Talk:DayJet
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Taxis in the Sky
There was an article in The Atlantic Monthly about DayJet. Taxis in the Sky. —216.68.194.99 (talk) 02:19, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
- That actually looks like a worthwhile article and may make a good ref as well. I have added it to the External Links section of the article. - Ahunt (talk) 13:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Hey - i made an edit regarding the five states listed as destinations. i think the fact that 45 airports are served in those 5 states is what is important... more than any other airline i think. well, please revert if you like my edits - someone?!?! --NicholasSThompson (talk) 06:57, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
well, i was looking at more of my edits. i think they're right!! check the references when you get a chance. one thing in particular that is confusing for this airline is that to fly nonstop and or direct (same plane with one stop possible...) you have to be heading to or coming from a "dayport". in other words to get from their smallest destination to another of their smallest destinations ("daystops...") you have to transit a dayport and bid for another ticket on another segment. a "daybase" has aircraft on standby and is where pilots begin and end shifts--NicholasSThompson (talk) 07:08, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
hey - i don't know what deserves to be on wikipedia and what should be deleted but i think dayjet will be adding lots more destinations in the next year or so. it is the largest customer of Eclipse Aviation and the Eclipse 500s it uses may never have been made if DayJet did not exist. having said that, the company could go out of business much like Hooters Air did! NicholasSThompson (talk) 09:27, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
- What should be included in this article is information that is verifiable under Wikipedia policies. It says:
"The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—meaning, in this context, whether readers are able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether we think it is true. Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or is likely to be challenged, or the material may be removed."