Talk:JetBlue Airways

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of Companies WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of companies. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B This article has been rated as b-Class on the assessment scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the assessment scale.
AVIATION This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Contents

[edit] Airlines Infobox

I'm creating an airline frame and infobox for this article --mitrebox 01:12, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

JetBlue Airways
IATA
B6
ICAO
JBU
Callsign
JetBlue
Founded 2000
Hubs John F. Kennedy International Airport
Focus cities Long Beach Airport
Logan International Airport
Frequent flyer program ?
Member lounge ?
Alliance ?
Fleet size {{{fleet_size}}}
Destinations {{{destinations}}}
Headquarters Forest Hills neighborhood of New York City, New York
Key people David Neeleman (CEO)
Website: www.jetblue.com

Regarding JetBlue Airways there was trouble on the 9.45 (?) flight from Long Beach, CA to JFK, NY on 3rd December 2005. The flight had to circle over Long Beach to dump fuel and after 3 hours landed back at the airport. This was supposedly because of a switch/button malfunction. The passengers were given food vouchers and taken to hotels nearby and to catch an 8am flight the next day. There is more info on this on Long Beach's news sites but I was wondering if anyone had more details and could write it up following the LAX incident in September 2005. --Mistyjane 01:56, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lowercase letter

Other than in the logo, I see no other uses of beginning JetBlue with a lowercase letter. On the title bar of the JetBlue website, JetBlue is capitalized. Therefore, I will be removing the template. Andros 1337 18:15, 28 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Stock chart?

The stock chart as currently displayed is quite out-of-date. Since it shows fairly unremarkable performance and is not specifically referenced in the text, it's not clear what real value this adds to the piece. If there's a way to dynamically update the chart, then maybe we should keep it. Otherwise, I'd suggest dropping the stock chart altogether. JXM 20:21, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I've removed it - Adrian Pingstone 14:48, 12 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Do not delete??

"209.6.182.19 (Talk) (→Foundings - DO NOT DELETE, THIS IS A TEST TO SEE IF AIRLINERS.NET WILL PICK UP ON THIS. IT WILL BE DELETED IN 24 HOURS. THANK YOU.)"

What is the purpose of inserting this baiting test for airliners.net? How is including this type of POV material furthering Wiipedia's goals and vision?

Seems to me that doing this sort of thing as an anonymous contributor debases the usefulness of the WP entry. JXM 18:25, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I've deleted it - if somebody wants to do some sort of test they they should at least discuss it first. They're trying to prove a WP:POINT somewhere... /wangi 20:58, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

It is not bait. It is not experimental. It is verifyable fact. I can provide a link should anybody want it. But it is verifyable material, and thus belongs here. I am returning it.

If it is verifyable, please provide the link. It all seems a little but suspicious to me... --KPWM_Spotter 19:03, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Here is the link. http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/news/channel_aviationdaily_story.jsp?id=news/JBLU06296.xml

Okay, thank you. The question still remains, what was the edit explaination for in the first place? If it was valid information, why did you take such drastic action towards having it not deleted (and then promising deletion at a later time?) --KPWM_Spotter 21:11, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

It was only meant to spark discussion. After reading how people wanted it discussed beforehand, I'll discuss it in a more appropriate way in the future. My apologies.

[edit] Deleted future routes

I am replacing the routes removed by user:Arpingstone, as they are announced and verifyable on the jetBlue website. See [1]. --KPWM_Spotter 17:11, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I did remove all mentions of Columbus Ohio. There has been no mention of Columbus in any official jetBlue press materiel, or on their site. --KPWM_Spotter 17:20, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Daily nonstop service between New York, NY/JFK and New York, NY/LGA begins August 17, 2006.

