This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tserg (talk | contribs) at 10:10, 5 October 2009 (→Aeroflot#Other functions of Aeroflot). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 10:10, 5 October 2009 by Tserg (talk | contribs) (→Aeroflot#Other functions of Aeroflot)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Bourne Supremacy
I don't remember Aeroflot figuring into this movie. Can someone enlighten me? - Sekicho
- An Il-96 at SVO was shown for around 1 sec in the movie. Hardly worthy of a mention Russavia 14:36, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Amman, Jordan codeshare
Since we are listing other codeshares, how can you remove this one? -Joseph (Talk) 02:47, 2004 Oct 22 (UTC)
As I said, Aeroflot doesn't use their own aircraft to fly that route. When showing destinations, one should only list those that the said airline uses their planes to fly to.
As for the others that are listed, Aeroflot actually uses their aircraft in that codeshare. If Aeroflot DOES NOT use their aircraft for any other listed codeshares, those should be moved to another section. WhisperToMe 05:08, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Iljuschin Il-62/-62M
I missed these Airplane in the Article. 16:16, April,18th.2005 Def
FLy the Aeroflot!
- During the Soviet era Aeroflot was a synonym for Russian civil aviation. One of the rare examples of Soviet commercial advertisement was Aeroflot's slogan, "Fly on Aeroflot planes!" ("Летайте самолетами Аэрофлота!"). The irony was that Aeroflot had no competitors and it was virtually impossible for an average Soviet citizen to fly on a non-Aeroflot plane.
Well perhaps they meant people should use the (Aeroflot) plane instead of the train or the bus. Meursault2004 ~
- I would assume crossing the USSR would be faster (cheaper?) by plane than by car, train, etc
-G —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.117.158.83 (talk) 21:08, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Aeroflot service to the U.S. suspended
I've merged the two paragraphs that dealt with Aeroflot service to the U.S. being suspended because they were contradicting each other. They were also in the "Accidents/Incidents" section, which is supposed to refer to aircraft accidents involving Aeroflot aircraft, which Korean Air Flight 007 did not. The new paragraph is:
- Aeroflot started commercial flights to the United States in 1968. However, in 1979 these flights were suspended by the U.S. Government in response to the Soviet intervention into Afghanistan. Aeroflot flights were further suspended on December 29, 1981, in response to Soviet actions in Poland , and again on September 15, 1983, in response to the Soviet Union's shoot-down of Korean Air Flight 007 over its territory . Aeroflot was allowed to resume flights to the United States in 1986.
It's still not exactly clear why service had to be suspended again and again; after it was first suspended in 1979, was it merely a political statement not causing any actual change in service (i.e., service was already suspended, you can't suspend it more)? The sources don't say. Any input is appreciated. —Cleared as filed. 14:07, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
Management
User:Arpingstone removed this section claiming that no other aviation article had such a list and it seemed to him unprofessional. However, this is hardly a legitimate reason. So I have reverted the change. If one feel uncomfortable with it, let's him make it more tidy and professional-looking and add such a section to another articles, but IMHO deleting it goes against WP policies. Colchicum 15:18, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- User:Dbinder removed it again motivating the decision by WP: NOT a directory. However, I disagree. The very essence of WP is internal linking of the content, and official WP policy as stated in WP: NOT a directory doesn't concern internal links. I would be glad if someone would made the list more tidy, but its content is important and notable. It is important to understand who manages the comany in order to understand its history. If other articles lack this, this is not a reason to remove such a thing. After all, in the very beginning WP didn't contain anything at all. Does this mean that we should blank all the Misplaced Pages? Obviously no. Colchicum 21:17, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Also keep in mind that this article is also within the scope of WikiProject Russia, not only Airlines. What is not interesting to those interested in Airlines may well be important to other people. It is simply ridiculous to make this article fit templates of a single project so strictly Colchicum 21:33, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Here is the section, just BTW: Colchicum 21:35, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- I think Colchicum is right. Articles about some of these people exist in Misplaced Pages. No one disputed their notability. Articles about other people may be provided in the future. However, it might be a good idea to organize such information as Table. Biophys 23:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- It has nothing to do with the airline project. If it was an article about McDonalds I would have done the same thing. Furthermore, WP:NOT#DIR certainly does apply to internal links; there is nothing there that says otherwise. The key executives and chairman should be listed in the infobox, the rest can easily be obtained from the airline's website. This is how almost every article I've seen about any corporation is set up, not just airlines. DB (talk) 04:08, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- If several of these people have articles, create an Aeroflot category and put them in there. DB (talk) 04:09, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, that could be a good solution to make such category and reduce the number of listed people, especially in the Executive Management. I agree that Misplaced Pages is not a phone book directory. Certainly, it is not. But it is exactly for that reason the internal Misplaced Pages links can not be treated as a phone directory. Many Misplaced Pages articles include very long lists of internal links. Look for example, List of alleged secret agents.Biophys 07:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- If several of these people have articles, create an Aeroflot category and put them in there. DB (talk) 04:09, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- It has nothing to do with the airline project. If it was an article about McDonalds I would have done the same thing. Furthermore, WP:NOT#DIR certainly does apply to internal links; there is nothing there that says otherwise. The key executives and chairman should be listed in the infobox, the rest can easily be obtained from the airline's website. This is how almost every article I've seen about any corporation is set up, not just airlines. DB (talk) 04:08, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- So, Colchicum could create a separate article called Aeroflot management list and make a list indicating names, positions, and whatever about these people. Then, this Aeroflot article would be more readable. Biophys 20:10, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
