Talk:Melbourne Airport

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Melbourne Airport article.
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

Archives: 1: 3 months

Melbourne Airport was one of the Engineering and technology good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
July 31, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed
August 7, 2008	Peer review	Reviewed
October 4, 2008	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
July 15, 2009	Peer review	Reviewed
December 28, 2024	Good article reassessment	Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

This article is written in Australian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, program, labour (but Labor Party)) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Aviation: Airports

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.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

This article is supported by the airport project.

This article has failed an A-Class review.

Australia: Melbourne / Transport Mid‑importance

	Australia portal Melbourne Airport is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Melbourne (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian Transport (assessed as Top-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Auto-archiving this page

Please don’t touch the talk page’s archives or place an auto-archive template at this moment as I’m currently waiting for assistance at the WP:Help desk on how to fix the mess that was created by an old manual archive. I will reply to this post once auto-archiving has been set up again. Fork99 (talk) 05:58, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All done. Fork99 (talk) 10:31, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) It's fixed now. I have deleted Talk:Melbourne Airport/Archive 2 since you copied the content to Talk:Melbourne Airport/Archive 1. The manual archiving was valid. The problem was to set up auto-archiving with counter = 1 instead of counter = 2 when there were 2 archives at the time. There is only 1 now so counter = 1 has become valid and I have restored auto-archiving. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:33, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA concerns

I am concerned that this article no longer meets the good article criteria. Some of my concerns are outlined below:

The article has uncited text, including entire paragraphs.
The "History" section does not give much post-2006 information, with no information about the airport's operations during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Is anyone interested in addressing the above concerns, or should this go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 01:25, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

Melbourne Airport

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:02, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article has several uncited statements, including entire paragraphs. The "History" section does not give much information after 2006, which is surprising considering that many airports were affected by COVID-19 lockdowns. Z1720 (talk) 17:27, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Melbourne Airport#Airlines and destinations has an RfC

Melbourne Airport#Airlines and destinations has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. SportingFlyer T·C 02:49, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Melbourne not sole international airport

hey guys, never really posted one of these before. Just wanted to request a minor correction regarding melbourne being the "sole" international airport serving victoria, since I believe Avalon also has international flights. Maybe I have overlooked some technicality? I am not sure. Ty ~ sox 210.1.69.59 (talk) 23:18, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]