Where is the source for this information? JFK and LGA are located a few miles from each other, so I am not sure that such a route is practical. After all, a JFK-LGA flight would probably be shorter than the time it takes to load and unload the plane. --user:mnw2000 15:18, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

There isn't a source. This flight doesn't exist. For some reason, un indentified IPs seem to enjoy adding new routes and airports to the jetBlue page as of recently. --KPWM_Spotter 18:03, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Concur. As a JetBlue Crewmember I can safely say there are no plans whatsoever to fly between JFK and LGA. User:neo16287 19:37, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Paperless Cockpit

In response to the message left in a comment on the main article by user:DG, a "paperless cockpit" is just that. A cockpit in which the pilots do not need to carry any charts, books, maps, or other paper resorces. Everything is managed through the autopilot and FMC. While this breakthrough is more due to the digital displays of the avionics of the A320 rather than any decision of the airline's, it is a first none the less, so I will replace it in the article. --KPWM_Spotter 21:00, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

NTG701 to tower. I just spilled my coffee. Could you tell me where I am? If I look out my window, I can see a blue building that looks kind of like a shoe... uh, which way is north? FractureTalk   14:52, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] IAM Vote did not pass

I received an email (I am a JetBlue Crewmember in BOS) today stating that the National Mediation Board denied the IAM their election because they did not get the required 35% of JetBlue crewmembers needed to call unionization to a vote. However it has not been listed by any agencies, and so I don't know where to cite the information, thus I am not listing it until such a time. I just wanted to say that as of today, JetBlue is still non-union, and the IAM vote is off. User:neo16287 02:00, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Possible International Relations

The article verifying the possible international relations is available here. http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD/MGArticle/RTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1137834649007 User: neo16287 02:08, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Focus City vs. Ops Hub

Boston has officially been given the title of a JetBlue operations hub, including basing of flight crews and a significant increase in flight operations (increasing operations to 70-80 flights a day starting this September). As of now Boston's operations are only surpassed by JFK. Should we change BOS from a focus city to an operations hub? The link is somewhere on the internet, but I'll find it it you guys want. User:Neo16287 16:00 20 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] JetBlue not jetBlue

I reverted the edits by 72.153.220.61 because while the logo is "jetBlue" JetBlue in text refers to itself as "JetBlue" -- pull up their website. —Cliffb 00:36, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I've also done a reversion. --Nelson Ricardo 03:07, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discontinued Routes

An anonymous editor continues to cite JetBlue's discontinued routes as being due to poor flight times. As a JetBlue Crewmember, I can say that flight times were not an issue. There was simply no customer demand on some routes. It doesn't mean that nobody wants to visit these cities, rather the routes did not generate enough attraction to be profitable. So, it is only lack of demand. Flight times are not a part of this. Please stop listing poor flight times. It is incorrect. --User:Neo16287 01:07, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notable Cities Not Served by JetBlue

If anybody read the part about JetBlue not wanting to contend with other major airlines, they would know this section is pointless. For those of you who feel it has a point, I will explain why JetBlue does not fly to these cities:

Atlanta (ATL) Served at one point, but no demand. Also Delta's largest hub city.
Minneapolis (MSP) Hub city for Northwest Airlines.
St. Louis (STL) Hub for American Airlines (formerly TWA's)
Kansas City (MCI) Hub for Midwest and Southwest.
Milwaukee (MKE) Hub for Midwest
Dallas/Ft. Worth (DFW) Hub for American. This city is also addressed in the article.

Now, I hope this helps the people who feel the world needs to know that JetBlue does not fly here. Now you know why. --Neo16287 02:35, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Founding?

The info box states that Jetblue was founded in 1998. Yet the very first sentence of this article states that "CEO David Neeleman founded the company in February of 2000." Either one or the other is incorrect (I am guessing the info box is wrong). Flyerhell 18:10, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

David Neeleman created the company in 1998, under the name NewAir. Over the course of 2 years, the airline infastructure was built up, and the airline's name changed from NewAir to Taxi, and then finally to JetBlue. According to CFO David Barger, they were originally planning to call it Bluejet, but in wanting to avoid the negative association with Valujet, they changed the name to JetBlue. The airline was 100% active in 2000, however it was created in 1998. I know this because I am a crewmember for JetBlue, and we covered this in our training phase. Neo16287 17:50, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No Hubs?

