "plan" but it is the name given to the process (the source mentions it and abbreviates it to VRS). Maybe it should be in quotes? → AA (talk • contribs) — 21:46, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I suppose the most WP:NPOV way to term it might be using the full term. As part of an official name it loses the negative connotation (in English at least). Quotes might actually do the same thing, imply something negative, but capitalizing the first instance of Voluntary Retirement Scheme and then any other mention VRS. It'd look sort of like this hypothetical example:
  • Airline X implemented a Voluntary Retirement Scheme in order to reduce it's operational losses. The airline says the VRS will apply first to employees with...
I didn't notice it mentioned twice, but I mention the option in case it gets mentioned in a rewrite. Anynobody 22:01, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Fleet

Can the section under level three heading "Fleet" be merged to the section under level two heading "Fleet"? May be the beginning of the former section is better merged to the top of the history section. For most part the former section talks about Biman's current fleet (A310, DC-10 and F-28) anyways. Y Done → AA (talk) — 09:33, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

The e-Ticketing fiasco can be part of the paragraph on corruption, while the management section may well (as the second to last paragraph) include the strikes. How about that? Aditya Kabir 17:03, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good - although we'd need more history material to fill in the gap. → AA (talk • contribs) — 20:30, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Destination

I wonder why Hong Kong is not included in "Destination". Even though there are several references below. Biman Bangladesh Airlines do fly to Hong Kong.(Addaick 06:40, 20 July 2007 (UTC))

In the most recent refs (ones following the accident at Dubai where they lost an aircraft), you'll see they cut back on a lot of destinations including Hong Kong. However, if they have restarted and you can find a current ref, then by all means add it back in. Cheers. → AA (talk) — 06:46, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi!AA,My reference is the time table of Hong Kong International Airport[1]. Today(20,July), there is a flight coming from Dhaka arriving at 17:10(Flight number: BG 078), however, this flight is cancelled this time.And also, the service between this two cities is not regular. I think that there is two flights per week.Please click the above link. If you have time, please check it out. Please reply me. Many thanks!(Addaick 12:52, 20 July 2007 (UTC))
"service between this two cities is not regular" - I believe that applies to all cities when it comes to Biman :-). I will look it up also but based on your ref, it does look like they have restarted. Thanks. → AA (talk) — 12:48, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
I have correct the link. There is a minor mistake on the link and now it is corrected.Sorry!(Addaick 12:55, 20 July 2007 (UTC))
Thanks for making the changes. → AA (talk) — 13:19, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Active Use

What is the meaning of 'Active use'in the article?(Addaick 12:28, 22 July 2007 (UTC))

Active use == in-service. The remainder are awaiting parts or repairs in their hangar. → AA (talk) — 12:50, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Many thanks!(Addaick 12:54, 22 July 2007 (UTC))

Which of the links been used?

Which of the links in the note section on this page been used in the article? If someone identifies them, I can volunteer to work on the rest. Aditya(talk • contribs) 14:59, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Only the revenue and passenger figures (in the hidden tables). The other ones provide info on the highlighed subjects (e.g. Hajj flights/strikes/etc) that need to be incorporated into the article. → AA (talk) — 15:30, 10 August 2007 (UTC)