Talk:List of Singapore Airlines Cargo destinations

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of Singapore Airlines Cargo destinations redirect.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article was nominated for deletion on October 24, 2015. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article was nominated for deletion on 23 April 2007. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Redirect, 7 August 2024, see discussion.
No consensus, 26 March 2024, see discussion.
keep, October 24, 2015, see discussion.
keep, May 15, 2007, see discussion.
Keep, 23 April 2007, see discussion.

Aviation: Airlines

	Aviation portal This redirect 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.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation
	This redirect is supported by the airline project.

Singapore Low‑importance

	Singapore portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Singapore, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Singapore 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.SingaporeWikipedia:WikiProject SingaporeTemplate:WikiProject SingaporeSingapore
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Merge with Singapore Airlines Cargo

SIA Cargo has a very limited network of its own, and could easily be covered in the Singapore Airlines Cargo article. The very nature of the airline industry dictates that on most passenger aircraft they will carry cargo. Aeroflot Cargo is a separate entity from Aeroflot, just like SIA, but to claim that the entity known as Aeroflot Cargo services all of the mainline Aeroflot destinations is misleading. The same goes for SIA Cargo. The list of destinations can easily be incorporated into Singapore Airlines Cargo and/or Singapore Airlines destinations --Russavia 22:21, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is interesting to note that the official Aeroflot website makes no mention of the name "Aeroflot Cargo" in its section on cargo services. [1] I hope your claims on Aeroflot's operations are well sourced, for I am beginning to find it odd that you continue to equate a seemingly non-existant "Aeroflot Cargo" with Singapore Airlines Cargo.--Huaiwei 17:38, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[2] case closed --Russavia 17:44, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks for the news link. I hope Aeroflot does something to update its main English website, unless they expect the international community to be proficient in Russian and somehow chance upon this.--Huaiwei 18:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup of destinations

On 9/10 May I have edited this article to reflect the true number of destinations which the company Singapore Airlines Cargo actually flies to. You will only hear the callsign SINGCARGO in 36 destinations in 18 countries, hence the airline only flies to this number of destinations on a scheduled basis. I have stated in the past that SIA Cargo does not fly to Perth, any flights into Perth will be met with the callsign SINGAPORE, not SINGCARGO. I mentioned this to Huaiwei, who mentioned in the deletion debate [3], and I quote:

If you are aware that there are factual errors, and you have the relevant sources to back that up, than you are most welcome to amend the list.

The list has been amended to what is correct. It is pointless in doing so if the same user who is quoted above keeps reverting. --Russavia 17:14, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I find the above comment laughable at best. From the customer's point of view, if I want to ship a parcel from Singapore to Kuala Lumpur, I suppose by looking at your version of this list, I would have to believe I cannot do so with this airline. Quite happily, this assumption is completely false. The callsign of the aircraft has no bearing on the actual freight services offered by this airline. It manages the cargo section of SIA's passenger fleet for them, if I need to repeat this yet again. It does not have to actually own those passenger aircraft to use their cargo holds. Is this explaination not elementary enough? Singapore Airlines Cargo does fly to Perth, and all sources[4][5][6] backs this fact up. Enough said.--Huaiwei 17:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Huaiwei, the sourced facts do not reflect the PR you wish to pursue on anything to do with Singapore Airlines, and I will not allow you to paint a false picture. You cannot claim that SIA Cargo flies to anything more than 36 destinations, whilst at the same time the Singapore Airlines article does not include all of the German destinations that SIA 'flies' to under a codeshare with LH. SIA Cargo Mega-Arks do not fly to Perth, and for that fact most SIA network destinations, on a scheduled basis. This article is about an airline, NOT the cargo product Singapore Airlines Cargo. If you think that this article is about the cargo product I would suggest that the following category tags be removed from this article

Airlines established in 2001 Airlines of Singapore Cargo airlines

I will then nominate for merge into Singapore Airlines and deletion, as there is not a SINGLE cargo product on this planet which deserves its own encyclopaedia entry.