Thank you for citing this source. I worked at JetBlue BOS, and it was drilled into our head that BOS was a hub that was aimed at mirroring the JFK operation. While this area is gray, this source appears valid, and I agree with what it says. Thank you. Neo16287 17:13, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok guys, once again. JetBlue uses a point to point system. They do not use a hub and spoke system. You don't need to fly to a certain airport to go to a certain city. Sure you have to fly through JFK to reach Bermuda, but you don't have to go through JFK to go to Florida, or San Jose, or Austin TX from BOS. This is a point to point system. Not a hub and spoke system. 134.88.170.250 07:05, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

ummm jetblue is hub and spoke as much as any other airline...JFK and BOS are just like DFW or ATL are for any other airline. sure, not every flight involves one of jetblues hub, and no, you dont have to go through jfk to get to florida, but thats because its florida. I guess what im saying is...jetblue is a hub and spoke airline, not to say that they dont have a few point to point routes... just look at their website and route map, and click on JFK. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.8.57.2 (talkcontribs)

Unsigned, you've got a point, but this discussion was aimed at eliminating the "Hubs" list from the infobox. Also I don't see what Florida has to do with it. Neo16287 15:13, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Why do you want to eliminate it? I don't understand... --Makaristos 02:23, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Hmm.. I've never quite liked the term point-to-point system. It doesn't really apply to SWA anymore (they were the ones to keep the term through the hubby 80s and 90s), and I'm not quite sure it applies to JetBlue anymore. I'm not sure what the appropriate term is for SWA and to a smaller extent JetBlue -- perhaps decentralized network carriers? There heavy point to point operations, but even Neeleman has said JetBlue is going to go after some more connecting traffic. But this also isn't the spot for original research. Getting back to the original point I think having "Focus Cities" first then secondary hubs in the infobox is the correct approach. —Cliffb 03:05, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
This was solved a few months ago, after heated edits about whether or not JetBlue only had one hub (JFK). After arguments ranging from how JFK was the only hub to hubs being BOS and JFK, we decided to do what editors did for the Southwest page, and list them all as focus cities. This was sorted out in early December. Neo16287 03:02, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Hey Cliffb- I could live with Focus Cities, and then secondary hubs. I know I'm not the only editor/reader, so I'm not trying to offer consent or anything. I can see BOS, JFK, FLL, and LGB being hubs (since B6 had them listed as crew bases) and OAK, IAD, and maybe MCO (due to traffic volume) being listed as secondary hubs. I would have no issue with such a setup. Does anybody object? Neo16287 03:11, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Howdy Neo. I think the problem we get into is JetBlue seems to hub differently than other airlines. While I'll agree BOS, JFK, FLL, and LGB (what about IAD B6 flags it the same on the route map as the others) are hubs, given that JetBlue operates the least number of planes per hub, therefore I think their hubs tend to be a little less busy than other hubs. Take a look at the comparison table I put together with Wikipedia info. (Note: System planes include all airplanes flying under both the mainline airline and the regional partners)
Airline System Planes Hubs Planes per Hub
JetBlue 119 6 19.8
SWA 484 10 48.4
NWA 523 7 74.7
US Airways 600 8 75.0
AA 1034 9 114.9
Delta 942 8 117.8
So while JetBlue does utilize hubs by the definition "an airport that an airline uses as a transfer point to get passengers to their intended destination" they don't use them in the same way. By the table below B6 is more of a point-to-point carrier than even SWA. I advocate that we just list BOS, JFK, FLL, LGB, and IAD as Key Cities. This is the same language JetBlue itself uses in customer facing materials. —Cliffb 05:36, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
I like that idea. Why not do it? Neo16287 05:55, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm working on it.. I've put in a request for the template to be modified.. —Cliffb 06:09, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Its done... —Cliffb 19:22, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Some of you must be joking. JetBlue it the epitomy of a hub and spoke airline: 70% of all flights are embarking or returning to one airport. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonorakitch (talk • contribs)