***
Board of Directors elected at the Annual General Meeting of shareholders in 2006: Viktor Ivanov(Chairman, Deputy Head of Russia's Presidential Staff for personnel, Aide to President Vladimir Putin), Vladimir Antonov (First Deputy Director General), Anatoly Danilitsky (CEO National Reserves Corporation), Leonid Dushatin (First Deputy CEO National Reserve Corporation), Mikhail Kopeykin (Deputy Chief of the Staff of Russia's Government), Gleb Nikitin (Chief of the Commercial Organizations Property Department of Rosimushchestvo), Valery Okulov (Director General), Alexander Tikhonov (Director of Russia's Ministry of Transport Department for Structural Reformation), Vladimir Shablin (Senior Vice-President of National Reserve Bank), Andrey Sharonov (Deputy Minister for Economic Development and Trade), Alexander Urchik (Chief of the Rosaviation agency).
Executive Management (as of January 2007): Valery Okulov (Director General), Vladimir Antonov (First Deputy Director General for Production), Vasily Avilov (Head of Administration), Alexey Sidorov (Commercial Director), Yuri Belykh (Technical Director), Nikolai Bosykh (Aircraft Maintenance Center Director), Konstantin Bushlanov (HR Department Head), Boris Eliseev (Deputy Director General, Head of Legal Department), Vladimir Gerasimov (Deputy Director General for Logistics), Igor Desyatnichenko (Deputy Director General for Routes and Freight Carriages Control), Kirill Budaev (Deputy Director general for Strategic and Corporate Development), Sergei Kiryushin (Deputy Director General, head of the Department for Information Technologies and Communications), Alexander Koldunov (Deputy Director General, Head of Flight Safety Department), Lev Koshlyakov (Deputy Director General , head of Public Relations Department), Mikhail Poluboyarinov (Deputy Director General for Finance and Planning), Vladimir Smirnov (Deputy Director General, Director of the Land Carriages Support Center), Stanislav Tulsky (Deputy Director General for Flight Management, Flight Complex Director), Andrei Trusov (Chief Accountant), Anatoly Volymerets (Head of Ilyushin Il-96/Il-86 flight team of Flight Operations Center).
Planes layout
How everyone knows, the layout of Aeroflot planes (specially Tupolev and Ilyushin) is different to the layout of (West-) Europe airlines. I´ll know more about it in July so what do you think about a new section (title: the special plane layout of Aeroflot) Dagadt
- There is no specific Aeroflot layout so no new section is necessary. If you can get a ride on one of the Tupolevs, enjoy it whille you can - these birds are being phased out --apoivre 21:23, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Il-96 order
I'm pretty sure that their order for 6 il-96-300 was converted to il-96-400. The article implies that they're not the same order wich gives a total of 12 planes on order. Can anyone verify this? --RIP-Acer 02:09, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Largest airline in the world
I removed this bit from the intro section because: A; it was unsourced, and B; there was no metric given for "largest" airline - did the line mean by airfleet, number of passengers, number of flights, what? If anybody has numbers to back up the largest airline claim, absolutely put them back in the intro. I just don't like unsourced, non-specific claims in the first couple paragraphs.
- Aeroflot was the world's largest airline in all 'metrics' - number of aircraft (10,000++), number of passengers (100 million+ per year), number of flights, RPKs, etc, etc, etc. It is best to put {{Fact}} tags instead of simply removing, to give people the op to credit sources. --Russavia 15:59, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
- It has been almost one month now, and the unsourced tag has remained. Kindly find the relevant sources, before the claim gets removed.--Huaiwei 13:41, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
The AskThePilot reference meant to support this claim is not satisfactory. This is an American commercial pilot telling late night stories. The fact that he is pilot is hardly enough reason to cite his book as an encylcopedic source. 82.141.158.14 (talk) 15:04, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
- You want sources that aeroflot was largest:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CE5DE1538F930A25753C1A966958260 and look at the date of the article. You want encyclopedic? How about Brittanica. It makes the claim. Is Brittanica good enough? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.231.46.37 (talk) 18:29, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Soviet era
Can somebody write down the routes and fleet during soviet era? Aeroflot was the largest existing airline ever so it is necessary! Dagadt
- Hello! Yes, I can help you and I have already tried - created the Article "Terminated destinations". I'm still improving it, collecting facts, verificating and so on. Please, let me know what kind of information do you need... As for comments of Russavia, you can easy miss them... Regards, --Dimitree 20:57, 20 December 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dimitree (talk • contribs)
- Impossible to do as almost every village in the USSR had service from Aeroflot. The list would be as long as Pi written out to a million decimal places. --Russavia 16:00, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Routes
Hi! I believe it would be nice to know what for aircrafts operates which routes!