I would mind you to stop vandalising this article with information which does not present the true picture on the airline Singapore Airlines Cargo --Russavia 17:38, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bring it on, if its your ego which is more important. Please be mindful that revert warring by using the word "Vandalism" to describe content disputes does not absolve you from disciplinary action.--Huaiwei 17:44, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Goodness gracious me, if you cannot decipher the difference between codesharing and the operation of cargoholds by cargo subsidiaries of passenger airliners. I do not consider it fit to explain this to you further. Singapore Airlines Cargo is more than its MegaArk fleet, and if you cannot swallow this fact, please go right ahead and do more research on air frieght management before attempting to push your extreme (and unsourced) views in this website.--Huaiwei 17:51, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Huaiwei, it is standard practice within Wikipedia:WikiProject_Airlines to only include the destinations that an airline flies to with its own metal. SIA Cargo does not have 777 metal or 747-400 metal. The only metal it has is 747-400F, and as such only those destinations which the 747-400F metal flies to should be included in any destination list. I am well aware of air freight management - remember I told you I had previous employment experience with SIA, well it was in SIA Reservations and then SIA Cargo - so I am well aware of this sector of the airline industry. I am also well aware that you don't see SIA Cargo metal in PER, and as such, it is not a destination of SIA Cargo metal. PER is a destination of SIA mainline metal, whilst SIA Cargo manages the cargo hold. One needs to distinguish between SIA Cargo (the airline) and SIA Cargo (the product). The article is about the destinations of SIA Cargo (the airline). It can't be explained any simpler than that. --Russavia 18:20, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this article should only include the destinations that SQC flies to. Anything else should not be listed. If you really want to push the point, with inter airline agreements, every airline could be said to offer service to every airport. Can someone who can sort through the data reduce the list to only those destinations that SQC actually flies to? There is a difference between offering service to and flying to. This article is for the later. Vegaswikian 02:33, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My own edit included precisely the correct information. I will be re-editing it now, to reflect the reality of their operations. --Russavia 06:20, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well I have dozen edits and reverts on this article in the last few days. All completely sources, whereas Huaiweis are not. This person seems to think it is his article to do with as he pleases. Seeing as what is being presented by myself is both factually accurate and sourced, and inline with WP:AVIATION guidelines, and because Huaiwei seems fit to keep reverting to totally inaccurate information, this article needs to go up for review. How is this done? --Russavia 02:33, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need to constantly whine about suppose adherence to sources, and my non-complance to them. I want to directly challenge you on this. Show me concrete proof that the facts I state are not supported by the sources I cite. Go on.--Huaiwei 22:43, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit waring

I just protected this article for 14 days. The reverting back and forth is not good for this wiki. Resolve the issues on the talk page or lets take it to arbitration. Since I am somewhat involved in this, I have no problem if any editor wishes to invite another administrator not involved in this discussion to review my action and unprotect if there is no problem with the back and forth edits. Vegaswikian 03:05, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree Vegaswikian, I think the best thing to do would be to take this to arbitration, as talking about the issues does not seem to get us anywhere, and we need articles which are factually accurate. I have been looking at the various cargo airline articles, and many of them are inaccurate such as the SIA Cargo one. An example is Emirates SkyCargo (this article is now accurate since being edited - it stills needs expanding though). --Russavia 05:41, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If this issue cannot be resolved based on cited sources alone (particularly since one party consistently refused to base judgements on cited sources anyway), then do feel free to bring this to formal dispute resolution. Meanwhile, I am very dissapointed that an admin here is blocking a page he is personally involved in.--Huaiwei 12:30, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have not hidden that fact that I am involved in the edits with the above statement and I have also asked for other administrators to review my action at WP:AN since this is not normal as you have pointed out. So it's not like I'm trying to scam the system. My actions are as open as possible and I have encouraged other administrators to unprotect the article if my actions are not supported by the articles edit history. Vegaswikian 18:13, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]