There's absolutely no doubt that JFK is JetBlue's hub. 70% of the flights use it and all of their destinations, with the obvious exception of other NYC airports, serve it, which none of the focus cities can claim.--69.123.112.18 (talk) 00:34, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Regardless of whether or not you feel JFK should be denoted as a hub on this page, we have reached a consensus on the issue, and any changes to such consensus should be discussed on the talk page first. Thank you. Neo16287 (talk) 12:20, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Stranded in NY

Can someone add the whole New York "stranded" fiasco to the article? I would, but I'm not so skilled at writing "news style" things. I added the {{current}} tag as well. CNNMSNBCYahoo! News —Preceding unsigned comment added by Calicore (talkcontribs)

I don't see how a stranding is noteworthy in an encyclopedia. Note that American Airlines' page does not have any mention of their recent stranding. Neo16287 17:57, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Hmm.. If one wanted to use it as an example of how JetBlue is different. AA didn't give any compensation (as far as I know.) JetBlue on the other hand refunded ticket prices and gave away free roundtrips to everyone who was on a plane for more than 3 hours on the tarmac. —Cliffb 01:08, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Well in this case I would agree. At first it seemed like a move to bash JetBlue, so I didn't think of it that way. Good point. Neo16287 01:24, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I got this really sincere letter from Jet Blue in the email regarding the whole incident...seems like they're trying to patch-up their reputation:

Dear JetBlue Customers,

We are sorry and embarrassed. But most of all, we are deeply sorry.

Last week was the worst operational week in JetBlue's seven year history. Following the severe winter ice storm in the Northeast, we subjected our customers to unacceptable delays, flight cancellations, lost baggage, and other major inconveniences. The storm disrupted the movement of aircraft, and, more importantly, disrupted the movement of JetBlue's pilot and inflight crewmembers who were depending on those planes to get them to the airports where they were scheduled to serve you. With the busy President's Day weekend upon us, rebooking opportunities were scarce and hold times at 1-800-JETBLUE were unacceptably long or not even available, further hindering our recovery efforts.

Words cannot express how truly sorry we are for the anxiety, frustration and inconvenience that we caused. This is especially saddening because JetBlue was founded on the promise of bringing humanity back to air travel and making the experience of flying happier and easier for everyone who chooses to fly with us. We know we failed to deliver on this promise last week.

We are committed to you, our valued customers, and are taking immediate corrective steps to regain your confidence in us. We have begun putting a comprehensive plan in place to provide better and more timely information to you, more tools and resources for our crewmembers and improved procedures for handling operational difficulties in the future. We are confident, as a result of these actions, that JetBlue will emerge as a more reliable and even more customer responsive airline than ever before.

Most importantly, we have published the JetBlue Airways Customer Bill of Rights—our official commitment to you of how we will handle operational interruptions going forward—including details of compensation. I have a video message to share with you about this industry leading action.

You deserved better—a lot better—from us last week. Nothing is more important than regaining your trust and all of us here hope you will give us the opportunity to welcome you onboard again soon and provide you the positive JetBlue Experience you have come to expect from us.


Sincerely,


David Neeleman

Founder and CEO

JetBlue Airways

Jumping cheese Cont@ct 23:35, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] JetBlue/Aer Lingus

Will someone please stop saying that JetBlue and Lingus have an agreement! Nothing has been finalized and no agreement has been made. Please delete!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.131.140.90 (talk • contribs)

64.131.140.90, do you have any proof of this? If you have legitimate proof, we can adjust it accordingly. Neo16287 05:43, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


The very article that is cited for proof of the alliance says in it's last sentence "The alliance is expected to be put in place this summer". I know this may be a minor point, but there is no alliance in place, they are still in talks and they hope to complete a deal, but a deal has not been done. Try to go anywhere on the JetBlue site to find anything about a deal. You won't find it. No deal has been signed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.131.140.90 (talk • contribs)