- This is unencyclopaedic information, as operational requirements can see an aircraft being subbed for another. If you need to know such info, the airline website is the place to visit --Russavia 16:01, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Great Website
I think it should be noted that Aeroflot's website (at least, the English version of it- I assume the Russian version is more or less identical apart from the language difference) incorporates several features that are unusual, such as pictures of the in-flight meals, songs about the airline, and a detailed list of the available in-flight music channels. It seems to me that this level of attention to detail regarding non-schedule related matters on an airline's website is quite unique and should be mentioned in this article. If anyone agrees with this I'd be happy to add in the content myself. (Note: This comment is from User:Hiram J. Hackenbacker (i.e. me), but I'm not logged in at the moment for security reasons.) 128.100.112.247 18:37, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Incidents
Why is this the only airline with no incidents / accidents section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.159.240.131 (talk • contribs)
- Probably because it is called Incidents and accidents ! MilborneOne 21:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- Or perhaps it would be long enough for an article all to itself?--Huaiwei 13:39, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks - there was no Incidents and accidents section when I made the initial post. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.159.240.131 (talk) 17:38, August 21, 2007 (UTC)
Aeroflot destinations list
I have merged Aeroflot destinations back into the main Aeroflot article and have reformatted it as a collapsable table. I have also removed Former destinations as it would be near on impossible to achieve a complete, verifiable list (no list should be left incomplete), due to the sheer number of destinations which Aeroflot used to fly to, particularly with the Antonov An-2 to many Urban-type settlements throughout the former Soviet Union. Prose will be included in this section in the very near future to explain former destinations of the airline (both Soviet and Russian). --Russavia 18:09, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
I think doing away with the Aerflot destinations article was a bad idea, please reinstate it.(116.71.46.210 19:20, 29 September 2007 (UTC))
It doesn't matter if there are destinations that we cannot source. We just take the destinations that we *can* source. IMO, this whole "we can't source destinations" logic had a major flaw. Per Misplaced Pages:Verifiability there are several destinations that we ought to include that we CAN source. All we need to do is exclude listing unsourced destinations and list destinations that can be sourced.
For instance, I have Seattle sourced. It's easy. A removal is unjustified. On the other hand, if someone dumps a list without sources, well, of course that list goes. Also I added "post-1992" because I understand the definition of Aeroflot varies. Therefore I added "1992" to distinguish the modern Aeroflot from the Aeroflot conglomerate of the older years. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:38, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Aeroflot ties to SVR
I came across some interesting facts of Aeroflot in http://en.wikipedia.org/Foreign_Intelligence_Service_%28Russia%29 and I think it would be good to mention it here as well. Turbofisk (talk) 18:50, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Fleet?
An aeroflot boeing 737 crashed last night, but it doesnt list it under their fleet. Any idea why? --Kraftlos (talk) 16:40, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
- Because it is in the fleet of Aeroflot-Nord, a subsidiary. --Tovarishch Komissar 16:45, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Aeroflot#Other functions of Aeroflot
It looks like this section was added by an 'anti-russian' editor. I therefore do not trust that the contents are npov. Quantpole (talk) 08:45, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
Anti Russian Editor? How so? It states what Aeroflot besides fly passengers and cargo. What is so anti-Russian about that?--71.162.142.154 (talk) 03:38, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
The material is very controversial; Controversial information should be in the "Controversies" paragraph, but it is strongly suggested by Misplaced Pages that controversies are not written in articles. The "Other functions of Aeroflot" paragraph was deleted.--Tserg (talk) 10:10, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Categories:- All unassessed articles
- B-Class Russia articles
- Mid-importance Russia articles
- Mid-importance B-Class Russia articles
- Russia articles needing attention
- WikiProject Russia articles with no associated task force
- WikiProject Russia articles
- B-Class Soviet Union articles
- Mid-importance Soviet Union articles
- WikiProject Soviet Union articles
- C-Class aviation articles
- C-Class airline articles
- WikiProject Airlines articles
- WikiProject Aviation articles
- Start-Class company articles
- High-importance company articles
- Company articles needing attention
- WikiProject Companies articles