Talk:Thai Airways International/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Page protection

I've protected the page for three days following a request at WP:RfPP. Please talk about your differences here with a view to reaching an agreement, rather than reverting back and forth without discussion. See WP:SOURCES for the need to use sources for any edits, especially disputed ones. Many thanks, SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 16:02, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Heathrow

"Thai Airways International is the first Asia/Pacific airline to serve London Heathrow Airport."

Was it not Cathay Pacific? Could somebody find a source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.33.187.10 (talk) 22:07, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Untitled

I previously entered the new Thai Airways slogan as, "I Fly THAI"....but someone returned it to "smooth as silk". It may one day be reverted to 'smooth as silk,' but for now it is "I Fly THAI". for example: http://www.bangkokpost.com/business/aviation/242075/not-so-smooth-sailing-for-slogan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.169.243.75 (talk) 12:28, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Could someone please fix up the photographs, I'm not very proficient in html.--Pavlova 14:45, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

FLEET

Why do someone, keep on insisting that TG STILL has MD-11:s in their fleet? This is insane. Pure insanity.

[UPDATE 6/4/2012]

I understand there is a lot of misinformation that is being added to the THAI fleet section. The section right now is currently a mess since there clearly are no 747-8s officially on order with TG nor are there any A330-200s or 767s on order. I have undone these edits now.

I do want to make clear, however, that my edits, which have come undone three times now, are actually factually accurate and are based on information TG has published as of May 23, 2012 at the following link: http://thai.listedcompany.com/misc/PRESN/20120523-THAI-analystBriefing1Q2012-02.pdf (see pages 17, 19, 20, and 23). In addition, confirmation can be found here: http://www.ch-aviation.ch/portal/aircraft.php?search=set&airline=TG

Even without the current erroneous 747-8 and A330-200 edits, the TG fleet section was also ERRONEOUS and OUT-OF-DATE. There are no sites listing TG as still having 13 A300s, TG themselves have stated they now have 23 A330-300s (11 new aircraft have been delivered since the original 12, with registrations -TEN through TEU, and -TBA through -TBC), and this wiki page seems to state that TG has 20 747-400s (18 passenger aircraft and 2 converted freighters). This is clearly erroneous as for some time, TG had at most 18 passenger 747-400s, and when two were taken to conversion then clearly 16 passenger aircraft must be left over, not 18. TG's site confirms this fact.

Regarding the leased 777-300ERs, TG does have 5 of them. In fact, this wikipedia page still suggests there are 5 considering that the notes say the 5 will leave the fleet in 2013. You can't say TG has 3 and then say "these five aircraft will leave the fleet in 2013." TG and other fleet sites confirm that TG is currently leasing FIVE 777-300ERs, all of which will be removed from the fleet in 2013 when TG has a sizable fleet of its own 777-300ERs, which start delivery later this fall.

Let me add that the notes are now out-of-date as well. Aircraft refurbishment was completed for all 747-400s that were undergoing economy class-only retrofitting. Currently underway is the retrofitting of 6 747 aircraft that will have all three cabins refurbished. As a result, discussion about a retrofit on 12 747-400 aircraft is now irrelevant to the present. Similarly TG has confirmed (and trip reports corroborate) that one 777-200 has now been retrofitted with PTVs in economy class. This aircraft is distinctive because its economy class seating has been provided by a different manufacturer than have those on TG's other 777 aircraft.

I will no longer be making these fleet edits if they continue to be undone. I just want to state my case that the fleet page as it currently stands is absolutely incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.107.88.162 (talk) 19:47, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Merge

Royal Orchid Plus should be merged into this article. It's not a notable program and does not need its own article. DB (talk) 04:15, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Merged the Subsidiaries section into the Infobox, since it does not need its own section. Also does Leaderships needs its own section, shouldn't it be part of the Infobox also. Bill-lim (talk) 19:54, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Errors

"stopped approximately 194 meters beyond a painted stop line". That seems like quite the distance. Wouldn't the plane have ended up within the terminal building/gate or something?

Boeing 747-300 and MD 11 was retired already!Why someone always put MD 11 in the article!!??Also,the seat configuation is WRONG!

People adding information to the page need to keep in mind correct citation formatting. PLEASE! Bill-lim (talk) 19:58, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

2000s

The 2000s section of the history seems a bit detailed. The only really noteworthy listed items here, to me, are the New York flight (should reference non-stop flight somewhere in that item) and the resumption of flights to Phitsanulok due to the floods.

Smoothsilver (talk) 02:16, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Please change logo from http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100514105957/logopedia/images/0/0f/Thai_logo.svg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.179.19.224 (talk) 01:19, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Article Rename

Any Objections on moving the article to Thai Airways as per WP:COMMONNAME? Thanks --JetBlast (talk) 14:40, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes. Thai Airways probably more accurately refers to Thai Airways Company, which was a separate airline prior to being merged to form Thai Airways International. Using the name for the current airline could potentially confuse some readers. --Paul_012 (talk) 09:17, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Just a quick look at the website its all branded Thai Airways not Thai Airways International so i think we should be ok. Thai Airways already redirects here anyway. --JetBlast (talk) 09:38, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

you should not change it because it is an international airline and it is correct even from its time table

it says thai airways international (Do do doggy (talk) 12:30, 8 August 2013 (UTC))

block page

why did you block editing this page to 15 august 2013? (Do do doggy (talk) 12:40, 8 August 2013 (UTC))

• That is explained in the section above. Black Kite (talk) 12:42, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit-war

After reverting the moves against talk page consensus, and the cut-and-paste copy move performed on Thai Airways International, I have reverted both pages to their original state and fully protected them for a week. This edit-warring can not be allowed to continue. Discuss the name of the article here and if necessary create a requested move discussion. If the back-and-forth warring continues after the protection expires I will not hesitate to hand out blocks for disruption. If there are any urgent changes that need to be made to this article, please use an edit request to ask for an admin to make them. Black Kite (talk) 12:39, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Please note that the page is currently locked at the title after the move from Thai Airways International to Thai Airways. According to WP:BRD, the move probably should have been reverted pending further discussion. Either would probably have been the Wrong Version though. --Paul_012 (talk) 08:06, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Not being funny but it was on the talk page. If there where objections they should have been brought up sooner. --JetBlast (talk) 08:56, 9 August 2013 (UTC)