64.131.140.90, do you suggest removing the entire listing, or rewording it to reflect correct information? Neo16287 18:56, 25 February 2007 (UTC)


Well, the paragraph states that on February 6th, Jetblue announced an alliance with Aer Lingus. Where is this press release issued by JetBlue? The paragraph should not state that JetBlue has announced this because they haven't. It is factually incorrect.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Dunyon (talk • contribs)

If B6 didn't put it out, why does Today in the Sky say they did? Neo16287 04:00, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Today in the Sky is citing various media reports, not JetBlue. Again, show me JetBlue's press release. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dunyon (talk • contribs)

I never claimed to have the press release. I cited Today in the Sky, not B6. You assumed I had the press release when I never said I did.Neo16287 01:15, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I did not assume that you have the press release, I know that you don't, because one doesn't exist. You know why? Because Jetblue hasn't announced anything. Again, the paragraph on Wikipedia that states "Jetblue announced an alliance with Aer Lingus" is factually incorrect. Various media reported an alliance, not Jetblue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dunyon (talk • contribs)

[edit] JetBlue/Airblue

Having worked for JetBlue, I can not tell you how many people I had come up to me in the terminal asking "where is Airblue's check in desk?" When I told them Airblue did not fly there, they assured me they did, that they had a reservation with them. When I asked to see their ticket, they had a JetBlue ticket. People have called JetBlue many things out of confusion, one of which is AirBlue. As we have a redirect on Airblue's page, they put one on our page. Neo16287 14:16, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I just cannot see how someone can confuse "Jet" with "Air". However, it looks like a few other people agree with me - perhaps you can reconsider? :) -- RattleMan 17:58, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
I would not have an issue with reconsidering, but I'm not the one who put it there. I had restored a redirect on Airblue's page, and one of their user put it here. In the interest of not having the other removed, I left it there. Neo16287 18:19, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
On checking the Airblue page, I noted the same editor who had removed the redirect from this page also removed it from that page. I will remove the redirect from this page, however if somebody sees fit to restore the redirect to Airblue, in the interests of cooperation, I will discuss restoring it to this page. I have removed the redirect from this page. Neo16287 19:59, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

It really doesn't need a disambiguation. Plenty of people confuse easyJet with ValuJet but that's just because they're being daft - we shouldn't be adding disabmiguations to the tops of these articles. If there was another airline operating somewhere under the name JetBlue or Jet Blue or jetblue etc. then that's the time to add a disambiguation link to the top of the article. Otherwise every article where people often confuse the subject of the article with something vaguely similar but with a different name would need a disambiguation link at the top and the whole enyclopedia would be one big mess. I mean, thousands - if not millions - of non-Brits think that Tower Bridge is the Tower of London. But just try adding a link to the top of the Tower Bridge article saying For the other major London landmark with the word Tower in its name and which is commonly confused with this one, please see Tower of London and see how long it stays in place! Metro Mover 16:48, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey give me a break man. I left it in in the interest of cooperation, and removed the article after people asked me to. I don't need wiki-101. This isn't my first time using this site. I'd appreciate it if you didn't treat me as if it were. Neo16287 19:03, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Did the company write-up the 07 story?

Some people were in planes eleven hours and they could see the terminal. The bathrooms were out of order and there was no heat or fresh air. Why is this outrageous abuse being sugar coded?

And what was your story? That you were helplessly kept on the plane with threats of prosecution and destruction if you looked outside, but braving that you single handedly fought off the flight crew and drove to the terminal yourself? Read the article then read the post. Note similarities. And learn to spell.


Why was the story on the Feb storm essentially gutted? Brevity is a laudable goal but not a reason to rewrite history. Direct quotes from Neeleman re:"shoestring communications" and an "undersized reservations system" were removed even though they were part of his explanation of why the incident occurred.

This sentence: "An absence of interline agreements prevented JetBlue from accommodating its passengers on other airlines" was removed despite it's factual nature and how it helps the reader understand a major difference between Jet Blue and the legacy carriers.

The way the article currently reads, it appears only the flight to Cancun suffered extraordinary delays.

The Revision by KPWM Spotter at 20:40, on 29 May 2007 would make a JetBlue PR flak proud. In the interest of impartiality, I suggest the entire edit be rescinded.

I don't agree. Neeleman's releasing was never admitted to be related directly to the incident. The interline agreements sentence may be useful info, but I don't think the entire edit should be rescinded. Impartiality aside, the edit, I presume, was shortened for space saving purposes. Maybe a cut down version somehow incorporating the facts is in order. Neo16287 19:45, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Didn't the jetBlue board specifically site the February incident as being one of the causes? NcSchu 21:17, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
If they did I must have missed it. I could be wrong. Neo16287 21:31, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Semi-protected

How long will the page be semi-protected? and why is it being protected? Sox23 21:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

The semi protection was implemented following vandalism from anonymous editors following the Feb. 14 incident. According to the edit summary, the protection will terminate March 9. Neo16287 22:47, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
ok- I was just wondering Sox23 23:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No Hubs?

JetBlue has lots of flights and destinations out of JFK. It may have point-to-point service, but Jfk is undoubtebly a hub. BOS, havng the number of b6 flights and destinations that it does, could be called a secondary hub. MCO, yes, could be called a focuus city because of traffic volume. BTW, I changed the infobox.
Well, if you read the previous discussion on this, we decided to keep it at all focus cities. Whether you think it is a hub or not, there are people who disagree, as well as thse who agree. Please stop modifying the infobox without discussing it first. Neo16287 00:10, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Logo?

What happened to the JetBlue logo? It doesn't appear anymore...Sox23 00:40, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

  • For some reason, the image file seemed to be blanked. I've reloaded it and it looks ok now. JGHowes talk - 20:54, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] OAK vs MCO focus city

I was looking at the Oakland International Airport page and noticed that JetBlue only has 5 destinations from OAK vs 11 destinations from Orlando International Airport...shouldn't we make MCO a focus city over OAK - they have more than double the destinations than OAK. I know JBLU has OAK highlighted on its route map but clearly MCO has become bigger than OAK for JetBlue...any suggestions? Sox23 19:31, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Controversies

What the hell? Does this need to be in here...I don't even know what it's getting at...Sox23 20:35, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

The story is about the company's alleged sponsoring of hate groups. Let's get real, we all know that if it had sponsored a KKK convention no one would object to noting it here. Hate is hate, regardless of it coming from the left or right. Arnabdas 20:51, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

This section is non-notable at best. While perhaps a single mention of the controversy could add to the article, the current section draws the event out far too much, and in my opinion, I find it very poorly written. If I hadn't already known of the event, I would have no clue of what actually happened. I vote for either a total removal, or a complete scaling back of the section. Opinions? --KPWM_Spotter 21:53, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

removal; extremly hard to follow. Sox23 23:12, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Companies every now and then will do some incredibly stupid things. A one time sponsorship I can see how that might have slipped through without a lot of oversight. The KKK is a little to infamous to pretend no one has heard of it. Daily KOS is not as well known. Now if they continue to sponsor them or other hate spewing groups, regardless of their location in the political spectrum, it would warrant inclusion then. Skywayman 01:16, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I understand the argument of not having a controversy section, but this is something that definitely deserves mention. Companies make mistakes all the time unknowingly sponsoring events they have no clue about. Most of the time, they retract the money and sponsorship and issue an apology. I am not out to get JetBlue (in fact they have been my favorite airline...so much that I have their credit card) but from the video of the interview and browsing JetBlue's site, I do not see any apology letter or retractment of the sponsorship. It should be known that they seem to be sticking to their guns.Arnabdas 15:11, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Oh, and as for KKK notability vs the Daily Kos, it really shouldn't matter if people heard of the KKK more than the Daily Kos or not. The reason of notability is support of a hate group. Ideology should have nothing to do with it.Arnabdas 16:13, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't want to get political in this issue, but from secondary reports and statements coming out it seems as though the whole issue was blown out of proportion anyway. I don't think it's meaningful enough in the long run to deserve mention. NcSchu 02:42, 18 July 2007 (UTC) Have any of you who are criticizing DailyKos actually spent any time on the site? It is a political site and as such there will be a few nut jobs, however it is far from a hate spewing group. Typical of Bill O'Reily to take a small sampling of the comments and make them representative of the whole site. This non-controversy is nothing more than O'Reily criticizing a site that doesn't agree with him and trying to take out the sponsors as well.67.53.88.160 15:18, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Although you are correct in that there will be nutjobs everywhere, websites and forums have complete control over what type of content can be posted and all responsible sites do not allow defamatory remarks. The website cannot control what their posters say, but they can have (and responsible ones do) rules and regulations that users may not post defammatory remarks or hate speech. By not stopping hate speech on its site, the Daily Kos passively agrees with the point of view. I doubt you would be so quick to defend the site if it was supporting the KKK.Arnabdas 16:13, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I e-mailed JetBlue about the situation. Received an e-mail signed by the CEO stating that the situation was blown out of proportion. Apparantly, according to Garber, all the company did was issue 10 free tickets to be auctioned off at the event. He also said in the e-mail that the company doesn't condone or support any group spewing hate speech and they have no affiliation with The Daily Kos (officially). This was a private e-mail to me, but still didn't see any official press release.Arnabdas 15:37, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TrueBlue Section

Is it just me, or is the section on the TrueBlue program practically a word for word advertisement for the program? I reccomend it for removal. Agree? Disagree? Neo16287 20:12, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that's why I put the template there. I see no reason for a separate section, but if it's not mentioned in the article it probably should be. NcSchu(Talk) 20:16, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Agree. But saying "you have earned yourself..." sounds like an ad. Rewrite maybe? Neo16287 21:40, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] JetBlue And Orlando

JetBlue has a bigger presence at Orlando than at their Washington-Dulles and Oakland focus cities. Why shouldn't it be considered a focus city. I know that JetBlue doesn't consider it a focus city but I think it should be added to the list of focus cities. Suggestions/Opinions are welcome. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.134.108.9 (talk) 21:02, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE: External links

Per WP:CITE, WP:SOURCE and elsewhere, "External links" are "for further reading" sites ONLY. "References" are general sources used to support facts in the article itself, such as the official site, which confirms basic information such as spellings, cities served, etc. "Footnotes" are footnotes. Also, Wikipedia policy is one main link per site; therefore, no separate links to interior JetBlue site-pages if we're linking to the main page. --209.125.153.34 (talk) 10:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] passengers

First of all I would like to know hoe many passengers were carried by JetBlue in 2007. Besides I want to know if revenue passengers in the traffic reports of JetBLue means passengers boarded/carried. Dagadt (talk) 11:33, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Largest Operator of the Airbus A320"

When the last user reverted one user's edit "Largest Operator of the Airbus A320," he probably meant the Airbus A320 itself, not the family. According to the article List of Airbus A320 operators, it says that JetBlue has 107 A320s, which is more than any other carrier. Therefore, it's true that JetBlue is the largest operator of the Airbus A320, not the family.

--Limaindia (talk) 23:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Apologies. Correct, I assumed the entire family. I was transiting several time zones then and must not have been that awake! Neo16287 (talk) 03:54, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bathroom

Surprised it's not here, but under incidents, should it list the man who was forced to sit in the bathroom for 5 hours due to the Flight Attendant being uncomfortable, and is now suing for 2 million dollars. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.69.80.190 (talk) 01:28, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

It was. However according to WikiProject: Airlines, a valid incident/accident involves aircraft damage, injury, loss of life, etc. Litigation does not apply, and in this case is not notable. Neo16287 (talk) 01:54, 29 May 2008 (UTC)